Greg Lukianoff: Cancel Culture, Deplatforming, Censorship & Free Speech

Demo Transcription

Transcription Details:

Date: September 24, 2023
Type: YouTube
Source: English
Destinations: en,fr,it,pt,es
Duration: 2:31:58
Processing time: 0:38:41

Greg Lukianoff: Cancel Culture, Deplatforming, Censorship & Free Speech | Lex Fridman Podcast #397

Multiple sepakers transcription text:

GREG: If the goal is the project of human knowledge, which is to know the world it is is, you cannot know the world as it is without knowing what people really think. And what people really think is an incredibly important fact to know. So every time you're actually saying, you can't say that you're actually depriving yourself of the knowledge of what people really think you're causing what Tim or crown who's on our board of advisors calls preference falsification. You end up with an inaccurate picture of the world, which by the way, in a lot of cases, because there are activists who want to restrict more speech, they actually tend to think that people are more prejudice than they might be. And actually, one very real practical way it makes things worse is when you censor people, it doesn't change their opinion. It just encourages them to not share it with people who will get them in trouble. So it leads them to talk to people who they already agree with and group polarization takes off.

LEX: The following is a conversation with Greg Lukianoff, free speech advocate, first amendment attorney, president and CEO of FIRE, the foundation for individual rights and expression. And he's the author of Unleashing Liberty, co -author with Jonathan Haidt of Coddling of the American Mind and co -author with Ricky Schlott of a new book coming out in October. They should definitely pre -order now called the Cancelling of the American Mind, which is a definitive accounting of the history, present and future of cancel culture, a term used and overused in public discourse, but rarely studied and understood with the depth and rigor that Greg and Ricky do in this book and in part in this conversation. Freedom of speech is important, especially on college campuses, the very place that should serve as the battleground of ideas, including weird and controversial ones that should encourage bold risk -taking, not conformity. This is the Lex Friedman podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here's Greg Lukianoff. Let's start with the big question. What is cancel culture? Now, you've said that you don't like the term as it's been, quote, dragged through the mud and abused endlessly by a whole host of controversial figures. Nevertheless, we have the term. What is it?

GREG: Cancel culture is the uptick of campaigns, especially successful campaigns, starting around 2014 to get people fired, expelled, deplatformed, et cetera, for speech that would normally be protected by the first amendment. And I say would be protected because we're talking about circumstances in which it isn't necessarily where the first amendment applies. But what I mean is like as an analog to say things you couldn't lose your job as a public employee for, and also the climate of fear that's resulted from that phenomenon, the fact that you can lose your job for having the wrong opinion. And it wasn't subtle that there was an uptick in this, particularly on campus around 2014. John Ronson wrote a book called So You've Been Publicly Shamed. It came out in 2015, already documenting this phenomenon. I wrote a book called Freedom From Speech in 2014. But it really was in 2017 when you started seeing this be directed at professors. And when it comes to the number of professors that we've seen be targeted and lose their jobs, I've been doing this for 22 years and I've seen nothing like it.

LEX: So there's so many things I want to ask you here. One, actually, just look at the organization of FIRE. Can you explain what the organization is? Because it's interconnected to this whole fight and the rise of cancer culture and the fight for freedom of speech since 2014 and before.

GREG: So FIRE was founded in 1999 by Harvey Silverglate. He is a famous civil liberties attorney. He's a bit on the show. He's the person who actually found me out in my very happy life out in San Francisco, but knew I was looking for a first amendment job. I'd gone to law school specifically to do first amendment. And he found me, which was pretty cool. His protege, Kathleen Sullivan, was the Dean of Stanford Law School. And this remains the best compliment I ever got in my life, is that she recommended me to Harvey. And since that's the whole reason why I went to law school, I was excited to be a part of this new organization. The other co -founder of FIRE is Alan Charles Kors. He's just an absolute genius. He is one of the leading experts in the world on the Enlightenment and particularly about Voltaire. And if any of your listeners do like the great courses, he has a lecture on Blaise Pascal. And Blaise, of course, is famous for the Pascal's Wager. And I left it just so moved and impressed and with a depth of understanding of how important this person was.

LEX: That's interesting. You mentioned to me offline connected to this that there is a, at least it runs in parallel or there's a connection between the love of science and the love of the freedom of speech. Yes. Can you maybe elaborate where that connection is?

GREG: Sure. I think that for those of us who are really, you know, who've devoted our lives to freedom of speech, one thing that we are into, whether we know it or not, is epistemology, you know, the study and philosophy of knowledge. You know, freedom of speech has lots of moral and philosophical dimensions, but from a pragmatic standpoint, it is necessary because we're creatures of incredibly limited knowledge. We are incredibly self -deceiving. I always love the fact that Yuval Harari refers to the Enlightenment as the discovery of ignorance because that's exactly what it was. It was suddenly being like, wow, hold on a second. All of this incredibly interesting folk wisdom we got, which by the way can be surprisingly reliable here and there. When you start testing a lot of it is nonsense and it doesn't hold up. Even our ideas about the way things fall, you know, as Galileo established, like even our intuitions, they're just wrong. And so a lot of the early history of freedom of speech, it was happening at the same time as sort of the scientific revolution. So a lot of the early debates about freedom of speech were tied in. So certainly Galileo, you know, I always point out like Kepler was probably like the even more radical idea that they weren't even perfect spheres. But at the same time, largely because of the invention of the printing press, you also had all these political developments. And, you know, I always talk about Jan Hus, you know, from the famous Czech hero who was burned at the stake and I think in 1419. But he was basically Luther before the printing press. Before Luther could get his word out, you know, he didn't stand a chance. And that was exactly what Jan Hus was. But a century later, thanks to the printing press, everyone could know what Luther thought and boy, did they. But it led to, of course, this completely crazy, hyper -disrupted period in European history.

LEX: Well, you mentioned to jump around a little bit, the First Amendment. First of all, what is the First Amendment and what is the connection to you between the First Amendment, the freedom of speech and cancel culture? Sure.

GREG: So I'm a First Amendment lawyer, as I mentioned, and that's what I, that's my passion, that's what I studied. And I think American First Amendment law is incredibly interesting. In one sentence, the First Amendment is trying to get rid of basically all the reasons why humankind had been killing each other for its entire existence. That we weren't going to fight any more over opinion, we weren't going to fight any more religion, that you have the right to approach your government for redress of grievances, that you have the freedom to associate. That all of these things in one sentence were like, nope, the government will no longer interfere with your right to have these fundamental human rights. And so one thing that makes FIRE a little different from other organizations is, however, we're not just a First Amendment organization, we are a free speech organization. And so, and, but at the same time, a lot of what I think free speech is, can be well explained with reference to a lot of First Amendment law, partially because in American history, some of our smartest people have been thinking about what the parameters of freedom of speech are in relationship to the First Amendment. And a lot of those principles, they transfer very well just as pragmatic ideas. So like the biggest sin in terms of censorship is called viewpoint discrimination. That essentially you allow freedom of speech, except for that opinion. Now it's, and it's found to be kind of more defensible. And I think this makes sense that if you, if you set up a forum and like, we're only going to talk about economics to exclude people who want to talk about a different topic, but it's considered rightfully a bigger deal. If you've set up a forum for economics, but we're not going to let people talk about that kind of economics or have that opinion on economics, most, most particularly. So a lot of the principles from First Amendment law actually make a lot of philosophical sense as good principles for when, like what is protected and unprotected speech, what should get you in trouble, how you actually analyze it, which is why we actually try in our definition of cancel culture to work in some of the First Amendment norms, just in the definition. So we don't have to bog down on them as well.

LEX: You're saying so many interesting things, but if you can link on the viewpoint discrimination, is there any gray area of discussion there? Like what is, and isn't economics for the example you gave? Yeah. Is it, is there, I mean, is it a science? Or is it an art to draw lines of what isn't, isn't allowed?

GREG: Yeah. You know, if you're saying that something is, or is not economics, well, you can say everything's economics and therefore I want to talk about poetry. There'd be some line drawing exercise in there, but let's say at once you decide to open up it to poetry even. It's a big difference between saying, okay, now we're open to poetry, but you can't say, you know, Dante was bad. Like that's an, that's a forbidden opinion now officially in, in this otherwise open forum that would immediately at an intuitive level strike people as a bigger problem than just saying that poetry isn't economics.

LEX: Yeah. I mean, that intuitive level that you speak to, I hope that all of us have that kind of basic intuition when the line is crossed, it's the same thing for like pornography, right? You know, when you see it, I think there's the same level of intuition that should be applied across the board here. And it's when that intuition becomes deformed by whatever forces of society, that's when it starts to feel like censorship.

GREG: Yeah. I mean, people find it a different thing. You know, if someone loses their job simply for their political opinion, even if that employer has every right in the world to fire you, I think Americans should still be like, well, it's true. They have every right in the world and I'm not making a legal case that maybe you shouldn't fire someone for their political opinion, but think that through. Like what, what society do we want to, what kind of society do we want to live in? And it's been funny watching, you know, and I, I point this out. Yes, I will defend businesses, first amendment rights of association to be able to have the legal right to decide, you know, who works for them. But from a moral or philosophical matter, if you think through the implications of, if every business in America becomes an expressive association, in addition to being a profit maximizing organization, that would be a disaster for democracy because you would end up in a situation where people would actually be saying to themselves, I don't think I can actually say what I really think and still believe I can keep my job. And that's where I was worried. I felt like we were headed because a lot of the initial response to people getting canceled was very simply, you know, Oh, but they have the right to get rid of this person. And that, and that's, that's the end and beginning and end of the discussion. And I thought that was a dodge. I thought that wasn't actually a very serious way of that.

LEX: If you care about both the first amendment and freedom of speech of thinking it through to you, just to clarify the first amendment is kind of a legal embodiment of the ideal of freedom of speech and then freedom of speech applied to government. And it's very specific applied to government and freedom of speech is the application of the principle to like everything, including like kind of the high level philosophical ideal of what it, of the value of people being able to speak their mind.

GREG: Yeah. It's an older, bolder, more expansive idea. And you can have a situation. And I talk about countries that have good free speech law, but not necessarily great free speech culture. And I talk about how when we sometimes make this distinction between free speech law and free speech culture, we're thinking in a very cloudy kind of way. And what I mean by that is that law is generally, particularly in a common law country, it's the reflection of norms. Those judges are people too. And in a lot of cases, common law is supposed to actually take our intuitive ideas of fairness and place them into the law. So if you actually have a culture that doesn't appreciate free speech from a philosophical standpoint, it's not going to be able to protect free speech for the long haul, even in the law. Cause eventually that's one of the reasons why I worry so much about some of these terrible cases coming out of law schools. Because I fear that even though sure American first amendment law is very strongly protective of first amendment for now, it's not going to stay that way. If you have generations of law students graduating who actually think there's nothing, there's no higher goal than shouting down, you're an opponent.

LEX: Yeah. So that's why so much of your focus or large fraction of your focus is on the higher education or education period is because education is the foundation of culture.

GREG: Yeah. You have this history, you know, uh, 64, you have the free speech movement on Berkeley and in a 65, you have repressive tolerance by Herbert Marcuse, which was a declaration of, by the way, um, we on the left, we, we shouldn't, we should have free speech, but we should have free speech for us. I mean, I went, went back and reread, um, uh, repressive tolerance and how clear it is. I forgot I had forgotten that it really is kind of like, um, and these so -called conservatives and right -wingers, we need to repress them because they're regressive thinkers. It really doesn't come out to anything more sophisticated than the very old idea, um, that our people are good. They get free speech. We should, they should keep it. The other side bad. Um, we, we should not have, uh, and we have to retrain society. And of course, like it, it ends up being another, he was also a fan of Mao. So it's not surprising that he, that of course the system would have to rely on some kind of totalitarian, uh, system. Um, but that was a laughable, um, uh, position, you know, uh, say 30, 40 years ago, the idea that essentially, you know, free speech for me, not for the, uh, as, as the great, you know, free speech champion that Hentoff used to say was something that you were supposed to be embarrassed by. But I saw this when I was in, in, in law school in 97, I saw this when I was interning at the ACLU in 99, um, that there was a slow motion train wreck coming that essentially there was, um, these bad ideas from campus that had been taking on more and more steam of basically no free speech for my opponent were actually becoming more, more and more accepted as, and partially because academia was becoming less and less viewpoint diverse. I think that as my co -author Jonathan Haidt points out that when you have low viewpoint diversity, people start thinking in a very kind of tribal way. And if you don't have the respected dissenters, you don't have the people that you can point to that I'm like, Hey, this is a smart person. Um, this is like, this is a smart, reasonable, decent person that I, that I disagree with, so I guess not everyone thinks alike on this issue. You start getting much more kind of like only, you know, only bad people, only heretics, only blasphemers, only right wingers, you know, um, can actually think in this way.

LEX: Every time you say something, I always have a million thoughts and million questions that pop up. But since you mentioned there's a kind of drift as you write about in the book and you mentioned now there's a drift towards the left in academia, um, which we'll also maybe draw a distinction here between the left and the right and the cancel culture as you present in your book is not necessarily associated with any one political viewpoint, that there's mechanisms on both sides that result in cancellation and censorship, uh, in violation of freedom of speech.

GREG: So one thing I want to be really clear about is the book takes on both right and left cancel culture. They're different, uh, in a lot of ways and definitely, you know, um, cancel culture from the left is more important in academia where the left is more dominates. Um, but we talk a lot about cancel culture coming from legislatures. We talk a lot about cancel culture on campus as well, because even though, um, most of the attempts that come from on campus to get people canceled are still from the left, there are a lot of attacks that come from the right that come from, you know, uh, the attempts by different organizations and, uh, sometimes when there are stories in Fox news, you know, like they'll go after professors and about one third of the attempts to get professors punished that are successful actually do come from the right. And, and we talk about, um, attempts to get books banned. Um, in, in the, in the book we talk about, um, and, uh, I talk about suing the Florida legislature. Rhonda Santus had something called the stop woke act, um, which we told everyone this is laughably unconstitutional. Um, they tried to ban, you know, particular topics in higher ed and we're like, no, this is a joke. Like, like, this will, this will be laughed out of court. Um, and they didn't listen to us and they brought it, uh, they passed it and we sued and we won. Now they're trying again with something that's equally as unconstitutional and we will sue again and we will, and we will win.

LEX: Can you elaborate on a stop woke act? So this is presumably trying to limit certain topics from being taught in school.

GREG: Yeah. Basically woke topics. Um, you know, it, it's more, it came out of the sort of attempt to get at a critical race theory. Um, so it's topics related to race, gender, et cetera. Um, I don't remember exactly how they tried to cabinet to, um, uh, to CRT. Um, but when you actually, the law is really well established that you can't tell higher education what they're allowed to teach without violating, uh, without violating the first amendment. And when this got in front of a judge, it was exactly as, uh, he was exactly as skeptical of it as we thought he'd be. I think he called this dystopian. Um, and it w it wasn't a close call.

LEX: So if you're against that kind of teaching the right way to fight it is by making the case that it's not a good idea as part of the curriculum as opposed to banning it from the curriculum.

GREG: Yeah. It just, the state doesn't have the power to simply say, to, to ban, um, you know, what, what teach, what professors in higher education teach. Now it gets a little more complicated when you talk about K through 12, because the state has a role in deciding what public K through 12 teaches because they're your kids, they, it's taxpayer funded. Um, and generally the legislature is involved. Um, there is democratic oversight of that process.

LEX: So for K through 12, is there also lean towards the left in terms of the administration that manages the curriculum?

GREG: Yeah, um, there, there, there definitely is, um, in K through 12, the, the, I mean, my kids go to public school. Um, I have a five and a seven year old, uh, and they have lovely teachers. Um, but we have run into a lot of problems with, with education schools at fire. Um, and a lot of the graduates of education school ended up being the administrators who clamped down on free speech in higher education. And so I'm been trying to think of positive ways to take on some of the, some of the problems that I see in K through 12. I thought that the attempt to just dictate, you won't teach the following 10 books, you know, or 20 books or 200 books was the wrong way to do it. Now, when it comes to deciding what books are in the curriculum, again, that's something the legislature actually, you know, can't, can't have some say in, and that's pretty uncontroversial, um, in terms of the law. But when it comes to how you fight it, I had something that since I'm kind of stuck with a formula, I called empowering of the American mind. Um, I gave principles that were inconsistent, um, with the sort of group think and heavy emphasis on, uh, identity politics, uh, that, um, you know, some of the critics are rightfully complaining about in K through 12. Uh, and we, we, that is actually in canceling of the American mind, but I have a more detailed explanation of it that I'm going to be putting up on my blog, the eternally radical idea.

LEX: Is it possible to legally, that's just a silly question, perhaps create an extra protection for certain kinds of literature 1984 or something to remain in the curriculum. I mean, it's already, it's all protected, I guess. Yeah. I guess to protect against administrators from fiddling too much with the curriculum, like stabilizing the curriculum. I don't know what the machinery of the K through 12 public school.

GREG: In K through 12, you know, the state legislatures, you know, um, they're part of that. They're, they're part of that and they can say like, you should teach the following books. Now, of course, people are always a little bit worried that, um, if you, uh, if they were to recommend, you know, teach, uh, teach the declaration of independence, you know, that it will end up being, well, they're going to teach the declaration of independence was just to protect slavery, which wasn't teaching a particular topic matter, which textbooks you choose, which perspective you take, all that kind of stuff.

LEX: There's like religion starts to creep into the whole question of like, how, you know, is the Bible allowed to teach into corporate that into education? Uh, don't, yeah.

GREG: I mean, I'm, I'm an atheist, uh, with an intense interest in religion. I actually read the entire Bible this year just cause I do stuff like that. And I never actually had read it from beginning to end. Um, then I read the Quran cause you know, and I'm going to try to do the book of Mormon, but you know.

LEX: Well, they started to, you're so fascinating. Um, do you recommend doing that?

GREG: I think you should, um, just to know, cause it's such a touchstone, um, in, in the way people talk about things, it can get pretty tedious, but I even made myself read through all of the very specific instructions on how tall the different parts of the temple need to be and how long the garbs need to be and what shape they need to be and what like, and those go on a lot. Um, that, that, that it surprisingly, sorry, surprisingly big chunk of Exodus. Um, I thought that was more like in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Um, but then you get to books like Job, you know, wow. I mean, Job is such a read and no way Job originally had that ending. Like Job is basically, it starts out as this perverse bet between God, um, and Satan about whether or not they can actually make a good man renounce God. And initially they can't, it's all going very predictably. And then they finally really tortured Job and he turns into the best, why is God cruel? How could God possibly exist? How could a kind God do these things? And he beats, he turns into like the best lawyer in the entire world and he defeats everyone, all the people who come to argue with him. He, he argues the pants off of them. And then suddenly at the end, God shows up and he's like, um, well, you know, uh, I am everywhere. And, uh, it's a very confusing answer. He gives an answer kind of like, I am there when, when, when lionesses give birth and I am there. And by the way, there's this giant monster Leviathan that's very big and it's very scary. And I, and I have to manage the universe. And I'm kind of like, God, are you saying that you're very busy? Is that, is that essentially your argument to Job? And you don't mention the whole, you don't mention the whole kind of like, that I have a bet that's why I was torturing you, that doesn't come up. And then at the end he decides, God decides, like Job's like, oh, no, you're totally right. I was totally wrong. Uh, sorry. Um, and, and God says, I'm going to punish those people who tried to argue with you and didn't, didn't win. So, um, so he gets rid of the, I don't know exactly what he does to them. I don't remember. Um, and then he gives Job all his money back and all, and it makes them super prosperous. And I'm like, no way that was the original ending of that book. Like, because this would like, this was clearly a beloved novel that they were like, but it can't have that ending. Okay. So, so, so, so yeah, so it's a long way of saying, I actually think it's worthwhile. Uh, some of it was, you're always kind of surprised when you end up in the part, like, um, there are parts of it that will sneak up on you, kind of like Isaiah's a trip, um, Ecclesiastes, Depeche mode.

LEX: And you did, you said you also, uh, the, the Qur 'an. Yeah. Which was fascinating. So what is there, it'd be interesting to ask, is there a tension between the study of religious texts or the following of religion and just believing in God and following the various aspects of religion with freedom of speech?

GREG: Um, in the first amendment, uh, we, we have something that we call the religion clause and I've never liked calling it just that because it's two brilliant things right next to each other. The state may not establish an official religion, but it cannot interfere with your right to practice your religion. That's beautiful. Two things at the same time. And I think they're, and I think they're both exactly right. And I think sometimes the right gets very excited of the free exercise clause and the left gets very excited about establishment. And I liked the fact that we have, we have both of them together. Now, how does it relate to freedom of speech? And I was right to the curriculum, like we were talking about. Um, I actually think it would be great if public schools could teach the Bible, like in the sense of like, read it as a historical document. But back when I was at the ACLU, every time I saw people trying this, it always turned into them actually advocating for, you know, a Catholic or Protestant or some orthodox even kind of like read on religion. Um, so if you actually make it into something advocating for a particular view on religion, then it crosses into the establishment clause side. So Americans haven't figured out a way to actually teach it. So it's probably better that you, you know, learn, learn outside of a public school class.

LEX: Do you think it's possible to teach religion, um, from like, uh, world religions kind of course, without disrespecting the religions?

GREG: I think the answer is it depends on from whose perspective.

LEX: Um, well, like the practitioners say you're like an orthodox follower of a particular religion. Is it possible to not piss you off in teaching like all the major religions of the world?

GREG: For some people, the bottom line is you have to teach it as true. Ah, um, and with that under those conditions, then the answer is no, you can't teach it without, without offending someone at least.

LEX: Can't you say these people believe it's true? Can you reform it? So you have to walk on eggshells, essentially.

GREG: You can try really hard and you will still make some people angry, but serious people will be like, oh no, you actually tried to be fair to the beliefs here. Um, and I, and I try to be respectful, um, as much as I can about, um, a lot of this, I still find myself much more drawn to both Buddhism and Stoicism. Well, where do I go?

LEX: Well, one interesting thing to get back to college campuses is, um, the fire keeps the college free speech rankings at rankings .thefire .org. I'm very proud of them. I highly recommend it because forget that even just the ranking, you get to learn a lot about the universities from this entirely different perspective than people are used to when they go to pick whatever university they want to go to. It just gives another perspective on the whole thing. And it gives quotes from people that are students there and so on, like about their experiences. And, and it gives different, maybe you could speak to the various measures here before we talk about who's in the top five and who's in the bottom five. What, what, what are the different parameters that contribute to the evaluation?

GREG: So people have been asking me since day one to do a ranking of schools, according to freedom of speech. And even though we had, we had the best database in existence of campus speech codes, uh, policies that universities have that violate the first amendment or first amendment norms. We also have the best database of, of, uh, we call the disinvitation database. Um, but it's actually the, um, it's better named the deplatforming database, which is what we're going to call it.

LEX: Um, and these are all cases where somebody was invited as a speaker to campus and then were disinvited.

GREG: Disinvited or deplatforming also includes chowding down.

LEX: Um, so they showed up and they couldn't really speak.

GREG: Yeah, exactly. Um, and, and, uh, and so having that, what we really needed in order to have some serious social science to really make a serious argument about what the ranking was, um, was to be able to one, get a better sense of how many professors were actually getting punished during this time. Um, and then the, the, the biggest missing element was to be able to, um, ask students directly what the environment was like on that campus for freedom of speech. Are you comfortable disagreeing with each other? Are you comfortable disagreeing with your, uh, with your professors? Do you think violence is acceptable in response to a speaker? Do you think shouting, uh, do you think shouting down is okay? Do you think blocking people's access to a speaker is okay? Um, and once we were able to get all those elements together, we, uh, first did a test run, I think in 2019, about 50. And we've been doing it for four years now, always trying to make the methodology more and more precise to better reflect the actual environment at particular schools. Um, and this year, the number one school was Michigan technological university, which was a, a nice surprise. Uh, the number two school was actually Auburn university. Um, which was, uh, nice to see, uh, in the top 10, the most well -known prestigious school is actually UVA, um, which did really well this year. University of Chicago was not happy that they weren't number one, but university Chicago is 13 and they had been number one or in the top three for years prior to that.

LEX: So can you explain, it's almost surprising. Is it because of, uh, like the really strong economics departments and things like this or what, why?

GREG: They had a case involving a student. They wouldn't recognize a chapter of turning point USA and they made a very classic argument, um, that we, and classic in the bad way that we hear campuses across the country. Oh, we have a campus Republicans, so we don't need this additional conservative group. And we're like, no, I'm sorry. Like we've seen dozens and dozens of not hundreds of attempts to get this one particular, um, conservative student, a student group, uh, do you recognize or not recognized? And so we told them like, listen, this like, uh, we told them at fire that, uh, you know, we consider this serious and they wouldn't recognize the group. So that, that's a, that, that's a point down in our ranking and it was enough to knock them from, they probably would have been number two in the rankings. Uh, but now they're 13 out of two 48. They're still one of the best schools in the country. I have no problem saying that the school that did not do so well, uh, um, at a negative 10 .69 negative 10 .69 and we rounded up to zero was Harvard and Harvard has been, um, not very happy with that result.

LEX: The only school to receive the abysmal ranking.

GREG: Yeah. And there are a couple of people, oh, Harvard, oh, Harvard. And there are a couple of people who've actually been really, I think, making a mistake by getting very Harvard, um, sounding by being like, I've had statisticians look at this and they, and they, they, they think your methodology is a joke. And, uh, and like pointing out, and this case wasn't that important. And that scholar wasn't that scholar, like the one of the arguments against one of the scholars that we counted against them for, uh, punishing was that that wasn't a very famous or influential scholar. And I'm kind of like, so your argument seems to be snobbery. Like essentially that like you, you're not understanding our methodology for one thing. And then you're saying that actually that scholar wasn't important enough to count. And by the way, Harvard, by the way, Harvard, um, if we, the Harvard campus, yeah. If we, even if we took all of your arguments as true, even if we decided to get rid of those two professors, um, you would still be in negative numbers. You would still be dead last. You would still be after Georgetown and Penn. And neither of those schools are good for freedom of speech.

LEX: I should say the, the, the bottom five is the university of Pennsylvania, Nicosette Penn, uh, the university of South Carolina, Georgetown university, and Fordham university.

GREG: All very well earned. They have so many bad cases at all of those schools.

LEX: What's the best way to find yourself in the bottom five?

GREG: If you're a university, what's, what's the fastest way to that negative, to that zero, a lot of de platforming, um, that, uh, when we looked at the bottom five, uh, 81 % of attempts to get speakers deplatformed were successful at the bottom five. Um, there were a couple of schools, I think Penn included where every single attempt, every time a student, like objected, a student group objected to that speaker coming, they canceled this, this speech. And I think, I think Georgetown was a hundred percent success rate. I think Penn had a hundred percent success rate. I think Harvard did stand up for a couple, but mostly, uh, people got deplatformed there as well.

LEX: So how do you push back on deplatforming? Well, who, who would do it? Is it other students? Is it faculty? Is it the administration? What's the dynamics of, of, uh, pushing back of basically, cause I imagine some of it is culture, but I imagine every university has a bunch of students who will protest basically every speaker. And it's a question of how you respond to that protest.

GREG: Well, here's, here's the dirty little secret about like the big change in 2014. Um, and, and fire and me and height, um, have been very clear that the big change that we saw on campus was that for most of my career, students were great, um, on freedom of speech. They were the best constituency for free speech, absolutely unambiguously until about 2013, 2014. And it was only in 2014 where we had this very, you know, kind of sad for us experience where suddenly students were the ones advocating for deplatforming and new speech codes kind of in a similar way that they had been doing in say like the mid eighties, uh, for example. But here's the dirty little secret. It's not the, it just the students, it's students and administrators, sometimes only a handful of them though, working together to make, uh, to create some of these problems. And this was exactly what happened at Stanford. When Kyle Duncan, uh, a fifth circuit judge tried to speak at my alma mater and a fifth of the class showed up to shout him down. Um, it was a real showing of the, of what was, what was going on that 10 minutes into the shout down of a fifth circuit judge. And I keep on emphasizing that cause I'm a constitutional lawyer, fifth circuit judge judges are big deals. They're one level below the Supreme court. Um, you know, about a fifth of the school shows up to shout them down after 10 minutes of shouting them down and administrator, a DEI administrator gets up with a prepared speech that she, that she's written. That's a seven minute long speech where she talks about, uh, free speech. Maybe the juice isn't worth the squeeze. And we were at this law school where people could learn to challenge these norms. So it's clear that there was coordination, you know, among some of these administrators and from talking to students there, they were in meetings, extensive meetings for a long time. They show up, do a shout down. Then they take additional seven minutes to, to, to lecture the speaker on free speech, not being, not the juice of free speech, not being worth the squeeze. Um, and then for the rest of it, it's just constant heckling. Um, after she, after she leaves, this is clearly, and this, and something very similar, you know, happened a number of times at Yale where it was very clearly administrators were helping along with, with a lot of these disruptions. So I think every time there is a shout down at a university, the investigation should be first and foremost, did administrators help create this problem? Did they do anything to stop it? Because I think a lot of what's really going on here is the hyper bureaucratization of universities with a lot more ideological people who think of their primary job as basically like policing speech, more or less, they're encouraging students, sorry, they're encouraging students who have opinions they like, um, to do shout downs. Um, and that's why they really need to investigate this. And it is, uh, at Stanford, the administrator who, who gave the prepared remarks, um, about the juice, not being worth the squeeze. She has not been invited back to Stanford, but she's one of the only examples I can think of when these things happen a lot where an administrator clearly facilitated something that was a shout down or deplatforming or resulted in a professor getting fired or resulted in a student getting expelled where the administrator has got off scot -free or probably in some cases even gotten a promotion.

LEX: And so a small number of administrators, maybe even a single administrator could participate in the encouraging and the organization and thereby empower the whole process.

GREG: And that's something I've seen throughout my entire career. And the only thing is kind of hard to catch this sort of in the act, so to speak. And that's one of the reasons why it's helpful for people to know about this, you know, uh, because it was this amazing case. This was at university of Washington. Um, and we've actually featured this in a documentary made in 2015, 20, that came on 2015, 2016 called, can we take a joke? Um, and this was when we started noticing something was changing on campus. We also heard that comedians were saying that they couldn't use their good humor anymore. This was right around the time that Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock said that they couldn't, uh, they didn't want to play on campuses cause they, they couldn't, they, they, they couldn't be funny. Uh, but we featured a case of a comedian who wanted to do a musical called the passion of the musical, making fun of the passion of the Christ with the stated goal of offending everyone, every group equally. It was very, very much a South park mission. Um, and it's an unusual case because we actually got documentation of administrators buying tickets for angry students and holding an event where they, where they train them to, to jump up in the middle of it and shout, I'm offended. Like they, they, they bought them tickets. They sent them to this, this thing with the goal of shouting it down. Now, unsurprisingly, when you send an angry group of students to shut down a play, it, it's not going to end at just I'm offended. Um, and it got heated. There were death threats being thrown, uh, the, um, and then the Pullman Washington police told Chris, uh, Chris Lee, the guy who made the play that he, they wouldn't actually protect them. Now it's not every day you're going to have that kind of hard evidence that, that, that, uh, of actually seeing the administrators, uh, it'd be so, uh, so brazen that they recorded the fact that they bought them tickets and sent them. But I think a lot of that stuff is, it is going on. And I think it's the, the, it's a good excuse to cut down on one of the big problems in higher education today, which is hyper -bureaucratization.

LEX: In your experience, is there a distinction between administrators and faculty in terms of, uh, perpetrators of this, of these kinds of things? So if, if we got rid of all, like Harvey's talked about, uh, getting rid of a large percentage of the administration, does that help fix the problem or is the faculty also small percent of the faculty also part of the encouraging in the organization of these kinds of cancel.

GREG: Yeah. And, and that's something that has been profoundly disappointing. Um, is that when you look at the huge uptick in attempts to get professors fired that we've seen over the last 10 years and actually over the last 22 years, as far back as our records go. Um, first they're overwhelmingly led by administrators, attempts to get professors punished. Um, and that was most, you know, I'd say that was my career up until 2013 was, was fighting back at administrative excesses. Um, then you start having the problem in 2014 of students trying to get people canceled. Um, and that really accelerated in 2017 and the number. So one, one way that one, one thing that makes it easier to document is, are the petitions to get professors fired or punished. Um, and how disproportionately that those actually do come from students. But another big uptick has been fellow professors demanding that their fellow professors get punished. And that to me, it's kind of shameful. You, you, you shouldn't be proud of signing the petition to get your fellow professor. And what's, what's even more, uh, more, more shameful is that we get, this, this is, this has almost become a cliche within fire. When someone is facing one of these cancellation campaigns as a professor, I would get letters from some of my friends saying, I am so sorry, this has happened to you. And these were the same people who publicly signed the petition to get them fired.

LEX: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Integrity integrity is an important thing in this world. And I think some of it, I'm so surprised people don't stand up more for this because there's so much hunger for it. And if you have the guts as a faculty or an administrator to really stand, stand up, uh, with eloquence, with rigor, with integrity, I feel like it's impossible for anyone to do anything because there's such a hunger. It's so refreshing. Yeah. I think everybody agrees that freedom of speech is a good thing. Oh, I don't, I don't.

GREG: Well, okay. Sorry, sorry. I don't agree. The, the majority of people, even at the universities that there's a hunger, but it's almost like, uh, this kind of nervousness around it because there's a small number of loud voices. They're doing the shouting. So, I mean, again, that's where great leadership comes in. And so, you know, presidents of universities should probably be, uh, making clear declarations of like, this is not, this is a place where we value the freedom of expression. When, and this was all throughout my career, um, a president, a university president who puts their foot down early and says, nope, you know, we are not entertaining firing this professor. We are not expelling the student. It ends the issue often very fast. Although sometimes, and this is where you can really tell the administrative involvement, um, students will do things like take over the president's office. And then that takeover will be catered by the university. People will point this out sometimes as being kind of like, oh, it's clearly like, um, my friend Sam Abrams, when they tried to get, uh, tried to get him fired at, at, at, uh, Sarah Lawrence college. Um, and, uh, that was one of the times that, that it was used as kind of like, oh, that was hostile to the university because they, the students took over the president's office. And I'm like, no, they let them take over the president's office. And I don't know if that was one of the cases in which the, the takeover was catered, but if there was ever sort of like a sign that's kind of like, yes, this isn't, this is actually really quite friendly.

LEX: Well, in some sense, like protesting and having really strong opinions, even like ridiculous, crazy, wild opinions is a good thing. It's just, it shouldn't lead to actual firing or deplatforming of people. Like it's good to protest. It's just not good to, uh, for the university to support that and take action based on it.

GREG: And this is one of, one of those like, um, tensions in, in, in first amendment that actually, I think has a pretty easy release. Essentially you have app, you absolutely have the right to, uh, devote your life to ending freedom of speech and ridiculing as a concept. And, and there are people who, who really are, can come off as very contemptible about even the philosophy of freedom of speech. Um, and we will defend your right to do that. We will also disagree with you. And if you try to get a professor fired, we will be on the other side of that. Now, I think you had Randy Kennedy, who I really, I love him. I think he's a great guy, but he's, he criticized us for our deplatforming database as saying, this is saying that students can't protest speakers. I'm like, okay, that's silly. Um, uh, we fire as an organization have defended the right to protest all the time. We are constantly defending the rights of the rights protesters, not believing that the protesters have the right to say this would like, basically that would be. Punishing the speakers. We're not calling for punishing, um, uh, the protestors, but what we are saying is you can't let the protestors win if they're demanding someone be fired for their freedom of speech.

LEX: So the line there is between protesters protesting and the university taking action based on the protest.

GREG: Yeah, exactly. And of course, shout downs that that's just mob censorship. Um, and that's something where the university, the way, the way you actually, you deal with that tension in first amendment law is essentially kind of like the one positive duty that the government has. The first, the negative duty, the thing that it's not allowed to do is censor you. Um, but it's positive duty is that if, that if I want to say awful things, or for that matter, great things that aren't popular in a public park, um, you can't let the crowd just shout me down. Um, you can't allow what's called a heckler's veto.

LEX: That's so interesting. Cause I feel like that comes into play on social media as well. Cause, uh, you know, there's this whole discussion about censorship and freedom of speech, but to me, the, the carrot question is almost more interesting. Once the freedom of speech is established is how do you incentivize high quality debate and disagreement? I'm thinking a lot about that.

GREG: And that's one of the things we talk about in canceling of the American mind is arguing towards truth and that cancel culture is cruel. It's merciless. It's anti -intellectual, but it also will never get you anywhere in your truth. And you are going to waste so much time destroying your opponents, um, in, in something that can actually never get you to truth through the process, of course, of, you never actually get directly at truth. You just chip away at falsity.

LEX: Yeah. But everybody having a megaphone on the internet with anonymity, it seems like it's better than censorship, but it feels like there's incentives on top of it. On top of that, you can construct to, um, yeah, to incentivize better discourse. Yeah. It's like to incentivize somebody who puts a huge amount of effort to make even the most ridiculous arguments, but basically ones that don't include any of the things you highlight in terms of all the rhetorical tricks to shut down conversations, just make really good arguments for whatever. Doesn't matter if it's a communism for fascism, whatever the heck you want to say, but do it with scale, with historical context, with, uh, uh, with steel man on the other side, all those kinds of elements.

GREG: We try to make three major points in the book. One, um, is just simply cancel culture is real. It's a, it's a historic era, um, and it's on a historic scale. The second one is you should think of cancel culture as part of a, um, rhetorical, as a larger lazy rhetorical, uh, approach to what, what, what we refer to as winning arguments without winning arguments. And we mean that in two senses without having winning arguments or without have actually having one arguments. And we talk about all the different, what we call rhetorical fortresses that both the left and the right have that prevent you from, that allow you to just dismiss the person, um, or dodge the argument without actually ever getting to the substance of the argument. Third part is just, you know, how do we fix it? But the rhetorical fortress stuff is actually something I've been, I'm very passionate about because it interferes with our ability to get at truth and it wastes time and frankly, it also kind of since cancel culture is part of that rhetorical tactic, it can also ruin lives.

LEX: It would actually be really fun to talk about this particular aspect of the book. And I highly recommend if you're listening to this, go pre -order the book now.

GREG: Uh, when does it come out? October 17th. Okay. The canceling of the American mind. Okay. So in, uh, in the book, you also have a list of cheap rhetorical tactics that both the left and the right use. And then you have a list of tactics that the left uses and the right uses. So there's the rhetorical, the perfect rhetorical fortress that the left uses and the efficient rhetorical fortress that the right uses.

LEX: First one is what about ism. Maybe we can go through a few of them that capture your heart in this particular moment as we talk about it. And if, if you can describe examples of it or if, uh, there's aspects of it that you see there, especially effective effective. So, uh, what about ism is defending against criticism of your side by bringing up the other side's alleged wrongdoing.

GREG: I want to make little cards of these, uh, of all of these tactics and start using them on X all the time because they are so commonly deployed.

LEX: And what about ism I put first for a reason, you know, it'd be an interesting idea to actually integrate that into Twitter slash X where people, you know, instead of clicking heart, they can click which of the, uh, uh, which of the rhetorical tactics this is. And then, cause you know, there's actually community notes. I don't know if you've seen on X that you people can contribute notes and it's quite fascinating. It works really, really well, but to give it a little more structure. Yeah. That's a really interesting method actually.

GREG: Yeah. I actually, when I was thinking about ways X could be used to argue towards truth, I wouldn't want to have it so that, you know, everybody would be bound to that. But I think that I imagine almost being like a stream within X that was truth focused that, that agrees to some additional rules on how they would argue. Yeah, man.

LEX: I would love that. Where like there's in terms of streams that intersect and can be separated the shit talking one where people just enjoy talking shit. Okay. Go for it, man. And then there's like truth and then, uh, I mean, they're like, then there's humor, then there's like good vibes. Like, you know, I'm not like somebody who absolutely needs good vibes all the time, but sometimes it's nice to have, it's nice to just log in and not have to see like the drama, the fighting, the bickering, the, the cancellations, the moms, all of this. It's good to just see, uh, that's why I go to Reddit are or like, uh, what are the cute animals ones, whether there's cute puppies and kittens.

GREG: And it's like, I just want to see Ryan Reynolds singing with Will Farrell.

LEX: I mean, sometimes that's all you need that in my heart. Yeah. Not all the time, just a little bit and right back to the battle for truth. Okay. So what about ism?

GREG: What about as a Mia? That's everywhere. Um, when, when you look at it, uh, when you look at Twitter, when you look at social media in general, um, and the first, like what we call the obstacle course is basically time tested, old fashioned, you know, argumentative dodges that everybody uses. And what about asm is just bringing up something, uh, you know, like someone makes an argument, like Biden is corrupt. And, and then someone says, well, Trump was worse, you know, like, and that's not an illegitimate, you know, argument to make back, but it does, it, it seems to happen. Every time someone makes an assertion, someone just points out some other thing that was going on and it can get increasingly attenuated from, from, from what you're actually trying to argue. And when you, and then you see this all the time on social media and it's kind of, you know, I was a big fan of Jon Stewart's daily show, but an awful lot of what the humor was and what the tactic was for arguing was this thing over here. It's like, Oh, I'm making this argument about this important problem. Oh, actually, you know, there, there's this other problem over here that I'm more concerned about. And it, it, you know, and on the, you know, let's, let's pick on the right here. So January 6, you know, watching everybody arguing about, um, chop, you know, like the, um, uh, the, the occupied part of Seattle or the occupied part of Portland and set, and basically trying to like, Oh, you're bringing up the, the, the riot in January 6. Um, and by the way, I live on Capitol Hill. So believe me, I was very aware of like how scary and bad it was. Um, you know, like I said, that just, my dad grew up in Yugoslavia and that was a night where we all ate dinner in the basement. Cause I'm like, Oh, when the shit goes down, eat in the basement. It was, it was, it was genuinely scary. And people would try to deflect from January 6 being serious by actually making the argument that, Oh, well, there are crazy, horrible things happening in all over the country. Uh, you know, riots, uh, uh, um, that came from some of the social justice protests. And of course the answer is you can be concerned about both of these things and, and find them both problems. But you know, if I'm arguing about chop, you know, someone bringing up January 6 isn't super relevant to it. Or if I'm arguing about January 6, someone bringing up the riots in 2020, isn't that helpful?

LEX: We took a long dark journey from what about ism and, uh, related to that is straw manning and steel manning. So misrepresenting the, the, the, the perspective of the, the, the opposing perspective. And this is something also, uh, I, I guess it's very prevalent and it's difficult to do the reverse of that, which is steel manning requires empathy or requires eloquence. It requires understanding, actually doing the research and understanding the, the, the alternative perspective.

GREG: My, uh, wonderful employee, Angel and Eduardo has something that he calls star manning and I find myself doing this a lot. It's nice to have, you know, two immigrant parents, um, because I remember being in San Francisco, uh, you know, uh, in the weird kind of like ACLU slash burning man kind of cohort and having a friend there who was an artist who would talk about hating Kansas. And that was his metaphor for middle America is what he meant by it. And, but he was kind of proud of the fact that he hated Kansas. And I'm like, you gotta understand. I still see all of you a little bit as foreigners and think about like, change the name of Kansas to Croatia, you know, change the name of Kansas to, to, to some. That's what it sounds like to me. And the star manning idea, which I, which I like is, is the idea of being like, so you're saying that you really hate your dominant religious minority, like, and that's when you start actually detaching yourself a little bit from it, how typical America is exceptional a number of ways, but some of our dynamics are incredibly typical. It's one of the reasons why, like when people start reading Thomas soul, for example, they start getting hooked because one of the things he does is he does comparative analysis of countries problems and points out that some of these things that we think are just unique to the United States exist in, you know, 75 % of the rest of the countries in the world. Francis Fukuyama's, um, the book that I'm reading right now, origins of the political order actually does this wonderful job of pointing out how we're not special in a variety of ways. This is actually something that's very much on my mind. And, uh, Fukuyama of course, uh, it's a, it's a, it's a great book. It's not, it's stilted a little bit in its writing because his term for one of the things he's concerned about what destroys societies is repatriation, which is the reversion to societies in which you favor your family and friends. And I actually think a lot of what I'm seeing in sort of, um, uh, in the United States, it makes me worried that we might be going through a little bit of a process of repatriation. And I think that's one of the reasons why people are so angry. I think having an, I think the prospect that we, you know, we very, we very nearly seem to have an election that was going to be, you know, Jeb Bush versus Hillary Clinton. It's like, are we a dynastic country now? Is that what's kind of happening? But also it's one of the reasons why people are getting so angry about the, about legacy admissions, about like how much, you know, certain families seem to be able to keep their people in the upper classes of the United States perpetually. And believe me, like I was poor when I was a kid and I went to, and I got to go to, I got to go to one of the fancies. I got to go to Stanford. And I got to see how people, they treat you differently in a way that's almost insulting. Like basically like suddenly to a certain kind of person, I was a legitimate person. And I look at how much America relies on Harvard, on Yale to produce its, I'm going to use a very marks a sounding term, ruling class. And that's one of the reasons why you have to be particularly worried about what goes on at these elite colleges. And these elite colleges with the exception of University of Chicago and UVA do really badly regarding freedom of speech. And that has all sorts of problems. It doesn't bode well for the future of the protection of freedom of speech for the rest of the society.

LEX: So can you also empathize there with the folks who voted for Donald Trump? Because as precisely that as a resistance to this kind of momentum of the ruling class, this royalty that passes on the rule from generation to generation.

GREG: I try really hard to empathize with to a degree everybody and try to really see where they're coming from and the anger on the right. I get it. I mean, like, I feel like the, the book, so copping the American mind was a book that I, that could be sort of a crowd pleaser to a degree, partially because we really meant what we said in the subtitle that these are good intentions and bad ideas that are hurting people. And if you understand it and read the book, you can say, it's like, okay, this isn't anybody being malicious. You know, this is people trying to protect their kids. They're just doing it in a way that actually can actually lead to greater anxiety, depression, and strangely eventually pose a threat to freedom of speech. But in this one, we can't be quite, me and my, oh, I haven't even mentioned my brilliant co -author, Ricky Schlott, a 23 year old genius. She's, she's, she's amazing. I started working with her when she was 20, who's, who's my co -author on this book. So when I'm saying we, I'm talking about me and Ricky. He's a libertarian. Libertarian journalist.

LEX: And a journalist. Yeah. A brilliant mind.

GREG: Yeah. And, but we can't actually write this in a way that's too kind because cancelers aren't kind. There's a cruelty and a mercilessness about it. I mean, I started getting really depressed this past year when I was writing it and I didn't even want to tell my staff why I was getting so anxious and depressed. It's partially because I'm talking about people who will, you know, in some of the cases we're talking about, go to your house, target your kids. So, so that's a long way of saying the, I kind of can get what sort of drives the right nuts to a degree in this. I feel like they're constantly feeling like they're being gaslit. Elite education is really insulting to the working class. Like it, part of the ideology that is dominant right now kind of treats, almost 70 % of the American public, like they're, we thought we developed this a little bit in the perfect rhetorical fortress, like they're to some, some way illegitimate and not worthy of respect or compassion.

LEX: Yeah. The, the general elitism that radiates, self -fueling elitism that radiates from the people that go to these institutions.

GREG: And what's funny is the, the, the elitism has been repackaged as a kind of, it masquerades as kind of infinite compassion, but essentially it's based in a sort of a very, to be frank, overly simple ideology and oversimply, a simple explanation of the world and breaking people into groups and judging people on how oppressed they are on their, on the intersection of their various identities. And it came to that, I think initially with, with, with an, an appeal from a compassionate core, but it gets used in a way that is, can be very cruel, very dismissive, compassionless, and allows you to not take seriously most of your fellow human beings.

LEX: It's really weird how that happened. Maybe you can explore why a thing that has kind of sounds good at first. Yeah. Can be, can create, can become such a cruel weapon of canceling and hurting people and ignoring people. I mean, this is what you described with the perfect rhetorical fortress. Yeah. Which is a set of questions. Maybe you can elaborate on what the perfect rhetorical fortress is.

GREG: Yeah. So the perfect rhetorical fortress is the way that's been developed on the left to not ever get to someone's actual argument. I want to make a chart, like a flow chart of this about like, here's the argument and here is this perfect fortress that will deflect you every time from getting to the argument. And I started to notice this certainly when I, when I was in law school, that there were lots of different ways you could dismiss people and perfect rhetorical fortress step one. And I can attest to this because I was guilty of this as well, that you can dismiss people if you can argue that they're conservative. They don't have to be conservative to be clear. You just have to say that they are. So I never read Thomas Sowell because he was a right winger. I didn't read Camille Poglia because I was, I, someone had convinced me she was a right winger. There were lots of authors that, and when I was in law school, it, among a lot of very bright people, it really was already an intellectual habit that if you could designate something conservative, then you didn't really have to think about it very much anymore or take it particularly seriously. This is a childish way of arguing, but nonetheless, I engaged in it. It was a common tactic. I even mentioned in the book, there was a time when a, a gay activist friend who was, I think decidedly to my left, but nonetheless had that pragmatic experience of actually being an activist said something like, well, just because someone's conservative doesn't mean they're wrong. And I remember feeling kind of scandalized at some level of just being like, well, that's kind of, isn't that the whole thing when we're saying is that they're just kind of bad people with bad ideas.

LEX: You can just throw a, oh, that guy's a right winger. You can just throw that.

GREG: Don't have to think about you anymore.

LEX: Yeah. And then it can, if you're popular enough, it can be those, it can be kind of sticky. Yeah.

GREG: Like, and it's weird because, because it's effective, that's why it keeps on getting used to essentially it, it should have hit someone's because, because I, you know, I have a great liberal pedigree, you know, everything from working at the ACLU to doing refugee law in Eastern Europe to, I was part of an environmental mentoring program for inner city high school kids in DC. You know, I've been, I've been, I, I, I can, you know, defend myself as being on the left, but I hate doing that because there's also part of me that's like, okay, so what, like, are you really saying that if you can magically make me argue or convince yourself that, that I'm on the right, that you don't have to listen to me anymore? And again, that's arguing like children. And the reason why this has become so popular is because even among, or maybe, maybe especially among elites that it works so effectively as a perfect weapon that you can use uncritically. If I can just prove you're on the right, I don't have to, I don't have to think about you. It's no wonder that suddenly you start seeing people calling the ACLU right wing and calling the New York Times right wing because it's been such an effective way to delegitimize people as thinkers. We've, you know, Stephen Pinker, who's on our board of advisors, he refers to academia as being the left pole that essentially it's, it's a position that from, from that point of view, everything looks to its right, it looks as if it's on the right. But once it becomes a tactic that we accept, it, and that's one of the reasons why, you know, I'm, I'm, I'm more on the left, but I think I'm left of center liberal. Ricky is, you know, more conservative libertarian. And initially I was kind of like, should I be really be writing something with someone who's more on the right? And I'm like, absolutely I should be. I have to actually live up to what I believe on this stuff because it's ridiculous that we have this primitive idea that you can dismiss someone as soon as you claim, rightly or wrongly, that they're on the right.

LEX: Well, I feel, correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like you were recently called right wing fire, maybe you by association because of that debate.

GREG: Oh, the LA Times. The LA Times. Let's talk about the LA Times.

LEX: So yes, there's an article, there's a debate. I can't wait to watch it because I don't think it's available yet to watch on video. You have to attend in person. I can't wait to see it. Uh, but fire was in part supporting and then LA Times wrote, um, a scathing article about, uh, that everybody in the debate was basically right leaning right. Okay.

GREG: Uh, so much to unpack there. Uh, you know, Barry Weiss has this, you know, great, great project, the free press. I've been very impressed. It's covering stories that the, that a lot of the media right or left isn't willing to cover. Um, and we did a, uh, we hosted a debate with her. Um, uh, and we, we wanted to make it as fun and controversial as possible. Uh, so fire and the free press hosted a debate. Did the sexual revolution fail? So the debate was really exciting, really fun. The side that said that sexual revolution wasn't a failure that, that, that Grimes and Sarah Hader were on. One, um, it was, you know, a nice, meaty, thoughtful night. And we got a rev there was a review of it that was just sort of scathing about the whole thing. And it included a line saying that, uh, fire, which claims to believe in free speech, but only defends viewpoints to degrees with. I can't believe that even made it into the magazine. Cause it's not just calling us. Cause of course, you know, the implication of course, that we're right wing, um, which we're not actually the staff leans decidedly more to the left and to the right. Um, but we also defend people all over the spectrum, all the time. Like that's something that, that even the most minimal Google search would have solved. So like we've been given LA times some heat on this because it's like, yeah, if you said. In my opinion, they're right wing, we would have argued back, you know, um, saying, well, here, here, here's the following 50 ,000 examples of, of, of us not being, but when you actually make the factual claim that we only defend opinions, we agree with, first of all, there's no way for us to agree with it. There's no way for us to agree with opinions because we actually have a politically diverse staff who won't even agree on which opinions are good and what opinions we have. But yeah, I had to, I, at one time when someone did something like this and they were just being a little bit flippant about kind of like free speech being fine. I did a 70 tweet long thread, you know, just being like, Hey, do you really think this is fine? I decided not to do that, um, on this particular one. But the nice thing about it is it demonstrated two parts of the book, uh, canceling of the American mind. If not more, one of them is dismissing someone cause they're conservative. Uh, and because that was the implication don't have to listen to fire cause they're conservative. But the other one is something, a term that I invented specifically for the way people argue on Twitter, which is hypocrisy projection. Hi, I'm person who only cares about one side of the political fence. And I think everyone else is a hypocrite. Um, and by the way, I haven't done any actual research on this, but I assume everyone else is a hypocrite. And you see this happen all the time. The, the, and this happens to fire a lot where someone will be like, where is fire on this case? And we're like, we are literally quoted in the link you just sent, but didn't actually read. Or it's like, where's fire on this? It's like, here's a, here's our lawsuit about it from six months ago. Um, so it's a favorite thing. And also John Stewart daily show, like the, the, the, the, um, uh, what about ism and the kind of like idea that these people must be hypocrites is something that greatest comedy, but as far as actually a rhetorical tactic that will get you to truth, just assuming that your opponent or just accusing your opponent of always being a hypocrite is not a good tactic for truth. But by the way, it tends to always come from people who aren't actually consistent on free speech themselves.

LEX: So that hands the projection, but basically not doing the research about whether the person is or isn't a hypocrite and assuming others are a large fraction of others reading it, uh, will also not do the research. And therefore this kind of statement becomes a kind of truthiness without a grounding in actual reality. It breaks down that barrier between what is and isn't true because if, if the mob says something is true, it's, it takes too much effort to correct it.

GREG: And there are three ways I want it, like, you know, I want to respond to this, which is just giving example after example of, of times where we defended people on both sides of every majorish, basically every major issue, whether it's Israel, Palestine, whether it's terrorism, whether it's gay marriage, we have been abortion. We have defended both sides of that argument. The other part, and I call these the orphans of the culture war. I really want to urge the media to start caring about free speech cases that are that actually don't have a political valence that are actually just about good old -fashioned exercise of power against the little guy or little girl or little group on campus or off campus for that matter. Cause these cases happen. A lot of our litigation are just little people as regular people being told that they can't protest, that they can't hold signs. And then the last part of the argument that I want people to really get is like, yeah. And by the way, uh, right wingers get in trouble too. Um, and there are attacks from the left and you should take those seriously too. Um, you should care when Republicans get in trouble. You should care when California has a DEI, a program that requires this on the California community colleges has a DEI program policy that actually requires even chemistry professors to work in a different DEI ideas from intersectionality to anti -racism into their classroom, into their syllabus, et cetera. This is a gross violation of academic freedom. It is as bad as it is to tell professors what they can't say. Like we fought and defeated in Florida. It's even worse to tell them what they must say. That's downright totalitarian. And we're suing against this. And what I'm, what I'm saying is that it, when you're dismissing someone for just being on the other, other side of the political fence, you are also kind of claiming, making a claim that none of these cases matter as well. And I want people to care about censorship when it even is against people they hate.

LEX: Censorship is censorship. If we can take that tangent briefly with DEI, diversity, equity, and inclusion, what is the good and what is the harm of such programs?

GREG: DEI, I know people who are DEI, um, consultants or some, actually I have a dear friend who I love very much, um, who does DEI. Absolutely decent people. What they want to do is create bonds of understanding, friendship, compassion among the people, people who are different. Unfortunately, the research on what a lot of DEI actually does is often times the opposite of that. And I think that it's partially a problem with some of the ideology that comes from a critical race theory, which is a real thing, by the way, that, that informs a lot of DEI, that actually makes it something more likely to divide than unite. We talk about this in coddling in the American mind as the difference between common humanity identity politics and common enemy identity politics. And I think that, uh, I know some of the people that I know who, who do DEI, they really want it to be common humanity identity politics, but some of the actual ideological assumptions that are baked in can actually cause people to feel more alienated from each other. Now, when I started at FIRE, my first cases involved 9 -11. Um, and it was bad. Uh, professors were getting targeted. Professors were losing their jobs for saying insensitive things about 9 -11 and both from, from the right and the left, actually in that case, actually sometimes more, a lot more from the right. Um, and it was really bad. And about five professors lost their jobs. That's bad. Five professors over a relatively short period of time being fired for a political opinion. That's something that, you know, would get written up in any previous decades. We're now evaluating like how many professors have been targeted for cancellation between 2014 and, uh, middle of this year, July of, of, of 2023. We're in about, well over a thousand attempts to get professors, uh, fired or punished, usually driven by students and administrators, often driven by professors, unfortunately as well. About two thirds of those result in the professor being punished in some way. Um, everything from, you know, having their article removed to suspension, et cetera. About one fifth of those result in professors being fired. So right now we're, it's, it's almost 200, it's around 190, um, professors being fired. Um, so I want to give some context here. Uh, the, the Red Scare is generally considered to have been, uh, from 1947 to 1957. It ended by the way in 57 when it finally became clear, um, thanks to the first amendment that you couldn't actually fire people for their ideologies. Prior to that, a lot of universities thought they could. They were like, this guy is a very doc, uh, doctrinaire communist. Uh, you know, it can't be just waited. I'm, I'm going to fire them. They thought they actually could do that. Um, and it was only 57 when the law was established. So like right now, these are happening in an environment where freedom of speech, academic freedom are clearly protected, um, at public colleges in the United States. And we're still seeing these kinds of numbers. Um, during, during the Red Scare, the biggest study that was done of what was going on is I think this came out in like 55. And the evaluation was that there was about 62 professors fired for, for, for being communist and about 90 something professors fired for political views overall. Um, that usually is, it is reported as being about 100. Um, so 60, 90, 100, depending on how you look at it, I think the number is actually higher. Um, but that's only because of hindsight. Like what I mean by hindsight is we can look back and we actually find there were more professors who were fired at, as time reveals, we're at 190 professors fired. And I still have to put up with people saying this isn't even happening. And I'm like in the nine and a half years of cancel culture, 190 professors fired in the 11 years of, uh, of the Red Scare, probably, you know, somewhere around a hundred, maybe probably more it's got, the number is going to keep going up. Um, but unlike during the Red Scare where people could clearly tell something was happening, the craziest thing about cancel culture is some still dealing with people who are saying this isn't happening at all. And it hasn't been subtle on campus. And we know that's a wild undercount, by the way, because when we, when we surveyed professors, 17 % of them said that they had been threatened with, uh, threatened with investigation or actually investigated for what they taught, said, or their research. And one third of them said that they were told by administrators not to take on controversial research. So like extrapolating that out, that that's a huge number. And the reason why you're not going to hear about a lot of these cases is because there are so many different conformity inducing mechanisms in the whole thing. Yeah. And that's one of the reasons why the idea that you'd add something like a D, like requiring a DEI statement to be hired or to get into a school under the current environment is so completely nuts. We have had a genuine crisis of academic freedom over the last, you know, particularly since 2017 on campuses, we have very low viewpoint diversity to begin with. And under these circumstances, administrators to start saying, you know what the problem is? We have too much heterogeneous thought. We have, we're not homogeneous enough. We actually need, you know, we need another political litmus test, which is nuts. And that's what a DEI statement effectively is. Cause there's no way to actually fill out a DEI statement without someone evaluating you on your politics. It's crystal clear. It's crystal clear. We even did an experiment on this Nate honeycutt. He got something like almost like 3000 professors to participate evaluating different kinds of DEI statements. Um, and one was basically like the standard kind of identity politics intersectionality one, one was about viewpoint diversity. One was about religious diversity and one was about socioeconomic diversity. And as far as where my heart really is, it's that we have too little socioeconomic diversity, particularly in elite higher ed, but also in education period. So the experiment was large participation, really interestingly set up. And it tried to model the way a lot of these DEI policies were actually implemented. And one of the ways these have been implemented, and I think in some of the California schools is that administrators and go through the DEI statements before. Anyone else looks at them and then eliminates people off the top, depending on how, how they feel about their, um, DEI statements and the one on, um, viewpoint diversity. I think like half of the people who reviewed it would, would eliminate it right out. Um, and I think it was basically the same for religious diversity. It was slightly better, like 40 % for socioeconomic diversity, but that kills me. Like the idea that kind of like, yeah, that actually is the kind of diversity that I think we need a great deal more of in, in higher education. You can agree with it's not hostile to the other kinds, by the way. Um, but the idea that we need more people from the bottom, you know, uh, three quarters of American society, like in a higher education, I think should be something we could all get around. But the only one that really succeeded was the one that's, that sprouted back exactly the kind of, you know, uh, ideology that they thought the rears would like, which is like, okay, there's no way this couldn't be a political litmus test. We've proved that it's a political litmus test and still school after school is adding these to its application process to make schools still more ideologically homogenous.

LEX: Why does that have a negative effect? Is it because it enforces a kind of group think where people are afraid, start becoming afraid to sort of think and speak freely, liberally about whatever.

GREG: Well, one, it selects for people who tend to be farther to the left, um, in a situation where you already have, uh, people, a situation where universities do lean decidedly that way, but it also establishes essentially a set of sacred ideas that if you're being quizzed on whether, you know, what you've done to advance anti -racism, um, injured, uh, how you've been conscious of intersectionality, it's unlikely that you'd actually get in. And if you said, by the way, I actually think these are dubious concepts. I think they're thin. I think they're philosophically not very defensible, but basically like if, if your position was, I actually re I actually reject, um, these concepts as being over simple. Um, you're not, you're not going to get in. And, and, and I think that, um, the person that I always think of that wasn't a right winger that would be like, go to hell. If you, if you made him fill one of these things out, it's Feynman. I feel like if you, if you gave one of these things to Richard Feynman, he'd be like, he would tear it to pieces.

LEX: Yeah. And not get the job. Yeah, there, there's some element of it that creates this hard to pin down fear. So you said like the firing, the thing I wanted to say is firing a hundred people or 200 people. The point is even firing one person, I've just seen it. It can create this quiet ripple effect of fear. Oh, of course. That single firing of a faculty. Oh, absolutely. Has a ripple effect across tens of thousands of people, of educators, of, of, uh, who's hired, what kind of conversations are being had, had, what kind of textbooks are chosen, what kind of self -censorship and different flavors of that is happening. It's hard to measure that. Yeah.

GREG: I mean, when you ask professors about, you know, are they intimidated under the current environment? Um, the, the answer is yes. And particularly conservative professors, you know, already, you know, reporting that they're, you know, afraid for their jobs in a lot of different cases.

LEX: You have a lot of good statistics in the book, things like self -censorship. When provided with the definition of self -censorship, at least a quarter of students said they self -censor fairly often or very often during conversations with other students, with professors and during classroom discussions, 25%, 27 % and 28 % respectively. Uh, a quarter of students also said that they are more likely to self -censor on campus now, uh, at the time they were surveyed than they were when they first started college. So sort of colleges kind of instilling this idea of, of, of censorship, self -censorship.

GREG: And back to the Red Scare comparison, and this is one of the interesting things about the data as well, is that that same study that I was talking about, the most comprehensive study of the, of the Red Scare, there was polling about whether or not professors were self -censoring due to the fear of the environment. And 9 % of professors said that they were self -censoring their research and that what they were saying, 9 % is really bad. Um, that, that's almost a 10th of professors saying that they were actually, their speech was chilled. When we did this question for professors on our latest faculty survey, um, when you factor together, if they're, we asked them, are they self -censoring in their research or they self -censoring in class, they're self-censoring online, et cetera, it was 90 % of professors. So the idea that we're actually in an environment that is historic, um, in terms of like how scared people are actually of expressing controversial views. I think that it's, it's the reason why we're going to actually be studying this in 50 years, the same, the, the same way we study the Red Scare. Um, it's not the idea that this isn't happening is, will just be correctly viewed as insane.

LEX: So maybe we can just, uh, discuss the leaning, the current leaning of academia towards the left, which you describe in various different perspectives. So one, there's a voter registration ratio chart that you have by department, which I think is interesting. Can you explain this chart and can you explain what it shows?

GREG: Yeah, when I started fire in 2001, I didn't take the viewpoint diversity issue as seriously. I thought it was just something that right -wingers complained about. Um, but I really started to get what happens when you have a community with low, um, with low, uh, viewpoint diversity. And actually a lot of the research that I got most interested in was, uh, done in conjunction with the great Cass Sunstein, um, who writes a lot about group polarization. Um, because as, uh, and the research on this is very strong, but essentially when you have groups with, um, political diversity, and you can see this actually in judges, for example, it tends to produce, you know, reliably more moderate outcomes. Um, whereas groups that are, that have low political diversity tend to sort of spiral, spiral off in their own direction. And when you have a super majority of people from just one political perspective, that's a problem for the production of ideas. It creates a situation where there are sacred ideas. Um, and when you look at some of the departments, um, you know, I think the S the estimate from the Crimson is that Harvard is, has 3 % conservatives. But when you look at different departments, there are elite departments that have literally no, um, uh, conservatives, uh, in them. And I think that's, that's on a healthy intellectual, uh, environment. The problem is definitely worse. Um, as you get more elite, uh, we definitely see more cases of, uh, lefty professors getting canceled at less elite schools. It gets worse as you, as you get down from the, the, the elite schools, that's where a lot of the one third of attempts to get, uh, professors punished that are successful, you know, do, do come from the right and largely from off campus, uh, off campus sources. And we spend a lot of time talking about that in the book as well. Um, it's something that I do think is underappreciated. Uh, but when it comes to the low, low viewpoint diversity, it's, you know, it works out kind of like you'd expect to a degree, you know, economics is what four to one or something like that. It's not as bad. Um, but then when you start getting into some of the humanities, you know, like there are departments that they're literally none.

LEX: Is there a good why to why did the university's university faculty administration move to the left?

GREG: Yeah, I don't love, and this is an argument that you'll sometimes run into on the left, uh, just the argument that, well, people on the left are just smarter. Right. And it's like, okay, it's, it's interesting because at least the research as of 10 years ago was indicating that if you dig a little bit deeper into that, a lot of the people who do consider themselves on the left tend to be a little bit more. Libertarian, the song that Pinker, uh, you know, wrote a fair amount about the idea that we're just smarter. It is not, is not an opinion. I, I'm at least a bit comfortable with, um, I do think that, that, uh, it, that departments take on, um, momentum when they become a place where you're like, wow, it'd be really unpleasant for me to work in this department. If I'm the token conservative. And I think that takes on a life of its own. There are also departments where a lot of the ideologies kind of explicitly leftist. Um, you look at education schools, a lot of the, a lot of the stuff that is actually leftover from what is correctly called critical race theories is present. And you end up having that in a number of the departments. Um, and it would be very strange to be a, in many departments, a, you know, a conservative social worker professor. I'm sure they exist. Um, but it, there's a lot of pressure to shut up if you are.

LEX: So the process on the left of cancellation, as you started to talk about with the perfect rhetorical fortress, the, the first step is dismiss a person. If they're just, if you can put a label of conservative on them, you can dismiss them in that way. What, what other efficient or what other effective dismissal are there?

GREG: We have a little bit of fun with, uh, uh, with demographic numbers, but I run this by height. Um, uh, and I remember him being kind of like, I don't, don't, don't include the actual percentage. I'm like, no, we need to include the actual percentages. Cause people are really bad at estimating what the demographics of the U S actually looks like both the right and the left in different ways. Um, so we put it in the numbers and we talk about, you know, um, being dismissed for being white or being dismissed for, uh, being straight or being dismissed for being male. Um, and we, uh, and you can already dismiss people for being conservative. And we, so we, we, we give examples in the book of, of these being used to dismiss people and oftentimes on topics not related to the fact that they're a male or whether or not they're minority. And then we get to, I think it's like layer six and we're like, surprise, guess what? You're down to 0 .4 % of the population and none of it mattered. Because if you have the wrong opinion, even if you're in that 0 .4 % of the most intersectional person who ever lived and you have the wrong opinion, you're a heretic and you actually probably will be hated even more. And the most interesting part of the research we did for this was just asking every prominent, uh, black conservative and moderate that we knew personally, have you been told that you're not really black for an opinion you had every single one of them was like, oh yeah, no. And it's kind of funny cause it's like oftentimes white lefties telling them that's like, oh, do you consider yourself black? John McWhorter talked about having a reporter. Um, when he talked about, when he showed that he dissented from some of, uh, what he described as kind of like woke racism in his book, woke ideas, the reporter actually is like, so do you consider yourself black? He's like, he was like, what are you crazy? Of course I do. And Coleman Hughes had one of the best quotes on it. He said, I'm constantly being told that the most important thing, uh, to the, how legitimate my opinion is, is whether, uh, whether or not I'm black, but then when I have a dissenting opinion, I get told I'm not really black. So perfect. Like there's, there's, there's no way to falsify, uh, this argument. Um, that one really, that investigation really, really struck me.

LEX: So, and you lay this out really nicely in the book that there is this process of saying, are you conservative? Yes. You can dismiss the person. Are you white? Dismiss the person. Are you male? You can dismiss the person. There's these categories that make it easier for you to dismiss a person's ideas based on that. And like you said, you end up in that tiny percentage and you can still dismiss.

GREG: And it's not just dismiss. I, we, we talk about this from a, from a practical standpoint, the way the limitations on reality and one of them is time. Um, and a lot of cancel culture, um, as, as, uh, as cultural norms, as this way of winning arguments without winning arguments is about running out the clock. Because by the time you get down to the bottom of the, uh, uh, of the, or actually even to get a couple steps into the perfect record fortress and, you know, where has the time gone? You know, like you're, you're, you probably just give up, uh, trying to, uh, you know, trying to actually have the argument and you never get to the argument in the first place.

LEX: All of these things are pretty sticky on social media.

GREG: Social media practically invented the perfect rhetorical fortress.

LEX: So that each one of those stages has a virality to it. So it could, it could stick and then it can get people really excited.

GREG: It allows you to feel outrage and superiority. Yeah.

LEX: Because of that, that at the scale of the virality allows you to never get to the actual discussion of the point. Um, so, but you know, it's not just the left, it's the right, also, so the efficient rhetorical fortress, uh, so there's something to be proud of on the right.

GREG: It's more efficient.

LEX: So you don't have to listen to liberals and anyone could be labeled a liberal if they have a wrong opinion. I've seen liberal and left and leftist all used as a, in the same kind of way. That's leftist nonsense. You don't have to listen to experts, even conservative experts, if they have the wrong opinion, you don't have to listen to journalists, even conservative journalists, if they have the wrong opinion and among the MAGA wing, there's a fourth proposition, there's a fourth provision. You don't need to listen to anyone who isn't pro Trump.

GREG: Yeah. And we call it efficient because it eliminates a lot of people you probably should listen to at least sometimes, you know, like we point out sometimes like how cancel culture can interfere with faith and expertise. So we get kind of being a little suspicious of experts, but the same time, if you follow that and you follow it mechanically, and I definitely, you know, I think everybody in the U S probably has some older uncle, um, uh, who exercises some of these. It is a really efficient way to sort of, so you're, uh, to wall yourself off from the rest of the world and dismiss, you know, at least some people you really should be listening to.

LEX: The way you laid it out, it made me realize that we just take up so much of our brain power. These things, it's literally time. We could be solving things. And you get like, you kind of exhaust yourself through this process of being outraged based on these labels and you never get to actually, there's almost not enough time for empathy, for like looking at a person thinking, well, maybe they're right. Cause you're so busy categorizing them.

GREG: What's the fun in empathy? And I mean, what's so interesting about this is that so much, um, societal energy seems to be spent on these nasty primal desires where essentially a lot of it's like, please tell me who I'm allowed to hate. Where can I legitimately be cruel? Where can I actually exercise some aggression against somebody? Um, and it seems to sometimes be just finding new justifications for that. And it's an understandable, you know, human failing, uh, that sometimes can be used to defend justice. But again, it will never get you anywhere near the truth.

LEX: Uh, one interesting case that you cover about expertise is with COVID. Yeah. So how did cancel culture come into play on the topic of COVID?

GREG: Yeah, I think that COVID was a big blow to people's faith and expertise and cancel culture played a big role in that. Um, I think one of the best examples of this is Jennifer Say at Levi's. Um, she is a lovely woman. Um, she was a vice president at Levi's. Uh, she talked about actually potentially to be the president of Levi's jeans. And she was a big advocate for kids. And when they started shutting down the schools, she started saying, this is going to be a disaster. This is going to hurt, uh, the poor and disadvantaged kids the most. Um, we have to figure out a way to open the schools back up. And that was such a heretical point of view. And the typical kind of cancel culture, uh, wave took over as he had all sorts of petitions for her to be fired and that she needed to apologize and all this kind of stuff. And, you know, she was offered, I think like an a million dollar severance, which she wouldn't take because she wanted to tell the world what she thought about this and, and that she wanted to continue saying, um, that she hadn't changed her mind, that this was a disaster for young people. And now that's kind of the conventional wisdom and the research is pretty, it is quite clear that this was devastating to particularly disadvantaged youths. Like people understand this as being okay, she was probably right. But one of the, one of the really sad aspects of cancel culture is people forget why you were canceled and they just know they hate you. Um, there's this lingering kind of like, well, I don't have to take them seriously anymore. But by the way, did you notice they happened to be right on something very important? Now, one funny thing about freedom of speech, freedom of speech wouldn't exist if you didn't also have the right to say things that were wrong. Because if you can't, you know, engage in idea for you, if you can't actually speculate, you'll never actually get to something that's right in the first place. But it's especially galling when people who were right were censored and you, uh, and never actually get the credit that they deserve.

LEX: Well, this might be a good place to ask a little bit more about the freedom of speech. And so you said that included in the freedom of speech is to say things that are wrong.

GREG: Yep.

LEX: Um, what is your perspective on hate speech?

GREG: Hate speech is the best marketing campaign for censorship. Um, and it came from academia, um, of the, of the 20th century. And that when I talked about the anti -free speech movement, uh, that was one of their first inventions. Um, there, there was a lot of talk about critical race theory, um, and, and being against critical race theory and fire will sue if you say that people can't advocate for it or teach it or research it, because you do absolutely have the right to pursue it academically. However, every time someone mentioned CRT, they should also say the very first project of the people who founded CRT, um, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, um, et cetera, was to go, was to create this new category of unprotected speech called hate speech and to get it banned. The person who enabled this drift, of course, was Herbert Marcuse in 1965, you know, basically questioning whether or not free speech should be a sacred value on the left. And he was on the losing side for a really long time. The liberals, you know, the way I grew up, that was basically being pro -free speech was synonymous with being a liberal, but that started to be etched away on campus. And the way it was, was with, with the idea of hate speech, um, that, that essentially, oh, but you should, um, we can designate particularly bad speech as, uh, not protected. Um, and, and who's going to enforce it? Who's going to decide what hate speech actually is? Well, it's usually overwhelmingly can only happen in an environment of really low viewpoint diversity because you have to actually agree on, on what the most hateful and wrong things are. And there's a bedrock principle. Um, it's referred to this in a, in a great case about flag burning in the first amendment that I think all the world could benefit from. You can't ban speech just cause it's offensive. It's too subjective. It basically, it's one of the reasons why these, uh, kind of codes have been more happily adopted in places like Europe, where they have a sense that there's like a modal German or a modal Englishman. Um, and I think this is offensive and therefore I can say that this is, this is wrong in a more multicultural, in a, in a genuinely more diverse country that's never actually had an honest thought that there is a single kind of American. There's never been like, we had, we had the idea of uncle Sam, but that was always kind of a joke. Um, Boston always knew it wasn't Richmond always knew it wasn't Georgia always knew it wasn't, you know, Alaska. Like we've always been a hodgepodge and we get in a society that diverse that you can't ban things simply because they're offensive. Um, and that's, that's one of the reasons why hate speech is not an unprotected category of speech. And I, and I go further, my theory on freedom of speech is slightly different than most other constitutional lawyers. Um, and I think, and I think that's partially because some of the ways, uh, some of these theories, although a lot of them are really good are inadequate, they're not expansive enough. And I sometimes call my theory, the pure informational theory of freedom of speech. Um, or sometimes when I want to be fancy, the lab and the looking glass theory and it's most important tenant is that there is that if the goal is the project of human knowledge, which is to know the world it is, is you cannot know the world as it is without knowing what people really think and what people really think is an incredibly important fact to know. So every time you're actually saying, you can't say that you're actually depriving yourself of the knowledge of what people really think you're causing what Tim or Karan who's on our board of advisors calls preference falsification. Um, you end up with an inaccurate picture of the world, which by the way, in a lot of cases, um, because there are activists who want to restrict more speech, they actually tend to think that people are more prejudice than they, uh, than they might be. Um, and actually these kinds of restrictions, there was a book called racial paranoia, um, that came out in about 15 years ago that was making the point that the imposition of some of these codes can sometimes make people think that the only thing holding you back from being a raging racist, um, are these codes. So it must be really, really bad. It can actually make all of these things worse. And one, which we talk about in the book, one very real practical way it makes things worse is when you censor people, it doesn't change their opinion. It just encourages them to not share it with people who will get them in trouble. So it leads them to talk to people who they already agree with and group polarization takes off. So we have some interesting data in the book, um, about how driving people off of Twitter, for example, um, you know, uh, in 2017. Um, and then again, I think in 2020 driving people to gab led to, you know, greater radicalization among those people. It's a very predictable force. Censorship doesn't actually change people's minds and it pushes them in directions that actually by very, you know, solid research will actually make them more radicalized. So yeah, I think that the, I think that the attempt to ban hate speech, it doesn't really protect us from it, but it gives the government such a vast, uh, weapon to use against us that we will regret giving them.

LEX: Is there a way to sort of, to look at extreme cases, to test this idea out a little bit? So if we look on campus, what's your view about allowing say white supremacists on campus to do, to do speeches? Okay.

GREG: I think you should be able to study what people think. And I think it's important that we actually do. So I think that, you know, um, let's take for example, QAnon. Yeah, QAnon is wrong. Um, but where did it come from? Why did they think that? What's the motivation? Who taught them it?

LEX: Who came up with these ideas?

GREG: This is important to understand history. That's under important to understand modern American politics. And so if you put your act, if you put your scholar hat on and which you should be curious about kind of everyone about where they're coming from. Darrell Davis, who I'm sure you're familiar with part of his goal was just simply to get to know where people were coming from. And in the process, he actually de radicalized a number of clients members when they actually realized that this black man who would be friended them actually was compassionate, was a decent person. They realized all their preconceptions were wrong. So it can have a de radicalizing factor by the way, but even when it doesn't, it's still really important to know what the bad people in your society think. Honestly, in some ways it's for, for your own safety, it's probably more important to know what the bad people in your society actually think.

LEX: I personally, I don't know what you think about that, but I personally think that freedom of speech in cases like that, like KKK and campus can do more harm in the short term, but much more benefit in the longterm. Cause you can sometimes argue for like, this is going to hurt. Yeah. In the short term. But I mean, Harvey said this is like consider the alternative. Cause you just kind of made the case for like, this potentially would be a good thing even in the short term. And it often is, I think, especially in a stable society like ours, uh, with a strong middle -class, all these kinds of things where people have like the comforts, the reason through things. Yeah. Um, but you know, to me it's like, even if it hurts in the short term, even if it does create more hate in the short term, the freedom of speech has this really beneficial thing, which is it helps you move towards the truth, the entirety of society towards a deeper, more accurate understanding of life on earth, of society, of how people function, of ethics, of metaphysics, of everything. And that in the longterm is a huge benefit. It gets rid of the Nazis in the longterm, even if it adds to the number of Nazis in the short term. Yeah.

GREG: Well, and meanwhile, just for, and the reality check part of this is people always bring up, what about the clan on campus? I'm like, they're never invited. Um, the, the, the, the, I haven't seen a case where they've been invited. Um, usually this, the, the clan argument gets thrown out when people are trying to excuse. And that's why we shouted down Ben Shapiro. And that's why you can't have Bill Maher on campus. That's why, you know, and it's like, okay. Um, you know, and it's, it's a little bit of that what aboutism again, about being like, well, that thing over there is terrible and therefore this comedian shouldn't come.

LEX: Uh, so I do have a question maybe by way of advice, you know, interviewing folks and seeing this like a, like a podcast as a platform in deciding who to talk to and not, not something I have to come face to face with on occasion. My natural inclination before I started the podcast was I would talk to anyone and including people, which I'm still interested in who are, you know, the current members of the KKK. And to me, there's a responsibility to do that with skill. Yeah. Um, and that responsibility has been weighing heavier and heavier on me because you realize how much skill it actually takes because you have to know, to understand so much, cause I've, I've come to understand that the devil is always going to be charismatic. Yeah. Um, the devil is not going to look like the devil. And so you have to realize you have to, you can't always come to the table with a deep compassion for another human being. You have to have, you know, like 90 % compassion and, and another 90 % deep historical knowledge about the context of the battles around this particular issue. And that takes just a huge amount of effort, but I don't know if there's thoughts you have about this, how to handle speech, um, in a way without censoring, bringing it to the surface, but in a way that creates more love in the world.

GREG: I remember, um, Steve Bannon got disinvited from the New Yorker festival and Jim Carrey freaked out and all sorts of other people freaked out and he got disinvited, um, from, from the, and I got invited to speak on smirk on us about this. And I was saying like, listen, you don't have people to your conference because you agree with them. Um, like that's the, the, we have to get out of this idea that that's because they were trying to make it sound like that's an endorsement of Steve Bannon. Like that's nonsense. Like if you actually look at the opinions of all the people who are there, you can't possibly endorse all the opinions that all these other people who are going to be there actually have. And then in the process of making that argument, I got, um, and, and also of course, the very classic, it's very valuable to know what someone Steve Bannon thinks. You should be curious about that. And I remember someone arguing back saying, well, what would you want someone to interview a jihadi? And I'm like, because at the moment, like it was at the time when, when ISIS was really in going, going for it. Um, and I was like, would you not want to go to a talk where someone was trying to figure out what makes some of these people tick? Um, because that changes your framing that essentially it's like, no, it's curiosity. It is the, uh, is the cure for a lot of this stuff. And we need a great deal more curiosity and a lot less unwarranted certainty.

LEX: And there's a question of like, how do you conduct such conversations? And, um, I feel deeply under qualified. Who do you think is especially good at that? I feel like documentary filmmakers usually do a much better job. And the best job is usually done by biographers. Yeah. So the more time you give to a particular conversation, like really deep thought and historical context and studying the people, how they think, looking at all different perspectives, looking at the psychology of the person, upbringing, their parents, their grandparents, all of this, the more time you spend with that, uh, the better, the better the quality of the conversation is because you get to understand the, you get to really empathize with the person, with the people he or she represents, um, and you get to see the common humanity, all of this. I w in interviewers are often don't do that work.

GREG: Yeah. Um, so like the best stuff I've seen is interviews that are part of a documentary. Yeah.

LEX: But even now documentaries are like, there's a huge incentive to do as quickly as possible. There's not an incentive to really spend time with the person.

GREG: There's a great new documentary about Floyd Abrams that I really recommend. We did a documentary about Ira Glasser called mighty Ira, um, which was my video team and my protege Nico Perino and Chris Mulvey and Aaron Reese put it together. And it's just follows the life and times of, um, of Ira Glasser, the former head of the ACLU.

LEX: If you could just linger on that, that's a fascinating story. Oh yeah.

GREG: Amazing. Um, Ira, he wasn't a lawyer. Um, he started working at the NYCLU, New York civil liberties union back in, I think the sixties. He was, uh, I think Robert Kennedy recommended that he go in that direction. Um, and he became the president of the ACLU right at the time that they were, um, suffering from, uh, defending the Nazis at Skokie and Nico, uh, and, and, and, and Aaron and Chris put together this and they'd never done a documentary before. And it came out so, so well. Um, and it tells the story of the Nazis in Skokie. It tells the story of the case around it tells the story of the ACLU at the time. And what a great leader Ira Glasser was. And what's one of the things that's so great is like, when you get to see the Nazis at Skokie, they come off like the idiots that you would expect them to. There's a moment when the, when the rally is not going very well and the leader gets flustered. And it almost seems like he's going to like shout out kind of like, you're, you're, you're, you're making this Nazi rally into a mockery. And so it showed how actually allowing the Nazis to speak at Skokie kind of took the wind out of their sails. Like if they had the whole movement, like everybody was kind of, it all kind of dissolved after that because they looked like racist fools that they were. They were, you know, even blues brothers made jokes, you know, jokes about them. Um, and it, and it didn't turn into the disaster that people thought it was going to be just by letting them speak. And Ira Glasser, okay. So he has this wonderful story about how Jackie Robinson joined the Brooklyn Dodgers and how there was a moment when it was seeing someone, an African American as on their literally on their team and how that really got them excited about the cause of racial equality. And that became a big part of what his life was. And I just think of that as such a great metaphor is expanding your circle and seeing more people as being quite literally on your team is the solution to so many of these problems. And I worry that one of the things that is absolutely just a fact of life in America is like, we do see each other more as enemy camps as opposed to people on the same team. And that was actually something in the early days, like me and Will Creely, the legal director of fire wrote about the forthcoming free speech challenges of everyone being on Facebook. And one thing that I was hoping was that as more people were exposing more of their lives, we'd realize a lot of these things we knew intellectually, like kids go to the bar and get drunk and do stupid things. Um, that, uh, that when we started seeing the evidence of them doing stupid things that we might be shocked at first, but then eventually get more sophisticated and be like, well, come on, people are like that. That never actually really seemed to happen. Um, that, that, that I don't think that I think that there are plenty of things we know about human nature and we know about dumb things people say, uh, and we've, we've made it into an environment where there's just someone out there waiting to be kind of like, Oh, remember that dumb thing you said we were 14? Well, I'm going to make sure that you don't get into the, to your dream school because of that.

LEX: This offense archeology.

GREG: That's not my term though. It's a great term. We steal from the best digging through someone's past comments to find a speech that hasn't aged well. And that one's tactical. Like that, that one isn't just someone not being empathetic. They're like, I'm going to punish you for this or, and that's one of the reasons why I got depressed writing this book because you know, it's already, there's already people who don't love me because of coddling the American mind, usually based on a misunderstanding of what we actually said and coddling in the American mind, but nonetheless. Uh, but on this one, you know, like I'm calling out people for being very cruel in a lot of cases, but put, but one thing that was really scary about studying a lot of these cases is that once you have that target on your back, what they're going to try to cancel you for could be anything. You know, they might go back into your old, your old boats, find something that you said in 1995, you know, do something, um, where essentially it looks like it's this entire other thing, but really what they're, what's going on is they didn't like your opinion. They didn't like your point of view on something. And they're going to find a, find a way that from now on, anytime your name comes up, it's like, Oh, remember this, this thing I didn't like about them. And it's again, it's cruel. It doesn't get you anywhere closer to the truth. And, but it is a little scary to stick your neck out.

LEX: Okay. In terms of solutions, I'm going to ask you a few things. So one, uh, parenting.

GREG: Yeah. Five and seven year old.

LEX: So I'm sure you've figured it all out then. Oh God, no.

GREG: From a free speech perspective. Yeah. Uh, from a free speech culture perspective, how to be a good parent. Yeah. I think the first quality you should be cultivating in your children, if you want to have a free speech culture is curiosity and an awareness of the vastness that will always be unknown. And getting my kids excited about the idea that's like, we're going to spend our whole lives learning about stuff. And it's fast and exciting and endless and we'll never make a big dent in it, but the journey will be amazing. But only fools think they know everything. Um, and sometimes dangerous fools at that. So giving the sense of intellectual humility early on being also, you know, saying things that actually do sound kind of old fashioned, like, but I say things to my kids, like, listen, if you enjoy study and work, both things that I very much enjoy, I do for fun. Um, your life is going to feel great and it's going to feel easy. Um, so some of, some, you know, some of those old fashioned virtues are things I try to preach, um, counterintuitive stuff like outdoor time playing, um, having time that are not intermediate experiences is really, uh, is really important. And little things like, um, I talk about in the book about when my kids are watching something that's scary and I'm not talking about like zombie movies, you know, I'm talking about like a cartoon that has kind of a scary moment and saying that they want to turn the TV off. And I, and I talked to them and I say, listen, I miss it next to you and we're going to finish this show and I want you to tell me what you think of, of this afterwards. And I sat next to my sons. Um, and by the end of it, every single time I, you know, when I asked them, was that as scary as you thought it was going to be? And there was like, no daddy, that was fine. And I'm like, that's one of the great lessons in life. The fear that you don't go through becomes much bigger in your head than actually simply facing it. That's one of the reasons why I'm fighting back against this culture. I love, you know, for all of our kids to be able to grow up in an environment where people give you grace and, you know, accept the fact that sometimes people are going to say things that piss you off, take seriously the possibility and be wrong and, and, uh, be curious.

LEX: Well, I'm, I have hope that the thing you mentioned, which is because so much of young people's stuff is on the internet that they're going to give each other a break because then everybody is cancel worthy.

GREG: Generation Z hates cancel culture the most. And that's another reason why it's like people still claiming this is even happening. It's kind of like, no, you actually can ask kids what they think of cancel culture and they hate it.

LEX: Yeah. Well, I kind of think of them as like the immune system. That's like, that's the culture waking up to like, no, this is not a good thing.

GREG: I am glad though. I mean, I, I, I'm one of those kids who, you know, is really glad that I was a little kid in the eighties and a teenager in the nineties because having everything potentially online, uh, it's, it's not a, an upbringing.

LEX: I envy. Well, I, because you can also do the absolute free speech. I like leading into it where I hope for future where a lot of our insecurities, flaws, everything's out there. And to be raw honest with it, uh, I think that leads to a better world. Cause the flaws are beautiful. I mean, that's the flaws is the, uh, the basic ingredients of human connection.

GREG: Uh, Robert Wright, he wrote a book on, uh, on, on Buddhism. Um, and I talked about trying to use social media from a, from a Buddhist perspective and like, as if you're, as if it's the collective unconscious meditating and seeing those little like angry bits that are trying to cancel you or get you to shut up and just kind of like letting them go the same way you're supposed to watch your thoughts kind of trail off.

LEX: I would love to see that like visualized whatever the, whatever the drama going on, going on, just seeing the sea of it, of the collective consciousness, just processing this and having a little like panic attack and just kind of like, yeah, reading it in, looking at the little sort of hateful, angry voices kind of pop up and be like, okay, there you are.

GREG: And I'm still focused on, on that thing because that is, that, that is one of the things is, okay. Yeah, actually this is probably late in the game to be, to giving my grand theory on this stuff. Um, but, uh, never too late. So, so what I was studying, um, in law school, when I ran out of first amendment classes, um, I decided to study censorship during the tutor dynasty, uh, because that's where we get our ideas of prior restraint, uh, that, that come from the licensing of the printing press, um, which was something that Henry the eighth was the first to do where basically, um, the idea was that if you can't print anything in England, unless it's with these, uh, uh, your majesty approved printers, um, it will prevent heretical work and anti Henry the eighth stuff from coming out. I'm pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty, um, efficient idea if nothing else. Um, and I always, so he started getting angry at the printing press around 1521 and then pass something that required prints prints to be along with parliament in, in, uh, 1538. Uh, and I always think of that as kind of like where we are now, um, because we have this, we had the, back then we had the original disruptive technology, you know, writing was probably, but the next one, which, which was the printing press, which was absolutely calamitous. And I mean, and I, and I say calamitous on purpose because in the short term, the witch hunts went up like crazy because the printing press allowed you to get that manual on how to find witches that the religious wars went crazy. Um, it led to all sorts of distress, misinformation, nastiness. And Henry the eighth was trying to put the genie back in the bottle. You know, he was kind of like, I can, I can, I can, I want to use this for good. Like, uh, like I feel like it could, it could be used, but he was in an unavoidable period of epistemic anarchy. There's nothing you can do to make the period after the printing press come, uh, came out to be a non disruptive, non crazy period other than like absolute totalitarianism and destroy all the print presses, which simply was not possible in Europe. So I feel like that's kind of like where we are now. That disruption came from adding, I think, you know, several million people to the European conversation and that eventually the global conversation, but eventually it became the best tool for disconfirmation, um, for getting rid of falsity, for spotting bad ideas. And it's the benefits, the long -term benefits of the printing press are in calculably great. Um, and that's what gives me some optimism for where we are now with social media, cause we are in that unavoidably anarchical period. And I do worry that, that there, um, uh, that there are attempts in States to pass things to try to put the genie back in the bottle. Like if we ban a tick tock or we say that, um, nobody under 18 can be on the, on the internet, unless they have parental permission, we're going at something that no amount of sort of top down is going to be able to fix it. We have to culturally adapt to the fact of it, um, uh, in ways that make us wiser that actually, um, and allow it potentially to be that wonderful engine for disconfirmation that we're nowhere near yet, by the way, but think about it. Additional millions of eyes on problems, um, thanks to the printing press helped create the scientific revolution, the enlightenment, the discovery ignorance. Um, we now have added billions of eyes and voices to solving problems. And we're just, we're using them for cat videos and canceling.

LEX: But that those are just the early days of the printing press. All starts with the cats and the canceling. Is there something about X about Twitter, which is perhaps the most energetic source of cats and canceling.

GREG: It seems like the collective unconscious of the species. I mean, like it's one of these things where the tendency to want to see patterns in history sometimes can limit the actual batshit crazy experience of what history actually is. Because yes, we, we, we have these nice comforting ideas that it's going to be like last time. We don't know. It hasn't happened yet. And I think how unusual Twitter is because I think of it as like the kids, because people talk about, you know, writing and mass communications and, uh, as being expanding the size of our collective brain. But now we're kind of looking at our collective brain in real time. And it's filled just like our own brains with all sorts of like little crazy things that pop up and, and, and, and appear like virtual particles kind of all over the place of, of people, um, you know, reacting in real time to things. There's never been anything even vaguely like it. And it can be at its worst, awful to see. At its best, sometimes seeing people like just getting a euphoric over something going on and cracking absolutely brilliant immediate jokes, you know, at the same time, it can be, it can't even be a joyful experience. Um, I, I feel like, uh, and I live in a neighborhood now on X where I mostly deal with people that I think are actually thoughtful, even if I disagree with them. Um, and, and it's not such a bad experience. I occasionally run into those other sort of what I call neighborhoods on X where it's just all canceling all nastiness. And it's always kind of an unpleasant visit to those places. I'm not saying the whole thing needs to be, uh, like, like my experience, but I do think that the reason why people keep on coming back to it is it reveals raw aspects of humanity that sometimes we prefer to pretend don't exist.

LEX: Yeah. Yeah. But also it's totally new. Like you said, it's just a virality, the speed, the news travels, that opinions travel, that the battle over ideas travels.

GREG: The battle over information too.

LEX: Yeah. Of what is true and not lies traveled, the old Mark Twain thing pretty fast on the thing. Yeah. And then it changes your understanding of how to interpret information.

GREG: It also stress you out to no end. I remembered to get off it sometimes. The stats are pretty bad on mental health, uh, with, with, with young people. And I'm definitely in the camp of people who think that social media is part of that. I understand the debate, but I'm pretty persuaded that one of the things that is, hasn't been great for mental health of people is this just constantly being exposed.

LEX: Yeah, absolutely. I think it's possible to create social media that makes a huge amount of money, makes people happy to me, like it's possible to align the incentives. So in terms of, yeah, making teenagers, making, uh, every stage of life, giving you long -term fulfillment and happiness with your physical existence outside of the social media and on social media, helping you grow as a human being, uh, helping challenge you just the right amount and just the right amount of cat videos, whatever gives this full rich human experience. I think it's just a machine learning problem. It's like, it's not easy to create a feed. So the easiest feed you could do is like maximize engagement. Yeah. But that's just like a really dumb algorithm. Yeah. It's like for the, for the algorithm to learn enough about you to understand what will make you truly happy as a human being to grow long -term. That's just a very difficult problem to solve.

GREG: You ever watch Fleabag? It's absolutely brilliant, a British show. Um, and it sets you up. One of the reasons why like people love it so much is it sets you up that you're watching like a, a raunchy British Sex and the City, except the main character is the most prominent. Um, it's like, okay. And you kind of roll your eyes a little bit and it's kind of funny and it's kind of cute and kind of spicy. And then you realize that the person is actually kind of suffering and having a hard time and it gets deeper and deeper as the show goes on. And she will do these incredible speeches about, tell me what to do. Like I just, I know there's experts out there. I know there's knowledge out there. I know there's an optimal way to live my life. So why can't someone just tell me what to do? And, and it's this wonderfully like, um, accurate, I think, uh, aspect of, of human desire that what if something could actually tell me the optimal way to go? Cause I think there is a desire to give up some amount of your own freedom and discretion in order to be told to do the optimally right thing. But that path scares me to death.

LEX: Yeah, we see the way you phrase it. That's, it scares me too. So there's several things that one, you can be constantly distracted in a TikTok way by things that keep you engaged. So removing that and giving you a bunch of options constantly and learning from long -term what results in your actual long -term happiness. So like which amounts of challenging ideas are good for you? Uh, that, you know, for, for somebody like me, but there is a number like that for you, Greg, like for me, that number is pretty high. I love debate. I love, I, I love the feeling of like realizing, holy shit, I've been wrong.

GREG: Yes. But like, you know, and I would love for the algorithm to know that about me and to help me, but always giving me options. If I want to descend into cat videos and so on. Well, the educational aspect of it.

LEX: Yes, education. Like the idea of kind of like both going the speed that you need to and running as fast as you can. Yeah. You know, I mean, there's that, you know, the whole flow thing. I just feel that YouTube recommendation for, for better or worse, if used correctly, it feels like it does a pretty good job. Whenever I just refuse to click on stuff that's just dopamine based and click on only educational things, the recommendation provides a really damn good. So I feel like it's a solvable problem, at least in the space of education of challenging yourself, but also expanding your realm of knowledge and all this kind of stuff.

GREG: And I'm definitely more in the, we're in an inescapably anarchical period and require big cultural adjustments. And there's gonna, there's no way that this isn't going to be difficult transition.

LEX: Is there any specific little or big things that you'd like to see X do, Twitter do? I have lots of thoughts on that.

GREG: With the printing press and extra millions of eyes on any problem can tear down any institution, any, any person or any idea. And that's good in some ways, cause a lot of medieval institutions needed to be torn down. And some people did too, and a lot of ideas needed to be torn down. Same thing is true now. An extra billions of eyes on every problem can tear down any person, idea or institution. And some, again, some of those things needed to be torn down, but it can't build yet. We are not at the stage that can build yet, but it has shown us how thin our knowledge was. It's one of the reasons why we're also aware of the replication crisis. It's one of the reasons why we're also aware of how kind of shoddy our research is, how much our expert class is arrogant in many cases, but people don't want to live in a world where they don't have people that they respect and they can look at. And I think what's happening possibly now, but will, will continue to happen is people are going to establish themselves as being high integrity, that they will always be honest. I think you are establishing yourself as someone who is high integrity, where they can trust that person. A fire wants to be, you know, the institution that people can come to is like, if it's free speech, we will defend it, period. And I think that people need new, need to have authorities that they can actually trust. And I think that if you actually had a stream that maybe people can watch in action, but not flood with, you know, stupid cancel culture stuff or dumb cat means, where it is actually a serious discussion bounded around rules, no perfect rhetorical fortress, no efficient rhetorical fortress, none of the BS ways we debate. I think you could start to actually create something that could actually be a major improvement in the speed with which we come up with new, better ideas and establish and separate truth from falsity.

LEX: Yeah. If it's done well, it can inspire a large number of people to become higher and higher integrity and it can create integrity as a value to strive for. I mean, like, you know, there's been projects throughout the internet that have done an incredible job of that, but have been also very flawed. Like Wikipedia is an example of a big leap forward in doing that.

GREG: It's pretty damn impressive. What's your overall take? I mean, I'm mostly impressed.

LEX: So there's a few really powerful ideas for the people who edit Wikipedia. One of which is each editor kind of for themselves declares, you know, I'm into politics and I really kind of left leaning guy. So I really shouldn't be editing political articles because I have bias. So they declare their biases and they're often do a good job of actually declaring the biases, but they'll still like, they'll find a way to justify themselves. Like something will piss them off and they want to correct it because they love correcting untruth into truth. But the perspective of what is true and not is affected by their bias. Truth is hard to know. And it is true that there is a left leaning bias on the editors of Wikipedia. So for that, what happens is on articles, which I mostly appreciate that don't have a political aspect to them, you know, um, scientific articles or, uh, technical articles, they're going to be really strong, even history, just describing the facts of history that don't have a subjective element, uh, strong. Also just using my own brain, I can kind of filter out if it's, uh, you know, if it's something about January 6th or something like this, I know I'm going to be like, I'm not whatever's going on here. I'm gonna kind of read it, but most I'm going to look to other sources. I'm going to look to a bunch of different perspectives on it. It's going to be very tense. There's probably going to be some kind of bias. Maybe some wording will be such, which is one word. This is where Wikipedia does this thing. The way they word stuff will be biased, the choice of words, but the Wikipedia editors themselves are so self -reflective. They literally have articles describing these very effects of how you can use words to inject bias in all the ways that you talk about it.

GREG: That's healthier than most environments.

LEX: It's incredibly healthy, but I think you could do better. One of the big flaws of Wikipedia to me, that community notes on X does better is the accessibility of becoming an editor. Um, it's, it's difficult to become an editor and it's not as visible, the process of editing. So I would love, like you said, a stream, everyone to be able to observe this debate between people with integrity of when they discuss things like January 6th, a very controversial topics to see how the process of the debate goes as opposed to being hidden in the shadows, which it currently is in Wikipedia. You can access that. It's just hard to access, but, and I've also seen how they will use certain articles, like on certain people, like articles about people I've learned to trust less and less because they'll literally will use those to make personal attacks. And this is something you write about. They'll use, uh, descriptions of different controversies to paint a picture of a person that's, that doesn't to me at least feel like an accurate representation of the person. And it's like writing an article about Einstein mentioning something about, uh, theory of relativity and then saying that he was a womanizer and abuser and a, like controversy, you know, yeah, he is Feynman also, you know, not, you know, it was the, you know, they're not exactly the perfect human in terms of women, but like there's other aspects of this human and to capture that human properly, there's a certain way to do it. I think Wikipedia will often lean. They really try to be self reflective and try to stop this, but they will lean into the drama if it matches the bias. But again, much better than the world I believe is much better. Uh, because Wikipedia exists, but now that we're in these adolescent stages, we're growing and trying to come up with different technologies. The idea of a stream is really, really interesting as you get more and more people into this discourse that where the value is, let's try to get the truth.

GREG: Yeah. Yeah. And that basically, you know, you get the little cards for, Nope, wrong, nope, wrong.

LEX: And the different, the different, the different rhetorical techniques that are being used to avoid actually discussing.

GREG: Yeah. And I think actually you can make it a little bit fun by you got a limited number of them. Um, you know, it's kind of like, you get three, what about as some cards.

LEX: So gamifying the whole thing.

GREG: Uh, absolutely.

LEX: Yeah. Uh, let me ask you about, uh, so you mentioned going to some difficult moments in your life. Um, what, what has been your experience with, uh, with, with depression? What has been your experience getting out of it, overcoming it?

GREG: Yeah. I mean, the whole thing, the whole journey, um, th th th th th th th th th th th th th with coddling the American mind began with me, um, in the, at the Belmont psychiatric facility in Philadelphia back in 2007, I had called 911 in a moment of clarity because I'd gone to the, uh, the hardware store to, to, um, make sure that when I killed myself, that I, it stuck. I wanted to make sure that I, you know, had my head wrapped and everything. So like if all the drugs I was planning to take didn't work, that I wouldn't be able to claw my way out. It'd been a really rough year and I always had issues with depression, um, but they were getting worse. And frankly, one of the reasons why this cancel culture stuff is so, um, important to me is that the thing that I didn't emphasize as much in coddling the American mind, which by the way, that description that I give of trying to kill myself was the first time I'd ever written it down. Nobody in my family was aware, um, of how, uh, of it being like that. My wife had never seen it. And basically the only way I was able to write that was by, by doing, you know, how you can kind of trick yourself. If, um, and I was like, I'm going to convince myself that this is just between me and my computer and nobody will see it. And it's probably not the most public thing I've ever written. Um, but what I didn't emphasize in that was how much the culture war played into how depressed I got, because I was originally the legal director of fire. Then I became president of fire in 2005, moved to Philadelphia is where I get depressed. Um, and, uh, in just, I don't have family there. There's something about the town. They don't seem to like me very much. Um, but the main thing was being in the culture world all the time. Um, there was a girl that I was dating. Um, I remember, you know, she didn't seem to really approve of what I did. And a lot of people didn't really seem to. And meanwhile, like I was defending people on the left all the time and they'd be like, Oh, that's good that you're defending someone on the left, but they still would never forgive me for defending someone on the right. And I remember saying what one point I'm like, listen, I'm like, I'm, I'm a true believer in this stuff. I'm willing to defend Nazis. I'm certainly willing to defend Republicans. And she actually said, I think Republicans might be worse. Um, and that didn't, that relationship didn't go very well. And then I nearly gotten fistfights a couple of times with, with people on the right. Um, because they found out I defended people who crack jokes about 9 11. Like this happened more than once. And that, you know, by the time I'm in my twenties, I'm not fist fighting again. Um, but yeah, it was always like that. You, you, you see how hypocritical people can be. You can see how friends can turn on you if they don't like your politics. So I got an early preview of this, of, of, of what the culture we're heading into by being the president of fire. And it was exhausting. Um, and that was one of the main things that led me to be, you know, suicidally depressed, uh, at the Belmont center. If you told me that that would be the beginning of a new and better life for me, I would have laughed if I could have, but I would, you know, I don't like, you can tell I'm okay if I'm still laughing. And I wasn't laughing, um, at that point. So, um, I got a doctor and I started doing cognitive behavioral therapy. I started having all these voices in my head that were catastrophizing and, um, you know, it gave me an over, over generalization and, um, uh, fortune telling, you know, uh, mind reading all of these things that they teach you not to do. And it, uh, and what they, what you do in CBT is essentially you have something makes you upset and then you just write down what the thought was. Um, and you know, something minor could happen in your response was, you know, like, um, well, the date didn't seem to go very well. Um, and that's because I'm broken and we'll die alone. And you're like, okay, okay, okay. What, what, what are the following, you know, uh, that's catastrophizing, that's mind reading, that's a fortune telling, that's all this stuff. Um, and you have to do this several times a day forever. I actually need to brush up on it at the moment. Um, and it slowly over time voices in my head that had been saying horrible, you know, horrible internal talk, it just didn't sound as convincing anymore, which was a really kind of like subtle effect. Like it was just kind of like, oh wait, I don't buy that I'm broken. You know, like that doesn't sound true. That doesn't sound like truth from God like it used to. And nine months after I was planning to kill myself, I was probably happier than I'd been in a decade. Um, and that was one of the things that, you know, that the CBT is what led me to notice this in my own work, that it felt like administrators were kind of selling cognitive distortions, but students weren't buying yet. And then when I started noticing that they seemed to come in actually already believing in a lot of this stuff, that it would be very dangerous. And that led to coddling the American mind and all that stuff. But the thing that was rough about writing Hansling of the American mind, I'd have mentioned this already a couple of times, I got really depressed this past year, um, because I was studying, you know, there's a friend in there that I talked about who killed himself after being canceled. I talked to him a week before he killed himself and I hadn't actually, um, I hadn't actually checked in with him because he seemed so confident. I thought it would be totally fine because he, he had an insensitive tweet in June of 2020 and, you know, got, got forced out in a way that didn't actually sound as bad as a lot of the other professors. He actually at least got a severance package, so they knew he'd sue and win, um, cause he had before. And so I, I waited to check in on him cause we were so overwhelmed with the request for helps. And he was saying people were coming to his house still. And then he shot himself the next week. And I definitely, and because everyone knows I'm so public about my struggles with this stuff, everybody who fights this stuff comes to me when they're having a hard time. And this is a very hard psychologically taxing business to be in. And even admitting this right now, like I think about like all the, all the vultures out there, they'll have fun with it. Just like the same way when, when, when my friend Mike Adams killed himself, there were people like celebrating on Twitter, um, that, that a man was dead, uh, because they didn't like his tweets. And, but somehow that made them compassionate for some abstract other person. So I was getting a little depressed and anxious. And the thing that really helped me more than anything else, um, was confessing to my staff that I, you know, I, I, books take a lot of energy. So I knew they didn't want to hear that. Not only was this taking a lot of the boss's time, this was making him depressed and anxious. But when I finally told my, the leadership of my staff, um, you know, people that, even though I try to maintain a lot of distance from, I love very, very much, um, it made such a difference, you know, um, because I could be open about that. And the other thing was, have you heard this conference dialogue? Oh, yes. It's like an invite only thing. It's Orrin Hoffman, um, runs it. Um, it intentionally tries to get people over the political spectrum, um, to come together, uh, and have off the record conversations about big issues. And it was nice to be in a room where liberal conservative, none of the above, we're all like, oh, thank God someone's taken on cancel culture. And where it felt like, I felt like maybe this won't be the disaster for me and my family that I was, that I was starting to be afraid of. It would be that taking the stuff on might actually have a happy ending.

LEX: Well, one thing I just stands out from that is the, the pain of cancellation can be really intense. And that doesn't necessarily mean losing your job, but just even, you can call it bullying, you can call whatever name, but just some number of people on the internet. And that number can be small kind of saying bad things to you.

GREG: Yeah. That can be a pretty powerful force to the human psyche, which is, but was very surprising. And then the flip side also of that, um, it really makes me sad how cruel people can be. It's such a, thinking that your, your cause is a social justice in many cases can lead people to think I can be as cruel as I want in pursuit of this. When it, a lot of times it's just a way to sort of vent some aggression on a person that you think of only as an abstraction.

LEX: So I think it's important for people to realize that they're whatever, like whatever, whatever negative energy, whatever negativity you want to put out there, like there's real people that can get hurt. Like you can really get people, um, to one be the worst version of themselves or to possibly take their own life. And it's not as real.

GREG: Yeah. Well, that's one of the things that we do in the book, um, to, to really kind of address people who still try to claim this isn't real is we just quote, we quote the Pope, we quote Obama, we quote James Carville, we quote Taylor Swift on cancel culture. Like, um, and Taylor's Swiss quote is, is essentially about like how behind all of this, there's the, when it gets particularly nasty, there's this very clear, you know, kill yourself kind of undercurrent to it. Um, and it's, it's cruel. And the problem is that in an environment so wide open, there's always going to be someone who wants to be so transgressive and say the most hurtful, you know, terrible thing. But then you have to remember the misrepresentation, getting back to the old idioms, sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never, never hurt me. Has been re -imagined in campus debates in the most asinine way. People will literally say stuff like, but now we know words can hurt. And it's like, now we know words can hurt. Guys, you didn't have to come up with a special little thing that you teach children to make her words hurt less. If they never hurt in the first place, it wouldn't even make sense. The saying it's a saying that you repeat to yourself to give yourself strength. When the bullies have noticed you're a little weird, maybe a little personal, um, the, uh, and it helps. It really does help to be like, listen, okay, assholes are going to say asshole things. Um, and I can't let them have that kind of power over me.

LEX: Yeah. Yeah. It still is a learning experience because it does, it does, it does hurt.

GREG: But for the good people out there who actually, you know, just sometimes think, think that they're venting, you know, think about it. Remember that there are people on the other side of it.

LEX: Yeah. For me, it hurts my kind of faith in humanity. Um, I know it shouldn't, but it does sometimes when I just see people being cool to each other, it kind of, it's, uh, it floats a cloud over my perspective of the world. And that don't, I wish didn't have to be there.

GREG: Yeah. That was always my sort of flippant, but, uh, answer to that. If, if mankind is basically good or basically evil being like the biggest debate in, in, in philosophy and being like, well, the problem with, uh, the first is there's nothing basic about humanity.

LEX: Yeah. What gives you hope about this whole thing about, about this dark state that we're in, as you describe, how can we get out? What gives you hope that we will get out?

GREG: I think that people are sick of it. Um, I think people are sick of not being able to be authentic. Um, and that's really, you know, what censorship is. It's basically telling you, don't be yourself. Don't actually be to say what you think. Um, don't show your personality. Don't dissent. Don't be weird. Don't be wrong. Um, and that's not sustainable. I think that people have kind of had enough of it. Uh, but one thing I definitely want to say to your audience is it can't just be up to us, our viewers to try to fix this. Um, and I think that, and this may sound like it's an unrelated problem. I think if there were highly respected, let's say extremely difficult ways to prove that you're extremely smart and hardworking that cost little or nothing, that actually can give the Harvard's and the Yale's of the world to run for their money. I think that might be the most positive thing we could do to, to, to deal with a lot of these problems and why I think the fact that we have become a weird America with a great anti elitist tradition has become weirdly elitist in this, in, um, in the respect that we not only again, our leadership coming from these few fancy schools, we actually have like great admiration for them. We kind of look up to them, but I think we'd have a lot healthier of a society if people could prove, you know, their excellence in ways that are coming from completely different streams and, and that, that, that are highly respected. I sometimes talk about, there should be a test that anyone who passes it gets like a, you know, a BA in the humanities that it's like a super BA, like something, like someone, not a GED. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about something that like, you know, one out of only a couple, like a hundred people can pass some other way of actually, um, uh, of not going through these massive bloated expensive institutions that people can raise their hands and say, I am smart and hardworking. I think that could be an incredibly healthy way. I think we need additional streams for creative people to be solving problems, whether that's on X or someplace else. Um, I think that there's lots of things that technology could do to really help with this. I think some of the stuff that Sal Khan is working on, uh, Khan Academy could really help. Um, so I think there's a lot of ways, but they exist largely around coming up with new ways of doing things, not just expecting the old things that have say $40 billion in the bank that they're going to reform themselves. And here's my, you know, I've been picking on Harvard a lot, but I'm going to pick on them a little bit more. Um, the, and, and, uh, I talk a lot about class again, and you know, there's a great book called poison Ivy, um, by Evan Mandry, which I recommend to everybody. And it's outrageous. It sounds like me and a rant at Stanford, um, which was, uh, and I, and I think the status, you know, elite higher education has more kids from the top 1 % than they have from the bottom 50 or 60 % depending on the school. Um, and when you look at how much they actually like replicate class privilege, it's, it's really distressing. So everybody should read poison Ivy.

LEX: And above all else, uh, if you're weird, continue being weird. And you're one of the most interesting, one of the weirdest in the most beautiful way people have ever met. Greg, thank you for the really important work you do.

GREG: This was, this is appreciate the class, the whole area that you brought here today, man.

LEX: Um, this is an amazing conversation. Thank you for the work you do. Thank you. Thank you. And for me, who deeply cares about education, higher education, thank you for holding the MITs and the Harvard's accountable, uh, for, um, doing right by the people that walk their halls. So thank you so much for talking to me. Thanks for listening to this conversation with Greg Lukianoff to support this podcast. Please check out our sponsors in the description. And now let me leave you with some words from Noam Chomsky. If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views, you don't like. Gables was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.

Transcription subtitles:

0
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,240
If the goal is the project of human knowledge,

1
00:00:02,700 --> 00:00:04,320
which is to know the world it is is,

2
00:00:04,740 --> 00:00:10,140
you cannot know the world as it is without knowing what people really think.

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:14,440
And what people really think is an incredibly important fact to know.

4
00:00:15,040 --> 00:00:16,780
So every time you're actually saying,

5
00:00:17,460 --> 00:00:26,400
you can't say that you're actually depriving yourself of the knowledge of what people really think you're causing what Tim or crown who's on our board of advisors calls preference falsification.

6
00:00:27,140 --> 00:00:29,400
You end up with an inaccurate picture of the world,

7
00:00:29,460 --> 00:00:30,240
which by the way,

8
00:00:30,720 --> 00:00:31,640
in a lot of cases,

9
00:00:32,220 --> 00:00:35,040
because there are activists who want to restrict more speech,

10
00:00:35,340 --> 00:00:38,380
they actually tend to think that people are more prejudice than they might be.

11
00:00:38,520 --> 00:00:43,840
And actually, one very real practical way it makes things worse is when you censor people,

12
00:00:44,200 --> 00:00:46,340
it doesn't change their opinion.

13
00:00:46,340 --> 00:00:50,440
It just encourages them to not share it with people who will get them in trouble.

14
00:00:50,880 --> 00:00:55,920
So it leads them to talk to people who they already agree with and group polarization takes off.

15
00:00:58,660 --> 00:01:01,100
The following is a conversation with Greg Lukianoff,

16
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:02,520
free speech advocate,

17
00:01:03,020 --> 00:01:03,940
first amendment attorney,

18
00:01:04,440 --> 00:01:05,980
president and CEO of FIRE,

19
00:01:06,320 --> 00:01:08,460
the foundation for individual rights and expression.

20
00:01:09,020 --> 00:01:11,360
And he's the author of Unleashing Liberty,

21
00:01:11,880 --> 00:01:15,520
co-author with Jonathan Haidt of Coddling of the American

22
00:01:15,680 --> 00:01:21,200
Mind and co-author with Ricky Schlott of a new book coming out in October.

23
00:01:21,540 --> 00:01:26,060
They should definitely pre-order now called the Cancelling of the American Mind,

24
00:01:26,600 --> 00:01:29,100
which is a definitive accounting of the history,

25
00:01:29,420 --> 00:01:31,260
present and future of cancel culture,

26
00:01:31,680 --> 00:01:34,700
a term used and overused in public discourse,

27
00:01:35,260 --> 00:01:40,220
but rarely studied and understood with the depth and rigor that Greg and Ricky do

28
00:01:40,680 --> 00:01:43,820
in this book and in part in this conversation.

29
00:01:45,080 --> 00:01:46,480
Freedom of speech is important,

30
00:01:46,980 --> 00:01:48,580
especially on college campuses,

31
00:01:49,700 --> 00:01:52,980
the very place that should serve as the battleground of ideas,

32
00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:55,460
including weird and controversial ones

33
00:01:56,100 --> 00:01:58,420
that should encourage bold risk-taking,

34
00:01:58,820 --> 00:02:00,460
not conformity.

35
00:02:01,500 --> 00:02:03,140
This is the Lex Friedman podcast.

36
00:02:03,540 --> 00:02:03,940
To support it,

37
00:02:04,340 --> 00:02:06,280
please check out our sponsors in the description.

38
00:02:06,720 --> 00:02:07,160
And now,

39
00:02:07,480 --> 00:02:07,900
dear friends,

40
00:02:08,460 --> 00:02:09,960
here's Greg Lukianoff.

41
00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:12,760
Let's start with the big question.

42
00:02:13,000 --> 00:02:14,360
What is cancel culture?

43
00:02:14,880 --> 00:02:17,240
Now, you've said that you don't like the term as it's been,

44
00:02:17,380 --> 00:02:22,500
quote, dragged through the mud and abused endlessly by a whole host of controversial figures.

45
00:02:23,040 --> 00:02:24,280
Nevertheless, we have the term.

46
00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:25,380
What is it?

47
00:02:25,480 --> 00:02:30,480
Cancel culture is the uptick of campaigns, especially successful campaigns,

48
00:02:30,920 --> 00:02:34,120
starting around 2014 to get people fired,

49
00:02:34,780 --> 00:02:35,220
expelled,

50
00:02:35,580 --> 00:02:36,780
deplatformed, et cetera,

51
00:02:37,420 --> 00:02:39,280
for speech that would

52
00:02:39,280 --> 00:02:41,100
normally be protected by the first amendment.

53
00:02:41,640 --> 00:02:43,620
And I say would be protected because we're

54
00:02:43,740 --> 00:02:48,160
talking about circumstances in which it isn't necessarily where the first amendment applies.

55
00:02:48,460 --> 00:02:55,180
But what I mean is like as an analog to say things you couldn't lose your job as a public employee for,

56
00:02:55,560 --> 00:03:00,720
and also the climate of fear that's resulted from that phenomenon,

57
00:03:00,820 --> 00:03:03,080
the fact that you can lose your job for having the wrong opinion.

58
00:03:03,500 --> 00:03:04,900
And it wasn't subtle that

59
00:03:04,900 --> 00:03:06,360
there was an uptick in this,

60
00:03:06,760 --> 00:03:08,640
particularly on campus around 2014.

61
00:03:09,840 --> 00:03:11,140
John Ronson wrote a book

62
00:03:11,160 --> 00:03:12,700
called So You've Been Publicly Shamed.

63
00:03:12,800 --> 00:03:13,980
It came out in 2015,

64
00:03:14,180 --> 00:03:15,740
already documenting this phenomenon.

65
00:03:16,420 --> 00:03:19,020
I wrote a book called Freedom From Speech in 2014.

66
00:03:19,640 --> 00:03:22,360
But it really was in 2017 when you started seeing

67
00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:23,660
this be directed at professors.

68
00:03:24,600 --> 00:03:28,380
And when it comes to the number of professors that we've seen be

69
00:03:28,460 --> 00:03:29,820
targeted and lose their jobs,

70
00:03:30,420 --> 00:03:34,160
I've been doing this for 22 years and I've seen nothing like it.

71
00:03:34,560 --> 00:03:36,940
So there's so many things I want to ask you here.

72
00:03:37,300 --> 00:03:38,980
One, actually, just look at the organization of

73
00:03:39,000 --> 00:03:39,380
FIRE.

74
00:03:39,420 --> 00:03:41,220
Can you explain what the organization is?

75
00:03:41,260 --> 00:03:42,960
Because it's interconnected to this whole

76
00:03:43,760 --> 00:03:49,580
fight and the rise of cancer culture and the fight for freedom of speech since 2014 and before.

77
00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:54,100
So FIRE was founded in 1999 by Harvey Silverglate.

78
00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:56,480
He is a famous civil liberties attorney.

79
00:03:56,720 --> 00:03:58,360
He's a bit on the show.

80
00:03:58,620 --> 00:04:03,040
He's the person who actually found me out in my very happy life out in San Francisco,

81
00:04:03,040 --> 00:04:05,720
but knew I was looking for a first amendment job.

82
00:04:05,900 --> 00:04:09,200
I'd gone to law school specifically to do first amendment.

83
00:04:10,520 --> 00:04:11,780
And he found me,

84
00:04:11,960 --> 00:04:12,700
which was pretty cool.

85
00:04:13,100 --> 00:04:16,600
His protege, Kathleen Sullivan, was the Dean of Stanford Law School.

86
00:04:16,720 --> 00:04:19,820
And this remains the best compliment I ever got in my life,

87
00:04:19,920 --> 00:04:22,820
is that she recommended me to Harvey.

88
00:04:23,800 --> 00:04:26,200
And since that's the whole reason why I went to law school,

89
00:04:26,200 --> 00:04:28,240
I was excited to be a part of this new organization.

90
00:04:29,040 --> 00:04:32,060
The other co-founder of FIRE is Alan Charles Kors.

91
00:04:32,760 --> 00:04:34,400
He's just an absolute genius.

92
00:04:34,680 --> 00:04:40,520
He is one of the leading experts in the world on the Enlightenment and particularly about Voltaire.

93
00:04:41,280 --> 00:04:43,760
And if any of your listeners do like the great courses,

94
00:04:45,000 --> 00:04:47,620
he has a lecture on Blaise Pascal.

95
00:04:48,080 --> 00:04:50,840
And Blaise, of course, is famous for the Pascal's Wager.

96
00:04:51,660 --> 00:04:54,900
And I left it just so moved and impressed

97
00:04:54,900 --> 00:04:57,880
and with a depth of understanding of how important this person

98
00:04:58,400 --> 00:04:58,740
was.

99
00:04:59,720 --> 00:05:00,320
That's interesting.

100
00:05:00,600 --> 00:05:04,330
You mentioned to me offline connected to this that there is a,

101
00:05:05,060 --> 00:05:09,160
at least it runs in parallel or there's a connection between the love of science and

102
00:05:09,160 --> 00:05:10,460
the love of the freedom of speech.

103
00:05:10,540 --> 00:05:11,040
Yes.

104
00:05:11,420 --> 00:05:14,160
Can you maybe elaborate where that connection is?

105
00:05:14,480 --> 00:05:14,980
Sure.

106
00:05:15,260 --> 00:05:17,820
I think that for those of us who are really,

107
00:05:18,180 --> 00:05:20,480
you know, who've devoted our lives to freedom of

108
00:05:20,480 --> 00:05:22,840
speech, one thing that we are into,

109
00:05:22,840 --> 00:05:23,880
whether we know it or not,

110
00:05:24,660 --> 00:05:25,440
is epistemology,

111
00:05:25,960 --> 00:05:28,660
you know, the study and philosophy of knowledge.

112
00:05:29,540 --> 00:05:31,280
You know, freedom of speech has lots of

113
00:05:32,620 --> 00:05:34,400
moral and philosophical dimensions,

114
00:05:34,520 --> 00:05:36,400
but from a pragmatic standpoint,

115
00:05:36,940 --> 00:05:38,600
it is necessary because

116
00:05:38,600 --> 00:05:40,760
we're creatures of incredibly limited knowledge.

117
00:05:41,040 --> 00:05:43,140
We are incredibly self-deceiving.

118
00:05:43,640 --> 00:05:45,480
I always love the fact that Yuval Harari

119
00:05:46,060 --> 00:05:49,180
refers to the Enlightenment as the discovery of ignorance

120
00:05:49,580 --> 00:05:51,400
because that's exactly what it was.

121
00:05:51,560 --> 00:05:53,000
It was suddenly being like,

122
00:05:53,540 --> 00:05:54,420
wow, hold on a second.

123
00:05:55,140 --> 00:05:58,040
All of this incredibly interesting folk wisdom we got,

124
00:05:58,080 --> 00:06:01,700
which by the way can be surprisingly reliable here and there.

125
00:06:02,440 --> 00:06:07,040
When you start testing a lot of it is nonsense and it doesn't hold up.

126
00:06:07,600 --> 00:06:09,820
Even our ideas about the way things fall,

127
00:06:09,820 --> 00:06:14,400
you know, as Galileo established, like even our intuitions, they're just wrong.

128
00:06:15,680 --> 00:06:19,340
And so a lot of the early history of freedom of speech,

129
00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:23,420
it was happening at the same time as sort of the scientific revolution.

130
00:06:24,060 --> 00:06:28,140
So a lot of the early debates about freedom of speech were tied in.

131
00:06:28,660 --> 00:06:30,160
So certainly Galileo,

132
00:06:30,480 --> 00:06:31,080
you know,

133
00:06:31,900 --> 00:06:36,420
I always point out like Kepler was probably like the even more radical idea that they weren't even perfect spheres.

134
00:06:37,120 --> 00:06:38,500
But at the same time,

135
00:06:39,000 --> 00:06:40,720
largely because of the invention of the printing press,

136
00:06:41,080 --> 00:06:42,840
you also had all these political developments.

137
00:06:43,160 --> 00:06:45,120
And, you know,

138
00:06:45,460 --> 00:06:46,800
I always talk about Jan Hus,

139
00:06:47,000 --> 00:06:52,420
you know, from the famous Czech hero who was

140
00:06:52,780 --> 00:06:55,420
burned at the stake and I think in 1419.

141
00:06:56,420 --> 00:07:01,020
But he was basically Luther before the printing press.

142
00:07:01,720 --> 00:07:03,460
Before Luther could get his word out,

143
00:07:03,600 --> 00:07:05,000
you know, he didn't stand a chance.

144
00:07:05,120 --> 00:07:06,080
And that was exactly

145
00:07:06,080 --> 00:07:06,880
what Jan Hus was.

146
00:07:07,060 --> 00:07:07,960
But a century later,

147
00:07:08,320 --> 00:07:09,260
thanks to the printing press,

148
00:07:10,000 --> 00:07:10,540
everyone could know what

149
00:07:10,660 --> 00:07:11,920
Luther thought and boy,

150
00:07:12,340 --> 00:07:12,700
did they.

151
00:07:13,160 --> 00:07:13,860
But it led to,

152
00:07:13,920 --> 00:07:16,260
of course, this completely crazy,

153
00:07:16,940 --> 00:07:19,780
hyper-disrupted period in European history.

154
00:07:20,500 --> 00:07:23,080
Well, you mentioned to jump around a little bit,

155
00:07:23,260 --> 00:07:23,860
the First Amendment.

156
00:07:23,940 --> 00:07:27,680
First of all, what is the First Amendment and what is the connection to you between

157
00:07:28,700 --> 00:07:31,220
the First Amendment, the freedom of speech and cancel culture?

158
00:07:31,320 --> 00:07:31,660
Sure.

159
00:07:32,480 --> 00:07:33,640
So I'm a First Amendment

160
00:07:33,720 --> 00:07:35,180
lawyer, as I mentioned,

161
00:07:35,620 --> 00:07:36,680
and that's what I,

162
00:07:36,680 --> 00:07:38,180
that's my passion, that's what I studied.

163
00:07:38,280 --> 00:07:40,640
And I think American First Amendment law is incredibly interesting.

164
00:07:41,320 --> 00:07:42,480
In one sentence,

165
00:07:43,080 --> 00:07:44,580
the First Amendment is trying to

166
00:07:44,580 --> 00:07:50,440
get rid of basically all the reasons why humankind had been killing each other for its entire existence.

167
00:07:51,060 --> 00:07:53,300
That we weren't going to fight any more over opinion,

168
00:07:53,480 --> 00:07:54,640
we weren't going to fight any more

169
00:07:54,800 --> 00:07:58,200
religion, that you have the right to approach your government for redress of grievances,

170
00:07:58,620 --> 00:08:00,420
that you have the freedom to associate.

171
00:08:00,760 --> 00:08:03,340
That all of these things in one sentence were like, nope,

172
00:08:03,800 --> 00:08:11,040
the government will no longer interfere with your right to have these fundamental human rights.

173
00:08:12,280 --> 00:08:16,800
And so one thing that makes FIRE a little different from other organizations is,

174
00:08:17,040 --> 00:08:19,480
however, we're not just a First Amendment organization,

175
00:08:20,100 --> 00:08:21,940
we are a free speech organization.

176
00:08:22,900 --> 00:08:24,300
And so, and,

177
00:08:24,700 --> 00:08:25,660
but at the same time,

178
00:08:25,860 --> 00:08:29,420
a lot of what I think free speech is,

179
00:08:29,900 --> 00:08:31,120
can be well explained

180
00:08:31,640 --> 00:08:33,800
with reference to a lot of First Amendment law,

181
00:08:34,160 --> 00:08:36,300
partially because in American history,

182
00:08:36,440 --> 00:08:37,260
some of our smartest

183
00:08:37,340 --> 00:08:42,660
people have been thinking about what the parameters of freedom of speech are in relationship to

184
00:08:42,700 --> 00:08:43,280
the First Amendment.

185
00:08:43,420 --> 00:08:44,400
And a lot of those principles,

186
00:08:44,480 --> 00:08:48,000
they transfer very well just as pragmatic ideas.

187
00:08:48,420 --> 00:08:52,720
So like the biggest sin in terms of censorship is called viewpoint discrimination.

188
00:08:53,060 --> 00:08:54,560
That essentially you allow freedom of speech,

189
00:08:54,840 --> 00:08:55,940
except for that opinion.

190
00:08:56,780 --> 00:08:59,060
Now it's, and it's found to be kind

191
00:08:59,080 --> 00:09:00,040
of more defensible.

192
00:09:00,140 --> 00:09:01,940
And I think this makes sense that if you,

193
00:09:01,940 --> 00:09:02,980
if you set up a forum and like,

194
00:09:03,160 --> 00:09:07,020
we're only going to talk about economics to exclude people who want to talk about a different topic,

195
00:09:07,620 --> 00:09:11,160
but it's considered rightfully a bigger deal.

196
00:09:11,460 --> 00:09:12,860
If you've set up a forum for economics,

197
00:09:13,240 --> 00:09:17,920
but we're not going to let people talk about that kind of economics or have that opinion on economics,

198
00:09:18,260 --> 00:09:20,020
most, most particularly.

199
00:09:20,700 --> 00:09:27,400
So a lot of the principles from First Amendment law actually make a lot of philosophical sense as good principles for when,

200
00:09:27,520 --> 00:09:29,900
like what is protected and unprotected speech,

201
00:09:30,000 --> 00:09:31,160
what should get you in trouble,

202
00:09:31,760 --> 00:09:33,440
how you actually analyze it,

203
00:09:33,480 --> 00:09:37,400
which is why we actually try in our definition of cancel culture to work in

204
00:09:37,540 --> 00:09:38,700
some of the First Amendment norms,

205
00:09:38,800 --> 00:09:39,620
just in the definition.

206
00:09:39,900 --> 00:09:41,820
So we don't have to bog down on them as well.

207
00:09:42,400 --> 00:09:43,400
You're saying so many interesting things,

208
00:09:43,400 --> 00:09:45,540
but if you can link on the viewpoint discrimination,

209
00:09:46,400 --> 00:09:49,360
is there any gray area of discussion there?

210
00:09:49,400 --> 00:09:52,460
Like what is, and isn't economics for the example you gave?

211
00:09:52,560 --> 00:09:53,100
Yeah.

212
00:09:53,760 --> 00:09:54,600
Is it, is there,

213
00:09:55,400 --> 00:09:56,580
I mean, is it a science?

214
00:09:56,690 --> 00:09:59,400
Or is it an art to draw lines of what isn't,

215
00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:00,160
isn't allowed?

216
00:10:00,360 --> 00:10:00,520
Yeah.

217
00:10:00,700 --> 00:10:02,380
You know, if you're saying that something is,

218
00:10:02,380 --> 00:10:03,240
or is not economics,

219
00:10:03,300 --> 00:10:06,200
well, you can say everything's economics and therefore I want to talk about poetry.

220
00:10:06,460 --> 00:10:07,300
There'd be some line

221
00:10:07,300 --> 00:10:08,400
drawing exercise in there,

222
00:10:08,660 --> 00:10:14,520
but let's say at once you decide to open up it to poetry even.

223
00:10:16,060 --> 00:10:17,420
It's a big difference between saying,

224
00:10:17,460 --> 00:10:18,620
okay, now we're open to poetry,

225
00:10:18,860 --> 00:10:20,040
but you can't say,

226
00:10:20,440 --> 00:10:21,920
you know, Dante was bad.

227
00:10:22,780 --> 00:10:25,840
Like that's an, that's a forbidden opinion now officially in,

228
00:10:25,840 --> 00:10:29,720
in this otherwise open forum that would immediately at an intuitive level strike

229
00:10:29,740 --> 00:10:33,980
people as a bigger problem than just saying that poetry isn't economics.

230
00:10:35,060 --> 00:10:35,320
Yeah. I mean,

231
00:10:35,880 --> 00:10:38,240
that intuitive level that you speak to,

232
00:10:39,780 --> 00:10:40,280
I hope

233
00:10:41,580 --> 00:10:42,800
that all of us have

234
00:10:42,800 --> 00:10:45,300
that kind of basic intuition when the line is crossed,

235
00:10:45,380 --> 00:10:46,460
it's the same thing for

236
00:10:46,460 --> 00:10:47,780
like pornography, right?

237
00:10:47,780 --> 00:10:48,880
You know, when you see it,

238
00:10:48,880 --> 00:10:52,620
I think there's the same level of intuition that

239
00:10:52,620 --> 00:10:54,220
should be applied across the board here.

240
00:10:54,930 --> 00:10:56,320
And it's when

241
00:10:57,060 --> 00:11:00,280
that intuition becomes deformed by whatever forces of society,

242
00:11:00,340 --> 00:11:02,540
that's when it starts to feel like censorship.

243
00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:03,020
Yeah.

244
00:11:03,220 --> 00:11:05,280
I mean, people find it a different thing.

245
00:11:05,680 --> 00:11:07,240
You know, if someone loses their job simply

246
00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:08,440
for their political opinion,

247
00:11:08,780 --> 00:11:11,400
even if that employer has every right in the world to fire you,

248
00:11:11,880 --> 00:11:13,520
I think Americans should still be like,

249
00:11:13,520 --> 00:11:14,300
well, it's true.

250
00:11:14,520 --> 00:11:15,220
They have every right in

251
00:11:15,220 --> 00:11:17,900
the world and I'm not making a legal case that maybe you shouldn't

252
00:11:19,100 --> 00:11:20,680
fire someone for their political opinion,

253
00:11:21,120 --> 00:11:21,960
but think that through.

254
00:11:22,420 --> 00:11:24,020
Like what, what society do we want to,

255
00:11:24,040 --> 00:11:25,860
what kind of society do we want to live in?

256
00:11:26,160 --> 00:11:27,660
And it's been funny watching,

257
00:11:29,160 --> 00:11:30,440
you know, and I, I point this out.

258
00:11:30,600 --> 00:11:32,600
Yes, I will defend businesses,

259
00:11:33,520 --> 00:11:35,960
first amendment rights of association to be

260
00:11:35,960 --> 00:11:37,880
able to have the legal right to decide,

261
00:11:38,140 --> 00:11:39,440
you know, who works for them.

262
00:11:39,680 --> 00:11:42,280
But from a moral or philosophical matter,

263
00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:44,600
if you think through the implications of,

264
00:11:44,860 --> 00:11:46,640
if every business in

265
00:11:46,640 --> 00:11:49,160
America becomes an expressive association,

266
00:11:49,240 --> 00:11:52,360
in addition to being a profit maximizing organization,

267
00:11:53,120 --> 00:11:57,080
that would be a disaster for democracy because you would end up in a situation where people

268
00:11:57,080 --> 00:11:58,620
would actually be saying to themselves,

269
00:11:59,100 --> 00:12:01,500
I don't think I can actually say what I really

270
00:12:01,500 --> 00:12:03,900
think and still believe I can keep my job.

271
00:12:04,340 --> 00:12:05,600
And that's where I was worried.

272
00:12:05,620 --> 00:12:12,290
I felt like we were headed because a lot of the initial response to people getting canceled was very

273
00:12:12,600 --> 00:12:13,000
simply,

274
00:12:13,380 --> 00:12:15,860
you know, Oh, but they have the right to get rid of this person.

275
00:12:16,060 --> 00:12:20,100
And that, and that's, that's the end and beginning and end of the discussion.

276
00:12:20,680 --> 00:12:22,420
And I thought that was a dodge.

277
00:12:22,660 --> 00:12:25,760
I thought that wasn't actually a very serious way of that.

278
00:12:25,780 --> 00:12:29,790
If you care about both the first amendment and freedom of speech of thinking it through

279
00:12:29,900 --> 00:12:31,160
to you, just to

280
00:12:32,380 --> 00:12:34,920
clarify the first amendment is kind of

281
00:12:35,840 --> 00:12:38,980
a legal embodiment of the ideal

282
00:12:38,980 --> 00:12:41,280
of freedom of speech and then freedom of speech applied to government.

283
00:12:41,840 --> 00:12:47,360
And it's very specific applied to government and freedom of speech is the application of

284
00:12:47,500 --> 00:12:49,560
the principle to like everything,

285
00:12:50,040 --> 00:12:51,960
including like kind of the high level

286
00:12:52,720 --> 00:12:54,220
philosophical ideal

287
00:12:54,720 --> 00:12:59,160
of what it, of the value of people being able to speak their mind.

288
00:12:59,380 --> 00:12:59,580
Yeah.

289
00:12:59,660 --> 00:13:03,640
It's an older, bolder, more expansive idea.

290
00:13:04,020 --> 00:13:05,680
And you can have a situation.

291
00:13:05,820 --> 00:13:08,540
And I talk about countries that have good free speech law,

292
00:13:08,720 --> 00:13:10,580
but not necessarily great free speech culture.

293
00:13:11,100 --> 00:13:15,160
And I talk about how when we sometimes make this distinction between free speech

294
00:13:15,180 --> 00:13:16,420
law and free speech culture,

295
00:13:17,140 --> 00:13:19,920
we're thinking in a very cloudy kind of way.

296
00:13:21,160 --> 00:13:21,640
And what I mean

297
00:13:21,640 --> 00:13:24,140
by that is that law is generally,

298
00:13:24,180 --> 00:13:25,500
particularly in a common law country,

299
00:13:26,000 --> 00:13:27,200
it's the reflection

300
00:13:27,780 --> 00:13:28,520
of norms.

301
00:13:29,480 --> 00:13:31,200
Those judges are people too.

302
00:13:31,360 --> 00:13:32,140
And in a lot of cases,

303
00:13:32,240 --> 00:13:33,000
common law is supposed

304
00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:37,880
to actually take our intuitive ideas of fairness and place them into the law.

305
00:13:38,720 --> 00:13:39,660
So if you actually

306
00:13:39,660 --> 00:13:43,260
have a culture that doesn't appreciate free speech from a philosophical standpoint,

307
00:13:43,580 --> 00:13:46,640
it's not going to be able to protect free speech for the long haul,

308
00:13:46,720 --> 00:13:47,640
even in the law.

309
00:13:47,880 --> 00:13:50,940
Cause eventually that's one of the reasons why I worry so much about some of these terrible

310
00:13:50,940 --> 00:13:52,600
cases coming out of law schools.

311
00:13:52,940 --> 00:13:56,640
Because I fear that even though sure American first

312
00:13:56,640 --> 00:13:59,040
amendment law is very strongly protective of first amendment

313
00:13:59,700 --> 00:14:00,040
for now,

314
00:14:00,500 --> 00:14:01,880
it's not going to stay that way.

315
00:14:01,960 --> 00:14:06,480
If you have generations of law students graduating who actually think

316
00:14:06,580 --> 00:14:09,860
there's nothing, there's no higher goal than shouting down, you're an opponent.

317
00:14:10,600 --> 00:14:10,800
Yeah.

318
00:14:10,920 --> 00:14:12,800
So that's why so much of your focus

319
00:14:14,080 --> 00:14:22,620
or large fraction of your focus is on the higher education or education period is because education is the foundation of culture.

320
00:14:23,120 --> 00:14:23,240
Yeah.

321
00:14:23,500 --> 00:14:24,360
You have this history,

322
00:14:24,460 --> 00:14:26,000
you know, uh, 64,

323
00:14:26,320 --> 00:14:30,320
you have the free speech movement on Berkeley and in a 65,

324
00:14:30,600 --> 00:14:32,720
you have repressive tolerance by Herbert Marcuse,

325
00:14:33,000 --> 00:14:34,240
which was a declaration of,

326
00:14:34,780 --> 00:14:37,660
by the way, um, we on the left, we, we shouldn't,

327
00:14:38,180 --> 00:14:39,460
we should have free speech,

328
00:14:39,520 --> 00:14:41,240
but we should have free speech for us.

329
00:14:41,740 --> 00:14:44,040
I mean, I went, went back and reread,

330
00:14:44,400 --> 00:14:45,680
um, uh, repressive tolerance

331
00:14:46,200 --> 00:14:47,540
and how clear it is.

332
00:14:47,660 --> 00:14:50,240
I forgot I had forgotten that it really is kind of like,

333
00:14:50,340 --> 00:14:52,600
um, and these so-called conservatives and right-wingers,

334
00:14:52,880 --> 00:14:55,580
we need to repress them because they're regressive thinkers.

335
00:14:55,980 --> 00:14:59,680
It really doesn't come out to anything more sophisticated than the very old idea,

336
00:15:00,080 --> 00:15:01,940
um, that our people are good.

337
00:15:02,320 --> 00:15:03,420
They get free speech.

338
00:15:03,820 --> 00:15:04,760
We should, they should keep it.

339
00:15:05,800 --> 00:15:07,180
The other side bad.

340
00:15:07,820 --> 00:15:08,840
Um, we, we should not have,

341
00:15:08,980 --> 00:15:10,900
uh, and we have to retrain society.

342
00:15:11,040 --> 00:15:13,220
And of course, like it, it ends up being another,

343
00:15:13,560 --> 00:15:15,000
he was also a fan of Mao.

344
00:15:15,160 --> 00:15:16,320
So it's not surprising that he,

345
00:15:16,580 --> 00:15:20,160
that of course the system would have to rely on some kind of totalitarian, uh,

346
00:15:20,860 --> 00:15:21,500
system. Um,

347
00:15:22,640 --> 00:15:25,780
but that was a laughable, um,

348
00:15:26,160 --> 00:15:33,300
uh, position, you know, uh, say 30, 40 years ago, the idea that essentially, you know, free speech for me, not for the,

349
00:15:33,960 --> 00:15:39,400
uh, as, as the great, you know, free speech champion that Hentoff used to say was something that you were supposed

350
00:15:39,400 --> 00:15:40,260
to be embarrassed by.

351
00:15:40,980 --> 00:15:43,460
But I saw this when I was in,

352
00:15:43,460 --> 00:15:44,700
in, in law school in 97,

353
00:15:44,880 --> 00:15:46,180
I saw this when I was interning at

354
00:15:46,200 --> 00:15:47,500
the ACLU in 99,

355
00:15:48,580 --> 00:15:52,420
um, that there was a slow motion train wreck coming that essentially

356
00:15:52,420 --> 00:15:56,200
there was, um, these bad ideas from campus that had been

357
00:15:56,980 --> 00:15:58,780
taking on more and more steam

358
00:15:58,780 --> 00:16:03,780
of basically no free speech for my opponent were actually becoming more,

359
00:16:03,860 --> 00:16:09,640
more and more accepted as, and partially because academia was becoming less and less viewpoint diverse.

360
00:16:09,740 --> 00:16:15,180
I think that as my co-author Jonathan Haidt points out that when you have low viewpoint

361
00:16:15,280 --> 00:16:18,260
diversity, people start thinking in a very kind of tribal way.

362
00:16:18,780 --> 00:16:21,280
And if you don't have the respected dissenters,

363
00:16:21,340 --> 00:16:22,080
you don't have the people

364
00:16:22,080 --> 00:16:23,260
that you can point to that I'm like,

365
00:16:23,340 --> 00:16:24,650
Hey, this is a smart person.

366
00:16:24,780 --> 00:16:25,660
Um, this is like,

367
00:16:26,100 --> 00:16:26,740
this is a smart,

368
00:16:26,960 --> 00:16:28,120
reasonable, decent person that I,

369
00:16:28,180 --> 00:16:31,800
that I disagree with, so I guess not everyone thinks alike on this issue.

370
00:16:32,380 --> 00:16:35,180
You start getting much more kind of like only, you know,

371
00:16:35,600 --> 00:16:36,580
only bad people,

372
00:16:37,020 --> 00:16:41,220
only heretics, only blasphemers, only right wingers, you know, um, can actually

373
00:16:41,540 --> 00:16:42,180
think in this way.

374
00:16:42,580 --> 00:16:44,000
Every time you say something,

375
00:16:44,000 --> 00:16:47,320
I always have a million thoughts and million questions that

376
00:16:47,320 --> 00:16:47,640
pop up.

377
00:16:47,800 --> 00:16:52,300
But since you mentioned there's a kind of drift as you write about in the book and you

378
00:16:52,300 --> 00:16:55,140
mentioned now there's a drift towards the left in academia,

379
00:16:55,780 --> 00:16:57,340
um, which we'll also maybe

380
00:16:57,440 --> 00:17:01,440
draw a distinction here between the left and the right and the cancel culture as you present

381
00:17:01,440 --> 00:17:06,280
in your book is not necessarily associated with any one political viewpoint,

382
00:17:06,640 --> 00:17:09,260
that there's mechanisms on both sides that result

383
00:17:09,820 --> 00:17:11,360
in cancellation and censorship,

384
00:17:12,020 --> 00:17:13,260
uh, in violation of freedom of speech.

385
00:17:13,800 --> 00:17:18,160
So one thing I want to be really clear about is the book takes on both right and left cancel culture.

386
00:17:18,520 --> 00:17:21,080
They're different, uh, in a lot of ways and definitely,

387
00:17:21,080 --> 00:17:27,040
you know, um, cancel culture from the left is more important in academia where the left is more dominates.

388
00:17:27,800 --> 00:17:31,320
Um, but we talk a lot about cancel culture coming from legislatures.

389
00:17:31,480 --> 00:17:32,200
We talk a lot about

390
00:17:32,220 --> 00:17:35,120
cancel culture on campus as well,

391
00:17:35,440 --> 00:17:37,560
because even though, um,

392
00:17:38,320 --> 00:17:39,180
most of the attempts that

393
00:17:39,180 --> 00:17:42,460
come from on campus to get people canceled are still from the left,

394
00:17:42,740 --> 00:17:43,620
there are a lot of

395
00:17:43,620 --> 00:17:45,720
attacks that come from the right that come from,

396
00:17:45,720 --> 00:17:47,770
you know, uh, the attempts by different

397
00:17:47,960 --> 00:17:51,720
organizations and, uh, sometimes when there are stories in Fox news,

398
00:17:51,940 --> 00:17:58,120
you know, like they'll go after professors and about one third of the attempts to get professors punished that

399
00:17:58,140 --> 00:18:00,400
are successful actually do come from the right.

400
00:18:00,760 --> 00:18:01,880
And, and we talk about,

401
00:18:01,880 --> 00:18:03,440
um, attempts to get books banned.

402
00:18:03,440 --> 00:18:05,980
Um, in, in the, in the book we talk about,

403
00:18:06,040 --> 00:18:09,020
um, and, uh, I talk about suing

404
00:18:09,260 --> 00:18:10,520
the Florida legislature.

405
00:18:10,760 --> 00:18:12,880
Rhonda Santus had something called the stop woke act,

406
00:18:13,500 --> 00:18:17,160
um, which we told everyone this is laughably unconstitutional.

407
00:18:17,320 --> 00:18:19,200
Um, they tried to ban,

408
00:18:19,200 --> 00:18:21,800
you know, particular topics in higher ed and we're like,

409
00:18:21,880 --> 00:18:22,800
no, this is a joke.

410
00:18:23,040 --> 00:18:23,280
Like, like,

411
00:18:23,720 --> 00:18:25,340
this will, this will be laughed out of court.

412
00:18:26,580 --> 00:18:29,320
Um, and they didn't listen to us and they brought it,

413
00:18:29,600 --> 00:18:32,640
uh, they passed it and we sued and we won.

414
00:18:33,160 --> 00:18:35,800
Now they're trying again with something that's equally

415
00:18:35,800 --> 00:18:38,680
as unconstitutional and we will sue again and we will,

416
00:18:38,680 --> 00:18:39,540
and we will win.

417
00:18:39,700 --> 00:18:41,700
Can you elaborate on a stop woke act?

418
00:18:41,960 --> 00:18:43,340
So this is presumably trying to limit

419
00:18:44,040 --> 00:18:45,980
certain topics from being taught in school.

420
00:18:45,980 --> 00:18:46,340
Yeah.

421
00:18:46,420 --> 00:18:48,140
Basically woke topics.

422
00:18:48,240 --> 00:18:50,500
Um, you know, it, it's more, it came out of the sort of

423
00:18:50,640 --> 00:18:52,600
attempt to get at a critical race theory.

424
00:18:52,700 --> 00:18:55,620
Um, so it's topics related to race,

425
00:18:55,660 --> 00:18:56,580
gender, et cetera.

426
00:18:56,600 --> 00:18:59,880
Um, I don't remember exactly how they tried to cabinet to,

427
00:18:59,880 --> 00:19:01,580
um, uh, to CRT.

428
00:19:02,140 --> 00:19:04,000
Um, but when you actually,

429
00:19:04,380 --> 00:19:07,560
the law is really well established that you can't tell higher

430
00:19:07,560 --> 00:19:11,140
education what they're allowed to teach without violating,

431
00:19:11,700 --> 00:19:12,680
uh, without violating the first

432
00:19:12,680 --> 00:19:13,040
amendment.

433
00:19:13,300 --> 00:19:15,240
And when this got in front of a judge,

434
00:19:15,280 --> 00:19:16,500
it was exactly as,

435
00:19:16,500 --> 00:19:20,580
uh, he was exactly as skeptical of it as we thought he'd be.

436
00:19:20,680 --> 00:19:21,980
I think he called this dystopian.

437
00:19:22,980 --> 00:19:24,680
Um, and it w it wasn't a close call.

438
00:19:24,760 --> 00:19:30,080
So if you're against that kind of teaching the right way to fight it is by making the

439
00:19:30,080 --> 00:19:34,460
case that it's not a good idea as part of the curriculum as opposed to banning it from the curriculum.

440
00:19:34,540 --> 00:19:34,660
Yeah.

441
00:19:35,020 --> 00:19:37,480
It just, the state doesn't have the power to simply say,

442
00:19:37,720 --> 00:19:42,640
to, to ban, um, you know, what, what teach, what professors in higher education teach.

443
00:19:43,080 --> 00:19:45,840
Now it gets a little more complicated when you talk about K through 12,

444
00:19:46,400 --> 00:19:46,880
because

445
00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:52,120
the state has a role in deciding what public K through 12 teaches because they're your kids,

446
00:19:52,800 --> 00:19:53,960
they, it's taxpayer funded.

447
00:19:54,520 --> 00:19:57,260
Um, and generally the legislature is involved.

448
00:19:57,420 --> 00:19:59,900
Um, there is democratic oversight of that process.

449
00:20:00,640 --> 00:20:01,700
So for K through 12,

450
00:20:01,760 --> 00:20:03,420
is there also lean towards the

451
00:20:03,420 --> 00:20:06,060
left in terms of the administration that manages the curriculum?

452
00:20:06,120 --> 00:20:09,480
Yeah, um, there, there, there definitely is, um, in K through 12,

453
00:20:09,820 --> 00:20:10,920
the, the, I mean,

454
00:20:11,760 --> 00:20:13,000
my kids go to public school.

455
00:20:13,340 --> 00:20:15,160
Um, I have a five and a seven year old,

456
00:20:16,200 --> 00:20:19,540
uh, and they have lovely teachers.

457
00:20:19,720 --> 00:20:21,660
Um, but we have run into a

458
00:20:21,660 --> 00:20:22,380
lot of problems with,

459
00:20:22,600 --> 00:20:23,780
with education schools at fire.

460
00:20:24,340 --> 00:20:26,000
Um, and a lot of the graduates of

461
00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:30,120
education school ended up being the administrators who clamped down on free speech in higher education.

462
00:20:31,040 --> 00:20:35,300
And so I'm been trying to think of positive ways to take on some of the,

463
00:20:35,520 --> 00:20:37,440
some of the problems that I see in K through 12.

464
00:20:37,640 --> 00:20:38,860
I thought that the attempt to just

465
00:20:39,500 --> 00:20:39,950
dictate,

466
00:20:40,560 --> 00:20:43,020
you won't teach the following 10 books,

467
00:20:43,300 --> 00:20:46,340
you know, or 20 books or 200 books was the wrong way to do it.

468
00:20:46,540 --> 00:20:48,960
Now, when it comes to deciding what books are in the curriculum,

469
00:20:49,060 --> 00:20:50,360
again, that's something the legislature

470
00:20:50,360 --> 00:20:52,700
actually, you know, can't, can't have some say in,

471
00:20:52,700 --> 00:20:54,480
and that's pretty uncontroversial,

472
00:20:54,480 --> 00:20:55,560
um, in terms of the law.

473
00:20:56,220 --> 00:20:57,580
But when it comes to how you fight it,

474
00:20:57,780 --> 00:21:00,300
I had something that since I'm kind of stuck with a formula,

475
00:21:00,740 --> 00:21:02,860
I called empowering of the American mind.

476
00:21:02,860 --> 00:21:05,560
Um, I gave principles that were inconsistent,

477
00:21:05,960 --> 00:21:10,020
um, with the sort of group think and heavy emphasis on,

478
00:21:10,040 --> 00:21:13,000
uh, identity politics, uh, that,

479
00:21:13,400 --> 00:21:16,580
um, you know, some of the critics are rightfully complaining about in K through 12.

480
00:21:17,100 --> 00:21:18,600
Uh, and we, we,

481
00:21:19,160 --> 00:21:21,900
that is actually in canceling of the American mind,

482
00:21:21,960 --> 00:21:23,820
but I have a more detailed explanation of

483
00:21:23,820 --> 00:21:26,000
it that I'm going to be putting up on my blog,

484
00:21:26,260 --> 00:21:27,280
the eternally radical idea.

485
00:21:27,840 --> 00:21:29,080
Is it possible to legally,

486
00:21:29,080 --> 00:21:30,760
that's just a silly question,

487
00:21:31,000 --> 00:21:34,780
perhaps create an extra protection for certain kinds of literature

488
00:21:35,410 --> 00:21:38,440
1984 or something to remain in the curriculum.

489
00:21:38,700 --> 00:21:40,280
I mean, it's already, it's all protected, I guess.

490
00:21:40,560 --> 00:21:40,800
Yeah.

491
00:21:40,800 --> 00:21:41,440
I guess

492
00:21:42,140 --> 00:21:44,540
to protect against administrators from

493
00:21:45,220 --> 00:21:46,280
fiddling too much

494
00:21:46,900 --> 00:21:47,880
with the curriculum,

495
00:21:48,220 --> 00:21:49,400
like stabilizing the curriculum.

496
00:21:49,700 --> 00:21:51,400
I don't know what the machinery of

497
00:21:51,940 --> 00:21:53,900
the K through 12 public school.

498
00:21:54,000 --> 00:21:54,840
In K through 12,

499
00:21:54,980 --> 00:21:57,860
you know, the state legislatures, you know, um, they're part of that.

500
00:21:57,940 --> 00:21:59,540
They're, they're part of that and they can say like,

501
00:21:59,660 --> 00:22:01,060
you should teach the following books.

502
00:22:01,160 --> 00:22:03,400
Now, of course, people are always a little bit worried that, um,

503
00:22:03,760 --> 00:22:05,980
if you, uh, if they were to recommend,

504
00:22:06,500 --> 00:22:06,840
you know,

505
00:22:07,200 --> 00:22:07,540
teach,

506
00:22:07,860 --> 00:22:09,740
uh, teach the declaration of independence,

507
00:22:09,920 --> 00:22:11,120
you know, that it will end up being,

508
00:22:11,180 --> 00:22:14,040
well, they're going to teach the declaration of independence was just to protect slavery,

509
00:22:14,440 --> 00:22:14,700
which

510
00:22:15,030 --> 00:22:17,700
wasn't teaching a particular topic matter,

511
00:22:17,800 --> 00:22:18,980
which textbooks you choose,

512
00:22:19,200 --> 00:22:20,240
which perspective you take,

513
00:22:20,340 --> 00:22:21,120
all that kind of stuff.

514
00:22:21,120 --> 00:22:25,280
There's like religion starts to creep into the whole question of like, how, you know,

515
00:22:25,640 --> 00:22:29,000
is the Bible allowed to teach into corporate that into education?

516
00:22:29,020 --> 00:22:29,180
Uh,

517
00:22:30,180 --> 00:22:30,660
don't, yeah.

518
00:22:30,840 --> 00:22:32,660
I mean, I'm, I'm an atheist,

519
00:22:33,280 --> 00:22:35,080
uh, with an intense interest in religion.

520
00:22:35,240 --> 00:22:38,140
I actually read the entire Bible this year just cause I do stuff like that.

521
00:22:38,420 --> 00:22:39,480
And I never actually had read it

522
00:22:39,480 --> 00:22:40,500
from beginning to end.

523
00:22:40,680 --> 00:22:42,420
Um, then I read the Quran cause you know,

524
00:22:42,420 --> 00:22:43,480
and I'm going to try to do the

525
00:22:43,480 --> 00:22:44,540
book of Mormon, but you know.

526
00:22:44,680 --> 00:22:46,420
Well, they started to, you're so fascinating.

527
00:22:46,780 --> 00:22:48,360
Um, do you recommend doing that?

528
00:22:48,700 --> 00:22:50,040
I think you should,

529
00:22:50,040 --> 00:22:53,200
um, just to know, cause it's such a touchstone,

530
00:22:53,460 --> 00:22:55,940
um, in, in the way people talk about things,

531
00:22:56,360 --> 00:22:57,800
it can get pretty tedious,

532
00:22:58,080 --> 00:23:00,460
but I even made myself read through

533
00:23:00,500 --> 00:23:06,120
all of the very specific instructions on how tall the different parts of the temple need to be

534
00:23:06,120 --> 00:23:10,380
and how long the garbs need to be and what shape they need to be and what like,

535
00:23:10,620 --> 00:23:12,880
and those go on a lot.

536
00:23:13,300 --> 00:23:14,660
Um, that, that, that it surprisingly,

537
00:23:15,080 --> 00:23:16,880
sorry, surprisingly big chunk of Exodus.

538
00:23:17,100 --> 00:23:19,980
Um, I thought that was more like in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

539
00:23:20,600 --> 00:23:22,340
Um, but then you get to books like Job,

540
00:23:22,860 --> 00:23:23,240
you know,

541
00:23:23,580 --> 00:23:23,960
wow.

542
00:23:24,360 --> 00:23:28,260
I mean, Job is such a read and no way Job originally had that ending.

543
00:23:29,140 --> 00:23:30,260
Like Job is basically,

544
00:23:30,760 --> 00:23:34,020
it starts out as this perverse bet between God,

545
00:23:34,020 --> 00:23:36,760
um, and Satan about whether or not

546
00:23:36,800 --> 00:23:39,080
they can actually make a good man renounce God.

547
00:23:39,160 --> 00:23:40,060
And initially they can't,

548
00:23:40,060 --> 00:23:41,340
it's all going very predictably.

549
00:23:41,900 --> 00:23:44,460
And then they finally really tortured Job

550
00:23:45,160 --> 00:23:46,760
and he turns into the best,

551
00:23:47,960 --> 00:23:49,040
why is God cruel?

552
00:23:49,120 --> 00:23:50,600
How could God possibly exist?

553
00:23:50,640 --> 00:23:52,120
How could a kind God do these things?

554
00:23:52,360 --> 00:23:56,820
And he beats, he turns into like the best lawyer in the entire world and he defeats everyone,

555
00:23:57,120 --> 00:23:57,780
all the people who

556
00:23:57,780 --> 00:23:58,440
come to argue with him.

557
00:23:58,620 --> 00:24:00,780
He, he argues the pants off of them.

558
00:24:00,900 --> 00:24:02,800
And then suddenly at the end, God shows up

559
00:24:03,340 --> 00:24:04,380
and he's like,

560
00:24:04,880 --> 00:24:08,420
um, well, you know, uh, I am everywhere.

561
00:24:08,980 --> 00:24:09,860
And, uh,

562
00:24:10,560 --> 00:24:11,880
it's a very confusing answer.

563
00:24:11,900 --> 00:24:13,040
He gives an answer kind of like,

564
00:24:13,200 --> 00:24:14,360
I am there when,

565
00:24:14,360 --> 00:24:16,660
when, when lionesses give birth and I am there.

566
00:24:16,840 --> 00:24:17,360
And by the way,

567
00:24:17,400 --> 00:24:21,400
there's this giant monster Leviathan that's very big and it's very scary.

568
00:24:21,400 --> 00:24:23,260
And I, and I have to manage the universe.

569
00:24:23,580 --> 00:24:24,280
And I'm kind of like,

570
00:24:24,300 --> 00:24:26,300
God, are you saying that you're very

571
00:24:26,300 --> 00:24:26,680
busy?

572
00:24:26,960 --> 00:24:30,560
Is that, is that essentially your argument to Job?

573
00:24:31,000 --> 00:24:32,480
And you don't mention the whole,

574
00:24:32,820 --> 00:24:34,440
you don't mention the whole kind of like,

575
00:24:34,880 --> 00:24:37,300
that I have a bet that's why I was torturing you,

576
00:24:37,300 --> 00:24:38,160
that doesn't come up.

577
00:24:38,540 --> 00:24:39,940
And then at the end he decides,

578
00:24:40,180 --> 00:24:42,520
God decides, like Job's like, oh, no, you're totally right.

579
00:24:42,520 --> 00:24:43,460
I was totally wrong.

580
00:24:43,480 --> 00:24:44,140
Uh, sorry.

581
00:24:44,340 --> 00:24:49,360
Um, and, and God says, I'm going to punish those people who tried to argue with you and didn't, didn't win.

582
00:24:49,720 --> 00:24:51,440
So, um, so he gets rid of the,

583
00:24:51,440 --> 00:24:52,920
I don't know exactly what he does to them.

584
00:24:52,920 --> 00:24:53,480
I don't remember.

585
00:24:54,000 --> 00:24:56,860
Um, and then he gives Job all his money back and all,

586
00:24:57,020 --> 00:24:58,460
and it makes them super prosperous.

587
00:24:58,620 --> 00:25:02,440
And I'm like, no way that was the original ending of that book.

588
00:25:02,500 --> 00:25:03,860
Like, because this would like,

589
00:25:03,940 --> 00:25:06,420
this was clearly a beloved novel that they were like,

590
00:25:06,480 --> 00:25:07,540
but it can't have that ending.

591
00:25:07,740 --> 00:25:07,940
Okay.

592
00:25:08,180 --> 00:25:10,040
So, so, so, so yeah, so it's a long way of saying,

593
00:25:10,300 --> 00:25:11,560
I actually think it's worthwhile.

594
00:25:11,660 --> 00:25:12,620
Uh, some of it was,

595
00:25:12,620 --> 00:25:15,160
you're always kind of surprised when you end up in the part,

596
00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:16,160
like, um,

597
00:25:17,160 --> 00:25:19,260
there are parts of it that will sneak up on you,

598
00:25:19,380 --> 00:25:21,060
kind of like Isaiah's a trip, um,

599
00:25:21,380 --> 00:25:22,100
Ecclesiastes,

600
00:25:22,580 --> 00:25:23,000
Depeche mode.

601
00:25:24,280 --> 00:25:25,520
And you did, you said you also,

602
00:25:25,520 --> 00:25:26,640
uh, the, the Qur'an.

603
00:25:26,740 --> 00:25:26,860
Yeah.

604
00:25:26,860 --> 00:25:27,520
Which was fascinating.

605
00:25:28,040 --> 00:25:29,460
So what is there,

606
00:25:29,460 --> 00:25:30,340
it'd be interesting to ask,

607
00:25:30,380 --> 00:25:32,160
is there a tension between

608
00:25:32,900 --> 00:25:34,280
the study of religious

609
00:25:34,380 --> 00:25:41,400
texts or the following of religion and just believing in God and following the various

610
00:25:41,420 --> 00:25:43,560
aspects of religion with freedom of speech?

611
00:25:44,260 --> 00:25:45,740
Um, in the first amendment,

612
00:25:46,000 --> 00:25:46,860
uh, we, we have

613
00:25:47,220 --> 00:25:50,700
something that we call the religion clause and I've never liked calling it just that

614
00:25:50,820 --> 00:25:53,400
because it's two brilliant things right next to each other.

615
00:25:54,200 --> 00:25:55,880
The state may not establish

616
00:25:55,880 --> 00:26:00,100
an official religion, but it cannot interfere with your right to practice your religion.

617
00:26:00,700 --> 00:26:01,440
That's beautiful.

618
00:26:01,840 --> 00:26:03,360
Two things at the same time.

619
00:26:03,360 --> 00:26:04,000
And I think they're,

620
00:26:04,000 --> 00:26:05,580
and I think they're both exactly right.

621
00:26:06,060 --> 00:26:09,640
And I think sometimes the right gets very excited of the free exercise clause

622
00:26:09,660 --> 00:26:11,780
and the left gets very excited about establishment.

623
00:26:12,200 --> 00:26:13,440
And I liked the fact that we have,

624
00:26:13,480 --> 00:26:14,820
we have both of them together.

625
00:26:15,240 --> 00:26:16,940
Now, how does it relate to freedom of speech?

626
00:26:17,640 --> 00:26:18,960
And I was right to the curriculum,

627
00:26:19,000 --> 00:26:20,040
like we were talking about.

628
00:26:21,220 --> 00:26:25,720
Um, I actually think it would be great if public schools could teach

629
00:26:26,300 --> 00:26:28,120
the Bible, like in the sense of like,

630
00:26:28,200 --> 00:26:29,520
read it as a historical document.

631
00:26:30,060 --> 00:26:31,160
But back when I was at the

632
00:26:31,160 --> 00:26:33,460
ACLU, every time I saw people trying this,

633
00:26:33,680 --> 00:26:36,760
it always turned into them actually advocating for,

634
00:26:36,900 --> 00:26:42,620
you know, a Catholic or Protestant or some orthodox even kind of like read on religion.

635
00:26:43,260 --> 00:26:43,560
Um, so

636
00:26:44,000 --> 00:26:47,500
if you actually make it into something advocating for a particular view on religion,

637
00:26:47,640 --> 00:26:50,360
then it crosses into the establishment clause side.

638
00:26:50,900 --> 00:26:53,120
So Americans haven't figured out a way to actually teach it.

639
00:26:53,440 --> 00:26:54,920
So it's probably better that you,

640
00:26:54,920 --> 00:26:57,580
you know, learn, learn outside of a public school class.

641
00:26:57,580 --> 00:27:02,020
Do you think it's possible to teach religion, um,

642
00:27:02,700 --> 00:27:02,960
from like,

643
00:27:03,780 --> 00:27:06,120
uh, world religions kind of course,

644
00:27:06,780 --> 00:27:09,340
without disrespecting the religions?

645
00:27:09,920 --> 00:27:12,220
I think the answer is it depends on from whose perspective.

646
00:27:13,320 --> 00:27:17,320
Um, well, like the practitioners say you're like an orthodox follower of a particular

647
00:27:17,320 --> 00:27:17,760
religion.

648
00:27:17,760 --> 00:27:20,060
Is it possible

649
00:27:20,640 --> 00:27:24,360
to not piss you off in teaching like all the major

650
00:27:24,360 --> 00:27:25,120
religions of the world?

651
00:27:25,180 --> 00:27:26,100
For some people,

652
00:27:27,040 --> 00:27:30,080
the bottom line is you have to teach it as true.

653
00:27:30,340 --> 00:27:33,800
Ah, um, and with that under those conditions,

654
00:27:33,800 --> 00:27:34,940
then the answer is no,

655
00:27:34,940 --> 00:27:35,360
you can't teach it

656
00:27:35,380 --> 00:27:38,200
without, without offending someone at least.

657
00:27:38,380 --> 00:27:40,680
Can't you say these people believe it's true?

658
00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:41,920
Can you reform it?

659
00:27:41,920 --> 00:27:43,420
So you have to walk on eggshells,

660
00:27:43,500 --> 00:27:43,740
essentially.

661
00:27:43,960 --> 00:27:48,060
You can try really hard and you will still make some people angry,

662
00:27:48,340 --> 00:27:52,580
but serious people will be like, oh no, you actually tried to be fair to the beliefs here.

663
00:27:52,780 --> 00:27:54,800
Um, and I, and I try to be respectful,

664
00:27:54,800 --> 00:27:56,360
um, as much as I can about,

665
00:27:56,700 --> 00:27:57,660
um,

666
00:27:58,080 --> 00:27:58,440
a lot of this,

667
00:27:58,520 --> 00:28:01,040
I still find myself much more drawn to both Buddhism and Stoicism.

668
00:28:01,300 --> 00:28:01,420
Well,

669
00:28:03,360 --> 00:28:05,860
where do I go?

670
00:28:07,040 --> 00:28:09,100
Well, one interesting thing

671
00:28:09,640 --> 00:28:11,420
to get back to college campuses is,

672
00:28:11,420 --> 00:28:17,000
um, the fire keeps the college free speech rankings at rankings.thefire.org.

673
00:28:17,200 --> 00:28:18,060
I'm very proud of them.

674
00:28:18,180 --> 00:28:20,840
I highly recommend it because forget that even just the ranking,

675
00:28:20,840 --> 00:28:21,600
you get to learn a

676
00:28:21,600 --> 00:28:25,780
lot about the universities from this entirely different perspective than people are

677
00:28:25,780 --> 00:28:29,180
used to when they go to pick whatever university they want to go to.

678
00:28:29,220 --> 00:28:32,080
It just gives another perspective on the whole thing.

679
00:28:32,260 --> 00:28:35,340
And it gives quotes from people that are students there and so on,

680
00:28:35,540 --> 00:28:36,600
like about their experiences.

681
00:28:37,320 --> 00:28:38,300
And, and it gives different,

682
00:28:38,580 --> 00:28:44,620
maybe you could speak to the various measures here before we talk about who's in the top five and who's in the bottom five.

683
00:28:45,220 --> 00:28:49,880
What, what, what are the different parameters that contribute to the evaluation?

684
00:28:50,600 --> 00:28:54,200
So people have been asking me since day one to do a ranking of schools,

685
00:28:54,480 --> 00:28:55,360
according to freedom of speech.

686
00:28:55,720 --> 00:28:56,920
And even though we had,

687
00:28:57,300 --> 00:29:01,880
we had the best database in existence of campus speech codes, uh,

688
00:29:02,920 --> 00:29:06,600
policies that universities have that violate the first amendment or first amendment norms.

689
00:29:07,200 --> 00:29:08,920
We also have the best database of,

690
00:29:08,920 --> 00:29:11,040
of, uh, we call the disinvitation database.

691
00:29:11,330 --> 00:29:13,240
Um, but it's actually the,

692
00:29:13,240 --> 00:29:15,400
um, it's better named the deplatforming database,

693
00:29:15,480 --> 00:29:16,900
which is what we're going to call it.

694
00:29:17,260 --> 00:29:23,740
Um, and these are all cases where somebody was invited as a speaker to campus and then were disinvited.

695
00:29:23,860 --> 00:29:26,740
Disinvited or deplatforming also includes chowding down.

696
00:29:27,340 --> 00:29:28,120
Um, so they showed up

697
00:29:28,680 --> 00:29:30,000
and they couldn't really speak.

698
00:29:30,180 --> 00:29:30,760
Yeah, exactly.

699
00:29:31,480 --> 00:29:32,940
Um, and, and, uh,

700
00:29:33,640 --> 00:29:34,740
and so having that,

701
00:29:35,240 --> 00:29:41,040
what we really needed in order to have some serious social science to really make a serious argument about what the ranking was,

702
00:29:41,640 --> 00:29:43,500
um, was to be able to one,

703
00:29:43,720 --> 00:29:48,140
get a better sense of how many professors were actually getting punished during this time.

704
00:29:48,220 --> 00:29:53,480
Um, and then the, the, the biggest missing element was to be able to,

705
00:29:53,480 --> 00:29:58,420
um, ask students directly what the environment was like on that campus for freedom of speech.

706
00:29:58,920 --> 00:30:00,760
Are you comfortable disagreeing with each other?

707
00:30:00,800 --> 00:30:02,400
Are you comfortable disagreeing with your,

708
00:30:02,400 --> 00:30:03,400
uh, with your professors?

709
00:30:03,880 --> 00:30:07,200
Do you think violence is acceptable in response to a speaker?

710
00:30:07,380 --> 00:30:08,220
Do you think shouting,

711
00:30:08,480 --> 00:30:10,060
uh, do you think shouting down is okay?

712
00:30:10,140 --> 00:30:13,640
Do you think blocking people's access to a speaker is okay?

713
00:30:14,300 --> 00:30:16,900
Um, and once we were able to get all those elements together,

714
00:30:17,480 --> 00:30:20,200
we, uh, first did a test run,

715
00:30:20,200 --> 00:30:21,380
I think in 2019,

716
00:30:21,600 --> 00:30:22,340
about 50.

717
00:30:22,640 --> 00:30:24,280
And we've been doing it for four years now,

718
00:30:24,360 --> 00:30:31,820
always trying to make the methodology more and more precise to better reflect the actual environment at particular schools.

719
00:30:32,360 --> 00:30:36,160
Um, and this year, the number one school was Michigan technological university,

720
00:30:36,280 --> 00:30:38,380
which was a, a nice surprise.

721
00:30:38,560 --> 00:30:41,180
Uh, the number two school was actually Auburn university.

722
00:30:41,440 --> 00:30:45,720
Um, which was, uh, nice to see, uh, in the top 10,

723
00:30:45,900 --> 00:30:47,440
the most well-known prestigious school

724
00:30:47,440 --> 00:30:50,000
is actually UVA, um, which did really well this year.

725
00:30:50,700 --> 00:30:52,400
University of Chicago was not happy

726
00:30:52,400 --> 00:30:53,760
that they weren't number one,

727
00:30:53,920 --> 00:30:57,800
but university Chicago is 13 and they had been number one

728
00:30:57,800 --> 00:31:00,280
or in the top three for years prior to that.

729
00:31:00,620 --> 00:31:01,320
So can you explain,

730
00:31:01,420 --> 00:31:02,320
it's almost surprising.

731
00:31:02,340 --> 00:31:03,220
Is it because of,

732
00:31:03,240 --> 00:31:04,520
uh, like the really strong

733
00:31:04,530 --> 00:31:06,740
economics departments and things like this or what, why?

734
00:31:07,360 --> 00:31:09,220
They had a case involving a student.

735
00:31:09,480 --> 00:31:12,700
They wouldn't recognize a chapter of turning point USA and

736
00:31:12,700 --> 00:31:15,420
they made a very classic argument, um,

737
00:31:15,920 --> 00:31:18,060
that we, and classic in the bad way that we hear

738
00:31:18,200 --> 00:31:19,420
campuses across the country.

739
00:31:19,740 --> 00:31:21,200
Oh, we have a campus Republicans,

740
00:31:21,700 --> 00:31:23,920
so we don't need this additional conservative group.

741
00:31:24,280 --> 00:31:25,900
And we're like, no, I'm sorry.

742
00:31:25,960 --> 00:31:27,560
Like we've seen dozens and

743
00:31:27,560 --> 00:31:30,440
dozens of not hundreds of attempts to get this one particular,

744
00:31:30,440 --> 00:31:35,780
um, conservative student, a student group, uh, do you recognize or not recognized?

745
00:31:36,440 --> 00:31:38,560
And so we told them like,

746
00:31:38,700 --> 00:31:41,640
listen, this like, uh, we told them at fire that,

747
00:31:41,780 --> 00:31:43,860
uh, you know, we consider this serious and

748
00:31:43,860 --> 00:31:45,220
they wouldn't recognize the group.

749
00:31:45,380 --> 00:31:48,800
So that, that's a, that, that's a point down in our

750
00:31:48,800 --> 00:31:50,660
ranking and it was enough to knock them from,

751
00:31:51,100 --> 00:31:52,660
they probably would have been number two in

752
00:31:52,660 --> 00:31:53,160
the rankings.

753
00:31:53,320 --> 00:31:55,560
Uh, but now they're 13 out of two 48.

754
00:31:56,040 --> 00:31:57,160
They're still one of the best schools

755
00:31:57,160 --> 00:31:57,720
in the country.

756
00:31:57,900 --> 00:31:59,480
I have no problem saying that

757
00:32:00,080 --> 00:32:03,140
the school that did not do so well, uh, um,

758
00:32:03,800 --> 00:32:11,660
at a negative 10.69 negative 10.69 and we rounded up to zero was Harvard and

759
00:32:11,660 --> 00:32:15,320
Harvard has been, um, not very happy with that result.

760
00:32:15,460 --> 00:32:17,580
The only school to receive the abysmal ranking.

761
00:32:18,400 --> 00:32:19,900
Yeah. And there are a couple of people,

762
00:32:20,000 --> 00:32:21,380
oh, Harvard, oh, Harvard.

763
00:32:21,600 --> 00:32:23,500
And there are a couple of people who've actually been really,

764
00:32:23,700 --> 00:32:26,780
I think, making a mistake by getting very Harvard,

765
00:32:27,020 --> 00:32:28,880
um, sounding by being like,

766
00:32:28,880 --> 00:32:30,620
I've had statisticians look at this and they,

767
00:32:30,620 --> 00:32:32,340
and they, they, they think your methodology is a joke.

768
00:32:32,430 --> 00:32:34,160
And, uh, and like pointing out,

769
00:32:34,420 --> 00:32:35,580
and this case wasn't that important.

770
00:32:35,580 --> 00:32:39,780
And that scholar wasn't that scholar, like the one of the arguments against one of the scholars that

771
00:32:39,780 --> 00:32:41,180
we counted against them for,

772
00:32:41,580 --> 00:32:45,400
uh, punishing was that that wasn't a very famous or

773
00:32:45,400 --> 00:32:46,220
influential scholar.

774
00:32:46,360 --> 00:32:47,300
And I'm kind of like,

775
00:32:47,580 --> 00:32:51,200
so your argument seems to be snobbery.

776
00:32:51,200 --> 00:32:53,220
Like essentially that like you,

777
00:32:53,220 --> 00:32:55,620
you're not understanding our methodology for one thing.

778
00:32:56,080 --> 00:32:59,920
And then you're saying that actually that scholar wasn't important enough to

779
00:32:59,920 --> 00:33:00,020
count.

780
00:33:00,280 --> 00:33:01,200
And by the way, Harvard,

781
00:33:01,900 --> 00:33:03,140
by the way, Harvard,

782
00:33:04,060 --> 00:33:04,600
um,

783
00:33:05,020 --> 00:33:06,260
if we, the Harvard campus,

784
00:33:06,620 --> 00:33:06,720
yeah.

785
00:33:07,360 --> 00:33:08,120
If we,

786
00:33:08,840 --> 00:33:11,280
even if we took all of your arguments as true,

787
00:33:11,500 --> 00:33:14,260
even if we decided to get rid of those two professors,

788
00:33:14,460 --> 00:33:17,120
um, you would still be in negative numbers.

789
00:33:17,300 --> 00:33:18,720
You would still be dead last.

790
00:33:18,860 --> 00:33:20,780
You would still be after Georgetown and Penn.

791
00:33:20,940 --> 00:33:23,260
And neither of those schools are good for freedom of speech.

792
00:33:23,280 --> 00:33:23,980
I should say the,

793
00:33:23,980 --> 00:33:26,280
the, the bottom five is the university of Pennsylvania,

794
00:33:26,800 --> 00:33:27,300
Nicosette Penn,

795
00:33:27,740 --> 00:33:29,900
uh, the university of South Carolina,

796
00:33:30,180 --> 00:33:32,000
Georgetown university, and Fordham university.

797
00:33:32,640 --> 00:33:33,620
All very well earned.

798
00:33:33,840 --> 00:33:36,260
They have so many bad cases at all of those schools.

799
00:33:36,400 --> 00:33:39,640
What's the best way to find yourself in the bottom five?

800
00:33:39,640 --> 00:33:40,680
If you're a university,

801
00:33:40,900 --> 00:33:42,720
what's, what's the fastest way to that negative,

802
00:33:42,860 --> 00:33:46,480
to that zero, a lot of de platforming, um, that,

803
00:33:47,060 --> 00:33:48,520
uh, when we looked at the bottom five,

804
00:33:48,720 --> 00:33:54,400
uh, 81% of attempts to get speakers deplatformed were successful at the bottom five.

805
00:33:54,580 --> 00:33:55,800
Um, there were a couple of schools,

806
00:33:55,940 --> 00:33:58,240
I think Penn included where every single attempt,

807
00:33:58,860 --> 00:33:59,820
every time a student,

808
00:33:59,900 --> 00:34:03,260
like objected, a student group objected to that speaker coming,

809
00:34:03,340 --> 00:34:04,540
they canceled this, this speech.

810
00:34:05,120 --> 00:34:07,440
And I think, I think Georgetown was a hundred percent success rate.

811
00:34:07,520 --> 00:34:10,080
I think Penn had a hundred percent success rate.

812
00:34:10,180 --> 00:34:12,400
I think Harvard did stand up for a couple,

813
00:34:12,560 --> 00:34:15,460
but mostly, uh, people got deplatformed there as well.

814
00:34:15,540 --> 00:34:17,980
So how do you push back on deplatforming?

815
00:34:18,580 --> 00:34:19,960
Well, who, who would do it?

816
00:34:19,980 --> 00:34:21,280
Is it other students?

817
00:34:21,640 --> 00:34:22,360
Is it faculty?

818
00:34:22,520 --> 00:34:23,580
Is it the administration?

819
00:34:23,780 --> 00:34:25,260
What's the dynamics of, of,

820
00:34:25,600 --> 00:34:26,340
uh, pushing back of

821
00:34:27,080 --> 00:34:29,380
basically, cause I imagine

822
00:34:30,140 --> 00:34:32,600
some of it is culture,

823
00:34:33,200 --> 00:34:35,960
but I imagine every university has a bunch of students who will

824
00:34:35,960 --> 00:34:37,540
protest basically every speaker.

825
00:34:37,740 --> 00:34:39,760
And it's a question of how you respond to that protest.

826
00:34:40,340 --> 00:34:44,620
Well, here's, here's the dirty little secret about like the big change in 2014.

827
00:34:44,740 --> 00:34:47,520
Um, and, and fire and me and height,

828
00:34:47,580 --> 00:34:50,400
um, have been very clear that the big change that we

829
00:34:50,400 --> 00:34:53,700
saw on campus was that for most of my career, students were great,

830
00:34:54,060 --> 00:34:55,360
um, on freedom of speech.

831
00:34:55,580 --> 00:34:57,440
They were the best constituency for free speech,

832
00:34:58,100 --> 00:35:01,600
absolutely unambiguously until about 2013, 2014.

833
00:35:02,400 --> 00:35:04,820
And it was only in 2014 where we had this very,

834
00:35:04,820 --> 00:35:06,800
you know, kind of sad for us experience

835
00:35:06,820 --> 00:35:11,860
where suddenly students were the ones advocating for deplatforming and new speech codes kind

836
00:35:11,880 --> 00:35:15,880
of in a similar way that they had been doing in say like the mid eighties, uh, for example.

837
00:35:16,300 --> 00:35:17,320
But here's the dirty little secret.

838
00:35:18,040 --> 00:35:20,240
It's not the, it just the students,

839
00:35:20,760 --> 00:35:22,200
it's students and administrators,

840
00:35:23,140 --> 00:35:24,740
sometimes only a handful of them though,

841
00:35:24,900 --> 00:35:26,120
working together to make,

842
00:35:26,680 --> 00:35:27,760
uh, to create some of these problems.

843
00:35:28,120 --> 00:35:30,100
And this was exactly what happened at Stanford.

844
00:35:30,420 --> 00:35:31,400
When Kyle Duncan,

845
00:35:31,860 --> 00:35:34,660
uh, a fifth circuit judge tried to speak at my alma mater

846
00:35:35,220 --> 00:35:36,100
and a fifth of the

847
00:35:36,120 --> 00:35:37,680
class showed up to shout him down.

848
00:35:38,320 --> 00:35:40,480
Um, it was a real showing of the,

849
00:35:40,540 --> 00:35:45,980
of what was, what was going on that 10 minutes into the shout down of a fifth circuit judge.

850
00:35:46,000 --> 00:35:48,120
And I keep on emphasizing that cause I'm a constitutional lawyer,

851
00:35:48,280 --> 00:35:49,980
fifth circuit judge judges are big deals.

852
00:35:50,640 --> 00:35:52,320
They're one level below the Supreme court.

853
00:35:53,140 --> 00:35:55,820
Um, you know, about a fifth of the school shows up to shout them down

854
00:35:56,540 --> 00:35:57,420
after 10 minutes of

855
00:35:57,420 --> 00:35:59,020
shouting them down and administrator,

856
00:35:59,140 --> 00:36:01,560
a DEI administrator gets up with a prepared

857
00:36:01,580 --> 00:36:03,200
speech that she, that she's written.

858
00:36:03,380 --> 00:36:06,460
That's a seven minute long speech where she talks about,

859
00:36:06,900 --> 00:36:07,460
uh, free speech.

860
00:36:07,760 --> 00:36:09,400
Maybe the juice isn't worth the squeeze.

861
00:36:09,900 --> 00:36:14,220
And we were at this law school where people could learn to challenge these norms.

862
00:36:15,080 --> 00:36:16,840
So it's clear that there was coordination,

863
00:36:16,840 --> 00:36:18,580
you know, among some of these

864
00:36:18,580 --> 00:36:20,620
administrators and from talking to students there,

865
00:36:20,620 --> 00:36:21,660
they were in meetings,

866
00:36:22,320 --> 00:36:23,440
extensive meetings for a long time.

867
00:36:23,780 --> 00:36:25,100
They show up, do a shout down.

868
00:36:25,660 --> 00:36:28,940
Then they take additional seven minutes to,

869
00:36:28,940 --> 00:36:31,040
to, to lecture the speaker on free

870
00:36:31,060 --> 00:36:33,940
speech, not being, not the juice of free speech,

871
00:36:33,960 --> 00:36:35,040
not being worth the squeeze.

872
00:36:35,980 --> 00:36:37,580
Um, and then for the rest of it,

873
00:36:37,580 --> 00:36:39,160
it's just constant heckling.

874
00:36:39,420 --> 00:36:41,580
Um, after she, after she leaves,

875
00:36:41,960 --> 00:36:44,560
this is clearly, and this, and something very similar,

876
00:36:44,560 --> 00:36:46,660
you know, happened a number of times at Yale where

877
00:36:46,660 --> 00:36:49,820
it was very clearly administrators were helping along with,

878
00:36:49,820 --> 00:36:51,120
with a lot of these disruptions.

879
00:36:51,420 --> 00:36:55,020
So I think every time there is a shout down at a university,

880
00:36:55,740 --> 00:36:57,180
the investigation should be

881
00:36:57,740 --> 00:36:58,540
first and foremost,

882
00:36:59,160 --> 00:37:00,060
did administrators

883
00:37:01,220 --> 00:37:02,860
help create this problem?

884
00:37:03,060 --> 00:37:03,900
Did they do anything

885
00:37:03,900 --> 00:37:04,940
to stop it?

886
00:37:05,200 --> 00:37:08,520
Because I think a lot of what's really going on here is the hyper bureaucratization

887
00:37:08,560 --> 00:37:13,940
of universities with a lot more ideological people who think of their primary job as basically

888
00:37:13,940 --> 00:37:15,600
like policing speech, more or less,

889
00:37:16,440 --> 00:37:17,500
they're encouraging students,

890
00:37:17,840 --> 00:37:20,360
sorry, they're encouraging students who have opinions they like,

891
00:37:20,780 --> 00:37:22,580
um, to do shout downs.

892
00:37:22,760 --> 00:37:24,340
Um, and that's why they

893
00:37:24,420 --> 00:37:25,780
really need to investigate this.

894
00:37:26,640 --> 00:37:31,900
And it is, uh, at Stanford, the administrator who, who gave the prepared remarks,

895
00:37:31,900 --> 00:37:33,880
um, about the juice, not being worth the squeeze.

896
00:37:33,900 --> 00:37:35,660
She has not been invited back to Stanford,

897
00:37:36,160 --> 00:37:39,940
but she's one of the only examples I can think of when these things happen a lot

898
00:37:40,300 --> 00:37:42,880
where an administrator clearly facilitated something that

899
00:37:43,540 --> 00:37:44,660
was a shout down or

900
00:37:44,660 --> 00:37:48,480
deplatforming or resulted in a professor getting fired or resulted in a student

901
00:37:48,480 --> 00:37:51,640
getting expelled where the administrator has

902
00:37:52,380 --> 00:37:54,360
got off scot-free or probably in some

903
00:37:54,380 --> 00:37:55,440
cases even gotten a promotion.

904
00:37:56,080 --> 00:37:58,100
And so a small number of administrators,

905
00:37:58,760 --> 00:38:01,130
maybe even a single administrator could

906
00:38:01,480 --> 00:38:05,860
participate in the encouraging and the organization and thereby empower the whole

907
00:38:05,860 --> 00:38:06,220
process.

908
00:38:06,340 --> 00:38:08,320
And that's something I've seen throughout my entire career.

909
00:38:08,400 --> 00:38:11,400
And the only thing is kind of hard to catch this sort of in the act,

910
00:38:11,640 --> 00:38:12,140
so to speak.

911
00:38:12,160 --> 00:38:14,940
And that's one of the reasons why it's helpful for people to know about this, you know,

912
00:38:15,700 --> 00:38:17,020
uh, because it

913
00:38:17,680 --> 00:38:19,220
was this amazing case.

914
00:38:19,320 --> 00:38:20,520
This was at university of Washington.

915
00:38:20,820 --> 00:38:24,340
Um, and we've actually featured this in a documentary made in 2015,

916
00:38:24,920 --> 00:38:26,620
20, that came on 2015, 2016

917
00:38:27,340 --> 00:38:28,460
called, can we take a joke?

918
00:38:28,660 --> 00:38:29,080
Um,

919
00:38:29,380 --> 00:38:31,140
and this was when we started noticing something

920
00:38:31,140 --> 00:38:32,340
was changing on campus.

921
00:38:32,560 --> 00:38:34,840
We also heard that comedians were saying that they couldn't use

922
00:38:34,840 --> 00:38:35,860
their good humor anymore.

923
00:38:36,420 --> 00:38:39,180
This was right around the time that Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock

924
00:38:39,520 --> 00:38:40,380
said that they couldn't,

925
00:38:40,720 --> 00:38:42,540
uh, they didn't want to play on campuses cause they,

926
00:38:42,540 --> 00:38:44,320
they couldn't, they, they, they couldn't be funny.

927
00:38:45,120 --> 00:38:48,620
Uh, but we featured a case of a comedian who wanted

928
00:38:48,720 --> 00:38:51,060
to do a musical called the passion of the musical,

929
00:38:51,160 --> 00:38:52,280
making fun of the passion of the Christ

930
00:38:52,440 --> 00:38:55,380
with the stated goal of offending everyone,

931
00:38:55,820 --> 00:38:56,700
every group equally.

932
00:38:56,840 --> 00:38:58,800
It was very, very much a South park mission.

933
00:38:58,960 --> 00:38:59,240
Um,

934
00:39:00,360 --> 00:39:04,960
and it's an unusual case because we actually got documentation

935
00:39:04,980 --> 00:39:10,980
of administrators buying tickets for angry students and holding an event where they,

936
00:39:11,420 --> 00:39:12,860
where they train them to,

937
00:39:13,080 --> 00:39:15,140
to jump up in the middle of it and shout,

938
00:39:15,200 --> 00:39:15,940
I'm offended.

939
00:39:15,980 --> 00:39:17,600
Like they, they, they bought them tickets.

940
00:39:17,960 --> 00:39:18,880
They sent them to this,

941
00:39:18,880 --> 00:39:20,360
this thing with the goal

942
00:39:20,360 --> 00:39:22,000
of shouting it down.

943
00:39:22,340 --> 00:39:26,600
Now, unsurprisingly, when you send an angry group of students to shut

944
00:39:26,600 --> 00:39:29,400
down a play, it, it's not going to end at just

945
00:39:30,000 --> 00:39:30,740
I'm offended.

946
00:39:31,160 --> 00:39:32,460
Um, and it got heated.

947
00:39:32,760 --> 00:39:34,140
There were death threats being thrown,

948
00:39:34,140 --> 00:39:38,440
uh, the, um, and then the Pullman Washington police

949
00:39:38,590 --> 00:39:42,380
told Chris, uh, Chris Lee, the guy who made the play that he,

950
00:39:42,420 --> 00:39:43,440
they wouldn't actually protect

951
00:39:43,520 --> 00:39:43,720
them.

952
00:39:43,860 --> 00:39:46,960
Now it's not every day you're going to have that kind of hard evidence that,

953
00:39:47,080 --> 00:39:49,600
that, that, uh, of actually seeing the administrators,

954
00:39:49,640 --> 00:39:52,760
uh, it'd be so, uh, so brazen that they recorded

955
00:39:52,760 --> 00:39:54,640
the fact that they bought them tickets and sent them.

956
00:39:55,080 --> 00:39:56,200
But I think a lot of that stuff

957
00:39:56,300 --> 00:39:58,320
is, it is going on.

958
00:39:58,320 --> 00:39:59,460
And I think it's the,

959
00:39:59,460 --> 00:40:01,800
the, it's a good excuse to cut down on one

960
00:40:01,800 --> 00:40:03,440
of the big problems in higher education today,

961
00:40:03,520 --> 00:40:04,800
which is hyper-bureaucratization.

962
00:40:05,760 --> 00:40:09,440
In your experience, is there a distinction between administrators and faculty in terms of,

963
00:40:10,060 --> 00:40:13,160
uh, perpetrators of this, of these kinds of things?

964
00:40:13,180 --> 00:40:15,160
So if, if we got rid of all,

965
00:40:15,320 --> 00:40:19,380
like Harvey's talked about, uh, getting rid of a large percentage of the administration,

966
00:40:19,460 --> 00:40:24,280
does that help fix the problem or is the faculty also small

967
00:40:25,220 --> 00:40:26,960
percent of the faculty also part

968
00:40:26,960 --> 00:40:29,580
of the encouraging in the organization of these kinds of cancel.

969
00:40:30,060 --> 00:40:30,520
Yeah.

970
00:40:30,560 --> 00:40:33,500
And, and that's something that has been profoundly disappointing.

971
00:40:33,720 --> 00:40:38,980
Um, is that when you look at the huge uptick in attempts to get professors fired that we've seen over

972
00:40:39,000 --> 00:40:39,880
the last 10 years

973
00:40:41,060 --> 00:40:42,840
and actually over the last 22 years,

974
00:40:43,080 --> 00:40:45,080
as far back as our records go.

975
00:40:46,460 --> 00:40:49,880
Um, first they're overwhelmingly led by administrators,

976
00:40:49,880 --> 00:40:52,220
attempts to get professors punished.

977
00:40:52,260 --> 00:40:53,700
Um, and

978
00:40:54,120 --> 00:40:57,540
that was most, you know, I'd say that was my career up until 2013 was,

979
00:40:57,540 --> 00:40:59,720
was fighting back at administrative excesses.

980
00:41:00,000 --> 00:41:03,540
Um, then you start having the problem in 2014 of students trying

981
00:41:03,560 --> 00:41:04,580
to get people canceled.

982
00:41:04,960 --> 00:41:07,720
Um, and that really accelerated in 2017 and the number.

983
00:41:08,080 --> 00:41:09,460
So one, one way that one,

984
00:41:09,460 --> 00:41:11,400
one thing that makes it easier to document is,

985
00:41:11,620 --> 00:41:14,060
are the petitions to get professors fired or punished.

986
00:41:14,540 --> 00:41:17,620
Um, and how disproportionately that those actually do come from students.

987
00:41:18,280 --> 00:41:24,300
But another big uptick has been fellow professors demanding that their fellow professors get

988
00:41:24,300 --> 00:41:24,520
punished.

989
00:41:24,720 --> 00:41:25,280
And that to me,

990
00:41:25,660 --> 00:41:27,280
it's kind of shameful.

991
00:41:27,700 --> 00:41:30,420
You, you, you shouldn't be proud of signing the

992
00:41:30,600 --> 00:41:32,160
petition to get your fellow professor.

993
00:41:32,780 --> 00:41:34,400
And what's, what's even more, uh,

994
00:41:35,000 --> 00:41:36,680
more, more shameful is that

995
00:41:36,680 --> 00:41:40,180
we get, this, this is, this has almost become a cliche within fire.

996
00:41:40,580 --> 00:41:41,780
When someone is facing one of

997
00:41:41,780 --> 00:41:43,360
these cancellation campaigns as a professor,

998
00:41:43,860 --> 00:41:47,260
I would get letters from some of my friends saying,

999
00:41:47,440 --> 00:41:48,420
I am so sorry,

1000
00:41:48,420 --> 00:41:49,620
this has happened to you.

1001
00:41:50,340 --> 00:41:52,260
And these were the same people who publicly signed

1002
00:41:52,280 --> 00:41:54,000
the petition to get them fired.

1003
00:41:56,020 --> 00:41:56,200
Yeah.

1004
00:41:56,200 --> 00:41:56,540
Yeah.

1005
00:41:57,760 --> 00:41:58,120
Yeah.

1006
00:41:58,160 --> 00:42:01,800
Integrity integrity is an important thing in this world.

1007
00:42:02,500 --> 00:42:04,280
And I think some of it,

1008
00:42:06,140 --> 00:42:11,840
I'm so surprised people don't stand up more for this because there's so much hunger for it.

1009
00:42:11,980 --> 00:42:15,400
And if you have the guts as a faculty or an administrator to really stand,

1010
00:42:15,740 --> 00:42:16,240
stand up,

1011
00:42:17,440 --> 00:42:17,620
uh,

1012
00:42:18,150 --> 00:42:19,980
with eloquence,

1013
00:42:21,060 --> 00:42:21,720
with rigor,

1014
00:42:22,440 --> 00:42:23,780
with integrity, I feel like

1015
00:42:24,440 --> 00:42:25,640
it's impossible

1016
00:42:26,300 --> 00:42:27,480
for anyone to do anything

1017
00:42:27,920 --> 00:42:29,260
because there's such a hunger.

1018
00:42:29,540 --> 00:42:30,580
It's so refreshing.

1019
00:42:30,720 --> 00:42:30,980
Yeah.

1020
00:42:31,180 --> 00:42:32,960
I think everybody agrees

1021
00:42:33,540 --> 00:42:36,320
that freedom of speech is a good thing.

1022
00:42:36,520 --> 00:42:37,360
Oh, I don't, I don't.

1023
00:42:37,540 --> 00:42:38,160
Well, okay.

1024
00:42:38,260 --> 00:42:38,600
Sorry, sorry.

1025
00:42:38,660 --> 00:42:39,220
I don't agree.

1026
00:42:39,660 --> 00:42:41,180
The, the majority of people,

1027
00:42:41,380 --> 00:42:43,260
even at the universities that there's a hunger,

1028
00:42:43,260 --> 00:42:43,620
but it's almost like, uh,

1029
00:42:44,160 --> 00:42:49,580
this kind of nervousness around it because there's a small number of loud voices.

1030
00:42:49,640 --> 00:42:50,860
They're doing the shouting.

1031
00:42:51,900 --> 00:42:54,780
So, I mean, again, that's where great leadership comes in.

1032
00:42:54,980 --> 00:42:57,960
And so, you know, presidents of universities should probably be,

1033
00:42:58,620 --> 00:43:00,820
uh, making clear declarations of like,

1034
00:43:01,100 --> 00:43:05,220
this is not, this is a place where we value the freedom of expression.

1035
00:43:05,740 --> 00:43:09,040
When, and this was all throughout my career, um, a president,

1036
00:43:09,360 --> 00:43:11,940
a university president who puts their foot down early and says, nope,

1037
00:43:12,380 --> 00:43:13,120
you know,

1038
00:43:14,200 --> 00:43:16,780
we are not entertaining firing this professor.

1039
00:43:16,940 --> 00:43:18,120
We are not expelling the student.

1040
00:43:18,520 --> 00:43:21,300
It ends the issue often very fast.

1041
00:43:21,760 --> 00:43:24,740
Although sometimes, and this is where you can really tell the administrative involvement,

1042
00:43:25,720 --> 00:43:28,460
um, students will do things like take over the president's office.

1043
00:43:29,000 --> 00:43:31,720
And then that takeover will be catered by the university.

1044
00:43:32,220 --> 00:43:34,180
People will point this out sometimes as being kind of like,

1045
00:43:34,220 --> 00:43:37,420
oh, it's clearly like, um, my friend Sam Abrams,

1046
00:43:37,520 --> 00:43:38,260
when they tried to get,

1047
00:43:38,320 --> 00:43:39,540
uh, tried to get him fired at,

1048
00:43:39,540 --> 00:43:41,280
at, at, uh, Sarah Lawrence college.

1049
00:43:42,080 --> 00:43:45,080
Um, and, uh, that was one of the times that,

1050
00:43:45,080 --> 00:43:46,700
that it was used as kind of like,

1051
00:43:46,740 --> 00:43:49,360
oh, that was hostile to the university because they,

1052
00:43:49,780 --> 00:43:51,380
the students took over the president's office.

1053
00:43:51,420 --> 00:43:53,280
And I'm like, no, they let them take over the

1054
00:43:53,280 --> 00:43:53,900
president's office.

1055
00:43:53,980 --> 00:43:56,780
And I don't know if that was one of the cases in which the,

1056
00:43:56,780 --> 00:43:57,980
the takeover was catered,

1057
00:43:57,980 --> 00:44:00,000
but if there was ever sort of like a sign that's kind of

1058
00:44:00,000 --> 00:44:03,200
like, yes, this isn't, this is actually really quite friendly.

1059
00:44:03,280 --> 00:44:06,860
Well, in some sense, like protesting and having really strong opinions, even like

1060
00:44:07,540 --> 00:44:09,900
ridiculous, crazy, wild opinions is a good thing.

1061
00:44:10,000 --> 00:44:11,720
It's just, it shouldn't lead to actual

1062
00:44:12,460 --> 00:44:14,200
firing or deplatforming of people.

1063
00:44:14,240 --> 00:44:15,280
Like it's good to protest.

1064
00:44:15,440 --> 00:44:17,400
It's just not good to,

1065
00:44:17,400 --> 00:44:19,920
uh, for the university to support that and take action based on it.

1066
00:44:20,120 --> 00:44:20,680
And this is one of,

1067
00:44:20,680 --> 00:44:21,560
one of those like,

1068
00:44:21,560 --> 00:44:23,860
um, tensions in, in, in first amendment that

1069
00:44:23,860 --> 00:44:25,730
actually, I think has a pretty easy release.

1070
00:44:25,760 --> 00:44:27,400
Essentially you have app,

1071
00:44:27,440 --> 00:44:30,040
you absolutely have the right to,

1072
00:44:30,380 --> 00:44:32,200
uh, devote your life to

1073
00:44:32,200 --> 00:44:35,060
ending freedom of speech and ridiculing as a concept.

1074
00:44:35,160 --> 00:44:37,440
And, and there are people who,

1075
00:44:37,440 --> 00:44:42,480
who really are, can come off as very contemptible about even the philosophy of freedom of speech.

1076
00:44:42,940 --> 00:44:44,740
Um, and we will defend your right to do that.

1077
00:44:45,100 --> 00:44:47,660
We will also disagree with you.

1078
00:44:47,660 --> 00:44:49,460
And if you try to get a professor fired,

1079
00:44:49,460 --> 00:44:50,940
we will be on the other side of that.

1080
00:44:51,120 --> 00:44:52,720
Now, I think you had Randy Kennedy,

1081
00:44:52,840 --> 00:44:54,420
who I really, I love him.

1082
00:44:54,540 --> 00:44:55,660
I think he's a great guy,

1083
00:44:56,140 --> 00:45:01,400
but he's, he criticized us for our deplatforming database as saying,

1084
00:45:01,500 --> 00:45:04,100
this is saying that students can't protest speakers.

1085
00:45:04,160 --> 00:45:04,880
I'm like,

1086
00:45:05,500 --> 00:45:06,240
okay, that's silly.

1087
00:45:06,940 --> 00:45:11,660
Um, uh, we fire as an organization have defended the right to protest all the time.

1088
00:45:11,800 --> 00:45:14,440
We are constantly defending the rights of the rights protesters,

1089
00:45:15,060 --> 00:45:18,880
not believing that the protesters have the right to say this would like,

1090
00:45:18,940 --> 00:45:20,000
basically that would be.

1091
00:45:20,620 --> 00:45:21,620
Punishing the speakers.

1092
00:45:21,820 --> 00:45:23,340
We're not calling for punishing,

1093
00:45:23,340 --> 00:45:26,060
um, uh, the protestors, but what we are saying

1094
00:45:26,060 --> 00:45:29,620
is you can't let the protestors win if they're demanding someone be fired

1095
00:45:30,040 --> 00:45:30,740
for their freedom of speech.

1096
00:45:30,760 --> 00:45:35,940
So the line there is between protesters protesting and

1097
00:45:36,560 --> 00:45:40,100
the university taking action based on the protest.

1098
00:45:40,220 --> 00:45:40,560
Yeah, exactly.

1099
00:45:40,840 --> 00:45:43,440
And of course, shout downs that that's just mob censorship.

1100
00:45:44,080 --> 00:45:46,060
Um, and that's something where the university,

1101
00:45:46,280 --> 00:45:47,980
the way, the way you actually,

1102
00:45:48,060 --> 00:45:52,900
you deal with that tension in first amendment law is essentially kind of like the one positive duty that the government has.

1103
00:45:53,190 --> 00:45:57,560
The first, the negative duty, the thing that it's not allowed to do is censor you.

1104
00:45:58,400 --> 00:46:00,120
Um, but it's positive duty is that if,

1105
00:46:00,160 --> 00:46:02,320
that if I want to say awful things,

1106
00:46:02,620 --> 00:46:03,160
or for that matter,

1107
00:46:03,300 --> 00:46:05,520
great things that aren't popular in a public park,

1108
00:46:06,060 --> 00:46:08,760
um, you can't let the crowd just shout me down.

1109
00:46:09,060 --> 00:46:11,780
Um, you can't allow what's called a heckler's veto.

1110
00:46:14,280 --> 00:46:15,180
That's so interesting.

1111
00:46:15,200 --> 00:46:17,420
Cause I feel like that comes into play on social media as well.

1112
00:46:17,440 --> 00:46:17,980
Cause,

1113
00:46:18,920 --> 00:46:22,140
uh, you know, there's this whole discussion about censorship and freedom of speech,

1114
00:46:22,500 --> 00:46:25,780
but to me, the, the carrot question

1115
00:46:26,360 --> 00:46:27,060
is almost more

1116
00:46:28,000 --> 00:46:28,540
interesting.

1117
00:46:28,560 --> 00:46:32,580
Once the freedom of speech is established is how do you incentivize high quality

1118
00:46:32,580 --> 00:46:33,640
debate and disagreement?

1119
00:46:33,880 --> 00:46:35,140
I'm thinking a lot about that.

1120
00:46:35,880 --> 00:46:39,320
And that's one of the things we talk about in canceling of the American mind is arguing towards truth

1121
00:46:40,060 --> 00:46:43,060
and that cancel culture is cruel.

1122
00:46:43,460 --> 00:46:43,780
It's merciless.

1123
00:46:44,300 --> 00:46:45,900
It's anti-intellectual,

1124
00:46:46,240 --> 00:46:48,340
but it also will never get you anywhere in your truth.

1125
00:46:48,640 --> 00:46:51,460
And you are going to waste so much time destroying your opponents,

1126
00:46:52,640 --> 00:46:56,640
um, in, in something that can actually never get you to truth through the process, of course, of,

1127
00:46:57,040 --> 00:46:58,420
you never actually get directly at truth.

1128
00:46:58,540 --> 00:46:59,440
You just chip away at falsity.

1129
00:47:00,600 --> 00:47:00,780
Yeah.

1130
00:47:01,100 --> 00:47:04,500
But everybody having a megaphone on the internet with anonymity,

1131
00:47:05,440 --> 00:47:06,480
it seems like

1132
00:47:07,240 --> 00:47:08,460
it's better than censorship,

1133
00:47:10,540 --> 00:47:13,540
but it feels like there's incentives on top of it.

1134
00:47:13,800 --> 00:47:14,300
On top of that,

1135
00:47:15,000 --> 00:47:17,000
you can construct to, um,

1136
00:47:17,680 --> 00:47:19,620
yeah, to incentivize better discourse.

1137
00:47:19,620 --> 00:47:19,800
Yeah.

1138
00:47:20,200 --> 00:47:25,340
It's like to incentivize somebody who puts a huge amount of effort to make even the most ridiculous

1139
00:47:25,860 --> 00:47:34,960
arguments, but basically ones that don't include any of the things you highlight in terms of all the rhetorical tricks to shut down conversations,

1140
00:47:35,200 --> 00:47:38,320
just make really good arguments for whatever.

1141
00:47:38,560 --> 00:47:41,140
Doesn't matter if it's a communism for fascism,

1142
00:47:41,260 --> 00:47:42,540
whatever the heck you want to say,

1143
00:47:43,120 --> 00:47:45,720
but do it with scale, with historical context,

1144
00:47:47,140 --> 00:47:49,300
with, uh, uh, with steel man on the other side,

1145
00:47:49,360 --> 00:47:50,240
all those kinds of elements.

1146
00:47:50,620 --> 00:47:52,620
We try to make three major points in the book.

1147
00:47:52,960 --> 00:47:55,820
One, um, is just simply cancel culture is

1148
00:47:55,820 --> 00:47:56,080
real.

1149
00:47:56,220 --> 00:47:57,820
It's a, it's a historic era,

1150
00:47:57,820 --> 00:47:59,540
um, and it's on a historic scale.

1151
00:48:00,180 --> 00:48:00,980
The second one is

1152
00:48:01,240 --> 00:48:04,480
you should think of cancel culture as part of a, um,

1153
00:48:05,060 --> 00:48:09,100
rhetorical, as a larger lazy rhetorical,

1154
00:48:09,100 --> 00:48:13,520
uh, approach to what, what, what we refer to as winning arguments without winning arguments.

1155
00:48:14,220 --> 00:48:18,660
And we mean that in two senses without having winning arguments or without have actually having one arguments.

1156
00:48:19,400 --> 00:48:21,060
And we talk about all the different,

1157
00:48:21,140 --> 00:48:25,760
what we call rhetorical fortresses that both the left and the right have that prevent you from,

1158
00:48:26,100 --> 00:48:28,560
that allow you to just dismiss the person,

1159
00:48:29,300 --> 00:48:33,720
um, or dodge the argument without actually ever getting to the substance of the argument.

1160
00:48:33,880 --> 00:48:34,580
Third part is just,

1161
00:48:34,800 --> 00:48:36,040
you know, how do we fix it?

1162
00:48:36,240 --> 00:48:38,680
But the rhetorical fortress stuff is actually something I've been,

1163
00:48:38,920 --> 00:48:43,840
I'm very passionate about because it interferes with our ability to get at truth and it

1164
00:48:43,840 --> 00:48:45,620
wastes time and frankly,

1165
00:48:45,800 --> 00:48:48,640
it also kind of since cancel culture is part of that

1166
00:48:48,650 --> 00:48:50,180
rhetorical tactic, it can also ruin lives.

1167
00:48:51,320 --> 00:48:54,460
It would actually be really fun to talk about this particular aspect of the book.

1168
00:48:54,500 --> 00:48:56,780
And I highly recommend if you're listening to this,

1169
00:48:56,980 --> 00:48:59,020
go pre-order the book now.

1170
00:49:00,040 --> 00:49:00,220
Uh,

1171
00:49:00,600 --> 00:49:01,440
when does it come out?

1172
00:49:01,700 --> 00:49:02,340
October 17th.

1173
00:49:02,340 --> 00:49:02,540
Okay.

1174
00:49:02,680 --> 00:49:03,840
The canceling of the American mind.

1175
00:49:04,240 --> 00:49:04,380
Okay.

1176
00:49:04,440 --> 00:49:05,140
So in,

1177
00:49:05,540 --> 00:49:05,640
uh,

1178
00:49:06,360 --> 00:49:07,820
in the book, you also have

1179
00:49:08,340 --> 00:49:12,720
a list of cheap rhetorical tactics that both the left and the right use.

1180
00:49:13,100 --> 00:49:13,960
And then you have

1181
00:49:14,620 --> 00:49:19,060
a list of tactics that the left uses and the right uses.

1182
00:49:19,440 --> 00:49:25,620
So there's the rhetorical, the perfect rhetorical fortress that the left uses and the efficient rhetorical fortress

1183
00:49:25,880 --> 00:49:26,560
that the right uses.

1184
00:49:27,340 --> 00:49:29,560
First one is what about ism.

1185
00:49:29,740 --> 00:49:32,230
Maybe we can go through a few of them that capture

1186
00:49:32,240 --> 00:49:35,000
your heart in this particular moment as we talk about it.

1187
00:49:35,320 --> 00:49:36,200
And if, if you can

1188
00:49:37,260 --> 00:49:43,840
describe examples of it or if, uh, there's aspects of it that you see there, especially effective effective.

1189
00:49:44,180 --> 00:49:48,960
So, uh, what about ism is defending against criticism of your side by bringing up the other side's

1190
00:49:49,710 --> 00:49:51,400
alleged wrongdoing.

1191
00:49:51,600 --> 00:49:53,960
I want to make little cards of these, uh,

1192
00:49:54,280 --> 00:49:56,200
of all of these tactics and start

1193
00:49:56,200 --> 00:50:00,300
using them on X all the time because they are so commonly deployed.

1194
00:50:00,380 --> 00:50:01,760
And what about ism I put

1195
00:50:01,760 --> 00:50:02,800
first for a reason,

1196
00:50:03,020 --> 00:50:07,160
you know, it'd be an interesting idea to actually integrate that into Twitter slash X

1197
00:50:07,860 --> 00:50:10,100
where people, you know, instead of clicking heart,

1198
00:50:10,140 --> 00:50:12,340
they can click which of the,

1199
00:50:12,540 --> 00:50:15,360
uh, uh, which of the rhetorical tactics this is.

1200
00:50:15,700 --> 00:50:16,140
And then,

1201
00:50:16,560 --> 00:50:18,060
cause you know, there's actually community notes.

1202
00:50:18,200 --> 00:50:19,200
I don't know if you've seen

1203
00:50:19,940 --> 00:50:23,860
on X that you people can contribute notes and it's quite

1204
00:50:24,060 --> 00:50:24,560
fascinating.

1205
00:50:24,840 --> 00:50:25,920
It works really, really well,

1206
00:50:26,240 --> 00:50:28,240
but to give it a little more structure.

1207
00:50:28,320 --> 00:50:28,760
Yeah.

1208
00:50:28,780 --> 00:50:30,220
That's a really interesting method actually.

1209
00:50:30,500 --> 00:50:30,700
Yeah.

1210
00:50:30,780 --> 00:50:32,600
I actually, when I was thinking about ways

1211
00:50:33,100 --> 00:50:35,320
X could be used to argue towards truth,

1212
00:50:35,860 --> 00:50:37,480
I wouldn't want to have it so that,

1213
00:50:37,480 --> 00:50:39,340
you know, everybody would be bound to that.

1214
00:50:39,620 --> 00:50:43,740
But I think that I imagine almost being like a stream within X

1215
00:50:44,020 --> 00:50:45,700
that was truth focused that,

1216
00:50:45,700 --> 00:50:48,760
that agrees to some additional rules on how they would argue.

1217
00:50:48,820 --> 00:50:49,400
Yeah, man.

1218
00:50:49,400 --> 00:50:50,240
I would love that.

1219
00:50:50,840 --> 00:50:54,640
Where like there's in terms of streams that intersect and can be

1220
00:50:54,640 --> 00:50:59,320
separated the shit talking one where people just enjoy talking shit.

1221
00:50:59,700 --> 00:51:00,220
Okay. Go for it, man.

1222
00:51:00,260 --> 00:51:01,320
And then there's like truth

1223
00:51:01,840 --> 00:51:05,640
and then, uh, I mean, they're like, then there's humor,

1224
00:51:06,660 --> 00:51:08,240
then there's like good vibes.

1225
00:51:08,760 --> 00:51:09,220
Like, you know,

1226
00:51:09,560 --> 00:51:11,660
I'm not like somebody who absolutely needs good

1227
00:51:11,680 --> 00:51:12,820
vibes all the time,

1228
00:51:12,860 --> 00:51:14,380
but sometimes it's nice to have,

1229
00:51:14,440 --> 00:51:17,580
it's nice to just log in and not have to see

1230
00:51:17,960 --> 00:51:23,160
like the drama, the fighting, the bickering, the, the cancellations, the moms, all of this.

1231
00:51:23,220 --> 00:51:24,240
It's good to just see,

1232
00:51:24,820 --> 00:51:28,680
uh, that's why I go to Reddit are or like,

1233
00:51:28,680 --> 00:51:30,420
uh, what are the cute animals ones,

1234
00:51:30,640 --> 00:51:32,000
whether there's cute puppies and kittens.

1235
00:51:32,240 --> 00:51:34,960
And it's like, I just want to see Ryan Reynolds singing with Will Farrell.

1236
00:51:35,080 --> 00:51:35,260
I mean,

1237
00:51:35,880 --> 00:51:38,020
sometimes that's all you need that in my heart.

1238
00:51:38,060 --> 00:51:38,260
Yeah.

1239
00:51:38,800 --> 00:51:39,620
Not all the time,

1240
00:51:39,640 --> 00:51:42,420
just a little bit and right back to the battle

1241
00:51:42,940 --> 00:51:43,280
for truth.

1242
00:51:44,040 --> 00:51:44,300
Okay.

1243
00:51:44,360 --> 00:51:45,220
So what about ism?

1244
00:51:45,300 --> 00:51:46,040
What about as a Mia?

1245
00:51:46,140 --> 00:51:46,920
That's everywhere.

1246
00:51:47,080 --> 00:51:48,460
Um, when, when you look at it,

1247
00:51:48,460 --> 00:51:49,540
uh, when you look at Twitter,

1248
00:51:49,580 --> 00:51:51,660
when you look at social media in general, um,

1249
00:51:52,020 --> 00:51:56,480
and the first, like what we call the obstacle course is basically time tested,

1250
00:51:56,560 --> 00:51:58,400
old fashioned, you know,

1251
00:51:59,220 --> 00:52:00,800
argumentative dodges that everybody uses.

1252
00:52:01,380 --> 00:52:02,360
And what about asm is just

1253
00:52:02,360 --> 00:52:05,440
bringing up something, uh, you know, like someone makes an argument,

1254
00:52:05,580 --> 00:52:06,640
like Biden is corrupt.

1255
00:52:06,900 --> 00:52:08,060
And, and then someone says,

1256
00:52:08,140 --> 00:52:09,460
well, Trump was worse, you know, like,

1257
00:52:10,080 --> 00:52:12,760
and that's not an illegitimate,

1258
00:52:13,080 --> 00:52:15,400
you know, argument to make back, but it does,

1259
00:52:15,820 --> 00:52:16,820
it, it seems to happen.

1260
00:52:16,980 --> 00:52:17,780
Every time someone makes an

1261
00:52:17,780 --> 00:52:22,120
assertion, someone just points out some other thing that was going on and it can get increasingly attenuated from,

1262
00:52:22,440 --> 00:52:24,060
from, from what you're actually trying to argue.

1263
00:52:24,680 --> 00:52:25,920
And when you, and then you see

1264
00:52:25,920 --> 00:52:28,980
this all the time on social media and it's kind of,

1265
00:52:29,080 --> 00:52:31,080
you know, I was a big fan of Jon Stewart's

1266
00:52:31,080 --> 00:52:36,140
daily show, but an awful lot of what the humor was and what the tactic was for arguing was this

1267
00:52:36,280 --> 00:52:36,820
thing over here.

1268
00:52:37,060 --> 00:52:39,320
It's like, Oh, I'm making this argument about this important problem.

1269
00:52:39,860 --> 00:52:43,800
Oh, actually, you know, there, there's this other problem over here that I'm more concerned about.

1270
00:52:44,460 --> 00:52:47,780
And it, it, you know, and on the, you know, let's, let's pick on the right here.

1271
00:52:48,340 --> 00:52:49,340
So January 6,

1272
00:52:49,860 --> 00:52:53,260
you know, watching everybody arguing about, um, chop,

1273
00:52:53,600 --> 00:52:57,060
you know, like the, um, uh, the, the occupied part of Seattle or

1274
00:52:57,060 --> 00:52:59,220
the occupied part of Portland and set,

1275
00:52:59,260 --> 00:53:00,580
and basically trying to like,

1276
00:53:00,660 --> 00:53:01,900
Oh, you're bringing up the, the,

1277
00:53:02,240 --> 00:53:03,580
the riot in January 6.

1278
00:53:04,060 --> 00:53:04,620
Um, and by the way,

1279
00:53:04,660 --> 00:53:05,640
I live on Capitol Hill.

1280
00:53:05,760 --> 00:53:09,260
So believe me, I was very aware of like how scary and bad it was.

1281
00:53:09,620 --> 00:53:10,200
Um,

1282
00:53:10,700 --> 00:53:15,320
you know, like I said, that just, my dad grew up in Yugoslavia and that was a night where we all ate dinner in the basement.

1283
00:53:15,380 --> 00:53:17,300
Cause I'm like, Oh, when the shit goes down,

1284
00:53:17,540 --> 00:53:18,060
eat in the basement.

1285
00:53:18,760 --> 00:53:20,600
It was, it was, it was genuinely scary.

1286
00:53:20,600 --> 00:53:26,360
And people would try to deflect from January 6 being serious by actually making the argument that,

1287
00:53:26,480 --> 00:53:30,160
Oh, well, there are crazy, horrible things happening in all over the country.

1288
00:53:30,280 --> 00:53:35,060
Uh, you know, riots, uh, uh, um, that came from some of the social justice protests.

1289
00:53:35,660 --> 00:53:39,700
And of course the answer is you can be concerned about both of these things and,

1290
00:53:39,700 --> 00:53:41,240
and find them both problems.

1291
00:53:41,460 --> 00:53:44,040
But you know, if I'm arguing about chop,

1292
00:53:44,300 --> 00:53:47,500
you know, someone bringing up January 6 isn't super relevant to it.

1293
00:53:47,780 --> 00:53:49,200
Or if I'm arguing about January 6,

1294
00:53:49,340 --> 00:53:51,980
someone bringing up the riots in 2020,

1295
00:53:52,540 --> 00:53:53,040
isn't that helpful?

1296
00:53:53,320 --> 00:53:56,580
We took a long dark journey from what about ism and,

1297
00:53:56,580 --> 00:53:57,620
uh, related to that is

1298
00:53:57,640 --> 00:53:59,680
straw manning and steel manning.

1299
00:53:59,840 --> 00:54:04,860
So misrepresenting the, the, the, the perspective of the, the, the opposing perspective.

1300
00:54:05,440 --> 00:54:06,880
And this is something also,

1301
00:54:07,440 --> 00:54:13,180
uh, I, I guess it's very prevalent and it's difficult to do the reverse of that,

1302
00:54:13,300 --> 00:54:14,360
which is steel manning

1303
00:54:14,400 --> 00:54:16,380
requires empathy or requires eloquence.

1304
00:54:16,420 --> 00:54:17,480
It requires understanding,

1305
00:54:18,500 --> 00:54:20,660
actually doing the research and understanding the,

1306
00:54:20,960 --> 00:54:22,580
the, the alternative perspective.

1307
00:54:23,480 --> 00:54:27,060
My, uh, wonderful employee, Angel and Eduardo has something that he calls star manning

1308
00:54:27,640 --> 00:54:29,720
and I find myself doing this a lot.

1309
00:54:29,840 --> 00:54:30,700
It's nice to have,

1310
00:54:30,700 --> 00:54:34,860
you know, two immigrant parents, um, because I remember being in San Francisco,

1311
00:54:34,860 --> 00:54:44,240
uh, you know, uh, in the weird kind of like ACLU slash burning man kind of cohort and having a

1312
00:54:44,240 --> 00:54:48,060
friend there who was an artist who would talk about hating Kansas.

1313
00:54:48,310 --> 00:54:52,380
And that was his metaphor for middle America is what he meant by it.

1314
00:54:53,020 --> 00:54:56,180
And, but he was kind of proud of the fact that he hated Kansas.

1315
00:54:56,880 --> 00:54:58,630
And I'm like, you gotta understand.

1316
00:54:58,900 --> 00:55:02,240
I still see all of you a little bit as foreigners and

1317
00:55:03,040 --> 00:55:06,600
think about like, change the name of Kansas to Croatia,

1318
00:55:06,840 --> 00:55:09,260
you know, change the name of Kansas to,

1319
00:55:09,280 --> 00:55:09,920
to, to some.

1320
00:55:10,200 --> 00:55:11,600
That's what it sounds like to me.

1321
00:55:11,860 --> 00:55:13,460
And the star manning idea,

1322
00:55:13,640 --> 00:55:14,980
which I, which I like is,

1323
00:55:15,140 --> 00:55:15,740
is the idea of being like,

1324
00:55:16,000 --> 00:55:19,900
so you're saying that you really hate your dominant religious minority,

1325
00:55:20,300 --> 00:55:25,140
like, and that's when you start actually detaching yourself a little bit from it, how typical

1326
00:55:25,700 --> 00:55:27,780
America is exceptional a number of ways,

1327
00:55:28,060 --> 00:55:30,840
but some of our dynamics are incredibly

1328
00:55:30,840 --> 00:55:31,280
typical.

1329
00:55:31,420 --> 00:55:32,300
It's one of the reasons why,

1330
00:55:32,460 --> 00:55:34,340
like when people start reading Thomas soul,

1331
00:55:34,400 --> 00:55:37,460
for example, they start getting hooked because one of the things he does is he

1332
00:55:37,460 --> 00:55:41,500
does comparative analysis of countries problems and points out that some of these

1333
00:55:41,500 --> 00:55:44,300
things that we think are just unique to the United States exist in,

1334
00:55:45,500 --> 00:55:48,140
you know, 75% of the rest of the countries in the world.

1335
00:55:48,560 --> 00:55:51,460
Francis Fukuyama's, um, the book that I'm reading right now,

1336
00:55:51,500 --> 00:55:54,900
origins of the political order actually does this wonderful job of pointing

1337
00:55:54,900 --> 00:55:56,820
out how we're not special in a variety of ways.

1338
00:55:57,200 --> 00:55:59,260
This is actually something that's very much on my mind.

1339
00:56:00,420 --> 00:56:04,880
And, uh, Fukuyama of course, uh, it's a, it's a, it's a great book.

1340
00:56:05,240 --> 00:56:05,580
It's not,

1341
00:56:06,460 --> 00:56:08,200
it's stilted a little bit in its writing

1342
00:56:08,940 --> 00:56:11,100
because his term for one of the things he's concerned

1343
00:56:11,120 --> 00:56:14,560
about what destroys societies is repatriation,

1344
00:56:15,240 --> 00:56:21,780
which is the reversion to societies in which

1345
00:56:21,780 --> 00:56:23,280
you favor your family and friends.

1346
00:56:23,840 --> 00:56:28,240
And I actually think a lot of what I'm seeing in sort of,

1347
00:56:28,280 --> 00:56:29,900
um, uh, in the United States,

1348
00:56:30,020 --> 00:56:31,740
it makes me worried that we might be going through a little

1349
00:56:31,740 --> 00:56:33,260
bit of a process of repatriation.

1350
00:56:33,840 --> 00:56:35,560
And I think that's one of the reasons why people are so

1351
00:56:35,640 --> 00:56:36,000
angry.

1352
00:56:36,200 --> 00:56:36,920
I think having an,

1353
00:56:37,240 --> 00:56:39,080
I think the prospect that we,

1354
00:56:39,080 --> 00:56:43,700
you know, we very, we very nearly seem to have an election that was going to be,

1355
00:56:43,700 --> 00:56:46,180
you know, Jeb Bush versus Hillary Clinton.

1356
00:56:46,420 --> 00:56:48,680
It's like, are we a dynastic country now?

1357
00:56:48,680 --> 00:56:50,220
Is that what's kind of happening?

1358
00:56:50,780 --> 00:56:54,320
But also it's one of the reasons why people are getting so angry about the, about legacy admissions,

1359
00:56:54,780 --> 00:56:56,160
about like how much, you know,

1360
00:56:56,540 --> 00:57:00,140
certain families seem to be able to keep their people in the

1361
00:57:00,140 --> 00:57:02,540
upper classes of the United States perpetually.

1362
00:57:02,700 --> 00:57:05,220
And believe me, like I was poor when I was

1363
00:57:05,360 --> 00:57:06,400
a kid and I went to,

1364
00:57:06,400 --> 00:57:07,360
and I got to go to,

1365
00:57:07,500 --> 00:57:08,800
I got to go to one of the fancies.

1366
00:57:08,880 --> 00:57:09,620
I got to go to Stanford.

1367
00:57:11,170 --> 00:57:15,240
And I got to see how people,

1368
00:57:16,440 --> 00:57:19,640
they treat you differently in a way that's almost insulting.

1369
00:57:20,060 --> 00:57:23,660
Like basically like suddenly to a certain kind of person,

1370
00:57:23,660 --> 00:57:25,140
I was a legitimate person.

1371
00:57:25,540 --> 00:57:28,720
And I look at how much America relies on Harvard,

1372
00:57:29,200 --> 00:57:31,080
on Yale to produce its,

1373
00:57:31,780 --> 00:57:32,500
I'm going to use a very

1374
00:57:32,520 --> 00:57:34,200
marks a sounding term, ruling class.

1375
00:57:35,100 --> 00:57:37,880
And that's one of the reasons why you have to be particularly

1376
00:57:37,880 --> 00:57:40,420
worried about what goes on at these elite colleges.

1377
00:57:40,820 --> 00:57:42,260
And these elite colleges with the

1378
00:57:42,260 --> 00:57:48,460
exception of University of Chicago and UVA do really badly regarding freedom of speech.

1379
00:57:48,880 --> 00:57:50,960
And that has all sorts of problems.

1380
00:57:52,420 --> 00:57:55,260
It doesn't bode well for the future of the protection

1381
00:57:55,260 --> 00:57:56,980
of freedom of speech for the rest of the society.

1382
00:57:58,040 --> 00:57:59,920
So can you also empathize there

1383
00:58:00,480 --> 00:58:02,520
with the folks who voted for Donald Trump?

1384
00:58:04,480 --> 00:58:10,160
Because as precisely that as a resistance to this kind of

1385
00:58:11,060 --> 00:58:13,000
momentum of the ruling class,

1386
00:58:14,600 --> 00:58:16,220
this royalty that passes

1387
00:58:16,220 --> 00:58:19,760
on the rule from generation to generation.

1388
00:58:20,160 --> 00:58:25,660
I try really hard to empathize with to a degree everybody and try to really see where they're

1389
00:58:25,740 --> 00:58:29,440
coming from and the anger on the right.

1390
00:58:29,800 --> 00:58:30,440
I get it.

1391
00:58:30,780 --> 00:58:33,490
I mean, like, I feel like the, the

1392
00:58:33,860 --> 00:58:34,400
book,

1393
00:58:35,200 --> 00:58:37,560
so copping the American mind was a book that I,

1394
00:58:37,560 --> 00:58:39,280
that could be sort of a crowd pleaser

1395
00:58:39,580 --> 00:58:45,910
to a degree, partially because we really meant what we said in the subtitle that these are

1396
00:58:46,140 --> 00:58:49,660
good intentions and bad ideas that are hurting people.

1397
00:58:49,940 --> 00:58:51,820
And if you understand it and read the

1398
00:58:51,840 --> 00:58:56,280
book, you can say, it's like, okay, this isn't anybody being malicious.

1399
00:58:56,700 --> 00:58:58,640
You know, this is people trying to protect their kids.

1400
00:58:58,660 --> 00:59:03,220
They're just doing it in a way that actually can actually lead to greater anxiety, depression,

1401
00:59:04,340 --> 00:59:07,180
and strangely eventually pose a threat to freedom of speech.

1402
00:59:08,020 --> 00:59:09,040
But in this one,

1403
00:59:09,400 --> 00:59:10,360
we can't be quite,

1404
00:59:10,920 --> 00:59:13,960
me and my, oh, I haven't even mentioned my brilliant co-author, Ricky Schlott,

1405
00:59:14,280 --> 00:59:15,180
a 23 year old

1406
00:59:16,640 --> 00:59:17,120
genius.

1407
00:59:17,460 --> 00:59:18,580
She's, she's, she's amazing.

1408
00:59:18,620 --> 00:59:19,420
I started working with her when she

1409
00:59:19,440 --> 00:59:21,900
was 20, who's, who's my co-author on this book.

1410
00:59:21,900 --> 00:59:23,500
So when I'm saying we,

1411
00:59:23,520 --> 00:59:24,520
I'm talking about me and Ricky.

1412
00:59:24,640 --> 00:59:25,860
He's a libertarian.

1413
00:59:25,960 --> 00:59:26,580
Libertarian journalist.

1414
00:59:27,140 --> 00:59:28,060
And a journalist.

1415
00:59:28,440 --> 00:59:28,640
Yeah.

1416
00:59:28,720 --> 00:59:29,520
A brilliant mind.

1417
00:59:30,200 --> 00:59:30,380
Yeah.

1418
00:59:30,400 --> 00:59:34,780
And, but we can't actually write this in a way that's too kind because cancelers aren't kind.

1419
00:59:35,420 --> 00:59:38,100
There's a cruelty and a mercilessness about it.

1420
00:59:38,300 --> 00:59:39,920
I mean, I started getting really depressed

1421
00:59:40,260 --> 00:59:44,580
this past year when I was writing it and I didn't even want to tell my staff why I was getting so anxious and depressed.

1422
00:59:45,080 --> 00:59:47,520
It's partially because I'm talking about people who will,

1423
00:59:48,560 --> 00:59:50,580
you know, in some of the cases we're talking about,

1424
00:59:51,300 --> 00:59:53,140
go to your house, target your kids.

1425
00:59:54,860 --> 00:59:56,180
So, so that's a long

1426
00:59:56,180 --> 00:59:57,360
way of saying the,

1427
00:59:58,880 --> 01:00:03,200
I kind of can get what sort of drives the right nuts to a degree in this.

1428
01:00:03,400 --> 01:00:06,500
I feel like they're constantly feeling like they're being gaslit.

1429
01:00:08,320 --> 01:00:12,260
Elite education is really insulting to the working class.

1430
01:00:12,720 --> 01:00:16,620
Like it, part of the ideology that is dominant right now kind of treats,

1431
01:00:17,210 --> 01:00:19,460
almost 70% of the American public,

1432
01:00:19,740 --> 01:00:23,400
like they're, we thought we developed this a little bit in the perfect rhetorical fortress, like they're

1433
01:00:23,980 --> 01:00:30,060
to some, some way illegitimate and not worthy of respect or compassion.

1434
01:00:30,620 --> 01:00:30,720
Yeah.

1435
01:00:30,820 --> 01:00:33,940
The, the general elitism that radiates,

1436
01:00:35,600 --> 01:00:39,900
self-fueling elitism that radiates from the people that go to these institutions.

1437
01:00:40,320 --> 01:00:41,780
And what's funny is the,

1438
01:00:41,780 --> 01:00:45,580
the, the elitism has been repackaged as a kind of,

1439
01:00:48,740 --> 01:00:50,680
it masquerades as kind of infinite compassion,

1440
01:00:50,920 --> 01:00:53,940
but essentially it's based in a sort of a very,

1441
01:00:54,980 --> 01:00:55,380
to be frank,

1442
01:00:56,180 --> 01:00:58,620
overly simple ideology and oversimply,

1443
01:00:58,840 --> 01:01:01,940
a simple explanation of the world and breaking people

1444
01:01:01,940 --> 01:01:06,480
into groups and judging people on how oppressed they are on their,

1445
01:01:06,680 --> 01:01:08,660
on the intersection of their various identities.

1446
01:01:10,400 --> 01:01:12,200
And it came to that,

1447
01:01:12,280 --> 01:01:13,420
I think initially with,

1448
01:01:13,420 --> 01:01:16,240
with, with an, an appeal from a compassionate core,

1449
01:01:17,040 --> 01:01:19,660
but it gets used in a way that is,

1450
01:01:19,660 --> 01:01:22,160
can be very cruel, very dismissive,

1451
01:01:23,400 --> 01:01:27,960
compassionless, and allows you to not take seriously most of

1452
01:01:27,960 --> 01:01:28,700
your fellow human beings.

1453
01:01:29,280 --> 01:01:30,560
It's really weird how that happened.

1454
01:01:30,680 --> 01:01:34,680
Maybe you can explore why a thing that has

1455
01:01:35,880 --> 01:01:36,980
kind of sounds good at first.

1456
01:01:37,120 --> 01:01:38,080
Yeah.

1457
01:01:38,480 --> 01:01:39,080
Can be,

1458
01:01:39,900 --> 01:01:40,220
can create,

1459
01:01:41,420 --> 01:01:46,660
can become such a cruel weapon of canceling and hurting people and ignoring people.

1460
01:01:47,020 --> 01:01:49,860
I mean, this is what you described with the perfect rhetorical fortress.

1461
01:01:50,000 --> 01:01:50,300
Yeah.

1462
01:01:50,320 --> 01:01:51,260
Which is a set of questions.

1463
01:01:51,280 --> 01:01:55,000
Maybe you can elaborate on what the perfect rhetorical fortress is.

1464
01:01:55,220 --> 01:01:55,460
Yeah.

1465
01:01:55,540 --> 01:01:59,960
So the perfect rhetorical fortress is the way that's been developed

1466
01:02:00,640 --> 01:02:02,600
on the left to not

1467
01:02:02,720 --> 01:02:04,400
ever get to someone's actual argument.

1468
01:02:05,100 --> 01:02:06,480
I want to make a chart,

1469
01:02:06,520 --> 01:02:08,000
like a flow chart of this about like,

1470
01:02:08,100 --> 01:02:08,880
here's the argument and

1471
01:02:08,880 --> 01:02:13,740
here is this perfect fortress that will deflect you every time from getting to the argument.

1472
01:02:14,400 --> 01:02:16,560
And I started to notice this certainly when I,

1473
01:02:16,620 --> 01:02:17,680
when I was in law school,

1474
01:02:17,980 --> 01:02:22,860
that there were lots of different ways you could dismiss people and perfect rhetorical fortress step one.

1475
01:02:23,800 --> 01:02:26,980
And I can attest to this because I was guilty of this as well,

1476
01:02:27,440 --> 01:02:28,780
that you can dismiss people

1477
01:02:29,300 --> 01:02:31,540
if you can argue that they're conservative.

1478
01:02:31,700 --> 01:02:34,120
They don't have to be conservative to be clear.

1479
01:02:34,620 --> 01:02:36,280
You just have to say that they are.

1480
01:02:36,760 --> 01:02:38,620
So I never read Thomas Sowell

1481
01:02:39,160 --> 01:02:40,220
because he was a right winger.

1482
01:02:40,960 --> 01:02:42,380
I didn't read Camille Poglia

1483
01:02:43,160 --> 01:02:45,540
because I was, I, someone had convinced me she was a right

1484
01:02:45,540 --> 01:02:45,700
winger.

1485
01:02:45,820 --> 01:02:47,860
There were lots of authors that, and

1486
01:02:48,500 --> 01:02:49,740
when I was in law school,

1487
01:02:50,340 --> 01:02:52,640
it, among a lot of very bright people,

1488
01:02:53,160 --> 01:02:57,420
it really was already an intellectual habit that if you could designate

1489
01:02:57,430 --> 01:03:00,820
something conservative, then you didn't really have to think about it very much anymore or

1490
01:03:00,900 --> 01:03:01,920
take it particularly seriously.

1491
01:03:02,440 --> 01:03:05,020
This is a childish way of arguing,

1492
01:03:05,560 --> 01:03:07,160
but nonetheless, I engaged in it.

1493
01:03:07,160 --> 01:03:07,900
It was a common tactic.

1494
01:03:08,380 --> 01:03:09,360
I even mentioned in the book,

1495
01:03:09,480 --> 01:03:10,260
there was a time when

1496
01:03:10,260 --> 01:03:14,460
a, a gay activist friend who was,

1497
01:03:14,500 --> 01:03:15,720
I think decidedly to my left,

1498
01:03:15,900 --> 01:03:20,760
but nonetheless had that pragmatic experience of actually being an activist said something like,

1499
01:03:20,880 --> 01:03:22,740
well, just because someone's conservative doesn't mean they're wrong.

1500
01:03:23,420 --> 01:03:24,160
And I remember feeling kind

1501
01:03:24,160 --> 01:03:27,180
of scandalized at some level of just being like,

1502
01:03:27,260 --> 01:03:31,180
well, that's kind of, isn't that the whole thing when we're saying is that they're just kind of bad people with bad ideas.

1503
01:03:31,400 --> 01:03:33,160
You can just throw a,

1504
01:03:33,260 --> 01:03:34,140
oh, that guy's a right winger.

1505
01:03:34,460 --> 01:03:35,340
You can just throw that.

1506
01:03:35,430 --> 01:03:36,920
Don't have to think about you anymore.

1507
01:03:37,180 --> 01:03:37,420
Yeah.

1508
01:03:37,420 --> 01:03:38,280
And then it can,

1509
01:03:38,780 --> 01:03:39,600
if you're popular enough,

1510
01:03:39,620 --> 01:03:40,220
it can be those,

1511
01:03:40,440 --> 01:03:41,440
it can be kind of sticky.

1512
01:03:41,740 --> 01:03:42,040
Yeah.

1513
01:03:42,110 --> 01:03:42,860
Like,

1514
01:03:43,780 --> 01:03:46,060
and it's weird because, because it's effective,

1515
01:03:46,440 --> 01:03:47,720
that's why it keeps on getting

1516
01:03:47,720 --> 01:03:49,400
used to essentially it,

1517
01:03:49,620 --> 01:03:51,420
it should have hit someone's because,

1518
01:03:51,420 --> 01:03:53,380
because I, you know, I have a great

1519
01:03:54,460 --> 01:03:57,400
liberal pedigree, you know, everything from working at the ACLU to

1520
01:03:57,420 --> 01:03:59,220
doing refugee law in Eastern Europe to,

1521
01:03:59,380 --> 01:04:01,710
I was part of an environmental mentoring

1522
01:04:01,900 --> 01:04:04,260
program for inner city high school kids in DC.

1523
01:04:04,800 --> 01:04:06,060
You know, I've been, I've been,

1524
01:04:06,740 --> 01:04:10,240
I, I, I can, you know, defend myself as being on the left,

1525
01:04:10,620 --> 01:04:13,200
but I hate doing that because

1526
01:04:13,200 --> 01:04:15,120
there's also part of me that's like, okay,

1527
01:04:15,740 --> 01:04:16,280
so what,

1528
01:04:17,200 --> 01:04:17,420
like,

1529
01:04:17,760 --> 01:04:18,960
are you really saying that

1530
01:04:18,960 --> 01:04:23,300
if you can magically make me argue or convince yourself that,

1531
01:04:23,340 --> 01:04:24,200
that I'm on the right,

1532
01:04:24,640 --> 01:04:25,940
that you don't have to listen to me anymore?

1533
01:04:26,320 --> 01:04:27,840
And again, that's arguing like children.

1534
01:04:28,500 --> 01:04:32,040
And the reason why this has become so popular is because even among,

1535
01:04:32,340 --> 01:04:37,120
or maybe, maybe especially among elites that it works so effectively as a perfect weapon

1536
01:04:37,200 --> 01:04:38,560
that you can use uncritically.

1537
01:04:38,580 --> 01:04:39,820
If I can just prove you're on the right,

1538
01:04:39,920 --> 01:04:40,420
I don't have to,

1539
01:04:40,420 --> 01:04:41,560
I don't have to think about you.

1540
01:04:42,140 --> 01:04:45,020
It's no wonder that suddenly you start seeing people calling

1541
01:04:45,020 --> 01:04:50,220
the ACLU right wing and calling the New York Times right wing because it's been such an

1542
01:04:50,220 --> 01:04:53,940
effective way to delegitimize people as thinkers.

1543
01:04:54,580 --> 01:04:58,100
We've, you know, Stephen Pinker, who's on our board of advisors,

1544
01:04:58,500 --> 01:05:02,840
he refers to academia as being the left pole that essentially it's,

1545
01:05:02,840 --> 01:05:03,980
it's a position that from,

1546
01:05:04,320 --> 01:05:05,180
from that point of view,

1547
01:05:05,240 --> 01:05:06,880
everything looks to its right,

1548
01:05:06,920 --> 01:05:08,220
it looks as if it's on the right.

1549
01:05:09,240 --> 01:05:12,360
But once it becomes a tactic that we accept,

1550
01:05:12,920 --> 01:05:12,980
it,

1551
01:05:13,340 --> 01:05:15,240
and that's one of the reasons why, you know, I'm,

1552
01:05:15,880 --> 01:05:17,020
I'm, I'm more on the left,

1553
01:05:17,160 --> 01:05:18,980
but I think I'm left of center liberal.

1554
01:05:20,460 --> 01:05:23,160
Ricky is, you know, more conservative libertarian.

1555
01:05:23,620 --> 01:05:24,580
And initially I was kind of like,

1556
01:05:24,580 --> 01:05:27,220
should I be really be writing something with someone who's more on the right?

1557
01:05:27,280 --> 01:05:29,560
And I'm like, absolutely I should be.

1558
01:05:29,640 --> 01:05:31,900
I have to actually live up to what I believe on this

1559
01:05:31,900 --> 01:05:35,920
stuff because it's ridiculous that we have this primitive idea that you can dismiss someone

1560
01:05:36,060 --> 01:05:37,460
as soon as you claim,

1561
01:05:38,140 --> 01:05:39,640
rightly or wrongly, that they're on the right.

1562
01:05:40,120 --> 01:05:40,340
Well,

1563
01:05:41,220 --> 01:05:42,280
I feel, correct me if I'm wrong,

1564
01:05:42,360 --> 01:05:45,000
but I feel like you were recently called right wing

1565
01:05:45,740 --> 01:05:46,580
fire,

1566
01:05:47,000 --> 01:05:50,120
maybe you by association because of that debate.

1567
01:05:50,980 --> 01:05:51,920
Oh, the LA Times.

1568
01:05:51,940 --> 01:05:52,660
The LA Times.

1569
01:05:53,040 --> 01:05:54,100
Let's talk about the LA Times.

1570
01:05:54,640 --> 01:05:56,440
So yes, there's an article, there's a debate.

1571
01:05:57,080 --> 01:06:01,560
I can't wait to watch it because I don't think it's available yet to watch on video.

1572
01:06:01,620 --> 01:06:02,500
You have to attend in person.

1573
01:06:02,820 --> 01:06:04,140
I can't wait to see it.

1574
01:06:04,400 --> 01:06:07,100
Uh, but fire was in part supporting and then LA Times wrote, um,

1575
01:06:08,180 --> 01:06:12,020
a scathing article about, uh, that everybody in the debate was

1576
01:06:12,620 --> 01:06:13,760
basically right

1577
01:06:14,380 --> 01:06:15,080
leaning right.

1578
01:06:15,420 --> 01:06:15,540
Okay.

1579
01:06:15,840 --> 01:06:17,120
Uh, so much to unpack there.

1580
01:06:17,660 --> 01:06:19,520
Uh, you know, Barry Weiss has this,

1581
01:06:19,520 --> 01:06:21,100
you know, great, great project, the free press.

1582
01:06:21,220 --> 01:06:22,140
I've been very impressed.

1583
01:06:22,400 --> 01:06:23,820
It's covering stories that the,

1584
01:06:23,820 --> 01:06:26,940
that a lot of the media right or left isn't willing to cover.

1585
01:06:28,200 --> 01:06:29,620
Um, and we did a,

1586
01:06:29,840 --> 01:06:31,460
uh, we hosted a debate with her.

1587
01:06:31,900 --> 01:06:36,600
Um, uh, and we, we wanted to make it as fun and controversial as possible.

1588
01:06:37,260 --> 01:06:39,800
Uh, so fire and the free press hosted a debate.

1589
01:06:40,240 --> 01:06:41,720
Did the sexual revolution fail?

1590
01:06:42,300 --> 01:06:44,340
So the debate was really exciting,

1591
01:06:44,340 --> 01:06:44,960
really fun.

1592
01:06:45,120 --> 01:06:48,440
The side that said that sexual revolution wasn't a failure that,

1593
01:06:48,440 --> 01:06:50,080
that, that Grimes and Sarah Hader were on.

1594
01:06:50,530 --> 01:06:51,080
One,

1595
01:06:51,860 --> 01:06:52,420
um, it was,

1596
01:06:52,740 --> 01:06:53,720
you know, a nice,

1597
01:06:54,500 --> 01:06:55,260
meaty, thoughtful night.

1598
01:06:55,960 --> 01:07:00,320
And we got a rev there was a review of it that was just sort of scathing about the whole thing.

1599
01:07:00,500 --> 01:07:02,420
And it included a line saying that,

1600
01:07:02,940 --> 01:07:05,080
uh, fire, which claims to believe in free speech,

1601
01:07:05,120 --> 01:07:06,880
but only defends viewpoints to degrees with.

1602
01:07:08,080 --> 01:07:10,100
I can't believe that even made it into the magazine.

1603
01:07:10,120 --> 01:07:11,100
Cause it's not just calling us.

1604
01:07:11,100 --> 01:07:12,580
Cause of course, you know, the implication of course,

1605
01:07:12,580 --> 01:07:13,420
that we're right wing,

1606
01:07:13,500 --> 01:07:18,260
um, which we're not actually the staff leans decidedly more to the left and to the right.

1607
01:07:18,920 --> 01:07:19,320
Um,

1608
01:07:19,940 --> 01:07:20,240
but

1609
01:07:20,820 --> 01:07:23,060
we also defend people all over the spectrum,

1610
01:07:23,180 --> 01:07:23,880
all the time.

1611
01:07:24,100 --> 01:07:25,040
Like that's something that,

1612
01:07:25,040 --> 01:07:27,620
that even the most minimal Google search would have solved.

1613
01:07:27,840 --> 01:07:30,560
So like we've been given LA times some heat on this because it's like,

1614
01:07:30,840 --> 01:07:31,700
yeah, if you said.

1615
01:07:32,280 --> 01:07:35,180
In my opinion, they're right wing, we would have argued back,

1616
01:07:35,520 --> 01:07:40,400
you know, um, saying, well, here, here, here's the following 50,000 examples of,

1617
01:07:40,400 --> 01:07:41,880
of, of us not being,

1618
01:07:42,160 --> 01:07:45,660
but when you actually make the factual claim that we only defend opinions,

1619
01:07:45,680 --> 01:07:47,320
we agree with, first of all, there's no way for us to agree with it.

1620
01:07:47,340 --> 01:07:51,240
There's no way for us to agree with opinions because we actually have a politically diverse

1621
01:07:51,320 --> 01:07:56,260
staff who won't even agree on which opinions are good and what opinions we have.

1622
01:07:56,780 --> 01:07:57,280
But yeah,

1623
01:07:57,680 --> 01:07:58,000
I had to,

1624
01:07:58,400 --> 01:08:01,680
I, at one time when someone did something like this and they were just

1625
01:08:01,680 --> 01:08:04,620
being a little bit flippant about kind of like free speech being fine.

1626
01:08:04,780 --> 01:08:07,360
I did a 70 tweet long thread,

1627
01:08:07,360 --> 01:08:09,760
you know, just being like, Hey, do you really think this is fine?

1628
01:08:10,280 --> 01:08:11,820
I decided not to do that,

1629
01:08:11,820 --> 01:08:13,400
um, on this particular one.

1630
01:08:13,660 --> 01:08:13,940
But

1631
01:08:14,520 --> 01:08:18,420
the nice thing about it is it demonstrated two parts of the book,

1632
01:08:18,880 --> 01:08:19,720
uh, canceling of the American

1633
01:08:19,720 --> 01:08:20,000
mind.

1634
01:08:20,160 --> 01:08:20,720
If not more,

1635
01:08:21,200 --> 01:08:23,320
one of them is dismissing someone cause they're conservative.

1636
01:08:23,540 --> 01:08:27,160
Uh, and because that was the implication don't have to listen to fire cause they're conservative.

1637
01:08:27,380 --> 01:08:33,280
But the other one is something, a term that I invented specifically for the way people argue on Twitter,

1638
01:08:33,720 --> 01:08:35,080
which is hypocrisy projection.

1639
01:08:35,340 --> 01:08:39,480
Hi, I'm person who only cares about one side of the political fence.

1640
01:08:39,500 --> 01:08:42,520
And I think everyone else is a hypocrite.

1641
01:08:43,320 --> 01:08:43,760
Um, and by the way,

1642
01:08:43,840 --> 01:08:45,440
I haven't done any actual research on this,

1643
01:08:45,800 --> 01:08:48,400
but I assume everyone else is a hypocrite.

1644
01:08:48,580 --> 01:08:50,080
And you see this happen all the time.

1645
01:08:50,320 --> 01:08:52,920
The, the, and this happens to fire a lot where someone will be like,

1646
01:08:52,920 --> 01:08:54,260
where is fire on this case?

1647
01:08:54,320 --> 01:08:54,640
And we're like,

1648
01:08:54,960 --> 01:08:58,440
we are literally quoted in the link you just sent,

1649
01:08:58,640 --> 01:09:00,180
but didn't actually read.

1650
01:09:00,980 --> 01:09:02,540
Or it's like, where's fire on this?

1651
01:09:02,580 --> 01:09:06,540
It's like, here's a, here's our lawsuit about it from six months ago.

1652
01:09:07,200 --> 01:09:09,540
Um, so it's a favorite thing.

1653
01:09:09,740 --> 01:09:11,700
And also John Stewart daily show,

1654
01:09:12,200 --> 01:09:18,600
like the, the, the, the, um, uh, what about ism and the kind of like idea that these people must be hypocrites is something that

1655
01:09:19,120 --> 01:09:23,020
greatest comedy, but as far as actually a rhetorical tactic that will get you to truth,

1656
01:09:23,400 --> 01:09:28,200
just assuming that your opponent or just accusing your opponent of always being a

1657
01:09:28,200 --> 01:09:30,980
hypocrite is not a good tactic for truth.

1658
01:09:31,080 --> 01:09:31,720
But by the way,

1659
01:09:31,800 --> 01:09:36,080
it tends to always come from people who aren't actually consistent on free speech themselves.

1660
01:09:37,020 --> 01:09:38,640
So that hands the projection,

1661
01:09:39,140 --> 01:09:41,820
but basically not doing the research about whether the

1662
01:09:41,820 --> 01:09:47,520
person is or isn't a hypocrite and assuming others are a large fraction of others reading it,

1663
01:09:48,300 --> 01:09:49,980
uh, will also not do the research.

1664
01:09:50,140 --> 01:09:51,640
And therefore this kind of

1665
01:09:52,420 --> 01:09:55,220
statement becomes a kind of truthiness without a

1666
01:09:55,220 --> 01:09:56,520
grounding in actual reality.

1667
01:09:56,800 --> 01:10:00,740
It breaks down that barrier between what is and isn't true because if,

1668
01:10:00,740 --> 01:10:01,660
if the mob says

1669
01:10:01,660 --> 01:10:04,320
something is true, it's, it takes too much effort to correct it.

1670
01:10:04,480 --> 01:10:06,340
And there are three ways I want it,

1671
01:10:06,360 --> 01:10:08,860
like, you know, I want to respond to this,

1672
01:10:08,940 --> 01:10:11,180
which is just giving example after example of,

1673
01:10:11,320 --> 01:10:14,900
of times where we defended people on both sides of every majorish,

1674
01:10:15,000 --> 01:10:16,340
basically every major issue,

1675
01:10:16,440 --> 01:10:19,900
whether it's Israel, Palestine, whether it's terrorism, whether it's gay marriage,

1676
01:10:20,420 --> 01:10:21,720
we have been abortion.

1677
01:10:22,000 --> 01:10:24,360
We have defended both sides of that argument.

1678
01:10:24,980 --> 01:10:28,240
The other part, and I call these the orphans of the culture war.

1679
01:10:29,020 --> 01:10:34,320
I really want to urge the media to start caring about free speech cases that are

1680
01:10:34,340 --> 01:10:38,740
that actually don't have a political valence that are actually just about good old-fashioned

1681
01:10:38,780 --> 01:10:45,580
exercise of power against the little guy or little girl or little group on campus or off

1682
01:10:45,580 --> 01:10:46,420
campus for that matter.

1683
01:10:46,660 --> 01:10:47,460
Cause these cases happen.

1684
01:10:47,840 --> 01:10:49,820
A lot of our litigation are just little people

1685
01:10:50,580 --> 01:10:52,820
as regular people being told that they can't protest,

1686
01:10:52,840 --> 01:10:53,960
that they can't hold signs.

1687
01:10:54,440 --> 01:10:57,760
And then the last part of the argument that I want people to really get is like, yeah.

1688
01:10:58,100 --> 01:10:59,400
And by the way,

1689
01:10:59,740 --> 01:11:01,080
uh, right wingers get in trouble too.

1690
01:11:01,300 --> 01:11:03,480
Um, and there are attacks from the left

1691
01:11:03,560 --> 01:11:05,520
and you should take those seriously too.

1692
01:11:05,900 --> 01:11:08,080
Um, you should care when Republicans get in

1693
01:11:08,080 --> 01:11:08,220
trouble.

1694
01:11:08,500 --> 01:11:12,100
You should care when California has a DEI,

1695
01:11:12,100 --> 01:11:15,680
a program that requires this on the California community colleges

1696
01:11:16,260 --> 01:11:20,260
has a DEI program policy that actually requires even

1697
01:11:20,260 --> 01:11:25,820
chemistry professors to work in a different DEI ideas from intersectionality to

1698
01:11:25,820 --> 01:11:27,900
anti-racism into their classroom,

1699
01:11:28,040 --> 01:11:29,160
into their syllabus, et cetera.

1700
01:11:29,640 --> 01:11:30,240
This is a

1701
01:11:30,920 --> 01:11:32,580
gross violation of academic freedom.

1702
01:11:33,160 --> 01:11:36,980
It is as bad as it is to tell professors what they can't say.

1703
01:11:37,060 --> 01:11:38,920
Like we fought and defeated in Florida.

1704
01:11:39,340 --> 01:11:41,520
It's even worse to tell them what they must say.

1705
01:11:41,560 --> 01:11:42,880
That's downright totalitarian.

1706
01:11:43,360 --> 01:11:44,220
And we're suing against this.

1707
01:11:44,400 --> 01:11:46,540
And what I'm, what I'm saying is

1708
01:11:47,060 --> 01:11:48,620
that it,

1709
01:11:49,400 --> 01:11:50,860
when you're dismissing someone for just

1710
01:11:50,860 --> 01:11:51,500
being on the other,

1711
01:11:51,500 --> 01:11:52,780
other side of the political fence,

1712
01:11:53,540 --> 01:11:55,040
you are also kind of

1713
01:11:55,040 --> 01:11:58,420
claiming, making a claim that none of these cases matter as well.

1714
01:11:58,500 --> 01:12:04,390
And I want people to care about censorship when it even is against people they hate.

1715
01:12:05,800 --> 01:12:07,080
Censorship is censorship.

1716
01:12:08,710 --> 01:12:13,360
If we can take that tangent briefly with DEI,

1717
01:12:13,820 --> 01:12:15,040
diversity, equity, and inclusion,

1718
01:12:16,540 --> 01:12:20,340
what is the good and what is the harm of such programs?

1719
01:12:20,840 --> 01:12:23,340
DEI, I know people who are DEI, um,

1720
01:12:23,700 --> 01:12:24,740
consultants or some,

1721
01:12:25,400 --> 01:12:28,000
actually I have a dear friend who I love very much,

1722
01:12:28,000 --> 01:12:29,240
um, who does DEI.

1723
01:12:30,180 --> 01:12:31,640
Absolutely decent people.

1724
01:12:32,280 --> 01:12:37,000
What they want to do is create bonds of understanding,

1725
01:12:37,520 --> 01:12:39,480
friendship, compassion among the people,

1726
01:12:39,580 --> 01:12:40,140
people who are different.

1727
01:12:40,950 --> 01:12:41,500
Unfortunately,

1728
01:12:41,920 --> 01:12:44,620
the research on what a lot of DEI actually does

1729
01:12:45,200 --> 01:12:46,480
is often times the opposite of that.

1730
01:12:46,900 --> 01:12:53,240
And I think that it's partially a problem with some of the ideology that comes from a critical race theory,

1731
01:12:53,800 --> 01:12:54,560
which is a real thing,

1732
01:12:54,700 --> 01:12:57,280
by the way, that, that informs a lot of DEI,

1733
01:12:57,300 --> 01:12:59,960
that actually makes it something more likely to divide than unite.

1734
01:13:00,320 --> 01:13:03,440
We talk about this in coddling in the American

1735
01:13:03,440 --> 01:13:08,920
mind as the difference between common humanity identity politics and common enemy identity politics.

1736
01:13:09,560 --> 01:13:10,380
And I think that,

1737
01:13:10,760 --> 01:13:13,040
uh, I know some of the people that I know who,

1738
01:13:13,040 --> 01:13:17,520
who do DEI, they really want it to be common humanity identity politics,

1739
01:13:17,700 --> 01:13:18,960
but some of the actual

1740
01:13:19,000 --> 01:13:25,300
ideological assumptions that are baked in can actually cause people to feel more alienated from each other.

1741
01:13:26,060 --> 01:13:27,680
Now, when I started at FIRE,

1742
01:13:28,020 --> 01:13:30,280
my first cases involved 9-11.

1743
01:13:31,040 --> 01:13:32,660
Um, and it was bad.

1744
01:13:33,300 --> 01:13:34,620
Uh, professors were getting targeted.

1745
01:13:34,800 --> 01:13:37,180
Professors were losing their jobs for saying

1746
01:13:37,200 --> 01:13:40,420
insensitive things about 9-11 and both from,

1747
01:13:40,420 --> 01:13:41,340
from the right and the left,

1748
01:13:41,420 --> 01:13:42,440
actually in that case,

1749
01:13:42,560 --> 01:13:44,580
actually sometimes more, a lot more from the right.

1750
01:13:45,160 --> 01:13:46,200
Um, and

1751
01:13:46,840 --> 01:13:47,640
it was really bad.

1752
01:13:48,240 --> 01:13:50,160
And about five professors lost their jobs.

1753
01:13:50,640 --> 01:13:51,480
That's bad.

1754
01:13:51,740 --> 01:13:54,000
Five professors over a relatively short period of

1755
01:13:54,000 --> 01:13:55,720
time being fired for a political opinion.

1756
01:13:56,200 --> 01:13:58,420
That's something that, you know, would get written up

1757
01:13:58,480 --> 01:13:59,780
in any previous decades.

1758
01:14:00,800 --> 01:14:04,300
We're now evaluating like how many professors have been targeted

1759
01:14:04,520 --> 01:14:07,660
for cancellation between 2014 and, uh,

1760
01:14:08,220 --> 01:14:09,060
middle of this year,

1761
01:14:09,360 --> 01:14:11,600
July of, of, of 2023.

1762
01:14:12,320 --> 01:14:15,660
We're in about, well over a thousand attempts to get professors,

1763
01:14:16,140 --> 01:14:20,520
uh, fired or punished, usually driven by students and administrators,

1764
01:14:21,080 --> 01:14:23,100
often driven by professors, unfortunately as well.

1765
01:14:23,960 --> 01:14:26,220
About two thirds of those

1766
01:14:26,220 --> 01:14:28,880
result in the professor being punished in some way.

1767
01:14:29,120 --> 01:14:34,180
Um, everything from, you know, having their article removed to suspension, et cetera.

1768
01:14:35,080 --> 01:14:38,380
About one fifth of those result in professors being

1769
01:14:38,740 --> 01:14:39,280
fired.

1770
01:14:39,520 --> 01:14:40,240
So right now we're,

1771
01:14:40,300 --> 01:14:42,240
it's, it's almost 200, it's around 190,

1772
01:14:42,540 --> 01:14:43,740
um, professors being fired.

1773
01:14:44,260 --> 01:14:46,540
Um, so I want to give some context here.

1774
01:14:47,300 --> 01:14:50,000
Uh, the, the Red Scare is generally considered to have been,

1775
01:14:50,260 --> 01:14:52,240
uh, from 1947 to 1957.

1776
01:14:52,460 --> 01:14:55,940
It ended by the way in 57 when it finally became clear,

1777
01:14:55,940 --> 01:15:00,480
um, thanks to the first amendment that you couldn't actually fire people for their ideologies.

1778
01:15:00,620 --> 01:15:01,140
Prior to that,

1779
01:15:02,120 --> 01:15:03,360
a lot of universities thought they could.

1780
01:15:03,600 --> 01:15:05,040
They were like, this guy is a very doc,

1781
01:15:05,300 --> 01:15:06,140
uh, doctrinaire communist.

1782
01:15:06,280 --> 01:15:07,920
Uh, you know, it can't be just waited.

1783
01:15:08,160 --> 01:15:09,280
I'm, I'm going to fire them.

1784
01:15:09,680 --> 01:15:11,420
They thought they actually could do that.

1785
01:15:12,180 --> 01:15:14,620
Um, and it was only 57 when the law was established.

1786
01:15:14,660 --> 01:15:18,040
So like right now, these are happening in an environment where freedom of speech,

1787
01:15:18,360 --> 01:15:20,380
academic freedom are clearly protected,

1788
01:15:20,700 --> 01:15:23,360
um, at public colleges in the United States.

1789
01:15:23,360 --> 01:15:24,880
And we're still seeing these kinds of numbers.

1790
01:15:25,740 --> 01:15:26,460
Um, during,

1791
01:15:26,880 --> 01:15:28,080
during the Red Scare,

1792
01:15:28,400 --> 01:15:29,360
the biggest study that

1793
01:15:29,360 --> 01:15:32,840
was done of what was going on is I think this came out in like 55.

1794
01:15:33,420 --> 01:15:35,620
And the evaluation was

1795
01:15:35,640 --> 01:15:39,700
that there was about 62 professors fired for,

1796
01:15:39,700 --> 01:15:42,300
for, for being communist and about 90

1797
01:15:42,860 --> 01:15:45,840
something professors fired for political views overall.

1798
01:15:46,720 --> 01:15:50,560
Um, that usually is, it is reported as being about 100.

1799
01:15:51,860 --> 01:15:53,500
Um, so 60, 90,

1800
01:15:53,820 --> 01:15:55,160
100, depending on how you look at it,

1801
01:15:55,160 --> 01:15:56,880
I think the number is actually higher.

1802
01:15:57,280 --> 01:15:59,680
Um, but that's only because of hindsight.

1803
01:15:59,800 --> 01:16:01,200
Like what I mean by hindsight

1804
01:16:01,200 --> 01:16:06,500
is we can look back and we actually find there were more professors who were fired at, as time reveals,

1805
01:16:07,560 --> 01:16:10,300
we're at 190 professors fired.

1806
01:16:10,300 --> 01:16:11,900
And I still have to put up with people saying

1807
01:16:11,900 --> 01:16:12,980
this isn't even happening.

1808
01:16:13,000 --> 01:16:15,220
And I'm like in the nine and a half years of cancel culture,

1809
01:16:15,680 --> 01:16:19,300
190 professors fired in the 11 years of,

1810
01:16:19,300 --> 01:16:20,920
uh, of the Red Scare,

1811
01:16:21,820 --> 01:16:24,440
probably, you know, somewhere around a hundred, maybe probably more

1812
01:16:25,000 --> 01:16:27,060
it's got, the number is going to keep going up.

1813
01:16:27,400 --> 01:16:30,980
Um, but unlike during the Red Scare where people could clearly tell something was happening,

1814
01:16:31,360 --> 01:16:33,980
the craziest thing about cancel culture is some still dealing with

1815
01:16:33,980 --> 01:16:35,720
people who are saying this isn't happening at all.

1816
01:16:36,020 --> 01:16:38,300
And it hasn't been subtle on campus.

1817
01:16:38,620 --> 01:16:39,820
And we know that's a wild undercount,

1818
01:16:39,880 --> 01:16:42,120
by the way, because when we, when we surveyed professors,

1819
01:16:43,160 --> 01:16:44,540
17% of them

1820
01:16:45,240 --> 01:16:47,600
said that they had been threatened with, uh,

1821
01:16:48,160 --> 01:16:52,480
threatened with investigation or actually investigated for what they taught, said,

1822
01:16:52,920 --> 01:16:53,720
or their research.

1823
01:16:54,380 --> 01:17:00,620
And one third of them said that they were told by administrators not to take on controversial research.

1824
01:17:01,300 --> 01:17:02,980
So like extrapolating that out,

1825
01:17:02,980 --> 01:17:03,940
that that's a huge number.

1826
01:17:03,960 --> 01:17:10,920
And the reason why you're not going to hear about a lot of these cases is because there are so many different conformity inducing mechanisms in the whole thing.

1827
01:17:11,140 --> 01:17:11,500
Yeah.

1828
01:17:11,760 --> 01:17:15,060
And that's one of the reasons why the idea that you'd add something like a D,

1829
01:17:15,220 --> 01:17:22,040
like requiring a DEI statement to be hired or to get into a school under the current environment is so completely nuts.

1830
01:17:22,740 --> 01:17:25,680
We have had a genuine crisis of academic freedom over the last,

1831
01:17:25,820 --> 01:17:28,740
you know, particularly since 2017 on campuses,

1832
01:17:29,340 --> 01:17:31,740
we have very low viewpoint diversity to begin with.

1833
01:17:32,380 --> 01:17:34,180
And under these circumstances,

1834
01:17:34,420 --> 01:17:35,660
administrators to start saying,

1835
01:17:35,920 --> 01:17:36,640
you know what the problem is?

1836
01:17:36,860 --> 01:17:40,080
We have too much heterogeneous thought.

1837
01:17:40,280 --> 01:17:41,660
We have, we're not homogeneous enough.

1838
01:17:41,840 --> 01:17:46,040
We actually need, you know, we need another political litmus test, which is nuts.

1839
01:17:46,720 --> 01:17:49,000
And that's what a DEI statement effectively is.

1840
01:17:49,140 --> 01:17:54,660
Cause there's no way to actually fill out a DEI statement without someone evaluating you on your politics.

1841
01:17:55,040 --> 01:17:55,640
It's crystal clear.

1842
01:17:55,660 --> 01:17:56,380
It's crystal clear.

1843
01:17:56,880 --> 01:17:59,800
We even did an experiment on this Nate honeycutt.

1844
01:18:00,720 --> 01:18:04,240
He got something like almost like 3000 professors to participate

1845
01:18:04,840 --> 01:18:07,920
evaluating different kinds of DEI statements.

1846
01:18:08,720 --> 01:18:09,020
Um,

1847
01:18:09,420 --> 01:18:14,260
and one was basically like the standard kind of identity politics intersectionality one,

1848
01:18:14,640 --> 01:18:17,200
one was about viewpoint diversity.

1849
01:18:17,500 --> 01:18:21,560
One was about religious diversity and one was about socioeconomic diversity.

1850
01:18:21,660 --> 01:18:23,320
And as far as where my heart really is,

1851
01:18:23,640 --> 01:18:26,060
it's that we have too little socioeconomic diversity,

1852
01:18:26,300 --> 01:18:27,140
particularly in elite higher ed,

1853
01:18:27,160 --> 01:18:29,000
but also in education period.

1854
01:18:30,040 --> 01:18:34,120
So the experiment was large participation,

1855
01:18:34,340 --> 01:18:35,400
really interestingly set up.

1856
01:18:35,520 --> 01:18:39,180
And it tried to model the way a lot of these DEI policies were actually implemented.

1857
01:18:39,900 --> 01:18:41,860
And one of the ways these have been implemented,

1858
01:18:41,960 --> 01:18:43,000
and I think in some of the

1859
01:18:43,000 --> 01:18:48,480
California schools is that administrators and go through the DEI statements before.

1860
01:18:49,460 --> 01:18:53,220
Anyone else looks at them and then eliminates people off the top, depending on how,

1861
01:18:54,040 --> 01:18:56,920
how they feel about their, um, DEI statements

1862
01:18:57,500 --> 01:19:01,100
and the one on, um, viewpoint diversity.

1863
01:19:01,560 --> 01:19:04,120
I think like half of the people who reviewed it would,

1864
01:19:04,380 --> 01:19:05,180
would eliminate it right out.

1865
01:19:06,060 --> 01:19:08,380
Um, and I think it was basically the same for religious diversity.

1866
01:19:09,460 --> 01:19:10,680
It was slightly better,

1867
01:19:10,860 --> 01:19:14,620
like 40% for socioeconomic diversity,

1868
01:19:14,820 --> 01:19:15,880
but that kills me.

1869
01:19:15,960 --> 01:19:16,920
Like the idea that kind of like,

1870
01:19:16,960 --> 01:19:20,560
yeah, that actually is the kind of diversity that I think we need a great deal more of in,

1871
01:19:20,560 --> 01:19:21,280
in higher education.

1872
01:19:21,380 --> 01:19:24,200
You can agree with it's not hostile to the other kinds,

1873
01:19:24,240 --> 01:19:24,940
by the way.

1874
01:19:24,940 --> 01:19:27,880
Um, but the idea that we need more people from the bottom,

1875
01:19:27,980 --> 01:19:30,820
you know, uh, three quarters of American society,

1876
01:19:30,960 --> 01:19:32,640
like in a higher education,

1877
01:19:32,680 --> 01:19:33,560
I think should be something we could all get around.

1878
01:19:33,580 --> 01:19:37,000
But the only one that really succeeded was the one that's,

1879
01:19:37,000 --> 01:19:38,460
that sprouted back exactly

1880
01:19:38,460 --> 01:19:42,680
the kind of, you know, uh, ideology that they thought the rears would like,

1881
01:19:43,080 --> 01:19:43,760
which is like, okay,

1882
01:19:44,720 --> 01:19:46,560
there's no way this couldn't be a political litmus test.

1883
01:19:47,240 --> 01:19:52,100
We've proved that it's a political litmus test and still school after school is adding

1884
01:19:52,100 --> 01:19:57,100
these to its application process to make schools still more ideologically homogenous.

1885
01:19:57,840 --> 01:19:58,560
Why does that have a negative effect?

1886
01:19:58,580 --> 01:20:00,180
Is it because

1887
01:20:01,180 --> 01:20:06,300
it enforces a kind of group think where people are afraid,

1888
01:20:08,000 --> 01:20:11,800
start becoming afraid to sort of think and speak

1889
01:20:12,980 --> 01:20:13,540
freely,

1890
01:20:14,280 --> 01:20:15,760
liberally about whatever.

1891
01:20:16,240 --> 01:20:20,200
Well, one, it selects for people who tend to be farther to the left,

1892
01:20:20,540 --> 01:20:22,160
um, in a situation where you already have,

1893
01:20:22,460 --> 01:20:26,160
uh, people, a situation where universities do lean decidedly that

1894
01:20:26,180 --> 01:20:30,020
way, but it also establishes essentially a set of sacred ideas

1895
01:20:30,920 --> 01:20:33,740
that if you're being quizzed on whether,

1896
01:20:34,100 --> 01:20:35,980
you know, what you've done to advance

1897
01:20:36,540 --> 01:20:37,900
anti-racism,

1898
01:20:38,280 --> 01:20:39,380
um, injured, uh,

1899
01:20:39,680 --> 01:20:41,860
how you've been conscious of intersectionality,

1900
01:20:42,480 --> 01:20:44,240
it's unlikely that you'd actually get in.

1901
01:20:44,320 --> 01:20:44,740
And if you said,

1902
01:20:44,820 --> 01:20:47,700
by the way, I actually think these are dubious concepts.

1903
01:20:47,980 --> 01:20:48,720
I think they're thin.

1904
01:20:48,980 --> 01:20:50,920
I think they're philosophically not very defensible,

1905
01:20:51,160 --> 01:20:52,080
but basically like if,

1906
01:20:52,120 --> 01:20:53,080
if your position was,

1907
01:20:53,700 --> 01:20:54,960
I actually re I actually reject,

1908
01:20:55,220 --> 01:20:58,280
um, these concepts as being over simple.

1909
01:20:59,220 --> 01:21:00,680
Um, you're not, you're not going to get in.

1910
01:21:01,060 --> 01:21:02,180
And, and, and I think that,

1911
01:21:02,180 --> 01:21:03,320
um, the person that I

1912
01:21:03,320 --> 01:21:06,460
always think of that wasn't a right winger that would be like,

1913
01:21:07,160 --> 01:21:07,780
go to hell.

1914
01:21:07,960 --> 01:21:10,660
If you, if you made him fill one of these things out, it's Feynman.

1915
01:21:11,420 --> 01:21:12,060
I feel like if you,

1916
01:21:12,140 --> 01:21:14,720
if you gave one of these things to Richard Feynman, he'd be like,

1917
01:21:15,240 --> 01:21:17,060
he would tear it to pieces.

1918
01:21:18,360 --> 01:21:18,680
Yeah.

1919
01:21:18,780 --> 01:21:19,400
And not get the job.

1920
01:21:20,880 --> 01:21:24,940
Yeah, there, there's some element of it that creates this

1921
01:21:26,440 --> 01:21:28,220
hard to pin down fear.

1922
01:21:28,300 --> 01:21:29,560
So you said like the firing,

1923
01:21:30,100 --> 01:21:33,440
the thing I wanted to say is firing a hundred people or 200 people.

1924
01:21:33,940 --> 01:21:36,180
The point is even firing one person,

1925
01:21:36,280 --> 01:21:37,260
I've just seen it.

1926
01:21:37,280 --> 01:21:40,940
It can create this quiet ripple effect of fear.

1927
01:21:40,980 --> 01:21:41,500
Oh, of course.

1928
01:21:41,960 --> 01:21:44,220
That single firing of a faculty.

1929
01:21:44,220 --> 01:21:44,840
Oh, absolutely.

1930
01:21:45,120 --> 01:21:49,160
Has a ripple effect across tens of thousands of people,

1931
01:21:49,620 --> 01:21:50,300
of educators,

1932
01:21:51,020 --> 01:21:52,500
of, of, uh, who's hired,

1933
01:21:52,880 --> 01:21:55,020
what kind of conversations are being had, had,

1934
01:21:55,380 --> 01:21:56,920
what kind of textbooks are chosen,

1935
01:21:57,440 --> 01:22:00,340
what kind of self-censorship and different flavors of that is happening.

1936
01:22:00,900 --> 01:22:01,840
It's hard to measure that.

1937
01:22:02,420 --> 01:22:02,540
Yeah.

1938
01:22:02,540 --> 01:22:04,920
I mean, when you ask professors about,

1939
01:22:05,280 --> 01:22:07,960
you know, are they intimidated under the current environment?

1940
01:22:08,460 --> 01:22:11,080
Um, the, the answer is yes.

1941
01:22:11,080 --> 01:22:12,640
And particularly conservative professors,

1942
01:22:12,640 --> 01:22:14,180
you know, already, you know,

1943
01:22:14,940 --> 01:22:15,700
reporting that they're,

1944
01:22:16,460 --> 01:22:18,220
you know, afraid for their jobs in a lot of different cases.

1945
01:22:18,740 --> 01:22:20,500
You have a lot of good statistics in the book,

1946
01:22:20,640 --> 01:22:21,720
things like self-censorship.

1947
01:22:22,460 --> 01:22:24,980
When provided with the definition of self-censorship,

1948
01:22:25,040 --> 01:22:27,260
at least a quarter of students said they self-censor

1949
01:22:27,260 --> 01:22:30,160
fairly often or very often during conversations with other students,

1950
01:22:30,540 --> 01:22:32,780
with professors and during classroom discussions,

1951
01:22:33,680 --> 01:22:36,880
25%, 27% and 28% respectively.

1952
01:22:37,620 --> 01:22:39,680
Uh, a quarter of students also said that they are

1953
01:22:39,700 --> 01:22:42,160
more likely to self-censor on campus now,

1954
01:22:43,080 --> 01:22:46,240
uh, at the time they were surveyed than they

1955
01:22:46,240 --> 01:22:47,720
were when they first started college.

1956
01:22:48,300 --> 01:22:51,720
So sort of colleges kind of instilling this idea of,

1957
01:22:52,020 --> 01:22:54,280
of, of censorship, self-censorship.

1958
01:22:54,320 --> 01:22:55,740
And back to the Red Scare comparison,

1959
01:22:55,960 --> 01:22:57,460
and this is one of the interesting things about

1960
01:22:57,460 --> 01:22:58,240
the data as well,

1961
01:22:58,900 --> 01:22:59,220
is that

1962
01:22:59,740 --> 01:23:01,340
that same study that I was talking about,

1963
01:23:01,340 --> 01:23:03,360
the most comprehensive study of the, of the Red Scare,

1964
01:23:03,500 --> 01:23:06,140
there was polling about whether or not professors were

1965
01:23:06,160 --> 01:23:08,600
self-censoring due to the fear of the environment.

1966
01:23:09,480 --> 01:23:12,620
And 9% of professors said that they were self-censoring

1967
01:23:12,760 --> 01:23:14,360
their research and that what they were saying,

1968
01:23:15,380 --> 01:23:16,580
9% is really bad.

1969
01:23:17,820 --> 01:23:20,780
Um, that, that's almost a 10th of professors saying that they were actually,

1970
01:23:20,840 --> 01:23:22,140
their speech was chilled.

1971
01:23:23,080 --> 01:23:23,780
When we did this

1972
01:23:23,780 --> 01:23:27,340
question for professors on our latest faculty survey,

1973
01:23:28,000 --> 01:23:29,900
um, when you factor together, if they're,

1974
01:23:30,320 --> 01:23:33,200
we asked them, are they self-censoring in their research or they self-censoring in class,

1975
01:23:33,380 --> 01:23:34,720
they're self-censoring online,

1976
01:23:34,880 --> 01:23:37,680
et cetera, it was 90% of professors.

1977
01:23:38,280 --> 01:23:41,920
So the idea that we're actually in an environment that is historic,

1978
01:23:42,220 --> 01:23:45,060
um, in terms of like how scared people are actually of

1979
01:23:45,780 --> 01:23:46,980
expressing controversial views.

1980
01:23:47,240 --> 01:23:48,000
I think that it's,

1981
01:23:48,580 --> 01:23:50,760
it's the reason why we're going to actually be studying this

1982
01:23:51,400 --> 01:23:54,700
in 50 years, the same, the, the same way we study the Red Scare.

1983
01:23:54,780 --> 01:23:57,860
Um, it's not the idea that this isn't happening is,

1984
01:23:57,860 --> 01:24:00,100
will just be correctly viewed as insane.

1985
01:24:00,560 --> 01:24:01,760
So maybe we can just,

1986
01:24:01,760 --> 01:24:06,060
uh, discuss the leaning, the current leaning of academia towards the left,

1987
01:24:06,480 --> 01:24:08,780
which you describe in various different perspectives.

1988
01:24:09,080 --> 01:24:10,940
So one, there's a voter registration

1989
01:24:11,050 --> 01:24:13,880
ratio chart that you have by department,

1990
01:24:13,920 --> 01:24:14,900
which I think is interesting.

1991
01:24:15,740 --> 01:24:16,500
Can you explain this

1992
01:24:16,500 --> 01:24:18,460
chart and can you explain what it shows?

1993
01:24:19,020 --> 01:24:20,980
Yeah, when I started fire in 2001,

1994
01:24:20,980 --> 01:24:24,740
I didn't take the viewpoint diversity issue as seriously.

1995
01:24:24,760 --> 01:24:26,860
I thought it was just something that right-wingers complained about.

1996
01:24:27,980 --> 01:24:29,180
Um, but I really started to get

1997
01:24:29,800 --> 01:24:33,360
what happens when you have a community with low, um,

1998
01:24:34,620 --> 01:24:36,180
with low, uh, viewpoint diversity.

1999
01:24:36,680 --> 01:24:39,720
And actually a lot of the research that I got most interested in was,

2000
01:24:39,720 --> 01:24:43,320
uh, done in conjunction with the great Cass Sunstein,

2001
01:24:43,540 --> 01:24:46,300
um, who writes a lot about group polarization.

2002
01:24:46,300 --> 01:24:49,580
Um, because as, uh, and the research on this is very strong,

2003
01:24:49,900 --> 01:24:52,700
but essentially when you have groups with, um,

2004
01:24:53,580 --> 01:24:56,220
political diversity, and you can see this actually in judges, for example,

2005
01:24:56,740 --> 01:25:00,480
it tends to produce, you know, reliably more moderate outcomes.

2006
01:25:00,940 --> 01:25:02,400
Um, whereas groups that are,

2007
01:25:02,400 --> 01:25:05,180
that have low political diversity tend to sort of spiral,

2008
01:25:05,340 --> 01:25:07,020
spiral off in their own direction.

2009
01:25:07,600 --> 01:25:11,840
And when you have a super majority of people from just one political perspective,

2010
01:25:12,160 --> 01:25:13,820
that's a problem for the production of ideas.

2011
01:25:14,040 --> 01:25:16,140
It creates a situation where there are sacred ideas.

2012
01:25:16,900 --> 01:25:18,840
Um, and when you look at some of the departments,

2013
01:25:18,840 --> 01:25:21,660
um, you know, I think the S the

2014
01:25:21,660 --> 01:25:23,500
estimate from the Crimson is that Harvard is,

2015
01:25:23,500 --> 01:25:24,880
has 3% conservatives.

2016
01:25:25,460 --> 01:25:25,960
But when you look

2017
01:25:26,160 --> 01:25:29,920
at different departments, there are elite departments that have literally no, um,

2018
01:25:30,380 --> 01:25:31,700
uh, conservatives, uh, in them.

2019
01:25:31,720 --> 01:25:32,220
And I think that's,

2020
01:25:32,580 --> 01:25:35,340
that's on a healthy intellectual, uh, environment.

2021
01:25:35,720 --> 01:25:37,360
The problem is definitely worse.

2022
01:25:37,980 --> 01:25:39,100
Um, as you get more elite,

2023
01:25:39,280 --> 01:25:41,160
uh, we definitely see more cases of,

2024
01:25:41,760 --> 01:25:44,480
uh, lefty professors getting canceled at less elite schools.

2025
01:25:44,680 --> 01:25:45,920
It gets worse as you,

2026
01:25:45,920 --> 01:25:47,320
as you get down from the,

2027
01:25:47,320 --> 01:25:51,500
the, the elite schools, that's where a lot of the one third of attempts to get, uh,

2028
01:25:51,860 --> 01:25:53,480
professors punished that are successful,

2029
01:25:53,820 --> 01:25:55,520
you know, do, do come from the right and largely

2030
01:25:55,580 --> 01:25:56,640
from off campus, uh,

2031
01:25:57,460 --> 01:25:58,460
off campus sources.

2032
01:25:58,480 --> 01:26:01,400
And we spend a lot of time talking about that in the book as well.

2033
01:26:01,990 --> 01:26:03,990
Um, it's something that I do think is underappreciated.

2034
01:26:04,980 --> 01:26:06,320
Uh, but when it comes to the low,

2035
01:26:06,320 --> 01:26:10,580
low viewpoint diversity, it's, you know, it works out kind of like you'd expect to a degree,

2036
01:26:10,960 --> 01:26:12,920
you know, economics is what four

2037
01:26:12,920 --> 01:26:14,180
to one or something like that.

2038
01:26:14,480 --> 01:26:15,260
It's not as bad.

2039
01:26:15,540 --> 01:26:17,920
Um, but then when you start getting into some of the humanities,

2040
01:26:18,220 --> 01:26:21,040
you know, like there are departments that they're literally none.

2041
01:26:22,200 --> 01:26:23,760
Is there a good why

2042
01:26:24,700 --> 01:26:29,300
to why did the university's university faculty administration move to the left?

2043
01:26:29,760 --> 01:26:30,140
Yeah,

2044
01:26:30,960 --> 01:26:34,820
I don't love, and this is an argument that you'll sometimes run into on the left,

2045
01:26:35,140 --> 01:26:36,580
uh, just the argument that,

2046
01:26:36,840 --> 01:26:38,340
well, people on the left are just smarter.

2047
01:26:38,580 --> 01:26:39,040
Right.

2048
01:26:39,300 --> 01:26:43,000
And it's like, okay, it's, it's interesting because at least the research as of

2049
01:26:43,980 --> 01:26:47,560
10 years ago was indicating that if you dig a little bit deeper into that,

2050
01:26:47,700 --> 01:26:50,640
a lot of the people who do consider themselves on the left tend to be a little bit more.

2051
01:26:51,610 --> 01:26:52,160
Libertarian,

2052
01:26:53,040 --> 01:26:55,040
the song that Pinker, uh, you know,

2053
01:26:55,480 --> 01:26:58,520
wrote a fair amount about the idea that we're just smarter.

2054
01:26:59,440 --> 01:27:01,720
It is not, is not an opinion.

2055
01:27:02,080 --> 01:27:04,260
I, I'm at least a bit comfortable with,

2056
01:27:04,540 --> 01:27:05,600
um, I do think that,

2057
01:27:05,600 --> 01:27:07,740
that, uh, it, that departments take on,

2058
01:27:08,040 --> 01:27:10,300
um, momentum when they become a place

2059
01:27:10,370 --> 01:27:14,120
where you're like, wow, it'd be really unpleasant for me to work in this department.

2060
01:27:14,220 --> 01:27:15,660
If I'm the token conservative.

2061
01:27:15,680 --> 01:27:17,460
And I think that takes on a life of its own.

2062
01:27:17,860 --> 01:27:18,820
There are also departments

2063
01:27:19,240 --> 01:27:22,920
where a lot of the ideologies kind of explicitly

2064
01:27:23,680 --> 01:27:24,520
leftist.

2065
01:27:25,140 --> 01:27:26,420
Um, you look at education schools,

2066
01:27:26,680 --> 01:27:27,340
a lot of the,

2067
01:27:27,400 --> 01:27:31,560
a lot of the stuff that is actually leftover from what is correctly called critical

2068
01:27:31,560 --> 01:27:33,500
race theories is present.

2069
01:27:33,580 --> 01:27:36,060
And you end up having that in a number of the departments.

2070
01:27:36,380 --> 01:27:37,120
Um,

2071
01:27:37,580 --> 01:27:40,240
and it would be very strange to be a,

2072
01:27:40,780 --> 01:27:43,460
in many departments, a, you know, a conservative social worker

2073
01:27:43,560 --> 01:27:44,000
professor.

2074
01:27:44,180 --> 01:27:45,060
I'm sure they exist.

2075
01:27:45,300 --> 01:27:45,440
Um,

2076
01:27:46,020 --> 01:27:46,160
but

2077
01:27:47,120 --> 01:27:50,600
it, there's a lot of pressure to shut up if you are.

2078
01:27:51,360 --> 01:27:53,880
So the process on the left of cancellation,

2079
01:27:53,880 --> 01:27:57,000
as you started to talk about with the perfect rhetorical fortress,

2080
01:27:57,580 --> 01:27:59,220
the, the first step is

2081
01:28:00,300 --> 01:28:01,360
dismiss a person.

2082
01:28:01,440 --> 01:28:02,480
If they're just, if you can

2083
01:28:03,060 --> 01:28:05,140
put a label of conservative on them,

2084
01:28:05,540 --> 01:28:06,780
you can dismiss them in that way.

2085
01:28:06,880 --> 01:28:13,060
What, what other efficient or what other effective dismissal are there?

2086
01:28:13,260 --> 01:28:15,300
We have a little bit of fun with,

2087
01:28:15,300 --> 01:28:18,460
uh, uh, with demographic numbers, but I run this by height.

2088
01:28:18,760 --> 01:28:20,980
Um, uh, and I remember him being kind of like,

2089
01:28:20,980 --> 01:28:22,320
I don't, don't, don't include the actual

2090
01:28:22,360 --> 01:28:22,660
percentage.

2091
01:28:22,740 --> 01:28:24,620
I'm like, no, we need to include the actual percentages.

2092
01:28:24,720 --> 01:28:26,480
Cause people are really bad

2093
01:28:26,620 --> 01:28:32,200
at estimating what the demographics of the U S actually looks like both the right and the left in different ways.

2094
01:28:32,840 --> 01:28:35,340
Um, so we put it in the numbers and we talk about,

2095
01:28:35,340 --> 01:28:38,900
you know, um, being dismissed for being white or being dismissed for,

2096
01:28:38,900 --> 01:28:41,780
uh, being straight or being dismissed for being male.

2097
01:28:42,380 --> 01:28:45,260
Um, and we, uh, and you can already dismiss people for being conservative.

2098
01:28:45,580 --> 01:28:48,480
And we, so we, we, we give examples in the book of,

2099
01:28:48,480 --> 01:28:52,640
of these being used to dismiss people and oftentimes on topics not related

2100
01:28:52,760 --> 01:28:55,120
to the fact that they're a male or whether or not they're minority.

2101
01:28:55,500 --> 01:28:56,260
And then we get to,

2102
01:28:56,360 --> 01:28:58,240
I think it's like layer six and we're like,

2103
01:28:58,540 --> 01:28:59,280
surprise, guess what?

2104
01:28:59,680 --> 01:29:01,900
You're down to 0.4% of the population and

2105
01:29:01,900 --> 01:29:02,660
none of it mattered.

2106
01:29:02,740 --> 01:29:04,100
Because if you have the wrong opinion,

2107
01:29:04,300 --> 01:29:06,660
even if you're in that 0.4% of the

2108
01:29:06,680 --> 01:29:09,380
most intersectional person who ever lived and you have the wrong opinion,

2109
01:29:09,700 --> 01:29:12,680
you're a heretic and you actually probably will be hated even more.

2110
01:29:13,360 --> 01:29:15,440
And the most interesting part of the

2111
01:29:15,440 --> 01:29:19,960
research we did for this was just asking every prominent,

2112
01:29:20,260 --> 01:29:22,560
uh, black conservative and moderate

2113
01:29:22,640 --> 01:29:24,100
that we knew personally,

2114
01:29:24,700 --> 01:29:26,340
have you been told that you're not really

2115
01:29:26,900 --> 01:29:28,580
black for an opinion you had

2116
01:29:29,160 --> 01:29:31,000
every single one of them was like,

2117
01:29:31,000 --> 01:29:31,900
oh yeah, no.

2118
01:29:31,960 --> 01:29:32,740
And it's kind of funny cause

2119
01:29:32,980 --> 01:29:34,920
it's like oftentimes white lefties

2120
01:29:35,460 --> 01:29:36,400
telling them that's like,

2121
01:29:36,400 --> 01:29:37,540
oh, do you consider yourself black?

2122
01:29:37,840 --> 01:29:39,820
John McWhorter talked about having a reporter.

2123
01:29:39,820 --> 01:29:41,440
Um, when he talked about,

2124
01:29:41,500 --> 01:29:42,340
when he showed that he

2125
01:29:42,340 --> 01:29:43,300
dissented from some of,

2126
01:29:43,740 --> 01:29:48,020
uh, what he described as kind of like woke racism in his book, woke ideas,

2127
01:29:48,540 --> 01:29:49,420
the reporter actually is like,

2128
01:29:49,500 --> 01:29:50,680
so do you consider yourself black?

2129
01:29:50,980 --> 01:29:51,380
He's like,

2130
01:29:51,780 --> 01:29:53,160
he was like, what are you crazy?

2131
01:29:53,180 --> 01:29:53,880
Of course I do.

2132
01:29:54,160 --> 01:29:56,720
And Coleman Hughes had one of the best quotes on it.

2133
01:29:56,840 --> 01:29:57,080
He said,

2134
01:29:57,960 --> 01:30:00,780
I'm constantly being told that the most important thing,

2135
01:30:00,780 --> 01:30:03,300
uh, to the, how legitimate my opinion is,

2136
01:30:03,740 --> 01:30:04,100
is whether,

2137
01:30:04,580 --> 01:30:05,460
uh, whether or not I'm black,

2138
01:30:05,980 --> 01:30:07,800
but then when I have a dissenting opinion,

2139
01:30:07,960 --> 01:30:09,500
I get told I'm not really black.

2140
01:30:10,260 --> 01:30:11,260
So perfect.

2141
01:30:11,820 --> 01:30:14,320
Like there's, there's, there's no way to falsify, uh,

2142
01:30:14,640 --> 01:30:15,220
this argument.

2143
01:30:15,680 --> 01:30:19,800
Um, that one really, that investigation really, really struck me.

2144
01:30:19,900 --> 01:30:23,100
So, and you lay this out really nicely in the book that there is this process of saying,

2145
01:30:23,480 --> 01:30:24,320
are you conservative?

2146
01:30:24,400 --> 01:30:24,800
Yes.

2147
01:30:24,820 --> 01:30:26,940
You can dismiss the person.

2148
01:30:27,580 --> 01:30:28,660
Are you white?

2149
01:30:28,920 --> 01:30:29,680
Dismiss the person.

2150
01:30:29,820 --> 01:30:30,460
Are you male?

2151
01:30:30,540 --> 01:30:31,560
You can dismiss the person.

2152
01:30:31,660 --> 01:30:34,780
There's these categories that make it easier for you

2153
01:30:35,360 --> 01:30:36,080
to dismiss

2154
01:30:36,620 --> 01:30:37,880
a person's ideas based on that.

2155
01:30:37,980 --> 01:30:38,500
And like you said,

2156
01:30:38,500 --> 01:30:40,800
you end up in that tiny percentage and you can still dismiss.

2157
01:30:41,040 --> 01:30:41,960
And it's not just dismiss.

2158
01:30:42,200 --> 01:30:43,560
I, we, we talk about this from a,

2159
01:30:43,860 --> 01:30:45,520
from a practical standpoint, the way

2160
01:30:46,040 --> 01:30:49,120
the limitations on reality and one of them is time.

2161
01:30:49,440 --> 01:30:51,420
Um, and a lot of cancel culture,

2162
01:30:51,560 --> 01:30:54,200
um, as, as, uh, as cultural norms,

2163
01:30:54,620 --> 01:30:55,720
as this way of winning

2164
01:30:55,720 --> 01:30:58,320
arguments without winning arguments is about running out the clock.

2165
01:30:58,880 --> 01:30:59,440
Because by the time

2166
01:30:59,440 --> 01:31:01,380
you get down to the bottom of the,

2167
01:31:01,380 --> 01:31:02,700
uh, uh, of the,

2168
01:31:03,020 --> 01:31:04,280
or actually even to get a couple steps

2169
01:31:04,280 --> 01:31:06,180
into the perfect record fortress and,

2170
01:31:06,340 --> 01:31:07,440
you know, where has the time gone?

2171
01:31:07,560 --> 01:31:08,100
You know, like

2172
01:31:08,690 --> 01:31:11,460
you're, you're, you probably just give up,

2173
01:31:11,840 --> 01:31:15,840
uh, trying to, uh, you know, trying to actually have the argument and you never get to the argument in the first place.

2174
01:31:16,040 --> 01:31:19,280
All of these things are pretty sticky on social media.

2175
01:31:19,400 --> 01:31:22,000
Social media practically invented the perfect rhetorical fortress.

2176
01:31:22,480 --> 01:31:25,520
So that each one of those stages has a virality to it.

2177
01:31:25,940 --> 01:31:28,840
So it could, it could stick and then it can get people really excited.

2178
01:31:29,160 --> 01:31:31,270
It allows you to feel outrage and superiority.

2179
01:31:31,580 --> 01:31:31,880
Yeah.

2180
01:31:31,980 --> 01:31:35,900
Because of that, that at the scale of the virality allows you to never get to the

2181
01:31:35,920 --> 01:31:37,360
actual discussion of the point.

2182
01:31:37,780 --> 01:31:40,000
Um, so, but you know, it's not just the left,

2183
01:31:40,060 --> 01:31:43,100
it's the right, also, so the efficient rhetorical fortress,

2184
01:31:43,880 --> 01:31:44,220
uh,

2185
01:31:44,620 --> 01:31:46,860
so there's something to be proud of on the right.

2186
01:31:46,980 --> 01:31:47,740
It's more efficient.

2187
01:31:49,760 --> 01:31:53,580
So you don't have to listen to liberals and anyone could be labeled a liberal if

2188
01:31:53,580 --> 01:31:54,820
they have a wrong opinion.

2189
01:31:55,740 --> 01:31:59,020
I've seen liberal and left and leftist all used as a,

2190
01:31:59,060 --> 01:32:00,280
in the same kind of way.

2191
01:32:00,660 --> 01:32:02,240
That's leftist nonsense.

2192
01:32:02,660 --> 01:32:04,400
You don't have to listen to experts,

2193
01:32:05,540 --> 01:32:08,220
even conservative experts, if they have the wrong opinion,

2194
01:32:08,820 --> 01:32:10,360
you don't have to listen to journalists,

2195
01:32:10,480 --> 01:32:15,380
even conservative journalists, if they have the wrong opinion and among the MAGA wing,

2196
01:32:15,900 --> 01:32:17,080
there's a fourth proposition,

2197
01:32:17,740 --> 01:32:18,820
there's a fourth provision.

2198
01:32:19,240 --> 01:32:22,260
You don't need to listen to anyone who isn't pro Trump.

2199
01:32:22,820 --> 01:32:25,500
Yeah. And we call it efficient because it eliminates

2200
01:32:26,280 --> 01:32:27,400
a lot of people you probably

2201
01:32:27,400 --> 01:32:28,720
should listen to at least sometimes,

2202
01:32:28,720 --> 01:32:31,300
you know, like we point out sometimes like how cancel

2203
01:32:31,300 --> 01:32:33,320
culture can interfere with faith and expertise.

2204
01:32:33,800 --> 01:32:36,960
So we get kind of being a little suspicious of experts,

2205
01:32:37,440 --> 01:32:38,280
but the same time,

2206
01:32:38,280 --> 01:32:40,320
if you follow that and you follow it mechanically,

2207
01:32:40,320 --> 01:32:45,800
and I definitely, you know, I think everybody in the U S probably has some older uncle,

2208
01:32:45,920 --> 01:32:48,340
um, uh, who exercises some of these.

2209
01:32:49,140 --> 01:32:51,980
It is a really efficient way to sort of,

2210
01:32:52,320 --> 01:32:55,080
so you're, uh, to wall yourself off from the rest of the world and dismiss,

2211
01:32:55,080 --> 01:32:57,980
you know, at least some people you really should be listening to.

2212
01:32:58,360 --> 01:32:59,340
The way you laid it out,

2213
01:32:59,460 --> 01:33:00,660
it made me realize that we just

2214
01:33:01,500 --> 01:33:03,220
take up so much of our brain power.

2215
01:33:03,820 --> 01:33:04,940
These things,

2216
01:33:05,280 --> 01:33:06,260
it's literally time.

2217
01:33:06,340 --> 01:33:07,460
We could be solving things.

2218
01:33:07,640 --> 01:33:08,360
And you get like,

2219
01:33:08,500 --> 01:33:12,860
you kind of exhaust yourself through this process of being outraged based

2220
01:33:12,860 --> 01:33:14,600
on these labels and you never get to actually,

2221
01:33:15,580 --> 01:33:17,420
there's almost not enough time for empathy,

2222
01:33:17,820 --> 01:33:19,200
for like looking at a person thinking,

2223
01:33:19,400 --> 01:33:20,220
well, maybe they're right.

2224
01:33:20,400 --> 01:33:23,460
Cause you're so busy categorizing them.

2225
01:33:24,280 --> 01:33:25,220
What's the fun in empathy?

2226
01:33:25,660 --> 01:33:27,640
And I mean, what's so interesting about this is that

2227
01:33:28,440 --> 01:33:32,260
so much, um, societal energy seems to be spent on these

2228
01:33:33,100 --> 01:33:36,600
nasty primal desires where essentially a lot of it's like,

2229
01:33:36,680 --> 01:33:38,140
please tell me who I'm allowed to hate.

2230
01:33:39,100 --> 01:33:41,500
Where can I legitimately be cruel?

2231
01:33:41,680 --> 01:33:42,600
Where can I actually

2232
01:33:42,600 --> 01:33:44,780
exercise some aggression against somebody?

2233
01:33:45,400 --> 01:33:49,780
Um, and it seems to sometimes be just finding new justifications for that.

2234
01:33:50,300 --> 01:33:51,260
And it's an understandable,

2235
01:33:51,260 --> 01:33:55,060
you know, human failing, uh, that sometimes can be

2236
01:33:55,080 --> 01:33:56,720
used to defend justice.

2237
01:33:57,000 --> 01:33:59,440
But again, it will never get you anywhere near the truth.

2238
01:34:00,500 --> 01:34:04,840
Uh, one interesting case that you cover about expertise is with COVID.

2239
01:34:05,000 --> 01:34:05,360
Yeah.

2240
01:34:05,700 --> 01:34:09,260
So how did cancel culture come into play on the topic of COVID?

2241
01:34:10,020 --> 01:34:17,640
Yeah, I think that COVID was a big blow to people's faith and expertise and cancel culture played a big role in that.

2242
01:34:18,420 --> 01:34:21,700
Um, I think one of the best examples of this is Jennifer Say at Levi's.

2243
01:34:21,960 --> 01:34:24,580
Um, she is a lovely woman.

2244
01:34:24,840 --> 01:34:27,740
Um, she was a vice president at Levi's.

2245
01:34:27,740 --> 01:34:29,460
Uh, she talked about actually potentially

2246
01:34:29,480 --> 01:34:31,160
to be the president of Levi's jeans.

2247
01:34:32,200 --> 01:34:35,440
And she was a big advocate for kids.

2248
01:34:36,060 --> 01:34:36,980
And when they started

2249
01:34:36,980 --> 01:34:38,020
shutting down the schools,

2250
01:34:38,680 --> 01:34:39,640
she started saying,

2251
01:34:40,000 --> 01:34:41,620
this is going to be a disaster.

2252
01:34:41,760 --> 01:34:42,780
This is going to hurt,

2253
01:34:43,490 --> 01:34:45,980
uh, the poor and disadvantaged kids the most.

2254
01:34:46,700 --> 01:34:50,520
Um, we have to figure out a way to open the schools back up.

2255
01:34:50,880 --> 01:34:53,120
And that was such a heretical point of view.

2256
01:34:53,680 --> 01:34:55,380
And the typical kind of cancel culture,

2257
01:34:55,930 --> 01:35:00,360
uh, wave took over as he had all sorts of petitions for her to be fired and that she

2258
01:35:00,360 --> 01:35:02,060
needed to apologize and all this kind of stuff.

2259
01:35:02,700 --> 01:35:03,660
And,

2260
01:35:04,040 --> 01:35:07,000
you know, she was offered, I think like an a million dollar severance,

2261
01:35:07,040 --> 01:35:09,520
which she wouldn't take because she wanted to tell the world

2262
01:35:09,520 --> 01:35:10,960
what she thought about this and,

2263
01:35:10,960 --> 01:35:13,100
and that she wanted to continue saying,

2264
01:35:13,100 --> 01:35:15,860
um, that she hadn't changed her mind,

2265
01:35:15,980 --> 01:35:17,840
that this was a disaster for young people.

2266
01:35:18,200 --> 01:35:20,180
And now that's kind of the

2267
01:35:20,200 --> 01:35:22,780
conventional wisdom and the research is pretty,

2268
01:35:22,820 --> 01:35:25,600
it is quite clear that this was devastating

2269
01:35:26,300 --> 01:35:28,660
to particularly disadvantaged youths.

2270
01:35:28,720 --> 01:35:30,200
Like people understand this as

2271
01:35:30,200 --> 01:35:32,000
being okay, she was probably right.

2272
01:35:32,400 --> 01:35:33,080
But one of the,

2273
01:35:33,080 --> 01:35:34,420
one of the really sad aspects

2274
01:35:34,420 --> 01:35:40,260
of cancel culture is people forget why you were canceled and they just know they hate you.

2275
01:35:40,660 --> 01:35:42,620
Um, there's this lingering kind of like,

2276
01:35:42,740 --> 01:35:43,400
well, I don't have to take

2277
01:35:43,400 --> 01:35:44,220
them seriously anymore.

2278
01:35:44,480 --> 01:35:44,940
But by the way,

2279
01:35:44,960 --> 01:35:46,220
did you notice they happened to be right

2280
01:35:46,380 --> 01:35:47,940
on something very important?

2281
01:35:48,860 --> 01:35:50,340
Now, one funny thing about freedom of speech,

2282
01:35:51,260 --> 01:35:55,780
freedom of speech wouldn't exist if you didn't also have the right to say things that were wrong.

2283
01:35:56,160 --> 01:35:56,720
Because if you can't,

2284
01:35:57,220 --> 01:35:59,120
you know, engage in idea for you,

2285
01:35:59,120 --> 01:36:00,820
if you can't actually speculate,

2286
01:36:01,080 --> 01:36:03,540
you'll never actually get to something that's right in the first place.

2287
01:36:04,000 --> 01:36:05,440
But it's especially galling

2288
01:36:05,740 --> 01:36:07,120
when people who were right

2289
01:36:07,660 --> 01:36:08,440
were censored

2290
01:36:09,060 --> 01:36:11,720
and you, uh, and never actually get the credit that they deserve.

2291
01:36:13,320 --> 01:36:16,920
Well, this might be a good place to ask a little bit more about the freedom of speech.

2292
01:36:18,100 --> 01:36:22,680
And so you said that included in the freedom of speech is to say things that are wrong.

2293
01:36:22,940 --> 01:36:23,440
Yep.

2294
01:36:23,860 --> 01:36:26,760
Um, what is your perspective on hate speech?

2295
01:36:27,840 --> 01:36:33,320
Hate speech is the best marketing campaign for censorship.

2296
01:36:33,440 --> 01:36:36,000
Um, and it came from academia,

2297
01:36:36,250 --> 01:36:38,260
um, of the, of the 20th century.

2298
01:36:38,460 --> 01:36:41,320
And that when I talked about the anti-free speech movement,

2299
01:36:41,800 --> 01:36:43,700
uh, that was one of their first inventions.

2300
01:36:43,900 --> 01:36:46,300
Um, there, there was a lot of talk about critical race theory,

2301
01:36:46,400 --> 01:36:48,680
um, and, and being against critical race theory

2302
01:36:49,240 --> 01:36:55,040
and fire will sue if you say that people can't advocate for it or teach it or research it,

2303
01:36:55,640 --> 01:36:59,920
because you do absolutely have the right to pursue it academically.

2304
01:37:00,680 --> 01:37:01,140
However,

2305
01:37:01,480 --> 01:37:08,660
every time someone mentioned CRT, they should also say the very first project of the people who founded CRT,

2306
01:37:09,020 --> 01:37:11,500
um, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, um, et cetera,

2307
01:37:12,060 --> 01:37:15,360
was to go, was to create this new category of unprotected

2308
01:37:15,460 --> 01:37:18,020
speech called hate speech and to get it banned.

2309
01:37:18,780 --> 01:37:20,420
The person who enabled this drift,

2310
01:37:20,420 --> 01:37:22,760
of course, was Herbert Marcuse in 1965,

2311
01:37:22,760 --> 01:37:25,700
you know, basically questioning whether or not free speech should be

2312
01:37:25,700 --> 01:37:26,820
a sacred value on the left.

2313
01:37:27,260 --> 01:37:29,640
And he was on the losing side for a really long time.

2314
01:37:29,780 --> 01:37:30,540
The liberals,

2315
01:37:30,840 --> 01:37:31,940
you know, the way I grew up,

2316
01:37:32,120 --> 01:37:35,500
that was basically being pro-free speech was synonymous with being

2317
01:37:35,960 --> 01:37:36,460
a liberal,

2318
01:37:36,920 --> 01:37:40,120
but that started to be etched away on campus.

2319
01:37:40,660 --> 01:37:42,240
And the way it was, was with,

2320
01:37:42,580 --> 01:37:43,980
with the idea of hate speech,

2321
01:37:44,260 --> 01:37:48,780
um, that, that essentially, oh, but you should, um, we can designate particularly

2322
01:37:48,840 --> 01:37:52,060
bad speech as, uh, not protected.

2323
01:37:52,320 --> 01:37:53,320
Um, and, and

2324
01:37:53,920 --> 01:37:54,880
who's going to enforce it?

2325
01:37:54,880 --> 01:37:55,720
Who's going to decide what

2326
01:37:55,840 --> 01:37:56,920
hate speech actually is?

2327
01:37:57,500 --> 01:38:01,020
Well, it's usually overwhelmingly can only happen in an environment

2328
01:38:01,020 --> 01:38:04,760
of really low viewpoint diversity because you have to actually agree on,

2329
01:38:04,960 --> 01:38:07,320
on what the most hateful and wrong things are.

2330
01:38:08,000 --> 01:38:10,580
And there's a bedrock principle.

2331
01:38:11,060 --> 01:38:16,600
Um, it's referred to this in a, in a great case about flag burning in the first amendment that I think all the

2332
01:38:16,600 --> 01:38:17,680
world could benefit from.

2333
01:38:18,140 --> 01:38:20,960
You can't ban speech just cause it's offensive.

2334
01:38:21,340 --> 01:38:22,640
It's too subjective.

2335
01:38:22,940 --> 01:38:24,920
It basically, it's one of the reasons why these,

2336
01:38:24,920 --> 01:38:27,400
uh, kind of codes have been more happily

2337
01:38:27,400 --> 01:38:29,040
adopted in places like Europe,

2338
01:38:29,060 --> 01:38:31,320
where they have a sense that there's like a modal German

2339
01:38:31,320 --> 01:38:32,520
or a modal Englishman.

2340
01:38:32,940 --> 01:38:36,360
Um, and I think this is offensive and therefore I can say that this is,

2341
01:38:36,680 --> 01:38:38,620
this is wrong in a more

2342
01:38:39,300 --> 01:38:42,480
multicultural, in a, in a genuinely more diverse country

2343
01:38:42,480 --> 01:38:47,180
that's never actually had an honest thought that there is a single kind of American.

2344
01:38:47,520 --> 01:38:49,120
There's never been like,

2345
01:38:49,500 --> 01:38:50,860
we had, we had the idea of uncle Sam,

2346
01:38:50,880 --> 01:38:52,100
but that was always kind of a joke.

2347
01:38:53,000 --> 01:38:57,580
Um, Boston always knew it wasn't Richmond always knew it wasn't Georgia always knew it wasn't, you know, Alaska.

2348
01:38:57,900 --> 01:39:03,180
Like we've always been a hodgepodge and we get in a society that diverse

2349
01:39:03,560 --> 01:39:04,260
that

2350
01:39:04,940 --> 01:39:07,180
you can't ban things simply because they're offensive.

2351
01:39:07,180 --> 01:39:09,320
Um, and that's, that's one of the

2352
01:39:09,320 --> 01:39:12,560
reasons why hate speech is not an unprotected category of speech.

2353
01:39:12,940 --> 01:39:14,020
And I, and I go further,

2354
01:39:14,380 --> 01:39:18,400
my theory on freedom of speech is slightly different than most other constitutional lawyers.

2355
01:39:19,560 --> 01:39:22,000
Um, and I think, and I think that's partially because some of the ways,

2356
01:39:22,120 --> 01:39:23,040
uh, some of these theories,

2357
01:39:23,160 --> 01:39:26,040
although a lot of them are really good are inadequate,

2358
01:39:26,500 --> 01:39:27,780
they're not expansive enough.

2359
01:39:28,300 --> 01:39:29,720
And I sometimes call my theory,

2360
01:39:29,740 --> 01:39:31,940
the pure informational theory of freedom of speech.

2361
01:39:32,400 --> 01:39:34,600
Um, or sometimes when I want to be fancy,

2362
01:39:34,640 --> 01:39:38,340
the lab and the looking glass theory and it's most

2363
01:39:38,340 --> 01:39:43,060
important tenant is that there is that if the goal is the project of human knowledge,

2364
01:39:43,200 --> 01:39:43,660
which is to know

2365
01:39:43,680 --> 01:39:44,580
the world it is,

2366
01:39:44,900 --> 01:39:50,420
is you cannot know the world as it is without knowing what people really think

2367
01:39:51,000 --> 01:39:54,920
and what people really think is an incredibly important fact to know.

2368
01:39:55,780 --> 01:39:57,380
So every time you're actually saying,

2369
01:39:58,040 --> 01:40:00,900
you can't say that you're actually depriving yourself of the knowledge

2370
01:40:00,900 --> 01:40:07,020
of what people really think you're causing what Tim or Karan who's on our board of advisors calls preference falsification.

2371
01:40:07,380 --> 01:40:09,940
Um, you end up with an inaccurate picture of the world,

2372
01:40:10,160 --> 01:40:10,840
which by the way,

2373
01:40:11,320 --> 01:40:12,300
in a lot of cases,

2374
01:40:12,700 --> 01:40:15,260
um, because there are activists who want to restrict more

2375
01:40:15,260 --> 01:40:18,620
speech, they actually tend to think that people are more prejudice than they,

2376
01:40:18,620 --> 01:40:19,960
uh, than they might be.

2377
01:40:19,960 --> 01:40:21,860
Um, and actually these kinds of restrictions,

2378
01:40:21,900 --> 01:40:23,120
there was a book called racial

2379
01:40:23,420 --> 01:40:29,420
paranoia, um, that came out in about 15 years ago that was making the point that the imposition

2380
01:40:29,420 --> 01:40:33,060
of some of these codes can sometimes make people think that the only thing holding you

2381
01:40:33,060 --> 01:40:35,060
back from being a raging racist,

2382
01:40:35,620 --> 01:40:36,840
um, are these codes.

2383
01:40:37,020 --> 01:40:38,060
So it must be really,

2384
01:40:38,060 --> 01:40:38,560
really bad.

2385
01:40:38,600 --> 01:40:40,020
It can actually make all of these things worse.

2386
01:40:40,380 --> 01:40:41,880
And one, which we talk about in the book,

2387
01:40:42,080 --> 01:40:44,800
one very real practical way it makes things worse

2388
01:40:45,400 --> 01:40:46,700
is when you censor people,

2389
01:40:47,140 --> 01:40:49,200
it doesn't change their opinion.

2390
01:40:49,440 --> 01:40:53,400
It just encourages them to not share it with people who will get them in trouble.

2391
01:40:53,740 --> 01:40:58,800
So it leads them to talk to people who they already agree with and group polarization takes off.

2392
01:40:59,360 --> 01:41:03,040
So we have some interesting data in the book, um, about how

2393
01:41:03,620 --> 01:41:06,200
driving people off of Twitter, for example, um,

2394
01:41:06,540 --> 01:41:08,200
you know, uh, in 2017.

2395
01:41:08,200 --> 01:41:13,000
Um, and then again, I think in 2020 driving people to gab led to, you know,

2396
01:41:13,300 --> 01:41:15,420
greater radicalization among those people.

2397
01:41:15,520 --> 01:41:17,860
It's a very predictable force.

2398
01:41:18,080 --> 01:41:20,180
Censorship doesn't actually change people's minds and

2399
01:41:20,180 --> 01:41:23,240
it pushes them in directions that actually by very,

2400
01:41:23,240 --> 01:41:25,320
you know, solid research will actually

2401
01:41:25,320 --> 01:41:26,320
make them more radicalized.

2402
01:41:26,720 --> 01:41:28,180
So yeah, I think that the,

2403
01:41:28,460 --> 01:41:30,780
I think that the attempt to ban hate speech,

2404
01:41:31,080 --> 01:41:32,780
it doesn't really protect us from it,

2405
01:41:33,040 --> 01:41:34,040
but it gives the government

2406
01:41:34,680 --> 01:41:40,540
such a vast, uh, weapon to use against us that we will regret giving them.

2407
01:41:41,500 --> 01:41:42,220
Is there a way to

2408
01:41:42,800 --> 01:41:45,040
sort of, to look at extreme cases,

2409
01:41:45,660 --> 01:41:47,120
to test this idea out a little bit?

2410
01:41:47,360 --> 01:41:48,520
So if we look on campus,

2411
01:41:49,420 --> 01:41:54,520
what's your view about allowing say white supremacists on campus

2412
01:41:54,520 --> 01:41:55,760
to do, to do speeches?

2413
01:41:55,920 --> 01:41:56,100
Okay.

2414
01:41:56,980 --> 01:42:02,140
I think you should be able to study what people think.

2415
01:42:02,240 --> 01:42:04,620
And I think it's important that we actually do.

2416
01:42:05,340 --> 01:42:06,060
So I think that,

2417
01:42:06,060 --> 01:42:08,080
you know, um, let's take for example, QAnon.

2418
01:42:09,060 --> 01:42:09,880
Yeah, QAnon is wrong.

2419
01:42:10,220 --> 01:42:13,060
Um, but where did it come from?

2420
01:42:13,380 --> 01:42:14,520
Why did they think that?

2421
01:42:14,640 --> 01:42:15,720
What's the motivation?

2422
01:42:15,820 --> 01:42:16,800
Who taught them it?

2423
01:42:16,800 --> 01:42:18,140
Who came up with these ideas?

2424
01:42:18,260 --> 01:42:20,220
This is important to understand history.

2425
01:42:20,360 --> 01:42:23,520
That's under important to understand modern American politics.

2426
01:42:24,220 --> 01:42:26,420
And so if you put your act,

2427
01:42:26,420 --> 01:42:26,840
if you put your

2428
01:42:26,860 --> 01:42:33,780
scholar hat on and which you should be curious about kind of everyone about where they're coming from.

2429
01:42:34,440 --> 01:42:35,080
Darrell Davis,

2430
01:42:35,380 --> 01:42:38,960
who I'm sure you're familiar with part of his goal was just simply

2431
01:42:38,960 --> 01:42:40,540
to get to know where people were coming from.

2432
01:42:40,600 --> 01:42:41,340
And in the process,

2433
01:42:41,860 --> 01:42:43,080
he actually de radicalized

2434
01:42:43,280 --> 01:42:46,660
a number of clients members when they actually realized that this black man

2435
01:42:47,260 --> 01:42:49,480
who would be friended them actually was compassionate,

2436
01:42:49,600 --> 01:42:50,500
was a decent person.

2437
01:42:50,660 --> 01:42:51,520
They realized all their

2438
01:42:51,520 --> 01:42:52,460
preconceptions were wrong.

2439
01:42:52,540 --> 01:42:55,120
So it can have a de radicalizing factor by the way,

2440
01:42:55,440 --> 01:42:56,440
but even when it doesn't,

2441
01:42:56,840 --> 01:43:00,720
it's still really important to know what the bad people in your society think.

2442
01:43:01,800 --> 01:43:03,640
Honestly, in some ways it's for,

2443
01:43:03,740 --> 01:43:04,540
for your own safety,

2444
01:43:04,560 --> 01:43:05,820
it's probably more important

2445
01:43:05,820 --> 01:43:07,860
to know what the bad people in your society actually think.

2446
01:43:08,120 --> 01:43:10,760
I personally, I don't know what you think about that,

2447
01:43:10,760 --> 01:43:12,120
but I personally think that freedom

2448
01:43:12,120 --> 01:43:13,320
of speech in cases like that,

2449
01:43:13,400 --> 01:43:14,420
like KKK and campus

2450
01:43:15,060 --> 01:43:17,800
can do more harm in the short term,

2451
01:43:18,660 --> 01:43:21,240
but much more benefit in the longterm.

2452
01:43:22,040 --> 01:43:24,000
Cause you can sometimes argue for like,

2453
01:43:24,180 --> 01:43:25,200
this is going to hurt.

2454
01:43:25,480 --> 01:43:25,820
Yeah.

2455
01:43:25,820 --> 01:43:26,620
In the short term.

2456
01:43:27,560 --> 01:43:30,540
But I mean, Harvey said this is like consider the alternative.

2457
01:43:31,110 --> 01:43:34,180
Cause you just kind of made the case for like,

2458
01:43:34,180 --> 01:43:35,520
this potentially would be a good

2459
01:43:35,520 --> 01:43:36,900
thing even in the short term.

2460
01:43:37,160 --> 01:43:38,160
And it often is, I think,

2461
01:43:38,660 --> 01:43:40,620
especially in a stable society like ours,

2462
01:43:41,400 --> 01:43:44,640
uh, with a strong middle-class, all these kinds of things where people have like the

2463
01:43:44,640 --> 01:43:46,060
comforts, the reason through things.

2464
01:43:46,260 --> 01:43:46,540
Yeah.

2465
01:43:46,660 --> 01:43:46,980
Um,

2466
01:43:47,500 --> 01:43:49,700
but you know, to me it's like,

2467
01:43:50,060 --> 01:43:51,320
even if it hurts in the short term,

2468
01:43:51,700 --> 01:43:54,000
even if it does create more hate in the short term,

2469
01:43:54,560 --> 01:43:56,060
the freedom of speech has this

2470
01:43:56,800 --> 01:43:58,360
really beneficial thing,

2471
01:43:58,720 --> 01:44:00,480
which is it helps you move towards the truth,

2472
01:44:00,480 --> 01:44:03,280
the entirety of society towards a deeper,

2473
01:44:03,280 --> 01:44:05,400
more accurate understanding of

2474
01:44:05,940 --> 01:44:09,740
life on earth, of society, of how people function,

2475
01:44:10,460 --> 01:44:10,940
of ethics,

2476
01:44:11,300 --> 01:44:12,540
of metaphysics, of everything.

2477
01:44:12,700 --> 01:44:15,980
And that in the longterm is a huge benefit.

2478
01:44:16,340 --> 01:44:18,560
It gets rid of the Nazis in the longterm,

2479
01:44:18,680 --> 01:44:20,500
even if it adds to the number

2480
01:44:20,500 --> 01:44:21,720
of Nazis in the short term.

2481
01:44:21,720 --> 01:44:21,820
Yeah.

2482
01:44:22,180 --> 01:44:26,000
Well, and meanwhile, just for, and the reality check part of this is people always bring up,

2483
01:44:26,120 --> 01:44:27,140
what about the clan on campus?

2484
01:44:27,240 --> 01:44:27,840
I'm like,

2485
01:44:28,300 --> 01:44:29,200
they're never invited.

2486
01:44:30,200 --> 01:44:33,580
Um, the, the, the, the, I haven't seen a case where they've been invited.

2487
01:44:34,040 --> 01:44:34,640
Um,

2488
01:44:35,020 --> 01:44:40,120
usually this, the, the clan argument gets thrown out when people are trying to excuse.

2489
01:44:40,380 --> 01:44:42,220
And that's why we shouted down Ben Shapiro.

2490
01:44:42,800 --> 01:44:45,620
And that's why you can't have Bill Maher on campus.

2491
01:44:45,820 --> 01:44:48,200
That's why, you know, and it's like, okay.

2492
01:44:48,240 --> 01:44:51,940
Um, you know, and it's, it's a little bit of that what aboutism again,

2493
01:44:52,020 --> 01:44:55,700
about being like, well, that thing over there is terrible and therefore this comedian shouldn't come.

2494
01:44:56,780 --> 01:44:59,640
Uh, so I do have a question maybe by way of advice,

2495
01:45:00,540 --> 01:45:00,900
you know,

2496
01:45:01,280 --> 01:45:02,940
interviewing folks and seeing

2497
01:45:02,950 --> 01:45:05,440
this like a, like a podcast as a platform

2498
01:45:07,320 --> 01:45:10,080
in deciding who to talk to and not,

2499
01:45:10,240 --> 01:45:12,760
not something I have to come face to face with on occasion.

2500
01:45:13,560 --> 01:45:17,220
My natural inclination before I started the podcast was I would talk to anyone

2501
01:45:18,000 --> 01:45:22,120
and including people, which I'm still interested in who are,

2502
01:45:22,480 --> 01:45:22,800
you know,

2503
01:45:23,460 --> 01:45:24,300
the current members of the

2504
01:45:24,300 --> 01:45:24,720
KKK.

2505
01:45:24,720 --> 01:45:26,240
And to me,

2506
01:45:26,940 --> 01:45:29,620
there's a responsibility to do that with skill.

2507
01:45:29,660 --> 01:45:30,500
Yeah.

2508
01:45:31,260 --> 01:45:35,340
Um, and that responsibility has been weighing heavier and heavier on me because

2509
01:45:35,340 --> 01:45:39,560
you realize how much skill it actually takes because you have to know,

2510
01:45:39,840 --> 01:45:40,980
to understand so much,

2511
01:45:41,360 --> 01:45:43,600
cause I've, I've come to understand that the devil

2512
01:45:44,140 --> 01:45:45,700
is always going to be charismatic.

2513
01:45:46,140 --> 01:45:46,400
Yeah.

2514
01:45:46,900 --> 01:45:48,800
Um, the devil is not going to look like the devil.

2515
01:45:48,800 --> 01:45:51,080
And so you have to realize you have to,

2516
01:45:51,540 --> 01:45:52,820
you can't always

2517
01:45:54,080 --> 01:45:57,280
come to the table with a deep compassion for another human being.

2518
01:45:57,420 --> 01:45:58,000
You have to have,

2519
01:45:58,100 --> 01:46:00,140
you know, like 90% compassion and,

2520
01:46:01,080 --> 01:46:03,800
and another 90% deep historical knowledge

2521
01:46:03,800 --> 01:46:06,840
about the context of the battles around this particular issue.

2522
01:46:06,940 --> 01:46:08,360
And that takes just a huge

2523
01:46:08,360 --> 01:46:10,460
amount of effort, but I don't know if there's

2524
01:46:11,080 --> 01:46:12,320
thoughts you have about this,

2525
01:46:12,520 --> 01:46:15,620
how to handle speech,

2526
01:46:16,860 --> 01:46:17,180
um,

2527
01:46:17,820 --> 01:46:18,520
in a way

2528
01:46:19,640 --> 01:46:22,100
without censoring, bringing it to the surface,

2529
01:46:22,400 --> 01:46:23,400
but in a way that creates

2530
01:46:23,400 --> 01:46:24,460
more love in the world.

2531
01:46:25,040 --> 01:46:26,000
I remember, um,

2532
01:46:26,780 --> 01:46:27,600
Steve Bannon

2533
01:46:28,160 --> 01:46:32,260
got disinvited from the New Yorker festival and Jim Carrey

2534
01:46:32,260 --> 01:46:34,960
freaked out and all sorts of other people freaked out and he got disinvited,

2535
01:46:35,280 --> 01:46:39,660
um, from, from the, and I got invited to speak on smirk on us about this.

2536
01:46:40,480 --> 01:46:42,000
And I was saying like, listen,

2537
01:46:44,740 --> 01:46:49,080
you don't have people to your conference because you agree with them.

2538
01:46:49,080 --> 01:46:53,980
Um, like that's the, the, we have to get out of this idea that that's because they were trying to make it

2539
01:46:53,980 --> 01:46:55,540
sound like that's an endorsement of Steve Bannon.

2540
01:46:55,600 --> 01:46:56,480
Like that's nonsense.

2541
01:46:56,580 --> 01:46:59,020
Like if you actually look at the opinions of all the people who are there,

2542
01:46:59,800 --> 01:47:01,040
you can't possibly endorse

2543
01:47:01,040 --> 01:47:03,860
all the opinions that all these other people who are going to be there actually have.

2544
01:47:04,460 --> 01:47:06,420
And then in the process of making that argument,

2545
01:47:06,640 --> 01:47:08,580
I got, um, and, and also of course,

2546
01:47:09,180 --> 01:47:12,660
the very classic, it's very valuable to know what someone Steve Bannon thinks.

2547
01:47:12,660 --> 01:47:13,300
You should be curious

2548
01:47:13,320 --> 01:47:13,980
about that.

2549
01:47:14,260 --> 01:47:16,080
And I remember someone arguing back saying,

2550
01:47:16,540 --> 01:47:17,940
well, what would you want someone

2551
01:47:17,940 --> 01:47:18,740
to interview a jihadi?

2552
01:47:18,940 --> 01:47:21,020
And I'm like, because at the moment,

2553
01:47:21,200 --> 01:47:22,300
like it was at the time when,

2554
01:47:22,300 --> 01:47:23,460
when ISIS was really in

2555
01:47:23,980 --> 01:47:24,260
going,

2556
01:47:24,700 --> 01:47:25,860
going for it.

2557
01:47:25,880 --> 01:47:27,620
Um, and I was like,

2558
01:47:28,020 --> 01:47:29,480
would you not want to go

2559
01:47:29,480 --> 01:47:32,980
to a talk where someone was trying to figure out what makes some of these people tick?

2560
01:47:33,240 --> 01:47:36,160
Um, because that changes your framing that essentially it's like,

2561
01:47:36,220 --> 01:47:37,280
no, it's curiosity.

2562
01:47:37,520 --> 01:47:40,200
It is the, uh, is the cure for a lot of this stuff.

2563
01:47:40,200 --> 01:47:44,060
And we need a great deal more curiosity and a lot less unwarranted certainty.

2564
01:47:44,760 --> 01:47:45,920
And there's a question of like,

2565
01:47:46,120 --> 01:47:48,000
how do you conduct such conversations?

2566
01:47:48,740 --> 01:47:48,840
And,

2567
01:47:49,540 --> 01:47:51,460
um, I feel deeply under qualified.

2568
01:47:51,700 --> 01:47:53,100
Who do you think is especially good at that?

2569
01:47:54,100 --> 01:47:57,440
I feel like documentary filmmakers usually do a much better job.

2570
01:47:57,860 --> 01:47:59,820
And the best job is usually done by biographers.

2571
01:48:00,320 --> 01:48:00,720
Yeah.

2572
01:48:00,720 --> 01:48:04,140
So the more time you give to a particular conversation,

2573
01:48:04,860 --> 01:48:06,660
like really deep thought and

2574
01:48:06,660 --> 01:48:09,920
historical context and studying the people, how they think,

2575
01:48:10,280 --> 01:48:10,900
looking at all different

2576
01:48:10,920 --> 01:48:13,300
perspectives, looking at the psychology of the person,

2577
01:48:13,780 --> 01:48:16,540
upbringing, their parents, their grandparents, all of this,

2578
01:48:17,100 --> 01:48:18,620
the more time you spend with that,

2579
01:48:19,760 --> 01:48:20,700
uh, the better,

2580
01:48:21,500 --> 01:48:24,000
the better the quality of the conversation is because

2581
01:48:24,580 --> 01:48:25,520
you get to understand the,

2582
01:48:26,700 --> 01:48:29,360
you get to really empathize with the person,

2583
01:48:29,740 --> 01:48:30,900
with the people he or she

2584
01:48:31,380 --> 01:48:34,340
represents, um, and you get to see the common humanity,

2585
01:48:34,520 --> 01:48:35,160
all of this.

2586
01:48:35,420 --> 01:48:38,900
I w in interviewers are often don't do that work.

2587
01:48:39,140 --> 01:48:39,420
Yeah.

2588
01:48:39,640 --> 01:48:43,840
Um, so like the best stuff I've seen is interviews that are part of a documentary.

2589
01:48:43,920 --> 01:48:44,360
Yeah.

2590
01:48:44,640 --> 01:48:46,200
But even now documentaries are like,

2591
01:48:46,220 --> 01:48:48,680
there's a huge incentive to do as quickly as possible.

2592
01:48:48,820 --> 01:48:51,860
There's not an incentive to really spend time with the person.

2593
01:48:52,000 --> 01:48:55,820
There's a great new documentary about Floyd Abrams that I really recommend.

2594
01:48:56,340 --> 01:48:59,160
We did a documentary about Ira Glasser called mighty Ira,

2595
01:48:59,300 --> 01:49:01,900
um, which was my video

2596
01:49:01,900 --> 01:49:06,540
team and my protege Nico Perino and Chris Mulvey and Aaron Reese put it together.

2597
01:49:07,140 --> 01:49:10,160
And it's just follows the life and times of, um,

2598
01:49:10,600 --> 01:49:13,120
of Ira Glasser, the former head of the ACLU.

2599
01:49:13,540 --> 01:49:14,980
If you could just linger on that,

2600
01:49:15,040 --> 01:49:16,360
that's a fascinating story.

2601
01:49:16,360 --> 01:49:16,860
Oh yeah.

2602
01:49:18,280 --> 01:49:18,440
Amazing.

2603
01:49:18,660 --> 01:49:20,240
Um, Ira, he wasn't a lawyer.

2604
01:49:20,440 --> 01:49:23,300
Um, he started working at the NYCLU,

2605
01:49:23,480 --> 01:49:24,600
New York civil liberties union

2606
01:49:25,220 --> 01:49:26,460
back in, I think the sixties.

2607
01:49:26,600 --> 01:49:26,780
He was,

2608
01:49:27,160 --> 01:49:30,540
uh, I think Robert Kennedy recommended that he go in that direction.

2609
01:49:30,600 --> 01:49:31,200
Um,

2610
01:49:32,520 --> 01:49:37,100
and he became the president of the ACLU right at the time that they were, um,

2611
01:49:37,480 --> 01:49:41,760
suffering from, uh, defending the Nazis at Skokie and Nico,

2612
01:49:41,760 --> 01:49:46,980
uh, and, and, and, and Aaron and Chris put together this and they'd never done a documentary before.

2613
01:49:47,320 --> 01:49:49,420
And it came out so, so well.

2614
01:49:50,040 --> 01:49:53,100
Um, and it tells the story of the Nazis in Skokie.

2615
01:49:53,720 --> 01:49:57,760
It tells the story of the case around it tells the story of the ACLU at the time.

2616
01:49:57,760 --> 01:49:59,540
And what a great leader Ira Glasser was.

2617
01:49:59,840 --> 01:50:02,280
And what's one of the things that's so great is like,

2618
01:50:02,300 --> 01:50:03,420
when you get to see

2619
01:50:04,020 --> 01:50:04,980
the Nazis at Skokie,

2620
01:50:05,600 --> 01:50:08,920
they come off like the idiots that you would expect them to.

2621
01:50:09,020 --> 01:50:10,340
There's a moment when the,

2622
01:50:10,340 --> 01:50:14,410
when the rally is not going very well and the leader gets flustered.

2623
01:50:14,980 --> 01:50:17,340
And it almost seems like he's going to like shout out kind of like,

2624
01:50:17,420 --> 01:50:20,280
you're, you're, you're, you're making this Nazi rally into a mockery.

2625
01:50:20,300 --> 01:50:20,420
And

2626
01:50:21,000 --> 01:50:26,760
so it showed how actually allowing the Nazis to speak at Skokie kind of took the wind out of their sails.

2627
01:50:27,180 --> 01:50:29,180
Like if they had the whole movement,

2628
01:50:30,040 --> 01:50:31,320
like everybody was kind of,

2629
01:50:31,320 --> 01:50:34,100
it all kind of dissolved after that because they looked like

2630
01:50:34,780 --> 01:50:36,120
racist fools that they were.

2631
01:50:36,280 --> 01:50:38,580
They were, you know, even blues brothers made jokes,

2632
01:50:38,580 --> 01:50:39,580
you know, jokes about them.

2633
01:50:40,160 --> 01:50:45,360
Um, and it, and it didn't turn into the disaster that people thought it was going to be just by letting them speak.

2634
01:50:45,920 --> 01:50:46,800
And Ira Glasser, okay.

2635
01:50:46,820 --> 01:50:47,560
So he has

2636
01:50:48,380 --> 01:50:54,800
this wonderful story about how Jackie Robinson joined the Brooklyn Dodgers and how

2637
01:50:55,320 --> 01:50:57,980
there was a moment when it was seeing someone,

2638
01:50:58,360 --> 01:51:03,800
an African American as on their literally on their team and how that really got them excited about

2639
01:51:03,800 --> 01:51:05,460
the cause of racial equality.

2640
01:51:05,660 --> 01:51:07,820
And that became a big part of what his life was.

2641
01:51:08,700 --> 01:51:11,920
And I just think of that as such a great metaphor is

2642
01:51:12,440 --> 01:51:14,540
expanding your circle and

2643
01:51:14,600 --> 01:51:19,920
seeing more people as being quite literally on your team is the solution to so many of these problems.

2644
01:51:20,560 --> 01:51:24,260
And I worry that one of the things that is absolutely just a fact of life

2645
01:51:24,260 --> 01:51:25,440
in America is like,

2646
01:51:26,000 --> 01:51:30,160
we do see each other more as enemy camps as opposed to people on the same team.

2647
01:51:30,940 --> 01:51:32,720
And that was actually something in the early days,

2648
01:51:33,060 --> 01:51:34,200
like me and Will Creely,

2649
01:51:34,260 --> 01:51:39,700
the legal director of fire wrote about the forthcoming free speech challenges of everyone being on Facebook.

2650
01:51:41,200 --> 01:51:46,300
And one thing that I was hoping was that as more people were exposing

2651
01:51:46,300 --> 01:51:47,340
more of their lives,

2652
01:51:47,700 --> 01:51:49,720
we'd realize a lot of these things we knew intellectually,

2653
01:51:50,100 --> 01:51:52,780
like kids go to the bar and get drunk and do stupid things.

2654
01:51:53,380 --> 01:51:53,920
Um,

2655
01:51:54,380 --> 01:51:55,460
that, uh,

2656
01:51:55,780 --> 01:51:56,620
that when we started

2657
01:51:56,690 --> 01:52:01,500
seeing the evidence of them doing stupid things that we might be shocked at first,

2658
01:52:01,520 --> 01:52:03,540
but then eventually get more sophisticated and be like,

2659
01:52:03,540 --> 01:52:04,720
well, come on, people are like that.

2660
01:52:05,400 --> 01:52:06,960
That never actually really seemed to happen.

2661
01:52:07,300 --> 01:52:09,880
Um, that, that, that I don't think that I think

2662
01:52:09,920 --> 01:52:13,920
that there are plenty of things we know about human nature and we know about dumb things

2663
01:52:13,920 --> 01:52:20,340
people say, uh, and we've, we've made it into an environment where there's just someone

2664
01:52:20,340 --> 01:52:22,220
out there waiting to be kind of like,

2665
01:52:23,120 --> 01:52:24,300
Oh, remember that dumb thing you said we were

2666
01:52:24,300 --> 01:52:24,700
14?

2667
01:52:24,980 --> 01:52:26,620
Well, I'm going to make sure that you don't get into the,

2668
01:52:26,720 --> 01:52:27,700
to your dream school because

2669
01:52:27,720 --> 01:52:28,200
of that.

2670
01:52:28,380 --> 01:52:29,680
This offense archeology.

2671
01:52:30,300 --> 01:52:31,140
That's not my term though.

2672
01:52:31,340 --> 01:52:32,040
It's a great term.

2673
01:52:32,080 --> 01:52:38,160
We steal from the best digging through someone's past comments to find a speech that hasn't aged well.

2674
01:52:38,940 --> 01:52:39,760
And that one's tactical.

2675
01:52:39,940 --> 01:52:41,380
Like that, that one isn't just someone not being

2676
01:52:41,380 --> 01:52:41,880
empathetic.

2677
01:52:41,960 --> 01:52:44,560
They're like, I'm going to punish you for this or,

2678
01:52:44,740 --> 01:52:45,240
and that's one of the reasons

2679
01:52:45,240 --> 01:52:47,200
why I got depressed writing this book

2680
01:52:47,720 --> 01:52:52,680
because you know, it's already, there's already people who don't love me because of coddling the American mind,

2681
01:52:52,820 --> 01:52:54,300
usually based on a misunderstanding

2682
01:52:54,440 --> 01:52:56,880
of what we actually said and coddling in the American mind, but nonetheless.

2683
01:52:57,940 --> 01:53:04,280
Uh, but on this one, you know, like I'm calling out people for being very cruel in a lot of cases,

2684
01:53:05,120 --> 01:53:09,240
but put, but one thing that was really scary about studying a lot of

2685
01:53:09,240 --> 01:53:11,560
these cases is that once you have that target on your back,

2686
01:53:11,680 --> 01:53:14,220
what they're going to try to cancel you for could be anything.

2687
01:53:14,860 --> 01:53:17,100
You know, they might go back into your old,

2688
01:53:17,220 --> 01:53:20,840
your old boats, find something that you said in 1995,

2689
01:53:21,040 --> 01:53:22,500
you know, do something,

2690
01:53:23,020 --> 01:53:26,980
um, where essentially it looks like it's this entire other thing,

2691
01:53:27,160 --> 01:53:28,500
but really what they're,

2692
01:53:28,500 --> 01:53:30,740
what's going on is they didn't like your opinion.

2693
01:53:30,820 --> 01:53:32,400
They didn't like your point of view on something.

2694
01:53:32,620 --> 01:53:33,480
And they're going to find a,

2695
01:53:33,560 --> 01:53:34,860
find a way that from now on,

2696
01:53:34,920 --> 01:53:35,900
anytime your name comes up,

2697
01:53:36,220 --> 01:53:38,620
it's like, Oh, remember this, this thing I didn't like about them.

2698
01:53:39,100 --> 01:53:41,280
And it's again, it's cruel.

2699
01:53:41,300 --> 01:53:42,980
It doesn't get you anywhere closer to the truth.

2700
01:53:43,340 --> 01:53:45,540
And, but it is a little scary to stick your neck out.

2701
01:53:46,700 --> 01:53:47,080
Okay.

2702
01:53:47,160 --> 01:53:48,120
In terms of solutions,

2703
01:53:48,460 --> 01:53:49,700
I'm going to ask you a few things.

2704
01:53:50,020 --> 01:53:50,320
So one,

2705
01:53:51,440 --> 01:53:52,600
uh, parenting.

2706
01:53:52,860 --> 01:53:53,060
Yeah.

2707
01:53:54,080 --> 01:53:54,820
Five and seven year old.

2708
01:53:56,380 --> 01:53:58,240
So I'm sure you've figured it all out then.

2709
01:53:58,240 --> 01:53:59,160
Oh God, no.

2710
01:53:59,340 --> 01:54:00,780
From a free speech perspective.

2711
01:54:01,180 --> 01:54:01,600
Yeah.

2712
01:54:01,780 --> 01:54:03,860
Uh, from a free speech culture perspective,

2713
01:54:03,960 --> 01:54:04,760
how to be a good parent.

2714
01:54:05,380 --> 01:54:05,600
Yeah.

2715
01:54:06,340 --> 01:54:10,780
I think the first quality you should be cultivating in your children,

2716
01:54:10,780 --> 01:54:12,820
if you want to have a free speech culture

2717
01:54:14,140 --> 01:54:15,200
is curiosity

2718
01:54:16,100 --> 01:54:20,580
and an awareness of the vastness that will always be unknown.

2719
01:54:21,560 --> 01:54:24,500
And getting my kids excited about the idea that's like,

2720
01:54:24,640 --> 01:54:25,540
we're going to spend our whole

2721
01:54:25,540 --> 01:54:26,600
lives learning about stuff.

2722
01:54:27,640 --> 01:54:32,680
And it's fast and exciting and endless and we'll never make

2723
01:54:32,680 --> 01:54:33,600
a big dent in it,

2724
01:54:33,660 --> 01:54:35,240
but the journey will be amazing.

2725
01:54:36,120 --> 01:54:38,760
But only fools think they know everything.

2726
01:54:39,560 --> 01:54:41,660
Um, and sometimes dangerous fools at that.

2727
01:54:42,840 --> 01:54:44,560
So giving the sense of intellectual humility

2728
01:54:45,060 --> 01:54:45,680
early on

2729
01:54:46,220 --> 01:54:47,960
being also, you know,

2730
01:54:48,360 --> 01:54:50,380
saying things that actually do sound kind of old fashioned,

2731
01:54:50,760 --> 01:54:52,140
like, but I say things to my kids,

2732
01:54:52,540 --> 01:54:53,020
like, listen,

2733
01:54:53,780 --> 01:54:54,280
if you

2734
01:54:55,540 --> 01:54:57,720
enjoy study and work,

2735
01:54:58,040 --> 01:54:59,480
both things that I very much enjoy,

2736
01:54:59,520 --> 01:55:00,320
I do for fun.

2737
01:55:01,400 --> 01:55:04,220
Um, your life is going to feel great and it's going to feel easy.

2738
01:55:05,000 --> 01:55:07,900
Um, so some of, some, you know, some of those old fashioned virtues are things

2739
01:55:07,900 --> 01:55:08,600
I try to preach,

2740
01:55:08,900 --> 01:55:12,680
um, counterintuitive stuff like outdoor time playing,

2741
01:55:12,680 --> 01:55:16,720
um, having time that are not intermediate experiences is really,

2742
01:55:16,760 --> 01:55:18,120
uh, is really important.

2743
01:55:19,020 --> 01:55:19,440
And

2744
01:55:20,120 --> 01:55:25,800
little things like, um, I talk about in the book about when my kids are watching something that's scary

2745
01:55:25,920 --> 01:55:28,320
and I'm not talking about like zombie movies,

2746
01:55:28,320 --> 01:55:30,240
you know, I'm talking about like a cartoon

2747
01:55:30,240 --> 01:55:31,520
that has kind of a scary moment

2748
01:55:32,300 --> 01:55:34,220
and saying that they want to turn the TV off.

2749
01:55:34,660 --> 01:55:36,960
And I, and I talked to them and I say, listen,

2750
01:55:37,920 --> 01:55:40,180
I miss it next to you and we're going to finish this show

2751
01:55:41,080 --> 01:55:44,520
and I want you to tell me what you think of, of this afterwards.

2752
01:55:45,220 --> 01:55:47,560
And I sat next to my sons.

2753
01:55:48,300 --> 01:55:49,920
Um, and by the end of it,

2754
01:55:49,980 --> 01:55:51,380
every single time I,

2755
01:55:51,460 --> 01:55:52,460
you know, when I asked them,

2756
01:55:52,580 --> 01:55:53,940
was that as scary as you thought it was going to be?

2757
01:55:54,660 --> 01:55:55,140
And there was like,

2758
01:55:55,240 --> 01:55:56,260
no daddy, that was fine.

2759
01:55:56,300 --> 01:55:58,460
And I'm like, that's one of the great lessons in life.

2760
01:55:59,060 --> 01:56:00,060
The fear that you don't

2761
01:56:00,800 --> 01:56:05,000
go through becomes much bigger in your head than actually simply facing it.

2762
01:56:05,620 --> 01:56:07,340
That's one of the reasons why I'm fighting back against this culture.

2763
01:56:07,500 --> 01:56:08,220
I love,

2764
01:56:08,540 --> 01:56:14,420
you know, for all of our kids to be able to grow up in an environment where people give you grace and, you know,

2765
01:56:15,160 --> 01:56:17,860
accept the fact that sometimes people are going to say things that piss you off,

2766
01:56:18,100 --> 01:56:20,740
take seriously the possibility and be wrong and,

2767
01:56:20,740 --> 01:56:21,700
and, uh, be curious.

2768
01:56:22,260 --> 01:56:24,560
Well, I'm, I have hope that the thing you mentioned,

2769
01:56:24,560 --> 01:56:26,560
which is because so much of young

2770
01:56:26,560 --> 01:56:28,400
people's stuff is on the internet

2771
01:56:29,040 --> 01:56:31,600
that they're going to give each other a break because then

2772
01:56:31,600 --> 01:56:32,920
everybody is cancel worthy.

2773
01:56:33,600 --> 01:56:35,700
Generation Z hates cancel culture the most.

2774
01:56:35,840 --> 01:56:37,860
And that's another reason why it's like people

2775
01:56:37,960 --> 01:56:39,240
still claiming this is even happening.

2776
01:56:39,460 --> 01:56:39,720
It's kind of like,

2777
01:56:39,800 --> 01:56:41,520
no, you actually can ask kids

2778
01:56:41,980 --> 01:56:44,320
what they think of cancel culture and they hate it.

2779
01:56:44,600 --> 01:56:47,080
Yeah. Well, I kind of think of them as like the immune system.

2780
01:56:47,480 --> 01:56:47,600
That's like,

2781
01:56:48,360 --> 01:56:50,080
that's the culture waking up to like,

2782
01:56:50,140 --> 01:56:51,000
no, this is not a good thing.

2783
01:56:51,260 --> 01:56:52,520
I am glad though.

2784
01:56:52,620 --> 01:56:55,360
I mean, I, I, I'm one of those kids who,

2785
01:56:55,360 --> 01:56:56,820
you know, is really glad that

2786
01:56:56,820 --> 01:57:01,620
I was a little kid in the eighties and a teenager in the nineties because having everything

2787
01:57:01,760 --> 01:57:04,560
potentially online, uh, it's, it's not a,

2788
01:57:04,940 --> 01:57:05,520
an upbringing.

2789
01:57:05,820 --> 01:57:05,980
I envy.

2790
01:57:06,880 --> 01:57:11,080
Well, I, because you can also do the absolute free speech.

2791
01:57:11,920 --> 01:57:12,660
I like

2792
01:57:13,380 --> 01:57:20,000
leading into it where I hope for future where a lot of our insecurities,

2793
01:57:20,540 --> 01:57:20,860
flaws,

2794
01:57:21,580 --> 01:57:22,940
everything's out there.

2795
01:57:23,380 --> 01:57:25,700
And to be raw honest with it,

2796
01:57:25,800 --> 01:57:28,600
uh, I think that leads to a better world.

2797
01:57:28,840 --> 01:57:29,960
Cause the flaws are beautiful.

2798
01:57:30,340 --> 01:57:32,120
I mean, that's the flaws is the,

2799
01:57:32,120 --> 01:57:34,300
uh, the basic ingredients of human connection.

2800
01:57:34,780 --> 01:57:35,400
Uh, Robert Wright,

2801
01:57:35,820 --> 01:57:37,000
he wrote a book on,

2802
01:57:37,120 --> 01:57:38,280
uh, on, on Buddhism.

2803
01:57:38,340 --> 01:57:40,100
Um, and I talked about trying

2804
01:57:40,100 --> 01:57:41,940
to use social media from a,

2805
01:57:42,080 --> 01:57:43,840
from a Buddhist perspective and like,

2806
01:57:44,000 --> 01:57:48,220
as if you're, as if it's the collective unconscious meditating and

2807
01:57:48,800 --> 01:57:50,060
seeing those little like

2808
01:57:50,580 --> 01:57:56,820
angry bits that are trying to cancel you or get you to shut up and just kind of like letting them go the

2809
01:57:56,820 --> 01:57:58,940
same way you're supposed to watch your thoughts kind of trail off.

2810
01:57:59,240 --> 01:58:02,700
I would love to see that like visualized whatever the,

2811
01:58:02,940 --> 01:58:04,520
whatever the drama going on,

2812
01:58:04,800 --> 01:58:07,180
going on, just seeing the sea of it,

2813
01:58:07,180 --> 01:58:08,600
of the collective consciousness,

2814
01:58:08,660 --> 01:58:11,220
just processing this and having

2815
01:58:11,220 --> 01:58:14,200
a little like panic attack and just kind of like,

2816
01:58:14,200 --> 01:58:16,860
yeah, reading it in, looking at the little sort of hateful,

2817
01:58:16,860 --> 01:58:18,360
angry voices kind of pop up and be like,

2818
01:58:18,480 --> 01:58:19,360
okay, there you are.

2819
01:58:19,740 --> 01:58:21,220
And I'm still focused on,

2820
01:58:21,220 --> 01:58:22,960
on that thing because that is,

2821
01:58:23,600 --> 01:58:25,240
that, that is one of the things is,

2822
01:58:26,280 --> 01:58:26,300
okay.

2823
01:58:26,480 --> 01:58:28,440
Yeah, actually this is probably late in the game to be,

2824
01:58:28,440 --> 01:58:30,740
to giving my grand theory on this stuff.

2825
01:58:31,760 --> 01:58:32,600
Um, but,

2826
01:58:32,920 --> 01:58:34,580
uh, never too late.

2827
01:58:35,220 --> 01:58:35,360
So,

2828
01:58:35,720 --> 01:58:37,060
so what I was studying,

2829
01:58:37,060 --> 01:58:39,740
um, in law school, when I ran out of first amendment classes,

2830
01:58:39,740 --> 01:58:42,620
um, I decided to study censorship during the tutor

2831
01:58:42,620 --> 01:58:46,080
dynasty, uh, because that's where we get our ideas of prior restraint,

2832
01:58:46,080 --> 01:58:49,220
uh, that, that come from the licensing of the printing press,

2833
01:58:49,360 --> 01:58:51,040
um, which was something that Henry the eighth

2834
01:58:51,040 --> 01:58:52,520
was the first to do where basically,

2835
01:58:53,060 --> 01:58:56,140
um, the idea was that if you can't print anything

2836
01:58:56,160 --> 01:58:58,360
in England, unless it's with these, uh,

2837
01:58:59,200 --> 01:59:01,080
uh, your majesty approved printers,

2838
01:59:01,580 --> 01:59:06,840
um, it will prevent heretical work and anti Henry the eighth stuff from coming out.

2839
01:59:07,060 --> 01:59:08,380
I'm pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty,

2840
01:59:08,880 --> 01:59:10,000
pretty, um,

2841
01:59:10,420 --> 01:59:11,700
efficient idea if nothing else.

2842
01:59:12,400 --> 01:59:19,100
Um, and I always, so he started getting angry at the printing press around 1521 and then pass something

2843
01:59:19,120 --> 01:59:23,880
that required prints prints to be along with parliament in, in, uh, 1538.

2844
01:59:24,620 --> 01:59:27,760
Uh, and I always think of that as kind of like where we are now,

2845
01:59:28,260 --> 01:59:29,560
um, because we have this,

2846
01:59:29,920 --> 01:59:33,040
we had the, back then we had the original disruptive technology,

2847
01:59:33,160 --> 01:59:34,120
you know, writing was probably,

2848
01:59:34,420 --> 01:59:36,980
but the next one, which, which was the printing press,

2849
01:59:37,020 --> 01:59:38,340
which was absolutely calamitous.

2850
01:59:38,560 --> 01:59:42,920
And I mean, and I, and I say calamitous on purpose because in the short term,

2851
01:59:43,380 --> 01:59:44,580
the witch hunts went up

2852
01:59:44,580 --> 01:59:49,060
like crazy because the printing press allowed you to get that manual on how to find witches

2853
01:59:49,460 --> 01:59:52,540
that the religious wars went crazy.

2854
01:59:52,780 --> 01:59:56,360
Um, it led to all sorts of distress, misinformation,

2855
01:59:57,300 --> 01:59:57,700
nastiness.

2856
01:59:58,460 --> 02:00:00,760
And Henry the eighth was trying to put the genie back in the bottle.

2857
02:00:00,880 --> 02:00:01,980
You know, he was kind of like,

2858
02:00:01,980 --> 02:00:04,680
I can, I can, I can, I want to use this for good.

2859
02:00:04,860 --> 02:00:06,380
Like, uh, like I feel like it could,

2860
02:00:06,500 --> 02:00:07,140
it could be used,

2861
02:00:07,780 --> 02:00:12,580
but he was in an unavoidable period of epistemic anarchy.

2862
02:00:13,320 --> 02:00:17,360
There's nothing you can do to make the period after the printing press come,

2863
02:00:17,560 --> 02:00:19,960
uh, came out to be a non disruptive,

2864
02:00:20,180 --> 02:00:23,900
non crazy period other than like absolute totalitarianism

2865
02:00:23,900 --> 02:00:25,500
and destroy all the print presses,

2866
02:00:25,880 --> 02:00:28,200
which simply was not possible in Europe.

2867
02:00:28,920 --> 02:00:30,060
So I feel like

2868
02:00:30,060 --> 02:00:31,220
that's kind of like where we are now.

2869
02:00:32,140 --> 02:00:33,700
That disruption came from adding,

2870
02:00:33,900 --> 02:00:38,280
I think, you know, several million people to the European conversation and that eventually the global

2871
02:00:38,280 --> 02:00:43,740
conversation, but eventually it became the best tool for disconfirmation,

2872
02:00:43,900 --> 02:00:47,320
um, for getting rid of falsity, for spotting bad ideas.

2873
02:00:48,420 --> 02:00:49,800
And it's the benefits,

2874
02:00:49,900 --> 02:00:51,140
the long-term benefits

2875
02:00:52,000 --> 02:00:54,940
of the printing press are in calculably great.

2876
02:00:55,780 --> 02:00:58,100
Um, and that's what gives me some optimism

2877
02:00:58,100 --> 02:00:59,940
for where we are now with social media,

2878
02:01:00,000 --> 02:01:02,580
cause we are in that unavoidably anarchical period.

2879
02:01:02,580 --> 02:01:04,440
And I do worry that, that there,

2880
02:01:05,180 --> 02:01:07,720
um, uh, that there are attempts in States to pass things

2881
02:01:07,720 --> 02:01:09,240
to try to put the genie back in the bottle.

2882
02:01:09,300 --> 02:01:13,160
Like if we ban a tick tock or we say that,

2883
02:01:13,520 --> 02:01:15,880
um, nobody under 18 can be on the,

2884
02:01:15,980 --> 02:01:17,940
on the internet, unless they have parental permission,

2885
02:01:18,660 --> 02:01:20,620
we're going at something that

2886
02:01:22,140 --> 02:01:25,840
no amount of sort of top down is going to be able to fix it.

2887
02:01:26,000 --> 02:01:30,000
We have to culturally adapt to the fact of it, um,

2888
02:01:30,420 --> 02:01:33,580
uh, in ways that make us wiser that actually,

2889
02:01:33,580 --> 02:01:41,160
um, and allow it potentially to be that wonderful engine for disconfirmation that we're nowhere near yet, by the way,

2890
02:01:41,560 --> 02:01:42,680
but think about

2891
02:01:43,300 --> 02:01:43,480
it.

2892
02:01:43,480 --> 02:01:46,040
Additional millions of eyes on problems,

2893
02:01:46,380 --> 02:01:48,060
um, thanks to the printing press helped

2894
02:01:48,060 --> 02:01:50,560
create the scientific revolution, the enlightenment,

2895
02:01:50,960 --> 02:01:52,000
the discovery ignorance.

2896
02:01:53,380 --> 02:01:55,800
Um, we now have added billions

2897
02:01:56,360 --> 02:01:58,620
of eyes and voices to solving problems.

2898
02:01:58,780 --> 02:02:01,320
And we're just, we're using them for cat videos and canceling.

2899
02:02:02,760 --> 02:02:05,660
But that those are just the early days of the printing press.

2900
02:02:05,840 --> 02:02:08,460
All starts with the cats and the canceling.

2901
02:02:08,480 --> 02:02:11,900
Is there something about X about Twitter,

2902
02:02:12,640 --> 02:02:15,520
which is perhaps the most energetic

2903
02:02:16,140 --> 02:02:17,720
source of cats and canceling.

2904
02:02:17,900 --> 02:02:19,680
It seems like the collective unconscious of the species.

2905
02:02:19,840 --> 02:02:28,980
I mean, like it's one of these things where the tendency to want to see patterns in history sometimes can limit

2906
02:02:30,220 --> 02:02:34,580
the actual batshit crazy experience of what history actually is.

2907
02:02:34,700 --> 02:02:38,620
Because yes, we, we, we have these nice comforting ideas that it's going to be like last time.

2908
02:02:38,880 --> 02:02:39,700
We don't know.

2909
02:02:39,960 --> 02:02:41,860
It hasn't happened yet.

2910
02:02:42,420 --> 02:02:43,300
And I think

2911
02:02:43,920 --> 02:02:49,340
how unusual Twitter is because I think of it as like the kids,

2912
02:02:49,460 --> 02:02:50,120
because people talk about,

2913
02:02:50,800 --> 02:02:54,820
you know, writing and mass communications and,

2914
02:02:54,900 --> 02:02:58,740
uh, as being expanding the size of our collective brain.

2915
02:02:59,400 --> 02:03:02,220
But now we're kind of looking at our collective brain in real time.

2916
02:03:03,000 --> 02:03:07,860
And it's filled just like our own brains with all sorts of like little crazy things that pop up and,

2917
02:03:07,860 --> 02:03:11,720
and, and, and appear like virtual particles kind of all over the place of, of people,

2918
02:03:12,020 --> 02:03:13,380
um, you know,

2919
02:03:13,740 --> 02:03:15,440
reacting in real time to things.

2920
02:03:15,680 --> 02:03:18,580
There's never been anything even vaguely like it.

2921
02:03:18,580 --> 02:03:20,320
And it can be at its worst,

2922
02:03:20,920 --> 02:03:21,180
awful to see.

2923
02:03:21,800 --> 02:03:22,900
At its best,

2924
02:03:23,240 --> 02:03:29,640
sometimes seeing people like just getting a euphoric over something going on and cracking absolutely brilliant immediate jokes,

2925
02:03:29,660 --> 02:03:30,780
you know, at the same time,

2926
02:03:31,120 --> 02:03:31,960
it can be,

2927
02:03:32,620 --> 02:03:34,820
it can't even be a joyful experience.

2928
02:03:35,400 --> 02:03:36,080
Um, I, I feel like,

2929
02:03:36,760 --> 02:03:44,880
uh, and I live in a neighborhood now on X where I mostly deal with people that I think are actually thoughtful,

2930
02:03:44,940 --> 02:03:45,180
even if I disagree with them.

2931
02:03:45,420 --> 02:03:45,820
Um,

2932
02:03:47,020 --> 02:03:49,220
and, and it's not such a bad experience.

2933
02:03:49,600 --> 02:03:55,880
I occasionally run into those other sort of what I call neighborhoods on X where it's just all canceling all nastiness.

2934
02:03:55,880 --> 02:03:57,940
And it's always kind of an unpleasant visit to those places.

2935
02:03:58,580 --> 02:04:00,540
I'm not saying the whole thing needs to be,

2936
02:04:00,540 --> 02:04:02,460
uh, like, like my experience,

2937
02:04:02,820 --> 02:04:03,980
but I do think that

2938
02:04:04,820 --> 02:04:12,120
the reason why people keep on coming back to it is it reveals raw aspects of humanity that sometimes we prefer to pretend don't exist.

2939
02:04:12,560 --> 02:04:12,820
Yeah.

2940
02:04:13,500 --> 02:04:13,880
Yeah.

2941
02:04:13,880 --> 02:04:15,240
But also it's totally new.

2942
02:04:15,460 --> 02:04:15,880
Like you said,

2943
02:04:16,260 --> 02:04:17,300
it's just a virality,

2944
02:04:17,360 --> 02:04:22,380
the speed, the news travels, that opinions travel, that the battle over ideas travels.

2945
02:04:22,740 --> 02:04:23,860
The battle over information too.

2946
02:04:24,160 --> 02:04:24,380
Yeah.

2947
02:04:24,440 --> 02:04:26,720
Of what is true and not lies traveled,

2948
02:04:27,160 --> 02:04:29,180
the old Mark Twain thing pretty fast on the

2949
02:04:29,180 --> 02:04:29,440
thing.

2950
02:04:29,440 --> 02:04:29,940
Yeah.

2951
02:04:29,940 --> 02:04:33,800
And then it changes your understanding of how to interpret

2952
02:04:34,420 --> 02:04:35,140
information.

2953
02:04:35,260 --> 02:04:36,720
It also stress you out to no end.

2954
02:04:37,280 --> 02:04:38,760
I remembered to get off it sometimes.

2955
02:04:39,060 --> 02:04:41,520
The stats are pretty bad on mental health, uh,

2956
02:04:41,960 --> 02:04:42,620
with, with, with young people.

2957
02:04:42,780 --> 02:04:46,540
And I'm definitely in the camp of people who think that social media is part of that.

2958
02:04:46,700 --> 02:04:48,260
I understand the debate,

2959
02:04:48,300 --> 02:04:51,100
but I'm pretty persuaded that one of the things that is,

2960
02:04:51,160 --> 02:04:56,340
hasn't been great for mental health of people is this just constantly being exposed.

2961
02:04:56,920 --> 02:04:57,360
Yeah, absolutely.

2962
02:04:57,540 --> 02:05:02,220
I think it's possible to create social media that makes a huge

2963
02:05:02,220 --> 02:05:04,220
amount of money, makes people happy to me,

2964
02:05:04,280 --> 02:05:07,490
like it's possible to align the incentives.

2965
02:05:08,260 --> 02:05:08,900
So in terms of,

2966
02:05:09,540 --> 02:05:10,580
yeah, making teenagers,

2967
02:05:10,920 --> 02:05:11,260
making,

2968
02:05:11,760 --> 02:05:12,920
uh, every stage of life, giving

2969
02:05:13,560 --> 02:05:19,320
you long-term fulfillment and happiness with your physical existence outside of the social media and on social media,

2970
02:05:19,860 --> 02:05:21,420
helping you grow as a human being,

2971
02:05:22,220 --> 02:05:25,640
uh, helping challenge you just the right amount and just the right amount of cat videos,

2972
02:05:25,880 --> 02:05:29,180
whatever gives this full rich human experience.

2973
02:05:29,940 --> 02:05:30,760
I think it's just

2974
02:05:31,340 --> 02:05:32,640
a machine learning problem.

2975
02:05:32,680 --> 02:05:35,700
It's like, it's not easy to create a feed.

2976
02:05:36,380 --> 02:05:38,960
So the easiest feed you could do is like maximize engagement.

2977
02:05:39,340 --> 02:05:39,740
Yeah.

2978
02:05:39,740 --> 02:05:41,020
But that's just like a really dumb algorithm.

2979
02:05:41,730 --> 02:05:42,280
Yeah.

2980
02:05:42,600 --> 02:05:43,800
It's like for the,

2981
02:05:43,840 --> 02:05:48,240
for the algorithm to learn enough about you to understand

2982
02:05:48,960 --> 02:05:52,360
what will make you truly happy as a human being to grow long-term.

2983
02:05:52,860 --> 02:05:55,100
That's just a very difficult problem to solve.

2984
02:05:55,720 --> 02:05:56,720
You ever watch Fleabag?

2985
02:05:57,340 --> 02:05:59,560
It's absolutely brilliant, a British show.

2986
02:05:59,560 --> 02:06:01,940
Um, and it sets you up.

2987
02:06:02,040 --> 02:06:05,920
One of the reasons why like people love it so much is it sets you up that you're watching like a,

2988
02:06:06,020 --> 02:06:07,940
a raunchy British Sex and the City,

2989
02:06:08,160 --> 02:06:10,060
except the main character is the most prominent.

2990
02:06:11,080 --> 02:06:11,620
Um,

2991
02:06:12,580 --> 02:06:13,400
it's like, okay.

2992
02:06:13,620 --> 02:06:16,480
And you kind of roll your eyes a little bit and it's kind of funny and it's kind of cute

2993
02:06:16,620 --> 02:06:18,480
and kind of spicy.

2994
02:06:19,340 --> 02:06:24,140
And then you realize that the person is actually kind of suffering and having a hard time

2995
02:06:24,800 --> 02:06:25,780
and it gets

2996
02:06:26,620 --> 02:06:28,560
deeper and deeper as the show goes on.

2997
02:06:28,960 --> 02:06:31,640
And she will do these incredible speeches about,

2998
02:06:32,080 --> 02:06:32,800
tell me what to do.

2999
02:06:33,220 --> 02:06:35,400
Like I just, I know there's experts out there.

3000
02:06:35,500 --> 02:06:36,920
I know there's knowledge out there.

3001
02:06:36,960 --> 02:06:38,320
I know there's an optimal way

3002
02:06:38,880 --> 02:06:39,700
to live my life.

3003
02:06:39,720 --> 02:06:42,320
So why can't someone just tell me what to do?

3004
02:06:42,460 --> 02:06:44,480
And, and it's this wonderfully like,

3005
02:06:45,840 --> 02:06:46,540
um,

3006
02:06:47,700 --> 02:06:52,120
accurate, I think, uh, aspect of, of human desire that what if something could

3007
02:06:52,120 --> 02:06:54,620
actually tell me the optimal way to go?

3008
02:06:55,120 --> 02:06:57,400
Cause I think there is a desire to give

3009
02:06:57,400 --> 02:07:04,100
up some amount of your own freedom and discretion in order to be told to do the optimally right thing.

3010
02:07:04,540 --> 02:07:05,300
But that path

3011
02:07:05,840 --> 02:07:07,180
scares me to death.

3012
02:07:07,260 --> 02:07:09,000
Yeah, we see the way you phrase it.

3013
02:07:09,220 --> 02:07:10,480
That's, it scares me too.

3014
02:07:11,100 --> 02:07:12,520
So there's several things that one,

3015
02:07:12,660 --> 02:07:14,540
you can be constantly distracted in a

3016
02:07:14,540 --> 02:07:17,480
TikTok way by things that keep you engaged.

3017
02:07:17,480 --> 02:07:18,880
So removing that

3018
02:07:19,480 --> 02:07:22,580
and giving you a bunch of options constantly

3019
02:07:23,100 --> 02:07:29,080
and learning from long-term what results in your actual long-term happiness.

3020
02:07:30,020 --> 02:07:33,920
So like which amounts of challenging ideas are good for you?

3021
02:07:34,120 --> 02:07:34,260
Uh,

3022
02:07:35,480 --> 02:07:37,160
that, you know, for, for somebody like me,

3023
02:07:39,220 --> 02:07:42,120
but there is a number like that for you, Greg, like

3024
02:07:42,720 --> 02:07:45,100
for me, that number is pretty high.

3025
02:07:45,260 --> 02:07:45,560
I love

3026
02:07:46,240 --> 02:07:46,680
debate.

3027
02:07:46,860 --> 02:07:47,120
I love,

3028
02:07:47,660 --> 02:07:50,120
I, I love the feeling of like realizing,

3029
02:07:50,420 --> 02:07:51,720
holy shit, I've been wrong.

3030
02:07:51,940 --> 02:07:52,040
Yes.

3031
02:07:52,680 --> 02:07:57,680
But like, you know, and I would love for the algorithm to know that about me and to help me,

3032
02:07:57,740 --> 02:07:59,040
but always giving me options.

3033
02:07:59,080 --> 02:08:01,760
If I want to descend into cat videos and so on.

3034
02:08:01,760 --> 02:08:03,040
Well, the educational aspect of it.

3035
02:08:03,240 --> 02:08:03,520
Yes,

3036
02:08:03,840 --> 02:08:04,060
education.

3037
02:08:04,940 --> 02:08:08,180
Like the idea of kind of like both going the speed that you need to and running as

3038
02:08:08,180 --> 02:08:08,800
fast as you can.

3039
02:08:09,080 --> 02:08:09,180
Yeah.

3040
02:08:09,660 --> 02:08:11,780
You know, I mean, there's that, you know, the whole flow thing.

3041
02:08:12,100 --> 02:08:15,240
I just feel that YouTube recommendation for,

3042
02:08:15,580 --> 02:08:17,500
for better or worse, if used correctly,

3043
02:08:18,220 --> 02:08:19,540
it feels like it does a pretty good job.

3044
02:08:20,160 --> 02:08:22,300
Whenever I just refuse to click on stuff

3045
02:08:22,900 --> 02:08:26,460
that's just dopamine based and click on only educational things,

3046
02:08:26,980 --> 02:08:29,000
the recommendation provides a really damn good.

3047
02:08:29,360 --> 02:08:31,560
So I feel like it's a solvable

3048
02:08:32,360 --> 02:08:35,460
problem, at least in the space of education of challenging yourself,

3049
02:08:36,020 --> 02:08:38,820
but also expanding your realm of knowledge and all this kind of stuff.

3050
02:08:38,920 --> 02:08:40,460
And I'm definitely more in the,

3051
02:08:40,460 --> 02:08:45,620
we're in an inescapably anarchical period and require big cultural adjustments.

3052
02:08:45,780 --> 02:08:48,380
And there's gonna, there's no way that this isn't going to be difficult transition.

3053
02:08:49,020 --> 02:08:54,160
Is there any specific little or big things that you'd like to see X do, Twitter do?

3054
02:08:54,720 --> 02:08:56,420
I have lots of thoughts on that.

3055
02:08:57,060 --> 02:09:00,180
With the printing press and extra millions of eyes on any problem

3056
02:09:00,420 --> 02:09:01,900
can tear down any institution,

3057
02:09:02,140 --> 02:09:03,560
any, any person or any idea.

3058
02:09:03,720 --> 02:09:05,020
And that's good in some ways,

3059
02:09:05,040 --> 02:09:07,480
cause a lot of medieval institutions needed to be torn down.

3060
02:09:07,540 --> 02:09:08,400
And some people did too,

3061
02:09:08,540 --> 02:09:10,760
and a lot of ideas needed to be torn down.

3062
02:09:11,140 --> 02:09:11,820
Same thing is true now.

3063
02:09:11,900 --> 02:09:16,560
An extra billions of eyes on every problem can tear down any person, idea or institution.

3064
02:09:17,100 --> 02:09:20,680
And some, again, some of those things needed to be torn down,

3065
02:09:21,160 --> 02:09:22,400
but it can't build yet.

3066
02:09:22,600 --> 02:09:23,080
We are not at the

3067
02:09:23,160 --> 02:09:24,160
stage that can build yet,

3068
02:09:24,340 --> 02:09:26,760
but it has shown us how thin our knowledge was.

3069
02:09:27,000 --> 02:09:29,480
It's one of the reasons why we're also aware of the replication crisis.

3070
02:09:29,560 --> 02:09:30,540
It's one of the reasons why we're

3071
02:09:30,600 --> 02:09:33,240
also aware of how kind of shoddy our research is,

3072
02:09:33,460 --> 02:09:35,940
how much our expert class is arrogant

3073
02:09:36,200 --> 02:09:41,920
in many cases, but people don't want to live in a world where they don't have people that

3074
02:09:41,920 --> 02:09:43,600
they respect and they can look at.

3075
02:09:43,900 --> 02:09:45,480
And I think what's happening

3076
02:09:46,200 --> 02:09:53,020
possibly now, but will, will continue to happen is people are going to establish themselves as being high integrity,

3077
02:09:53,180 --> 02:09:54,240
that they will always be honest.

3078
02:09:54,260 --> 02:09:57,340
I think you are establishing yourself as someone who is high integrity,

3079
02:09:57,960 --> 02:09:59,940
where they can trust that person.

3080
02:10:00,060 --> 02:10:01,300
A fire wants to be,

3081
02:10:01,740 --> 02:10:03,460
you know, the institution that people can come to is like,

3082
02:10:03,620 --> 02:10:04,420
if it's free speech,

3083
02:10:04,500 --> 02:10:05,840
we will defend it, period.

3084
02:10:06,520 --> 02:10:08,740
And I think that people need new,

3085
02:10:09,720 --> 02:10:12,360
need to have authorities that they can actually trust.

3086
02:10:12,540 --> 02:10:16,620
And I think that if you actually had a stream that maybe people can watch in action,

3087
02:10:16,660 --> 02:10:18,860
but not flood with, you know,

3088
02:10:19,440 --> 02:10:21,800
stupid cancel culture stuff or dumb cat means,

3089
02:10:22,100 --> 02:10:23,240
where it is actually a serious

3090
02:10:23,240 --> 02:10:24,960
discussion bounded around rules,

3091
02:10:25,500 --> 02:10:26,740
no perfect rhetorical fortress,

3092
02:10:26,900 --> 02:10:30,200
no efficient rhetorical fortress, none of the BS ways we debate.

3093
02:10:30,760 --> 02:10:33,460
I think you could start to actually create something

3094
02:10:33,460 --> 02:10:38,600
that could actually be a major improvement in the speed with which we come up with new,

3095
02:10:38,700 --> 02:10:41,200
better ideas and establish and separate truth from falsity.

3096
02:10:41,960 --> 02:10:42,240
Yeah.

3097
02:10:42,460 --> 02:10:43,900
If it's done well,

3098
02:10:43,920 --> 02:10:46,880
it can inspire a large number of people to become higher and higher

3099
02:10:46,900 --> 02:10:51,160
integrity and it can create integrity as a value to strive for.

3100
02:10:51,600 --> 02:10:56,640
I mean, like, you know, there's been projects throughout the internet that have done an

3101
02:10:56,640 --> 02:10:57,540
incredible job of that,

3102
02:10:57,600 --> 02:10:59,220
but have been also very flawed.

3103
02:10:59,580 --> 02:11:01,920
Like Wikipedia is an example of a big

3104
02:11:01,920 --> 02:11:03,800
leap forward in doing that.

3105
02:11:03,840 --> 02:11:04,800
It's pretty damn impressive.

3106
02:11:04,940 --> 02:11:05,880
What's your overall take?

3107
02:11:06,160 --> 02:11:07,600
I mean, I'm mostly impressed.

3108
02:11:07,780 --> 02:11:09,220
So there's a few really

3109
02:11:10,080 --> 02:11:11,060
powerful ideas

3110
02:11:11,600 --> 02:11:13,280
for the people who edit Wikipedia.

3111
02:11:13,760 --> 02:11:15,300
One of which is each

3112
02:11:15,580 --> 02:11:18,740
editor kind of for themselves declares,

3113
02:11:19,040 --> 02:11:19,480
you know,

3114
02:11:19,820 --> 02:11:24,340
I'm into politics and I really kind of left leaning guy.

3115
02:11:24,780 --> 02:11:26,460
So I really shouldn't be editing

3116
02:11:27,140 --> 02:11:29,300
political articles because I have bias.

3117
02:11:29,420 --> 02:11:31,220
So they declare their biases

3118
02:11:31,220 --> 02:11:34,020
and they're often do a good job of actually declaring the biases,

3119
02:11:34,100 --> 02:11:36,010
but they'll still like,

3120
02:11:36,960 --> 02:11:39,160
they'll find a way to justify themselves.

3121
02:11:39,320 --> 02:11:41,440
Like something will piss them off and they want to

3122
02:11:41,540 --> 02:11:46,160
correct it because they love correcting untruth into truth.

3123
02:11:46,780 --> 02:11:50,040
But the perspective of what is true and not is affected by their bias.

3124
02:11:50,160 --> 02:11:51,280
Truth is hard to know.

3125
02:11:52,100 --> 02:11:56,720
And it is true that there is a left leaning bias on the editors of Wikipedia.

3126
02:11:57,360 --> 02:11:57,780
So for that,

3127
02:11:58,860 --> 02:12:00,680
what happens is on articles,

3128
02:12:00,780 --> 02:12:04,360
which I mostly appreciate that don't have a political

3129
02:12:04,920 --> 02:12:05,860
aspect to them,

3130
02:12:06,280 --> 02:12:07,440
you know,

3131
02:12:08,100 --> 02:12:11,220
um, scientific articles or, uh, technical articles,

3132
02:12:11,840 --> 02:12:13,120
they're going to be really strong,

3133
02:12:13,300 --> 02:12:17,400
even history, just describing the facts of history that don't have a subjective element,

3134
02:12:18,000 --> 02:12:18,580
uh, strong.

3135
02:12:19,100 --> 02:12:19,280
Also

3136
02:12:19,900 --> 02:12:21,180
just using my own brain,

3137
02:12:21,620 --> 02:12:22,980
I can kind of filter out

3138
02:12:23,580 --> 02:12:24,220
if it's,

3139
02:12:24,600 --> 02:12:26,780
uh, you know, if it's something about January 6th or something like this,

3140
02:12:27,120 --> 02:12:28,000
I know I'm going to

3141
02:12:28,000 --> 02:12:30,200
be like, I'm not whatever's going on here.

3142
02:12:30,280 --> 02:12:32,060
I'm gonna kind of read it,

3143
02:12:32,720 --> 02:12:34,320
but most I'm going to look to other sources.

3144
02:12:34,320 --> 02:12:36,640
I'm going to look to a bunch of different perspectives on it.

3145
02:12:36,740 --> 02:12:37,820
It's going to be very tense.

3146
02:12:38,220 --> 02:12:39,940
There's probably going to be some kind of bias.

3147
02:12:40,000 --> 02:12:43,260
Maybe some wording will be such,

3148
02:12:43,560 --> 02:12:44,180
which is one word.

3149
02:12:44,660 --> 02:12:46,980
This is where Wikipedia does this thing.

3150
02:12:47,540 --> 02:12:50,300
The way they word stuff will be biased,

3151
02:12:50,700 --> 02:12:51,640
the choice of words,

3152
02:12:52,920 --> 02:12:56,400
but the Wikipedia editors themselves are so self-reflective.

3153
02:12:56,480 --> 02:13:01,020
They literally have articles describing these very effects of how you can use

3154
02:13:01,020 --> 02:13:05,800
words to inject bias in all the ways that you talk about it.

3155
02:13:05,800 --> 02:13:07,140
That's healthier than most environments.

3156
02:13:07,500 --> 02:13:08,880
It's incredibly healthy,

3157
02:13:09,200 --> 02:13:10,580
but I think you could do better.

3158
02:13:11,000 --> 02:13:12,880
One of the big flaws of Wikipedia to me,

3159
02:13:13,280 --> 02:13:19,060
that community notes on X does better is the accessibility of becoming an editor.

3160
02:13:19,560 --> 02:13:24,240
Um, it's, it's difficult to become an editor and it's not as visible,

3161
02:13:24,240 --> 02:13:25,380
the process of editing.

3162
02:13:26,120 --> 02:13:26,820
So I would love,

3163
02:13:27,140 --> 02:13:36,140
like you said, a stream, everyone to be able to observe this debate between people with integrity of when they discuss things like January 6th,

3164
02:13:36,160 --> 02:13:43,500
a very controversial topics to see how the process of the debate goes as opposed to being hidden in the shadows,

3165
02:13:43,520 --> 02:13:44,800
which it currently is in Wikipedia.

3166
02:13:45,060 --> 02:13:45,780
You can access that.

3167
02:13:45,820 --> 02:13:47,740
It's just hard to access, but,

3168
02:13:48,080 --> 02:13:51,520
and I've also seen how they will use certain articles,

3169
02:13:52,680 --> 02:13:53,680
like on certain people,

3170
02:13:54,080 --> 02:14:01,140
like articles about people I've learned to trust less and less because they'll literally will use those to make personal attacks.

3171
02:14:01,160 --> 02:14:02,420
And this is something you write about.

3172
02:14:03,060 --> 02:14:03,660
They'll use,

3173
02:14:04,340 --> 02:14:08,540
uh, descriptions of different controversies to paint a picture of a person that's,

3174
02:14:09,840 --> 02:14:12,440
that doesn't to me at least feel like an accurate representation

3175
02:14:12,640 --> 02:14:13,840
of the person.

3176
02:14:14,100 --> 02:14:18,240
And it's like writing an article about Einstein mentioning something about,

3177
02:14:18,760 --> 02:14:22,880
uh, theory of relativity and then saying that he was a womanizer and abuser and a,

3178
02:14:22,880 --> 02:14:27,720
like controversy, you know, yeah, he is Feynman also,

3179
02:14:27,720 --> 02:14:32,780
you know, not, you know, it was the, you know, they're not exactly the perfect human in terms of women,

3180
02:14:33,160 --> 02:14:39,060
but like there's other aspects of this human and to capture that human properly,

3181
02:14:39,400 --> 02:14:40,860
there's a certain way to do it.

3182
02:14:41,000 --> 02:14:42,820
I think Wikipedia will often lean.

3183
02:14:43,520 --> 02:14:45,880
They really try to be self reflective and

3184
02:14:46,880 --> 02:14:47,800
try to stop this,

3185
02:14:47,880 --> 02:14:52,040
but they will lean into the drama if it matches the bias.

3186
02:14:52,500 --> 02:14:52,940
But again,

3187
02:14:53,960 --> 02:14:57,040
much better than the world I believe is much better.

3188
02:14:58,340 --> 02:14:58,480
Uh,

3189
02:14:58,900 --> 02:14:59,800
because Wikipedia exists,

3190
02:15:01,020 --> 02:15:03,660
but now that we're in these adolescent stages,

3191
02:15:03,780 --> 02:15:05,690
we're growing and trying to come up with different technologies.

3192
02:15:05,980 --> 02:15:08,000
The idea of a stream is really,

3193
02:15:08,000 --> 02:15:12,720
really interesting as you get more and more people into this discourse

3194
02:15:12,940 --> 02:15:14,680
that where the value is,

3195
02:15:14,780 --> 02:15:16,120
let's try to get the truth.

3196
02:15:17,080 --> 02:15:17,160
Yeah.

3197
02:15:17,420 --> 02:15:17,640
Yeah.

3198
02:15:17,640 --> 02:15:19,860
And that basically, you know, you get the little cards for,

3199
02:15:19,980 --> 02:15:21,320
Nope, wrong, nope, wrong.

3200
02:15:21,620 --> 02:15:22,400
And the different,

3201
02:15:22,720 --> 02:15:25,100
the different, the different rhetorical techniques that are being used

3202
02:15:25,160 --> 02:15:26,460
to avoid actually discussing.

3203
02:15:26,500 --> 02:15:26,800
Yeah.

3204
02:15:26,880 --> 02:15:29,460
And I think actually you can make it a little bit fun by you got a limited number

3205
02:15:29,460 --> 02:15:30,220
of them.

3206
02:15:30,220 --> 02:15:32,300
Um, you know, it's kind of like,

3207
02:15:32,580 --> 02:15:33,940
you get three, what about as some cards.

3208
02:15:34,420 --> 02:15:35,420
So gamifying the whole thing.

3209
02:15:35,660 --> 02:15:36,560
Uh, absolutely.

3210
02:15:36,760 --> 02:15:37,180
Yeah.

3211
02:15:37,220 --> 02:15:38,240
Uh, let me ask you about,

3212
02:15:39,460 --> 02:15:42,480
uh, so you mentioned going to some difficult moments in your life.

3213
02:15:42,520 --> 02:15:43,560
Um,

3214
02:15:44,760 --> 02:15:45,740
what, what has been your

3215
02:15:45,740 --> 02:15:47,980
experience with, uh, with, with depression?

3216
02:15:48,460 --> 02:15:50,220
What has been your experience getting out

3217
02:15:50,220 --> 02:15:51,020
of it, overcoming it?

3218
02:15:52,230 --> 02:15:52,380
Yeah.

3219
02:15:52,520 --> 02:15:54,840
I mean, the whole thing, the whole journey, um,

3220
02:15:55,240 --> 02:15:56,700
th th th th th th th th th th th th th

3221
02:15:56,700 --> 02:15:59,600
with coddling the American mind began with me, um,

3222
02:16:00,240 --> 02:16:02,340
in the, at the Belmont psychiatric

3223
02:16:02,340 --> 02:16:05,760
facility in Philadelphia back in 2007, I

3224
02:16:06,380 --> 02:16:09,760
had called 911 in a moment of clarity because I'd

3225
02:16:09,760 --> 02:16:12,620
gone to the, uh, the hardware store to, to, um,

3226
02:16:13,740 --> 02:16:14,980
make sure that when I killed myself,

3227
02:16:14,980 --> 02:16:16,000
that I, it stuck.

3228
02:16:16,220 --> 02:16:17,160
I wanted to make sure that I,

3229
02:16:17,160 --> 02:16:19,160
you know, had my head wrapped and everything.

3230
02:16:19,460 --> 02:16:22,000
So like if all the drugs I was planning to take didn't work,

3231
02:16:22,040 --> 02:16:22,580
that I wouldn't be able

3232
02:16:22,600 --> 02:16:24,360
to claw my way out.

3233
02:16:25,300 --> 02:16:29,580
It'd been a really rough year and I always had issues with depression,

3234
02:16:29,780 --> 02:16:31,580
um, but they were getting worse.

3235
02:16:32,280 --> 02:16:34,440
And frankly, one of the reasons why this cancel culture

3236
02:16:34,440 --> 02:16:37,440
stuff is so, um, important to me is that

3237
02:16:38,820 --> 02:16:40,840
the thing that I didn't emphasize as much in coddling

3238
02:16:40,840 --> 02:16:42,080
the American mind, which by the way,

3239
02:16:42,760 --> 02:16:44,240
that description that I give of trying to kill

3240
02:16:44,260 --> 02:16:46,740
myself was the first time I'd ever written it down.

3241
02:16:47,280 --> 02:16:49,240
Nobody in my family was aware, um,

3242
02:16:49,600 --> 02:16:49,780
of how,

3243
02:16:50,220 --> 02:16:51,580
uh, of it being like that.

3244
02:16:51,660 --> 02:16:52,980
My wife had never seen it.

3245
02:16:52,980 --> 02:16:55,140
And basically the only way I was able to write that was by,

3246
02:16:55,280 --> 02:16:57,640
by doing, you know, how you can kind of trick yourself.

3247
02:16:58,240 --> 02:16:59,840
If, um, and I was like,

3248
02:17:00,140 --> 02:17:03,880
I'm going to convince myself that this is just between me and my computer and nobody will see it.

3249
02:17:03,880 --> 02:17:05,760
And it's probably not the most public thing I've ever written.

3250
02:17:06,960 --> 02:17:12,840
Um, but what I didn't emphasize in that was how much the culture war played into how depressed I got,

3251
02:17:13,040 --> 02:17:14,180
because I was originally

3252
02:17:14,200 --> 02:17:15,140
the legal director of fire.

3253
02:17:15,360 --> 02:17:17,220
Then I became president of fire in 2005,

3254
02:17:17,960 --> 02:17:19,680
moved to Philadelphia is where I get depressed.

3255
02:17:19,680 --> 02:17:23,360
Um, and, uh, in just, I don't have family there.

3256
02:17:23,580 --> 02:17:24,720
There's something about the town.

3257
02:17:24,820 --> 02:17:26,060
They don't seem to like me very much.

3258
02:17:26,480 --> 02:17:27,120
Um,

3259
02:17:27,540 --> 02:17:28,480
but the main thing

3260
02:17:28,480 --> 02:17:29,880
was being in the culture world all the time.

3261
02:17:29,920 --> 02:17:32,400
Um, there was a girl that I was dating.

3262
02:17:32,740 --> 02:17:33,190
Um,

3263
02:17:33,540 --> 02:17:36,260
I remember, you know, she didn't seem to really approve of what I did.

3264
02:17:36,280 --> 02:17:36,940
And a lot of people

3265
02:17:36,940 --> 02:17:37,940
didn't really seem to.

3266
02:17:38,220 --> 02:17:41,220
And meanwhile, like I was defending people on the left all the

3267
02:17:41,400 --> 02:17:43,080
time and they'd be like,

3268
02:17:43,080 --> 02:17:44,300
Oh, that's good that you're defending someone on the

3269
02:17:44,300 --> 02:17:46,960
left, but they still would never forgive me for defending someone on the right.

3270
02:17:47,260 --> 02:17:49,560
And I remember saying what one point I'm like,

3271
02:17:49,680 --> 02:17:52,220
listen, I'm like, I'm, I'm a true believer in this stuff.

3272
02:17:52,280 --> 02:17:53,500
I'm willing to defend Nazis.

3273
02:17:54,020 --> 02:17:55,430
I'm certainly willing to defend Republicans.

3274
02:17:56,420 --> 02:17:57,880
And she actually said,

3275
02:17:57,880 --> 02:17:59,380
I think Republicans might be worse.

3276
02:18:00,040 --> 02:18:00,740
Um,

3277
02:18:01,080 --> 02:18:03,640
and that didn't, that relationship didn't go very well.

3278
02:18:04,000 --> 02:18:06,640
And then I nearly gotten fistfights a couple of times with,

3279
02:18:06,640 --> 02:18:07,420
with people on the

3280
02:18:07,440 --> 02:18:07,760
right.

3281
02:18:08,040 --> 02:18:11,500
Um, because they found out I defended people who crack jokes about 9 11.

3282
02:18:11,680 --> 02:18:13,240
Like this happened more than once.

3283
02:18:13,580 --> 02:18:15,500
And that, you know, by the time I'm in my twenties,

3284
02:18:15,580 --> 02:18:16,840
I'm not fist fighting again.

3285
02:18:17,820 --> 02:18:20,060
Um, but yeah, it was always like that.

3286
02:18:20,120 --> 02:18:22,040
You, you, you see how hypocritical people

3287
02:18:22,040 --> 02:18:22,640
can be.

3288
02:18:22,740 --> 02:18:26,780
You can see how friends can turn on you if they don't like your politics.

3289
02:18:27,120 --> 02:18:29,220
So I got an early preview of this,

3290
02:18:29,300 --> 02:18:33,460
of, of, of what the culture we're heading into by being the

3291
02:18:33,480 --> 02:18:34,300
president of fire.

3292
02:18:34,360 --> 02:18:35,340
And it was exhausting.

3293
02:18:36,460 --> 02:18:39,500
Um, and that was one of the main things

3294
02:18:39,500 --> 02:18:40,560
that led me to be,

3295
02:18:40,560 --> 02:18:41,720
you know, suicidally depressed,

3296
02:18:42,480 --> 02:18:44,180
uh, at the Belmont center.

3297
02:18:44,240 --> 02:18:48,420
If you told me that that would be the beginning of a new and better life for me,

3298
02:18:48,740 --> 02:18:50,260
I would have laughed if I could have,

3299
02:18:50,600 --> 02:18:51,940
but I would, you know, I don't like,

3300
02:18:52,360 --> 02:18:53,540
you can tell I'm okay if I'm still laughing.

3301
02:18:54,220 --> 02:18:54,800
And I wasn't laughing,

3302
02:18:55,280 --> 02:18:56,280
um, at that point.

3303
02:18:57,000 --> 02:19:01,880
So, um, I got a doctor and I started doing cognitive behavioral therapy.

3304
02:19:02,280 --> 02:19:07,480
I started having all these voices in my head that were catastrophizing and,

3305
02:19:08,160 --> 02:19:10,100
um, you know, it gave me an over,

3306
02:19:10,140 --> 02:19:16,900
over generalization and, um, uh, fortune telling, you know, uh, mind reading all of these things that they teach you not to do.

3307
02:19:17,580 --> 02:19:18,200
And it,

3308
02:19:18,580 --> 02:19:25,720
uh, and what they, what you do in CBT is essentially you have something makes you upset and then you just

3309
02:19:25,720 --> 02:19:27,020
write down what the thought was.

3310
02:19:27,160 --> 02:19:29,920
Um, and you know, something minor could happen in your

3311
02:19:29,940 --> 02:19:31,880
response was, you know, like, um,

3312
02:19:32,440 --> 02:19:32,600
well,

3313
02:19:33,300 --> 02:19:34,780
the date didn't seem to go very well.

3314
02:19:34,920 --> 02:19:37,540
Um, and that's because I'm broken and we'll die alone.

3315
02:19:37,640 --> 02:19:39,200
And you're like, okay, okay, okay.

3316
02:19:39,280 --> 02:19:40,860
What, what, what are the following,

3317
02:19:40,860 --> 02:19:45,240
you know, uh, that's catastrophizing, that's mind reading, that's a fortune telling, that's all this stuff.

3318
02:19:45,820 --> 02:19:48,520
Um, and you have to do this several times a day

3319
02:19:49,400 --> 02:19:49,740
forever.

3320
02:19:49,820 --> 02:19:51,580
I actually need to brush up on it at the moment.

3321
02:19:51,580 --> 02:19:52,300
Um,

3322
02:19:52,780 --> 02:19:54,840
and it slowly over

3323
02:19:54,860 --> 02:19:58,880
time voices in my head that had been saying horrible, you know,

3324
02:19:59,200 --> 02:19:59,960
horrible internal talk,

3325
02:20:00,640 --> 02:20:02,380
it just didn't sound as convincing anymore,

3326
02:20:02,860 --> 02:20:05,240
which was a really kind of like subtle effect.

3327
02:20:05,300 --> 02:20:06,200
Like it was just kind of like,

3328
02:20:06,260 --> 02:20:09,000
oh wait, I don't buy that I'm broken.

3329
02:20:09,440 --> 02:20:11,100
You know, like that doesn't sound true.

3330
02:20:11,340 --> 02:20:14,380
That doesn't sound like truth from God like it used to.

3331
02:20:15,380 --> 02:20:18,020
And nine months after I was

3332
02:20:19,000 --> 02:20:19,940
planning to kill myself,

3333
02:20:19,960 --> 02:20:22,060
I was probably happier than I'd been in a decade.

3334
02:20:22,940 --> 02:20:26,140
Um, and that was one of the things that,

3335
02:20:26,380 --> 02:20:30,660
you know, that the CBT is what led me to notice this in my own work,

3336
02:20:30,680 --> 02:20:32,120
that it felt like administrators were

3337
02:20:32,760 --> 02:20:34,840
kind of selling cognitive distortions,

3338
02:20:34,940 --> 02:20:36,080
but students weren't buying yet.

3339
02:20:36,140 --> 02:20:40,040
And then when I started noticing that they seemed to come in actually already believing in a lot of this stuff,

3340
02:20:40,040 --> 02:20:41,080
that it would be very dangerous.

3341
02:20:41,080 --> 02:20:43,620
And that led to coddling the American mind and all that stuff.

3342
02:20:44,640 --> 02:20:48,500
But the thing that was rough about writing Hansling of the American mind,

3343
02:20:48,540 --> 02:20:50,440
I'd have mentioned this already a couple of times,

3344
02:20:50,720 --> 02:20:52,520
I got really depressed this past year,

3345
02:20:52,900 --> 02:20:54,060
um, because I was studying,

3346
02:20:54,400 --> 02:20:56,180
you know, there's a friend in there

3347
02:20:56,180 --> 02:20:58,740
that I talked about who killed himself after being canceled.

3348
02:20:58,900 --> 02:21:00,020
I talked to him a week before

3349
02:21:00,020 --> 02:21:01,900
he killed himself and I hadn't actually, um,

3350
02:21:03,120 --> 02:21:04,960
I hadn't actually checked in with him because

3351
02:21:04,960 --> 02:21:06,000
he seemed so confident.

3352
02:21:06,000 --> 02:21:08,140
I thought it would be totally fine because he, he

3353
02:21:08,800 --> 02:21:11,780
had an insensitive tweet in June of 2020 and,

3354
02:21:11,940 --> 02:21:13,640
you know, got, got forced out

3355
02:21:14,220 --> 02:21:15,320
in a way that didn't actually

3356
02:21:15,320 --> 02:21:16,940
sound as bad as a lot of the other professors.

3357
02:21:16,940 --> 02:21:18,280
He actually at least got a severance package,

3358
02:21:18,440 --> 02:21:20,100
so they knew he'd sue and win, um,

3359
02:21:20,620 --> 02:21:21,400
cause he had before.

3360
02:21:22,360 --> 02:21:26,200
And so I, I waited to check in on him cause we were so overwhelmed with the request for

3361
02:21:26,200 --> 02:21:26,380
helps.

3362
02:21:26,380 --> 02:21:29,180
And he was saying people were coming to his house still.

3363
02:21:29,360 --> 02:21:31,260
And then he shot himself the next week.

3364
02:21:31,420 --> 02:21:36,360
And I definitely, and because everyone knows I'm so public about my struggles with this stuff,

3365
02:21:37,280 --> 02:21:37,620
everybody

3366
02:21:38,240 --> 02:21:41,040
who fights this stuff comes to me when they're having a hard time.

3367
02:21:41,100 --> 02:21:45,780
And this is a very hard psychologically taxing business to be in.

3368
02:21:45,920 --> 02:21:47,400
And even admitting this right now,

3369
02:21:48,840 --> 02:21:50,240
like I think about like all the,

3370
02:21:50,240 --> 02:21:51,180
all the vultures out there,

3371
02:21:51,200 --> 02:21:52,080
they'll have fun with it.

3372
02:21:52,120 --> 02:21:53,140
Just like the same way when,

3373
02:21:53,140 --> 02:21:54,400
when, when my friend Mike Adams killed himself,

3374
02:21:54,580 --> 02:21:56,480
there were people like celebrating on Twitter,

3375
02:21:56,560 --> 02:21:58,620
um, that, that a man was dead,

3376
02:21:59,400 --> 02:22:01,420
uh, because they didn't like his tweets.

3377
02:22:02,240 --> 02:22:06,640
And, but somehow that made them compassionate for some abstract other person.

3378
02:22:07,420 --> 02:22:09,080
So I was getting a little depressed and anxious.

3379
02:22:09,160 --> 02:22:13,560
And the thing that really helped me more than anything else, um,

3380
02:22:14,420 --> 02:22:16,200
was confessing to my staff

3381
02:22:17,070 --> 02:22:18,220
that I,

3382
02:22:18,560 --> 02:22:19,080
you know, I,

3383
02:22:19,580 --> 02:22:20,660
I, books take a lot of energy.

3384
02:22:20,820 --> 02:22:22,520
So I knew they didn't want to hear that.

3385
02:22:22,620 --> 02:22:24,920
Not only was this taking a lot of the boss's time,

3386
02:22:25,400 --> 02:22:26,660
this was making him depressed and anxious.

3387
02:22:26,820 --> 02:22:29,860
But when I finally told my, the leadership of my staff,

3388
02:22:29,940 --> 02:22:32,860
um, you know, people that, even though I try to maintain

3389
02:22:32,860 --> 02:22:33,820
a lot of distance from,

3390
02:22:34,220 --> 02:22:36,340
I love very, very much, um, it made

3391
02:22:36,860 --> 02:22:37,440
such a difference,

3392
02:22:37,920 --> 02:22:40,000
you know, um, because I could be open about that.

3393
02:22:40,180 --> 02:22:41,880
And the other thing was,

3394
02:22:41,960 --> 02:22:43,260
have you heard this conference dialogue?

3395
02:22:43,720 --> 02:22:44,160
Oh, yes.

3396
02:22:44,420 --> 02:22:45,760
It's like an invite only thing.

3397
02:22:46,060 --> 02:22:47,500
It's Orrin Hoffman, um,

3398
02:22:48,100 --> 02:22:48,440
runs it.

3399
02:22:48,880 --> 02:22:50,440
Um, it intentionally tries to get

3400
02:22:50,460 --> 02:22:51,880
people over the political spectrum,

3401
02:22:51,880 --> 02:22:53,140
um, to come together,

3402
02:22:53,700 --> 02:22:56,200
uh, and have off the record conversations about big issues.

3403
02:22:57,160 --> 02:23:01,360
And it was nice to be in a room where liberal conservative,

3404
02:23:01,800 --> 02:23:02,600
none of the above,

3405
02:23:02,740 --> 02:23:05,180
we're all like, oh, thank God someone's taken on cancel culture.

3406
02:23:05,260 --> 02:23:06,640
And where it felt like, I

3407
02:23:07,440 --> 02:23:08,580
felt like maybe

3408
02:23:09,200 --> 02:23:13,000
this won't be the disaster for me and my family that I was,

3409
02:23:13,000 --> 02:23:14,700
that I was starting to be afraid of.

3410
02:23:14,840 --> 02:23:17,700
It would be that taking the stuff on might actually have a happy ending.

3411
02:23:18,160 --> 02:23:20,600
Well, one thing I just stands out from that

3412
02:23:23,540 --> 02:23:29,200
is the, the pain of cancellation can be really intense.

3413
02:23:29,620 --> 02:23:33,480
And that doesn't necessarily mean losing your job, but just even,

3414
02:23:34,000 --> 02:23:36,040
you can call it bullying, you can call whatever name,

3415
02:23:36,480 --> 02:23:39,120
but just some number of people on the internet.

3416
02:23:40,060 --> 02:23:43,360
And that number can be small kind of saying

3417
02:23:44,540 --> 02:23:45,820
bad things to you.

3418
02:23:45,820 --> 02:23:46,000
Yeah.

3419
02:23:46,500 --> 02:23:49,540
That can be a pretty powerful force to the human psyche,

3420
02:23:49,540 --> 02:23:51,160
which is, but was very surprising.

3421
02:23:51,600 --> 02:23:53,620
And then the flip side also of that,

3422
02:23:54,300 --> 02:23:56,960
um, it really makes me

3423
02:23:56,960 --> 02:23:58,900
sad how cruel people can be.

3424
02:23:59,360 --> 02:24:00,400
It's such a,

3425
02:24:00,900 --> 02:24:05,680
thinking that your, your cause is a social justice in many cases can lead

3426
02:24:05,680 --> 02:24:09,520
people to think I can be as cruel as I want in pursuit of this.

3427
02:24:09,840 --> 02:24:10,560
When it, a lot of times

3428
02:24:10,740 --> 02:24:18,280
it's just a way to sort of vent some aggression on a person that you think of only as an abstraction.

3429
02:24:18,980 --> 02:24:23,120
So I think it's important for people to realize that they're whatever,

3430
02:24:23,820 --> 02:24:24,860
like whatever,

3431
02:24:27,060 --> 02:24:31,100
whatever negative energy, whatever negativity you want to put out there,

3432
02:24:31,920 --> 02:24:33,140
like there's real people

3433
02:24:33,140 --> 02:24:34,060
that can get hurt.

3434
02:24:34,340 --> 02:24:37,060
Like you can really get people,

3435
02:24:37,740 --> 02:24:40,180
um, to one be the worst version of

3436
02:24:40,300 --> 02:24:42,100
themselves or to possibly take their own life.

3437
02:24:42,220 --> 02:24:43,600
And it's not

3438
02:24:44,540 --> 02:24:45,060
as real.

3439
02:24:45,880 --> 02:24:47,740
Yeah. Well, that's one of the things that we do in the book,

3440
02:24:47,740 --> 02:24:54,560
um, to, to really kind of address people who still try to claim this isn't real is we just quote,

3441
02:24:55,500 --> 02:24:56,220
we quote the Pope,

3442
02:24:56,540 --> 02:24:57,280
we quote Obama,

3443
02:24:57,640 --> 02:24:58,680
we quote James Carville,

3444
02:24:58,920 --> 02:25:01,000
we quote Taylor Swift on cancel culture.

3445
02:25:01,780 --> 02:25:03,840
Like, um, and Taylor's Swiss quote is,

3446
02:25:04,020 --> 02:25:05,820
is essentially about like how behind all of

3447
02:25:05,820 --> 02:25:07,800
this, there's the, when it gets particularly nasty,

3448
02:25:07,800 --> 02:25:09,880
there's this very clear, you know,

3449
02:25:10,440 --> 02:25:12,860
kill yourself kind of undercurrent to it.

3450
02:25:13,280 --> 02:25:14,580
Um, and it's,

3451
02:25:14,960 --> 02:25:15,560
it's cruel.

3452
02:25:16,280 --> 02:25:20,360
And the problem is that in an environment so wide open,

3453
02:25:20,700 --> 02:25:22,220
there's always going to be

3454
02:25:22,240 --> 02:25:26,560
someone who wants to be so transgressive and say the most hurtful, you know,

3455
02:25:26,980 --> 02:25:27,460
terrible thing.

3456
02:25:27,900 --> 02:25:30,660
But then you have to remember the misrepresentation,

3457
02:25:30,780 --> 02:25:31,820
getting back to the old idioms,

3458
02:25:32,500 --> 02:25:33,980
sticks and stones will break my bones,

3459
02:25:34,120 --> 02:25:35,920
but names will never, never hurt me.

3460
02:25:36,260 --> 02:25:37,860
Has been

3461
02:25:38,560 --> 02:25:42,940
re-imagined in campus debates in the most asinine way.

3462
02:25:43,240 --> 02:25:44,960
People will literally say stuff like,

3463
02:25:45,240 --> 02:25:46,600
but now we know words can hurt.

3464
02:25:46,880 --> 02:25:49,080
And it's like, now we know words can hurt.

3465
02:25:49,430 --> 02:25:50,180
Guys,

3466
02:25:50,640 --> 02:25:55,420
you didn't have to come up with a special little thing that you teach children to make

3467
02:25:55,420 --> 02:25:56,460
her words hurt less.

3468
02:25:56,600 --> 02:25:57,920
If they never hurt in the first place,

3469
02:25:57,940 --> 02:25:58,960
it wouldn't even make sense.

3470
02:25:59,380 --> 02:26:03,980
The saying it's a saying that you repeat to yourself to give yourself strength.

3471
02:26:04,220 --> 02:26:07,180
When the bullies have noticed you're a little weird,

3472
02:26:07,440 --> 02:26:08,880
maybe a little personal,

3473
02:26:09,400 --> 02:26:10,340
um, the,

3474
02:26:10,800 --> 02:26:11,820
uh, and it helps.

3475
02:26:12,160 --> 02:26:14,140
It really does help to be like,

3476
02:26:14,160 --> 02:26:16,460
listen, okay, assholes are going to say asshole things.

3477
02:26:17,000 --> 02:26:20,260
Um, and I can't let them have that kind of power over me.

3478
02:26:20,560 --> 02:26:20,840
Yeah.

3479
02:26:21,580 --> 02:26:22,020
Yeah.

3480
02:26:22,060 --> 02:26:24,400
It still is a learning experience because it does,

3481
02:26:24,720 --> 02:26:25,880
it does, it does hurt.

3482
02:26:26,280 --> 02:26:28,420
But for the good people out there who actually,

3483
02:26:28,420 --> 02:26:30,560
you know, just sometimes think, think that they're venting,

3484
02:26:30,680 --> 02:26:31,680
you know, think about it.

3485
02:26:31,700 --> 02:26:33,560
Remember that there are people on the other side of it.

3486
02:26:35,100 --> 02:26:35,240
Yeah.

3487
02:26:35,240 --> 02:26:37,620
For me, it hurts my kind of faith in humanity.

3488
02:26:38,070 --> 02:26:39,160
Um, I know it shouldn't,

3489
02:26:39,160 --> 02:26:39,980
but it does sometimes

3490
02:26:40,620 --> 02:26:41,800
when I just see people being

3491
02:26:41,860 --> 02:26:43,120
cool to each other, it kind of,

3492
02:26:44,700 --> 02:26:45,200
it's,

3493
02:26:45,800 --> 02:26:46,620
uh, it floats

3494
02:26:47,620 --> 02:26:49,940
a cloud over my perspective of the world.

3495
02:26:50,360 --> 02:26:52,820
And that don't, I wish didn't have to be there.

3496
02:26:53,280 --> 02:26:53,340
Yeah.

3497
02:26:53,340 --> 02:26:55,000
That was always my sort of flippant,

3498
02:26:55,120 --> 02:26:56,960
but, uh, answer to that.

3499
02:26:57,180 --> 02:27:02,660
If, if mankind is basically good or basically evil being like the biggest debate in,

3500
02:27:02,660 --> 02:27:04,200
in, in philosophy and being like,

3501
02:27:04,500 --> 02:27:06,440
well, the problem with, uh, the first is there's

3502
02:27:06,440 --> 02:27:08,080
nothing basic about humanity.

3503
02:27:09,460 --> 02:27:09,800
Yeah.

3504
02:27:09,940 --> 02:27:12,600
What gives you hope about this whole thing about,

3505
02:27:12,720 --> 02:27:16,080
about this dark state that we're

3506
02:27:16,080 --> 02:27:18,440
in, as you describe, how can we get out?

3507
02:27:18,460 --> 02:27:20,480
What gives you hope that we will get out?

3508
02:27:21,300 --> 02:27:23,460
I think that people are sick of it.

3509
02:27:24,020 --> 02:27:26,280
Um, I think people are sick of

3510
02:27:27,080 --> 02:27:28,620
not being able to be authentic.

3511
02:27:28,790 --> 02:27:31,600
Um, and that's really, you know, what censorship is.

3512
02:27:31,780 --> 02:27:32,620
It's basically telling you,

3513
02:27:32,760 --> 02:27:33,140
don't be yourself.

3514
02:27:33,420 --> 02:27:35,380
Don't actually be to say what you think.

3515
02:27:35,900 --> 02:27:37,360
Um, don't show your personality.

3516
02:27:37,520 --> 02:27:38,280
Don't dissent.

3517
02:27:38,500 --> 02:27:39,120
Don't be weird.

3518
02:27:39,140 --> 02:27:39,840
Don't be wrong.

3519
02:27:40,800 --> 02:27:42,020
Um, and that's not sustainable.

3520
02:27:42,460 --> 02:27:43,120
I think that

3521
02:27:44,400 --> 02:27:45,940
people have kind of had enough of it.

3522
02:27:46,050 --> 02:27:50,460
Uh, but one thing I definitely want to say to your audience is

3523
02:27:51,140 --> 02:27:53,680
it can't just be

3524
02:27:53,680 --> 02:27:58,080
up to us, our viewers to try to fix this.

3525
02:27:58,760 --> 02:28:00,360
Um, and I think that,

3526
02:28:00,760 --> 02:28:03,280
and this may sound like it's an unrelated problem.

3527
02:28:03,880 --> 02:28:05,240
I think if there were

3528
02:28:06,220 --> 02:28:07,440
highly respected,

3529
02:28:07,760 --> 02:28:11,180
let's say extremely difficult ways to prove that

3530
02:28:11,180 --> 02:28:14,260
you're extremely smart and hardworking that cost little or nothing,

3531
02:28:15,360 --> 02:28:16,540
that actually can give

3532
02:28:17,660 --> 02:28:20,680
the Harvard's and the Yale's of the world to run for their money.

3533
02:28:20,780 --> 02:28:23,840
I think that might be the most positive thing we could do to,

3534
02:28:23,840 --> 02:28:24,580
to, to deal with a lot of

3535
02:28:24,580 --> 02:28:28,700
these problems and why I think the fact that we have become

3536
02:28:29,320 --> 02:28:31,440
a weird America with a great

3537
02:28:31,660 --> 02:28:35,060
anti elitist tradition has become weirdly elitist in this,

3538
02:28:35,340 --> 02:28:36,640
in, um, in the respect that

3539
02:28:36,640 --> 02:28:38,300
we not only again,

3540
02:28:38,320 --> 02:28:41,920
our leadership coming from these few fancy schools,

3541
02:28:42,480 --> 02:28:44,380
we actually have like great admiration for them.

3542
02:28:44,520 --> 02:28:45,700
We kind of look up to them,

3543
02:28:46,020 --> 02:28:47,340
but I think we'd have a lot

3544
02:28:47,340 --> 02:28:49,740
healthier of a society if people could prove,

3545
02:28:50,380 --> 02:28:52,480
you know, their excellence in ways that are

3546
02:28:52,480 --> 02:28:54,600
coming from completely different streams and,

3547
02:28:54,840 --> 02:28:56,040
and that, that, that are highly respected.

3548
02:28:56,140 --> 02:28:56,960
I sometimes talk about,

3549
02:28:57,340 --> 02:29:00,540
there should be a test that anyone who passes it gets like a,

3550
02:29:00,900 --> 02:29:01,120
you know,

3551
02:29:01,580 --> 02:29:05,260
a BA in the humanities that it's like a super BA,

3552
02:29:06,020 --> 02:29:06,480
like something,

3553
02:29:06,860 --> 02:29:08,000
like someone, not a GED.

3554
02:29:08,100 --> 02:29:09,040
That's not what I'm talking about.

3555
02:29:09,180 --> 02:29:10,500
I'm talking about something that like,

3556
02:29:11,580 --> 02:29:13,380
you know, one out of only a couple,

3557
02:29:13,500 --> 02:29:16,860
like a hundred people can pass some other way of actually, um,

3558
02:29:17,220 --> 02:29:21,160
uh, of not going through these massive bloated expensive institutions that people

3559
02:29:21,160 --> 02:29:22,240
can raise their hands and say,

3560
02:29:22,240 --> 02:29:23,140
I am smart and hardworking.

3561
02:29:23,700 --> 02:29:26,340
I think that could be an incredibly healthy way.

3562
02:29:26,600 --> 02:29:29,740
I think we need additional streams for creative people to be solving problems,

3563
02:29:29,820 --> 02:29:31,400
whether that's on X or someplace else.

3564
02:29:32,080 --> 02:29:35,720
Um, I think that there's lots of things that technology could do to really help with

3565
02:29:35,720 --> 02:29:35,940
this.

3566
02:29:36,160 --> 02:29:38,580
I think some of the stuff that Sal Khan is working on,

3567
02:29:38,920 --> 02:29:40,020
uh, Khan Academy could really help.

3568
02:29:40,720 --> 02:29:42,380
Um, so I think there's a lot of ways,

3569
02:29:42,480 --> 02:29:45,980
but they exist largely around coming up with new ways of doing things,

3570
02:29:46,120 --> 02:29:49,220
not just expecting the old things that have say

3571
02:29:50,140 --> 02:29:51,860
$40 billion in the bank

3572
02:29:52,440 --> 02:29:53,900
that they're going to reform themselves.

3573
02:29:54,180 --> 02:29:56,600
And here's my, you know, I've been picking on Harvard a lot,

3574
02:29:56,660 --> 02:29:57,700
but I'm going to pick on them a little bit more.

3575
02:29:58,580 --> 02:29:58,660
Um,

3576
02:29:59,180 --> 02:30:02,380
the, and, and, uh, I talk a lot about class again,

3577
02:30:02,640 --> 02:30:05,380
and you know, there's a great book called poison Ivy,

3578
02:30:05,380 --> 02:30:07,880
um, by Evan Mandry, which I recommend to everybody.

3579
02:30:07,880 --> 02:30:08,740
And it's outrageous.

3580
02:30:08,780 --> 02:30:10,280
It sounds like me and a rant at Stanford,

3581
02:30:10,760 --> 02:30:14,620
um, which was, uh, and I, and I think the status, you know,

3582
02:30:15,080 --> 02:30:17,020
elite higher education has more kids from

3583
02:30:17,020 --> 02:30:21,780
the top 1% than they have from the bottom 50 or 60% depending on the school.

3584
02:30:22,580 --> 02:30:27,000
Um, and when you look at how much they actually like replicate class privilege,

3585
02:30:27,160 --> 02:30:28,640
it's, it's really distressing.

3586
02:30:28,840 --> 02:30:30,300
So everybody should read poison Ivy.

3587
02:30:31,300 --> 02:30:32,280
And above all else,

3588
02:30:32,480 --> 02:30:35,580
uh, if you're weird, continue being weird.

3589
02:30:37,620 --> 02:30:39,760
And you're one of the most interesting,

3590
02:30:39,800 --> 02:30:41,560
one of the weirdest in the most beautiful

3591
02:30:41,560 --> 02:30:42,940
way people have ever met.

3592
02:30:43,000 --> 02:30:45,580
Greg, thank you for the really important work you do.

3593
02:30:46,300 --> 02:30:48,820
This was, this is

3594
02:30:51,960 --> 02:30:55,220
appreciate the class, the whole area that you brought here today,

3595
02:30:55,220 --> 02:30:55,600
man.

3596
02:30:55,600 --> 02:30:57,280
Um, this is an amazing conversation.

3597
02:30:57,540 --> 02:30:58,540
Thank you for the work you do.

3598
02:30:59,140 --> 02:30:59,840
Thank you.

3599
02:30:59,860 --> 02:31:00,200
Thank you.

3600
02:31:00,760 --> 02:31:04,260
And for me, who deeply cares about education, higher education,

3601
02:31:04,620 --> 02:31:08,520
thank you for holding the MITs and the Harvard's accountable,

3602
02:31:09,080 --> 02:31:09,980
uh, for, um,

3603
02:31:10,620 --> 02:31:12,020
doing right by the people that

3604
02:31:12,620 --> 02:31:13,420
walk their halls.

3605
02:31:13,600 --> 02:31:15,480
So thank you so much for talking to me.

3606
02:31:16,040 --> 02:31:20,260
Thanks for listening to this conversation with Greg Lukianoff to support this podcast.

3607
02:31:20,680 --> 02:31:22,520
Please check out our sponsors in the description.

3608
02:31:22,660 --> 02:31:25,760
And now let me leave you with some words from Noam Chomsky.

3609
02:31:27,000 --> 02:31:28,520
If you believe in freedom of speech,

3610
02:31:29,220 --> 02:31:31,440
you believe in freedom of speech for views, you don't

3611
02:31:32,400 --> 02:31:34,060
like. Gables was in favor

3612
02:31:34,060 --> 02:31:36,020
of freedom of speech for views he liked.

3613
02:31:36,640 --> 02:31:37,360
So was Stalin.

3614
02:31:38,060 --> 02:31:39,700
If you're in favor of freedom of speech,

3615
02:31:40,180 --> 02:31:44,330
that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.

3616
02:31:45,800 --> 02:31:48,620
Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.

Translations:

French transcription text:

GREG : Si le but est le projet de connaissance humaine, qui est de connaître le monde dans lequel il est, vous ne pouvez pas connaître le monde tel qu'il est sans savoir ce que pensent réellement les gens. Et ce que les gens pensent réellement est un fait extrêmement important à connaître. Donc, chaque fois que vous dites, vous ne pouvez pas dire que vous vous privez de la connaissance de ce que les gens pensent vraiment que vous causez ce que Tim ou Crown, qui fait partie de notre conseil consultatif, appelle la falsification des préférences. On se retrouve avec une image inexacte du monde qui, d'ailleurs, dans de nombreux cas, parce qu'il y a des militants qui veulent restreindre davantage la liberté d'expression, ont tendance à penser que les gens ont plus de préjugés qu'ils ne pourraient l'être. Et en fait, une façon très pratique d'aggraver les choses est que lorsque vous censurez les gens, cela ne change pas leur opinion. Cela les encourage simplement à ne pas le partager avec des personnes qui pourraient leur causer des ennuis. Cela les amène donc à parler à des personnes avec lesquelles ils sont déjà d'accord et la polarisation de groupe prend son envol.

LEX : Ce qui suit est une conversation avec Greg Lukianoff, défenseur de la liberté d'expression, avocat du premier amendement, président et PDG de FIRE, le fondement des droits et de l’expression individuels. Et il est l'auteur de Unleashing Liberty, co-auteur avec Jonathan Haidt de Coddling of the American Mind et co-auteur avec Ricky Schlott d'un nouveau livre qui sortira en octobre. Ils devraient absolument pré-commander maintenant appelé Canceling of the American Mind, qui est un compte rendu définitif de l'histoire, du présent et de l'avenir de la Cancel Culture, un terme utilisé et galvaudé dans le discours public, mais rarement étudié et compris avec la profondeur et la rigueur. ce que font Greg et Ricky dans ce livre et en partie dans cette conversation. La liberté d’expression est importante, en particulier sur les campus universitaires, l’endroit même qui devrait servir de champ de bataille aux idées, y compris les idées étranges et controversées qui devraient encourager la prise de risque audacieuse, et non le conformisme. Ceci est le podcast de Lex Friedman. Pour le soutenir, veuillez consulter nos sponsors dans la description. Et maintenant, chers amis, voici Greg Lukianoff. Commençons par la grande question. Qu’est-ce que la culture d’annulation ? Maintenant, vous avez dit que vous n'aimiez pas le terme tel qu'il a été, je cite, traîné dans la boue et abusé sans cesse par toute une série de personnalités controversées. Néanmoins, nous avons le terme. Qu'est-ce que c'est ?

GREG : La culture d'annulation est la hausse des campagnes, en particulier des campagnes réussies, qui ont commencé vers 2014 pour obtenir des personnes licenciées, expulsées, déportées, et cetera, pour des discours qui seraient normalement protégés par le premier amendement. . Et je dis qu'il serait protégé parce que nous parlons de circonstances dans lesquelles ce n'est pas nécessairement là que le premier amendement s'applique. Mais ce que je veux dire, c'est comme une analogie pour dire des choses pour lesquelles vous ne pouvez pas perdre votre emploi en tant qu'agent public, et aussi le climat de peur qui résulte de ce phénomène, le fait que vous pouvez perdre votre emploi parce que vous avez une mauvaise opinion. . Et il n'est pas subtil qu'il y ait eu une légère hausse, en particulier sur le campus vers 2014. John Ronson a écrit un livre intitulé So You've Been Publicly Shamed. Il est sorti en 2015, documentant déjà ce phénomène. J'ai écrit un livre intitulé Freedom From Speech en 2014. Mais c'est vraiment en 2017 que l'on a commencé à voir cela s'adresser aux professeurs. Et quand il s'agit du nombre de professeurs que nous avons vu être ciblés et perdre leur emploi, je fais cela depuis 22 ans et je n'ai rien vu de tel.

LEX : Il y a donc tellement beaucoup de choses que je veux vous demander ici. En fait, il suffit de regarder l’organisation de FIRE. Pouvez-vous expliquer quelle est l'organisation? Parce que c'est lié à toute cette lutte, à la montée de la culture du cancer et à la lutte pour la liberté d'expression depuis 2014 et avant.

GREG : FIRE a donc été fondée en 1999 par Harvey Silverglate. C'est un célèbre avocat des libertés civiles. Il est un peu dans la série. C'est lui qui m'a découvert au cours de ma vie très heureuse à San Francisco, mais qui savait que je cherchais un emploi dans le cadre du premier amendement. J'étais allé à la faculté de droit spécifiquement pour faire le premier amendement. Et il m'a trouvé, ce qui était plutôt cool. Sa protégée, Kathleen Sullivan, était la doyenne de la faculté de droit de Stanford. Et cela reste le meilleur compliment que j'ai jamais reçu de ma vie, c'est qu'elle m'a recommandé à Harvey. Et comme c’est la raison pour laquelle je suis allé à la faculté de droit, j’étais ravi de faire partie de cette nouvelle organisation. L'autre co-fondateur de FIRE est Alan Charles Kors. C'est juste un génie absolu. Il est l’un des plus grands experts mondiaux des Lumières et en particulier de Voltaire. Et si l'un de vos auditeurs aime les bons cours, il donne une conférence sur Blaise Pascal. Et Blaise, bien sûr, est célèbre pour le Pari de Pascal. Et je l’ai quitté très ému et impressionné et avec une profonde compréhension de l’importance de cette personne.

LEX : C'est intéressant. Vous m'avez mentionné hors ligne qu'il y avait un, au moins il fonctionnait en parallèle ou il y avait une connexion entre lel'amour de la science et l'amour de la liberté d'expression. Oui. Pouvez-vous peut-être expliquer où se trouve cette connexion ?

GREG : Bien sûr. Je pense que pour ceux d'entre nous qui, vous savez, ont vraiment consacré leur vie à la liberté d'expression, une chose qui nous passionne, que nous le sachions ou non, c'est l'épistémologie, vous savez, l'étude et la philosophie de connaissance. Vous savez, la liberté d’expression a de nombreuses dimensions morales et philosophiques, mais d’un point de vue pragmatique, elle est nécessaire parce que nous sommes des créatures aux connaissances incroyablement limitées. Nous nous trompons incroyablement nous-mêmes. J'aime toujours le fait que Yuval Harari fasse référence aux Lumières comme à la découverte de l'ignorance parce que c'est exactement ce dont il s'agissait. C'était soudain comme, wow, attends une seconde. Nous avons acquis toute cette sagesse populaire incroyablement intéressante, qui d'ailleurs peut être étonnamment fiable ici et là. Quand on commence à tester beaucoup, c'est absurde et ça ne tient pas. Même nos idées sur la façon dont les choses tombent, vous savez, comme l'a établi Galilée, comme même nos intuitions, sont tout simplement fausses. Une grande partie de l’histoire de la liberté d’expression s’est déroulée en même temps qu’une sorte de révolution scientifique. Donc, beaucoup des premiers débats sur la liberté d'expression étaient liés. Donc certainement Galileo, vous savez, je souligne toujours que Kepler était probablement comme l'idée encore plus radicale qu'il ne s'agissait même pas de sphères parfaites. Mais en même temps, en grande partie à cause de l’invention de l’imprimerie, il y a eu aussi tous ces développements politiques. Et, vous savez, je parle toujours de Jan Hus, vous savez, du célèbre héros tchèque qui a été brûlé vif et je pense en 1419. Mais il était fondamentalement Luther avant l'imprimerie. Avant que Luther puisse faire passer sa parole, vous savez, il n'avait aucune chance. Et c’était exactement ce qu’était Jan Hus. Mais un siècle plus tard, grâce à l’imprimerie, tout le monde pouvait savoir ce que pensait Luther et, bon sang, ils l’ont fait. Mais cela a bien sûr conduit à cette période complètement folle et hyper perturbée de l’histoire européenne.

LEX : Eh bien, vous avez mentionné de sauter un peu, le Premier Amendement. Tout d’abord, qu’est-ce que le Premier Amendement et quel est pour vous le lien entre le Premier Amendement, la liberté d’expression et la Cancel Culture ? Bien sûr.

GREG : Je suis donc un avocat du premier amendement, comme je l'ai mentionné, et c'est ce que je, c'est ma passion, c'est ce que j'ai étudié. Et je pense que la loi américaine du premier amendement est incroyablement intéressante. En une phrase, le Premier Amendement tente d’éliminer pratiquement toutes les raisons pour lesquelles l’humanité s’est entretuée tout au long de son existence. Que nous n'allions plus lutter pour l'opinion, que nous n'allions plus lutter contre la religion, que vous avez le droit de vous adresser à votre gouvernement pour obtenir réparation de vos griefs, que vous avez la liberté de vous associer. Que toutes ces choses en une seule phrase disaient : non, le gouvernement n'interférera plus avec votre droit à ces droits humains fondamentaux. Et donc une chose qui rend FIRE un peu différent des autres organisations est que nous ne sommes pas seulement une organisation du Premier Amendement, nous sommes une organisation de liberté d'expression. Et donc, et en même temps, une grande partie de ce que je pense être la liberté d'expression peut être bien expliquée en référence à de nombreuses lois du premier amendement, en partie parce que dans l'histoire américaine, certaines de nos personnes les plus intelligentes ont réfléchi à quels sont les paramètres de la liberté d'expression par rapport au premier amendement. Et beaucoup de ces principes sont très bien transposés, tout comme les idées pragmatiques. Ainsi, le plus grand péché en termes de censure s’appelle la discrimination de point de vue. En substance, vous autorisez la liberté d’expression, à l’exception de cette opinion. C’est maintenant le cas, et cela s’avère plus défendable. Et je pense qu'il est logique que si vous créez un forum et que vous le souhaitez, nous allons parler uniquement d'économie pour exclure les personnes qui veulent parler d'un sujet différent, mais c'est à juste titre considéré comme une affaire plus importante. Si vous avez créé un forum sur l'économie, nous n'allons pas laisser les gens parler de ce genre d'économie ou avoir cette opinion sur l'économie, plus particulièrement. Ainsi, de nombreux principes de la loi du premier amendement ont en fait beaucoup de sens philosophique en tant que bons principes pour savoir quand, comme ce qui est un discours protégé et non protégé, ce qui devrait vous causer des ennuis, comment vous l'analysez réellement, c'est pourquoi nous essayons réellement dans notre définition de la culture d'annulation pour fonctionner dans certaines des normes du premier amendement, juste dans la définition. Nous n'avons donc pas à nous enliser là-dessus non plus.

LEX : Vous dites tellement de choses intéressantes, mais si vous pouvez faire un lien sur la discrimination des points de vue, y a-t-il une zone grise de discussion ? Qu'est-ce que l'économie, et n'est-ce pas, pour l'exemple que vous avez donné ? Ouais.Est-ce, est-ce que c'est là, je veux dire, est-ce une science ? Ou est-ce un art de tracer des lignes sur ce qui n'est pas, n'est pas autorisé ?

GREG : Ouais. Vous savez, si vous dites que quelque chose est ou n'est pas économique, eh bien, vous pouvez diretout est économie et c'est pour cela que je veux parler de poésie. Il y aurait un exercice de dessin au trait là-dedans, mais disons tout de suite que vous décidez de l'ouvrir même à la poésie. C'est une grande différence entre dire, d'accord, maintenant nous sommes ouverts à la poésie, mais on ne peut pas dire, vous savez, Dante était mauvais. C'est comme si c'était une opinion interdite maintenant officiellement, dans ce forum par ailleurs ouvert, qui apparaîtrait immédiatement, à un niveau intuitif, comme un problème plus grave que le simple fait de dire que la poésie n'est pas de l'économie.

LEX : Ouais. Je veux dire, à ce niveau intuitif dont vous parlez, j'espère que nous avons tous ce genre d'intuition de base lorsque la ligne est franchie, c'est la même chose pour la pornographie, n'est-ce pas ? Vous savez, quand vous le voyez, je pense qu'il y a le même niveau d'intuition qui devrait être appliqué à tous les niveaux ici. Et c'est lorsque cette intuition est déformée par n'importe quelle force de la société, c'est là que cela commence à ressembler à de la censure.

GREG : Ouais. Je veux dire, les gens trouvent ça différent. Vous savez, si quelqu'un perd son emploi simplement à cause de ses opinions politiques, même si cet employeur a parfaitement le droit de vous licencier, je pense que les Américains devraient toujours se dire : eh bien, c'est vrai. Ils ont tous les droits du monde et je ne prétends pas que vous ne devriez peut-être pas licencier quelqu'un en raison de ses opinions politiques, mais réfléchissez bien. Comme quoi, quelle société voulons-nous, dans quel genre de société voulons-nous vivre ? Et ça a été drôle de regarder, vous savez, et je, je le souligne. Oui, je défendrai les entreprises, le premier amendement du droit d'association pour pouvoir avoir le droit légal de décider, vous savez, qui travaille pour elles. Mais d'un point de vue moral ou philosophique, si vous réfléchissez aux implications de, si chaque entreprise en Amérique devenait une association expressive, en plus d'être une organisation maximisant les profits, ce serait un désastre pour la démocratie car vous vous retrouveriez dans une situation là où les gens se diraient, je ne pense pas pouvoir dire ce que je pense vraiment et croire toujours que je peux garder mon emploi. Et c'est là que j'étais inquiet. J'avais l'impression que nous allions sur cette voie parce qu'une grande partie de la réponse initiale aux personnes annulées était très simplement, vous savez, Oh, mais ils ont le droit de se débarrasser de cette personne. Et ça, c'est la fin, le début et la fin de la discussion. Et je pensais que c'était une esquive. Je pensais que ce n'était pas vraiment une manière très sérieuse de procéder.

LEX : Si vous vous souciez à la fois du premier amendement et de la liberté d'expression d'y réfléchir, le simple fait de clarifier le premier amendement est en quelque sorte une incarnation juridique de l’idéal de la liberté d’expression, puis de la liberté d’expression appliquée au gouvernement. Et cela s'applique très spécifiquement au gouvernement et la liberté d'expression est l'application du principe d'aimer tout, y compris une sorte d'idéal philosophique de haut niveau de ce que c'est, de la valeur que les gens peuvent exprimer ce qu'ils pensent.

GREG : Ouais. C'est une idée plus ancienne, plus audacieuse et plus vaste. Et vous pouvez avoir une situation. Et je parle de pays qui ont une bonne loi sur la liberté d'expression, mais pas nécessairement une bonne culture de la liberté d'expression. Et j'explique que lorsque nous faisons parfois cette distinction entre la loi sur la liberté d'expression et la culture de la liberté d'expression, nous pensons d'une manière très floue. Et ce que je veux dire par là, c'est que le droit est généralement, en particulier dans un pays de common law, le reflet de normes. Ces juges sont aussi des personnes. Et dans de nombreux cas, la common law est censée reprendre nos idées intuitives d’équité et les inscrire dans la loi. Donc, si vous avez réellement une culture qui n’apprécie pas la liberté d’expression d’un point de vue philosophique, elle ne sera pas en mesure de protéger la liberté d’expression sur le long terme, même par la loi. Parce qu'en fin de compte, c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles je m'inquiète autant de certains de ces terribles cas qui sortent des facultés de droit. Parce que je crains que même si certaines lois américaines sur le premier amendement protègent très fortement le premier amendement pour l'instant, cela ne va pas rester ainsi. Si vous avez des générations d'étudiants en droit diplômés qui pensent en réalité qu'il n'y a rien, qu'il n'y a pas d'objectif plus élevé que de crier, vous êtes un adversaire.

LEX : Ouais. C'est pourquoi vous vous concentrez en grande partie ou en grande partie sur l'enseignement supérieur ou sur la période d'études, car l'éducation est le fondement de la culture.

GREG : Oui. Vous avez cette histoire, vous savez, euh, 64 ans, vous avez le mouvement pour la liberté d'expression à Berkeley et dans les années 65, vous avez la tolérance répressive d'Herbert Marcuse, qui était d'ailleurs une déclaration de, en passant, euh, nous à gauche, nous, nous ne devrions pas, nous devrions avoir la liberté d'expression, mais nous devrions avoir la liberté d'expression pour nous. Je veux dire, j'y suis allé, je suis revenu et j'ai relu, euh, euh, la tolérance répressive et à quel point elle est claire.J'ai oublié que j'avais oublié que c'est vraiment un peu comme, euh, et ces soi-disant conservateurs et de droite, nous devons les réprimer parce qu'ils sont des penseurs régressifs. Cela ne ressort vraiment pasquelque chose de plus sophistiqué que la très vieille idée, euh, que notre peuple est bon. Ils bénéficient de la liberté d’expression. Nous devrions, ils devraient le garder. L'autre côté est mauvais. Euh, nous, nous n'aurions pas dû, euh, et nous devons recycler la société. Et bien sûr, comme ça, ça finit par en être un autre, il était aussi fan de Mao. Il n’est donc pas surprenant que, bien sûr, le système doive s’appuyer sur une sorte de système totalitaire, euh. Euh, mais c'était une position risible, euh, euh, vous savez, euh, disons il y a 30, 40 ans, l'idée qu'essentiellement, vous savez, la liberté d'expression pour moi, pas pour le, euh, comme, comme le grand , vous savez, le champion de la liberté d'expression dont Hentoff avait l'habitude de dire que c'était quelque chose qui vous embarrassait. Mais j'ai vu ça quand j'étais à la faculté de droit en 97, j'ai vu ça pendant mon stage à l'ACLU en 99, euh, qu'il y avait un accident de train au ralenti qui arrivait et qu'essentiellement il y avait, euh, ces mauvais les idées du campus qui prenaient de plus en plus d'ampleur, pratiquement aucune liberté d'expression pour mon adversaire, étaient en fait de plus en plus acceptées et en partie parce que le monde universitaire devenait de moins en moins diversifié de points de vue. Je pense que, comme le souligne mon co-auteur Jonathan Haidt, lorsque la diversité des points de vue est faible, les gens commencent à penser d'une manière très tribale. Et si vous n'avez pas de dissidents respectés, vous n'avez pas de personnes à qui vous pouvez pointer du doigt et qui me disent : Hé, c'est une personne intelligente. Euh, c'est comme si c'était une personne intelligente, raisonnable et décente avec laquelle je ne suis pas d'accord, donc je suppose que tout le monde ne pense pas la même chose sur cette question. Vous commencez à avoir de plus en plus l'impression que, vous savez, seuls les méchants, uniquement les hérétiques, uniquement les blasphémateurs, uniquement les gens de droite, vous savez, euh, peuvent réellement penser de cette façon.

LEX : Chaque fois que vous dis quelque chose, j'ai toujours un million de pensées et un million de questions qui surgissent. Mais puisque vous avez mentionné qu'il y a une sorte de dérive comme vous l'écrivez dans le livre et que vous avez mentionné maintenant qu'il y a une dérive vers la gauche dans le monde universitaire, euh, nous allons peut-être aussi faire une distinction ici entre la gauche et la droite et l'annulation La culture telle que vous la présentez dans votre livre n'est pas nécessairement associée à un point de vue politique particulier, il existe des mécanismes des deux côtés qui aboutissent à l'annulation et à la censure, euh, en violation de la liberté d'expression.

GREG : Donc une chose Je veux être très clair sur le fait que le livre aborde à la fois la culture d'annulation de droite et de gauche. Ils sont différents, euh, à bien des égards et certainement, vous savez, euh, l'annulation de la culture de gauche est plus importante dans le monde universitaire où la gauche domine davantage. Euh, mais nous parlons beaucoup de la culture d'annulation venant des législatures. Nous parlons également beaucoup de la culture de l'annulation sur le campus, car même si, euh, la plupart des tentatives qui viennent du campus pour faire annuler les gens viennent toujours de la gauche, il y a beaucoup d'attaques qui viennent de la droite. de, vous savez, euh, les tentatives de différentes organisations et, euh, parfois quand il y a des histoires dans Fox News, vous savez, comme si elles s'en prenaient aux professeurs et environ un tiers des tentatives pour faire punir les professeurs qui réussissent en fait viennent de la droite. Et nous parlons de tentatives visant à interdire les livres. Euh, dans, dans le, dans le livre dont nous parlons, euh, et, euh, je parle de poursuivre en justice la législature de Floride. Rhonda Santus avait quelque chose appelé la loi stop woke, euh, dont nous avons dit à tout le monde que c'était ridiculement inconstitutionnel. Euh, ils ont essayé d'interdire, vous savez, des sujets particuliers dans l'enseignement supérieur et nous nous disons, non, c'est une blague. On se moquera de ça en dehors du tribunal. Euh, et ils ne nous ont pas écoutés et ils l'ont apporté, euh, ils l'ont adopté et nous avons intenté un procès et nous avons gagné. Maintenant, ils essaient à nouveau avec quelque chose qui est tout aussi inconstitutionnel et nous poursuivrons à nouveau en justice et nous le ferons, et nous gagnerons.

LEX : Pouvez-vous nous en dire plus sur une loi stop woke ? Il s'agit donc probablement d'une tentative de limiter l'enseignement de certains sujets à l'école.

GREG : Ouais. Fondamentalement, des sujets réveillés. Euh, vous savez, c'est plus, c'est le résultat d'une sorte de tentative d'aboutir à une théorie critique de la race. Euh, ce sont donc des sujets liés à la race, au sexe, et cetera. Euh, je ne me souviens pas exactement comment ils ont essayé de faire passer le Cabinet au CRT. Hum, mais en fait, la loi est vraiment bien établie : vous ne pouvez pas dire à l'enseignement supérieur ce qu'il est autorisé à enseigner sans violer, euh, sans violer le premier amendement. Et quand cela a été présenté à un juge, c'était exactement comme, euh, il était exactement aussi sceptique que nous le pensions. Je pense qu'il a qualifié cela de dystopique. Hum, et ce n'était pas une mince affaire.

LEX : Donc, si vous êtes contre ce genre d'enseignement, la bonne façon de le combattre est de faire valoir que ce n'est pas une bonne idée dans le cadre du programme au lieu de l'interdire du programme.

GREG : Ouais.C'est juste que l'État n'a pas le pouvoir de simplement dire, d'interdire, euh, vous savez, quoi, ce qu'enseignent, ce que les professeurs de l'enseignement supérieur enseignent. Maintenant, c'estCela devient un peu plus compliqué lorsque vous parlez de la maternelle à la 12e année, parce que l'État a un rôle à jouer dans la décision sur ce que le public enseigne de la maternelle à la 12e année parce que ce sont vos enfants, eux, c'est financé par les contribuables. Euh, et généralement, le législateur est impliqué. Euh, il y a un contrôle démocratique de ce processus.

LEX : Donc, de la maternelle à la terminale, y a-t-il également une tendance vers la gauche en termes d'administration qui gère le programme ?

GREG : Oui. , euh, là, là, il y a définitivement, euh, de la maternelle à la terminale, le, le, je veux dire, mes enfants vont à l'école publique. Euh, j'ai un enfant de cinq et sept ans, euh, et ils ont des professeurs adorables. Hum, mais nous avons rencontré beaucoup de problèmes avec les écoles en feu. Euh, et beaucoup de diplômés des écoles d’éducation ont fini par être les administrateurs qui ont réprimé la liberté d’expression dans l’enseignement supérieur. Et donc j'ai essayé de réfléchir à des moyens positifs de résoudre certains des problèmes que je vois de la maternelle à la terminale. Je pensais qu'en essayant simplement de dicter, vous n'enseigneriez pas les 10 livres suivants, vous savez, ou 20 ou 200 livres n'étaient pas la bonne façon de procéder. Maintenant, quand il s'agit de décider quels livres seront dans le programme, encore une fois, c'est quelque chose sur lequel le législateur, vous savez, ne peut pas, ne peut pas avoir son mot à dire, et c'est assez peu controversé, euh, en termes de loi. Mais en ce qui concerne la façon de lutter contre cela, j'avais quelque chose que, comme je suis en quelque sorte coincé avec une formule, j'appelle l'autonomisation de l'esprit américain. Euh, j'ai donné des principes qui étaient incompatibles, euh, avec le genre de réflexion de groupe et une forte insistance sur, euh, la politique identitaire, euh, dont, euh, vous savez, certains critiques se plaignent à juste titre de la maternelle à la terminale. , et nous, nous, c'est en fait une annulation de l'esprit américain, mais j'en ai une explication plus détaillée que je vais mettre sur mon blog, l'idée éternellement radicale.

LEX : Est-il possible légalement, c'est juste une question idiote, de créer peut-être une protection supplémentaire pour certains types de littérature en 1984 ou quelque chose qui reste dans le programme scolaire. Je veux dire, c'est déjà, tout est protégé, je suppose. Ouais. Je suppose que pour empêcher les administrateurs de trop manipuler le programme, comme stabiliser le programme. Je ne sais pas quel est le fonctionnement de l'école publique de la maternelle à la terminale.

GREG : De la maternelle à la terminale, vous savez, les législatures des États, vous savez, euh, elles en font partie. Ils en font partie et ils peuvent dire que vous devriez enseigner les livres suivants. Bien sûr, les gens sont toujours un peu inquiets du fait que, euh, si vous, euh, s'ils devaient recommander, vous savez, enseigner, euh, enseigner la déclaration d'indépendance, vous savez, cela finira par être, eh bien, ils vont enseigner que la déclaration d'indépendance visait simplement à protéger l'esclavage, ce qui n'enseignait pas un sujet particulier, quels manuels vous choisissez, quelle perspective vous adoptez, tout ce genre de choses.

LEX : On dirait que la religion commence à s'infiltrer dans toute la question de savoir comment, vous savez, la Bible est-elle autorisée à enseigner aux entreprises cela à l'éducation ? Euh, non, ouais.

GREG : Je veux dire, je suis, je suis athée, euh, avec un intérêt intense pour la religion. En fait, j'ai lu la Bible en entier cette année juste parce que je fais des choses comme ça. Et je ne l'avais jamais lu du début à la fin. Euh, ensuite j'ai lu le Coran parce que tu sais, et je vais essayer de lire le livre de Mormon, mais tu sais.

LEX : Eh bien, ils ont commencé à le faire, tu es tellement fascinant. Euh, est-ce que tu recommandes de faire ça ?

GREG : Je pense que tu devrais, euh, juste pour savoir, parce que c'est une telle pierre de touche, euh, dans la façon dont les gens parlent des choses, ça peut devenir assez fastidieux , mais je me suis même obligé à lire toutes les instructions très spécifiques sur la hauteur que doivent avoir les différentes parties du temple et la longueur que doivent avoir les vêtements et quelle forme ils doivent avoir et quoi, et ceux-ci vont sur un parcelle. Euh, ça, ça, c'est étonnamment, désolé, étonnamment gros morceau d'Exodus. Euh, je pensais que c'était plutôt dans le Lévitique et le Deutéronome. Euh, mais ensuite vous arrivez à des livres comme Job, vous savez, wow. Je veux dire, Job est une telle lecture et il est impossible que Job ait à l'origine cette fin. Comme Job l'est fondamentalement, cela commence comme ce pari pervers entre Dieu, euh, et Satan sur la question de savoir s'ils peuvent ou non faire renoncer à Dieu à un homme bon. Et au début, ils ne le peuvent pas, tout se passe de manière très prévisible. Et puis ils ont finalement vraiment torturé Job et il est devenu le meilleur, pourquoi Dieu est-il cruel ? Comment Dieu pourrait-il exister ? Comment un Dieu bon pourrait-il faire ces choses ? Et il bat, il devient comme le meilleur avocat du monde entier et il bat tout le monde, tous les gens qui viennent discuter avec lui. Lui, il leur fait enlever leur pantalon. Et puis soudain, à la fin, Dieu apparaît et il dit, euh, eh bien, vous savez, euh, je suis partout. Et c'est une réponse très déroutante.Il donne une réponse du genre : je suis là quand, quand, quand les lionnes accouchent et je suis là. Et au fait, il y a ce monstre géant Léviathan qui est trèsgrand et c'est très effrayant. Et moi, et je dois gérer l'univers. Et je me dis un peu, mon Dieu, tu dis que tu es très occupé ? Est-ce là, essentiellement, votre argument face à Job ? Et tu ne mentionnes pas le tout, tu ne mentionnes pas le tout, du genre, que j'ai parié que c'était pour ça que je te torturais, ça ne revient pas. Et puis à la fin, il décide, Dieu décide, comme Job, oh non, tu as tout à fait raison. J'avais totalement tort. Euh, désolé. Euh, et, et Dieu dit, je vais punir ces gens qui ont essayé de discuter avec vous et qui n'ont pas réussi, qui n'ont pas gagné. Alors, euh, donc il s'en débarrasse, je ne sais pas exactement ce qu'il leur fait. Je ne m'en souviens pas. Euh, et puis il rend à Job tout son argent et tout, et cela les rend super prospères. Et je me dis, ce n’est pas du tout la fin originale de ce livre. Comme, parce que cela le voudrait, c'était clairement un roman bien-aimé auquel ils ressemblaient, mais il ne peut pas avoir cette fin. D'accord. Alors, alors, alors, alors oui, donc c'est une longue façon de dire, je pense en fait que ça vaut la peine. Euh, une partie l'était, tu es toujours un peu surpris quand tu te retrouves dans le rôle, comme, euh, il y a des parties qui vont te surprendre, un peu comme le voyage d'Isaiah, euh, Ecclésiaste, Depeche mode.

LEX : Et vous l'avez fait, vous avez dit que vous aviez aussi, euh, le, le Coran. Ouais. Ce qui était fascinant. Alors qu'y a-t-il, il serait intéressant de se demander, y a-t-il une tension entre l'étude des textes religieux ou le fait de suivre une religion et le simple fait de croire en Dieu et de suivre les différents aspects de la religion avec la liberté d'expression ?

GREG : Euh, dans le premier amendement, euh, nous, nous avons quelque chose que nous appelons la clause religieuse et je n'ai jamais aimé l'appeler ainsi parce que ce sont deux choses brillantes l'une à côté de l'autre. L’État ne peut pas établir de religion officielle, mais il ne peut pas interférer avec votre droit de pratiquer votre religion. C'est beau. Deux choses à la fois. Et je pense qu’ils ont raison, et je pense qu’ils ont tous les deux tout à fait raison. Et je pense que parfois la droite est très enthousiasmée par la clause de libre exercice et la gauche est très enthousiasmée par l’établissement. Et j’ai aimé le fait que nous les ayons tous les deux ensemble. Maintenant, quel est le rapport avec la liberté d’expression ? Et j’avais raison sur le programme, dont nous parlions. Euh, je pense en fait que ce serait génial si les écoles publiques pouvaient enseigner la Bible, dans le sens de la lire comme un document historique. Mais à l'époque où j'étais à l'ACLU, chaque fois que je voyais des gens essayer cela, cela se transformait toujours en un plaidoyer pour, vous savez, un catholique ou un protestant ou une sorte de lecture orthodoxe même sur la religion. Euh, donc si vous en faites réellement quelque chose qui défend un point de vue particulier sur la religion, alors cela passe du côté de la clause d'établissement. Les Américains n’ont donc pas trouvé de moyen de l’enseigner réellement. Il est donc probablement préférable que vous, vous savez, appreniez, appreniez en dehors des cours d'une école publique.

LEX : Pensez-vous qu'il est possible d'enseigner la religion, euh, à partir de cours comme, euh, sur les religions du monde, sans manquer de respect aux religions ?

GREG : Je pense que la réponse est que cela dépend du point de vue de qui.

LEX : Euh, eh bien, comme le disent les pratiquants, vous êtes comme un adepte orthodoxe d'une religion. religion particulière. Est-il possible de ne pas vous énerver en enseignant comme toutes les grandes religions du monde ?

GREG : Pour certaines personnes, l'essentiel est que vous devez enseigner comme étant vrai. Ah, euh, et avec ça dans ces conditions, alors la réponse est non, vous ne pouvez pas l'enseigner sans, sans au moins offenser quelqu'un.

LEX : Vous ne pouvez pas dire que ces gens croient que c'est vrai ? Pouvez-vous le réformer ? Donc, en gros, vous devez marcher sur des œufs.

GREG : Vous pouvez faire de gros efforts et vous mettrez quand même certaines personnes en colère, mais les gens sérieux diront, oh non, vous avez en fait essayé d'être juste envers les autres. croyances ici. Euh, et moi, et j'essaie d'être respectueux, euh, autant que possible à propos de, euh, beaucoup de choses, je me trouve toujours beaucoup plus attiré par le bouddhisme et le stoïcisme. Eh bien, où dois-je aller ?

LEX : Eh bien, une chose intéressante pour revenir sur les campus universitaires est, euh, que l'incendie maintient le classement de la liberté d'expression dans les universités au classement .thefire .org. Je suis très fier d'eux. Je le recommande vivement car oubliez que même le simple classement, vous en apprendrez beaucoup sur les universités dans une perspective totalement différente de celle à laquelle les gens sont habitués lorsqu'ils choisissent l'université dans laquelle ils souhaitent aller. Cela donne juste une autre perspective sur le tout. Et il donne des citations de personnes qui y sont étudiants, etc., sur leurs expériences. Et, et cela donne une idée différente, vous pourriez peut-être parler des différentes mesures ici avant de parler de qui est parmi les cinq premiers et qui est parmi les cinq derniers.Quoi, quoi, quels sont les différents paramètres qui contribuent à l'évaluation ?

GREG : Alors on me demande depuis le premier jour de faire un classement des écoles, selon la liberté d'expression. Et même si c’était le cas, nous disposions de la meilleure base de données qui existeles codes vocaux des campus, euh, les politiques des universités qui violent le premier amendement ou les normes du premier amendement. Nous avons également la meilleure base de données que nous appelons la base de données de désinvitation. Euh, mais c'est en fait, euh, il est préférable de l'appeler la base de données déplatformante, c'est ainsi que nous allons l'appeler.

LEX : Euh, et ce sont tous des cas où quelqu'un a été invité en tant que conférencier à campus, puis ont été désinvités.

GREG : Désinvité ou déplateforming inclut également la nourriture.

LEX : Euh, donc ils sont arrivés et ils ne pouvaient pas vraiment parler.

GREG : Ouais, exactement. Euh, et, et, euh, et donc ayant cela, ce dont nous avions vraiment besoin pour avoir des sciences sociales sérieuses pour vraiment argumenter sérieusement sur ce qu'était le classement, euh, c'était de pouvoir en avoir une meilleure idée. du nombre de professeurs réellement punis pendant cette période. Euh, et puis le, le, le plus grand élément manquant était de pouvoir, euh, demander directement aux étudiants quel était l'environnement sur ce campus pour la liberté d'expression. Êtes-vous à l’aise d’être en désaccord les uns avec les autres ? Êtes-vous à l'aise d'être en désaccord avec vos, euh, avec vos professeurs ? Pensez-vous que la violence est acceptable en réponse à un orateur ? Pensez-vous que crier, euh, pensez-vous que crier est acceptable ? Pensez-vous que bloquer l’accès des gens à un haut-parleur est acceptable ? Euh, et une fois que nous avons pu rassembler tous ces éléments, nous avons d'abord fait un test, je pense en 2019, environ 50. Et nous le faisons depuis quatre ans maintenant, en essayant toujours de faire évoluer la méthodologie. de plus en plus précis pour mieux refléter l'environnement réel de certaines écoles. Hum, et cette année, l'école numéro un était l'université technologique du Michigan, ce qui était une, une belle surprise. Euh, l'école numéro deux était en fait l'université d'Auburn. Euh, ce qui était, euh, agréable de voir, euh, dans le top 10, l'école prestigieuse la plus connue est en fait l'UVA, euh, qui a très bien réussi cette année. L'Université de Chicago n'était pas contente de ne pas être numéro un, mais l'université de Chicago est 13e et elle était numéro un ou parmi les trois premiers depuis des années.

LEX : Alors, pouvez-vous expliquer, c'est presque surprenant. Est-ce à cause, euh, des départements d'économie vraiment forts et des choses comme ça ou quoi, pourquoi ?

GREG : Ils ont eu une affaire impliquant un étudiant. Ils ne reconnaissaient pas un chapitre du tournant américain et ils ont avancé un argument très classique, euh, que nous, et classique dans la mauvaise façon dont nous entendons les campus à travers le pays. Oh, nous avons un campus républicain, nous n'avons donc pas besoin de ce groupe conservateur supplémentaire. Et nous nous disons, non, je suis désolé. Comme nous avons vu des dizaines et des dizaines, voire des centaines de tentatives pour obtenir cet étudiant conservateur en particulier, un groupe d'étudiants, euh, le reconnaissez-vous ou non ? Et donc nous leur avons dit, écoutez, ceci comme, euh, nous leur avons dit à Fire que, euh, vous savez, nous considérons cela comme sérieux et ils ne reconnaîtraient pas le groupe. Donc ça, c'est un, ça, c'est un point en moins dans notre classement et c'était suffisant pour les faire tomber, ils auraient probablement été numéro deux du classement. Euh, mais maintenant ils sont 13 sur deux 48. C'est toujours l'une des meilleures écoles du pays. Je n'ai aucun problème à dire que l'école qui n'a pas si bien réussi, euh, euh, à moins 10,69 moins 10,69 et nous avons arrondi à zéro était Harvard et Harvard n'a pas été très satisfaite de ce résultat. .

LEX : La seule école à recevoir le classement épouvantable.

GREG : Ouais. Et il y a quelques personnes, oh, Harvard, oh, Harvard. Et il y a quelques personnes qui ont vraiment, je pense, fait une erreur en devenant très Harvard, euh, en disant, j'ai demandé à des statisticiens d'examiner ça et ils, et ils, ils, ils pensent votre méthodologie est une blague. Et, euh, et j'aime le souligner, et cette affaire n'était pas si importante. Et cet érudit n'était pas cet érudit, comme l'un des arguments contre l'un des érudits que nous avions retenus contre eux, euh, la punition était que ce n'était pas un érudit très célèbre ou influent. Et je suis un peu du genre, donc votre argument semble être du snobisme. En gros, comme vous, vous ne comprenez pas notre méthodologie pour une raison. Et puis vous dites qu'en réalité, cet érudit n'était pas assez important pour compter. Et au fait, Harvard, au fait, Harvard, euh, si nous, le campus de Harvard, ouais. Si nous, même si nous prenions tous vos arguments comme vrais, même si nous décidions de nous débarrasser de ces deux professeurs, euh, vous seriez toujours en nombre négatif. Vous seriez toujours bon dernier. Vous seriez toujours après Georgetown et Penn. Et aucune de ces écoles n’est bonne pour la liberté d’expression.

LEX : Je devrais dire que les cinq derniers sont l'université de Pennsylvanie, Nicosette Penn, euh, l'université de Caroline du Sud, l'université de Georgetown et l'université Fordham.

GREG : Tout cela est très bien mérité. Il y a tellement de mauvais cas dans toutes ces écoles.

LEX : Quelle est la meilleure façon de se retrouver au fondcinq ?

GREG : Si vous êtes une université, quel est, quel est le chemin le plus rapide vers ce négatif, vers ce zéro, beaucoup de déplateforme, euh, ça, euh, quand nous avons regardé les cinq derniers , euh, 81 % des tentatives pour retirer la plate-forme des haut-parleurs ont réussi dans les cinq derniers. Euh, il y avait quelques écoles, je pense que Penn y compris, où à chaque tentative, chaque fois qu'un étudiant, comme s'y opposait, un groupe d'étudiants s'opposait à la venue de cet orateur, ils annulaient ce, ce discours. Et je pense, je pense que Georgetown avait un taux de réussite de cent pour cent. Je pense que Penn avait un taux de réussite de cent pour cent. Je pense qu'Harvard en a défendu quelques-uns, mais la plupart du temps, euh, les gens ont également été déplatformés là-bas.

LEX : Alors, comment repousser le déplatformage ? Eh bien, qui, qui le ferait ? Est-ce que ce sont d'autres étudiants ? Est-ce la faculté ? Est-ce l'administration ? Quelle est la dynamique du recul, parce que j'imagine que c'est en partie dû à la culture, mais j'imagine que chaque université a un groupe d'étudiants qui protesteront contre pratiquement chaque orateur. Et il s'agit de savoir comment vous répondez à cette protestation.

GREG : Eh bien, voici, voici le sale petit secret sur le grand changement de 2014. Euh, et, et le feu et moi et la hauteur, euh, J'ai été très clair sur le fait que le grand changement que nous avons constaté sur le campus était que pendant la majeure partie de ma carrière, les étudiants étaient très attachés à la liberté d'expression. Ils constituaient le meilleur groupe en faveur de la liberté d'expression, sans aucune ambiguïté jusqu'en 2013 et 2014 environ. Et ce n'est qu'en 2014 que nous avons eu cette expérience très, vous savez, un peu triste pour nous, où tout à coup, les étudiants étaient ceux qui préconisaient le déplatformage et un nouveau discours. les codes étaient un peu similaires à ceux qu'ils faisaient au milieu des années 80, par exemple. Mais voici le sale petit secret. Ce ne sont pas les étudiants, ce sont juste les étudiants, ce sont les étudiants et les administrateurs, parfois seulement une poignée d'entre eux, qui travaillent ensemble pour créer certains de ces problèmes. Et c’est exactement ce qui s’est passé à Stanford. Quand Kyle Duncan, euh, un cinquième juge de circuit a essayé de parler à mon alma mater et un cinquième de la classe s'est présenté pour le crier. Euh, c'était une véritable démonstration de ce qui se passait, de ce qui se passait ces 10 minutes après le début des cris d'un juge du cinquième circuit. Et je continue de souligner que parce que je suis un avocat constitutionnel, les juges du cinquième circuit sont de grosses affaires. Ils se situent un niveau en dessous de la Cour suprême. Euh, vous savez, environ un cinquième de l'école se présente pour les crier après 10 minutes de cris et l'administrateur, un administrateur du DEI se lève avec un discours préparé qu'elle, qu'elle a écrit. C'est un discours de sept minutes dans lequel elle parle de la liberté d'expression. Peut-être que le jus ne vaut pas le coup. Et nous étions dans cette faculté de droit où les gens pouvaient apprendre à remettre en question ces normes. Il est donc clair qu'il y avait une coordination, vous savez, entre certains de ces administrateurs et, après avoir parlé aux étudiants là-bas, ils ont participé à des réunions, de longues réunions, pendant longtemps. Ils se présentent, crient. Ensuite, ils prennent sept minutes supplémentaires pour faire la leçon à l'orateur sur la liberté d'expression, qui n'est pas, n'est pas le jus de la liberté d'expression, ne vaut pas la peine d'être pressée. Euh, et pour le reste, c'est juste du chahut constant. Euh, après son départ, c'est clairement, et ceci, et quelque chose de très similaire, vous savez, s'est produit à plusieurs reprises à Yale où il était très clair que les administrateurs aidaient avec beaucoup de ces perturbations. Je pense donc que chaque fois qu'il y a une critique dans une université, l'enquête devrait avant tout se demander si les administrateurs ont contribué à créer ce problème ? Ont-ils fait quelque chose pour l'arrêter ? Parce que je pense qu'une grande partie de ce qui se passe ici est l'hyperbureaucratisation des universités avec beaucoup plus de gens idéologiques qui pensent que leur travail principal consiste essentiellement à contrôler le discours, plus ou moins, ils encouragent les étudiants, désolé, ils sont encourager les étudiants qui ont des opinions qu'ils aiment, euh, à crier. Euh, et c'est pourquoi ils doivent vraiment enquêter là-dessus. Et c'est, euh, à Stanford, l'administrateur qui, qui a fait les remarques préparées, euh, sur le jus, ne valait pas le coup. Elle n'a pas été invitée à nouveau à Stanford, mais elle est l'un des seuls exemples auxquels je puisse penser où ces choses se produisent souvent où un administrateur a clairement facilité quelque chose qui était une dénonciation ou une déplateforme ou qui a entraîné le licenciement d'un professeur ou a abouti à un un étudiant est expulsé alors que l'administrateur s'en sort indemne ou probablement dans certains cas a même obtenu une promotion.

LEX : Et donc un petit nombre d'administrateurs, peut-être même un seul administrateur pourrait participer à l'encouragement et à la organisation et ainsi responsabiliser l'ensemble du processus.

GREG : Et c'est quelque chose que j'ai vu tout au long de ma carrière.Et la seule chose qui est assez difficile à prendre sur le fait, pour ainsi dire. Et c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles il est utile que les gens soient au courant de cela, vousje sais, euh, parce que c'était ce cas incroyable. C'était à l'université de Washington. Euh, et nous avons en fait présenté cela dans un documentaire réalisé en 2015, 20, sorti en 2015, 2016 et intitulé, pouvons-nous prendre une blague ? Hum, et c'est à ce moment-là que nous avons commencé à remarquer que quelque chose changeait sur le campus. On entendait aussi que des comédiens disaient qu'ils ne pouvaient plus user de leur bonne humeur. C'était à peu près au moment où Jerry Seinfeld et Chris Rock disaient qu'ils ne pouvaient pas, euh, ils ne voulaient pas jouer sur les campus parce qu'ils, ils ne pouvaient pas, ils, ils, ils ne pouvaient pas être drôles. Euh, mais nous avons présenté le cas d'un comédien qui voulait faire une comédie musicale intitulée La passion de la comédie musicale, se moquant de la passion du Christ dans le but déclaré d'offenser tout le monde, tous les groupes de la même manière. C’était vraiment une mission de South Park. Euh, et c'est un cas inhabituel parce que nous avons en fait reçu des documents montrant que des administrateurs achètent des billets pour des étudiants en colère et organisent un événement où ils les entraînent, pour sauter au milieu et crier, je suis offensé. Comme eux, ils leur ont acheté des billets. Ils les ont envoyés vers ceci, cette chose dans le but de le crier. Maintenant, sans surprise, lorsque vous envoyez un groupe d'étudiants en colère pour arrêter une pièce, cela ne va pas s'arrêter là, je suis simplement offensé. Euh, et ça a chauffé. Il y a eu des menaces de mort, euh, et puis la police de Pullman Washington a dit à Chris, Chris Lee, le gars qui a fait la pièce, qu'ils ne les protégeraient pas réellement. Maintenant, ce n'est pas tous les jours que vous aurez ce genre de preuve tangible que, que, que, euh, en voyant réellement les administrateurs, euh, ce serait si, euh, si effronté qu'ils aient enregistré le fait qu'ils ont acheté je leur ai donné des billets et je les ai envoyés. Mais je pense que beaucoup de ces choses se produisent. Et je pense que c'est une bonne excuse pour réduire l'un des gros problèmes de l'enseignement supérieur aujourd'hui, qui est l'hyperbureaucratisation.

LEX : D'après votre expérience, y a-t-il une distinction entre les administrateurs et les facultés en ce qui concerne, euh, les auteurs de ceci, de ce genre de choses ? Donc si, si nous nous débarrassions de tout, comme Harvey l'a dit, en se débarrassant d'un grand pourcentage de l'administration, est-ce que cela aide à résoudre le problème ou est-ce que le corps professoral aussi, un petit pourcentage du corps enseignant participe également à l'encouragement dans le organisation de ce genre d'annulation.

GREG : Ouais. Et c’est quelque chose qui a été profondément décevant. Euh, c'est cela quand on regarde l'énorme augmentation des tentatives de licenciement de professeurs que nous avons constatées au cours des 10 dernières années et en fait au cours des 22 dernières années, aussi loin que nos archives remontent. D'abord, ils sont majoritairement dirigés par des administrateurs, qui tentent de faire punir les professeurs. Euh, et c'était surtout, vous savez, je dirais que c'était ma carrière jusqu'en 2013, c'était de lutter contre les excès administratifs. Euh, alors vous avez commencé à avoir le problème en 2014 avec des étudiants qui essayaient de faire annuler des personnes. Euh, et cela s'est vraiment accéléré en 2017 et en nombre. Donc, une chose qui facilite la documentation est la pétition visant à faire virer ou punir les professeurs. Euh, et à quel point ceux-ci proviennent de manière disproportionnée des étudiants. Mais une autre forte hausse a été celle des collègues professeurs qui ont exigé que leurs collègues professeurs soient punis. Et ça, pour moi, c'est un peu honteux. Vous, vous, vous ne devriez pas être fier d'avoir signé la pétition pour récupérer votre collègue professeur. Et ce qui est, ce qui est encore plus, euh, plus, plus honteux, c'est que nous obtenons, ceci, c'est, c'est presque devenu un cliché dans le feu. Quand quelqu'un est confronté à l'une de ces campagnes d'annulation en tant que professeur, je reçois des lettres de certains de mes amis disant : « Je suis vraiment désolé, cela vous est arrivé. Et ce sont les mêmes personnes qui ont publiquement signé la pétition pour les faire virer.

LEX : Ouais. Ouais. Ouais. L'intégrité est une chose importante dans ce monde. Et je pense que, dans une certaine mesure, je suis tellement surpris que les gens ne défendent pas davantage cela parce qu'il y a tellement de faim pour cela. Et si vous avez le courage, en tant que professeur ou administrateur, de vraiment vous lever, de vous lever, euh, avec éloquence, avec rigueur, avec intégrité, j'ai l'impression qu'il est impossible pour quiconque de faire quoi que ce soit parce qu'il y a une telle faim. C'est tellement rafraîchissant. Ouais. Je pense que tout le monde convient que la liberté d'expression est une bonne chose. Oh, je ne le fais pas, je ne le fais pas.

GREG : Eh bien, d'accord. Pardon pardon. Je ne suis pas d'accord. La majorité des gens, même dans les universités, ont faim, mais c'est presque comme, euh, ce genre de nervosité parce qu'il y a un petit nombre de voix fortes. Ce sont eux qui crient. Donc, je veux dire, encore une fois, c'est là qu'un grand leadership entre en jeu. Et donc, vous savez, les présidents d'université devraient probablement, euh, faire des déclarations claires du genre, ce n'est pas le cas, c'est un endroit où nous valorisons la liberté d'expression. .Quand, et c'était tout au long de ma carrière, euh, un président, un président d'université qui a mis le pied très tôt et a dit, non, vousvous savez, nous n'avons pas l'intention de renvoyer ce professeur. Nous n'expulsons pas l'étudiant. Cela met souvent fin au problème très rapidement. Bien que parfois, et c'est là que l'on peut vraiment voir l'implication administrative, les étudiants font des choses comme prendre la direction du bureau du président. Et puis cette reprise sera prise en charge par l’université. Les gens diront parfois que c'est un peu comme, oh, c'est clairement comme, euh, mon ami Sam Abrams, quand ils ont essayé de le faire virer à l'université Sarah Lawrence. Euh, et, euh, c'était une des fois où c'était utilisé comme un peu comme, oh, c'était hostile à l'université parce qu'eux, les étudiants ont pris le contrôle du bureau du président. Et je me dis, non, ils les ont laissés reprendre le bureau du président. Et je ne sais pas si c'était l'un des cas dans lesquels la prise de contrôle a été prise en charge, mais s'il y a jamais eu une sorte de signe du genre, oui, ce n'est pas le cas, c'est en fait vraiment très amical .

LEX : Eh bien, dans un certain sens, manifester et avoir des opinions très arrêtées, même des opinions ridicules, folles et sauvages, est une bonne chose. C’est juste que cela ne devrait pas conduire à de véritables licenciements ou à des délocalisations de personnes. Comme si c'était bien de protester. Ce n'est tout simplement pas bon, euh, que l'université soutienne cela et prenne des mesures en fonction de cela.

GREG : Et c'est l'une de ces tensions dans le premier amendement. en fait, je pense que sa version est assez simple. Essentiellement, vous avez une application, vous avez absolument le droit de, euh, consacrer votre vie à mettre fin à la liberté d'expression et à ridiculiser en tant que concept. Et il y a des gens qui, qui le sont vraiment, peuvent paraître très méprisables même à l’égard de la philosophie de la liberté d’expression. Euh, et nous défendrons votre droit de faire ça. Nous ne serons pas non plus d’accord avec vous. Et si vous essayez de faire virer un professeur, nous serons de l’autre côté. Maintenant, je pense que vous aviez Randy Kennedy, que je l'aime vraiment. Je pense que c'est un gars formidable, mais il nous a critiqué pour notre base de données déplateforme en disant que cela revient à dire que les étudiants ne peuvent pas protester contre les orateurs. Je me dis, d'accord, c'est idiot. Euh, euh, nous tirons car une organisation a toujours défendu le droit de manifester. Nous défendons constamment les droits des manifestants pour les droits, sans croire que les manifestants ont le droit de dire ceci, au fond, tel serait. Punir les orateurs. Nous n'appelons pas à punir, euh, euh, les manifestants, mais ce que nous disons, c'est que vous ne pouvez pas laisser les manifestants gagner s'ils exigent que quelqu'un soit renvoyé pour sa liberté d'expression.

LEX : Il y a donc une limite entre les manifestants qui protestent et l'université qui agit sur la base de la protestation.

GREG : Ouais, exactement. Et bien sûr, criez que ce n’est que de la censure populaire. Euh, et c'est quelque chose dans lequel l'université, la façon dont vous gérez cette tension dans la loi du premier amendement est essentiellement un peu comme le seul devoir positif du gouvernement. Le premier, le devoir négatif, ce qu’il n’est pas permis de faire, c’est de vous censurer. Hum, mais c'est un devoir positif, c'est que si, si je veux dire des choses horribles, ou d'ailleurs, de grandes choses qui ne sont pas populaires dans un parc public, euh, vous ne pouvez pas laisser la foule me crier dessus. Hum, vous ne pouvez pas autoriser ce qu'on appelle le veto d'un chahuteur.

LEX : C'est tellement intéressant. Parce que j’ai l’impression que cela joue également sur les réseaux sociaux. Parce que, euh, vous savez, il y a toute cette discussion sur la censure et la liberté d'expression, mais pour moi, la question de la carotte est presque plus intéressante. Une fois la liberté d’expression établie, comment encourager un débat et un désaccord de haute qualité ? J'y pense beaucoup.

GREG : Et c'est l'une des choses dont nous parlons dans l'annulation de l'esprit américain, c'est le plaidoyer en faveur de la vérité et le fait que la culture de l'annulation est cruelle. C'est impitoyable. C’est anti-intellectuel, mais cela ne vous mènera jamais nulle part dans votre vérité. Et vous allez perdre tellement de temps à détruire vos adversaires, euh, dans quelque chose qui ne pourra jamais vous amener à la vérité à travers le processus, bien sûr, où vous n'obtiendrez jamais directement la vérité. Vous ne faites que réduire la fausseté.

LEX : Ouais. Mais tout le monde ayant un mégaphone sur Internet en toute anonymat, il semble que c'est mieux que la censure, mais il semble qu'il y ait des incitations en plus. En plus de cela, vous pouvez construire, euh, oui, pour encourager un meilleur discours. Ouais. C'est comme inciter quelqu'un qui déploie énormément d'efforts pour présenter même les arguments les plus ridicules, mais qui, fondamentalement, n'incluent aucun des éléments que vous soulignez en termes d'astuces rhétoriques pour mettre fin aux conversations, font simplement de très bons arguments. arguments pour quoi que ce soit.Peu importe qu'il s'agisse d'un communisme pour le fascisme, peu importe ce que vous voulez dire, mais faites-le avec une échelle, avec un contexte historique, avec, euh, euh, avec Steel Man de l'autre côté, toutes ces sortes d'éléments.

GREG : Nous essayons d'en faire troispoints majeurs du livre. La première, euh, consiste simplement à annuler que la culture est réelle. C'est une époque historique, euh, et c'est à une échelle historique. La deuxième est que vous devriez considérer la culture de l'annulation comme faisant partie d'une rhétorique, comme d'une rhétorique paresseuse plus large, euh, une approche de quoi, quoi, ce que nous appelons des arguments gagnants sans arguments gagnants. Et nous entendons cela dans deux sens, sans avoir d’arguments gagnants ou sans avoir réellement d’arguments uniques. Et nous parlons de toutes les différentes forteresses rhétoriques que possèdent la gauche comme la droite et qui vous empêchent de le faire, qui vous permettent de simplement renvoyer la personne, euh, ou d'esquiver l'argumentation sans jamais vraiment aborder le fond de la question. argument. La troisième partie est simplement, vous savez, comment pouvons-nous y remédier ? Mais le truc de la forteresse rhétorique est en fait quelque chose qui me passionne beaucoup parce que cela interfère avec notre capacité à découvrir la vérité et cela nous fait perdre du temps et franchement, c'est aussi en quelque sorte puisque l'annulation de la culture fait partie de cette tactique rhétorique, cela peut aussi ruiner des vies.

LEX : Ce serait en fait vraiment amusant de parler de cet aspect particulier du livre. Et je vous recommande fortement, si vous écoutez ceci, d'aller pré-commander le livre maintenant.

GREG : Euh, quand sort-il ? 17 octobre. D'accord. L’annulation de l’esprit américain. D'accord. Donc, dans le livre, vous avez également une liste de tactiques rhétoriques bon marché utilisées à la fois par la gauche et la droite. Et puis vous avez une liste de tactiques utilisées par la gauche et par la droite. Il y a donc la rhétorique, la forteresse rhétorique parfaite que la gauche utilise et la forteresse rhétorique efficace qu'utilise la droite.

LEX : La première concerne l'isme. Peut-être pourrions-nous en passer en revue quelques-unes qui captivent votre cœur à ce moment particulier alors que nous en parlons. Et si, si vous pouvez en décrire des exemples ou si, euh, il y a des aspects que vous voyez là, particulièrement efficaces. Alors, euh, qu'en est-il de l'isme, c'est se défendre contre les critiques de votre camp en évoquant les prétendus actes répréhensibles de l'autre camp.

GREG : Je veux faire des petites cartes de ces, euh, de toutes ces tactiques et commencer à utiliser les sur X tout le temps parce qu'ils sont si couramment déployés.

LEX : Et qu'en est-il de l'isme que je mets en premier pour une raison, vous savez, ce serait une idée intéressante d'intégrer cela dans Twitter slash X où les gens, vous savez, au lieu de cliquer sur le cœur, ils peuvent cliquer sur laquelle des tactiques rhétoriques il s'agit. Et puis, parce que vous savez, il y a en fait des notes de la communauté. Je ne sais pas si vous avez vu sur X que vous pouvez contribuer des notes et c'est assez fascinant. Cela fonctionne vraiment très bien, mais pour lui donner un peu plus de structure. Ouais. En fait, c'est une méthode vraiment intéressante.

GREG : Ouais. En fait, quand je réfléchissais à la manière dont X pourrait être utilisé pour argumenter en faveur de la vérité, je ne voudrais pas que cela fasse que, vous savez, tout le monde soit lié à cela. Mais je pense que j'imagine être presque comme un flux au sein de X qui était axé sur la vérité, qui accepte certaines règles supplémentaires sur la façon dont ils argumenteraient. Ouais, mec.

LEX : J'adorerais ça. Alors qu'en termes de flux qui se croisent et peuvent être séparés, il y a celui qui parle de merde, où les gens aiment simplement dire de la merde. D'accord. Vas-y, mec. Et puis il y a la vérité et puis, euh, je veux dire, ils disent, puis il y a l'humour, puis il y a les bonnes vibrations. Vous savez, je ne suis pas comme quelqu'un qui a absolument besoin de bonnes vibrations tout le temps, mais parfois c'est agréable d'avoir, c'est agréable de simplement se connecter et de ne pas avoir à voir le drame, les combats, les querelles, le, les annulations, les mamans, tout ça. C'est bien de voir, euh, c'est pour ça que je vais sur Reddit, ou comme, euh, quels sont les animaux mignons, s'il y a des chiots et des chatons mignons.

GREG : Et c'est comme, je veux juste voir Ryan Reynolds chanter avec Will Farrell.

LEX : Je veux dire, parfois c'est tout ce dont tu as besoin dans mon cœur. Ouais. Pas tout le temps, juste un petit peu et revenons à la bataille pour la vérité. D'accord. Alors qu'en est-il de l'ism ?

GREG : Et en tant que Mia ? C'est partout. Euh, quand, quand vous regardez ça, euh, quand vous regardez Twitter, quand vous regardez les médias sociaux en général, euh, et le premier, comme ce que nous appelons la course du combattant, est fondamentalement éprouvé par le temps, démodé, vous savez , des esquives argumentatives que tout le monde utilise. Et qu’en est-il d’Asm, c’est juste évoquer quelque chose, euh, vous savez, comme si quelqu’un argumentait, comme si Biden était corrompu. Et puis quelqu'un dit, eh bien, Trump était pire, vous savez, et ce n'est pas un argument illégitime, vous savez, à revenir, mais c'est le cas, cela semble se produire.Chaque fois que quelqu'un fait une affirmation, quelqu'un souligne simplement quelque chose d'autre qui se passait et cela peut être de plus en plus atténué par rapport à ce que vous essayez réellement d'argumenter. Et quand vous, et puis vous voyez ça tout le temps sur les réseaux sociaux et c'est en quelque sorte, vous savez, j'étais un grand fan de l'émission quotidienne de Jon Stewart, mais énormémentde ce qu'était l'humour et quelle était la tactique pour discuter de cette chose ici. C'est comme, Oh, je fais valoir cet argument sur ce problème important. Oh, en fait, vous savez, il y a cet autre problème ici qui me préoccupe davantage. Et ça, ça, vous savez, et sur le, vous savez, choisissons le bon ici. Donc le 6 janvier, vous savez, regarder tout le monde se disputer à propos de, euh, chop, vous savez, comme, euh, euh, la partie occupée de Seattle ou la partie occupée de Portland et le décor, et en gros, j'essayais d'aimer, Oh, vous évoquez l'émeute du 6 janvier. Euh, et au fait, j'habite à Capitol Hill. Alors croyez-moi, j'étais très conscient de combien c'était effrayant et mauvais. Euh, tu sais, comme je l'ai dit, mon père a grandi en Yougoslavie et c'était une nuit où nous dînions tous au sous-sol. Parce que je me dis : Oh, quand ça va mal, mange au sous-sol. C'était, c'était, c'était vraiment effrayant. Et les gens essaieraient de détourner l’attention du sérieux du 6 janvier en faisant valoir que, oh, eh bien, il se passe des choses folles et horribles dans tout le pays. Euh, vous savez, les émeutes, euh, euh, euh, sont venues de certaines manifestations pour la justice sociale. Et bien sûr, la réponse est que vous pouvez être préoccupé par ces deux choses et trouver dans ces deux problèmes. Mais vous savez, si je parle de chop, vous savez, quelqu'un qui évoque le 6 janvier n'est pas très pertinent. Ou si je parle du 6 janvier, quelqu'un évoquant les émeutes de 2020, n'est-ce pas utile ?

LEX : Nous avons fait un long voyage sombre à partir de l'isme et, euh, lié à cela, c'est personnel en paille et personnel en acier. Donc déformer la perspective de la perspective opposée. Et c'est quelque chose aussi, euh, je suppose que c'est très répandu et qu'il est difficile de faire l'inverse, c'est-à-dire que la main d'œuvre en acier nécessite de l'empathie ou de l'éloquence. Cela nécessite de comprendre, de réellement faire des recherches et de comprendre la perspective alternative.

GREG : Mon, euh, merveilleux employé, Angel et Eduardo, ont quelque chose qu'il appelle le personnel vedette et je me retrouve à faire cela un peu parcelle. C'est bien d'avoir, vous savez, deux parents immigrés, euh, parce que je me souviens d'avoir été à San Francisco, euh, vous savez, euh, dans le genre étrange de la cohorte de l'ACLU slash Burning Man et d'avoir un ami là-bas qui était un artiste qui parlerait de détester le Kansas. Et c’était sa métaphore de l’Amérique centrale, c’est ce qu’il voulait dire par là. Et, mais il était plutôt fier du fait qu'il détestait le Kansas. Et je me dis, tu dois comprendre. Je vous considère toujours un peu comme des étrangers et je pense à changer le nom du Kansas en Croatie, vous savez, changer le nom du Kansas en, en, en certains. C'est à cela que je pense. Et l'idée de l'équipe vedette, que j'aime bien, c'est l'idée d'être semblable, donc vous dites que vous détestez vraiment votre minorité religieuse dominante, et c'est à ce moment-là que vous commencez à vous en détacher un peu. , à quel point l’Amérique typique est exceptionnelle à bien des égards, mais certaines de nos dynamiques sont incroyablement typiques. C'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles, lorsque les gens commencent à lire Thomas Soul, par exemple, ils commencent à devenir accros parce que l'une des choses qu'il fait est de faire une analyse comparative des problèmes des pays et de souligner que certaines de ces choses que nous pensons ne sont que des uniques aux États-Unis existent dans, vous savez, 75 % du reste des pays du monde. Le livre de Francis Fukuyama, euh, le livre que je lis en ce moment, Les origines de l'ordre politique, fait en fait un travail merveilleux en soulignant à quel point nous ne sommes pas spéciaux à bien des égards. C'est en fait quelque chose qui me préoccupe beaucoup. Et, euh, Fukuyama bien sûr, euh, c'est un, c'est un, c'est un super livre. Ce n'est pas le cas, c'est un peu guindé dans son écriture parce que son terme pour désigner l'une des choses qui le préoccupe et qui détruit les sociétés est le rapatriement, qui est le retour à des sociétés dans lesquelles vous favorisez votre famille et vos amis. Et je pense en fait qu'une grande partie de ce que je vois aux États-Unis me fait craindre que nous puissions passer par un petit processus de rapatriement. Et je pense que c’est l’une des raisons pour lesquelles les gens sont si en colère. Je pense qu'avoir, je pense, la perspective que nous, vous savez, nous semblons très, très presque avoir une élection qui serait, vous savez, Jeb Bush contre Hillary Clinton. C'est comme si nous étions un pays dynastique maintenant ? Est-ce que c'est ce qui se passe ? Mais c'est aussi l'une des raisons pour lesquelles les gens sont si en colère à propos des admissions héritées, du fait que, vous savez, certaines familles semblent capables de maintenir perpétuellement leurs membres dans les classes supérieures des États-Unis. Et croyez-moi, j'étais pauvre quand j'étais enfant et j'allais, et je devais y aller, je devais aller à l'une des fantaisies. Je dois aller à Stanford.Et j'ai pu voir comment les gens vous traitent différemment, d'une manière presque insultante. En gros, commedu coup, pour un certain type de personne, j'étais une personne légitime. Et je regarde à quel point l’Amérique compte sur Harvard, sur Yale pour produire sa classe dirigeante, je vais utiliser un terme qui sonne très bien. Et c’est l’une des raisons pour lesquelles il faut s’inquiéter particulièrement de ce qui se passe dans ces collèges d’élite. Et ces collèges d’élite, à l’exception de l’Université de Chicago et de l’UVA, ont de très mauvais résultats en matière de liberté d’expression. Et cela pose toutes sortes de problèmes. Cela n'augure rien de bon pour l'avenir de la protection de la liberté d'expression pour le reste de la société.

LEX : Alors, pouvez-vous également sympathiser avec les gens qui ont voté pour Donald Trump ? Parce que c'est précisément cela, en tant que résistance à ce genre d'élan de la classe dirigeante, à cette royauté qui transmet le pouvoir de génération en génération.

GREG : J'essaie vraiment de sympathiser avec tout le monde dans une certaine mesure et j'essaie pour vraiment voir d'où ils viennent et la colère à droite. Je comprends. Je veux dire, j'ai l'impression que le livre, donc Copping the American Mind, était un livre qui, dans une certaine mesure, pourrait plaire à la foule, en partie parce que nous pensions vraiment ce que nous disions dans le sous-titre, à savoir que ce sont de bonnes intentions et de mauvaises idées qui nuisent aux gens. Et si vous le comprenez et lisez le livre, vous pouvez dire, c'est comme, d'accord, personne n'est malveillant. Vous savez, ce sont des gens qui essaient de protéger leurs enfants. Ils le font simplement d'une manière qui peut en fait conduire à une plus grande anxiété, à une plus grande dépression et, étrangement, éventuellement constituer une menace pour la liberté d'expression. Mais dans celui-ci, nous ne pouvons pas être tout à fait tout à fait, moi et mon, oh, je n'ai même pas mentionné mon brillant co-auteur, Ricky Schlott, un génie de 23 ans. Elle est, elle est, elle est incroyable. J'ai commencé à travailler avec elle quand elle avait 20 ans, qui est mon co-auteur de ce livre. Alors quand je dis nous, je parle de moi et Ricky. C'est un libertaire. Journaliste libertaire.

LEX : Et journaliste. Ouais. Un esprit brillant.

GREG : Ouais. Et, mais nous ne pouvons pas réellement écrire ceci d’une manière trop gentille parce que les annuleurs ne sont pas gentils. Il y a une cruauté et une impitoyable là-dedans. Je veux dire, j'ai commencé à être vraiment déprimé l'année dernière lorsque j'écrivais ce livre et je ne voulais même pas dire à mon équipe pourquoi j'étais si anxieux et déprimé. C'est en partie parce que je parle de personnes qui, vous savez, dans certains des cas dont nous parlons, se rendront chez vous et cibleront vos enfants. Donc, c’est une longue façon de dire que je peux en quelque sorte comprendre ce qui rend les bons fous dans une certaine mesure. J'ai l'impression qu'ils ont constamment l'impression d'être allumés. L’éducation d’élite est vraiment insultante pour la classe ouvrière. Comme ça, une partie de l'idéologie qui est dominante en ce moment traite en quelque sorte près de 70 % du public américain, comme eux, nous pensions avoir développé cela un peu dans la forteresse rhétorique parfaite, comme ils le sont pour certains, en quelque sorte illégitime et indigne de respect ou de compassion.

LEX : Ouais. L'élitisme général qui irradie, l'élitisme auto-alimenté qui irradie des gens qui fréquentent ces institutions.

GREG : Et ce qui est drôle, c'est que l'élitisme a été reconditionné comme une sorte de, il se fait passer pour une sorte de compassion infinie, mais essentiellement basée sur une sorte d'idéologie très, pour être franc, trop simple et trop simple, une explication simple du monde et la division des gens en groupes et le jugement des gens sur la façon dont ils sont opprimés sur leur, à l'intersection de leurs différentes identités. Et nous en sommes arrivés à cela, je pense qu'au départ, avec, avec, avec un, un appel d'un noyau compatissant, mais cela est utilisé d'une manière qui peut être très cruelle, très dédaigneuse, sans compassion, et vous permet de ne pas prendre au sérieux la plupart de vos semblables.

LEX : C'est vraiment bizarre comment cela s'est produit. Peut-être pourriez-vous découvrir pourquoi une chose qui semble bonne au début. Ouais. Peut être, peut créer, peut devenir une arme si cruelle pour annuler et blesser les gens et ignorer les gens. Je veux dire, c’est ce que vous avez décrit avec une forteresse rhétorique parfaite. Ouais. C'est une série de questions. Peut-être pourriez-vous nous expliquer ce qu'est la forteresse rhétorique parfaite.

GREG : Ouais. La forteresse rhétorique parfaite est donc la façon dont la gauche a développé de ne jamais parvenir au véritable argument de quelqu'un. Je veux faire un diagramme, comme un organigramme, de ce genre, voici l'argument et voici cette forteresse parfaite qui vous empêchera à chaque fois d'arriver à l'argument. Et j'ai commencé à le remarquer certainement quand j'étais à la faculté de droit, qu'il y avait de nombreuses façons différentes de licencier les gens et de perfectionner la forteresse rhétorique, première étape. Et je peux en témoigner parce que j'en étais également coupable, qu'on peut licencier des gens si on peut faire valoir qu'ils sont conservateurs.Ils n’ont pas besoin d’être conservateurs pour être clairs. Il suffit de dire qu'ils le sont. Je n’ai donc jamais lu Thomas Sowell parce qu’il était ailier droit. Je n'ai pas lu Camille Pogliaparce que j'étais, moi, quelqu'un m'avait convaincu qu'elle était de droite. Il y avait beaucoup d'auteurs qui, et quand j'étais à la faculté de droit, parmi beaucoup de gens très brillants, c'était déjà une habitude intellectuelle selon laquelle si l'on pouvait désigner quelque chose de conservateur, alors il n'y avait pas vraiment besoin d'y penser. je ne le prends plus ou je le prends particulièrement au sérieux. C’est une façon puérile d’argumenter, mais néanmoins, je m’y suis engagé. C'était une tactique courante. J'ai même mentionné dans le livre qu'il fut un temps où un ami activiste gay qui était, je pense, résolument à ma gauche, mais qui avait néanmoins l'expérience pragmatique d'être un activiste, a dit quelque chose comme, eh bien, juste parce que le conservateur de quelqu'un ne le fait pas. ça ne veut pas dire qu'ils ont tort. Et je me souviens m'être senti un peu scandalisé à un certain niveau, en me disant simplement, eh bien, c'est en quelque sorte, n'est-ce pas le problème lorsque nous disons que ce sont juste de mauvaises personnes avec de mauvaises idées.

LEX : Vous pouvez simplement lancer un, oh, ce type est un ailier droit. Tu peux juste lancer ça.

GREG : Je n'ai plus besoin de penser à toi.

LEX : Ouais. Et puis ça peut, si vous êtes assez populaire, ça peut être ceux-là, ça peut être un peu collant. Ouais.

GREG : Genre, et c'est bizarre parce que, parce que c'est efficace, c'est pour ça qu'il continue de s'y habituer, il aurait dû frapper quelqu'un parce que, parce que, vous savez, j'ai un grand libéral pedigree, vous savez, du travail à l'ACLU au droit des réfugiés en Europe de l'Est, j'ai fait partie d'un programme de mentorat environnemental pour les lycéens des quartiers défavorisés de Washington DC. Tu sais, j'ai été, j'ai été, je, je, je peux, tu sais, me défendre comme étant de gauche, mais je déteste faire ça parce qu'il y a aussi une partie de moi qui se dit, d'accord, et alors, genre, est-ce que tu dis vraiment que si tu peux comme par magie me faire argumenter ou te convaincre que, que j'ai raison, que tu n'es plus obligé de m'écouter ? Et encore une fois, c'est se disputer comme des enfants. Et la raison pour laquelle cela est devenu si populaire est que même parmi, ou peut-être, peut-être surtout parmi les élites, cela fonctionne si efficacement comme une arme parfaite que vous pouvez utiliser sans esprit critique. Si je peux juste prouver que tu as raison, je n'ai pas à le faire, je n'ai pas à penser à toi. Il n’est pas étonnant que soudainement vous commenciez à voir des gens qualifier l’ACLU de droite et le New York Times de droite, car cela a été un moyen très efficace de délégitimer les gens en tant que penseurs. Nous avons, vous savez, Stephen Pinker, qui fait partie de notre conseil consultatif, il fait référence au monde universitaire comme étant le pôle de gauche, c'est essentiellement une position selon laquelle, de ce point de vue, tout semble à sa droite, il semble comme si c'était à droite. Mais une fois que cela devient une tactique que nous acceptons, et c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles, vous savez, je suis, je suis, je suis plus à gauche, mais je pense que je suis à gauche du centre libéral. Ricky est, vous savez, un libertaire plus conservateur. Et au début, je me demandais : devrais-je vraiment écrire quelque chose avec quelqu'un qui est plus à droite ? Et je me dis, absolument je devrais l'être. Je dois en fait être à la hauteur de ce que je crois sur ce sujet, car c'est ridicule que nous ayons cette idée primitive selon laquelle vous pouvez licencier quelqu'un dès que vous prétendez, à tort ou à raison, qu'il est de droite.

LEX : Eh bien, corrigez-moi si je me trompe, mais j'ai l'impression que vous avez récemment été traité de feu de droite, peut-être par association, à cause de ce débat.

GREG : Oh, le LA Times . Le Los Angeles Times. Parlons du LA Times.

LEX : Alors oui, il y a un article, il y a un débat. J'ai hâte de le regarder car je ne pense pas qu'il soit encore disponible en vidéo. Vous devez y assister en personne. J'ai hâte de le voir. Euh, mais le feu soutenait en partie, puis le LA Times a écrit, euh, un article cinglant sur, euh, que tout le monde dans le débat avait fondamentalement raison et penchait à droite. D'accord.

GREG : Euh, il y a tellement de choses à déballer là-bas. Euh, vous savez, Barry Weiss a ce, vous savez, un super, super projet, la presse libre. J'ai été très impressionné. Il s'agit de couvrir des sujets que beaucoup de médias, de droite ou de gauche, ne sont pas disposés à couvrir. Euh, et nous avons fait, euh, nous avons organisé un débat avec elle. Euh, euh, et nous, nous voulions que ce soit aussi amusant et controversé que possible. Euh, alors le feu et la presse libre ont organisé un débat. La révolution sexuelle a-t-elle échoué ? Le débat était donc vraiment passionnant, vraiment amusant. Le côté qui disait que la révolution sexuelle n’était pas un échec était celui auquel appartenaient Grimes et Sarah Hader. Une, euh, c'était, vous savez, une soirée agréable, charnue et réfléchie. Et nous avons eu une critique, il y a eu une critique qui était plutôt cinglante à propos de tout cela. Et il comprenait une ligne disant que, euh, le feu, qui prétend croire en la liberté d'expression, mais ne défend ses points de vue qu'à des degrés divers. Je n'arrive pas à croire que cela ait même été publié dans le magazine.Parce qu'il ne s'agit pas seulement de nous appeler. Parce que bien sûr, vous savez, l'implication bien sûr, que nous sommes de droite, euh, ce que nous ne sommes pas en fait, le personnel penche nettement plus à gauche etÀ droite. Hum, mais nous défendons aussi des personnes de tous bords, tout le temps. Comme si c'était quelque chose que même la recherche Google la plus minime aurait résolu. Donc, comme si on nous avait donné un peu de chaleur à Los Angeles à ce sujet parce que c'était comme, ouais, si vous le disiez. À mon avis, ils sont de droite, nous aurions répondu, vous savez, euh, en disant, eh bien, ici, voici les 50 000 exemples suivants de, de, de nous ne le sommes pas, mais quand vous faites réellement Nous sommes d'accord avec l'affirmation factuelle selon laquelle nous ne défendons que des opinions. Tout d'abord, nous n'avons aucun moyen d'être d'accord avec cela. Nous n'avons aucun moyen d'être d'accord avec des opinions, car nous avons en réalité un personnel politiquement diversifié qui ne sera même pas d'accord sur les opinions qui sont bonnes et sur celles que nous avons. Mais oui, j'ai dû le faire, à un moment donné, quand quelqu'un faisait quelque chose comme ça et qu'il était juste un peu désinvolte sur le fait que la liberté d'expression était une bonne chose. J'ai fait un fil de discussion de 70 tweets, vous savez, juste pour dire : Hé, tu penses vraiment que ça va ? J'ai décidé de ne pas faire ça, euh, sur celui-ci en particulier. Mais ce qui est bien, c'est que cela démontre deux parties du livre, euh, l'annulation de l'esprit américain. Si ce n’est plus, l’un d’eux licencie quelqu’un parce qu’il est conservateur. Euh, et parce que c'était l'implication, ils ne sont pas obligés d'écouter le feu parce qu'ils sont conservateurs. Mais l’autre est quelque chose, un terme que j’ai inventé spécifiquement pour désigner la façon dont les gens argumentent sur Twitter, qui est une projection d’hypocrisie. Bonjour, je suis une personne qui ne se soucie que d'un côté de la barrière politique. Et je pense que tout le monde est hypocrite. Euh, et au fait, je n'ai fait aucune recherche réelle à ce sujet, mais je suppose que tout le monde est un hypocrite. Et vous voyez cela arriver tout le temps. Le, le, et cela arrive souvent à tirer là où quelqu'un se demandera, où est le feu dans cette affaire ? Et nous sommes comme si nous étions littéralement cités dans le lien que vous venez d'envoyer, mais que nous n'avons pas réellement lu. Ou c'est comme, où est le feu là-dessus ? C'est comme, voici notre procès à ce sujet il y a six mois. Euh, donc c'est ce que je préfère. Et aussi l'émission quotidienne de John Stewart, comme le, le, le, le, euh, euh, qu'en est-il de l'isme et le genre d'idée selon laquelle ces gens doivent être des hypocrites est quelque chose de la plus grande comédie, mais en ce qui concerne en fait une tactique rhétorique qui vous amènera à la vérité, supposer simplement que votre adversaire ou simplement accuser votre adversaire d'être toujours un hypocrite n'est pas une bonne tactique pour la vérité. Mais en passant, cela a tendance à toujours venir de personnes qui ne sont pas elles-mêmes cohérentes en matière de liberté d'expression.

LEX : Cela donne donc une idée, mais fondamentalement, ne fait pas de recherche pour savoir si la personne l'est ou non. Ce n'est pas un hypocrite et en supposant que les autres représentent une grande partie des autres qui le lisent, euh, ne feront pas non plus la recherche. Et par conséquent, ce genre de déclaration devient une sorte de véracité sans fondement dans la réalité réelle. Cela brise cette barrière entre ce qui est vrai et ce qui ne l'est pas, car si la foule dit que quelque chose est vrai, c'est vrai, cela demande trop d'efforts pour le corriger.

GREG : Et il y a trois façons dont je veux vous savez, je veux répondre à cela, qui ne fait que donner exemple après exemple de moments où nous avons défendu des gens des deux côtés de chaque majorité, fondamentalement de chaque question majeure, que ce soit Israël, la Palestine, que ce soit le terrorisme. , qu'il s'agisse du mariage homosexuel, nous avons avorté. Nous avons défendu les deux côtés de cet argument. L’autre partie, et je les appelle les orphelins de la guerre culturelle. Je veux vraiment exhorter les médias à commencer à s'intéresser aux cas de liberté d'expression qui n'ont en réalité aucune valeur politique et qui sont en fait simplement un bon vieux exercice du pouvoir contre un petit gars, une petite fille ou un petit groupe sur le campus ou hors campus d'ailleurs. Parce que ces cas arrivent. Beaucoup de nos litiges concernent simplement de petites personnes, des gens ordinaires, à qui on dit qu'ils ne peuvent pas protester, qu'ils ne peuvent pas brandir de pancartes. Et puis la dernière partie de l’argument que je veux que les gens comprennent vraiment, c’est oui. Et au fait, les gens de droite ont aussi des ennuis. Euh, et il y a des attaques de gauche et vous devriez aussi les prendre au sérieux. Hum, vous devriez vous en soucier lorsque les Républicains ont des ennuis. Vous devriez vous en soucier lorsque la Californie a un DEI, un programme qui l'exige, les collèges communautaires de Californie ont une politique de programme DEI qui oblige même les professeurs de chimie à travailler sur des idées DEI différentes, de l'intersectionnalité à l'antiracisme, dans leur classe, dans leur programme. , etc. Il s’agit d’une violation flagrante de la liberté académique. C'est aussi mauvais que de dire aux professeurs ce qu'ils ne peuvent pas dire. Comme si nous avions combattu et vaincu en Floride. C'est encore pire de leur dire ce qu'ils doivent dire. C'est carrément totalitaire. Et nous intentons une action en justice contre cela.Et ce que je dis, c'est que lorsque vous licenciez quelqu'un simplement parce qu'il se trouve de l'autre côté de la barrière politique, vous prétendez aussi, en prétendant qu'aucun de ces cas importe aussi. Et je veux des gensse soucier de la censure même si elle vise des personnes qu'ils détestent.

LEX : La censure est la censure. Si nous pouvons prendre brièvement cette tangente avec DEI, diversité, équité et inclusion, quel est le bien et quel est le mal de tels programmes ?

GREG : DEI, je connais des gens qui sont DEI, euh, des consultants ou certains, en fait j'ai un ami cher que j'aime beaucoup, euh, qui fait du DEI. Des gens absolument honnêtes. Ce qu’ils veulent, c’est créer des liens de compréhension, d’amitié, de compassion entre les gens, les gens qui sont différents. Malheureusement, les recherches sur ce que font réellement de nombreux DEI sont souvent à l’opposé de cela. Et je pense que c'est en partie un problème avec une partie de l'idéologie qui vient d'une théorie critique de la race, qui est une chose réelle, d'ailleurs, qui informe beaucoup de DEI, qui en fait en fait quelque chose de plus susceptible de diviser que unir. Nous parlons de cela en dorlotant dans l’esprit américain comme de la différence entre la politique identitaire commune de l’humanité et la politique identitaire de l’ennemi commun. Et je pense que, euh, je connais certaines des personnes que je connais qui, qui font de la DEI, veulent vraiment que ce soit une politique identitaire commune de l'humanité, mais certaines des hypothèses idéologiques réelles qui sont ancrées peuvent en fait amener les gens à se sentir plus éloignés les uns des autres. Maintenant, quand j'ai commencé chez FIRE, mes premiers cas impliquaient le 11 septembre. Euh, et c'était mauvais. Euh, les professeurs étaient ciblés. Des professeurs perdaient leur emploi pour avoir tenu des propos insensibles sur le 11 septembre et à la fois de droite et de gauche, en fait dans ce cas-là, en fait parfois davantage, beaucoup plus de droite. Euh, et c'était vraiment mauvais. Et environ cinq professeurs ont perdu leur emploi. C'est mauvais. Cinq professeurs ont été licenciés sur une période relativement courte pour une opinion politique. C'est quelque chose qui, vous savez, aurait été écrit au cours des décennies précédentes. Nous évaluons maintenant combien de professeurs ont été ciblés pour annulation entre 2014 et, euh, le milieu de cette année, en juillet 2023. Nous sommes dans plus d'un millier de tentatives pour obtenir des professeurs, euh, licenciés ou punis, généralement motivés par les étudiants et les administrateurs, souvent également motivés par les professeurs. Environ les deux tiers de ces plaintes entraînent une punition du professeur d’une manière ou d’une autre. Euh, tout depuis, vous savez, la suppression de leur article jusqu'à la suspension, et cetera. Environ un cinquième de ces cas entraîne le licenciement de professeurs. Donc en ce moment, nous sommes, c'est presque 200, c'est environ 190, euh, professeurs licenciés. Euh, donc je veux donner un peu de contexte ici. Euh, on considère généralement que la Peur Rouge s'est déroulée de 1947 à 1957. Elle s'est d'ailleurs terminée en 57 quand il est finalement devenu clair, euh, grâce au premier amendement, qu'on ne pouvait pas réellement licencier des gens pour leurs idéologies. Avant cela, de nombreuses universités pensaient que c’était possible. Ils disaient que ce type est un très doc, euh, communiste doctrinaire. Euh, tu sais, on ne peut pas simplement attendre. Je vais les virer. Ils pensaient qu’ils pouvaient réellement le faire. Euh, et il n'y avait que 57 ans lorsque la loi a été établie. Comme en ce moment, tout cela se produit dans un environnement où la liberté d'expression et la liberté académique sont clairement protégées, euh, dans les collèges publics des États-Unis. Et nous voyons toujours ce genre de chiffres. Euh, pendant, pendant la Peur Rouge, la plus grande étude qui a été faite sur ce qui se passait, je pense, a abouti à environ 55. Et l'évaluation était qu'il y avait environ 62 professeurs licenciés parce que, pour, parce qu'ils étaient communistes et environ 90 professeurs ont été licenciés pour leurs opinions politiques en général. Euh, c'est généralement le cas, on rapporte qu'il est d'environ 100. Euh, donc 60, 90, 100, selon la façon dont vous le regardez, je pense que le nombre est en fait plus élevé. Euh, mais c'est seulement à cause du recul. Ce que je veux dire avec le recul, c'est que nous pouvons regarder en arrière et constater que davantage de professeurs ont été licenciés. Comme le temps le révèle, nous sommes à 190 professeurs licenciés. Et je dois encore supporter que les gens disent que cela n’arrive même pas. Et je suis comme au cours des neuf années et demie de la culture d'annulation, 190 professeurs licenciés au cours des 11 années de, euh, de la Peur Rouge, probablement, vous savez, environ une centaine, peut-être probablement plus, le nombre va continuer à augmenter. Hum, mais contrairement à la Peur Rouge où les gens pouvaient clairement dire que quelque chose se passait, le plus fou dans la culture d'annulation, c'est que certains ont encore affaire à des gens qui disent que cela ne se produit pas du tout. Et cela n'a pas été subtil sur le campus. Et nous savons que c'est un chiffre largement sous-estimé, d'ailleurs, parce que lorsque nous avons interrogé les professeurs, 17 % d'entre eux ont déclaré qu'ils avaient été menacés, euh, menacés d'enquête ou qu'ils avaient fait l'objet d'une enquête pour ce qu'ils enseignaient, disaient ou leur recherche. Et un tiers d’entre eux ont déclaré que les administrateurs leur avaient dit de ne pas entreprendre de recherches controversées.Donc, en extrapolant cela, c'est un chiffre énorme. Et la raison pour laquelle vous n'entendrez pas parler de beaucoup de ces cas est qu'il y en a tellementdifférents mécanismes induisant la conformité dans l’ensemble. Ouais. Et c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles l'idée d'ajouter quelque chose comme un D, comme exiger une déclaration DEI pour être embauché ou pour entrer dans une école dans l'environnement actuel, est complètement folle. Nous avons connu une véritable crise de la liberté académique ces dernières années, vous savez, en particulier depuis 2017 sur les campus, nous avons pour commencer une très faible diversité de points de vue. Et dans ces circonstances, les administrateurs commencent à dire : vous savez quel est le problème ? Nous avons trop de pensées hétérogènes. Nous l’avons fait, nous ne sommes pas assez homogènes. En fait, nous avons besoin, vous savez, d’un autre test décisif politique, ce qui est fou. Et c’est effectivement ce qu’est une déclaration DEI. Parce qu'il n'y a aucun moyen de remplir une déclaration DEI sans que quelqu'un vous évalue sur votre politique. C'est limpide. C'est limpide. Nous avons même fait une expérience sur ce Honeycutt de Nate. Il a demandé à près de 3 000 professeurs de participer à l’évaluation de différents types de déclarations DEI. Euh, et l’un était fondamentalement comme le type standard d’intersectionnalité de politique identitaire, l’autre concernait la diversité des points de vue. L’un portait sur la diversité religieuse et l’autre sur la diversité socio-économique. Et ce qui me tient vraiment à cœur, c'est que nous avons trop peu de diversité socio-économique, en particulier dans l'enseignement supérieur d'élite, mais aussi dans la période d'éducation. L’expérience a donc bénéficié d’une large participation, et a été mise en place de manière vraiment intéressante. Et il a essayé de modéliser la manière dont bon nombre de ces politiques DEI étaient réellement mises en œuvre. Et l’une des façons dont cela a été mis en œuvre, et je pense que dans certaines écoles californiennes, est que les administrateurs examinent les déclarations DEI au préalable. N'importe qui d'autre les regarde et élimine ensuite les gens d'emblée, en fonction de ce qu'ils pensent de leurs déclarations DEI et de celles sur la diversité des points de vue. Je pense que la moitié des personnes qui l’ont examiné l’élimineraient d’emblée. Euh, et je pense que c'était fondamentalement la même chose pour la diversité religieuse. C'était un peu mieux, genre 40 % pour la diversité socio-économique, mais ça me tue. C’est comme l’idée du genre, oui, c’est en fait le genre de diversité dont je pense que nous avons beaucoup plus besoin dans l’enseignement supérieur. Soit dit en passant, vous pouvez être d'accord avec le fait que ce n'est pas hostile aux autres types. Euh, mais l'idée selon laquelle nous avons besoin de plus de gens issus du bas, vous savez, des trois quarts de la société américaine, comme dans l'enseignement supérieur, je pense que devrait être quelque chose que nous pourrions tous accepter. Mais le seul qui a vraiment réussi est celui qui a repoussé exactement le genre d'idéologie, vous savez, euh, qu'ils pensaient que les arrières aimeraient, ce qui signifie, d'accord, il n'y a aucun moyen que cela ne puisse pas être un projet politique. test décisif. Nous avons prouvé qu'il s'agit d'un test décisif politique et, école après école, nous les ajoutons à notre processus de candidature pour rendre les écoles encore plus homogènes sur le plan idéologique.

LEX : Pourquoi cela a-t-il un effet négatif ? Est-ce parce que cela impose une sorte de réflexion de groupe où les gens ont peur, commencent à avoir peur de penser et de parler librement, libéralement de quoi que ce soit.

GREG : Eh bien, premièrement, il sélectionne pour les gens qui ont tendance à être plus à gauche, euh, dans une situation où vous avez déjà, euh, des gens, une situation où les universités penchent résolument dans ce sens, mais cela établit aussi essentiellement un ensemble d'idées sacrées que si on vous demande si, vous tu sais, ce que tu as fait pour faire avancer la lutte contre le racisme, euh, blessé, euh, comment tu as été conscient de l'intersectionnalité, il est peu probable que tu y entres réellement. Et si tu disais, en passant, je pense en fait ce sont des concepts douteux. Je pense qu'ils sont minces. Je pense qu'ils ne sont pas très défendables sur le plan philosophique, mais fondamentalement, si, si votre position l'était, je rejette en fait, euh, ces concepts comme étant trop simples. Euh, tu n'es pas, tu n'entreras pas. Et, et, et je pense que, euh, la personne à laquelle je pense toujours n'était pas un ailier droit qui dirait, va au diable. Si vous, si vous lui avez fait remplir une de ces choses, c'est Feynman. J'ai l'impression que si tu, si tu donnais une de ces choses à Richard Feynman, il la mettrait en pièces.

LEX : Ouais. Et ne pas obtenir le poste. Ouais, il y a un élément qui crée cette peur difficile à cerner. Donc vous avez dit, comme pour les licenciements, ce que je voulais dire, c'est de licencier une centaine ou 200 personnes. Il s'agit même de virer une personne, je viens de le voir. Cela peut créer cet effet d’entraînement discret de peur. Oh bien sûr. Ce seul licenciement d’une faculté. Oh, absolument. Cela a un effet d'entraînement sur des dizaines de milliers de personnes, d'éducateurs, de, de, euh, qui sont embauchés, quel genre de conversations ont lieu, quels types de manuels sont choisis, quel genre d'autocensure et différentes saveurs de cela se produit.C'est difficile à mesurer. Ouais.

GREG : Je veux dire, quand vous demandez aux professeurs, vous savez, sont-ils intimidés par la loi actuelleenvironnement? Euh, la réponse est oui. Et particulièrement les professeurs conservateurs, vous savez, qui rapportent déjà, vous savez, qu'ils ont, vous savez, peur pour leur emploi dans de nombreux cas différents.

LEX : Vous avez beaucoup de bonnes statistiques dans le livre, des choses comme l’autocensure. Lorsqu'on leur donne la définition de l'autocensure, au moins un quart des étudiants déclarent s'autocensurer assez souvent ou très souvent lors de conversations avec d'autres étudiants, avec des professeurs et lors de discussions en classe, soit respectivement 25%, 27% et 28%. Euh, un quart des étudiants ont également déclaré qu'ils étaient plus susceptibles de s'autocensurer sur le campus maintenant, euh, au moment où ils ont été interrogés qu'ils ne l'étaient lorsqu'ils ont commencé l'université. Donc, en quelque sorte, les universités inculquent cette idée de, de, de censure, d'autocensure.

GREG : Et revenons à la comparaison avec Red Scare, et c'est aussi l'une des choses intéressantes à propos des données, est-ce que cette même étude dont je parlais, l'étude la plus complète sur la Peur Rouge, il y avait un sondage pour savoir si les professeurs s'autocensuraient ou non en raison de la peur de l'environnement. Et 9 % des professeurs ont déclaré qu'ils s'autocensuraient dans leurs recherches et que ce qu'ils disaient, 9 % est vraiment mauvais. Euh, ça, c'est presque un dixième des professeurs qui disent qu'ils l'étaient en fait, leur discours était froid. Lorsque nous avons posé cette question aux professeurs lors de notre dernière enquête auprès des professeurs, euh, lorsque vous prenez en compte ensemble, s'ils le sont, nous leur avons demandé s'ils s'autocensurent dans leurs recherches ou s'ils s'autocensurent en classe, ils s'autocensurent. la censure en ligne, etc., c'était 90 % des professeurs. Donc l’idée que nous sommes en fait dans un environnement historique, euh, en termes de peur des gens d’exprimer des opinions controversées. Je pense que c'est la raison pour laquelle nous allons étudier cela dans 50 ans, de la même manière que nous étudions la Peur Rouge. Euh, ce n'est pas l'idée que cela ne se produit pas qui sera simplement considérée à juste titre comme insensée.

LEX : Alors peut-être que nous pourrions juste, euh, discuter de la tendance, de la tendance actuelle du monde universitaire vers la gauche. , que vous décrivez sous différentes perspectives. Premièrement, vous avez un tableau des taux d'inscription des électeurs par département, ce que je trouve intéressant. Pouvez-vous expliquer ce graphique et expliquer ce qu'il montre ?

GREG : Oui, lorsque j'ai allumé le feu en 2001, je n'ai pas pris la question de la diversité des points de vue aussi au sérieux. Je pensais que c’était juste quelque chose dont la droite se plaignait. Euh, mais j'ai vraiment commencé à comprendre ce qui se passe lorsque vous avez une communauté avec une faible, euh, une faible, euh, diversité de points de vue. Et en fait, une grande partie des recherches qui m'ont le plus intéressé ont été réalisées en collaboration avec le grand Cass Sunstein, euh, qui écrit beaucoup sur la polarisation des groupes. Euh, parce que, euh, et les recherches à ce sujet sont très solides, mais essentiellement lorsque vous avez des groupes avec, euh, une diversité politique, et vous pouvez voir cela chez les juges, par exemple, cela a tendance à produire, vous savez, de manière fiable des résultats plus modérés. Euh, alors que les groupes qui le sont, qui ont une faible diversité politique, ont tendance à s'enrouler dans leur propre direction. Et lorsqu’il y a une grande majorité de personnes issues d’un seul point de vue politique, cela pose un problème pour la production d’idées. Cela crée une situation où il y a des idées sacrées. Euh, et quand vous regardez certains départements, euh, vous savez, je pense que l'estimation du Crimson est que Harvard compte 3 % de conservateurs. Mais quand vous regardez différents départements, il y a des départements d’élite qui ne comptent littéralement aucun conservateur en leur sein. Et je pense que c'est dans un environnement intellectuel sain, euh. Le problème est définitivement pire. Euh, à mesure qu'il y a plus d'élite, euh, nous voyons certainement plus de cas, euh, de professeurs de gauche annulés dans des écoles moins élitistes. Cela empire à mesure que vous quittez les écoles d'élite, c'est là qu'une grande partie du tiers des tentatives visant à faire punir les professeurs qui réussissent, vous savez, viennent de la droite. et en grande partie à partir de sources hors campus, euh, hors campus. Et nous passons également beaucoup de temps à en parler dans le livre. Euh, c'est quelque chose qui, à mon avis, est sous-estimé. Euh, mais quand il s'agit de la faible, faible diversité de points de vue, c'est, vous savez, cela fonctionne un peu comme on pourrait s'y attendre dans une certaine mesure, vous savez, l'économie, c'est quatre contre un ou quelque chose comme ça. Ce n'est pas si grave. Euh, mais quand vous commencez à vous lancer dans certaines sciences humaines, vous savez, il y a des départements qui n'en sont littéralement aucun.

LEX : Y a-t-il une bonne raison pour laquelle l'administration du corps professoral de l'université s'est déplacée vers la gauche ?

GREG : Ouais, je n'aime pas, et c'est un argument que vous ' Je rencontrerai parfois à gauche, euh, juste l'argument selon lequel, eh bien, les gens de gauche sont simplement plus intelligents. Droite. Et c'est comme, d'accord, c'est, c'est intéressant parce qu'au moins la recherche du 10il y a quelques années, indiquait que si vous approfondissez un peu cela, beaucoup de gens qui se considèrent à gauche ont tendance à être un peu plus à gauche. Libertarian, la chanson que Pinker, euh, vous savez, a beaucoup écrit sur l'idée que nous sommes simplement plus intelligents. Ce n’est pas une opinion. Je, je suis au moins un peu à l'aise avec, euh, je pense que, euh, ça, que les départements prennent, euh, un élan lorsqu'ils deviennent un endroit où vous vous dites, wow, ce serait vraiment désagréable pour moi de travailler dans ce département. Si je suis le conservateur symbolique. Et je pense que cela prend sa propre vie. Il existe également des départements où de nombreuses idéologies sont explicitement de gauche. Euh, si vous regardez les écoles d'éducation, une grande partie de ce qui reste de ce que l'on appelle à juste titre les théories critiques de la race est présente. Et on finit par avoir cela dans un certain nombre de ministères. Euh, et ce serait très étrange d'être, dans de nombreux départements, un, vous savez, un professeur conservateur en travail social. Je suis sûr qu'ils existent. Euh, mais ça, il y a beaucoup de pression pour se taire si c'est le cas.

LEX : Donc, le processus à gauche de l'annulation, dont vous avez commencé à parler avec la forteresse rhétorique parfaite, le, le premier L'étape consiste à renvoyer une personne. S’ils sont justes, si vous pouvez leur apposer une étiquette de conservateur, vous pouvez les rejeter de cette façon. Quoi, quels autres licenciements efficaces existe-t-il ?

GREG : Nous nous amusons un peu avec, euh, euh, avec les chiffres démographiques, mais je gère cela en fonction de la hauteur. Euh, euh, et je me souviens qu'il disait un peu, je n'inclue pas le pourcentage réel. Je me dis non, nous devons inclure les pourcentages réels. Parce que les gens sont vraiment mauvais pour estimer à quoi ressemble réellement la démographie des États-Unis, à droite comme à gauche, de différentes manières. Hum, donc nous mettons cela dans les chiffres et nous parlons, vous savez, euh, d'être licencié parce que vous êtes blanc ou d'être licencié parce que, euh, vous êtes hétéro ou d'être licencié parce que vous êtes un homme. Euh, et nous, euh, et vous pouvez déjà licencier des gens parce qu'ils sont conservateurs. Et nous, donc nous, nous, nous donnons des exemples dans le livre de ceux-ci étant utilisés pour licencier des gens et souvent sur des sujets qui ne sont pas liés au fait qu'ils sont un homme ou qu'ils appartiennent ou non à une minorité. Et puis nous arrivons, je pense que c'est comme la couche six et nous nous disons, surprise, devinez quoi ? Vous n'êtes plus que 0,4 % de la population et rien de tout cela n'a d'importance. Parce que si vous avez une mauvaise opinion, même si vous faites partie des 0,4 % des personnes les plus intersectionnelles qui aient jamais vécu et que vous avez une mauvaise opinion, vous êtes un hérétique et vous serez probablement encore plus détesté. Et la partie la plus intéressante de la recherche que nous avons faite à ce sujet consistait simplement à demander à tous les éminents conservateurs et modérés noirs que nous connaissions personnellement, on vous a-t-on dit que vous n'êtes pas vraiment noir pour une opinion que vous aviez chacun d'entre eux ? c'était comme, oh ouais, non. Et c'est plutôt drôle parce que c'est souvent comme si des gauchers blancs leur disaient que c'était du genre, oh, vous considérez-vous comme noir ? John McWhorter a parlé d'avoir un journaliste. Euh, quand il a parlé, quand il a montré qu'il était en désaccord avec certains de, euh, ce qu'il a décrit comme un genre de racisme éveillé dans son livre, d'idées éveillées, le journaliste est en fait comme, alors vous considérez-vous noir ? Il m'a dit, qu'est-ce que tu es fou ? Bien sur que oui. Et Coleman Hughes avait l’une des meilleures citations à ce sujet. Il a dit, on me dit constamment que la chose la plus importante, euh, pour la légitimité de mon opinion, c'est de savoir si, euh, je suis noir ou non, mais quand j'ai une opinion dissidente, j'obtiens dit que je ne suis pas vraiment noir. Tellement parfait. Il n'y a aucun moyen de falsifier cet argument. Euh, celle-là, vraiment, cette enquête m'a vraiment, vraiment frappé.

LEX : Donc, et vous expliquez très bien dans le livre qu'il y a ce processus qui consiste à dire : êtes-vous conservateur ? Oui. Vous pouvez renvoyer la personne. Es-tu blanc ? Renvoyez la personne. Êtes-vous un homme? Vous pouvez renvoyer la personne. Il existe ces catégories qui vous permettent de rejeter plus facilement les idées d'une personne sur cette base. Et comme vous l'avez dit, vous vous retrouvez dans ce petit pourcentage et vous pouvez toujours licencier.

GREG : Et il ne s'agit pas simplement d'un licenciement. Moi, nous, nous parlons de cela d'un point de vue pratique, de la façon dont les limites de la réalité et l'une d'elles sont le temps. Euh, et beaucoup d'annulation de la culture, euh, comme, euh, comme normes culturelles, car cette façon de gagner des arguments sans gagner des arguments revient à manquer de temps.Parce qu'au moment où vous descendez au fond du, euh, euh, du, ou même en fait, faites quelques pas dans la forteresse de disques parfaite et, vous savez, où est passé le temps ? Vous savez, comme si vous étiez, vous êtes, vous abandonnez probablement, euh, d'essayer, euh, vous savez, d'essayer de réellement avoir une dispute et vous n'y parvenez jamais en premier lieu.

LEX : Toutes ces choses sont assez collantes sur les réseaux sociaux.

GREG : Réseaux sociauxa pratiquement inventé la forteresse rhétorique parfaite.

LEX : Pour que chacune de ces étapes ait une viralité. Donc ça pourrait, ça pourrait rester et alors ça pourrait vraiment enthousiasmer les gens.

GREG : Cela vous permet de ressentir de l'indignation et de la supériorité. Ouais.

LEX : À cause de cela, cela à l'échelle de la viralité vous permet de ne jamais aborder la discussion réelle sur ce point. Euh, donc, mais vous savez, ce n'est pas seulement la gauche, c'est aussi la droite, donc la forteresse rhétorique efficace, euh, donc il y a de quoi être fier à droite.

GREG : C'est plus efficace .

LEX : Vous n'êtes donc pas obligé d'écouter les libéraux et n'importe qui pourrait être qualifié de libéral s'il a une mauvaise opinion. J'ai vu des libéraux, des gauchistes et des gauchistes tous utilisés comme un, du même genre de manière. C'est un non-sens de gauche. Vous n'êtes pas obligé d'écouter les experts, même les experts conservateurs, s'ils ont une mauvaise opinion, vous n'êtes pas obligé d'écouter les journalistes, même les journalistes conservateurs, s'ils ont une mauvaise opinion et parmi l'aile MAGA, il y en a un quatrième proposition, il y a une quatrième disposition. Vous n'avez pas besoin d'écouter quelqu'un qui n'est pas pro Trump.

GREG : Ouais. Et nous appelons cela efficace parce que cela élimine beaucoup de gens que vous devriez probablement écouter au moins parfois, vous savez, comme nous le soulignons parfois, comme la façon dont la culture d'annulation peut interférer avec la foi et l'expertise. Donc nous devenons un peu méfiants à l'égard des experts, mais en même temps, si vous suivez cela et que vous le suivez mécaniquement, et je pense vraiment, vous savez, je pense que tout le monde aux États-Unis a probablement un oncle plus âgé, euh, euh, qui en exerce certains. C'est un moyen très efficace de procéder, donc vous devez, euh, vous isoler du reste du monde et renvoyer, vous savez, au moins certaines personnes que vous devriez vraiment écouter.

LEX : La façon dont vous l'avez présenté m'a fait réaliser que nous utilisons une grande partie de notre puissance cérébrale. Ces choses-là, il est littéralement temps. Nous pourrions résoudre les problèmes. Et vous obtenez comme si vous vous épuisiez en quelque sorte à travers ce processus d'indignation à cause de ces étiquettes et vous n'y parvenez jamais en fait, il n'y a presque pas assez de temps pour l'empathie, comme regarder une personne en train de penser, eh bien, peut-être qu'elle a raison. . Parce que tu es tellement occupé à les catégoriser.

GREG : Qu'est-ce qui est amusant dans l'empathie ? Et je veux dire, ce qui est si intéressant à propos de tout cela, c'est qu'une grande partie de l'énergie sociétale semble être dépensée pour ces vilains désirs primaires dont une grande partie est essentiellement du genre, s'il vous plaît, dites-moi qui j'ai le droit de détester. Où puis-je légitimement être cruel ? Où puis-je réellement exercer une certaine agression contre quelqu’un ? Euh, et il semble parfois qu'il s'agisse simplement de trouver de nouvelles justifications à cela. Et c'est un échec humain compréhensible, vous savez, qui peut parfois être utilisé pour défendre la justice. Mais encore une fois, cela ne vous rapprochera jamais de la vérité.

LEX : Euh, un cas intéressant que vous évoquez en matière d'expertise est celui du COVID. Ouais. Alors, comment la Cancel Culture est-elle entrée en jeu sur le thème du COVID ?

GREG : Oui, je pense que COVID a été un coup dur pour la foi et l'expertise des gens et la Cancel Culture a joué un grand rôle à cet égard. Hum, je pense que l'un des meilleurs exemples est celui de Jennifer Say chez Levi's. Hum, c'est une femme charmante. Hum, elle était vice-présidente chez Levi's. Euh, elle a parlé d'être potentiellement présidente de Levi's Jeans. Et elle était une grande défenseure des enfants. Et quand ils ont commencé à fermer les écoles, elle a commencé à dire que cela allait être un désastre. Cela va faire le plus mal aux enfants pauvres et défavorisés. Hum, nous devons trouver un moyen de rouvrir les écoles. Et c’était un point de vue tellement hérétique. Et le genre typique de culture d'annulation, euh, vague a pris le dessus car il avait toutes sortes de pétitions pour qu'elle soit licenciée et qu'elle devait s'excuser et tout ce genre de choses. Et, vous savez, on lui a proposé, je pense, une indemnité de départ d'un million de dollars, qu'elle n'a pas accepté parce qu'elle voulait dire au monde ce qu'elle pensait de ça et, et qu'elle voulait continuer à dire, euh, qu'elle n'avait pas changé d'avis, que c'était un désastre pour les jeunes. Et maintenant que c'est un peu la sagesse conventionnelle et que les recherches sont assez claires, il est tout à fait clair que cela a été dévastateur pour les jeunes particulièrement défavorisés. Comme si les gens comprenaient que tout cela était normal, elle avait probablement raison. Mais l’un des aspects vraiment tristes de la culture de l’annulation est que les gens oublient pourquoi vous avez été annulé et savent simplement qu’ils vous détestent. Euh, il y a ce genre de genre persistant, eh bien, je n'ai plus besoin de les prendre au sérieux. Mais au fait, avez-vous remarqué qu’ils avaient raison sur quelque chose de très important ? Ce qui est drôle à propos de la liberté d'expression, c'est que la liberté d'expression n'existerait pas si vous n'aviez pas également le droit de dire des choses qui ne sont pas bonnes.Parce que si vous ne pouvez pas, vous savez, vous lancer dans une idée à votre place, si vous ne pouvez pas réellement spéculer, vous n'arriverez jamais à quelque chose qui soit juste au départ. Mais c'est particulièrement exaspérantquand les gens qui avaient raison étaient censurés et que vous, euh, n'obteniez jamais le crédit qu'ils méritent.

LEX : Eh bien, cela pourrait être un bon endroit pour en poser un peu plus sur la liberté d'expression. Et donc vous avez dit que la liberté d'expression inclut le fait de dire des choses qui ne sont pas bonnes.

GREG : Oui.

LEX : Euh, quel est votre point de vue sur le discours de haine ?

GREG : Le discours de haine est la meilleure campagne marketing de censure. Euh, et ça vient du milieu universitaire, euh, du, du 20e siècle. Et quand j'ai parlé du mouvement anti-liberté d'expression, c'était l'une de leurs premières inventions. Euh, là-bas, on a beaucoup parlé de la théorie critique de la race, euh, et, et être contre la théorie critique de la race et le feu vous poursuivra en justice si vous dites que les gens ne peuvent pas la défendre, l'enseigner ou faire des recherches, parce que vous le faites. ont absolument le droit de poursuivre leurs études sur le plan académique. Cependant, chaque fois que quelqu'un mentionne CRT, il devrait aussi dire que le tout premier projet des gens qui ont fondé CRT, euh, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, euh, et cetera, devait disparaître, était de créer cette nouvelle catégorie de discours non protégés appelés discours de haine et de les interdire. La personne qui a permis cette dérive, bien sûr, était Herbert Marcuse en 1965, vous savez, se demandant essentiellement si la liberté d’expression devait ou non être une valeur sacrée à gauche. Et il a été du côté des perdants pendant très longtemps. Les libéraux, vous savez, la façon dont j'ai grandi, étaient fondamentalement pro-liberté d'expression était synonyme d'être libéral, mais cela a commencé à être gravé sur le campus. Et la façon dont cela s'est passé, c'était avec, avec l'idée du discours de haine, euh, ça, ça essentiellement, oh, mais vous devriez, euh, nous pouvons désigner les discours particulièrement mauvais comme, euh, non protégés. Euh, et, et qui va le faire respecter ? Qui va décider de ce qu’est réellement un discours de haine ? Eh bien, cela ne peut généralement se produire que dans un environnement de très faible diversité de points de vue, car il faut réellement se mettre d'accord sur ce que sont les choses les plus haineuses et les plus mauvaises. Et il y a un principe fondamental. Hum, on en parle dans une affaire intéressante concernant l'incendie de drapeaux dans le premier amendement dont je pense que le monde entier pourrait bénéficier. Vous ne pouvez pas interdire la parole simplement parce que c’est offensant. C'est trop subjectif. En gros, c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles ce genre de codes a été adopté avec plus de bonheur dans des endroits comme l'Europe, où ils ont le sentiment qu'il y a comme un Allemand modal ou un Anglais modal. Euh, et je pense que c'est offensant et donc je peux dire que c'est, c'est faux dans un pays plus multiculturel, dans un, dans un pays véritablement plus diversifié qui n'a jamais vraiment pensé honnêtement qu'il existe un seul type d'Américain. Nous n'avons jamais eu l'idée de l'Oncle Sam, mais c'était toujours une sorte de blague. Hum, Boston a toujours su que ce n'était pas Richmond a toujours su que ce n'était pas la Géorgie a toujours su que ce n'était pas, vous savez, l'Alaska. Comme si nous avions toujours été un méli-mélo et que nous nous retrouvons dans une société si diversifiée qu'on ne peut pas interdire des choses simplement parce qu'elles sont offensantes. Euh, et c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles le discours de haine n'est pas une catégorie de discours non protégée. Et moi, et je vais plus loin, ma théorie sur la liberté d’expression est légèrement différente de celle de la plupart des autres constitutionnalistes. Euh, et je pense, et je pense que c'est en partie dû au fait que certaines de ces théories, même si beaucoup d'entre elles sont vraiment bonnes, sont inadéquates, elles ne sont pas assez vastes. Et j’appelle parfois ma théorie la pure théorie informationnelle de la liberté d’expression. Euh, ou parfois, quand je veux être sophistiqué, la théorie du laboratoire et du miroir et son principe le plus important est que si le but est le projet de la connaissance humaine, qui est de connaître le monde qu'il est, vous ne pouvez pas connaître le monde tel qu'il est sans savoir ce que les gens pensent vraiment et ce que les gens pensent vraiment est un fait extrêmement important à connaître. Donc, chaque fois que vous dites, vous ne pouvez pas dire que vous vous privez de la connaissance de ce que les gens pensent vraiment que vous causez ce que Tim ou Karan, qui fait partie de notre conseil consultatif, appellent la falsification des préférences. Euh, vous vous retrouvez avec une image inexacte du monde qui, d'ailleurs, dans beaucoup de cas, euh, parce qu'il y a des militants qui veulent restreindre davantage la liberté d'expression, ils ont en fait tendance à penser que les gens ont plus de préjugés qu'eux, euh, qu'ils pourraient l'être. Euh, et en fait ce genre de restrictions, il y avait un livre intitulé Paranoïa raciale, euh, qui est sorti il y a environ 15 ans et qui soulignait que l'imposition de certains de ces codes peut parfois faire croire aux gens que la seule chose qui tient vous revenez d'être un raciste enragé, euh, ce sont ces codes. Donc ça doit être vraiment très mauvais. Cela peut en fait aggraver toutes ces choses.Et premièrement, dont nous parlons dans le livre, une façon très pratique d'aggraver les choses est que lorsque vous censurez les gens, cela ne change pas leur opinion. Cela les encourage simplement à ne pas le partager avec des personnes qui pourraient leur causer des ennuis. Donc çales amène à parler à des personnes avec lesquelles ils sont déjà d’accord et la polarisation du groupe prend son envol. Nous avons donc des données intéressantes dans le livre, euh, sur la façon dont les gens ont quitté Twitter, par exemple, euh, vous savez, euh, en 2017. Euh, et puis encore une fois, je pense qu'en 2020, pousser les gens à bavarder a conduit à, vous savez, une plus grande radicalisation parmi ces gens. C'est une force très prévisible. La censure ne change pas réellement l'avis des gens et elle les pousse dans des directions qui, en fait, grâce à des recherches très solides, les rendront plus radicalisés. Alors oui, je pense que la tentative d'interdire les discours de haine ne nous en protège pas vraiment, mais elle donne au gouvernement une arme si vaste à utiliser contre nous que nous regretterons de leur avoir donné .

LEX : Existe-t-il un moyen d'examiner des cas extrêmes, de tester un peu cette idée ? Donc, si nous regardons sur le campus, que pensez-vous du fait de permettre, par exemple, aux suprémacistes blancs sur le campus de faire des discours ? D'accord.

GREG : Je pense que vous devriez pouvoir étudier ce que pensent les gens. Et je pense qu'il est important que nous le fassions réellement. Donc je pense que, vous savez, prenons par exemple QAnon. Ouais, QAnon a tort. Euh, mais d'où ça vient ? Pourquoi pensaient-ils cela ? Quelle est la motivation ? Qui leur a appris ?

LEX : Qui a eu ces idées ?

GREG : C'est important pour comprendre l'histoire. C’est important pour comprendre la politique américaine moderne. Et donc si vous mettez votre acte, si vous mettez votre chapeau d'érudit et que vous devriez être curieux de savoir d'où ils viennent. Darrell Davis, que vous connaissez sûrement, dont une partie de son objectif était simplement de savoir d'où venaient les gens. Et dans le processus, il a en fait déradicalisé un certain nombre de membres clients lorsqu'ils ont réalisé que cet homme noir qui se lierait d'amitié avec eux était en fait compatissant et était une personne honnête. Ils ont réalisé que toutes leurs idées préconçues étaient fausses. Cela peut donc avoir un facteur de déradicalisation, mais même si ce n'est pas le cas, il est toujours très important de savoir ce que pensent les mauvaises personnes de votre société. Honnêtement, d'une certaine manière, pour votre propre sécurité, il est probablement plus important de savoir ce que pensent réellement les mauvaises personnes de votre société.

LEX : Personnellement, je ne sais pas ce que vous en pensez. , mais je pense personnellement que la liberté d'expression dans des cas comme celui-là, comme le KKK et les campus, peut faire plus de mal à court terme, mais bien plus de bénéfices à long terme. Parce que vous pouvez parfois argumenter en disant que ça va faire mal. Ouais. A court terme. Mais je veux dire, Harvey a dit que c'était comme considérer l'alternative. Parce que vous venez en quelque sorte de faire valoir que ce serait potentiellement une bonne chose, même à court terme. Et c'est souvent le cas, je pense, surtout dans une société stable comme la nôtre, euh, avec une classe moyenne forte, toutes ces sortes de choses où les gens ont comme le confort, la raison à travers les choses. Ouais. Hum, mais vous savez, pour moi, même si cela fait mal à court terme, même si cela crée davantage de haine à court terme, la liberté d'expression a ce côté vraiment bénéfique, c'est qu'elle vous aide à avancer vers le la vérité, l'ensemble de la société vers une compréhension plus profonde et plus précise de la vie sur terre, de la société, du fonctionnement des gens, de l'éthique, de la métaphysique, de tout. Et cela, à long terme, représente un énorme avantage. Cela élimine les nazis à long terme, même si cela augmente le nombre de nazis à court terme. Ouais.

GREG : Eh bien, et en attendant, juste pour, et pour vérifier la réalité, les gens en parlent toujours, qu'en est-il du clan sur le campus ? Je me dis qu'ils ne sont jamais invités. Euh, le, le, le, le, je n'ai pas vu de cas où ils ont été invités. Hum, généralement, l'argument du clan est rejeté lorsque les gens essaient de s'excuser. Et c'est pourquoi nous avons critiqué Ben Shapiro. Et c'est pourquoi vous ne pouvez pas avoir Bill Maher sur le campus. C'est pour ça, tu sais, et c'est comme, d'accord. Euh, vous savez, et c'est, c'est un peu ça, encore une fois, le proposisme, le fait d'être comme, eh bien, cette chose là-bas est terrible et donc ce comédien ne devrait pas venir.

LEX : Euh, alors J'ai une question, peut-être à titre de conseil, vous savez, en interviewant des gens et en voyant cela comme un podcast comme une plate-forme pour décider à qui parler ou non, pas quelque chose avec lequel je dois me retrouver face à face à l'occasion. Mon inclination naturelle avant de commencer le podcast était de parler à n'importe qui, y compris aux gens, ce qui m'intéresse toujours, qui sont, vous savez, les membres actuels du KKK. Et pour moi, il est de notre responsabilité de le faire avec compétence. Ouais.Euh, et cette responsabilité me pèse de plus en plus lourdement parce que vous réalisez à quel point cela demande des compétences parce qu'il faut savoir, comprendre tellement de choses, parce que j'ai, j'en suis venu à comprendre que le diable va toujours être charismatique. Ouais. Hum, le diable ne ressemblera pas au diable. Et donc tu dois réaliser que tu dois le faire, tu ne peux pas toujoursvenir à la table avec une profonde compassion pour un autre être humain. Vous devez avoir, vous savez, environ 90 % de compassion et 90 % de connaissances historiques approfondies sur le contexte des batailles autour de cette question particulière. Et cela demande énormément d'efforts, mais je ne sais pas si vous avez des idées à ce sujet, comment gérer la parole, euh, d'une manière sans censure, sans la faire remonter à la surface, mais d'une manière qui crée plus de l'amour du monde.

GREG : Je me souviens, euh, Steve Bannon a été désinvité du festival new-yorkais et Jim Carrey a paniqué et toutes sortes d'autres personnes ont paniqué et il a été désinvité, euh, de, de le, et j'ai été invité à parler de cela avec un sourire narquois. Et je disais, écoutez, vous n'avez pas de monde à votre conférence parce que vous êtes d'accord avec eux. Euh, comme si c'était le, le, nous devons sortir de cette idée que c'est parce qu'ils essayaient de donner l'impression que c'était une approbation de Steve Bannon. Comme si c'était absurde. Par exemple, si vous regardez réellement les opinions de toutes les personnes qui sont là, vous ne pouvez pas approuver toutes les opinions qu'ont réellement toutes ces autres personnes qui seront là. Et puis, en faisant valoir cet argument, j'ai eu, euh, et, et aussi bien sûr, le très classique, c'est très précieux de savoir ce que pense quelqu'un Steve Bannon. Vous devriez être curieux à ce sujet. Et je me souviens que quelqu'un avait répondu en disant : eh bien, que voudriez-vous que quelqu'un interviewe un djihadiste ? Et je me dis, parce qu'en ce moment, c'était au moment où, quand ISIS était vraiment en train de se lancer, de se lancer. Euh, et je me disais, ne voudriez-vous pas aller à une conférence où quelqu'un essayait de comprendre ce qui motive certaines de ces personnes ? Euh, parce que cela change votre cadrage, c'est essentiellement, non, c'est de la curiosité. C'est le remède à beaucoup de ces choses. Et nous avons besoin de beaucoup plus de curiosité et de beaucoup moins de certitudes injustifiées.

LEX : Et la question se pose de savoir comment mener de telles conversations ? Et je me sens profondément sous-qualifié. Selon vous, qui est particulièrement doué pour ça ? J’ai l’impression que les documentaristes font généralement un bien meilleur travail. Et le meilleur travail est généralement réalisé par les biographes. Ouais. Donc, plus vous accordez de temps à une conversation particulière, comme une réflexion très approfondie et un contexte historique et étudier les gens, comment ils pensent, en regardant toutes les perspectives différentes, en regardant la psychologie de la personne, son éducation, ses parents, ses grands-parents, tout de cela, plus vous passez de temps avec cela, euh, meilleure est la qualité de la conversation parce que vous apprenez à comprendre, vous apprenez vraiment à sympathiser avec la personne, avec les gens qu'elle représente, euh, et vous pouvez voir l'humanité commune, tout cela. Souvent, les intervieweurs ne font pas ce travail.

GREG : Ouais. Euh, donc les meilleures choses que j'ai vues, ce sont des interviews qui font partie d'un documentaire. Ouais.

LEX : Mais même aujourd'hui, les documentaires sont comme s'il y avait une énorme incitation à les faire le plus rapidement possible. Il n'y a aucune incitation à vraiment passer du temps avec la personne.

GREG : Il y a un nouveau documentaire génial sur Floyd Abrams que je recommande vraiment. Nous avons réalisé un documentaire sur Ira Glasser intitulé Mighty Ira, euh, qui a été réalisé par mon équipe vidéo et mon protégé Nico Perino, Chris Mulvey et Aaron Reese. Et cela suit simplement la vie et l'époque de, euh, d'Ira Glasser, l'ancien chef de l'ACLU.

LEX : Si vous pouviez vous attarder là-dessus, c'est une histoire fascinante. Oh ouais.

GREG : Incroyable. Euh, Ira, il n'était pas avocat. Euh, il a commencé à travailler au NYCLU, le syndicat des libertés civiles de New York, dans les années soixante, je pense. Il était, euh, je pense que Robert Kennedy lui a recommandé d'aller dans cette direction. Euh, et il est devenu président de l'ACLU juste au moment où ils souffraient, euh, de la défense des nazis à Skokie et Nico, euh, et, et, et, et Aaron et Chris ont mis en place ça et ils Je n'avais jamais fait de documentaire auparavant. Et ça s’est tellement bien passé. Euh, et ça raconte l'histoire des nazis à Skokie. Il raconte l'histoire de l'affaire qui l'entoure, il raconte l'histoire de l'ACLU à l'époque. Et quel grand leader Ira Glasser était. Et ce qui est génial, c'est que lorsque vous voyez les nazis à Skokie, ils se comportent comme les idiots auxquels on s'attendrait. Il y a un moment où le rallye ne se passe pas très bien et où le leader s'énerve. Et on dirait presque qu'il va aimer crier un peu comme, tu es, tu es, tu es, tu fais de ce rassemblement nazi une moquerie. Cela montrait ainsi à quel point le fait de permettre aux nazis de s’exprimer à Skokie leur coupait le souffle.Comme s’ils avaient tout le mouvement, comme tout le monde, tout s’est en quelque sorte dissous après ça parce qu’ils ressemblaient à des imbéciles racistes. Ils étaient, vous savez, même les frères blues faisaient des blagues, vous savez, des blagues à leur sujet. Euh, et ça, et ça ne s'est pas transformé en désastreque les gens pensaient que cela se ferait simplement en les laissant parler. Et Ira Glasser, d'accord. Il a donc cette merveilleuse histoire sur la façon dont Jackie Robinson a rejoint les Brooklyn Dodgers et comment il y a eu un moment où il a vu quelqu'un, un Afro-Américain comme littéralement dans leur équipe et comment cela les a vraiment enthousiasmés pour la cause de l'égalité raciale. Et cela est devenu une grande partie de sa vie. Et je pense simplement à cela comme une si belle métaphore élargit votre cercle et voir plus de personnes comme faisant littéralement partie de votre équipe est la solution à tant de ces problèmes. Et je crains que l'une des choses qui soit absolument une réalité en Amérique, c'est que nous nous considérons davantage comme des camps ennemis plutôt que comme des membres de la même équipe. Et c'était en fait quelque chose au début, comme moi et Will Creely, le directeur juridique de Fire, avons écrit sur les défis à venir en matière de liberté d'expression pour tous ceux qui étaient sur Facebook. Et une chose que j'espérais était qu'à mesure que de plus en plus de gens exposaient davantage leur vie, nous réaliserions beaucoup de ces choses que nous connaissions intellectuellement, comme les enfants qui vont au bar, se saoulent et font des choses stupides. Euh, ça, euh, que quand nous avons commencé à voir la preuve qu'ils faisaient des choses stupides, nous pourrions être choqués au début, mais finalement devenir plus sophistiqués et nous dire, eh bien, allez, les gens sont comme ça. Cela n’a jamais vraiment semblé se produire. Euh, ça, ça, je ne pense pas qu'il y ait beaucoup de choses que nous savons sur la nature humaine et nous savons des choses stupides que les gens disent, euh, et nous en avons fait un environnement où il y a juste quelqu'un là-bas qui attend de dire : Oh, tu te souviens de cette connerie que tu as dit que nous avions 14 ans ? Eh bien, je vais m'assurer que tu n'entres pas dans l'école de tes rêves à cause de ça.

LEX : Cette archéologie offensive.

GREG : Ce n'est pas mon terme cependant. C'est un excellent terme. On vole les meilleurs en fouillant dans les commentaires passés de quelqu'un pour trouver un discours qui n'a pas bien vieilli. Et celui-là est tactique. Comme ça, celui-là n’est pas seulement quelqu’un qui ne fait pas preuve d’empathie. Ils disent, je vais te punir pour ceci ou, et c'est une des raisons pour lesquelles j'ai été déprimé en écrivant ce livre parce que tu sais, c'est déjà le cas, il y a déjà des gens qui ne m'aiment pas à cause de dorloter l'Américain. esprit, généralement basé sur une mauvaise compréhension de ce que nous avons réellement dit et dorlotant l'esprit américain, mais néanmoins. Euh, mais sur celui-ci, vous savez, j'appelle les gens à être très cruels dans beaucoup de cas, mais en d'autres termes, mais une chose qui était vraiment effrayante dans l'étude de beaucoup de ces cas, c'est qu'une fois que vous avez cela cible sur votre dos, ce pour quoi ils vont essayer de vous annuler pourrait être n'importe quoi. Vous savez, ils pourraient retourner dans vos vieux, vos vieux bateaux, trouver quelque chose que vous avez dit en 1995, vous savez, faire quelque chose, euh, où en gros, on dirait que c'est tout autre chose, mais en réalité ce qu'ils sont, qu'est-ce que c'est ? le problème, c'est qu'ils n'ont pas aimé votre opinion. Ils n’aimaient pas votre point de vue sur quelque chose. Et ils vont trouver un moyen qu'à partir de maintenant, chaque fois que votre nom apparaît, ce soit comme, Oh, souviens-toi de ça, de cette chose que je n'aimais pas chez eux. Et c'est encore une fois, c'est cruel. Cela ne vous rapproche en rien de la vérité. Et, mais c'est un peu effrayant de sortir le cou.

LEX : D'accord. En termes de solutions, je vais vous poser quelques questions. Donc une, euh, parentalité.

GREG : Ouais. Cinq et sept ans.

LEX : Je suis donc sûr que vous avez tout compris à ce moment-là. Oh mon Dieu, non.

GREG : Du point de vue de la liberté d'expression. Ouais. Euh, du point de vue de la culture de la liberté d'expression, comment être un bon parent. Ouais. Je pense que la première qualité que vous devriez cultiver chez vos enfants, si vous voulez avoir une culture de la liberté d'expression, est la curiosité et la conscience de l'immensité qui sera toujours inconnue. Et enthousiasmer mes enfants pour l'idée que nous allons passer toute notre vie à apprendre des choses. Et c'est rapide, excitant et sans fin et nous n'y ferons jamais une grande brèche, mais le voyage sera incroyable. Mais seuls les imbéciles pensent tout savoir. Euh, et parfois des imbéciles dangereux en plus. Donc, donner le sentiment d'humilité intellectuelle dès le début, vous savez, dire des choses qui en fait semblent un peu démodées, comme, mais je dis des choses à mes enfants, comme, écoutez, si vous aimez étudier et travailler, les deux choses qui J'apprécie beaucoup, je le fais pour m'amuser. Hum, ta vie va être géniale et facile. Euh, donc certaines, vous savez, certaines de ces vertus à l'ancienne sont des choses que j'essaie de prêcher, euh, des trucs contre-intuitifs comme passer du temps à jouer en plein air, euh, avoir du temps qui ne sont pas des expériences intermédiaires est vraiment, euh, c'est vraiment important .Et des petites choses comme, euh, je parle dans le livre du moment où mes enfants regardent quelque chose qui fait peur et je ne parle pas de films de zombies, vous savez, je parle d'un dessin animé qui a une sorte d'horreur. moment et disant qu'ilsje veux éteindre le téléviseur. Et moi, et je leur ai parlé et je leur dis, écoute, ça me manque à côté de toi et on va finir ce spectacle et je veux que tu me dises ce que tu en penses, de ça après. Et je me suis assis à côté de mes fils. Euh, et à la fin, chaque fois que je, vous savez, quand je leur ai demandé, était-ce aussi effrayant que vous le pensiez ? Et il y avait comme, non papa, c'était bien. Et je me dis que c'est l'une des grandes leçons de la vie. La peur que vous ne traversez pas devient beaucoup plus grande dans votre tête que le simple fait d'y faire face. C'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles je me bats contre cette culture. J'aime, vous savez, que tous nos enfants puissent grandir dans un environnement où les gens vous donnent de la grâce et, vous savez, acceptez le fait que parfois les gens vont dire des choses qui vous énervent, prenez au sérieux cette possibilité. et ayez tort et, euh, soyez curieux.

LEX : Eh bien, j'espère que ce que vous avez mentionné, c'est parce qu'une grande partie des contenus des jeunes sont sur Internet et qu'ils Nous allons nous accorder une pause, car alors tout le monde mérite d'annuler.

GREG : La génération Z déteste le plus l'annulation de la culture. Et c’est une autre raison pour laquelle c’est comme si les gens prétendaient encore que cela se produisait. C'est un peu comme si, non, vous pouvez en fait demander aux enfants ce qu'ils pensent de la Cancel Culture et ils détestent ça.

LEX : Ouais. Eh bien, je les considère en quelque sorte comme le système immunitaire. C'est comme si c'était la culture qui s'éveille et se dit : non, ce n'est pas une bonne chose.

GREG : Je suis content cependant. Je veux dire, je, je, je fais partie de ces enfants qui, vous savez, sont vraiment heureux d'être un petit enfant dans les années 80 et un adolescent dans les années 90 parce que tout avoir potentiellement en ligne, euh, ce n'est pas un problème. , une éducation.

LEX : J'envie. Eh bien, moi, parce que vous pouvez aussi exercer la liberté d'expression absolue. J'aime mener là où j'espère un avenir où beaucoup de nos insécurités, nos défauts, tout est là-bas. Et pour être honnête, je pense que cela mène à un monde meilleur. Parce que les défauts sont beaux. Je veux dire, ce sont les défauts, euh, les ingrédients de base de la connexion humaine.

GREG : Euh, Robert Wright, il a écrit un livre sur, euh, sur le bouddhisme. Euh, et j'ai parlé d'essayer d'utiliser les médias sociaux d'un point de vue bouddhiste et comme si c'était l'inconscient collectif qui méditait et voyait ces petits morceaux de colère qui essayaient de vous annuler ou de vous obtenir. se taire et juste un peu comme les laisser partir de la même manière que vous êtes censé regarder vos pensées s'éloigner.

LEX : J'adorerais voir cela comme visualisé quel que soit le drame qui se passe. continuer, continuer, juste voir l'océan de tout cela, de la conscience collective, juste traiter cela et avoir une petite crise de panique et juste un peu comme, ouais, le lire, regarder le petit genre de voix haineuses et en colère de pop-up et dites, d'accord, vous y êtes.

GREG : Et je suis toujours concentré sur, sur cette chose parce que c'est, ça, c'est l'une des choses, d'accord. Ouais, en fait, il est probablement tard dans le jeu pour donner ma grande théorie sur ce genre de choses. Euh, mais, euh, jamais trop tard. Donc, ce que j'étudiais, euh, à la faculté de droit, quand j'ai manqué de cours de premier amendement, euh, j'ai décidé d'étudier la censure pendant la dynastie des tuteurs, euh, parce que c'est de là que nous viennent nos idées de retenue préalable, euh, ça, ça vient de l'autorisation de l'imprimerie, euh, ce qu'Henri VIII a été le premier à faire où, fondamentalement, euh, l'idée était que si vous ne pouvez rien imprimer en Angleterre, à moins que ce soit avec ceux-ci, euh, euh, votre majesté a approuvé les imprimeurs, euh, cela empêchera les travaux hérétiques et les trucs anti-Henri huitième de sortir. Je suis jolie, jolie, jolie, jolie, jolie, euh, une idée efficace au moins. Euh, et moi toujours, alors il a commencé à se mettre en colère contre l'imprimerie vers 1521, puis a adopté quelque chose qui exigeait que les imprimés soient avec le Parlement en, euh, 1538. Euh, et je pense toujours à cela comme un peu comme là où nous en sommes maintenant, euh, parce que nous avons ceci, nous avions la, à l'époque, nous avions la technologie perturbatrice d'origine, vous savez, l'écriture l'était probablement, mais la suivante, qui était l'imprimerie, qui était absolument calamiteuse. Et je veux dire, et moi, et je dis calamiteux exprès parce qu'à court terme, les chasses aux sorcières se sont multipliées comme des folles parce que l'imprimerie permettait d'avoir ce manuel sur la façon de trouver les sorcières que les guerres de religion sont devenues folles. Hum, cela a conduit à toutes sortes de détresse, de désinformation et de méchanceté. Et Henri VIII essayait de remettre le génie dans la bouteille. Vous savez, il disait un peu : je peux, je peux, je peux, je veux utiliser ça pour de bon. Comme, euh, j'ai l'impression que ça pourrait, ça pourrait être utilisé, mais il était dans une période inévitable d'anarchie épistémique.Il n'y a rien que vous puissiez faire pour que la période qui a suivi la planche à billets se révèle être une période non perturbatrice et non folle, à part une période absolue.totalitarisme et détruire toutes les presses écrites, ce qui n'était tout simplement pas possible en Europe. J’ai donc l’impression que c’est un peu là où nous en sommes actuellement. Cette perturbation est venue de l'ajout, je pense, vous savez, de plusieurs millions de personnes à la conversation européenne et finalement à la conversation mondiale, mais finalement c'est devenu le meilleur outil de non-confirmation, euh, pour se débarrasser de la fausseté, pour repérer les mauvaises idées. Et ce sont les avantages, les avantages à long terme de l’imprimerie qui sont incalculablement grands. Euh, et c'est ce qui me donne un certain optimisme quant à la situation actuelle des médias sociaux, car nous sommes dans cette période inévitablement anarchique. Et je crains que, euh, euh, il y ait des tentatives dans les États pour adopter des mesures pour essayer de remettre le génie dans la bouteille. Par exemple, si nous interdisons le tic-tac ou si nous disons que, euh, personne de moins de 18 ans ne peut accéder à Internet, à moins d'avoir une autorisation parentale, nous nous dirigeons vers quelque chose qu'aucune sorte de hiérarchie ne peut permettre. capable de le réparer. Nous devons nous adapter culturellement à ce fait, euh, euh, d'une manière qui nous rende plus sages qu'en fait, euh, et lui permettre d'être potentiellement ce merveilleux moteur de non-confirmation dont nous sommes encore loin, d'ailleurs, mais Pensez-y. Des millions d'yeux supplémentaires sur les problèmes, euh, grâce à l'imprimerie, ont contribué à créer la révolution scientifique, les Lumières, l'ignorance des découvertes. Euh, nous avons maintenant ajouté des milliards d'yeux et de voix pour résoudre les problèmes. Et nous les utilisons simplement pour des vidéos de chats et pour les annulations.

LEX : Mais ce ne sont que les premiers jours de l'imprimerie. Tout commence avec les chats et l'annulation. Y a-t-il quelque chose à propos de X à propos de Twitter, qui est peut-être la source la plus énergétique de chats et d'annulations.

GREG : Cela semble être l'inconscient collectif de l'espèce. Je veux dire, comme si c'était une de ces choses où la tendance à vouloir voir des modèles dans l'histoire peut parfois limiter l'expérience vraiment folle de ce qu'est réellement l'histoire. Parce que oui, nous, nous, nous avons ces belles idées réconfortantes que ça va être comme la dernière fois. Nous ne le savons pas. Cela n'est pas encore arrivé. Et je pense à quel point Twitter est inhabituel parce que je le considère comme les enfants, parce que les gens parlent, vous savez, d'écriture et de communications de masse et, euh, comme d'une expansion de la taille de notre cerveau collectif. Mais maintenant, nous observons en quelque sorte notre cerveau collectif en temps réel. Et c'est rempli, tout comme notre propre cerveau, de toutes sortes de petites choses folles qui surgissent et, et, et, et apparaissent comme des particules virtuelles un peu partout, des gens, euh, vous savez, réagissent en temps réel. aux choses. Il n’y a jamais eu quelque chose de semblable, même vaguement. Et cela peut être au pire, horrible à voir. Au mieux, voir parfois des gens simplement euphoriques à propos de quelque chose qui se passe et faire des blagues immédiates absolument brillantes, vous savez, en même temps, cela peut être, cela ne peut même pas être une expérience joyeuse. Euh, je, j'ai l'impression, euh, et je vis maintenant dans un quartier sur X où je traite principalement avec des gens que je pense vraiment attentionnés, même si je ne suis pas d'accord avec eux. Euh, et, et ce n'est pas une si mauvaise expérience. Il m'arrive parfois de tomber sur ce genre de quartiers que j'appelle sur X, où tout cela annule toute méchanceté. Et c'est toujours une visite plutôt désagréable dans ces endroits. Je ne dis pas que tout cela doit ressembler à mon expérience, mais je pense que la raison pour laquelle les gens continuent d'y revenir est que cela révèle des aspects bruts de l'humanité que nous préférons parfois faire semblant de ne pas voir. Ça n'existe pas.

LEX : Ouais. Ouais. Mais c'est aussi totalement nouveau. Comme vous l'avez dit, c'est juste une viralité, la vitesse, les nouvelles voyagent, les opinions voyagent, la bataille pour les idées voyage.

GREG : La bataille pour l'information aussi.

LEX : Ouais . De ce qui est vrai et non des mensonges, le vieux truc de Mark Twain est assez rapide sur la chose. Ouais. Et puis cela change votre compréhension de la façon d'interpréter les informations.

GREG : Cela vous stresse également énormément. Je me suis souvenu de m'en débarrasser parfois. Les statistiques sont plutôt mauvaises en matière de santé mentale, euh, chez les jeunes. Et je fais définitivement partie du camp de ceux qui pensent que les réseaux sociaux en font partie. Je comprends le débat, mais je suis assez persuadé que l'une des choses qui n'a pas été bénéfique pour la santé mentale des gens est que cela est simplement constamment exposé.

LEX : Ouais, absolument. Je pense qu'il est possible de créer des médias sociaux qui rapportent énormément d'argent, qui rendent les gens heureux, tout comme il est possible d'aligner les incitations.Donc, en termes de, oui, créer des adolescents, créer, euh, chaque étape de la vie, vous donner un épanouissement et un bonheur à long terme dans votre existence physique en dehors des réseaux sociaux et sur les réseaux sociaux, vous aider à grandir en tant qu'être humain, euh , vous aidant à vous mettre au défi juste ce qu'il faut et juste ce qu'il faut de vidéos de chats, tout ce qui donne cette expérience humaine riche et complète. Je pense que c'est juste un problème d'apprentissage automatique. C'est comme,ce n'est pas facile de créer un flux. Le flux le plus simple que vous puissiez faire est donc de maximiser l'engagement. Ouais. Mais c'est comme un algorithme vraiment stupide. Ouais. C'est comme si l'algorithme en apprenait suffisamment sur vous pour comprendre ce qui vous rendra vraiment heureux en tant qu'être humain pour grandir à long terme. C'est juste un problème très difficile à résoudre.

GREG : Tu as déjà regardé Fleabag ? C'est absolument génial, un spectacle britannique. Euh, et ça vous prépare. L'une des raisons pour lesquelles les gens l'aiment tant, c'est que cela vous donne l'impression de regarder comme un britannique torride Sex and the City, sauf que le personnage principal est le plus important. Euh, c'est comme, d'accord. Et vous roulez un peu les yeux et c'est plutôt drôle et c'est plutôt mignon et plutôt épicé. Et puis vous réalisez que la personne souffre en fait et traverse une période difficile et cela devient de plus en plus profond à mesure que la série avance. Et elle fera ces discours incroyables sur, dites-moi quoi faire. Comme je viens de le dire, je sais qu'il y a des experts là-bas. Je sais qu'il existe des connaissances. Je sais qu'il existe une façon optimale de vivre ma vie. Alors pourquoi quelqu'un ne peut-il pas me dire quoi faire ? Et, et c'est cet aspect merveilleusement, euh, précis, je pense, euh, du désir humain, que se passerait-il si quelque chose pouvait réellement me dire la voie optimale à suivre ? Parce que je pense qu'il y a un désir de renoncer à une certaine part de votre propre liberté et de votre discrétion afin qu'on vous dise de faire la bonne chose de manière optimale. Mais ce chemin me fait très peur.

LEX : Ouais, nous voyons la façon dont vous le formulez. C'est vrai que ça me fait peur aussi. Il y a donc plusieurs choses : vous pouvez être constamment distrait à la manière de TikTok par des choses qui vous maintiennent engagé. Donc, supprimez cela et vous offrez constamment un tas d'options et apprenez à long terme ce qui se traduit par votre bonheur réel à long terme. Alors, quelle quantité d’idées stimulantes est bonne pour vous ? Euh, ça, tu sais, pour quelqu'un comme moi, mais il y a un chiffre comme ça pour toi, Greg, comme pour moi, ce chiffre est assez élevé. J'adore le débat. J'aime, je, j'aime le sentiment de réaliser, putain de merde, j'ai eu tort.

GREG : Oui. Mais comme, vous savez, et j'aimerais que l'algorithme sache cela sur moi et m'aide, tout en me donnant toujours des options. Si je veux descendre dans les vidéos de chats, etc. Eh bien, l'aspect éducatif.

LEX : Oui, l'éducation. J’aime l’idée d’aller à la vitesse dont vous avez besoin et de courir aussi vite que vous le pouvez. Ouais. Vous savez, je veux dire, il y a ça, vous savez, toute cette histoire de flux. Je pense simplement que la recommandation de YouTube, pour le meilleur ou pour le pire, si elle est utilisée correctement, j'ai l'impression qu'elle fait du très bon travail. Chaque fois que je refuse de cliquer sur des éléments uniquement basés sur la dopamine et de cliquer uniquement sur des éléments éducatifs, la recommandation offre un très bon résultat. J'ai donc l'impression que c'est un problème qui peut être résolu, au moins dans le domaine de l'éducation consistant à se mettre au défi, mais aussi à élargir son domaine de connaissances et tout ce genre de choses.

GREG : Et je suis définitivement plus dans le , nous sommes dans une période inévitablement anarchique et avons besoin de grands ajustements culturels. Et il n'y a aucun moyen que cette transition ne soit pas difficile.

LEX : Y a-t-il des petites ou grandes choses spécifiques que vous aimeriez voir X faire, Twitter faire ? J'ai beaucoup de réflexions à ce sujet.

GREG : Avec la presse à imprimer et des millions d'yeux supplémentaires sur n'importe quel problème, n'importe quelle institution, n'importe quelle personne ou n'importe quelle idée peut être détruite. Et c’est une bonne chose à certains égards, car de nombreuses institutions médiévales ont dû être démolies. Et certaines personnes l’ont fait aussi, et beaucoup d’idées ont dû être démolies. La même chose est vraie maintenant. Des milliards d’yeux supplémentaires sur chaque problème peuvent détruire n’importe quelle personne, idée ou institution. Et certaines, encore une fois, certaines de ces choses devaient être démolies, mais cela ne peut pas encore être construit. Nous n’en sommes pas encore au stade où nous pouvons construire, mais cela nous a montré à quel point nos connaissances étaient limitées. C'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles nous sommes également conscients de la crise de la réplication. C'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles nous sommes également conscients de la mauvaise qualité de nos recherches, de l'arrogance de notre classe d'experts dans de nombreux cas, mais les gens ne veulent pas vivre dans un monde où il n'y a pas de gens qui ils respectent et ils peuvent regarder. Et je pense que ce qui se passe peut-être maintenant, mais qui continuera à se produire, c'est que les gens vont s'établir comme étant d'une grande intégrité, qu'ils seront toujours honnêtes. Je pense que vous vous établissez comme une personne de grande intégrité, en qui on peut faire confiance à cette personne. Un incendie veut être, vous savez, l'institution vers laquelle les gens peuvent venir, c'est comme si c'était la liberté d'expression, nous la défendrions, point final. Et je pense que les gens ont besoin de nouvelles autorités, d’autorités en qui ils peuvent réellement avoir confiance.Et je pense que si vous aviez réellement un stream que les gens pourraient peut-être regarder en action, mais sans être inondé de, vous savez, des trucs stupides de culture d'annulation ou des moyens de chat stupides, où il s'agit en fait d'une discussion sérieuse limitée autour de règles, pas de forteresse rhétorique parfaite. , pas efficaceforteresse rhétorique, aucune des façons stupides dont nous débattons. Je pense que vous pourriez commencer à créer quelque chose qui pourrait réellement améliorer considérablement la vitesse à laquelle nous proposons de nouvelles et meilleures idées et établissons et séparons la vérité du faux.

LEX : Ouais. Si cela est bien fait, cela peut inciter un grand nombre de personnes à devenir de plus en plus intègres et cela peut créer l'intégrité comme une valeur à atteindre. Je veux dire, vous savez, il y a eu des projets sur Internet qui ont fait un travail incroyable, mais qui étaient également très imparfaits. Comme Wikipédia, c'est un exemple d'un grand pas en avant dans ce domaine.

GREG : C'est sacrément impressionnant. Quelle est votre opinion globale ? Je veux dire, je suis surtout impressionné.

LEX : Il y a donc quelques idées vraiment puissantes pour les personnes qui éditent Wikipédia. L'un d'entre eux est que chaque éditeur déclare pour lui-même, vous savez, je suis passionné de politique et je suis vraiment un gars de gauche. Je ne devrais donc vraiment pas éditer des articles politiques parce que j’ai des préjugés. Alors ils déclarent leurs préjugés et ils font souvent du bon travail en déclarant ces préjugés, mais ils aimeront quand même, ils trouveront un moyen de se justifier. Comme si quelque chose allait les énerver et qu’ils voulaient le corriger parce qu’ils adoraient corriger le mensonge en vérité. Mais la perspective de ce qui est vrai ou non est affectée par leurs préjugés. La vérité est difficile à connaître. Et il est vrai qu’il existe un parti pris de gauche à l’égard des éditeurs de Wikipédia. Donc pour ça, ce qui se passe, c'est sur les articles, que j'apprécie surtout et qui n'ont pas d'aspect politique, vous savez, euh, les articles scientifiques ou, euh, les articles techniques, ils vont être vraiment forts, même historiques. , décrivant simplement les faits historiques qui n'ont pas d'élément subjectif, euh, fort. Aussi, en utilisant simplement mon propre cerveau, je peux en quelque sorte filtrer si c'est, euh, vous savez, si c'est quelque chose à propos du 6 janvier ou quelque chose comme ça, je sais que je vais être comme, je ne suis pas ce qui se passe ici . Je vais en quelque sorte le lire, mais je vais surtout me tourner vers d'autres sources. Je vais examiner un tas de perspectives différentes à ce sujet. Cela va être très tendu. Il y aura probablement une sorte de parti pris. Peut-être qu'une certaine formulation sera telle, qui est un seul mot. C'est là que Wikipédia fait cette chose. La façon dont ils formulent les choses sera biaisée, le choix des mots, mais les éditeurs de Wikipédia eux-mêmes sont tellement réfléchis. Ils ont littéralement des articles décrivant ces mêmes effets sur la façon dont vous pouvez utiliser des mots pour injecter des préjugés dans toutes les manières dont vous en parlez.

GREG : C'est plus sain que la plupart des environnements.

LEX : C'est incroyablement sain, mais je pense que vous pourriez faire mieux. Pour moi, l'un des gros défauts de Wikipédia, que les notes de la communauté sur X font mieux, est l'accessibilité de devenir éditeur. Euh, c'est difficile de devenir monteur et ce n'est pas aussi visible, le processus de montage. J'aimerais donc, comme vous l'avez dit, un flux, permettant à tout le monde de pouvoir observer ce débat entre personnes avec intégrité lorsqu'ils discutent de choses comme le 6 janvier, un sujet très controversé pour voir comment se déroule le processus du débat au lieu d'être caché dans l’ombre, ce qu’il est actuellement sur Wikipédia. Vous pouvez y accéder. C'est juste difficile d'accès, mais j'ai aussi vu comment ils utiliseront certains articles, comme sur certaines personnes, comme des articles sur des personnes en qui j'ai appris à faire de moins en moins confiance parce qu'ils les utiliseront littéralement pour faire des commentaires personnels. attaques. Et c’est quelque chose sur lequel vous écrivez. Ils utiliseront, euh, des descriptions de différentes controverses pour dresser le portrait d'une personne qui, du moins, ne me semble pas être une représentation précise de la personne. Et c'est comme écrire un article sur Einstein mentionnant quelque chose à propos de la théorie de la relativité, puis disant qu'il était un coureur de jupons et un agresseur et, comme une controverse, vous savez, ouais, il est aussi Feynman, vous savez, non, vous savez. , c'était, vous savez, ils ne sont pas exactement l'humain parfait en termes de femmes, mais comme il y a d'autres aspects de cet humain et pour capturer cet humain correctement, il y a une certaine façon de le faire. Je pense que Wikipédia penche souvent. Ils essaient vraiment de réfléchir sur eux-mêmes et d’essayer d’arrêter cela, mais ils se pencheront sur le drame si cela correspond au parti pris. Mais encore une fois, c’est bien meilleur que le monde qui, je crois, est bien meilleur. Euh, parce que Wikipédia existe, mais maintenant que nous sommes dans ces stades d'adolescence, nous grandissons et essayons de proposer différentes technologies. L'idée d'un flux est vraiment, vraiment intéressante à mesure que de plus en plus de gens participent à ce discours selon lequel là où se trouve la valeur, essayons d'obtenir la vérité.

GREG : Ouais. Ouais. Et en gros, vous savez, vous obtenez les petites cartes pour, Non, faux, non, faux.

LEX : Et les différentes, les différentes, les différentes techniques rhétoriques qui sont utilisées pour éviter de réellement discuter.

GREG : Ouais. Et je pense qu'en fait, vous pouvez rendre les choses un peu plus amusantes en en ayant un nombre limité. Euh, tu sais, c'est un peu comme,vous en obtenez trois, que diriez-vous de quelques cartes.

LEX : Donc jouer le tout.

GREG : Euh, absolument.

LEX : Ouais. Euh, laissez-moi vous poser une question sur, euh, alors vous avez mentionné avoir vécu des moments difficiles dans votre vie. Euh, quoi, quelle a été votre expérience avec, euh, avec, avec la dépression ? Quelle a été votre expérience pour vous en sortir, la surmonter ?

GREG : Ouais. Je veux dire, tout ça, tout le voyage, euh, pour dorloter l'esprit américain, a commencé avec moi, euh, dans l'établissement psychiatrique de Belmont à Philadelphie en 2007. , j'avais appelé le 911 dans un moment de clarté parce que j'étais allé à la quincaillerie pour, euh, m'assurer que lorsque je me suis suicidé, ça restait coincé. Je voulais m'assurer que, vous savez, j'avais la tête enveloppée et tout. Donc, si tous les médicaments que j'avais l'intention de prendre ne fonctionnaient pas, je ne pourrais pas m'en sortir. Cela avait été une année vraiment difficile et j'avais toujours des problèmes de dépression, euh, mais ils empiraient. Et franchement, l'une des raisons pour lesquelles cette histoire de culture d'annulation est si importante pour moi, c'est que la chose sur laquelle je n'ai pas autant insisté en dorlotant l'esprit américain, qui d'ailleurs, cette description que je donne d'essayer me suicider, c'était la première fois que je l'écrivais. Personne dans ma famille ne savait, euh, comment, euh, c'était comme ça. Ma femme ne l'avait jamais vu. Et fondamentalement, la seule façon pour moi d'écrire cela, c'était en faisant, vous savez, comment vous pouvez en quelque sorte vous tromper. Si, euh, et je me disais, je vais me convaincre que c'est juste entre moi et mon ordinateur et que personne ne le verra. Et ce n’est probablement pas la chose la plus publique que j’ai jamais écrite. Hum, mais ce que je n'ai pas souligné là-dedans, c'est à quel point la guerre culturelle a joué dans ma dépression, parce que j'étais à l'origine le directeur juridique des pompiers. Puis je suis devenu président du feu en 2005, j'ai déménagé à Philadelphie et c'est là que je déprime. Euh, et, euh, en fait, je n'ai pas de famille là-bas. Il y a quelque chose dans la ville. Ils n'ont pas l'air de m'apprécier beaucoup. Hum, mais l'essentiel était d'être tout le temps dans le monde de la culture. Euh, il y avait une fille avec qui je sortais. Euh, je me souviens, tu sais, elle ne semblait pas vraiment approuver ce que je faisais. Et beaucoup de gens ne semblaient pas vraiment le faire. Et pendant ce temps, je défendais tout le temps les gens de gauche et ils disaient : Oh, c'est bien que tu défendes quelqu'un de gauche, mais ils ne me pardonneraient toujours jamais de défendre quelqu'un de droite. Et je me souviens avoir dit à quel point je pensais, écoutez, je me dis, je suis, je crois sincèrement en ce genre de choses. Je suis prêt à défendre les nazis. Je suis certainement prêt à défendre les républicains. Et elle a en fait dit : je pense que les Républicains pourraient être pires. Euh, et ça n'a pas été le cas, cette relation ne s'est pas très bien passée. Et puis j’ai failli me battre à plusieurs reprises avec des gens de droite. Euh, parce qu'ils ont découvert que je défendais les gens qui faisaient des blagues sur le 11 septembre. Comme si cela s'était produit plus d'une fois. Et ça, vous savez, lorsque j'aurai la vingtaine, je ne me bats plus au poing. Euh, mais oui, c'était toujours comme ça. Toi, toi, tu vois à quel point les gens peuvent être hypocrites. Vous pouvez voir comment vos amis peuvent se retourner contre vous s'ils n'aiment pas votre politique. J'ai donc eu un premier aperçu de la culture vers laquelle nous nous dirigeons en étant président du feu. Et c'était épuisant. Euh, et c'est l'une des principales choses qui m'ont amené à être, vous savez, suicidairement déprimé, euh, au centre Belmont. Si tu m'avais dit que ce serait le début d'une vie nouvelle et meilleure pour moi, j'aurais ri si j'avais pu, mais je l'aurais fait, tu sais, je n'aime pas, tu peux dire que je vais bien si je je rigole toujours. Et je ne riais pas, euh, à ce moment-là. Alors, j'ai consulté un médecin et j'ai commencé à suivre une thérapie cognitivo-comportementale. J'ai commencé à avoir toutes ces voix dans ma tête qui étaient catastrophiques et, euh, vous savez, cela m'a donné une généralisation excessive et, euh, euh, une divination, vous savez, euh, lire dans les pensées de toutes ces choses qu'ils enseignent. tu ne dois pas le faire. Et ce, euh, et ce qu'ils, ce que vous faites dans la TCC, c'est essentiellement que quelque chose vous énerve et ensuite vous écrivez simplement quelle était la pensée. Euh, et vous savez, quelque chose de mineur pourrait arriver dans votre réponse, vous savez, comme, euh, eh bien, le rendez-vous ne semblait pas très bien se passer. Euh, et c'est parce que je suis brisé et que nous mourrons seuls. Et tu dis, d'accord, d'accord, d'accord. Quoi, quoi, quelles sont les choses suivantes, vous savez, euh, c'est catastrophique, c'est de la lecture dans les pensées, c'est une divination, c'est tout ça. Euh, et tu dois faire ça plusieurs fois par jour pour toujours. En fait, j'ai besoin de le rafraîchir en ce moment.Euh, et lentement, au fil du temps, des voix dans ma tête qui disaient des conversations internes horribles, vous savez, horribles, cela ne semblait plus aussi convaincant, ce qui était vraiment un effet subtil. Comme si c'était juste un peu comme, oh attends, je n'achète pas que je sois brisé. Tu sais, comme si ça n'avait pas l'airvrai. Cela ne ressemble plus à la vérité venant de Dieu comme avant. Et neuf mois après avoir projeté de me suicider, j'étais probablement plus heureux qu'en dix ans. Euh, et c'est l'une des choses qui, vous savez, que la TCC m'a amené à remarquer cela dans mon propre travail, que j'avais l'impression que les administrateurs vendaient en quelque sorte des distorsions cognitives, mais que les étudiants n'achetaient pas encore. Et puis, quand j’ai commencé à remarquer qu’ils semblaient déjà croire à beaucoup de ces choses, que ce serait très dangereux. Et cela a conduit à dorloter l’esprit américain et tout ça. Mais ce qui était dur dans l'écriture de Hansling sur l'esprit américain, je l'aurais déjà mentionné plusieurs fois, j'étais vraiment déprimé l'année dernière, euh, parce que j'étudiais, vous savez, il y a un ami là-dedans qui J'ai parlé de qui s'est suicidé après avoir été annulé. Je lui ai parlé une semaine avant qu'il ne se suicide et je ne lui avais pas vraiment parlé parce qu'il semblait si confiant. Je pensais que ce serait tout à fait bien parce que lui, il a eu un tweet insensible en juin 2020 et, vous savez, a été expulsé d'une manière qui ne semblait pas aussi mauvaise que la plupart des autres professeurs. En fait, il a au moins reçu une indemnité de départ, donc ils savaient qu'il poursuivrait en justice et gagnerait, euh, parce que c'était déjà le cas. Et donc j'ai attendu de le voir parce que nous étions tellement submergés par les demandes d'aide. Et il disait que les gens venaient encore chez lui. Et puis il s'est suicidé la semaine suivante. Et certainement, et parce que tout le monde sait que je parle très publiquement de mes difficultés avec ce genre de choses, tous ceux qui luttent contre ce genre de choses viennent me voir quand ils traversent une période difficile. Et c'est un métier très éprouvant psychologiquement. Et même en admettant cela maintenant, je pense que comme tous les vautours là-bas, ils s'amuseront avec ça. De la même manière quand, quand, quand mon ami Mike Adams s'est suicidé, il y avait des gens qui célébraient sur Twitter, euh, qu'un homme était mort, euh, parce qu'ils n'aimaient pas ses tweets. Et, d’une manière ou d’une autre, cela les rendait compatissants envers une autre personne abstraite. Donc je devenais un peu déprimé et anxieux. Et ce qui m'a vraiment aidé plus que toute autre chose, euh, c'est d'avouer à mon équipe que je, vous savez, je, je, les livres demandent beaucoup d'énergie. Donc je savais qu’ils ne voulaient pas entendre ça. Non seulement cela prenait beaucoup de temps au patron, mais cela le rendait déprimé et anxieux. Mais quand j'ai finalement dit à mes dirigeants, à mes collaborateurs, euh, vous savez, aux gens que, même si j'essaie de garder beaucoup de distance, j'aime beaucoup, euh, ça a fait une telle différence, vous savez. , euh, parce que je pourrais être ouvert à ce sujet. Et l’autre chose était : avez-vous entendu ce dialogue de conférence ? Oh oui. C'est comme une chose sur invitation seulement. C'est Orrin Hoffman, euh, qui le dirige. Euh, il essaie intentionnellement d'amener les gens de tout le spectre politique, euh, à se réunir, euh, et à avoir des conversations officieuses sur de grandes questions. Et c'était agréable d'être dans une pièce où les libéraux conservateurs, rien de tout cela ci-dessus, nous sommes tous du genre, oh, Dieu merci, quelqu'un s'est lancé dans la culture de l'annulation. Et là où j'avais l'impression, j'avais l'impression que peut-être que ce ne serait pas le désastre pour moi et ma famille que j'étais, dont je commençais à avoir peur. Ce serait que reprendre ces choses pourrait en fait avoir une fin heureuse.

LEX : Eh bien, une chose qui me démarque, c'est que la douleur de l'annulation peut être vraiment intense. Et cela ne signifie pas nécessairement perdre votre emploi, mais même, vous pouvez appeler cela de l'intimidation, vous pouvez appeler n'importe quel nom, mais juste un certain nombre de personnes sur Internet. Et ce nombre peut être petit et vous dire de mauvaises choses.

GREG : Ouais. Cela peut être une force assez puissante pour la psyché humaine, ce qui est très surprenant. Et puis le revers de la médaille aussi, euh, ça me rend vraiment triste de voir à quel point les gens peuvent être cruels. C'est tellement vrai que penser que votre, votre cause est une justice sociale, dans de nombreux cas, peut amener les gens à penser que je peux être aussi cruel que je le souhaite dans cette poursuite. Souvent, c'est simplement une façon d'exprimer une certaine agressivité envers une personne, ce que vous considérez uniquement comme une abstraction.

LEX : Je pense donc qu'il est important que les gens réalisent qu'ils sont peu importe, peu importe, quelle que soit l'énergie négative, quelle que soit la négativité que vous voulez diffuser, comme s'il y avait de vraies personnes qui pouvaient être blessées. Comme si on pouvait vraiment amener les gens, euh, à devenir la pire version d'eux-mêmes ou éventuellement à se suicider. Et ce n'est pas aussi réel.

GREG : Ouais. Eh bien, c'est l'une des choses que nous faisons dans le livre, euh, pour vraiment nous adresser aux gens qui essaient encore de prétendre que ce n'est pas réel, c'est-à-dire que nous citons simplement, nous citons le Pape, nous citons Obama, nous citons James Carville, nous citons Taylor Swift sur la Cancel Culture.Comme, euh, et la citation suisse de Taylor, c'est essentiellement que derrière tout ça, il y a, quand ça devient particulièrement méchant, il y a ce très clair, vous savez, tuervous-même en quelque sorte sous-jacent. Euh, et c'est, c'est cruel. Et le problème est que dans un environnement aussi ouvert, il y aura toujours quelqu'un qui voudra être si transgressif et dire la chose la plus blessante, la plus terrible. Mais ensuite, vous devez vous rappeler de la fausse déclaration, revenir aux vieux idiomes, les bâtons et les pierres me briseront les os, mais les noms ne me feront jamais, jamais de mal. A été réinventé dans les débats sur les campus de la manière la plus stupide. Les gens diront littéralement des choses comme ça, mais maintenant nous savons que les mots peuvent faire mal. Et c'est comme si maintenant nous savons que les mots peuvent faire mal. Les gars, vous n'aviez pas besoin d'inventer une petite chose spéciale que vous enseignez aux enfants pour que ses paroles soient moins blessantes. S’ils ne faisaient jamais mal, cela n’aurait aucun sens. Le dicton c'est un dicton qu'on se répète pour se donner de la force. Quand les intimidateurs ont remarqué que vous êtes un peu bizarre, peut-être un peu personnel, euh, euh, et ça aide. Ça aide vraiment de se dire : écoute, d'accord, les connards vont dire des trucs de connards. Hum, et je ne peux pas les laisser avoir ce genre de pouvoir sur moi.

LEX : Ouais. Ouais. C'est toujours une expérience d'apprentissage parce que ça fait, ça fait, ça fait mal.

GREG : Mais pour les bonnes personnes qui, en fait, vous savez, pensent parfois, pensent qu'elles se défoulent, vous sais, réfléchis-y. N'oubliez pas qu'il y a des gens de l'autre côté.

LEX : Ouais. Pour moi, cela blesse ma foi en l’humanité. Euh, je sais que ça ne devrait pas, mais c'est parfois le cas, quand je vois des gens sympas les uns avec les autres, c'est en quelque sorte, euh, ça fait flotter un nuage sur ma vision du monde. Et ce n'est pas le cas, j'aurais aimé ne pas avoir à être là.

GREG : Ouais. Ça a toujours été mon genre de désinvolture, mais, euh, réponse à ça. Si, si l'humanité est fondamentalement bonne ou fondamentalement mauvaise, c'est comme le plus grand débat en philosophie et, eh bien, le problème avec, euh, le premier, c'est qu'il n'y a rien de fondamental dans l'humanité.

LEX : Ouais. Qu'est-ce qui vous donne de l'espoir dans toute cette histoire, dans cet état sombre dans lequel nous nous trouvons, comme vous le décrivez, comment pouvons-nous en sortir ? Qu'est-ce qui vous donne l'espoir que nous allons nous en sortir ?

GREG : Je pense que les gens en ont marre. Euh, je pense que les gens en ont assez de ne pas pouvoir être authentiques. Euh, et c'est vraiment, vous savez, ce qu'est la censure. Cela vous dit essentiellement de ne pas être vous-même. Ne dites pas vraiment ce que vous pensez. Euh, ne montre pas ta personnalité. Ne soyez pas en désaccord. Ne sois pas bizarre. Ne vous trompez pas. Euh, et ce n'est pas durable. Je pense que les gens en ont assez. Euh, mais une chose que je veux vraiment dire à votre public, c'est que cela ne peut pas dépendre uniquement de nous, nos téléspectateurs, d'essayer de résoudre ce problème. Euh, et je pense que, et cela peut sembler être un problème sans rapport. Je pense que s'il existait des moyens très respectés, disons extrêmement difficiles, de prouver que l'on est extrêmement intelligent et travailleur, et qui coûtent peu ou rien, cela pourrait en fait donner aux Harvard et aux Yale du monde la possibilité de gagner leur argent. Je pense que cela pourrait être la chose la plus positive que nous puissions faire pour résoudre beaucoup de ces problèmes et c'est pourquoi je pense que le fait que nous soyons devenus une Amérique étrange avec une grande tradition anti-élitiste est devenu étrangement élitiste dans ce domaine, dans le sens que non seulement, encore une fois, nos dirigeants venant de ces quelques écoles sophistiquées, nous avons en fait une grande admiration pour eux. Nous les admirons en quelque sorte, mais je pense que nous aurions une société beaucoup plus saine si les gens pouvaient prouver, vous savez, leur excellence d'une manière qui vient de courants complètement différents et, et cela, cela, qui est hautement respecté. Je dis parfois qu'il devrait y avoir un test selon lequel quiconque le réussit obtient comme un, vous savez, un BA en sciences humaines, c'est comme un super BA, comme quelque chose, comme quelqu'un, pas un GED. Ce n'est pas de cela que je parle. Je parle de quelque chose qui, vous savez, une personne sur seulement quelques, comme une centaine, peut passer par un autre moyen, euh, euh, de ne pas passer par ces énormes institutions coûteuses et gonflées où les gens peuvent lever la main. et dis, je suis intelligent et travailleur. Je pense que cela pourrait être une manière incroyablement saine. Je pense que nous avons besoin de flux supplémentaires pour que les créatifs résolvent les problèmes, que ce soit sur X ou ailleurs. Euh, je pense qu'il y a beaucoup de choses que la technologie pourrait faire pour vraiment aider dans ce domaine. Je pense que certaines des choses sur lesquelles Sal Khan travaille, euh, la Khan Academy pourraient vraiment aider. Euh, donc je pense qu'il y a beaucoup de façons, mais elles existent en grande partie pour trouver de nouvelles façons de faire les choses, pas seulement pour attendre les vieilles choses qui disent 40 milliards de dollars en banque qu'elles vont se réformer elles-mêmes. Et voici mon, vous savez, je m'en prends beaucoup à Harvard, mais je vais m'en prendre un peu plus.Euh, et, et, euh, je parle encore beaucoup de cours, et vous savez, il y a un super livre intitulé Poison Ivy, euh, d'Evan Mandry, que je recommande à tout le monde. Et c'est scandaleux. Ça me ressembleet une diatribe à Stanford, euh, qui était, euh, et moi, et je pense que le statut, vous savez, l'enseignement supérieur d'élite a plus d'enfants issus des 1 % les plus riches que des 50 ou 60 % les plus pauvres, selon l'école. . Euh, et quand vous regardez à quel point ils aiment réellement le privilège de classe de réplication, c'est vraiment pénible. Donc tout le monde devrait lire Poison Ivy.

LEX : Et par-dessus tout, euh, si vous êtes bizarre, continuez à l'être. Et tu es l'un des plus intéressants, l'un des plus étranges et de la plus belle manière que les gens aient jamais rencontré. Greg, merci pour le travail vraiment important que vous faites.

GREG : C'était, c'est apprécier le cours, tout le domaine que vous avez amené ici aujourd'hui, mec.

LEX : Hum, c'est une conversation incroyable. Merci pour le travail que vous faites. Merci. Merci. Et pour moi, qui me soucie profondément de l'éducation, de l'enseignement supérieur, merci de tenir les MIT et Harvard responsables, euh, de bien faire envers les gens qui marchent dans leurs couloirs. Alors merci beaucoup de m'avoir parlé. Merci d'avoir écouté cette conversation avec Greg Lukianoff pour soutenir ce podcast. Veuillez consulter nos sponsors dans la description. Et maintenant, permettez-moi de vous laisser avec quelques mots de Noam Chomsky. Si vous croyez en la liberté d'expression, vous croyez en la liberté d'expression des opinions, vous n'aimez pas. Gables était en faveur de la liberté d'expression pour les opinions qui lui plaisaient. Staline aussi. Si vous êtes en faveur de la liberté d’expression, cela signifie que vous êtes en faveur de la liberté d’expression précisément pour les opinions que vous méprisez. Merci de votre écoute et j'espère vous revoir la prochaine fois.

French transcription subtitles:

0
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,240
Si le but est le projet de connaissance humaine,

1
00:00:02,700 --> 00:00:04,320
c'est-à-dire connaître le monde dans lequel il est,

2
00:00:04,740 --> 00:00:10,140
on ne peut pas connaître le monde tel qu’il est sans savoir ce que pensent réellement les gens.

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:14,440
Et ce que les gens pensent réellement est un fait extrêmement important à connaître.

4
00:00:15,040 --> 00:00:16,780
Donc à chaque fois que tu dis,

5
00:00:17,460 --> 00:00:26,400
vous ne pouvez pas dire que vous vous privez réellement de la connaissance de ce que les gens pensent réellement que vous causez ce que Tim ou Crown, qui fait partie de notre conseil consultatif, appelle la falsification des préférences.

6
00:00:27,140 --> 00:00:29,400
Vous vous retrouvez avec une image inexacte du monde,

7
00:00:29,460 --> 00:00:30,240
qui d'ailleurs,

8
00:00:30,720 --> 00:00:31,640
dans de nombreux cas,

9
00:00:32,220 --> 00:00:35,040
parce qu'il y a des militants qui veulent restreindre davantage la liberté d'expression,

10
00:00:35,340 --> 00:00:38,380
ils ont en fait tendance à penser que les gens ont plus de préjugés qu’ils ne pourraient l’être.

11
00:00:38,520 --> 00:00:43,840
Et en fait, une façon très pratique d'aggraver les choses est de censurer les gens,

12
00:00:44,200 --> 00:00:46,340
cela ne change pas leur avis.

13
00:00:46,340 --> 00:00:50,440
Cela les encourage simplement à ne pas le partager avec des personnes qui pourraient leur causer des ennuis.

14
00:00:50,880 --> 00:00:55,920
Cela les amène donc à parler à des personnes avec lesquelles ils sont déjà d’accord et la polarisation du groupe prend son envol.

15
00:00:58,660 --> 00:01:01,100
Ce qui suit est une conversation avec Greg Lukianoff,

16
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:02,520
défenseur de la liberté d'expression,

17
00:01:03,020 --> 00:01:03,940
avocat du premier amendement,

18
00:01:04,440 --> 00:01:05,980
président-directeur général de FIRE,

19
00:01:06,320 --> 00:01:08,460
le fondement des droits et de l’expression individuels.

20
00:01:09,020 --> 00:01:11,360
Et il est l'auteur de Unleashing Liberty,

21
00:01:11,880 --> 00:01:15,520
co-auteur avec Jonathan Haidt de Coddling of the American

22
00:01:15,680 --> 00:01:21,200
Mind et co-auteur avec Ricky Schlott d'un nouveau livre qui sortira en octobre.

23
00:01:21,540 --> 00:01:26,060
Ils devraient absolument pré-commander maintenant appelé Canceling of the American Mind,

24
00:01:26,600 --> 00:01:29,100
qui est un récit définitif de l'histoire,

25
00:01:29,420 --> 00:01:31,260
présent et futur de la Cancel Culture,

26
00:01:31,680 --> 00:01:34,700
un terme utilisé et galvaudé dans le discours public,

27
00:01:35,260 --> 00:01:40,220
mais rarement étudié et compris avec la profondeur et la rigueur que font Greg et Ricky

28
00:01:40,680 --> 00:01:43,820
dans ce livre et en partie dans cette conversation.

29
00:01:45,080 --> 00:01:46,480
La liberté d'expression est importante,

30
00:01:46,980 --> 00:01:48,580
surtout sur les campus universitaires,

31
00:01:49,700 --> 00:01:52,980
l'endroit même qui devrait servir de champ de bataille des idées,

32
00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:55,460
y compris des choses étranges et controversées

33
00:01:56,100 --> 00:01:58,420
qui devrait encourager une prise de risque audacieuse,

34
00:01:58,820 --> 00:02:00,460
pas de conformité.

35
00:02:01,500 --> 00:02:03,140
Ceci est le podcast de Lex Friedman.

36
00:02:03,540 --> 00:02:03,940
Pour le soutenir,

37
00:02:04,340 --> 00:02:06,280
veuillez consulter nos sponsors dans la description.

38
00:02:06,720 --> 00:02:07,160
Et maintenant,

39
00:02:07,480 --> 00:02:07,900
chers amis,

40
00:02:08,460 --> 00:02:09,960
voici Greg Lukianoff.

41
00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:12,760
Commençons par la grande question.

42
00:02:13,000 --> 00:02:14,360
Qu’est-ce que la culture de l’annulation ?

43
00:02:14,880 --> 00:02:17,240
Maintenant, vous avez dit que vous n'aimez pas le terme tel qu'il est,

44
00:02:17,380 --> 00:02:22,500
citation, traînée dans la boue et malmenée sans cesse par toute une kyrielle de personnalités controversées.

45
00:02:23,040 --> 00:02:24,280
Néanmoins, nous avons le terme.

46
00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:25,380
Qu'est-ce que c'est?

47
00:02:25,480 --> 00:02:30,480
La culture d'annulation est la hausse des campagnes, en particulier des campagnes réussies,

48
00:02:30,920 --> 00:02:34,120
à partir de 2014 environ pour faire licencier les gens,

49
00:02:34,780 --> 00:02:35,220
exclu,

50
00:02:35,580 --> 00:02:36,780
déplatformé, et cetera,

51
00:02:37,420 --> 00:02:39,280
pour un discours qui

52
00:02:39,280 --> 00:02:41,100
normalement être protégé par le premier amendement.

53
00:02:41,640 --> 00:02:43,620
Et je dis que nous serions protégés parce que nous sommes

54
00:02:43,740 --> 00:02:48,160
parler de circonstances dans lesquelles ce n'est pas nécessairement là que le premier amendement s'applique.

55
00:02:48,460 --> 00:02:55,180
Mais ce que je veux dire, c'est comme dire des choses pour lesquelles vous ne pourriez pas perdre votre emploi en tant qu'employé public,

56
00:02:55,560 --> 00:03:00,720
et aussi le climat de peur qui résulte de ce phénomène,

57
00:03:00,820 --> 00:03:03,080
le fait que vous pouvez perdre votre emploi si vous avez une mauvaise opinion.

58
00:03:03,500 --> 00:03:04,900
Et ce n'était pas subtil ça

59
00:03:04,900 --> 00:03:06,360
il y a eu une légère hausse là-dedans,

60
00:03:06,760 --> 00:03:08,640
en particulier sur le campus vers 2014.

61
00:03:09,840 --> 00:03:11,140
John Ronson a écrit un livre

62
00:03:11,160 --> 00:03:12,700
intitulé Donc vous avez été publiquement honteux.

63
00:03:12,800 --> 00:03:13,980
Il est sorti en 2015,

64
00:03:14,180 --> 00:03:15,740
documentant déjà ce phénomène.

65
00:03:16,420 --> 00:03:19,020
J'ai écrit un livre intitulé Freedom From Speech en 2014.

66
00:03:19,640 --> 00:03:22,360
Mais c'est vraiment en 2017 que tu as commencé à voir

67
00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:23,660
cela s'adresse aux professeurs.

68
00:03:24,600 --> 00:03:28,380
Et quand il s'agit du nombre de professeurs que nous avons vu

69
00:03:28,460 --> 00:03:29,820
ciblés et perdent leur emploi,

70
00:03:30,420 --> 00:03:34,160
Je fais ça depuis 22 ans et je n'ai rien vu de tel.

71
00:03:34,560 --> 00:03:36,940
Il y a donc tellement de choses que je veux vous demander ici.

72
00:03:37,300 --> 00:03:38,980
Premièrement, en fait, il suffit de regarder l'organisation de

73
00:03:39,000 --> 00:03:39,380
FEU.

74
00:03:39,420 --> 00:03:41,220
Pouvez-vous expliquer quelle est l'organisation?

75
00:03:41,260 --> 00:03:42,960
Parce que c'est interconnecté à tout cela

76
00:03:43,760 --> 00:03:49,580
la lutte et la montée de la culture du cancer et la lutte pour la liberté d’expression depuis 2014 et avant.

77
00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:54,100
FIRE a donc été fondée en 1999 par Harvey Silverglate.

78
00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:56,480
C'est un célèbre avocat des libertés civiles.

79
00:03:56,720 --> 00:03:58,360
Il est un peu dans la série.

80
00:03:58,620 --> 00:04:03,040
C'est lui qui m'a découvert dans ma vie très heureuse à San Francisco,

81
00:04:03,040 --> 00:04:05,720
mais je savais que je cherchais un emploi pour le premier amendement.

82
00:04:05,900 --> 00:04:09,200
J'étais allé à la faculté de droit spécifiquement pour faire le premier amendement.

83
00:04:10,520 --> 00:04:11,780
Et il m'a trouvé,

84
00:04:11,960 --> 00:04:12,700
ce qui était plutôt cool.

85
00:04:13,100 --> 00:04:16,600
Sa protégée, Kathleen Sullivan, était la doyenne de la faculté de droit de Stanford.

86
00:04:16,720 --> 00:04:19,820
Et cela reste le meilleur compliment que j'ai jamais reçu de ma vie,

87
00:04:19,920 --> 00:04:22,820
c'est qu'elle m'a recommandé à Harvey.

88
00:04:23,800 --> 00:04:26,200
Et puisque c'est la seule raison pour laquelle je suis allé à la faculté de droit,

89
00:04:26,200 --> 00:04:28,240
J'étais ravi de faire partie de cette nouvelle organisation.

90
00:04:29,040 --> 00:04:32,060
L'autre co-fondateur de FIRE est Alan Charles Kors.

91
00:04:32,760 --> 00:04:34,400
C'est juste un génie absolu.

92
00:04:34,680 --> 00:04:40,520
Il est l’un des plus grands experts mondiaux des Lumières et en particulier de Voltaire.

93
00:04:41,280 --> 00:04:43,760
Et si l'un de vos auditeurs aime les excellents cours,

94
00:04:45,000 --> 00:04:47,620
il donne une conférence sur Blaise Pascal.

95
00:04:48,080 --> 00:04:50,840
Et Blaise, bien sûr, est célèbre pour le Pari de Pascal.

96
00:04:51,660 --> 00:04:54,900
Et je l'ai laissé tellement ému et impressionné

97
00:04:54,900 --> 00:04:57,880
et avec une compréhension approfondie de l'importance de cette personne

98
00:04:58,400 --> 00:04:58,740
était.

99
00:04:59,720 --> 00:05:00,320
C'est intéressant.

100
00:05:00,600 --> 00:05:04,330
Vous m'avez mentionné hors ligne qu'il y avait un,

101
00:05:05,060 --> 00:05:09,160
au moins, cela fonctionne en parallèle ou il y a un lien entre l'amour de la science et

102
00:05:09,160 --> 00:05:10,460
l'amour de la liberté d'expression.

103
00:05:10,540 --> 00:05:11,040
Oui.

104
00:05:11,420 --> 00:05:14,160
Pouvez-vous peut-être préciser où se situe ce lien ?

105
00:05:14,480 --> 00:05:14,980
Bien sûr.

106
00:05:15,260 --> 00:05:17,820
Je pense que pour ceux d'entre nous qui le sont vraiment,

107
00:05:18,180 --> 00:05:20,480
vous savez, qui ont consacré nos vies à la liberté de

108
00:05:20,480 --> 00:05:22,840
discours, une chose qui nous passionne,

109
00:05:22,840 --> 00:05:23,880
que nous le sachions ou non,

110
00:05:24,660 --> 00:05:25,440
c'est l'épistémologie,

111
00:05:25,960 --> 00:05:28,660
vous savez, l'étude et la philosophie de la connaissance.

112
00:05:29,540 --> 00:05:31,280
Vous savez, la liberté d'expression a beaucoup de

113
00:05:32,620 --> 00:05:34,400
dimensions morales et philosophiques,

114
00:05:34,520 --> 00:05:36,400
mais d'un point de vue pragmatique,

115
00:05:36,940 --> 00:05:38,600
c'est nécessaire parce que

116
00:05:38,600 --> 00:05:40,760
nous sommes des créatures aux connaissances incroyablement limitées.

117
00:05:41,040 --> 00:05:43,140
Nous nous trompons incroyablement nous-mêmes.

118
00:05:43,640 --> 00:05:45,480
J'aime toujours le fait que Yuval Harari

119
00:05:46,060 --> 00:05:49,180
fait référence aux Lumières comme à la découverte de l'ignorance

120
00:05:49,580 --> 00:05:51,400
parce que c'est exactement ce que c'était.

121
00:05:51,560 --> 00:05:53,000
C'était soudain comme si,

122
00:05:53,540 --> 00:05:54,420
wow, attends une seconde.

123
00:05:55,140 --> 00:05:58,040
Toute cette sagesse populaire incroyablement intéressante que nous avons,

124
00:05:58,080 --> 00:06:01,700
qui d'ailleurs peut être étonnamment fiable ici et là.

125
00:06:02,440 --> 00:06:07,040
Quand on commence à tester beaucoup, c'est absurde et ça ne tient pas.

126
00:06:07,600 --> 00:06:09,820
Même nos idées sur la façon dont les choses tombent,

127
00:06:09,820 --> 00:06:14,400
vous savez, comme Galilée l'a établi, comme même nos intuitions, elles sont tout simplement fausses.

128
00:06:15,680 --> 00:06:19,340
Et donc une grande partie des débuts de l’histoire de la liberté d’expression,

129
00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:23,420
cela se produisait en même temps qu’une sorte de révolution scientifique.

130
00:06:24,060 --> 00:06:28,140
Bon nombre des premiers débats sur la liberté d’expression étaient donc liés.

131
00:06:28,660 --> 00:06:30,160
Alors certainement Galilée,

132
00:06:30,480 --> 00:06:31,080
Vous savez,

133
00:06:31,900 --> 00:06:36,420
Je souligne toujours que Kepler était probablement une idée encore plus radicale selon laquelle ce n'étaient même pas des sphères parfaites.

134
00:06:37,120 --> 00:06:38,500
Mais en même temps,

135
00:06:39,000 --> 00:06:40,720
en grande partie grâce à l'invention de l'imprimerie,

136
00:06:41,080 --> 00:06:42,840
vous avez également eu tous ces développements politiques.

137
00:06:43,160 --> 00:06:45,120
Et vous savez,

138
00:06:45,460 --> 00:06:46,800
Je parle toujours de Jan Hus,

139
00:06:47,000 --> 00:06:52,420
vous savez, du célèbre héros tchèque qui était

140
00:06:52,780 --> 00:06:55,420
brûlé sur le bûcher et je pense en 1419.

141
00:06:56,420 --> 00:07:01,020
Mais il était fondamentalement Luther avant l’imprimerie.

142
00:07:01,720 --> 00:07:03,460
Avant que Luther puisse faire passer sa parole,

143
00:07:03,600 --> 00:07:05,000
tu sais, il n'avait aucune chance.

144
00:07:05,120 --> 00:07:06,080
Et c'était exactement

145
00:07:06,080 --> 00:07:06,880
ce qu'était Jan Hus.

146
00:07:07,060 --> 00:07:07,960
Mais un siècle plus tard,

147
00:07:08,320 --> 00:07:09,260
grâce à l'imprimerie,

148
00:07:10,000 --> 00:07:10,540
tout le monde pourrait savoir quoi

149
00:07:10,660 --> 00:07:11,920
Luther pensa et mon garçon,

150
00:07:12,340 --> 00:07:12,700
ont-ils.

151
00:07:13,160 --> 00:07:13,860
Mais cela a conduit à,

152
00:07:13,920 --> 00:07:16,260
bien sûr, c'est complètement fou,

153
00:07:16,940 --> 00:07:19,780
période hyper-perturbée de l’histoire européenne.

154
00:07:20,500 --> 00:07:23,080
Eh bien, tu as mentionné de sauter un peu partout,

155
00:07:23,260 --> 00:07:23,860
le premier amendement.

156
00:07:23,940 --> 00:07:27,680
Tout d’abord, qu’est-ce que le Premier Amendement et quel est le lien pour vous entre

157
00:07:28,700 --> 00:07:31,220
le Premier Amendement, la liberté d’expression et l’annulation de la culture ?

158
00:07:31,320 --> 00:07:31,660
Bien sûr.

159
00:07:32,480 --> 00:07:33,640
Donc je suis un premier amendement

160
00:07:33,720 --> 00:07:35,180
avocat, comme je l'ai mentionné,

161
00:07:35,620 --> 00:07:36,680
et c'est ce que moi,

162
00:07:36,680 --> 00:07:38,180
c'est ma passion, c'est ce que j'ai étudié.

163
00:07:38,280 --> 00:07:40,640
Et je pense que la loi américaine du premier amendement est incroyablement intéressante.

164
00:07:41,320 --> 00:07:42,480
En une phrase,

165
00:07:43,080 --> 00:07:44,580
le premier amendement tente de

166
00:07:44,580 --> 00:07:50,440
se débarrasser de pratiquement toutes les raisons pour lesquelles l’humanité s’est entretuée pendant toute son existence.

167
00:07:51,060 --> 00:07:53,300
Qu'on n'allait plus se battre pour l'opinion,

168
00:07:53,480 --> 00:07:54,640
nous n'allions plus nous battre

169
00:07:54,800 --> 00:07:58,200
religion, que vous avez le droit de vous adresser à votre gouvernement pour obtenir réparation de vos griefs,

170
00:07:58,620 --> 00:08:00,420
que vous avez la liberté de vous associer.

171
00:08:00,760 --> 00:08:03,340
Que toutes ces choses dans une phrase ressemblaient à, non,

172
00:08:03,800 --> 00:08:11,040
le gouvernement n’interférera plus avec votre droit à ces droits humains fondamentaux.

173
00:08:12,280 --> 00:08:16,800
Et donc une chose qui rend FIRE un peu différent des autres organisations est :

174
00:08:17,040 --> 00:08:19,480
cependant, nous ne sommes pas seulement une organisation du Premier Amendement,

175
00:08:20,100 --> 00:08:21,940
nous sommes une organisation de liberté d'expression.

176
00:08:22,900 --> 00:08:24,300
Et ainsi, et,

177
00:08:24,700 --> 00:08:25,660
mais en même temps,

178
00:08:25,860 --> 00:08:29,420
une grande partie de ce que je pense qu'est la liberté d'expression,

179
00:08:29,900 --> 00:08:31,120
peut être bien expliqué

180
00:08:31,640 --> 00:08:33,800
en référence à de nombreuses lois du premier amendement,

181
00:08:34,160 --> 00:08:36,300
en partie parce que dans l'histoire américaine,

182
00:08:36,440 --> 00:08:37,260
certains de nos plus intelligents

183
00:08:37,340 --> 00:08:42,660
les gens ont réfléchi aux paramètres de la liberté d’expression par rapport à

184
00:08:42,700 --> 00:08:43,280
le premier amendement.

185
00:08:43,420 --> 00:08:44,400
Et beaucoup de ces principes,

186
00:08:44,480 --> 00:08:48,000
ils transfèrent très bien tout comme les idées pragmatiques.

187
00:08:48,420 --> 00:08:52,720
Ainsi, le plus grand péché en termes de censure s’appelle la discrimination de point de vue.

188
00:08:53,060 --> 00:08:54,560
Qu'essentiellement vous autorisez la liberté d'expression,

189
00:08:54,840 --> 00:08:55,940
sauf pour cet avis.

190
00:08:56,780 --> 00:08:59,060
Maintenant c'est le cas, et ça s'avère gentil

191
00:08:59,080 --> 00:09:00,040
de plus défendable.

192
00:09:00,140 --> 00:09:01,940
Et je pense que c'est logique que si tu,

193
00:09:01,940 --> 00:09:02,980
si vous créez un forum et aimez,

194
00:09:03,160 --> 00:09:07,020
on va parler uniquement d'économie pour exclure les gens qui veulent parler d'un autre sujet,

195
00:09:07,620 --> 00:09:11,160
mais c'est à juste titre considéré comme une affaire plus importante.

196
00:09:11,460 --> 00:09:12,860
Si vous avez créé un forum sur l'économie,

197
00:09:13,240 --> 00:09:17,920
mais nous n'allons pas laisser les gens parler de ce genre d'économie ou avoir cette opinion sur l'économie,

198
00:09:18,260 --> 00:09:20,020
le plus, le plus particulièrement.

199
00:09:20,700 --> 00:09:27,400
Donc, beaucoup de principes de la loi du Premier Amendement ont en fait beaucoup de sens philosophique en tant que bons principes lorsque,

200
00:09:27,520 --> 00:09:29,900
comme ce qu'est la parole protégée et non protégée,

201
00:09:30,000 --> 00:09:31,160
qu'est-ce qui devrait te causer des ennuis,

202
00:09:31,760 --> 00:09:33,440
comment vous l'analysez réellement,

203
00:09:33,480 --> 00:09:37,400
c'est pourquoi nous essayons en fait, dans notre définition de la culture d'annulation, de travailler dans

204
00:09:37,540 --> 00:09:38,700
certaines des normes du premier amendement,

205
00:09:38,800 --> 00:09:39,620
juste dans la définition.

206
00:09:39,900 --> 00:09:41,820
Nous n’avons donc pas à nous enliser non plus.

207
00:09:42,400 --> 00:09:43,400
Tu dis tellement de choses intéressantes,

208
00:09:43,400 --> 00:09:45,540
mais si vous pouvez établir un lien sur la discrimination des points de vue,

209
00:09:46,400 --> 00:09:49,360
y a-t-il une zone grise de discussion ?

210
00:09:49,400 --> 00:09:52,460
Qu'est-ce que l'économie, et n'est-ce pas, pour l'exemple que vous avez donné ?

211
00:09:52,560 --> 00:09:53,100
Ouais.

212
00:09:53,760 --> 00:09:54,600
Est-ce, est-ce là,

213
00:09:55,400 --> 00:09:56,580
Je veux dire, est-ce une science ?

214
00:09:56,690 --> 00:09:59,400
Ou est-ce un art de tracer des lignes sur ce qui ne l'est pas,

215
00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:00,160
n'est-ce pas autorisé ?

216
00:10:00,360 --> 00:10:00,520
Ouais.

217
00:10:00,700 --> 00:10:02,380
Vous savez, si vous dites que quelque chose est,

218
00:10:02,380 --> 00:10:03,240
ou ce n'est pas l'économie,

219
00:10:03,300 --> 00:10:06,200
eh bien, on peut dire que tout est économique et donc je veux parler de poésie.

220
00:10:06,460 --> 00:10:07,300
Il y aurait une ligne

221
00:10:07,300 --> 00:10:08,400
exercice de dessin là-dedans,

222
00:10:08,660 --> 00:10:14,520
mais disons tout de suite que vous décidez de l'ouvrir même à la poésie.

223
00:10:16,060 --> 00:10:17,420
C'est une grande différence entre dire,

224
00:10:17,460 --> 00:10:18,620
ok, maintenant nous sommes ouverts à la poésie,

225
00:10:18,860 --> 00:10:20,040
mais tu ne peux pas dire,

226
00:10:20,440 --> 00:10:21,920
tu sais, Dante était mauvais.

227
00:10:22,780 --> 00:10:25,840
Comme si c'était une opinion interdite maintenant officiellement,

228
00:10:25,840 --> 00:10:29,720
dans ce forum par ailleurs ouvert qui frapperait immédiatement, à un niveau intuitif

229
00:10:29,740 --> 00:10:33,980
les gens comme un problème plus grave que de simplement dire que la poésie n'est pas de l'économie.

230
00:10:35,060 --> 00:10:35,320
Ouais. Je veux dire,

231
00:10:35,880 --> 00:10:38,240
ce niveau intuitif auquel vous parlez,

232
00:10:39,780 --> 00:10:40,280
J'espère

233
00:10:41,580 --> 00:10:42,800
que nous avons tous

234
00:10:42,800 --> 00:10:45,300
ce genre d'intuition fondamentale quand la ligne est franchie,

235
00:10:45,380 --> 00:10:46,460
c'est la même chose pour

236
00:10:46,460 --> 00:10:47,780
comme de la pornographie, non ?

237
00:10:47,780 --> 00:10:48,880
Tu sais, quand tu le vois,

238
00:10:48,880 --> 00:10:52,620
Je pense qu'il y a le même niveau d'intuition que

239
00:10:52,620 --> 00:10:54,220
devrait être appliqué à tous les niveaux ici.

240
00:10:54,930 --> 00:10:56,320
Et c'est quand

241
00:10:57,060 --> 00:11:00,280
que l'intuition est déformée par toutes les forces de la société,

242
00:11:00,340 --> 00:11:02,540
c'est à ce moment-là que cela commence à ressembler à de la censure.

243
00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:03,020
Ouais.

244
00:11:03,220 --> 00:11:05,280
Je veux dire, les gens trouvent ça différent.

245
00:11:05,680 --> 00:11:07,240
Vous savez, si quelqu'un perd son emploi simplement

246
00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:08,440
pour leurs opinions politiques,

247
00:11:08,780 --> 00:11:11,400
même si cet employeur a tous les droits du monde de vous licencier,

248
00:11:11,880 --> 00:11:13,520
Je pense que les Américains devraient toujours se dire :

249
00:11:13,520 --> 00:11:14,300
eh bien, c'est vrai.

250
00:11:14,520 --> 00:11:15,220
Ils ont parfaitement le droit de

251
00:11:15,220 --> 00:11:17,900
le monde et je ne défends pas en justice que vous ne devriez peut-être pas

252
00:11:19,100 --> 00:11:20,680
licencier quelqu'un pour ses opinions politiques,

253
00:11:21,120 --> 00:11:21,960
mais réfléchissez bien à cela.

254
00:11:22,420 --> 00:11:24,020
Comme quoi, quelle société voulons-nous,

255
00:11:24,040 --> 00:11:25,860
dans quel genre de société voulons-nous vivre ?

256
00:11:26,160 --> 00:11:27,660
Et ça a été drôle de regarder,

257
00:11:29,160 --> 00:11:30,440
vous savez, et moi, je le souligne.

258
00:11:30,600 --> 00:11:32,600
Oui, je défendrai les entreprises,

259
00:11:33,520 --> 00:11:35,960
le premier amendement des droits d'association sera

260
00:11:35,960 --> 00:11:37,880
pouvoir avoir le droit légal de décider,

261
00:11:38,140 --> 00:11:39,440
vous savez, qui travaille pour eux.

262
00:11:39,680 --> 00:11:42,280
Mais d'un point de vue moral ou philosophique,

263
00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:44,600
si vous réfléchissez aux implications de,

264
00:11:44,860 --> 00:11:46,640
si chaque entreprise dans

265
00:11:46,640 --> 00:11:49,160
L'Amérique devient une association expressive,

266
00:11:49,240 --> 00:11:52,360
en plus d'être une organisation maximisant les profits,

267
00:11:53,120 --> 00:11:57,080
ce serait un désastre pour la démocratie car on se retrouverait dans une situation où les gens

268
00:11:57,080 --> 00:11:58,620
se dirait en fait,

269
00:11:59,100 --> 00:12:01,500
Je ne pense pas pouvoir dire ce que je pense vraiment

270
00:12:01,500 --> 00:12:03,900
je pense et je crois toujours que je peux garder mon emploi.

271
00:12:04,340 --> 00:12:05,600
Et c'est là que j'étais inquiet.

272
00:12:05,620 --> 00:12:12,290
J'avais l'impression que nous allions y aller parce qu'une grande partie de la réponse initiale aux personnes annulées était très

273
00:12:12,600 --> 00:12:13,000
simplement,

274
00:12:13,380 --> 00:12:15,860
vous savez, Oh, mais ils ont le droit de se débarrasser de cette personne.

275
00:12:16,060 --> 00:12:20,100
Et ça, c'est la fin, le début et la fin de la discussion.

276
00:12:20,680 --> 00:12:22,420
Et je pensais que c'était une esquive.

277
00:12:22,660 --> 00:12:25,760
Je pensais que ce n’était pas vraiment une manière très sérieuse de procéder.

278
00:12:25,780 --> 00:12:29,790
Si vous vous souciez à la fois du premier amendement et de la liberté d'expression d'y réfléchir

279
00:12:29,900 --> 00:12:31,160
à toi, juste pour

280
00:12:32,380 --> 00:12:34,920
clarifier que le premier amendement est en quelque sorte

281
00:12:35,840 --> 00:12:38,980
une incarnation juridique de l’idéal

282
00:12:38,980 --> 00:12:41,280
de la liberté d'expression, puis de la liberté d'expression appliquée au gouvernement.

283
00:12:41,840 --> 00:12:47,360
Et cela s'applique très spécifiquement au gouvernement et la liberté d'expression est l'application de

284
00:12:47,500 --> 00:12:49,560
le principe de tout aimer,

285
00:12:50,040 --> 00:12:51,960
y compris une sorte de haut niveau

286
00:12:52,720 --> 00:12:54,220
idéal philosophique

287
00:12:54,720 --> 00:12:59,160
de ce que c'est, de la valeur que les gens peuvent exprimer ce qu'ils pensent.

288
00:12:59,380 --> 00:12:59,580
Ouais.

289
00:12:59,660 --> 00:13:03,640
C'est une idée plus ancienne, plus audacieuse et plus vaste.

290
00:13:04,020 --> 00:13:05,680
Et vous pouvez avoir une situation.

291
00:13:05,820 --> 00:13:08,540
Et je parle de pays qui ont une bonne loi sur la liberté d'expression,

292
00:13:08,720 --> 00:13:10,580
mais pas nécessairement une grande culture de la liberté d'expression.

293
00:13:11,100 --> 00:13:15,160
Et je parle du fait que, lorsque nous faisons parfois cette distinction entre la liberté d'expression

294
00:13:15,180 --> 00:13:16,420
le droit et la culture de la liberté d'expression,

295
00:13:17,140 --> 00:13:19,920
nous pensons d'une manière très trouble.

296
00:13:21,160 --> 00:13:21,640
Et ce que je veux dire

297
00:13:21,640 --> 00:13:24,140
par là c'est que la loi est généralement,

298
00:13:24,180 --> 00:13:25,500
en particulier dans un pays de common law,

299
00:13:26,000 --> 00:13:27,200
c'est le reflet

300
00:13:27,780 --> 00:13:28,520
de normes.

301
00:13:29,480 --> 00:13:31,200
Ces juges sont aussi des personnes.

302
00:13:31,360 --> 00:13:32,140
Et dans bien des cas,

303
00:13:32,240 --> 00:13:33,000
la common law est censée

304
00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:37,880
prendre réellement nos idées intuitives d’équité et les inscrire dans la loi.

305
00:13:38,720 --> 00:13:39,660
Donc si en fait tu

306
00:13:39,660 --> 00:13:43,260
avoir une culture qui n'apprécie pas la liberté d'expression d'un point de vue philosophique,

307
00:13:43,580 --> 00:13:46,640
il ne pourra pas protéger la liberté d'expression sur le long terme,

308
00:13:46,720 --> 00:13:47,640
même dans la loi.

309
00:13:47,880 --> 00:13:50,940
Parce qu'en fin de compte, c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles je m'inquiète autant à propos de certains de ces terribles

310
00:13:50,940 --> 00:13:52,600
cas sortant des facultés de droit.

311
00:13:52,940 --> 00:13:56,640
Parce que je crains que même si c'est sûr, l'Américain d'abord

312
00:13:56,640 --> 00:13:59,040
la loi d'amendement protège très fortement le premier amendement

313
00:13:59,700 --> 00:14:00,040
pour l'instant,

314
00:14:00,500 --> 00:14:01,880
ça ne va pas rester ainsi.

315
00:14:01,960 --> 00:14:06,480
Si vous avez des générations d'étudiants en droit diplômés qui pensent réellement

316
00:14:06,580 --> 00:14:09,860
il n'y a rien, il n'y a pas de but plus élevé que de crier, tu es un adversaire.

317
00:14:10,600 --> 00:14:10,800
Ouais.

318
00:14:10,920 --> 00:14:12,800
C'est pourquoi tu te concentres autant

319
00:14:14,080 --> 00:14:22,620
Si une grande partie de votre attention se porte sur l’enseignement supérieur ou sur la période d’études, c’est parce que l’éducation est le fondement de la culture.

320
00:14:23,120 --> 00:14:23,240
Ouais.

321
00:14:23,500 --> 00:14:24,360
Vous avez cette histoire,

322
00:14:24,460 --> 00:14:26,000
tu sais, euh, 64 ans,

323
00:14:26,320 --> 00:14:30,320
vous avez le mouvement pour la liberté d'expression à Berkeley et dans les années 65,

324
00:14:30,600 --> 00:14:32,720
vous avez une tolérance répressive par Herbert Marcuse,

325
00:14:33,000 --> 00:14:34,240
qui était une déclaration de,

326
00:14:34,780 --> 00:14:37,660
au fait, euh, nous sommes à gauche, nous, nous ne devrions pas,

327
00:14:38,180 --> 00:14:39,460
nous devrions avoir la liberté d'expression,

328
00:14:39,520 --> 00:14:41,240
mais nous devrions avoir la liberté d'expression pour nous.

329
00:14:41,740 --> 00:14:44,040
Je veux dire, j'y suis allé, je suis revenu et j'ai relu,

330
00:14:44,400 --> 00:14:45,680
euh, euh, tolérance répressive

331
00:14:46,200 --> 00:14:47,540
et comme c'est clair.

332
00:14:47,660 --> 00:14:50,240
J'ai oublié que j'avais oublié que c'était vraiment un peu comme,

333
00:14:50,340 --> 00:14:52,600
euh, et ces soi-disant conservateurs et de droite,

334
00:14:52,880 --> 00:14:55,580
nous devons les réprimer parce que ce sont des penseurs régressifs.

335
00:14:55,980 --> 00:14:59,680
Il n'y a vraiment rien de plus sophistiqué que la très vieille idée,

336
00:15:00,080 --> 00:15:01,940
euh, que nos gens sont bons.

337
00:15:02,320 --> 00:15:03,420
Ils bénéficient de la liberté d’expression.

338
00:15:03,820 --> 00:15:04,760
Nous devrions, ils devraient le garder.

339
00:15:05,800 --> 00:15:07,180
L'autre côté est mauvais.

340
00:15:07,820 --> 00:15:08,840
Euh, nous, nous n'aurions pas dû,

341
00:15:08,980 --> 00:15:10,900
euh, et nous devons recycler la société.

342
00:15:11,040 --> 00:15:13,220
Et bien sûr, comme ça, ça finit par en être un autre,

343
00:15:13,560 --> 00:15:15,000
il était aussi un fan de Mao.

344
00:15:15,160 --> 00:15:16,320
Il n'est donc pas surprenant qu'il,

345
00:15:16,580 --> 00:15:20,160
que bien sûr, le système devrait s'appuyer sur une sorte de totalitaire, euh,

346
00:15:20,860 --> 00:15:21,500
système. Euh,

347
00:15:22,640 --> 00:15:25,780
mais c'était risible, euh,

348
00:15:26,160 --> 00:15:33,300
euh, position, vous savez, euh, disons il y a 30, 40 ans, l'idée selon laquelle, essentiellement, vous savez, la liberté d'expression pour moi, pas pour le,

349
00:15:33,960 --> 00:15:39,400
euh, comme, comme le disait le grand champion de la liberté d'expression que Hentoff avait l'habitude de dire, c'était quelque chose que vous étiez censé

350
00:15:39,400 --> 00:15:40,260
être gêné par.

351
00:15:40,980 --> 00:15:43,460
Mais j'ai vu ça quand j'y étais,

352
00:15:43,460 --> 00:15:44,700
à la faculté de droit en 97,

353
00:15:44,880 --> 00:15:46,180
J'ai vu ça pendant mon stage à

354
00:15:46,200 --> 00:15:47,500
l'ACLU en 99,

355
00:15:48,580 --> 00:15:52,420
euh, qu'il y avait un accident de train au ralenti qui arrivait essentiellement

356
00:15:52,420 --> 00:15:56,200
il y avait, euh, ces mauvaises idées du campus qui avaient été

357
00:15:56,980 --> 00:15:58,780
prendre de plus en plus de vitesse

358
00:15:58,780 --> 00:16:03,780
l'absence de liberté d'expression pour mon adversaire était en réalité de plus en plus grande,

359
00:16:03,860 --> 00:16:09,640
de plus en plus accepté à mesure que, et en partie parce que le monde universitaire devenait de moins en moins diversifié en termes de points de vue.

360
00:16:09,740 --> 00:16:15,180
Je pense que, comme le souligne mon co-auteur Jonathan Haidt, lorsque vous avez un faible point de vue

361
00:16:15,280 --> 00:16:18,260
diversité, les gens commencent à penser d’une manière très tribale.

362
00:16:18,780 --> 00:16:21,280
Et si vous n'avez pas de dissidents respectés,

363
00:16:21,340 --> 00:16:22,080
tu n'as pas les gens

364
00:16:22,080 --> 00:16:23,260
que tu peux souligner que je suis comme,

365
00:16:23,340 --> 00:16:24,650
Hé, c'est une personne intelligente.

366
00:16:24,780 --> 00:16:25,660
Euh, c'est comme,

367
00:16:26,100 --> 00:16:26,740
c'est intelligent,

368
00:16:26,960 --> 00:16:28,120
personne raisonnable et décente que je,

369
00:16:28,180 --> 00:16:31,800
avec lequel je ne suis pas d'accord, donc je suppose que tout le monde ne pense pas la même chose sur cette question.

370
00:16:32,380 --> 00:16:35,180
Vous commencez à devenir de plus en plus comme seulement, vous savez,

371
00:16:35,600 --> 00:16:36,580
seulement des mauvaises personnes,

372
00:16:37,020 --> 00:16:41,220
seuls les hérétiques, seuls les blasphémateurs, seuls les gens de droite, vous savez, euh, peuvent en fait

373
00:16:41,540 --> 00:16:42,180
pense de cette façon.

374
00:16:42,580 --> 00:16:44,000
Chaque fois que tu dis quelque chose,

375
00:16:44,000 --> 00:16:47,320
J'ai toujours un million de pensées et un million de questions qui

376
00:16:47,320 --> 00:16:47,640
surgir.

377
00:16:47,800 --> 00:16:52,300
Mais comme vous l'avez mentionné, il y a une sorte de dérive à mesure que vous écrivez dans le livre et vous

378
00:16:52,300 --> 00:16:55,140
J'ai mentionné qu'il y avait maintenant une dérive vers la gauche dans le monde universitaire,

379
00:16:55,780 --> 00:16:57,340
euh, ce que nous ferons aussi peut-être

380
00:16:57,440 --> 00:17:01,440
faites ici une distinction entre la gauche et la droite et la culture de l'annulation telle que vous la présentez

381
00:17:01,440 --> 00:17:06,280
dans votre livre n'est pas nécessairement associé à un point de vue politique particulier,

382
00:17:06,640 --> 00:17:09,260
qu'il y a des mécanismes des deux côtés qui aboutissent

383
00:17:09,820 --> 00:17:11,360
en annulation et en censure,

384
00:17:12,020 --> 00:17:13,260
euh, en violation de la liberté d'expression.

385
00:17:13,800 --> 00:17:18,160
Donc, une chose sur laquelle je veux être très clair, c'est que le livre aborde à la fois la culture d'annulation de droite et de gauche.

386
00:17:18,520 --> 00:17:21,080
Ils sont différents, euh, à bien des égards et définitivement,

387
00:17:21,080 --> 00:17:27,040
vous savez, euh, annuler la culture de gauche est plus important dans le monde universitaire où la gauche est plus dominante.

388
00:17:27,800 --> 00:17:31,320
Euh, mais nous parlons beaucoup de la culture d'annulation venant des législatures.

389
00:17:31,480 --> 00:17:32,200
On en parle beaucoup

390
00:17:32,220 --> 00:17:35,120
annuler également la culture sur le campus,

391
00:17:35,440 --> 00:17:37,560
parce que même si, euh,

392
00:17:38,320 --> 00:17:39,180
la plupart des tentatives qui

393
00:17:39,180 --> 00:17:42,460
viennent du campus pour faire annuler les gens sont toujours de gauche,

394
00:17:42,740 --> 00:17:43,620
il y a beaucoup de

395
00:17:43,620 --> 00:17:45,720
les attaques qui viennent de la droite qui viennent de,

396
00:17:45,720 --> 00:17:47,770
tu sais, euh, les tentatives de différents

397
00:17:47,960 --> 00:17:51,720
organisations et, euh, parfois quand il y a des histoires dans Fox News,

398
00:17:51,940 --> 00:17:58,120
vous savez, ils s'en prendront aux professeurs et environ un tiers des tentatives visant à faire punir les professeurs seront punis.

399
00:17:58,140 --> 00:18:00,400
qui réussissent viennent en fait de la droite.

400
00:18:00,760 --> 00:18:01,880
Et, et nous en parlons,

401
00:18:01,880 --> 00:18:03,440
euh, tentatives pour faire interdire les livres.

402
00:18:03,440 --> 00:18:05,980
Euh, dans, dans le, dans le livre dont nous parlons,

403
00:18:06,040 --> 00:18:09,020
euh, et, euh, je parle de poursuivre en justice

404
00:18:09,260 --> 00:18:10,520
la législature de Floride.

405
00:18:10,760 --> 00:18:12,880
Rhonda Santus avait quelque chose qui s'appelait le numéro du stop woke,

406
00:18:13,500 --> 00:18:17,160
euh, ce dont nous avons dit à tout le monde que c'était ridiculement inconstitutionnel.

407
00:18:17,320 --> 00:18:19,200
Euh, ils ont essayé d'interdire,

408
00:18:19,200 --> 00:18:21,800
vous savez, des sujets particuliers dans l'enseignement supérieur et nous nous disons,

409
00:18:21,880 --> 00:18:22,800
non, c'est une blague.

410
00:18:23,040 --> 00:18:23,280
Comme, comme,

411
00:18:23,720 --> 00:18:25,340
ce sera, cela sera ri hors du tribunal.

412
00:18:26,580 --> 00:18:29,320
Euh, et ils ne nous ont pas écoutés et ils l'ont apporté,

413
00:18:29,600 --> 00:18:32,640
euh, ils l'ont adopté et nous avons intenté un procès et nous avons gagné.

414
00:18:33,160 --> 00:18:35,800
Maintenant, ils essaient à nouveau avec quelque chose qui est également

415
00:18:35,800 --> 00:18:38,680
comme inconstitutionnelle et nous poursuivrons à nouveau et nous le ferons,

416
00:18:38,680 --> 00:18:39,540
et nous gagnerons.

417
00:18:39,700 --> 00:18:41,700
Pouvez-vous nous expliquer un acte stop-woke ?

418
00:18:41,960 --> 00:18:43,340
Il s'agit donc probablement d'une tentative de limiter

419
00:18:44,040 --> 00:18:45,980
certains sujets d'être enseignés à l'école.

420
00:18:45,980 --> 00:18:46,340
Ouais.

421
00:18:46,420 --> 00:18:48,140
Fondamentalement, des sujets réveillés.

422
00:18:48,240 --> 00:18:50,500
Euh, tu sais, c'est plus, c'est sorti du genre de

423
00:18:50,640 --> 00:18:52,600
tenter d’aboutir à une théorie critique de la race.

424
00:18:52,700 --> 00:18:55,620
Hum, donc ce sont des sujets liés à la race,

425
00:18:55,660 --> 00:18:56,580
le genre, et cetera.

426
00:18:56,600 --> 00:18:59,880
Euh, je ne me souviens pas exactement comment ils ont essayé de faire,

427
00:18:59,880 --> 00:19:01,580
euh, euh, au CRT.

428
00:19:02,140 --> 00:19:04,000
Euh, mais quand en fait, tu

429
00:19:04,380 --> 00:19:07,560
la loi est vraiment bien établie qu'on ne peut pas dire plus haut

430
00:19:07,560 --> 00:19:11,140
l'éducation ce qu'ils sont autorisés à enseigner sans violer,

431
00:19:11,700 --> 00:19:12,680
euh, sans violer le premier

432
00:19:12,680 --> 00:19:13,040
amendement.

433
00:19:13,300 --> 00:19:15,240
Et quand cela a été présenté à un juge,

434
00:19:15,280 --> 00:19:16,500
c'était exactement comme,

435
00:19:16,500 --> 00:19:20,580
euh, il était exactement aussi sceptique que nous le pensions.

436
00:19:20,680 --> 00:19:21,980
Je pense qu'il a qualifié cela de dystopique.

437
00:19:22,980 --> 00:19:24,680
Euh, et ce n'était pas un match serré.

438
00:19:24,760 --> 00:19:30,080
Donc, si vous êtes contre ce genre d'enseignement, la bonne façon de le combattre est de faire en sorte que les

439
00:19:30,080 --> 00:19:34,460
Dans ce cas, ce n'est pas une bonne idée de l'inscrire dans le programme scolaire plutôt que de l'interdire.

440
00:19:34,540 --> 00:19:34,660
Ouais.

441
00:19:35,020 --> 00:19:37,480
C'est juste que l'État n'a pas le pouvoir de simplement dire :

442
00:19:37,720 --> 00:19:42,640
à, pour interdire, euh, vous savez, quoi, qu'est-ce qu'enseignent, ce qu'enseignent les professeurs de l'enseignement supérieur.

443
00:19:43,080 --> 00:19:45,840
Maintenant, ça devient un peu plus compliqué quand on parle de la maternelle à la 12e,

444
00:19:46,400 --> 00:19:46,880
parce que

445
00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:52,120
l'État a un rôle à jouer dans le choix de ce que le public de la maternelle à la terminale enseigne parce que ce sont vos enfants,

446
00:19:52,800 --> 00:19:53,960
eux, c'est financé par les contribuables.

447
00:19:54,520 --> 00:19:57,260
Euh, et généralement, le législateur est impliqué.

448
00:19:57,420 --> 00:19:59,900
Euh, il y a un contrôle démocratique de ce processus.

449
00:20:00,640 --> 00:20:01,700
Donc, de la maternelle à la 12e année,

450
00:20:01,760 --> 00:20:03,420
y a-t-il aussi un penchant vers le

451
00:20:03,420 --> 00:20:06,060
gauche en termes d’administration qui gère le curriculum ?

452
00:20:06,120 --> 00:20:09,480
Ouais, euh, là, là, il y en a définitivement, euh, de la maternelle à la terminale,

453
00:20:09,820 --> 00:20:10,920
le, le, je veux dire,

454
00:20:11,760 --> 00:20:13,000
mes enfants vont à l'école publique.

455
00:20:13,340 --> 00:20:15,160
Euh, j'ai un enfant de cinq et sept ans,

456
00:20:16,200 --> 00:20:19,540
euh, et ils ont des professeurs adorables.

457
00:20:19,720 --> 00:20:21,660
Euh, mais nous sommes tombés sur un

458
00:20:21,660 --> 00:20:22,380
beaucoup de problèmes avec,

459
00:20:22,600 --> 00:20:23,780
avec des écoles d'éducation en feu.

460
00:20:24,340 --> 00:20:26,000
Euh, et beaucoup de diplômés de

461
00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:30,120
Les écoles d’éducation ont fini par être les administrateurs qui ont réprimé la liberté d’expression dans l’enseignement supérieur.

462
00:20:31,040 --> 00:20:35,300
Et donc j'ai essayé de réfléchir à des moyens positifs de faire face à certains des problèmes,

463
00:20:35,520 --> 00:20:37,440
certains des problèmes que je vois de la maternelle à la 12e année.

464
00:20:37,640 --> 00:20:38,860
Je pensais que la tentative de simplement

465
00:20:39,500 --> 00:20:39,950
dicter,

466
00:20:40,560 --> 00:20:43,020
vous n'enseignerez pas les 10 livres suivants,

467
00:20:43,300 --> 00:20:46,340
vous savez, ou 20 ou 200 livres n'étaient pas la bonne façon de procéder.

468
00:20:46,540 --> 00:20:48,960
Maintenant, lorsqu'il s'agit de décider quels livres figureront dans le programme,

469
00:20:49,060 --> 00:20:50,360
encore une fois, c'est quelque chose que le législateur

470
00:20:50,360 --> 00:20:52,700
En fait, tu sais, je ne peux pas, je ne peux pas avoir mon mot à dire,

471
00:20:52,700 --> 00:20:54,480
et c'est assez peu controversé,

472
00:20:54,480 --> 00:20:55,560
euh, en termes de loi.

473
00:20:56,220 --> 00:20:57,580
Mais quand il s'agit de savoir comment le combattre,

474
00:20:57,780 --> 00:21:00,300
J'avais quelque chose qui, comme je suis coincé avec une formule,

475
00:21:00,740 --> 00:21:02,860
J’ai appelé l’autonomisation de l’esprit américain.

476
00:21:02,860 --> 00:21:05,560
Euh, j'ai donné des principes qui étaient incohérents,

477
00:21:05,960 --> 00:21:10,020
euh, avec le genre de réflexion de groupe et l'accent mis sur,

478
00:21:10,040 --> 00:21:13,000
euh, la politique identitaire, euh, ça,

479
00:21:13,400 --> 00:21:16,580
euh, vous savez, certains critiques se plaignent à juste titre de la maternelle à la 12e année.

480
00:21:17,100 --> 00:21:18,600
Euh, et nous, nous,

481
00:21:19,160 --> 00:21:21,900
il s'agit en fait d'annuler l'esprit américain,

482
00:21:21,960 --> 00:21:23,820
mais j'ai une explication plus détaillée de

483
00:21:23,820 --> 00:21:26,000
c'est ce que je vais mettre sur mon blog,

484
00:21:26,260 --> 00:21:27,280
l'idée éternellement radicale.

485
00:21:27,840 --> 00:21:29,080
Est-il possible légalement,

486
00:21:29,080 --> 00:21:30,760
c'est juste une question idiote,

487
00:21:31,000 --> 00:21:34,780
peut-être créer une protection supplémentaire pour certains types de littérature

488
00:21:35,410 --> 00:21:38,440
1984 ou quelque chose pour rester dans le programme.

489
00:21:38,700 --> 00:21:40,280
Je veux dire, c'est déjà, tout est protégé, je suppose.

490
00:21:40,560 --> 00:21:40,800
Ouais.

491
00:21:40,800 --> 00:21:41,440
Je suppose

492
00:21:42,140 --> 00:21:44,540
pour se protéger contre les administrateurs de

493
00:21:45,220 --> 00:21:46,280
je bidouille trop

494
00:21:46,900 --> 00:21:47,880
avec le programme d'études,

495
00:21:48,220 --> 00:21:49,400
comme stabiliser le programme.

496
00:21:49,700 --> 00:21:51,400
Je ne sais pas de quoi est faite la machinerie

497
00:21:51,940 --> 00:21:53,900
l'école publique de la maternelle à la 12e année.

498
00:21:54,000 --> 00:21:54,840
De la maternelle à la terminale,

499
00:21:54,980 --> 00:21:57,860
vous savez, les législatures des États, vous savez, euh, elles en font partie.

500
00:21:57,940 --> 00:21:59,540
Ils en font partie et ils peuvent dire :

501
00:21:59,660 --> 00:22:01,060
vous devriez enseigner les livres suivants.

502
00:22:01,160 --> 00:22:03,400
Bien sûr, les gens sont toujours un peu inquiets du fait que, euh,

503
00:22:03,760 --> 00:22:05,980
si vous, euh, s'ils me recommandaient,

504
00:22:06,500 --> 00:22:06,840
Vous savez,

505
00:22:07,200 --> 00:22:07,540
enseigner,

506
00:22:07,860 --> 00:22:09,740
euh, enseigne la déclaration d'indépendance,

507
00:22:09,920 --> 00:22:11,120
tu sais, que ça finira par être,

508
00:22:11,180 --> 00:22:14,040
eh bien, ils vont enseigner que la déclaration d'indépendance était juste pour protéger l'esclavage,

509
00:22:14,440 --> 00:22:14,700
lequel

510
00:22:15,030 --> 00:22:17,700
n'enseignait pas un sujet particulier,

511
00:22:17,800 --> 00:22:18,980
quels manuels vous choisissez,

512
00:22:19,200 --> 00:22:20,240
quelle perspective vous adoptez,

513
00:22:20,340 --> 00:22:21,120
tout ce genre de choses.

514
00:22:21,120 --> 00:22:25,280
C'est comme si la religion commençait à s'infiltrer dans toute la question du comment, vous savez,

515
00:22:25,640 --> 00:22:29,000
La Bible est-elle autorisée à enseigner aux entreprises ce qui s'applique à l'éducation ?

516
00:22:29,020 --> 00:22:29,180
Euh,

517
00:22:30,180 --> 00:22:30,660
non, ouais.

518
00:22:30,840 --> 00:22:32,660
Je veux dire, je suis, je suis athée,

519
00:22:33,280 --> 00:22:35,080
euh, avec un intérêt intense pour la religion.

520
00:22:35,240 --> 00:22:38,140
En fait, j'ai lu la Bible en entier cette année juste parce que je fais des choses comme ça.

521
00:22:38,420 --> 00:22:39,480
Et je ne l'avais jamais lu

522
00:22:39,480 --> 00:22:40,500
Du début à la fin.

523
00:22:40,680 --> 00:22:42,420
Euh, alors j'ai lu le Coran parce que tu sais,

524
00:22:42,420 --> 00:22:43,480
et je vais essayer de faire le

525
00:22:43,480 --> 00:22:44,540
livre de Mormon, mais vous savez.

526
00:22:44,680 --> 00:22:46,420
Eh bien, ils ont commencé à le faire, tu es tellement fascinant.

527
00:22:46,780 --> 00:22:48,360
Euh, est-ce que tu recommandes de faire ça ?

528
00:22:48,700 --> 00:22:50,040
Je pense que tu devrais,

529
00:22:50,040 --> 00:22:53,200
euh, juste pour savoir, parce que c'est une telle pierre de touche,

530
00:22:53,460 --> 00:22:55,940
euh, dans la manière dont les gens parlent des choses,

531
00:22:56,360 --> 00:22:57,800
ça peut devenir assez fastidieux,

532
00:22:58,080 --> 00:23:00,460
mais je me suis même obligé à lire

533
00:23:00,500 --> 00:23:06,120
toutes les instructions très spécifiques sur la hauteur que doivent avoir les différentes parties du temple

534
00:23:06,120 --> 00:23:10,380
et quelle longueur doivent avoir les vêtements et quelle forme ils doivent avoir et quoi,

535
00:23:10,620 --> 00:23:12,880
et cela se produit souvent.

536
00:23:13,300 --> 00:23:14,660
Euh, ça, ça, c'est surprenant,

537
00:23:15,080 --> 00:23:16,880
désolé, une partie étonnamment grosse d'Exodus.

538
00:23:17,100 --> 00:23:19,980
Euh, je pensais que c'était plutôt dans le Lévitique et le Deutéronome.

539
00:23:20,600 --> 00:23:22,340
Hum, mais ensuite on arrive à des livres comme Job,

540
00:23:22,860 --> 00:23:23,240
Vous savez,

541
00:23:23,580 --> 00:23:23,960
Ouah.

542
00:23:24,360 --> 00:23:28,260
Je veux dire, Job est une telle lecture et il est impossible que Job ait à l'origine cette fin.

543
00:23:29,140 --> 00:23:30,260
Comme Job l'est fondamentalement,

544
00:23:30,760 --> 00:23:34,020
ça commence comme ce pari pervers entre Dieu,

545
00:23:34,020 --> 00:23:36,760
euh, et Satan pour savoir si oui ou non

546
00:23:36,800 --> 00:23:39,080
ils peuvent en fait amener un homme bon à renoncer à Dieu.

547
00:23:39,160 --> 00:23:40,060
Et au début, ils ne peuvent pas,

548
00:23:40,060 --> 00:23:41,340
tout se passe de manière très prévisible.

549
00:23:41,900 --> 00:23:44,460
Et puis ils ont finalement vraiment torturé Job

550
00:23:45,160 --> 00:23:46,760
et il devient le meilleur,

551
00:23:47,960 --> 00:23:49,040
pourquoi Dieu est-il cruel ?

552
00:23:49,120 --> 00:23:50,600
Comment Dieu pourrait-il exister ?

553
00:23:50,640 --> 00:23:52,120
Comment un Dieu bon pourrait-il faire ces choses ?

554
00:23:52,360 --> 00:23:56,820
Et il bat, il devient le meilleur avocat du monde entier et il bat tout le monde,

555
00:23:57,120 --> 00:23:57,780
tous les gens qui

556
00:23:57,780 --> 00:23:58,440
viens discuter avec lui.

557
00:23:58,620 --> 00:24:00,780
Lui, il leur fait enlever leur pantalon.

558
00:24:00,900 --> 00:24:02,800
Et puis soudain, à la fin, Dieu apparaît

559
00:24:03,340 --> 00:24:04,380
et il est comme,

560
00:24:04,880 --> 00:24:08,420
euh, eh bien, tu sais, euh, je suis partout.

561
00:24:08,980 --> 00:24:09,860
Et, euh,

562
00:24:10,560 --> 00:24:11,880
c'est une réponse très déroutante.

563
00:24:11,900 --> 00:24:13,040
Il donne une réponse du genre :

564
00:24:13,200 --> 00:24:14,360
Je suis là quand,

565
00:24:14,360 --> 00:24:16,660
quand, quand les lionnes accouchent et que je suis là.

566
00:24:16,840 --> 00:24:17,360
Et d'ailleurs,

567
00:24:17,400 --> 00:24:21,400
il y a ce monstre géant Léviathan qui est très gros et qui fait très peur.

568
00:24:21,400 --> 00:24:23,260
Et moi, et je dois gérer l'univers.

569
00:24:23,580 --> 00:24:24,280
Et je suis un peu comme,

570
00:24:24,300 --> 00:24:26,300
Mon Dieu, es-tu en train de dire que tu es très

571
00:24:26,300 --> 00:24:26,680
occupé?

572
00:24:26,960 --> 00:24:30,560
Est-ce là, essentiellement, votre argument face à Job ?

573
00:24:31,000 --> 00:24:32,480
Et tu ne mentionnes pas le tout,

574
00:24:32,820 --> 00:24:34,440
tu ne mentionnes pas tout le genre,

575
00:24:34,880 --> 00:24:37,300
que j'ai un pari que c'est pour ça que je te torturais,

576
00:24:37,300 --> 00:24:38,160
cela ne revient pas.

577
00:24:38,540 --> 00:24:39,940
Et puis à la fin il décide,

578
00:24:40,180 --> 00:24:42,520
Dieu décide, comme Job : oh, non, tu as tout à fait raison.

579
00:24:42,520 --> 00:24:43,460
J'avais totalement tort.

580
00:24:43,480 --> 00:24:44,140
Euh, désolé.

581
00:24:44,340 --> 00:24:49,360
Euh, et, et Dieu dit, je vais punir ces gens qui ont essayé de discuter avec vous et qui n'ont pas réussi, qui n'ont pas gagné.

582
00:24:49,720 --> 00:24:51,440
Alors, euh, donc il se débarrasse du,

583
00:24:51,440 --> 00:24:52,920
Je ne sais pas exactement ce qu'il leur fait.

584
00:24:52,920 --> 00:24:53,480
Je ne m'en souviens pas.

585
00:24:54,000 --> 00:24:56,860
Hum, et puis il rend à Job tout son argent et tout,

586
00:24:57,020 --> 00:24:58,460
et cela les rend super prospères.

587
00:24:58,620 --> 00:25:02,440
Et je me dis, ce n’est pas du tout la fin originale de ce livre.

588
00:25:02,500 --> 00:25:03,860
Comme, parce que cela voudrait,

589
00:25:03,940 --> 00:25:06,420
c'était clairement un roman bien-aimé auquel ils ressemblaient,

590
00:25:06,480 --> 00:25:07,540
mais ça ne peut pas avoir cette fin.

591
00:25:07,740 --> 00:25:07,940
D'accord.

592
00:25:08,180 --> 00:25:10,040
Alors, alors, alors, alors ouais, donc c'est une longue façon de dire,

593
00:25:10,300 --> 00:25:11,560
En fait, je pense que ça vaut le coup.

594
00:25:11,660 --> 00:25:12,620
Euh, une partie l'était,

595
00:25:12,620 --> 00:25:15,160
tu es toujours un peu surpris quand tu te retrouves dans le rôle,

596
00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:16,160
comme, euh,

597
00:25:17,160 --> 00:25:19,260
il y a des parties qui vont vous surprendre,

598
00:25:19,380 --> 00:25:21,060
un peu comme si Isaiah était un voyage, euh,

599
00:25:21,380 --> 00:25:22,100
Ecclésiaste,

600
00:25:22,580 --> 00:25:23,000
Mode Dépêche.

601
00:25:24,280 --> 00:25:25,520
Et tu l'as fait, tu l'as dit toi aussi,

602
00:25:25,520 --> 00:25:26,640
euh, le, le Coran.

603
00:25:26,740 --> 00:25:26,860
Ouais.

604
00:25:26,860 --> 00:25:27,520
Ce qui était fascinant.

605
00:25:28,040 --> 00:25:29,460
Alors qu'est-ce qu'il y a,

606
00:25:29,460 --> 00:25:30,340
ce serait intéressant de demander,

607
00:25:30,380 --> 00:25:32,160
y a-t-il une tension entre

608
00:25:32,900 --> 00:25:34,280
l'étude des religions

609
00:25:34,380 --> 00:25:41,400
textes ou le suivi de la religion et simplement croire en Dieu et suivre les différents

610
00:25:41,420 --> 00:25:43,560
aspects de la religion avec la liberté d’expression ?

611
00:25:44,260 --> 00:25:45,740
Euh, dans le premier amendement,

612
00:25:46,000 --> 00:25:46,860
euh, nous, nous avons

613
00:25:47,220 --> 00:25:50,700
quelque chose que nous appelons la clause religieuse et je n'ai jamais aimé l'appeler ainsi

614
00:25:50,820 --> 00:25:53,400
parce que ce sont deux choses brillantes l'une à côté de l'autre.

615
00:25:54,200 --> 00:25:55,880
L'État ne peut établir

616
00:25:55,880 --> 00:26:00,100
une religion officielle, mais elle ne peut pas interférer avec votre droit de pratiquer votre religion.

617
00:26:00,700 --> 00:26:01,440
C'est beau.

618
00:26:01,840 --> 00:26:03,360
Deux choses à la fois.

619
00:26:03,360 --> 00:26:04,000
Et je pense qu'ils le sont,

620
00:26:04,000 --> 00:26:05,580
et je pense qu'ils ont tous les deux tout à fait raison.

621
00:26:06,060 --> 00:26:09,640
Et je pense que parfois la droite est très enthousiasmée par la clause de libre exercice

622
00:26:09,660 --> 00:26:11,780
et la gauche est très enthousiasmée par l’establishment.

623
00:26:12,200 --> 00:26:13,440
Et j'ai aimé le fait que nous ayons,

624
00:26:13,480 --> 00:26:14,820
nous les avons tous les deux ensemble.

625
00:26:15,240 --> 00:26:16,940
Maintenant, quel est le rapport avec la liberté d’expression ?

626
00:26:17,640 --> 00:26:18,960
Et j'avais raison au programme,

627
00:26:19,000 --> 00:26:20,040
comme nous en parlions.

628
00:26:21,220 --> 00:26:25,720
Euh, je pense en fait que ce serait génial si les écoles publiques pouvaient enseigner

629
00:26:26,300 --> 00:26:28,120
la Bible, comme dans le sens de comme,

630
00:26:28,200 --> 00:26:29,520
lisez-le comme un document historique.

631
00:26:30,060 --> 00:26:31,160
Mais à l'époque où j'étais au

632
00:26:31,160 --> 00:26:33,460
ACLU, chaque fois que je voyais des gens essayer ça,

633
00:26:33,680 --> 00:26:36,760
cela s'est toujours transformé en un véritable plaidoyer pour,

634
00:26:36,900 --> 00:26:42,620
vous savez, un catholique ou un protestant ou un orthodoxe, même un peu comme un lecteur sur la religion.

635
00:26:43,260 --> 00:26:43,560
Euh, alors

636
00:26:44,000 --> 00:26:47,500
si vous en faites réellement quelque chose qui défend une vision particulière de la religion,

637
00:26:47,640 --> 00:26:50,360
puis il passe du côté de la clause d’établissement.

638
00:26:50,900 --> 00:26:53,120
Les Américains n’ont donc pas trouvé de moyen de l’enseigner réellement.

639
00:26:53,440 --> 00:26:54,920
Donc c'est probablement mieux que toi,

640
00:26:54,920 --> 00:26:57,580
vous savez, apprenez, apprenez en dehors d’une classe d’école publique.

641
00:26:57,580 --> 00:27:02,020
Pensez-vous qu'il est possible d'enseigner la religion, euh,

642
00:27:02,700 --> 00:27:02,960
de genre,

643
00:27:03,780 --> 00:27:06,120
euh, les religions du monde bien sûr,

644
00:27:06,780 --> 00:27:09,340
sans manquer de respect aux religions ?

645
00:27:09,920 --> 00:27:12,220
Je pense que la réponse est que cela dépend du point de vue de qui.

646
00:27:13,320 --> 00:27:17,320
Euh, eh bien, comme le disent les praticiens, vous êtes comme un adepte orthodoxe d'un domaine particulier.

647
00:27:17,320 --> 00:27:17,760
religion.

648
00:27:17,760 --> 00:27:20,060
Est-il possible

649
00:27:20,640 --> 00:27:24,360
pour ne pas t'emmerder dans l'enseignement comme tous les majors

650
00:27:24,360 --> 00:27:25,120
religions du monde ?

651
00:27:25,180 --> 00:27:26,100
Pour certaines personnes,

652
00:27:27,040 --> 00:27:30,080
l'essentiel est que vous devez l'enseigner comme étant vrai.

653
00:27:30,340 --> 00:27:33,800
Ah, euh, et avec ça dans ces conditions,

654
00:27:33,800 --> 00:27:34,940
alors la réponse est non,

655
00:27:34,940 --> 00:27:35,360
tu ne peux pas l'enseigner

656
00:27:35,380 --> 00:27:38,200
sans, sans offenser quelqu'un au moins.

657
00:27:38,380 --> 00:27:40,680
Ne peux-tu pas dire que ces gens croient que c'est vrai ?

658
00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:41,920
Pouvez-vous le réformer ?

659
00:27:41,920 --> 00:27:43,420
Il faut donc marcher sur des œufs,

660
00:27:43,500 --> 00:27:43,740
essentiellement.

661
00:27:43,960 --> 00:27:48,060
Vous pouvez faire de gros efforts et vous mettrez quand même certaines personnes en colère,

662
00:27:48,340 --> 00:27:52,580
mais les gens sérieux diront, oh non, vous avez en fait essayé d'être juste envers les croyances ici.

663
00:27:52,780 --> 00:27:54,800
Euh, et moi, et j'essaie d'être respectueux,

664
00:27:54,800 --> 00:27:56,360
euh, autant que je peux,

665
00:27:56,700 --> 00:27:57,660
euh,

666
00:27:58,080 --> 00:27:58,440
beaucoup de ça,

667
00:27:58,520 --> 00:28:01,040
Je me trouve toujours beaucoup plus attiré par le bouddhisme et le stoïcisme.

668
00:28:01,300 --> 00:28:01,420
Bien,

669
00:28:03,360 --> 00:28:05,860
où est-ce que je vais?

670
00:28:07,040 --> 00:28:09,100
Eh bien, une chose intéressante

671
00:28:09,640 --> 00:28:11,420
retourner sur les campus universitaires, c'est,

672
00:28:11,420 --> 00:28:17,000
euh, le feu maintient le classement de la liberté d'expression dans les universités sur Rankings.thefire.org.

673
00:28:17,200 --> 00:28:18,060
Je suis très fier d'eux.

674
00:28:18,180 --> 00:28:20,840
Je le recommande vivement car oubliez que même juste le classement,

675
00:28:20,840 --> 00:28:21,600
tu apprends un

676
00:28:21,600 --> 00:28:25,780
beaucoup de choses sur les universités d'un point de vue totalement différent de celui des gens.

677
00:28:25,780 --> 00:28:29,180
ils en avaient l'habitude lorsqu'ils choisissaient l'université qu'ils voulaient fréquenter.

678
00:28:29,220 --> 00:28:32,080
Cela donne juste une autre perspective sur le tout.

679
00:28:32,260 --> 00:28:35,340
Et il donne des citations de personnes qui y sont étudiantes, etc.,

680
00:28:35,540 --> 00:28:36,600
comme à propos de leurs expériences.

681
00:28:37,320 --> 00:28:38,300
Et, et ça donne différent,

682
00:28:38,580 --> 00:28:44,620
peut-être pourriez-vous parler des différentes mesures ici avant de parler de qui se classe parmi les cinq premiers et qui se classe parmi les cinq derniers.

683
00:28:45,220 --> 00:28:49,880
Quels sont, quels, quels sont les différents paramètres qui contribuent à l’évaluation ?

684
00:28:50,600 --> 00:28:54,200
Donc les gens me demandent depuis le premier jour de faire un classement des écoles,

685
00:28:54,480 --> 00:28:55,360
selon la liberté d'expression.

686
00:28:55,720 --> 00:28:56,920
Et même si nous l'avions fait,

687
00:28:57,300 --> 00:29:01,880
nous avions la meilleure base de données qui existe sur les codes vocaux du campus, euh,

688
00:29:02,920 --> 00:29:06,600
les politiques des universités qui violent le premier amendement ou les normes du premier amendement.

689
00:29:07,200 --> 00:29:08,920
Nous disposons également de la meilleure base de données de,

690
00:29:08,920 --> 00:29:11,040
de, euh, nous appelons la base de données de désinvitation.

691
00:29:11,330 --> 00:29:13,240
Euh, mais c'est en fait le,

692
00:29:13,240 --> 00:29:15,400
euh, c'est mieux nommé la base de données déplatformante,

693
00:29:15,480 --> 00:29:16,900
c'est ainsi que nous allons l'appeler.

694
00:29:17,260 --> 00:29:23,740
Euh, et ce sont tous des cas où quelqu'un a été invité en tant que conférencier sur le campus et a ensuite été désinvité.

695
00:29:23,860 --> 00:29:26,740
Désinviter ou déplateformer inclut également la nourriture.

696
00:29:27,340 --> 00:29:28,120
Euh, alors ils sont arrivés

697
00:29:28,680 --> 00:29:30,000
et ils ne pouvaient pas vraiment parler.

698
00:29:30,180 --> 00:29:30,760
Oui exactement.

699
00:29:31,480 --> 00:29:32,940
Euh, et, et, euh,

700
00:29:33,640 --> 00:29:34,740
et ainsi ayant ça,

701
00:29:35,240 --> 00:29:41,040
ce dont nous avions vraiment besoin pour avoir des sciences sociales sérieuses et pouvoir réellement argumenter sérieusement sur le classement,

702
00:29:41,640 --> 00:29:43,500
euh, c'était pour pouvoir en faire un,

703
00:29:43,720 --> 00:29:48,140
avoir une meilleure idée du nombre de professeurs réellement punis pendant cette période.

704
00:29:48,220 --> 00:29:53,480
Euh, et puis le, le, le plus gros élément manquant était de pouvoir,

705
00:29:53,480 --> 00:29:58,420
euh, demandez directement aux étudiants quel était l'environnement sur ce campus pour la liberté d'expression.

706
00:29:58,920 --> 00:30:00,760
Êtes-vous à l’aise d’être en désaccord les uns avec les autres ?

707
00:30:00,800 --> 00:30:02,400
Êtes-vous à l'aise d'être en désaccord avec votre,

708
00:30:02,400 --> 00:30:03,400
euh, avec tes professeurs ?

709
00:30:03,880 --> 00:30:07,200
Pensez-vous que la violence est acceptable en réponse à un orateur ?

710
00:30:07,380 --> 00:30:08,220
Pensez-vous qu'en criant,

711
00:30:08,480 --> 00:30:10,060
euh, tu penses que crier est acceptable ?

712
00:30:10,140 --> 00:30:13,640
Pensez-vous que bloquer l’accès des gens à un haut-parleur est acceptable ?

713
00:30:14,300 --> 00:30:16,900
Hum, et une fois que nous avons pu rassembler tous ces éléments,

714
00:30:17,480 --> 00:30:20,200
nous avons d'abord fait un test,

715
00:30:20,200 --> 00:30:21,380
Je pense qu'en 2019,

716
00:30:21,600 --> 00:30:22,340
autour de 50.

717
00:30:22,640 --> 00:30:24,280
Et nous le faisons depuis quatre ans maintenant,

718
00:30:24,360 --> 00:30:31,820
j'essaie toujours de rendre la méthodologie de plus en plus précise pour mieux refléter l'environnement réel de certaines écoles.

719
00:30:32,360 --> 00:30:36,160
Et cette année, l'école numéro un était l'université technologique du Michigan,

720
00:30:36,280 --> 00:30:38,380
ce qui était une, une bonne surprise.

721
00:30:38,560 --> 00:30:41,180
Euh, l'école numéro deux était en fait l'université d'Auburn.

722
00:30:41,440 --> 00:30:45,720
Euh, c'était sympa de voir, euh, dans le top 10,

723
00:30:45,900 --> 00:30:47,440
l'école prestigieuse la plus connue

724
00:30:47,440 --> 00:30:50,000
est en fait UVA, euh, qui a très bien fonctionné cette année.

725
00:30:50,700 --> 00:30:52,400
L'Université de Chicago n'était pas contente

726
00:30:52,400 --> 00:30:53,760
qu'ils n'étaient pas numéro un,

727
00:30:53,920 --> 00:30:57,800
mais l'université de Chicago a 13 ans et elle était numéro un

728
00:30:57,800 --> 00:31:00,280
ou dans les trois premiers les années précédentes.

729
00:31:00,620 --> 00:31:01,320
Alors peux-tu expliquer,

730
00:31:01,420 --> 00:31:02,320
c'est presque surprenant.

731
00:31:02,340 --> 00:31:03,220
Est-ce à cause de,

732
00:31:03,240 --> 00:31:04,520
euh, comme le très fort

733
00:31:04,530 --> 00:31:06,740
les départements d'économie et des choses comme ça ou quoi, pourquoi ?

734
00:31:07,360 --> 00:31:09,220
Ils ont eu un cas impliquant un étudiant.

735
00:31:09,480 --> 00:31:12,700
Ils ne reconnaîtraient pas un chapitre du tournant américain et

736
00:31:12,700 --> 00:31:15,420
ils ont avancé un argument très classique, euh,

737
00:31:15,920 --> 00:31:18,060
que nous, et classique dans le mauvais sens qu'on entend

738
00:31:18,200 --> 00:31:19,420
campus à travers le pays.

739
00:31:19,740 --> 00:31:21,200
Oh, nous avons un campus républicain,

740
00:31:21,700 --> 00:31:23,920
nous n’avons donc pas besoin de ce groupe conservateur supplémentaire.

741
00:31:24,280 --> 00:31:25,900
Et nous nous disons, non, je suis désolé.

742
00:31:25,960 --> 00:31:27,560
Comme si nous en avions vu des dizaines et

743
00:31:27,560 --> 00:31:30,440
des dizaines, voire des centaines de tentatives pour obtenir celui-ci en particulier,

744
00:31:30,440 --> 00:31:35,780
euh, un étudiant conservateur, un groupe d'étudiants, euh, tu reconnais ou pas ?

745
00:31:36,440 --> 00:31:38,560
Et donc nous leur avons dit,

746
00:31:38,700 --> 00:31:41,640
écoute, c'est comme si, euh, nous leur avions dit au feu que,

747
00:31:41,780 --> 00:31:43,860
euh, tu sais, nous considérons cela comme sérieux et

748
00:31:43,860 --> 00:31:45,220
ils ne reconnaîtraient pas le groupe.

749
00:31:45,380 --> 00:31:48,800
Donc ça, c'est un, ça, c'est un point dans notre

750
00:31:48,800 --> 00:31:50,660
classement et c'était suffisant pour les éliminer,

751
00:31:51,100 --> 00:31:52,660
ils auraient probablement été numéro deux dans

752
00:31:52,660 --> 00:31:53,160
les classements.

753
00:31:53,320 --> 00:31:55,560
Euh, mais maintenant ils sont 13 sur deux 48.

754
00:31:56,040 --> 00:31:57,160
C'est toujours l'une des meilleures écoles

755
00:31:57,160 --> 00:31:57,720
dans le pays.

756
00:31:57,900 --> 00:31:59,480
Je n'ai aucun problème à dire ça

757
00:32:00,080 --> 00:32:03,140
l'école qui n'a pas si bien réussi, euh, euh,

758
00:32:03,800 --> 00:32:11,660
à moins 10,69 moins 10,69 et nous avons arrondi à zéro était Harvard et

759
00:32:11,660 --> 00:32:15,320
Harvard n’est pas très satisfait de ce résultat.

760
00:32:15,460 --> 00:32:17,580
La seule école à recevoir le classement épouvantable.

761
00:32:18,400 --> 00:32:19,900
Ouais. Et il y a quelques personnes,

762
00:32:20,000 --> 00:32:21,380
oh, Harvard, oh, Harvard.

763
00:32:21,600 --> 00:32:23,500
Et il y a quelques personnes qui ont vraiment été,

764
00:32:23,700 --> 00:32:26,780
Je pense qu'avoir fait une erreur en devenant très Harvard,

765
00:32:27,020 --> 00:32:28,880
euh, ça ressemble à,

766
00:32:28,880 --> 00:32:30,620
J'ai demandé à des statisticiens d'examiner cela et ils,

767
00:32:30,620 --> 00:32:32,340
et eux, ils, ils pensent que votre méthodologie est une blague.

768
00:32:32,430 --> 00:32:34,160
Et, euh, et comme pour souligner,

769
00:32:34,420 --> 00:32:35,580
et cette affaire n'était pas si importante.

770
00:32:35,580 --> 00:32:39,780
Et ce savant n’était pas ce savant, comme l’ont été les arguments contre l’un des savants qui

771
00:32:39,780 --> 00:32:41,180
nous comptions contre eux car,

772
00:32:41,580 --> 00:32:45,400
euh, la punition, c'est que ce n'était pas un personnage très célèbre ou

773
00:32:45,400 --> 00:32:46,220
érudit influent.

774
00:32:46,360 --> 00:32:47,300
Et je suis un peu comme,

775
00:32:47,580 --> 00:32:51,200
donc votre argument semble être du snobisme.

776
00:32:51,200 --> 00:32:53,220
Comme essentiellement comme toi,

777
00:32:53,220 --> 00:32:55,620
vous ne comprenez pas notre méthodologie pour une chose.

778
00:32:56,080 --> 00:32:59,920
Et puis vous dites qu'en réalité, cet érudit n'était pas assez important pour

779
00:32:59,920 --> 00:33:00,020
compter.

780
00:33:00,280 --> 00:33:01,200
Et au fait, Harvard,

781
00:33:01,900 --> 00:33:03,140
au fait, Harvard,

782
00:33:04,060 --> 00:33:04,600
euh,

783
00:33:05,020 --> 00:33:06,260
si nous, le campus de Harvard,

784
00:33:06,620 --> 00:33:06,720
Ouais.

785
00:33:07,360 --> 00:33:08,120
Si nous,

786
00:33:08,840 --> 00:33:11,280
même si nous prenions tous vos arguments pour vrais,

787
00:33:11,500 --> 00:33:14,260
même si nous décidions de nous débarrasser de ces deux professeurs,

788
00:33:14,460 --> 00:33:17,120
euh, vous seriez toujours en nombres négatifs.

789
00:33:17,300 --> 00:33:18,720
Vous seriez toujours bon dernier.

790
00:33:18,860 --> 00:33:20,780
Vous seriez toujours après Georgetown et Penn.

791
00:33:20,940 --> 00:33:23,260
Et aucune de ces écoles n’est bonne pour la liberté d’expression.

792
00:33:23,280 --> 00:33:23,980
Je devrais dire le,

793
00:33:23,980 --> 00:33:26,280
les cinq derniers sont l'université de Pennsylvanie,

794
00:33:26,800 --> 00:33:27,300
Nicosette Penn,

795
00:33:27,740 --> 00:33:29,900
euh, l'université de Caroline du Sud,

796
00:33:30,180 --> 00:33:32,000
Université de Georgetown et université Fordham.

797
00:33:32,640 --> 00:33:33,620
Tout cela est très bien mérité.

798
00:33:33,840 --> 00:33:36,260
Il y a tellement de cas graves dans toutes ces écoles.

799
00:33:36,400 --> 00:33:39,640
Quelle est la meilleure façon de se retrouver parmi les cinq derniers ?

800
00:33:39,640 --> 00:33:40,680
Si vous êtes une université,

801
00:33:40,900 --> 00:33:42,720
quel est le chemin le plus rapide vers ce négatif,

802
00:33:42,860 --> 00:33:46,480
à ce zéro, beaucoup de déplateforme, euh, ça,

803
00:33:47,060 --> 00:33:48,520
euh, quand nous avons regardé les cinq derniers,

804
00:33:48,720 --> 00:33:54,400
euh, 81 % des tentatives visant à retirer la plate-forme des haut-parleurs ont réussi dans les cinq derniers.

805
00:33:54,580 --> 00:33:55,800
Euh, il y avait quelques écoles,

806
00:33:55,940 --> 00:33:58,240
Je pense que Penn a inclus où chaque tentative,

807
00:33:58,860 --> 00:33:59,820
chaque fois qu'un étudiant,

808
00:33:59,900 --> 00:34:03,260
comme objecté, un groupe d'étudiants s'est opposé à la venue de cet orateur,

809
00:34:03,340 --> 00:34:04,540
ils ont annulé ceci, ce discours.

810
00:34:05,120 --> 00:34:07,440
Et je pense, je pense que Georgetown avait un taux de réussite de cent pour cent.

811
00:34:07,520 --> 00:34:10,080
Je pense que Penn avait un taux de réussite de cent pour cent.

812
00:34:10,180 --> 00:34:12,400
Je pense que Harvard en a défendu quelques-uns,

813
00:34:12,560 --> 00:34:15,460
mais surtout, euh, les gens ont été délocalisés là aussi.

814
00:34:15,540 --> 00:34:17,980
Alors, comment repousser le déplatforming ?

815
00:34:18,580 --> 00:34:19,960
Eh bien, qui, qui le ferait ?

816
00:34:19,980 --> 00:34:21,280
Est-ce que ce sont d'autres étudiants ?

817
00:34:21,640 --> 00:34:22,360
Est-ce la faculté ?

818
00:34:22,520 --> 00:34:23,580
Est-ce l'administration ?

819
00:34:23,780 --> 00:34:25,260
Quelle est la dynamique de, de,

820
00:34:25,600 --> 00:34:26,340
euh, repousser

821
00:34:27,080 --> 00:34:29,380
en gros, parce que j'imagine

822
00:34:30,140 --> 00:34:32,600
une partie est liée à la culture,

823
00:34:33,200 --> 00:34:35,960
mais j'imagine que chaque université a un groupe d'étudiants qui

824
00:34:35,960 --> 00:34:37,540
protestent pratiquement tous les orateurs.

825
00:34:37,740 --> 00:34:39,760
Et il s’agit de savoir comment vous répondez à cette protestation.

826
00:34:40,340 --> 00:34:44,620
Eh bien, voici, voici le sale petit secret sur le grand changement de 2014.

827
00:34:44,740 --> 00:34:47,520
Euh, et, et le feu et moi et la hauteur,

828
00:34:47,580 --> 00:34:50,400
euh, j'ai été très clair sur le grand changement que nous

829
00:34:50,400 --> 00:34:53,700
J'ai vu sur le campus que pendant la majeure partie de ma carrière, les étudiants étaient formidables,

830
00:34:54,060 --> 00:34:55,360
euh, sur la liberté d'expression.

831
00:34:55,580 --> 00:34:57,440
Ils constituaient le meilleur groupe pour la liberté d'expression,

832
00:34:58,100 --> 00:35:01,600
sans aucune ambiguïté jusque vers 2013, 2014.

833
00:35:02,400 --> 00:35:04,820
Et ce n'est qu'en 2014 que nous avons eu cela,

834
00:35:04,820 --> 00:35:06,800
tu sais, c'est un peu triste pour nous d'avoir vécu cette expérience

835
00:35:06,820 --> 00:35:11,860
où tout à coup, ce sont les étudiants qui préconisaient le déplatforming et de nouveaux codes de parole

836
00:35:11,880 --> 00:35:15,880
d'une manière similaire à ce qu'ils faisaient, disons, au milieu des années 80, euh, par exemple.

837
00:35:16,300 --> 00:35:17,320
Mais voici le sale petit secret.

838
00:35:18,040 --> 00:35:20,240
Ce ne sont pas les, c'est juste les étudiants,

839
00:35:20,760 --> 00:35:22,200
ce sont les étudiants et les administrateurs,

840
00:35:23,140 --> 00:35:24,740
parfois seulement une poignée d'entre eux,

841
00:35:24,900 --> 00:35:26,120
travailler ensemble pour faire,

842
00:35:26,680 --> 00:35:27,760
euh, pour créer certains de ces problèmes.

843
00:35:28,120 --> 00:35:30,100
Et c’est exactement ce qui s’est passé à Stanford.

844
00:35:30,420 --> 00:35:31,400
Quand Kyle Duncan,

845
00:35:31,860 --> 00:35:34,660
euh, un juge du cinquième circuit a essayé de parler à mon alma mater

846
00:35:35,220 --> 00:35:36,100
et un cinquième des

847
00:35:36,120 --> 00:35:37,680
la classe est arrivée pour le crier.

848
00:35:38,320 --> 00:35:40,480
Hum, c'était une vraie démonstration du,

849
00:35:40,540 --> 00:35:45,980
de ce qui se passait, de ce qui se passait ces 10 minutes après le début de la dénonciation d'un cinquième juge de circuit.

850
00:35:46,000 --> 00:35:48,120
Et je continue de souligner cela parce que je suis un constitutionnaliste,

851
00:35:48,280 --> 00:35:49,980
Les juges du cinquième circuit sont de grosses affaires.

852
00:35:50,640 --> 00:35:52,320
Ils se situent un niveau en dessous de la Cour suprême.

853
00:35:53,140 --> 00:35:55,820
Euh, tu sais, environ un cinquième des élèves de l'école se présentent pour les dénoncer.

854
00:35:56,540 --> 00:35:57,420
après 10 minutes de

855
00:35:57,420 --> 00:35:59,020
les criant et l'administrateur,

856
00:35:59,140 --> 00:36:01,560
un administrateur DEI se lève avec un préparé

857
00:36:01,580 --> 00:36:03,200
discours qu'elle, qu'elle a écrit.

858
00:36:03,380 --> 00:36:06,460
C'est un discours de sept minutes dans lequel elle parle,

859
00:36:06,900 --> 00:36:07,460
euh, la liberté d'expression.

860
00:36:07,760 --> 00:36:09,400
Peut-être que le jus ne vaut pas le coup.

861
00:36:09,900 --> 00:36:14,220
Et nous étions dans cette faculté de droit où les gens pouvaient apprendre à remettre en question ces normes.

862
00:36:15,080 --> 00:36:16,840
Donc c'est clair qu'il y avait une coordination,

863
00:36:16,840 --> 00:36:18,580
tu sais, parmi certains d'entre eux

864
00:36:18,580 --> 00:36:20,620
administrateurs et en discutant avec les étudiants là-bas,

865
00:36:20,620 --> 00:36:21,660
ils étaient en réunion,

866
00:36:22,320 --> 00:36:23,440
de longues réunions pendant longtemps.

867
00:36:23,780 --> 00:36:25,100
Ils se présentent, crient.

868
00:36:25,660 --> 00:36:28,940
Ensuite, ils prennent sept minutes supplémentaires pour,

869
00:36:28,940 --> 00:36:31,040
à, pour donner une conférence à l'orateur gratuitement

870
00:36:31,060 --> 00:36:33,940
la parole, le non-être, pas le jus de la liberté d'expression,

871
00:36:33,960 --> 00:36:35,040
ça ne vaut pas le coup.

872
00:36:35,980 --> 00:36:37,580
Euh, et puis pour le reste,

873
00:36:37,580 --> 00:36:39,160
c'est juste du chahut constant.

874
00:36:39,420 --> 00:36:41,580
Euh, après elle, après son départ,

875
00:36:41,960 --> 00:36:44,560
c'est clairement, et ceci, et quelque chose de très similaire,

876
00:36:44,560 --> 00:36:46,660
vous savez, cela s'est produit plusieurs fois à Yale où

877
00:36:46,660 --> 00:36:49,820
il était très clair que les administrateurs aidaient,

878
00:36:49,820 --> 00:36:51,120
avec beaucoup de ces perturbations.

879
00:36:51,420 --> 00:36:55,020
Donc je pense qu'à chaque fois qu'on crie dans une université,

880
00:36:55,740 --> 00:36:57,180
l'enquête devrait être

881
00:36:57,740 --> 00:36:58,540
tout d'abord,

882
00:36:59,160 --> 00:37:00,060
les administrateurs ont-ils

883
00:37:01,220 --> 00:37:02,860
aider à créer ce problème ?

884
00:37:03,060 --> 00:37:03,900
Est-ce qu'ils ont fait quelque chose

885
00:37:03,900 --> 00:37:04,940
pour l'arrêter ?

886
00:37:05,200 --> 00:37:08,520
Parce que je pense qu'une grande partie de ce qui se passe ici est due à l'hyperbureaucratisation

887
00:37:08,560 --> 00:37:13,940
d'universités avec beaucoup plus de gens idéologiques qui pensent que leur travail principal est essentiellement

888
00:37:13,940 --> 00:37:15,600
comme le discours policier, plus ou moins,

889
00:37:16,440 --> 00:37:17,500
ils encouragent les étudiants,

890
00:37:17,840 --> 00:37:20,360
désolé, ils encouragent les étudiants qui ont des opinions qui leur plaisent,

891
00:37:20,780 --> 00:37:22,580
euh, pour faire des cris.

892
00:37:22,760 --> 00:37:24,340
Euh, et c'est pourquoi ils

893
00:37:24,420 --> 00:37:25,780
il faut vraiment enquêter là-dessus.

894
00:37:26,640 --> 00:37:31,900
Et c'est, euh, à Stanford, l'administrateur qui, qui a fait les remarques préparées,

895
00:37:31,900 --> 00:37:33,880
euh, à propos du jus, ça ne vaut pas le coup.

896
00:37:33,900 --> 00:37:35,660
Elle n'a pas été invitée à Stanford,

897
00:37:36,160 --> 00:37:39,940
mais elle est l'un des seuls exemples auxquels je puisse penser lorsque ces choses arrivent souvent

898
00:37:40,300 --> 00:37:42,880
où un administrateur a clairement facilité quelque chose qui

899
00:37:43,540 --> 00:37:44,660
c'était un cri ou

900
00:37:44,660 --> 00:37:48,480
déplateforming ou a entraîné le licenciement d'un professeur ou a entraîné le licenciement d'un étudiant

901
00:37:48,480 --> 00:37:51,640
se faire expulser là où l'administrateur a

902
00:37:52,380 --> 00:37:54,360
je m'en suis tiré sans problème ou probablement dans certains

903
00:37:54,380 --> 00:37:55,440
certains cas ont même obtenu une promotion.

904
00:37:56,080 --> 00:37:58,100
Et donc un petit nombre d'administrateurs,

905
00:37:58,760 --> 00:38:01,130
peut-être même qu'un seul administrateur pourrait

906
00:38:01,480 --> 00:38:05,860
participer à l'encouragement et à l'organisation et ainsi responsabiliser l'ensemble

907
00:38:05,860 --> 00:38:06,220
processus.

908
00:38:06,340 --> 00:38:08,320
Et c'est quelque chose que j'ai constaté tout au long de ma carrière.

909
00:38:08,400 --> 00:38:11,400
Et la seule chose qui est assez difficile à attraper sur le fait,

910
00:38:11,640 --> 00:38:12,140
pour ainsi dire.

911
00:38:12,160 --> 00:38:14,940
Et c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles il est utile que les gens soient au courant de cela, vous savez,

912
00:38:15,700 --> 00:38:17,020
euh, parce que c'est

913
00:38:17,680 --> 00:38:19,220
était ce cas étonnant.

914
00:38:19,320 --> 00:38:20,520
C'était à l'université de Washington.

915
00:38:20,820 --> 00:38:24,340
Euh, et nous avons en fait présenté cela dans un documentaire réalisé en 2015,

916
00:38:24,920 --> 00:38:26,620
20, arrivé en 2015, 2016

917
00:38:27,340 --> 00:38:28,460
appelé, est-ce qu'on peut plaisanter ?

918
00:38:28,660 --> 00:38:29,080
Euh,

919
00:38:29,380 --> 00:38:31,140
et c'est à ce moment-là que nous avons commencé à remarquer quelque chose

920
00:38:31,140 --> 00:38:32,340
changeait sur le campus.

921
00:38:32,560 --> 00:38:34,840
Nous avons également entendu dire que des comédiens disaient qu'ils ne pouvaient pas utiliser

922
00:38:34,840 --> 00:38:35,860
leur bonne humeur.

923
00:38:36,420 --> 00:38:39,180
C'était à peu près à l'époque où Jerry Seinfeld et Chris Rock

924
00:38:39,520 --> 00:38:40,380
ont dit qu'ils ne pouvaient pas,

925
00:38:40,720 --> 00:38:42,540
euh, ils ne voulaient pas jouer sur les campus parce qu'ils,

926
00:38:42,540 --> 00:38:44,320
ils ne pouvaient pas, ils, ils, ils ne pouvaient pas être drôles.

927
00:38:45,120 --> 00:38:48,620
Euh, mais nous avons présenté le cas d'un comédien qui voulait

928
00:38:48,720 --> 00:38:51,060
faire une comédie musicale appelée la passion de la comédie musicale,

929
00:38:51,160 --> 00:38:52,280
se moquer de la passion du Christ

930
00:38:52,440 --> 00:38:55,380
dans le but déclaré d'offenser tout le monde,

931
00:38:55,820 --> 00:38:56,700
chaque groupe de manière égale.

932
00:38:56,840 --> 00:38:58,800
C’était vraiment une mission de South Park.

933
00:38:58,960 --> 00:38:59,240
Euh,

934
00:39:00,360 --> 00:39:04,960
et c'est un cas inhabituel car nous avons effectivement obtenu de la documentation

935
00:39:04,980 --> 00:39:10,980
d'administrateurs achetant des billets pour des étudiants en colère et organisant un événement où ils,

936
00:39:11,420 --> 00:39:12,860
où ils les entraînent,

937
00:39:13,080 --> 00:39:15,140
sauter au milieu et crier,

938
00:39:15,200 --> 00:39:15,940
Je suis offensé.

939
00:39:15,980 --> 00:39:17,600
Comme eux, ils leur ont acheté des billets.

940
00:39:17,960 --> 00:39:18,880
Ils les ont envoyés là-bas,

941
00:39:18,880 --> 00:39:20,360
ce truc avec le but

942
00:39:20,360 --> 00:39:22,000
de le crier.

943
00:39:22,340 --> 00:39:26,600
Maintenant, sans surprise, lorsque vous envoyez un groupe d'étudiants en colère fermer

944
00:39:26,600 --> 00:39:29,400
une pièce, ça ne va pas se terminer à

945
00:39:30,000 --> 00:39:30,740
Je suis offensé.

946
00:39:31,160 --> 00:39:32,460
Euh, et ça a chauffé.

947
00:39:32,760 --> 00:39:34,140
Des menaces de mort ont été lancées,

948
00:39:34,140 --> 00:39:38,440
euh, euh, et puis la police Pullman Washington

949
00:39:38,590 --> 00:39:42,380
a dit à Chris, euh, Chris Lee, le gars qui a fait la pièce, qu'il,

950
00:39:42,420 --> 00:39:43,440
ils ne protégeraient pas réellement

951
00:39:43,520 --> 00:39:43,720
eux.

952
00:39:43,860 --> 00:39:46,960
Ce n'est pas tous les jours que vous aurez ce genre de preuves tangibles que,

953
00:39:47,080 --> 00:39:49,600
ça, ça, euh, de voir les administrateurs,

954
00:39:49,640 --> 00:39:52,760
euh, ce serait si, euh, si effronté qu'ils enregistrent

955
00:39:52,760 --> 00:39:54,640
le fait qu'ils leur ont acheté des billets et les ont envoyés.

956
00:39:55,080 --> 00:39:56,200
Mais je pense à beaucoup de ces trucs

957
00:39:56,300 --> 00:39:58,320
c'est que ça continue.

958
00:39:58,320 --> 00:39:59,460
Et je pense que c'est le,

959
00:39:59,460 --> 00:40:01,800
la, c'est une bonne excuse pour en réduire un

960
00:40:01,800 --> 00:40:03,440
des grands problèmes de l'enseignement supérieur aujourd'hui,

961
00:40:03,520 --> 00:40:04,800
ce qui est une hyper-bureaucratisation.

962
00:40:05,760 --> 00:40:09,440
D'après votre expérience, existe-t-il une distinction entre les administrateurs et les professeurs en termes de :

963
00:40:10,060 --> 00:40:13,160
euh, les auteurs de ceci, de ce genre de choses ?

964
00:40:13,180 --> 00:40:15,160
Alors si, si on se débarrassait de tout,

965
00:40:15,320 --> 00:40:19,380
comme Harvey a parlé de se débarrasser d'un grand pourcentage de l'administration,

966
00:40:19,460 --> 00:40:24,280
est-ce que cela aide à résoudre le problème ou la faculté est-elle également petite

967
00:40:25,220 --> 00:40:26,960
pour cent des professeurs font également partie

968
00:40:26,960 --> 00:40:29,580
des encouragements dans l'organisation de ce genre d'annulation.

969
00:40:30,060 --> 00:40:30,520
Ouais.

970
00:40:30,560 --> 00:40:33,500
Et c’est quelque chose qui a été profondément décevant.

971
00:40:33,720 --> 00:40:38,980
Euh, c'est que lorsque vous regardez l'énorme augmentation des tentatives de licenciement de professeurs que nous avons constatées

972
00:40:39,000 --> 00:40:39,880
les 10 dernières années

973
00:40:41,060 --> 00:40:42,840
et en fait, au cours des 22 dernières années,

974
00:40:43,080 --> 00:40:45,080
aussi loin que nos archives remontent.

975
00:40:46,460 --> 00:40:49,880
D'abord, ils sont majoritairement dirigés par des administrateurs,

976
00:40:49,880 --> 00:40:52,220
tentatives de faire punir les professeurs.

977
00:40:52,260 --> 00:40:53,700
Euh, et

978
00:40:54,120 --> 00:40:57,540
c'était l'essentiel, vous savez, je dirais que c'était ma carrière jusqu'en 2013,

979
00:40:57,540 --> 00:40:59,720
luttait contre les excès administratifs.

980
00:41:00,000 --> 00:41:03,540
Hum, alors vous avez commencé à avoir le problème en 2014 des étudiants essayant

981
00:41:03,560 --> 00:41:04,580
pour que les gens annulent.

982
00:41:04,960 --> 00:41:07,720
Euh, et cela s'est vraiment accéléré en 2017 et en nombre.

983
00:41:08,080 --> 00:41:09,460
Donc un, un sens, celui-là,

984
00:41:09,460 --> 00:41:11,400
une chose qui facilite la documentation est,

985
00:41:11,620 --> 00:41:14,060
sont les pétitions pour que les professeurs soient licenciés ou punis.

986
00:41:14,540 --> 00:41:17,620
Euh, et à quel point ceux-ci proviennent de manière disproportionnée des étudiants.

987
00:41:18,280 --> 00:41:24,300
Mais une autre forte hausse a été celle des collègues professeurs qui ont exigé que leurs collègues professeurs obtiennent

988
00:41:24,300 --> 00:41:24,520
puni.

989
00:41:24,720 --> 00:41:25,280
Et ça pour moi,

990
00:41:25,660 --> 00:41:27,280
c'est un peu honteux.

991
00:41:27,700 --> 00:41:30,420
Toi, toi, tu ne devrais pas être fier d'avoir signé le

992
00:41:30,600 --> 00:41:32,160
pétition pour obtenir votre collègue professeur.

993
00:41:32,780 --> 00:41:34,400
Et qu'est-ce qu'il y a encore plus, euh,

994
00:41:35,000 --> 00:41:36,680
plus, plus honteux c'est ça

995
00:41:36,680 --> 00:41:40,180
nous comprenons, ceci, c'est, c'est presque devenu un cliché dans le feu.

996
00:41:40,580 --> 00:41:41,780
Quand quelqu'un fait face à l'un des

997
00:41:41,780 --> 00:41:43,360
ces campagnes d'annulation en tant que professeur,

998
00:41:43,860 --> 00:41:47,260
Je recevais des lettres de certains de mes amis disant :

999
00:41:47,440 --> 00:41:48,420
Je suis tellement désolé,

1000
00:41:48,420 --> 00:41:49,620
cela vous est arrivé.

1001
00:41:50,340 --> 00:41:52,260
Et ce sont les mêmes personnes qui ont publiquement signé

1002
00:41:52,280 --> 00:41:54,000
la pétition pour les faire virer.

1003
00:41:56,020 --> 00:41:56,200
Ouais.

1004
00:41:56,200 --> 00:41:56,540
Ouais.

1005
00:41:57,760 --> 00:41:58,120
Ouais.

1006
00:41:58,160 --> 00:42:01,800
L'intégrité est une chose importante dans ce monde.

1007
00:42:02,500 --> 00:42:04,280
Et je pense qu'une partie d'entre eux,

1008
00:42:06,140 --> 00:42:11,840
Je suis tellement surpris que les gens ne défendent pas davantage ce projet, car il y a tellement de faim.

1009
00:42:11,980 --> 00:42:15,400
Et si vous avez le courage, en tant que professeur ou administrateur, de vraiment vous tenir debout,

1010
00:42:15,740 --> 00:42:16,240
se lever,

1011
00:42:17,440 --> 00:42:17,620
euh,

1012
00:42:18,150 --> 00:42:19,980
avec éloquence,

1013
00:42:21,060 --> 00:42:21,720
avec rigueur,

1014
00:42:22,440 --> 00:42:23,780
avec intégrité, j'ai l'impression

1015
00:42:24,440 --> 00:42:25,640
c'est impossible

1016
00:42:26,300 --> 00:42:27,480
pour que quiconque fasse n'importe quoi

1017
00:42:27,920 --> 00:42:29,260
parce qu'il y a une telle faim.

1018
00:42:29,540 --> 00:42:30,580
C'est tellement rafraîchissant.

1019
00:42:30,720 --> 00:42:30,980
Ouais.

1020
00:42:31,180 --> 00:42:32,960
Je pense que tout le monde est d'accord

1021
00:42:33,540 --> 00:42:36,320
que la liberté d'expression est une bonne chose.

1022
00:42:36,520 --> 00:42:37,360
Oh, je ne le fais pas, je ne le fais pas.

1023
00:42:37,540 --> 00:42:38,160
Bien, OK.

1024
00:42:38,260 --> 00:42:38,600
Pardon pardon.

1025
00:42:38,660 --> 00:42:39,220
Je ne suis pas d'accord.

1026
00:42:39,660 --> 00:42:41,180
La majorité des gens,

1027
00:42:41,380 --> 00:42:43,260
même dans les universités qu'il y a une faim,

1028
00:42:43,260 --> 00:42:43,620
mais c'est presque comme, euh,

1029
00:42:44,160 --> 00:42:49,580
ce genre de nervosité autour parce qu'il y a un petit nombre de voix fortes.

1030
00:42:49,640 --> 00:42:50,860
Ce sont eux qui crient.

1031
00:42:51,900 --> 00:42:54,780
Donc, je veux dire, encore une fois, c’est là qu’intervient un grand leadership.

1032
00:42:54,980 --> 00:42:57,960
Et donc, vous savez, les présidents d'université devraient probablement être,

1033
00:42:58,620 --> 00:43:00,820
euh, faire des déclarations claires,

1034
00:43:01,100 --> 00:43:05,220
ce n’est pas le cas, c’est un endroit où nous valorisons la liberté d’expression.

1035
00:43:05,740 --> 00:43:09,040
Quand, et c'était tout au long de ma carrière, euh, président,

1036
00:43:09,360 --> 00:43:11,940
un président d'université qui met le pied à terre très tôt et dit, non,

1037
00:43:12,380 --> 00:43:13,120
Vous savez,

1038
00:43:14,200 --> 00:43:16,780
nous n’avons pas l’intention de licencier ce professeur.

1039
00:43:16,940 --> 00:43:18,120
Nous n'expulsons pas l'étudiant.

1040
00:43:18,520 --> 00:43:21,300
Cela met souvent fin au problème très rapidement.

1041
00:43:21,760 --> 00:43:24,740
Même si parfois, et c'est là que l'on voit vraiment l'implication administrative,

1042
00:43:25,720 --> 00:43:28,460
euh, les étudiants feront des choses comme reprendre le bureau du président.

1043
00:43:29,000 --> 00:43:31,720
Et puis cette reprise sera prise en charge par l’université.

1044
00:43:32,220 --> 00:43:34,180
Les gens diront parfois cela comme étant un peu comme :

1045
00:43:34,220 --> 00:43:37,420
oh, c'est clairement comme, euh, mon ami Sam Abrams,

1046
00:43:37,520 --> 00:43:38,260
quand ils ont essayé d'obtenir,

1047
00:43:38,320 --> 00:43:39,540
euh, j'ai essayé de lui faire tirer dessus,

1048
00:43:39,540 --> 00:43:41,280
au, euh, au collège Sarah Lawrence.

1049
00:43:42,080 --> 00:43:45,080
Euh, et, euh, c'était une des fois où,

1050
00:43:45,080 --> 00:43:46,700
qu'il a été utilisé comme un peu comme,

1051
00:43:46,740 --> 00:43:49,360
oh, c'était hostile à l'université parce qu'ils,

1052
00:43:49,780 --> 00:43:51,380
les étudiants ont repris le bureau du président.

1053
00:43:51,420 --> 00:43:53,280
Et je me dis, non, ils les ont laissés prendre le relais

1054
00:43:53,280 --> 00:43:53,900
bureau du président.

1055
00:43:53,980 --> 00:43:56,780
Et je ne sais pas si c'était l'un des cas dans lesquels le,

1056
00:43:56,780 --> 00:43:57,980
la reprise a été prise en charge,

1057
00:43:57,980 --> 00:44:00,000
mais s'il y avait jamais eu une sorte de signe, c'est un peu

1058
00:44:00,000 --> 00:44:03,200
genre, oui, ce n'est pas le cas, c'est en fait vraiment très convivial.

1059
00:44:03,280 --> 00:44:06,860
Eh bien, dans un certain sens, c'est comme protester et avoir des opinions très arrêtées, comme

1060
00:44:07,540 --> 00:44:09,900
les opinions ridicules, folles et sauvages sont une bonne chose.

1061
00:44:10,000 --> 00:44:11,720
C'est juste que ça ne devrait pas conduire à de vrais

1062
00:44:12,460 --> 00:44:14,200
licenciement ou déplacement de personnes.

1063
00:44:14,240 --> 00:44:15,280
Comme si c'était bien de protester.

1064
00:44:15,440 --> 00:44:17,400
Ce n'est tout simplement pas bon de le faire,

1065
00:44:17,400 --> 00:44:19,920
euh, que l'université soutienne cela et prenne des mesures en fonction de cela.

1066
00:44:20,120 --> 00:44:20,680
Et c'est l'un des,

1067
00:44:20,680 --> 00:44:21,560
un de ceux comme,

1068
00:44:21,560 --> 00:44:23,860
euh, des tensions dans, dans, dans le premier amendement qui

1069
00:44:23,860 --> 00:44:25,730
en fait, je pense que sa version est assez simple.

1070
00:44:25,760 --> 00:44:27,400
Essentiellement, vous avez une application,

1071
00:44:27,440 --> 00:44:30,040
tu en as absolument le droit,

1072
00:44:30,380 --> 00:44:32,200
euh, consacre ta vie à

1073
00:44:32,200 --> 00:44:35,060
mettre fin à la liberté d’expression et ridiculiser en tant que concept.

1074
00:44:35,160 --> 00:44:37,440
Et, et il y a des gens qui,

1075
00:44:37,440 --> 00:44:42,480
qui le sont vraiment, peuvent paraître très méprisables, même à l'égard de la philosophie de la liberté d'expression.

1076
00:44:42,940 --> 00:44:44,740
Euh, et nous défendrons votre droit de faire ça.

1077
00:44:45,100 --> 00:44:47,660
Nous ne serons pas non plus d’accord avec vous.

1078
00:44:47,660 --> 00:44:49,460
Et si vous essayez de faire virer un professeur,

1079
00:44:49,460 --> 00:44:50,940
nous serons de l’autre côté.

1080
00:44:51,120 --> 00:44:52,720
Maintenant, je pense que vous aviez Randy Kennedy,

1081
00:44:52,840 --> 00:44:54,420
qui je suis vraiment, je l'aime.

1082
00:44:54,540 --> 00:44:55,660
Je pense que c'est un gars formidable,

1083
00:44:56,140 --> 00:45:01,400
mais il nous a critiqué pour notre base de données déplateforme en disant :

1084
00:45:01,500 --> 00:45:04,100
cela veut dire que les étudiants ne peuvent pas protester contre les orateurs.

1085
00:45:04,160 --> 00:45:04,880
Je suis comme,

1086
00:45:05,500 --> 00:45:06,240
ok, c'est idiot.

1087
00:45:06,940 --> 00:45:11,660
Euh, euh, nous tirons car une organisation a toujours défendu le droit de manifester.

1088
00:45:11,800 --> 00:45:14,440
Nous défendons constamment les droits des manifestants pour les droits,

1089
00:45:15,060 --> 00:45:18,880
ne croyant pas que les manifestants aient le droit de dire cela,

1090
00:45:18,940 --> 00:45:20,000
en gros, ce serait le cas.

1091
00:45:20,620 --> 00:45:21,620
Punir les orateurs.

1092
00:45:21,820 --> 00:45:23,340
Nous n'appelons pas à punir,

1093
00:45:23,340 --> 00:45:26,060
euh, euh, les manifestants, mais ce que nous disons

1094
00:45:26,060 --> 00:45:29,620
c'est qu'on ne peut pas laisser les manifestants gagner s'ils exigent que quelqu'un soit renvoyé

1095
00:45:30,040 --> 00:45:30,740
pour leur liberté d'expression.

1096
00:45:30,760 --> 00:45:35,940
Il y a donc une limite entre les manifestants qui protestent et

1097
00:45:36,560 --> 00:45:40,100
l'université a pris des mesures sur la base de la protestation.

1098
00:45:40,220 --> 00:45:40,560
Oui exactement.

1099
00:45:40,840 --> 00:45:43,440
Et bien sûr, criez que ce n’est que de la censure populaire.

1100
00:45:44,080 --> 00:45:46,060
Euh, et c'est quelque chose où l'université,

1101
00:45:46,280 --> 00:45:47,980
la façon dont tu es en fait,

1102
00:45:48,060 --> 00:45:52,900
gérer cette tension dans la loi du premier amendement est essentiellement un peu comme le seul devoir positif du gouvernement.

1103
00:45:53,190 --> 00:45:57,560
Le premier, le devoir négatif, ce qu’il n’est pas permis de faire, c’est de vous censurer.

1104
00:45:58,400 --> 00:46:00,120
Hum, mais c'est un devoir positif, c'est que si,

1105
00:46:00,160 --> 00:46:02,320
que si je veux dire des choses horribles,

1106
00:46:02,620 --> 00:46:03,160
ou d'ailleurs,

1107
00:46:03,300 --> 00:46:05,520
de belles choses qui ne sont pas populaires dans un parc public,

1108
00:46:06,060 --> 00:46:08,760
euh, tu ne peux pas laisser la foule me crier dessus.

1109
00:46:09,060 --> 00:46:11,780
Hum, vous ne pouvez pas autoriser ce qu'on appelle le veto d'un chahuteur.

1110
00:46:14,280 --> 00:46:15,180
C'est tellement intéressant.

1111
00:46:15,200 --> 00:46:17,420
Parce que j’ai l’impression que cela joue également sur les réseaux sociaux.

1112
00:46:17,440 --> 00:46:17,980
Cause,

1113
00:46:18,920 --> 00:46:22,140
euh, tu sais, il y a toute cette discussion sur la censure et la liberté d'expression,

1114
00:46:22,500 --> 00:46:25,780
mais pour moi, la question de la carotte

1115
00:46:26,360 --> 00:46:27,060
c'est presque plus

1116
00:46:28,000 --> 00:46:28,540
intéressant.

1117
00:46:28,560 --> 00:46:32,580
Une fois la liberté d’expression établie, comment encourager la qualité ?

1118
00:46:32,580 --> 00:46:33,640
débat et désaccord ?

1119
00:46:33,880 --> 00:46:35,140
J'y pense beaucoup.

1120
00:46:35,880 --> 00:46:39,320
Et c'est l'une des choses dont nous parlons en annulant l'esprit américain, c'est en plaidant pour la vérité.

1121
00:46:40,060 --> 00:46:43,060
et cette culture d’annulation est cruelle.

1122
00:46:43,460 --> 00:46:43,780
C'est impitoyable.

1123
00:46:44,300 --> 00:46:45,900
C'est anti-intellectuel,

1124
00:46:46,240 --> 00:46:48,340
mais cela ne vous mènera jamais nulle part dans votre vérité.

1125
00:46:48,640 --> 00:46:51,460
Et tu vas perdre tellement de temps à détruire tes adversaires,

1126
00:46:52,640 --> 00:46:56,640
euh, dans, dans quelque chose qui ne pourra jamais vous amener à la vérité à travers le processus, bien sûr, de,

1127
00:46:57,040 --> 00:46:58,420
on n’atteint jamais directement la vérité.

1128
00:46:58,540 --> 00:46:59,440
Vous ne faites que réduire la fausseté.

1129
00:47:00,600 --> 00:47:00,780
Ouais.

1130
00:47:01,100 --> 00:47:04,500
Mais tout le monde ayant un mégaphone sur Internet en toute anonymat,

1131
00:47:05,440 --> 00:47:06,480
il semble que

1132
00:47:07,240 --> 00:47:08,460
c'est mieux que la censure,

1133
00:47:10,540 --> 00:47:13,540
mais j'ai l'impression qu'il y a des incitations en plus.

1134
00:47:13,800 --> 00:47:14,300
En plus de ça,

1135
00:47:15,000 --> 00:47:17,000
tu peux construire pour, euh,

1136
00:47:17,680 --> 00:47:19,620
ouais, pour encourager un meilleur discours.

1137
00:47:19,620 --> 00:47:19,800
Ouais.

1138
00:47:20,200 --> 00:47:25,340
C'est comme inciter quelqu'un qui déploie énormément d'efforts pour rendre même les plus ridicules.

1139
00:47:25,860 --> 00:47:34,960
des arguments, mais fondamentalement, ceux qui n'incluent aucun des éléments que vous soulignez en termes de toutes les astuces rhétoriques pour mettre fin aux conversations,

1140
00:47:35,200 --> 00:47:38,320
il suffit de présenter de très bons arguments pour quoi que ce soit.

1141
00:47:38,560 --> 00:47:41,140
Peu importe si c'est un communisme pour le fascisme,

1142
00:47:41,260 --> 00:47:42,540
peu importe ce que tu veux dire,

1143
00:47:43,120 --> 00:47:45,720
mais faites-le avec échelle, avec contexte historique,

1144
00:47:47,140 --> 00:47:49,300
avec, euh, euh, avec Steel Man de l'autre côté,

1145
00:47:49,360 --> 00:47:50,240
toutes ces sortes d'éléments.

1146
00:47:50,620 --> 00:47:52,620
Nous essayons de souligner trois points majeurs dans le livre.

1147
00:47:52,960 --> 00:47:55,820
La première, euh, consiste simplement à annuler la culture, c'est

1148
00:47:55,820 --> 00:47:56,080
réel.

1149
00:47:56,220 --> 00:47:57,820
C'est, c'est une époque historique,

1150
00:47:57,820 --> 00:47:59,540
euh, et c'est à une échelle historique.

1151
00:48:00,180 --> 00:48:00,980
Le deuxième est

1152
00:48:01,240 --> 00:48:04,480
tu devrais penser à l'annulation de la culture dans le cadre d'un, euh,

1153
00:48:05,060 --> 00:48:09,100
rhétorique, comme une rhétorique paresseuse plus large,

1154
00:48:09,100 --> 00:48:13,520
euh, approche de quoi, quoi, ce que nous appelons des arguments gagnants sans arguments gagnants.

1155
00:48:14,220 --> 00:48:18,660
Et nous entendons cela dans deux sens, sans avoir d’arguments gagnants ou sans avoir réellement d’arguments uniques.

1156
00:48:19,400 --> 00:48:21,060
Et nous parlons de tous les différents,

1157
00:48:21,140 --> 00:48:25,760
ce que nous appelons des forteresses rhétoriques que possèdent à gauche comme à droite et qui vous empêchent de le faire,

1158
00:48:26,100 --> 00:48:28,560
qui vous permettent de simplement renvoyer la personne,

1159
00:48:29,300 --> 00:48:33,720
euh, ou esquiver l'argument sans jamais vraiment aborder le fond de l'argument.

1160
00:48:33,880 --> 00:48:34,580
La troisième partie est juste,

1161
00:48:34,800 --> 00:48:36,040
vous savez, comment pouvons-nous résoudre ce problème ?

1162
00:48:36,240 --> 00:48:38,680
Mais les trucs de forteresse rhétorique sont en fait quelque chose que j'ai été,

1163
00:48:38,920 --> 00:48:43,840
Je suis très passionné parce que cela interfère avec notre capacité à découvrir la vérité et cela

1164
00:48:43,840 --> 00:48:45,620
ça fait perdre du temps et franchement,

1165
00:48:45,800 --> 00:48:48,640
c'est aussi en quelque sorte puisque la culture de l'annulation en fait partie

1166
00:48:48,650 --> 00:48:50,180
tactique rhétorique, cela peut aussi ruiner des vies.

1167
00:48:51,320 --> 00:48:54,460
Ce serait en fait vraiment amusant de parler de cet aspect particulier du livre.

1168
00:48:54,500 --> 00:48:56,780
Et je recommande fortement si vous écoutez ceci,

1169
00:48:56,980 --> 00:48:59,020
allez précommander le livre maintenant.

1170
00:49:00,040 --> 00:49:00,220
Euh,

1171
00:49:00,600 --> 00:49:01,440
quand sort-il ?

1172
00:49:01,700 --> 00:49:02,340
17 octobre.

1173
00:49:02,340 --> 00:49:02,540
D'accord.

1174
00:49:02,680 --> 00:49:03,840
L’annulation de l’esprit américain.

1175
00:49:04,240 --> 00:49:04,380
D'accord.

1176
00:49:04,440 --> 00:49:05,140
Donc,

1177
00:49:05,540 --> 00:49:05,640
euh,

1178
00:49:06,360 --> 00:49:07,820
dans le livre, vous avez aussi

1179
00:49:08,340 --> 00:49:12,720
une liste de tactiques rhétoriques bon marché utilisées à la fois par la gauche et la droite.

1180
00:49:13,100 --> 00:49:13,960
Et puis tu as

1181
00:49:14,620 --> 00:49:19,060
une liste de tactiques utilisées par la gauche et la droite.

1182
00:49:19,440 --> 00:49:25,620
Il y a donc la rhétorique, la forteresse rhétorique parfaite que la gauche utilise et la forteresse rhétorique efficace

1183
00:49:25,880 --> 00:49:26,560
que le droit utilise.

1184
00:49:27,340 --> 00:49:29,560
La première concerne l’isme.

1185
00:49:29,740 --> 00:49:32,230
Peut-être pourrions-nous en passer en revue quelques-uns qui capturent

1186
00:49:32,240 --> 00:49:35,000
votre cœur à ce moment particulier alors que nous en parlons.

1187
00:49:35,320 --> 00:49:36,200
Et si, si tu peux

1188
00:49:37,260 --> 00:49:43,840
décrivez-en des exemples ou si, euh, il y a des aspects que vous voyez là, particulièrement efficaces.

1189
00:49:44,180 --> 00:49:48,960
Alors, qu'en est-il de l'isme, qui consiste à se défendre contre les critiques de son camp en évoquant les critiques de l'autre camp ?

1190
00:49:49,710 --> 00:49:51,400
actes répréhensibles allégués.

1191
00:49:51,600 --> 00:49:53,960
Je veux en faire des petites cartes, euh,

1192
00:49:54,280 --> 00:49:56,200
de toutes ces tactiques et commencer

1193
00:49:56,200 --> 00:50:00,300
les utiliser sur X tout le temps car ils sont si couramment déployés.

1194
00:50:00,380 --> 00:50:01,760
Et qu'en est-il de l'isme que j'ai mis

1195
00:50:01,760 --> 00:50:02,800
d'abord pour une raison,

1196
00:50:03,020 --> 00:50:07,160
vous savez, ce serait une idée intéressante d'intégrer cela dans Twitter slash X

1197
00:50:07,860 --> 00:50:10,100
où les gens, vous savez, au lieu de cliquer sur leur cœur,

1198
00:50:10,140 --> 00:50:12,340
ils peuvent cliquer sur lequel des,

1199
00:50:12,540 --> 00:50:15,360
euh, euh, de quelle tactique rhétorique il s'agit.

1200
00:50:15,700 --> 00:50:16,140
Et puis,

1201
00:50:16,560 --> 00:50:18,060
parce que vous savez, il y a en fait des notes de la communauté.

1202
00:50:18,200 --> 00:50:19,200
Je ne sais pas si tu as vu

1203
00:50:19,940 --> 00:50:23,860
sur X que vous pouvez contribuer des notes et c'est tout à fait

1204
00:50:24,060 --> 00:50:24,560
fascinant.

1205
00:50:24,840 --> 00:50:25,920
Ça marche vraiment très bien,

1206
00:50:26,240 --> 00:50:28,240
mais pour lui donner un peu plus de structure.

1207
00:50:28,320 --> 00:50:28,760
Ouais.

1208
00:50:28,780 --> 00:50:30,220
C'est en fait une méthode vraiment intéressante.

1209
00:50:30,500 --> 00:50:30,700
Ouais.

1210
00:50:30,780 --> 00:50:32,600
En fait, quand je réfléchissais aux moyens

1211
00:50:33,100 --> 00:50:35,320
X pourrait être utilisé pour argumenter en faveur de la vérité,

1212
00:50:35,860 --> 00:50:37,480
Je ne voudrais pas l'avoir pour que,

1213
00:50:37,480 --> 00:50:39,340
vous savez, tout le monde serait lié à cela.

1214
00:50:39,620 --> 00:50:43,740
Mais je pense que j'imagine être presque comme un flux au sein de X

1215
00:50:44,020 --> 00:50:45,700
c'était axé sur la vérité,

1216
00:50:45,700 --> 00:50:48,760
cela accepte certaines règles supplémentaires sur la façon dont ils argumenteraient.

1217
00:50:48,820 --> 00:50:49,400
Oui mon gars.

1218
00:50:49,400 --> 00:50:50,240
J'aimerais que.

1219
00:50:50,840 --> 00:50:54,640
Où en termes de flux qui se croisent et peuvent être

1220
00:50:54,640 --> 00:50:59,320
séparé celui qui parle de merde, celui où les gens aiment juste parler de la merde.

1221
00:50:59,700 --> 00:51:00,220
D'accord. Vas-y, mec.

1222
00:51:00,260 --> 00:51:01,320
Et puis il y a comme la vérité

1223
00:51:01,840 --> 00:51:05,640
et puis, euh, je veux dire, ils disent, puis il y a l'humour,

1224
00:51:06,660 --> 00:51:08,240
puis il y a de bonnes vibrations.

1225
00:51:08,760 --> 00:51:09,220
Comme, tu sais,

1226
00:51:09,560 --> 00:51:11,660
Je ne suis pas comme quelqu'un qui a absolument besoin de bien

1227
00:51:11,680 --> 00:51:12,820
des vibrations tout le temps,

1228
00:51:12,860 --> 00:51:14,380
mais parfois c'est agréable d'avoir,

1229
00:51:14,440 --> 00:51:17,580
c'est bien de simplement se connecter et de ne pas avoir à voir

1230
00:51:17,960 --> 00:51:23,160
comme le drame, les combats, les querelles, les annulations, les mamans, tout ça.

1231
00:51:23,220 --> 00:51:24,240
C'est bon de voir,

1232
00:51:24,820 --> 00:51:28,680
euh, c'est pour ça que je vais sur Reddit ou comme,

1233
00:51:28,680 --> 00:51:30,420
euh, quels sont les animaux mignons,

1234
00:51:30,640 --> 00:51:32,000
s'il y a des chiots et des chatons mignons.

1235
00:51:32,240 --> 00:51:34,960
Et c'est comme si je voulais juste voir Ryan Reynolds chanter avec Will Farrell.

1236
00:51:35,080 --> 00:51:35,260
Je veux dire,

1237
00:51:35,880 --> 00:51:38,020
parfois c'est tout ce dont tu as besoin dans mon cœur.

1238
00:51:38,060 --> 00:51:38,260
Ouais.

1239
00:51:38,800 --> 00:51:39,620
Pas tout le temps,

1240
00:51:39,640 --> 00:51:42,420
juste un petit peu et revenons à la bataille

1241
00:51:42,940 --> 00:51:43,280
pour la vérité.

1242
00:51:44,040 --> 00:51:44,300
D'accord.

1243
00:51:44,360 --> 00:51:45,220
Alors qu’en est-il de l’isme ?

1244
00:51:45,300 --> 00:51:46,040
Et en tant que Mia ?

1245
00:51:46,140 --> 00:51:46,920
C'est partout.

1246
00:51:47,080 --> 00:51:48,460
Euh, quand, quand tu le regardes,

1247
00:51:48,460 --> 00:51:49,540
euh, quand tu regardes Twitter,

1248
00:51:49,580 --> 00:51:51,660
quand tu regardes les réseaux sociaux en général, euh,

1249
00:51:52,020 --> 00:51:56,480
et le premier, comme ce que nous appelons la course du combattant, est fondamentalement éprouvé par le temps,

1250
00:51:56,560 --> 00:51:58,400
démodé, tu sais,

1251
00:51:59,220 --> 00:52:00,800
des esquives argumentatives que tout le monde utilise.

1252
00:52:01,380 --> 00:52:02,360
Et qu'en est-il de l'asm, c'est juste

1253
00:52:02,360 --> 00:52:05,440
évoquer quelque chose, euh, vous savez, comme si quelqu'un se disputait,

1254
00:52:05,580 --> 00:52:06,640
comme Biden est corrompu.

1255
00:52:06,900 --> 00:52:08,060
Et puis quelqu'un dit :

1256
00:52:08,140 --> 00:52:09,460
eh bien, Trump était pire, tu sais, genre,

1257
00:52:10,080 --> 00:52:12,760
et ce n'est pas illégitime,

1258
00:52:13,080 --> 00:52:15,400
vous savez, argument à revenir, mais c'est le cas,

1259
00:52:15,820 --> 00:52:16,820
ça, ça semble arriver.

1260
00:52:16,980 --> 00:52:17,780
Chaque fois que quelqu'un fait un

1261
00:52:17,780 --> 00:52:22,120
affirmation, quelqu'un souligne simplement une autre chose qui se passait et cela peut être de plus en plus atténué,

1262
00:52:22,440 --> 00:52:24,060
de, de ce que vous essayez réellement d'argumenter.

1263
00:52:24,680 --> 00:52:25,920
Et quand tu, et puis tu vois

1264
00:52:25,920 --> 00:52:28,980
ça tout le temps sur les réseaux sociaux et c'est un peu,

1265
00:52:29,080 --> 00:52:31,080
tu sais, j'étais un grand fan de Jon Stewart

1266
00:52:31,080 --> 00:52:36,140
émission quotidienne, mais une grande partie de l'humour et de la tactique pour se disputer était la suivante

1267
00:52:36,280 --> 00:52:36,820
chose ici.

1268
00:52:37,060 --> 00:52:39,320
C'est comme, Oh, je fais valoir cet argument sur ce problème important.

1269
00:52:39,860 --> 00:52:43,800
Oh, en fait, vous savez, il y a cet autre problème ici qui me préoccupe davantage.

1270
00:52:44,460 --> 00:52:47,780
Et ça, ça, vous savez, et sur le, vous savez, choisissons le bon ici.

1271
00:52:48,340 --> 00:52:49,340
Donc le 6 janvier

1272
00:52:49,860 --> 00:52:53,260
tu sais, regarder tout le monde se disputer à propos de, euh, hacher,

1273
00:52:53,600 --> 00:52:57,060
vous savez, comme la, euh, euh, la partie occupée de Seattle ou

1274
00:52:57,060 --> 00:52:59,220
la partie occupée de Portland et ensemble,

1275
00:52:59,260 --> 00:53:00,580
et fondamentalement, j'essaie d'aimer,

1276
00:53:00,660 --> 00:53:01,900
Oh, tu évoques le, le,

1277
00:53:02,240 --> 00:53:03,580
l'émeute du 6 janvier.

1278
00:53:04,060 --> 00:53:04,620
Euh, et au fait,

1279
00:53:04,660 --> 00:53:05,640
J'habite à Capitol Hill.

1280
00:53:05,760 --> 00:53:09,260
Alors croyez-moi, j'étais très conscient de combien c'était effrayant et mauvais.

1281
00:53:09,620 --> 00:53:10,200
Euh,

1282
00:53:10,700 --> 00:53:15,320
tu sais, comme je l'ai dit, mon père a grandi en Yougoslavie et c'était une nuit où nous dînions tous au sous-sol.

1283
00:53:15,380 --> 00:53:17,300
Parce que je me dis, Oh, quand ça va mal,

1284
00:53:17,540 --> 00:53:18,060
manger au sous-sol.

1285
00:53:18,760 --> 00:53:20,600
C'était, c'était, c'était vraiment effrayant.

1286
00:53:20,600 --> 00:53:26,360
Et les gens essaieraient de détourner l’attention du sérieux du 6 janvier en faisant valoir que,

1287
00:53:26,480 --> 00:53:30,160
Oh, eh bien, il se passe des choses folles et horribles partout dans le pays.

1288
00:53:30,280 --> 00:53:35,060
Euh, vous savez, les émeutes, euh, euh, euh, sont venues de certaines manifestations pour la justice sociale.

1289
00:53:35,660 --> 00:53:39,700
Et bien sûr, la réponse est que vous pouvez vous inquiéter de ces deux choses et,

1290
00:53:39,700 --> 00:53:41,240
et trouvez les deux problèmes.

1291
00:53:41,460 --> 00:53:44,040
Mais tu sais, si je parle de côtelette,

1292
00:53:44,300 --> 00:53:47,500
vous savez, quelqu'un qui évoque le 6 janvier n'est pas très pertinent.

1293
00:53:47,780 --> 00:53:49,200
Ou si je parle du 6 janvier,

1294
00:53:49,340 --> 00:53:51,980
quelqu'un qui évoque les émeutes de 2020,

1295
00:53:52,540 --> 00:53:53,040
n'est-ce pas utile ?

1296
00:53:53,320 --> 00:53:56,580
Nous avons fait un long voyage sombre depuis l'isme et,

1297
00:53:56,580 --> 00:53:57,620
euh, lié à ça, c'est

1298
00:53:57,640 --> 00:53:59,680
personnel en paille et personnel en acier.

1299
00:53:59,840 --> 00:54:04,860
Donc déformer la perspective de la perspective opposée.

1300
00:54:05,440 --> 00:54:06,880
Et c'est aussi quelque chose,

1301
00:54:07,440 --> 00:54:13,180
euh, je, je suppose que c'est très répandu et c'est difficile de faire l'inverse de ça,

1302
00:54:13,300 --> 00:54:14,360
qui est de la main d'œuvre en acier

1303
00:54:14,400 --> 00:54:16,380
nécessite de l'empathie ou de l'éloquence.

1304
00:54:16,420 --> 00:54:17,480
Cela nécessite de la compréhension,

1305
00:54:18,500 --> 00:54:20,660
faire réellement des recherches et comprendre,

1306
00:54:20,960 --> 00:54:22,580
la, la perspective alternative.

1307
00:54:23,480 --> 00:54:27,060
Mon merveilleux employé, Angel et Eduardo, ont quelque chose qu'il appelle un personnel vedette.

1308
00:54:27,640 --> 00:54:29,720
et je me retrouve à faire ça souvent.

1309
00:54:29,840 --> 00:54:30,700
C'est agréable d'avoir,

1310
00:54:30,700 --> 00:54:34,860
tu sais, deux parents immigrés, euh, parce que je me souviens d'avoir été à San Francisco,

1311
00:54:34,860 --> 00:54:44,240
euh, vous savez, euh, dans le genre étrange de la cohorte de l'ACLU slash Burning Man et avoir un

1312
00:54:44,240 --> 00:54:48,060
ami là-bas qui était un artiste qui parlait de détester le Kansas.

1313
00:54:48,310 --> 00:54:52,380
Et c’était sa métaphore de l’Amérique centrale, c’est ce qu’il voulait dire par là.

1314
00:54:53,020 --> 00:54:56,180
Et, mais il était plutôt fier du fait qu'il détestait le Kansas.

1315
00:54:56,880 --> 00:54:58,630
Et je me dis, tu dois comprendre.

1316
00:54:58,900 --> 00:55:02,240
Je vous vois encore tous un peu comme des étrangers et

1317
00:55:03,040 --> 00:55:06,600
pensez à changer le nom du Kansas en Croatie,

1318
00:55:06,840 --> 00:55:09,260
tu sais, change le nom du Kansas en,

1319
00:55:09,280 --> 00:55:09,920
à, à certains.

1320
00:55:10,200 --> 00:55:11,600
C'est à cela que je pense.

1321
00:55:11,860 --> 00:55:13,460
Et l'idée de l'effectif vedette,

1322
00:55:13,640 --> 00:55:14,980
ce que je, ce que j'aime, c'est

1323
00:55:15,140 --> 00:55:15,740
c'est l'idée d'être comme,

1324
00:55:16,000 --> 00:55:19,900
donc vous dites que vous détestez vraiment votre minorité religieuse dominante,

1325
00:55:20,300 --> 00:55:25,140
genre, et c'est à ce moment-là que vous commencez à vous en détacher un peu, comme c'est typique

1326
00:55:25,700 --> 00:55:27,780
L'Amérique est exceptionnelle à bien des égards,

1327
00:55:28,060 --> 00:55:30,840
mais certaines de nos dynamiques sont incroyablement

1328
00:55:30,840 --> 00:55:31,280
typique.

1329
00:55:31,420 --> 00:55:32,300
C'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles,

1330
00:55:32,460 --> 00:55:34,340
comme quand les gens commencent à lire Thomas soul,

1331
00:55:34,400 --> 00:55:37,460
par exemple, ils commencent à devenir accros parce qu'une des choses qu'il fait, c'est qu'il

1332
00:55:37,460 --> 00:55:41,500
fait une analyse comparative des problèmes des pays et souligne que certains d'entre eux

1333
00:55:41,500 --> 00:55:44,300
des choses que nous pensons uniques aux États-Unis existent,

1334
00:55:45,500 --> 00:55:48,140
vous savez, 75 % du reste des pays du monde.

1335
00:55:48,560 --> 00:55:51,460
Le livre de Francis Fukuyama, euh, que je lis en ce moment,

1336
00:55:51,500 --> 00:55:54,900
origines de l’ordre politique fait en réalité ce merveilleux travail de pointage

1337
00:55:54,900 --> 00:55:56,820
découvrir à quel point nous ne sommes pas spéciaux à bien des égards.

1338
00:55:57,200 --> 00:55:59,260
C'est en fait quelque chose qui me préoccupe beaucoup.

1339
00:56:00,420 --> 00:56:04,880
Et, euh, Fukuyama bien sûr, euh, c'est un, c'est un, c'est un super livre.

1340
00:56:05,240 --> 00:56:05,580
Ce n'est pas,

1341
00:56:06,460 --> 00:56:08,200
c'est un peu guindé dans son écriture

1342
00:56:08,940 --> 00:56:11,100
parce que son mandat pour l'une des choses qui le préoccupe

1343
00:56:11,120 --> 00:56:14,560
ce qui détruit les sociétés, c'est le rapatriement,

1344
00:56:15,240 --> 00:56:21,780
qui est le retour à des sociétés dans lesquelles

1345
00:56:21,780 --> 00:56:23,280
vous privilégiez votre famille et vos amis.

1346
00:56:23,840 --> 00:56:28,240
Et en fait, je pense en grande partie à ce que je vois en quelque sorte,

1347
00:56:28,280 --> 00:56:29,900
euh, euh, aux États-Unis,

1348
00:56:30,020 --> 00:56:31,740
ça me fait peur que nous puissions traverser un peu

1349
00:56:31,740 --> 00:56:33,260
un peu de processus de rapatriement.

1350
00:56:33,840 --> 00:56:35,560
Et je pense que c'est une des raisons pour lesquelles les gens sont si

1351
00:56:35,640 --> 00:56:36,000
en colère.

1352
00:56:36,200 --> 00:56:36,920
Je pense qu'avoir un,

1353
00:56:37,240 --> 00:56:39,080
Je pense que la perspective que nous,

1354
00:56:39,080 --> 00:56:43,700
vous savez, nous semblons presque avoir des élections qui allaient être,

1355
00:56:43,700 --> 00:56:46,180
vous savez, Jeb Bush contre Hillary Clinton.

1356
00:56:46,420 --> 00:56:48,680
C'est comme si nous étions un pays dynastique maintenant ?

1357
00:56:48,680 --> 00:56:50,220
Est-ce que c'est ce qui se passe ?

1358
00:56:50,780 --> 00:56:54,320
Mais c'est aussi l'une des raisons pour lesquelles les gens sont si en colère contre les admissions héritées,

1359
00:56:54,780 --> 00:56:56,160
à peu près combien, tu sais,

1360
00:56:56,540 --> 00:57:00,140
certaines familles semblent capables de maintenir leurs gens dans le

1361
00:57:00,140 --> 00:57:02,540
classes supérieures des États-Unis pour toujours.

1362
00:57:02,700 --> 00:57:05,220
Et crois-moi, comme si j'étais pauvre quand j'étais

1363
00:57:05,360 --> 00:57:06,400
un enfant et je suis allé à,

1364
00:57:06,400 --> 00:57:07,360
et je dois y aller,

1365
00:57:07,500 --> 00:57:08,800
Je dois aller à l'une des fantaisies.

1366
00:57:08,880 --> 00:57:09,620
Je dois aller à Stanford.

1367
00:57:11,170 --> 00:57:15,240
Et j'ai pu voir comment les gens,

1368
00:57:16,440 --> 00:57:19,640
ils vous traitent différemment, d'une manière presque insultante.

1369
00:57:20,060 --> 00:57:23,660
En gros, comme soudainement pour un certain type de personne,

1370
00:57:23,660 --> 00:57:25,140
J'étais une personne légitime.

1371
00:57:25,540 --> 00:57:28,720
Et je regarde à quel point l'Amérique compte sur Harvard,

1372
00:57:29,200 --> 00:57:31,080
sur Yale pour produire son,

1373
00:57:31,780 --> 00:57:32,500
Je vais utiliser un très

1374
00:57:32,520 --> 00:57:34,200
» marque un terme qui sonne, classe dirigeante.

1375
00:57:35,100 --> 00:57:37,880
Et c'est une des raisons pour lesquelles il faut être particulièrement

1376
00:57:37,880 --> 00:57:40,420
inquiet de ce qui se passe dans ces collèges d'élite.

1377
00:57:40,820 --> 00:57:42,260
Et ces collèges d'élite avec le

1378
00:57:42,260 --> 00:57:48,460
à l'exception de l'Université de Chicago et de l'UVA, les résultats sont très mauvais en matière de liberté d'expression.

1379
00:57:48,880 --> 00:57:50,960
Et cela pose toutes sortes de problèmes.

1380
00:57:52,420 --> 00:57:55,260
Cela n’augure rien de bon pour l’avenir de la protection

1381
00:57:55,260 --> 00:57:56,980
de la liberté d'expression pour le reste de la société.

1382
00:57:58,040 --> 00:57:59,920
Alors pouvez-vous aussi faire preuve d'empathie là-bas

1383
00:58:00,480 --> 00:58:02,520
avec les gens qui ont voté pour Donald Trump ?

1384
00:58:04,480 --> 00:58:10,160
Car précisément, en tant que résistance à ce genre de

1385
00:58:11,060 --> 00:58:13,000
l'élan de la classe dirigeante,

1386
00:58:14,600 --> 00:58:16,220
cette royauté qui passe

1387
00:58:16,220 --> 00:58:19,760
sur la règle de génération en génération.

1388
00:58:20,160 --> 00:58:25,660
J'essaie vraiment de sympathiser dans une certaine mesure avec tout le monde et j'essaie de vraiment voir où ils en sont.

1389
00:58:25,740 --> 00:58:29,440
venant et la colère à droite.

1390
00:58:29,800 --> 00:58:30,440
Je comprends.

1391
00:58:30,780 --> 00:58:33,490
Je veux dire, j'ai l'impression que le, le

1392
00:58:33,860 --> 00:58:34,400
livre,

1393
00:58:35,200 --> 00:58:37,560
donc faire face à l'esprit américain était un livre que je,

1394
00:58:37,560 --> 00:58:39,280
ça pourrait plaire à la foule

1395
00:58:39,580 --> 00:58:45,910
dans une certaine mesure, en partie parce que nous pensions vraiment ce que nous disions dans le sous-titre, à savoir que ce sont des

1396
00:58:46,140 --> 00:58:49,660
de bonnes intentions et de mauvaises idées qui nuisent aux gens.

1397
00:58:49,940 --> 00:58:51,820
Et si vous le comprenez et lisez le

1398
00:58:51,840 --> 00:58:56,280
livre, vous pouvez dire, c'est comme, d'accord, personne n'est malveillant.

1399
00:58:56,700 --> 00:58:58,640
Vous savez, ce sont des gens qui essaient de protéger leurs enfants.

1400
00:58:58,660 --> 00:59:03,220
Ils le font simplement d'une manière qui peut en fait conduire à une plus grande anxiété, dépression,

1401
00:59:04,340 --> 00:59:07,180
et, étrangement, finissent par constituer une menace pour la liberté d'expression.

1402
00:59:08,020 --> 00:59:09,040
Mais dans celui-ci,

1403
00:59:09,400 --> 00:59:10,360
nous ne pouvons pas être tout à fait,

1404
00:59:10,920 --> 00:59:13,960
moi et mon, oh, je n'ai même pas mentionné mon brillant co-auteur, Ricky Schlott,

1405
00:59:14,280 --> 00:59:15,180
un jeune de 23 ans

1406
00:59:16,640 --> 00:59:17,120
génie.

1407
00:59:17,460 --> 00:59:18,580
Elle est, elle est, elle est incroyable.

1408
00:59:18,620 --> 00:59:19,420
J'ai commencé à travailler avec elle quand elle

1409
00:59:19,440 --> 00:59:21,900
j'avais 20 ans, qui est, qui est mon co-auteur de ce livre.

1410
00:59:21,900 --> 00:59:23,500
Alors quand je dis nous,

1411
00:59:23,520 --> 00:59:24,520
Je parle de moi et de Ricky.

1412
00:59:24,640 --> 00:59:25,860
C'est un libertaire.

1413
00:59:25,960 --> 00:59:26,580
Journaliste libertaire.

1414
00:59:27,140 --> 00:59:28,060
Et un journaliste.

1415
00:59:28,440 --> 00:59:28,640
Ouais.

1416
00:59:28,720 --> 00:59:29,520
Un esprit brillant.

1417
00:59:30,200 --> 00:59:30,380
Ouais.

1418
00:59:30,400 --> 00:59:34,780
Et, mais nous ne pouvons pas réellement écrire ceci d’une manière trop gentille parce que les annuleurs ne sont pas gentils.

1419
00:59:35,420 --> 00:59:38,100
Il y a une cruauté et une impitoyable là-dedans.

1420
00:59:38,300 --> 00:59:39,920
Je veux dire, j'ai commencé à devenir vraiment déprimé

1421
00:59:40,260 --> 00:59:44,580
l'année dernière, lorsque je l'écrivais et je ne voulais même pas dire à mon équipe pourquoi j'étais si anxieux et déprimé.

1422
00:59:45,080 --> 00:59:47,520
C'est en partie parce que je parle de gens qui le feront,

1423
00:59:48,560 --> 00:59:50,580
vous savez, dans certains des cas dont nous parlons,

1424
00:59:51,300 --> 00:59:53,140
allez chez vous, ciblez vos enfants.

1425
00:59:54,860 --> 00:59:56,180
Alors, c'est long

1426
00:59:56,180 --> 00:59:57,360
façon de dire le,

1427
00:59:58,880 --> 01:00:03,200
Je peux en quelque sorte comprendre ce qui motive les bons cinglés dans une certaine mesure.

1428
01:00:03,400 --> 01:00:06,500
J'ai l'impression qu'ils ont constamment l'impression d'être allumés.

1429
01:00:08,320 --> 01:00:12,260
L’éducation d’élite est vraiment insultante pour la classe ouvrière.

1430
01:00:12,720 --> 01:00:16,620
Comme ça, une partie de l'idéologie qui est dominante en ce moment est une sorte de friandise,

1431
01:00:17,210 --> 01:00:19,460
près de 70% du public américain,

1432
01:00:19,740 --> 01:00:23,400
comme ils le sont, nous avons pensé avoir développé cela un peu dans la forteresse rhétorique parfaite, comme s'ils étaient

1433
01:00:23,980 --> 01:00:30,060
pour certains, en quelque sorte illégitime et indigne de respect ou de compassion.

1434
01:00:30,620 --> 01:00:30,720
Ouais.

1435
01:00:30,820 --> 01:00:33,940
L'élitisme général qui rayonne,

1436
01:00:35,600 --> 01:00:39,900
un élitisme auto-alimenté qui émane des personnes qui fréquentent ces institutions.

1437
01:00:40,320 --> 01:00:41,780
Et ce qui est drôle, c'est que

1438
01:00:41,780 --> 01:00:45,580
l'élitisme a été reconditionné comme une sorte de,

1439
01:00:48,740 --> 01:00:50,680
cela se fait passer pour une sorte de compassion infinie,

1440
01:00:50,920 --> 01:00:53,940
mais essentiellement, c'est basé sur une sorte de très,

1441
01:00:54,980 --> 01:00:55,380
pour être franc,

1442
01:00:56,180 --> 01:00:58,620
idéologie trop simple et trop simple,

1443
01:00:58,840 --> 01:01:01,940
une explication simple du monde et des gens brisés

1444
01:01:01,940 --> 01:01:06,480
en groupes et juger les gens sur la façon dont ils sont opprimés sur leur,

1445
01:01:06,680 --> 01:01:08,660
à l'intersection de leurs différentes identités.

1446
01:01:10,400 --> 01:01:12,200
Et on en est arrivé là,

1447
01:01:12,280 --> 01:01:13,420
Je pense d'abord avec,

1448
01:01:13,420 --> 01:01:16,240
avec, avec un, un appel d'un noyau compatissant,

1449
01:01:17,040 --> 01:01:19,660
mais il est utilisé d'une manière qui est,

1450
01:01:19,660 --> 01:01:22,160
peut être très cruel, très dédaigneux,

1451
01:01:23,400 --> 01:01:27,960
sans compassion et vous permet de ne pas prendre au sérieux la plupart des

1452
01:01:27,960 --> 01:01:28,700
vos semblables.

1453
01:01:29,280 --> 01:01:30,560
C'est vraiment bizarre comment c'est arrivé.

1454
01:01:30,680 --> 01:01:34,680
Peut-être pourriez-vous explorer pourquoi une chose qui a

1455
01:01:35,880 --> 01:01:36,980
ça a l'air bien au début.

1456
01:01:37,120 --> 01:01:38,080
Ouais.

1457
01:01:38,480 --> 01:01:39,080
Peut être,

1458
01:01:39,900 --> 01:01:40,220
Peut créer,

1459
01:01:41,420 --> 01:01:46,660
peut devenir une arme si cruelle pour annuler, blesser les gens et ignorer les gens.

1460
01:01:47,020 --> 01:01:49,860
Je veux dire, c’est ce que vous avez décrit avec une forteresse rhétorique parfaite.

1461
01:01:50,000 --> 01:01:50,300
Ouais.

1462
01:01:50,320 --> 01:01:51,260
C'est une série de questions.

1463
01:01:51,280 --> 01:01:55,000
Peut-être pourriez-vous nous expliquer ce qu’est la forteresse rhétorique parfaite.

1464
01:01:55,220 --> 01:01:55,460
Ouais.

1465
01:01:55,540 --> 01:01:59,960
La forteresse rhétorique parfaite est donc la manière dont elle a été développée.

1466
01:02:00,640 --> 01:02:02,600
à gauche pour ne pas

1467
01:02:02,720 --> 01:02:04,400
jamais arriver au véritable argument de quelqu'un.

1468
01:02:05,100 --> 01:02:06,480
Je veux faire un graphique,

1469
01:02:06,520 --> 01:02:08,000
comme un organigramme de ceci,

1470
01:02:08,100 --> 01:02:08,880
voici l'argument et

1471
01:02:08,880 --> 01:02:13,740
voici cette forteresse parfaite qui vous détournera à chaque fois du débat.

1472
01:02:14,400 --> 01:02:16,560
Et j'ai certainement commencé à le remarquer quand,

1473
01:02:16,620 --> 01:02:17,680
quand j'étais à la faculté de droit,

1474
01:02:17,980 --> 01:02:22,860
qu'il y avait de nombreuses façons différentes de renvoyer des gens et de perfectionner la forteresse rhétorique, première étape.

1475
01:02:23,800 --> 01:02:26,980
Et je peux en témoigner parce que j'étais coupable de cela aussi,

1476
01:02:27,440 --> 01:02:28,780
que tu peux renvoyer des gens

1477
01:02:29,300 --> 01:02:31,540
si vous pouvez affirmer qu'ils sont conservateurs.

1478
01:02:31,700 --> 01:02:34,120
Ils n’ont pas besoin d’être conservateurs pour être clairs.

1479
01:02:34,620 --> 01:02:36,280
Il suffit de dire qu'ils le sont.

1480
01:02:36,760 --> 01:02:38,620
Donc je n'ai jamais lu Thomas Sowell

1481
01:02:39,160 --> 01:02:40,220
parce qu'il était ailier droit.

1482
01:02:40,960 --> 01:02:42,380
Je n'ai pas lu Camille Poglia

1483
01:02:43,160 --> 01:02:45,540
parce que j'étais, moi, quelqu'un m'avait convaincu qu'elle avait raison

1484
01:02:45,540 --> 01:02:45,700
ailier.

1485
01:02:45,820 --> 01:02:47,860
Il y avait beaucoup d'auteurs qui

1486
01:02:48,500 --> 01:02:49,740
quand j'étais à la faculté de droit,

1487
01:02:50,340 --> 01:02:52,640
parmi beaucoup de gens très brillants,

1488
01:02:53,160 --> 01:02:57,420
c'était vraiment déjà une habitude intellectuelle que si l'on pouvait désigner

1489
01:02:57,430 --> 01:03:00,820
quelque chose de conservateur, alors vous n'aviez plus vraiment besoin d'y penser ou

1490
01:03:00,900 --> 01:03:01,920
prenez-le particulièrement au sérieux.

1491
01:03:02,440 --> 01:03:05,020
C'est une façon enfantine d'argumenter,

1492
01:03:05,560 --> 01:03:07,160
mais néanmoins, je m'y suis engagé.

1493
01:03:07,160 --> 01:03:07,900
C'était une tactique courante.

1494
01:03:08,380 --> 01:03:09,360
J'ai même mentionné dans le livre,

1495
01:03:09,480 --> 01:03:10,260
il fut un temps où

1496
01:03:10,260 --> 01:03:14,460
un ami activiste gay qui était,

1497
01:03:14,500 --> 01:03:15,720
Je pense décidément à ma gauche,

1498
01:03:15,900 --> 01:03:20,760
mais j'ai néanmoins eu cette expérience pragmatique d'être réellement un activiste, j'ai dit quelque chose comme :

1499
01:03:20,880 --> 01:03:22,740
eh bien, ce n’est pas parce que quelqu’un est conservateur qu’il a tort.

1500
01:03:23,420 --> 01:03:24,160
Et je me souviens m'être senti gentil

1501
01:03:24,160 --> 01:03:27,180
de scandalisé à un certain niveau d'être juste comme,

1502
01:03:27,260 --> 01:03:31,180
eh bien, c'est en quelque sorte, n'est-ce pas le problème lorsque nous disons que ce sont simplement de mauvaises personnes avec de mauvaises idées.

1503
01:03:31,400 --> 01:03:33,160
Vous pouvez simplement lancer un,

1504
01:03:33,260 --> 01:03:34,140
oh, ce type est un ailier droit.

1505
01:03:34,460 --> 01:03:35,340
Vous pouvez simplement lancer ça.

1506
01:03:35,430 --> 01:03:36,920
Je n'ai plus besoin de penser à toi.

1507
01:03:37,180 --> 01:03:37,420
Ouais.

1508
01:03:37,420 --> 01:03:38,280
Et puis ça peut,

1509
01:03:38,780 --> 01:03:39,600
si tu es assez populaire,

1510
01:03:39,620 --> 01:03:40,220
ça peut être ceux-là,

1511
01:03:40,440 --> 01:03:41,440
ça peut être un peu collant.

1512
01:03:41,740 --> 01:03:42,040
Ouais.

1513
01:03:42,110 --> 01:03:42,860
Comme,

1514
01:03:43,780 --> 01:03:46,060
et c'est bizarre parce que, parce que c'est efficace,

1515
01:03:46,440 --> 01:03:47,720
c'est pourquoi ça continue à arriver

1516
01:03:47,720 --> 01:03:49,400
habitué à ça essentiellement,

1517
01:03:49,620 --> 01:03:51,420
ça aurait dû frapper quelqu'un parce que,

1518
01:03:51,420 --> 01:03:53,380
parce que moi, tu sais, j'ai un super

1519
01:03:54,460 --> 01:03:57,400
pedigree libéral, vous savez, tout, du travail à l'ACLU à

1520
01:03:57,420 --> 01:03:59,220
faire du droit des réfugiés en Europe de l'Est,

1521
01:03:59,380 --> 01:04:01,710
J'ai fait partie d'un mentorat environnemental

1522
01:04:01,900 --> 01:04:04,260
programme pour les lycéens du centre-ville de DC.

1523
01:04:04,800 --> 01:04:06,060
Tu sais, j'ai été, j'ai été,

1524
01:04:06,740 --> 01:04:10,240
Je, je, je peux, tu sais, me défendre comme étant de gauche,

1525
01:04:10,620 --> 01:04:13,200
mais je déteste faire ça parce que

1526
01:04:13,200 --> 01:04:15,120
il y a aussi une partie de moi qui dit, ok,

1527
01:04:15,740 --> 01:04:16,280
et alors,

1528
01:04:17,200 --> 01:04:17,420
comme,

1529
01:04:17,760 --> 01:04:18,960
est-ce que tu dis vraiment ça

1530
01:04:18,960 --> 01:04:23,300
si vous pouvez comme par magie me faire argumenter ou vous convaincre que,

1531
01:04:23,340 --> 01:04:24,200
que je suis à droite,

1532
01:04:24,640 --> 01:04:25,940
que tu n'es plus obligé de m'écouter ?

1533
01:04:26,320 --> 01:04:27,840
Et encore une fois, c'est se disputer comme des enfants.

1534
01:04:28,500 --> 01:04:32,040
Et la raison pour laquelle cela est devenu si populaire est que même parmi,

1535
01:04:32,340 --> 01:04:37,120
ou peut-être, peut-être surtout parmi les élites, que cela fonctionne si efficacement comme une arme parfaite

1536
01:04:37,200 --> 01:04:38,560
que vous pouvez utiliser sans réserve.

1537
01:04:38,580 --> 01:04:39,820
Si je peux juste prouver que tu as raison,

1538
01:04:39,920 --> 01:04:40,420
je n'ai pas à le faire,

1539
01:04:40,420 --> 01:04:41,560
Je n'ai pas besoin de penser à toi.

1540
01:04:42,140 --> 01:04:45,020
Ce n'est pas étonnant que soudain tu commences à voir des gens appeler

1541
01:04:45,020 --> 01:04:50,220
l'aile droite de l'ACLU et appeler l'aile droite du New York Times parce que ça a été un tel

1542
01:04:50,220 --> 01:04:53,940
moyen efficace de délégitimer les gens en tant que penseurs.

1543
01:04:54,580 --> 01:04:58,100
Nous avons, vous savez, Stephen Pinker, qui fait partie de notre conseil consultatif,

1544
01:04:58,500 --> 01:05:02,840
il se réfère au monde universitaire comme étant le pôle de gauche, ce qu'il est essentiellement,

1545
01:05:02,840 --> 01:05:03,980
c'est une position à partir de laquelle,

1546
01:05:04,320 --> 01:05:05,180
de ce point de vue,

1547
01:05:05,240 --> 01:05:06,880
tout semble à sa droite,

1548
01:05:06,920 --> 01:05:08,220
on dirait que c'est à droite.

1549
01:05:09,240 --> 01:05:12,360
Mais une fois que cela devient une tactique que nous acceptons,

1550
01:05:12,920 --> 01:05:12,980
il,

1551
01:05:13,340 --> 01:05:15,240
et c'est une des raisons pour lesquelles, tu sais, je suis,

1552
01:05:15,880 --> 01:05:17,020
Je suis, je suis plutôt à gauche,

1553
01:05:17,160 --> 01:05:18,980
mais je pense que je suis à gauche du centre libéral.

1554
01:05:20,460 --> 01:05:23,160
Ricky est, vous savez, un libertaire plus conservateur.

1555
01:05:23,620 --> 01:05:24,580
Et au début, j'étais un peu comme,

1556
01:05:24,580 --> 01:05:27,220
devrais-je vraiment écrire quelque chose avec quelqu'un qui est plus à droite ?

1557
01:05:27,280 --> 01:05:29,560
Et je me dis, absolument je devrais l'être.

1558
01:05:29,640 --> 01:05:31,900
Je dois réellement être à la hauteur de ce que je crois à ce sujet

1559
01:05:31,900 --> 01:05:35,920
des trucs parce que c'est ridicule qu'on ait cette idée primitive qu'on peut licencier quelqu'un

1560
01:05:36,060 --> 01:05:37,460
dès que vous réclamez,

1561
01:05:38,140 --> 01:05:39,640
à tort ou à raison, qu'ils sont à droite.

1562
01:05:40,120 --> 01:05:40,340
Bien,

1563
01:05:41,220 --> 01:05:42,280
Je sens, corrigez-moi si je me trompe,

1564
01:05:42,360 --> 01:05:45,000
mais j'ai l'impression qu'on t'a récemment traité de droite

1565
01:05:45,740 --> 01:05:46,580
feu,

1566
01:05:47,000 --> 01:05:50,120
peut-être que vous par association à cause de ce débat.

1567
01:05:50,980 --> 01:05:51,920
Oh, le LA Times.

1568
01:05:51,940 --> 01:05:52,660
Le Los Angeles Times.

1569
01:05:53,040 --> 01:05:54,100
Parlons du LA Times.

1570
01:05:54,640 --> 01:05:56,440
Alors oui, il y a un article, il y a un débat.

1571
01:05:57,080 --> 01:06:01,560
J'ai hâte de le regarder car je ne pense pas qu'il soit encore disponible en vidéo.

1572
01:06:01,620 --> 01:06:02,500
Vous devez y assister en personne.

1573
01:06:02,820 --> 01:06:04,140
J'ai hâte de le voir.

1574
01:06:04,400 --> 01:06:07,100
Euh, mais le feu soutenait en partie et ensuite le LA Times a écrit, euh,

1575
01:06:08,180 --> 01:06:12,020
un article cinglant sur le fait que tout le monde dans le débat était

1576
01:06:12,620 --> 01:06:13,760
fondamentalement vrai

1577
01:06:14,380 --> 01:06:15,080
penché à droite.

1578
01:06:15,420 --> 01:06:15,540
D'accord.

1579
01:06:15,840 --> 01:06:17,120
Euh, il y a tellement de choses à déballer là-bas.

1580
01:06:17,660 --> 01:06:19,520
Euh, tu sais, Barry Weiss a ça,

1581
01:06:19,520 --> 01:06:21,100
vous savez, super, super projet, la presse libre.

1582
01:06:21,220 --> 01:06:22,140
J'ai été très impressionné.

1583
01:06:22,400 --> 01:06:23,820
Il couvre des histoires selon lesquelles,

1584
01:06:23,820 --> 01:06:26,940
que beaucoup de médias de droite ou de gauche ne veulent pas couvrir.

1585
01:06:28,200 --> 01:06:29,620
Euh, et nous avons fait un,

1586
01:06:29,840 --> 01:06:31,460
euh, nous avons organisé un débat avec elle.

1587
01:06:31,900 --> 01:06:36,600
Euh, euh, et nous, nous voulions que ce soit aussi amusant et controversé que possible.

1588
01:06:37,260 --> 01:06:39,800
Euh, alors le feu et la presse libre ont organisé un débat.

1589
01:06:40,240 --> 01:06:41,720
La révolution sexuelle a-t-elle échoué ?

1590
01:06:42,300 --> 01:06:44,340
Le débat était donc vraiment passionnant,

1591
01:06:44,340 --> 01:06:44,960
vraiment amusant.

1592
01:06:45,120 --> 01:06:48,440
Ceux qui disaient que la révolution sexuelle n'était pas un échec,

1593
01:06:48,440 --> 01:06:50,080
ça, que Grimes et Sarah Hader étaient là.

1594
01:06:50,530 --> 01:06:51,080
Un,

1595
01:06:51,860 --> 01:06:52,420
euh, c'était le cas,

1596
01:06:52,740 --> 01:06:53,720
tu sais, un gentil,

1597
01:06:54,500 --> 01:06:55,260
nuit charnue et réfléchie.

1598
01:06:55,960 --> 01:07:00,320
Et nous avons eu une critique, il y a eu une critique qui était plutôt cinglante à propos de tout cela.

1599
01:07:00,500 --> 01:07:02,420
Et il y avait une ligne disant que,

1600
01:07:02,940 --> 01:07:05,080
euh, le feu, qui prétend croire en la liberté d'expression,

1601
01:07:05,120 --> 01:07:06,880
mais ne défend ses points de vue qu'à des degrés divers.

1602
01:07:08,080 --> 01:07:10,100
Je n'arrive pas à croire que cela ait même été publié dans le magazine.

1603
01:07:10,120 --> 01:07:11,100
Parce qu'il ne s'agit pas seulement de nous appeler.

1604
01:07:11,100 --> 01:07:12,580
Parce que bien sûr, vous savez, l'implication bien sûr,

1605
01:07:12,580 --> 01:07:13,420
que nous sommes de droite,

1606
01:07:13,500 --> 01:07:18,260
euh, ce que nous ne sommes pas en fait, le personnel penche nettement plus à gauche et à droite.

1607
01:07:18,920 --> 01:07:19,320
Euh,

1608
01:07:19,940 --> 01:07:20,240
mais

1609
01:07:20,820 --> 01:07:23,060
nous défendons également les gens de tous bords,

1610
01:07:23,180 --> 01:07:23,880
tout le temps.

1611
01:07:24,100 --> 01:07:25,040
Comme si c'était quelque chose qui,

1612
01:07:25,040 --> 01:07:27,620
que même la recherche Google la plus minime aurait résolu.

1613
01:07:27,840 --> 01:07:30,560
Donc, on nous a donné un peu de chaleur à Los Angeles à ce sujet parce que c'est comme,

1614
01:07:30,840 --> 01:07:31,700
ouais, si tu disais.

1615
01:07:32,280 --> 01:07:35,180
À mon avis, ils sont de droite, nous aurions rétorqué,

1616
01:07:35,520 --> 01:07:40,400
vous savez, euh, en disant, eh bien, ici, voici les 50 000 exemples suivants de,

1617
01:07:40,400 --> 01:07:41,880
de, de nous qui ne sommes pas,

1618
01:07:42,160 --> 01:07:45,660
mais quand vous affirmez en réalité que nous ne défendons que des opinions,

1619
01:07:45,680 --> 01:07:47,320
nous sommes d'accord avec cela, tout d'abord, nous n'avons aucun moyen d'être d'accord avec cela.

1620
01:07:47,340 --> 01:07:51,240
Il n'y a aucun moyen pour nous d'être d'accord avec des opinions parce que nous avons en réalité une diversité politique

1621
01:07:51,320 --> 01:07:56,260
un personnel qui ne sera même pas d'accord sur les opinions qui sont bonnes et sur celles que nous avons.

1622
01:07:56,780 --> 01:07:57,280
Mais ouais,

1623
01:07:57,680 --> 01:07:58,000
J'ai dû,

1624
01:07:58,400 --> 01:08:01,680
Moi, à un moment donné, quand quelqu'un faisait quelque chose comme ça et qu'il était juste

1625
01:08:01,680 --> 01:08:04,620
être un peu désinvolte sur le fait que la liberté d'expression est une bonne chose.

1626
01:08:04,780 --> 01:08:07,360
J'ai fait un fil de discussion de 70 tweets,

1627
01:08:07,360 --> 01:08:09,760
tu sais, juste en disant : Hé, tu penses vraiment que ça va ?

1628
01:08:10,280 --> 01:08:11,820
J'ai décidé de ne pas faire ça,

1629
01:08:11,820 --> 01:08:13,400
euh, sur celui-ci en particulier.

1630
01:08:13,660 --> 01:08:13,940
Mais

1631
01:08:14,520 --> 01:08:18,420
ce qui est bien, c'est qu'il montre deux parties du livre,

1632
01:08:18,880 --> 01:08:19,720
euh, annulation de l'American

1633
01:08:19,720 --> 01:08:20,000
esprit.

1634
01:08:20,160 --> 01:08:20,720
Si ce n'est pas plus,

1635
01:08:21,200 --> 01:08:23,320
l'un d'eux licencie quelqu'un parce qu'il est conservateur.

1636
01:08:23,540 --> 01:08:27,160
Euh, et parce que c'était l'implication, ils ne sont pas obligés d'écouter le feu parce qu'ils sont conservateurs.

1637
01:08:27,380 --> 01:08:33,280
Mais l'autre est quelque chose, un terme que j'ai inventé spécifiquement pour désigner la façon dont les gens argumentent sur Twitter,

1638
01:08:33,720 --> 01:08:35,080
ce qui est une projection d'hypocrisie.

1639
01:08:35,340 --> 01:08:39,480
Bonjour, je suis une personne qui ne se soucie que d'un côté de la barrière politique.

1640
01:08:39,500 --> 01:08:42,520
Et je pense que tout le monde est hypocrite.

1641
01:08:43,320 --> 01:08:43,760
Euh, et au fait,

1642
01:08:43,840 --> 01:08:45,440
Je n'ai fait aucune recherche réelle à ce sujet,

1643
01:08:45,800 --> 01:08:48,400
mais je suppose que tout le monde est un hypocrite.

1644
01:08:48,580 --> 01:08:50,080
Et vous voyez cela arriver tout le temps.

1645
01:08:50,320 --> 01:08:52,920
Le, le, et cela arrive souvent à tirer là où quelqu'un sera comme,

1646
01:08:52,920 --> 01:08:54,260
où est le feu dans cette affaire ?

1647
01:08:54,320 --> 01:08:54,640
Et nous sommes comme,

1648
01:08:54,960 --> 01:08:58,440
nous sommes littéralement cités dans le lien que vous venez d'envoyer,

1649
01:08:58,640 --> 01:09:00,180
mais je n'ai pas vraiment lu.

1650
01:09:00,980 --> 01:09:02,540
Ou c'est comme, où est le feu là-dessus ?

1651
01:09:02,580 --> 01:09:06,540
C'est comme, voici notre procès à ce sujet il y a six mois.

1652
01:09:07,200 --> 01:09:09,540
Euh, donc c'est ce que je préfère.

1653
01:09:09,740 --> 01:09:11,700
Et aussi l'émission quotidienne de John Stewart,

1654
01:09:12,200 --> 01:09:18,600
comme le, le, le, le, euh, euh, qu'en est-il de l'isme et du genre d'idée selon laquelle ces gens doivent être des hypocrites est quelque chose qui

1655
01:09:19,120 --> 01:09:23,020
la plus grande comédie, mais en ce qui concerne en réalité une tactique rhétorique qui vous mènera à la vérité,

1656
01:09:23,400 --> 01:09:28,200
en supposant simplement que votre adversaire ou en l'accusant simplement d'être toujours un

1657
01:09:28,200 --> 01:09:30,980
l'hypocrite n'est pas une bonne tactique pour la vérité.

1658
01:09:31,080 --> 01:09:31,720
Mais d'ailleurs,

1659
01:09:31,800 --> 01:09:36,080
cela a tendance à venir toujours de personnes qui ne sont pas elles-mêmes cohérentes en matière de liberté d'expression.

1660
01:09:37,020 --> 01:09:38,640
Donc ça remet la projection,

1661
01:09:39,140 --> 01:09:41,820
mais fondamentalement, je ne fais pas de recherche pour savoir si le

1662
01:09:41,820 --> 01:09:47,520
la personne est ou n'est pas un hypocrite et en supposant que les autres représentent une grande partie des autres qui le lisent,

1663
01:09:48,300 --> 01:09:49,980
euh, je ne ferai pas non plus la recherche.

1664
01:09:50,140 --> 01:09:51,640
Et donc ce genre de

1665
01:09:52,420 --> 01:09:55,220
la déclaration devient une sorte de véracité sans

1666
01:09:55,220 --> 01:09:56,520
ancrage dans la réalité réelle.

1667
01:09:56,800 --> 01:10:00,740
Cela brise la barrière entre ce qui est vrai et ce qui ne l'est pas, car si,

1668
01:10:00,740 --> 01:10:01,660
si la foule dit

1669
01:10:01,660 --> 01:10:04,320
quelque chose est vrai, c'est qu'il faut trop d'efforts pour le corriger.

1670
01:10:04,480 --> 01:10:06,340
Et il y a trois façons dont je le veux,

1671
01:10:06,360 --> 01:10:08,860
genre, tu sais, je veux répondre à ça,

1672
01:10:08,940 --> 01:10:11,180
ce qui donne juste exemple après exemple,

1673
01:10:11,320 --> 01:10:14,900
des moments où nous avons défendu les gens des deux côtés de chaque majorité,

1674
01:10:15,000 --> 01:10:16,340
essentiellement tous les problèmes majeurs,

1675
01:10:16,440 --> 01:10:19,900
que ce soit Israël, la Palestine, le terrorisme, le mariage gay,

1676
01:10:20,420 --> 01:10:21,720
nous avons avorté.

1677
01:10:22,000 --> 01:10:24,360
Nous avons défendu les deux côtés de cet argument.

1678
01:10:24,980 --> 01:10:28,240
L’autre partie, et je les appelle les orphelins de la guerre culturelle.

1679
01:10:29,020 --> 01:10:34,320
Je veux vraiment exhorter les médias à commencer à se soucier des cas de liberté d'expression qui sont

1680
01:10:34,340 --> 01:10:38,740
qui n'ont en réalité aucune valeur politique et qui sont en réalité à peu près démodés

1681
01:10:38,780 --> 01:10:45,580
exercice du pouvoir contre un petit gars, une petite fille ou un petit groupe sur le campus ou à l'extérieur

1682
01:10:45,580 --> 01:10:46,420
campus d'ailleurs.

1683
01:10:46,660 --> 01:10:47,460
Parce que ces cas arrivent.

1684
01:10:47,840 --> 01:10:49,820
Beaucoup de nos litiges ne concernent que de petites personnes

1685
01:10:50,580 --> 01:10:52,820
comme des gens ordinaires à qui on dit qu'ils ne peuvent pas protester,

1686
01:10:52,840 --> 01:10:53,960
qu'ils ne peuvent pas tenir de pancartes.

1687
01:10:54,440 --> 01:10:57,760
Et puis la dernière partie de l’argument que je veux que les gens comprennent vraiment, c’est oui.

1688
01:10:58,100 --> 01:10:59,400
Et d'ailleurs,

1689
01:10:59,740 --> 01:11:01,080
euh, les gens de droite ont aussi des ennuis.

1690
01:11:01,300 --> 01:11:03,480
Euh, et il y a des attaques de gauche

1691
01:11:03,560 --> 01:11:05,520
et vous devriez aussi les prendre au sérieux.

1692
01:11:05,900 --> 01:11:08,080
Euh, tu devrais t'en soucier quand les Républicains entrent

1693
01:11:08,080 --> 01:11:08,220
inquiéter.

1694
01:11:08,500 --> 01:11:12,100
Vous devriez vous en soucier quand la Californie a un DEI,

1695
01:11:12,100 --> 01:11:15,680
un programme qui l'exige dans les collèges communautaires de Californie

1696
01:11:16,260 --> 01:11:20,260
a une politique de programme DEI qui exige en fait même

1697
01:11:20,260 --> 01:11:25,820
professeurs de chimie à travailler sur des idées DEI différentes, de l'intersectionnalité à

1698
01:11:25,820 --> 01:11:27,900
l'antiracisme dans leur classe,

1699
01:11:28,040 --> 01:11:29,160
dans leur programme, et cetera.

1700
01:11:29,640 --> 01:11:30,240
C'est un

1701
01:11:30,920 --> 01:11:32,580
violation flagrante de la liberté académique.

1702
01:11:33,160 --> 01:11:36,980
C'est aussi mauvais que de dire aux professeurs ce qu'ils ne peuvent pas dire.

1703
01:11:37,060 --> 01:11:38,920
Comme si nous avions combattu et vaincu en Floride.

1704
01:11:39,340 --> 01:11:41,520
C'est encore pire de leur dire ce qu'ils doivent dire.

1705
01:11:41,560 --> 01:11:42,880
C'est carrément totalitaire.

1706
01:11:43,360 --> 01:11:44,220
Et nous intentons une action en justice contre cela.

1707
01:11:44,400 --> 01:11:46,540
Et ce que je suis, ce que je dis, c'est

1708
01:11:47,060 --> 01:11:48,620
que ça,

1709
01:11:49,400 --> 01:11:50,860
quand vous licenciez quelqu'un juste pour

1710
01:11:50,860 --> 01:11:51,500
étant de l'autre,

1711
01:11:51,500 --> 01:11:52,780
de l'autre côté de la barrière politique,

1712
01:11:53,540 --> 01:11:55,040
tu es aussi un peu

1713
01:11:55,040 --> 01:11:58,420
prétendant, affirmant qu’aucun de ces cas n’a d’importance aussi.

1714
01:11:58,500 --> 01:12:04,390
Et je veux que les gens se soucient de la censure, même contre des personnes qu’ils détestent.

1715
01:12:05,800 --> 01:12:07,080
La censure est une censure.

1716
01:12:08,710 --> 01:12:13,360
Si nous pouvons prendre cette tangente brièvement avec DEI,

1717
01:12:13,820 --> 01:12:15,040
la diversité, l'équité et l'inclusion,

1718
01:12:16,540 --> 01:12:20,340
quel est le bien et quel est le mal de tels programmes ?

1719
01:12:20,840 --> 01:12:23,340
DEI, je connais des gens qui sont DEI, euh,

1720
01:12:23,700 --> 01:12:24,740
consultants ou certains,

1721
01:12:25,400 --> 01:12:28,000
en fait, j'ai un ami cher que j'aime beaucoup,

1722
01:12:28,000 --> 01:12:29,240
euh, qui fait du DEI.

1723
01:12:30,180 --> 01:12:31,640
Des gens absolument honnêtes.

1724
01:12:32,280 --> 01:12:37,000
Ce qu'ils veulent, c'est créer des liens de compréhension,

1725
01:12:37,520 --> 01:12:39,480
l'amitié, la compassion entre les gens,

1726
01:12:39,580 --> 01:12:40,140
des gens qui sont différents.

1727
01:12:40,950 --> 01:12:41,500
Malheureusement,

1728
01:12:41,920 --> 01:12:44,620
la recherche sur ce que fait réellement beaucoup de DEI

1729
01:12:45,200 --> 01:12:46,480
est souvent le contraire de cela.

1730
01:12:46,900 --> 01:12:53,240
Et je pense que c'est en partie un problème avec une partie de l'idéologie qui vient d'une théorie critique de la race,

1731
01:12:53,800 --> 01:12:54,560
ce qui est une chose réelle,

1732
01:12:54,700 --> 01:12:57,280
au fait, ça, ça informe beaucoup de DEI,

1733
01:12:57,300 --> 01:12:59,960
cela en fait en fait quelque chose de plus susceptible de diviser que d’unir.

1734
01:13:00,320 --> 01:13:03,440
On en parle en dorlotant à l'américaine

1735
01:13:03,440 --> 01:13:08,920
l’esprit comme la différence entre la politique identitaire commune de l’humanité et la politique identitaire de l’ennemi commun.

1736
01:13:09,560 --> 01:13:10,380
Et je pense que,

1737
01:13:10,760 --> 01:13:13,040
euh, je connais certaines personnes que je connais,

1738
01:13:13,040 --> 01:13:17,520
ceux qui font DEI, ils veulent vraiment que ce soit une politique identitaire commune de l'humanité,

1739
01:13:17,700 --> 01:13:18,960
mais certains des réels

1740
01:13:19,000 --> 01:13:25,300
les hypothèses idéologiques intégrées peuvent en fait amener les gens à se sentir plus éloignés les uns des autres.

1741
01:13:26,060 --> 01:13:27,680
Maintenant, quand j'ai commencé chez FIRE,

1742
01:13:28,020 --> 01:13:30,280
mes premiers cas concernaient le 11 septembre.

1743
01:13:31,040 --> 01:13:32,660
Euh, et c'était mauvais.

1744
01:13:33,300 --> 01:13:34,620
Euh, les professeurs étaient ciblés.

1745
01:13:34,800 --> 01:13:37,180
Des professeurs perdaient leur emploi pour avoir dit

1746
01:13:37,200 --> 01:13:40,420
des choses insensibles sur le 11 septembre et les deux,

1747
01:13:40,420 --> 01:13:41,340
de droite et de gauche,

1748
01:13:41,420 --> 01:13:42,440
en fait dans ce cas,

1749
01:13:42,560 --> 01:13:44,580
en fait, parfois plus, beaucoup plus à droite.

1750
01:13:45,160 --> 01:13:46,200
Euh, et

1751
01:13:46,840 --> 01:13:47,640
c'était vraiment mauvais.

1752
01:13:48,240 --> 01:13:50,160
Et environ cinq professeurs ont perdu leur emploi.

1753
01:13:50,640 --> 01:13:51,480
C'est mauvais.

1754
01:13:51,740 --> 01:13:54,000
Cinq professeurs sur une période relativement courte

1755
01:13:54,000 --> 01:13:55,720
temps d'être licencié pour une opinion politique.

1756
01:13:56,200 --> 01:13:58,420
C'est quelque chose qui, tu sais, serait écrit

1757
01:13:58,480 --> 01:13:59,780
au cours des décennies précédentes.

1758
01:14:00,800 --> 01:14:04,300
Nous évaluons maintenant combien de professeurs ont été ciblés

1759
01:14:04,520 --> 01:14:07,660
pour annulation entre 2014 et, euh,

1760
01:14:08,220 --> 01:14:09,060
au milieu de cette année,

1761
01:14:09,360 --> 01:14:11,600
Juillet de, de, de 2023.

1762
01:14:12,320 --> 01:14:15,660
Nous avons fait plus d'un millier de tentatives pour trouver des professeurs,

1763
01:14:16,140 --> 01:14:20,520
euh, viré ou puni, généralement conduit par des étudiants et des administrateurs,

1764
01:14:21,080 --> 01:14:23,100
souvent motivés par les professeurs, malheureusement aussi.

1765
01:14:23,960 --> 01:14:26,220
Environ les deux tiers d'entre eux

1766
01:14:26,220 --> 01:14:28,880
entraîner une punition du professeur d'une manière ou d'une autre.

1767
01:14:29,120 --> 01:14:34,180
Euh, tout depuis, vous savez, la suppression de leur article jusqu'à la suspension, et cetera.

1768
01:14:35,080 --> 01:14:38,380
Environ un cinquième de ces cas aboutissent à ce que les professeurs soient

1769
01:14:38,740 --> 01:14:39,280
licencié.

1770
01:14:39,520 --> 01:14:40,240
Donc en ce moment nous sommes,

1771
01:14:40,300 --> 01:14:42,240
c'est, c'est presque 200, c'est environ 190,

1772
01:14:42,540 --> 01:14:43,740
euh, des professeurs virés.

1773
01:14:44,260 --> 01:14:46,540
Euh, donc je veux donner un peu de contexte ici.

1774
01:14:47,300 --> 01:14:50,000
Euh, la Peur Rouge est généralement considérée comme ayant été,

1775
01:14:50,260 --> 01:14:52,240
euh, de 1947 à 1957.

1776
01:14:52,460 --> 01:14:55,940
Cela s'est d'ailleurs terminé en 57 quand il est finalement devenu clair,

1777
01:14:55,940 --> 01:15:00,480
euh, grâce au premier amendement, vous ne pouviez pas réellement licencier des gens pour leurs idéologies.

1778
01:15:00,620 --> 01:15:01,140
Avant cela,

1779
01:15:02,120 --> 01:15:03,360
beaucoup d’universités pensaient qu’elles le pouvaient.

1780
01:15:03,600 --> 01:15:05,040
Ils disaient, ce type est un très doc,

1781
01:15:05,300 --> 01:15:06,140
euh, communiste doctrinaire.

1782
01:15:06,280 --> 01:15:07,920
Euh, tu sais, on ne peut pas simplement attendre.

1783
01:15:08,160 --> 01:15:09,280
Je vais les virer.

1784
01:15:09,680 --> 01:15:11,420
Ils pensaient qu’ils pouvaient réellement le faire.

1785
01:15:12,180 --> 01:15:14,620
Euh, et il n'y avait que 57 ans lorsque la loi a été établie.

1786
01:15:14,660 --> 01:15:18,040
Comme en ce moment, tout cela se produit dans un environnement où la liberté d'expression,

1787
01:15:18,360 --> 01:15:20,380
les libertés académiques sont clairement protégées,

1788
01:15:20,700 --> 01:15:23,360
euh, dans les collèges publics aux États-Unis.

1789
01:15:23,360 --> 01:15:24,880
Et nous voyons toujours ce genre de chiffres.

1790
01:15:25,740 --> 01:15:26,460
Euh, pendant,

1791
01:15:26,880 --> 01:15:28,080
pendant la Peur Rouge,

1792
01:15:28,400 --> 01:15:29,360
la plus grande étude qui

1793
01:15:29,360 --> 01:15:32,840
a été fait de ce qui se passait, je pense que cela est sorti en 55 ans.

1794
01:15:33,420 --> 01:15:35,620
Et l'évaluation a été

1795
01:15:35,640 --> 01:15:39,700
qu'il y a eu environ 62 professeurs licenciés,

1796
01:15:39,700 --> 01:15:42,300
pour, pour être communiste et environ 90 ans

1797
01:15:42,860 --> 01:15:45,840
quelque chose que les professeurs ont renvoyé pour leurs opinions politiques en général.

1798
01:15:46,720 --> 01:15:50,560
Euh, c'est généralement le cas, on rapporte qu'il y en a environ 100.

1799
01:15:51,860 --> 01:15:53,500
Euh, donc 60, 90,

1800
01:15:53,820 --> 01:15:55,160
100, selon la façon dont vous le regardez,

1801
01:15:55,160 --> 01:15:56,880
Je pense que le chiffre est en fait plus élevé.

1802
01:15:57,280 --> 01:15:59,680
Euh, mais c'est seulement à cause du recul.

1803
01:15:59,800 --> 01:16:01,200
Comme ce que je veux dire par recul

1804
01:16:01,200 --> 01:16:06,500
c'est que nous pouvons regarder en arrière et constater que davantage de professeurs ont été licenciés, comme le temps le révèle,

1805
01:16:07,560 --> 01:16:10,300
nous en sommes à 190 professeurs licenciés.

1806
01:16:10,300 --> 01:16:11,900
Et je dois encore supporter que les gens disent

1807
01:16:11,900 --> 01:16:12,980
cela n'arrive même pas.

1808
01:16:13,000 --> 01:16:15,220
Et je suis comme dans les neuf ans et demi de culture d'annulation,

1809
01:16:15,680 --> 01:16:19,300
190 professeurs licenciés en 11 ans,

1810
01:16:19,300 --> 01:16:20,920
euh, de la Peur Rouge,

1811
01:16:21,820 --> 01:16:24,440
probablement, vous savez, environ une centaine, peut-être probablement plus

1812
01:16:25,000 --> 01:16:27,060
c'est fait, le nombre va continuer à augmenter.

1813
01:16:27,400 --> 01:16:30,980
Hum, mais contrairement à la Peur Rouge où les gens pouvaient clairement voir que quelque chose se passait,

1814
01:16:31,360 --> 01:16:33,980
le plus fou avec la Cancel Culture, c'est que certains y sont encore confrontés

1815
01:16:33,980 --> 01:16:35,720
les gens qui disent que cela n’arrive pas du tout.

1816
01:16:36,020 --> 01:16:38,300
Et cela n'a pas été subtil sur le campus.

1817
01:16:38,620 --> 01:16:39,820
Et nous savons que c'est un sous-dénombrement sauvage,

1818
01:16:39,880 --> 01:16:42,120
d'ailleurs, parce que lorsque nous avons interrogé les professeurs,

1819
01:16:43,160 --> 01:16:44,540
17% d'entre eux

1820
01:16:45,240 --> 01:16:47,600
ont dit qu'ils avaient été menacés de, euh,

1821
01:16:48,160 --> 01:16:52,480
menacés d'enquête ou faisant l'objet d'une enquête pour ce qu'ils ont enseigné, ont déclaré :

1822
01:16:52,920 --> 01:16:53,720
ou leurs recherches.

1823
01:16:54,380 --> 01:17:00,620
Et un tiers d’entre eux ont déclaré que les administrateurs leur avaient dit de ne pas entreprendre de recherches controversées.

1824
01:17:01,300 --> 01:17:02,980
Donc, en extrapolant cela,

1825
01:17:02,980 --> 01:17:03,940
que c'est un chiffre énorme.

1826
01:17:03,960 --> 01:17:10,920
Et la raison pour laquelle vous n’entendrez pas beaucoup parler de ces cas est qu’il y a tellement de mécanismes différents induisant la conformité dans l’ensemble.

1827
01:17:11,140 --> 01:17:11,500
Ouais.

1828
01:17:11,760 --> 01:17:15,060
Et c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles l'idée d'ajouter quelque chose comme un D,

1829
01:17:15,220 --> 01:17:22,040
comme exiger une déclaration DEI pour être embauché ou pour entrer dans une école dans l’environnement actuel est complètement fou.

1830
01:17:22,740 --> 01:17:25,680
Nous avons connu une véritable crise de la liberté académique ces derniers temps,

1831
01:17:25,820 --> 01:17:28,740
vous savez, notamment depuis 2017 sur les campus,

1832
01:17:29,340 --> 01:17:31,740
pour commencer, nous avons une très faible diversité de points de vue.

1833
01:17:32,380 --> 01:17:34,180
Et dans ces circonstances,

1834
01:17:34,420 --> 01:17:35,660
les administrateurs commencent à dire,

1835
01:17:35,920 --> 01:17:36,640
tu sais quel est le problème ?

1836
01:17:36,860 --> 01:17:40,080
Nous avons trop de pensées hétérogènes.

1837
01:17:40,280 --> 01:17:41,660
Nous l’avons fait, nous ne sommes pas assez homogènes.

1838
01:17:41,840 --> 01:17:46,040
En fait, nous avons besoin, vous savez, d’un autre test décisif politique, ce qui est fou.

1839
01:17:46,720 --> 01:17:49,000
Et c’est effectivement ce qu’est une déclaration DEI.

1840
01:17:49,140 --> 01:17:54,660
Parce qu'il n'y a aucun moyen de remplir une déclaration DEI sans que quelqu'un vous évalue sur votre politique.

1841
01:17:55,040 --> 01:17:55,640
C'est limpide.

1842
01:17:55,660 --> 01:17:56,380
C'est limpide.

1843
01:17:56,880 --> 01:17:59,800
Nous avons même fait une expérience sur ce Honeycutt de Nate.

1844
01:18:00,720 --> 01:18:04,240
Il a fait participer près de 3 000 professeurs.

1845
01:18:04,840 --> 01:18:07,920
évaluer différents types de déclarations DEI.

1846
01:18:08,720 --> 01:18:09,020
Euh,

1847
01:18:09,420 --> 01:18:14,260
et l’un d’eux ressemblait fondamentalement au type standard d’intersectionnalité de politique identitaire,

1848
01:18:14,640 --> 01:18:17,200
l’un concernait la diversité des points de vue.

1849
01:18:17,500 --> 01:18:21,560
L’un portait sur la diversité religieuse et l’autre sur la diversité socio-économique.

1850
01:18:21,660 --> 01:18:23,320
Et quant à l'endroit où se trouve réellement mon cœur,

1851
01:18:23,640 --> 01:18:26,060
c'est que nous avons trop peu de diversité socio-économique,

1852
01:18:26,300 --> 01:18:27,140
en particulier dans l'enseignement supérieur d'élite,

1853
01:18:27,160 --> 01:18:29,000
mais aussi en période d'éducation.

1854
01:18:30,040 --> 01:18:34,120
L'expérience a donc réuni une large participation,

1855
01:18:34,340 --> 01:18:35,400
une configuration vraiment intéressante.

1856
01:18:35,520 --> 01:18:39,180
Et il a essayé de modéliser la manière dont bon nombre de ces politiques DEI étaient réellement mises en œuvre.

1857
01:18:39,900 --> 01:18:41,860
Et l'une des façons dont ils ont été mis en œuvre,

1858
01:18:41,960 --> 01:18:43,000
et je pense que dans certains des

1859
01:18:43,000 --> 01:18:48,480
Les écoles californiennes sont confiées aux administrateurs qui examinent les déclarations DEI auparavant.

1860
01:18:49,460 --> 01:18:53,220
N'importe qui d'autre les regarde et élimine ensuite les gens d'en haut, selon la façon dont,

1861
01:18:54,040 --> 01:18:56,920
ce qu'ils pensent de leurs, euh, déclarations DEI

1862
01:18:57,500 --> 01:19:01,100
et celui sur la diversité des points de vue.

1863
01:19:01,560 --> 01:19:04,120
Je pense que comme la moitié des personnes qui l'ont examiné le feraient,

1864
01:19:04,380 --> 01:19:05,180
l'éliminerait d'emblée.

1865
01:19:06,060 --> 01:19:08,380
Euh, et je pense que c'était fondamentalement la même chose pour la diversité religieuse.

1866
01:19:09,460 --> 01:19:10,680
C'était un peu mieux,

1867
01:19:10,860 --> 01:19:14,620
comme 40% pour la diversité socio-économique,

1868
01:19:14,820 --> 01:19:15,880
mais ça me tue.

1869
01:19:15,960 --> 01:19:16,920
J'aime l'idée qui fait un peu comme,

1870
01:19:16,960 --> 01:19:20,560
ouais, c'est en fait le genre de diversité dont je pense que nous avons besoin de beaucoup plus,

1871
01:19:20,560 --> 01:19:21,280
dans l'enseignement supérieur.

1872
01:19:21,380 --> 01:19:24,200
Vous pouvez être d'accord, ce n'est pas hostile aux autres types,

1873
01:19:24,240 --> 01:19:24,940
d'ailleurs.

1874
01:19:24,940 --> 01:19:27,880
Hum, mais l'idée selon laquelle nous avons besoin de plus de gens venant d'en bas,

1875
01:19:27,980 --> 01:19:30,820
vous savez, les trois quarts de la société américaine,

1876
01:19:30,960 --> 01:19:32,640
comme dans un enseignement supérieur,

1877
01:19:32,680 --> 01:19:33,560
Je pense que cela devrait être quelque chose que nous pourrions tous contourner.

1878
01:19:33,580 --> 01:19:37,000
Mais le seul qui a vraiment réussi est celui qui,

1879
01:19:37,000 --> 01:19:38,460
qui a repoussé exactement

1880
01:19:38,460 --> 01:19:42,680
le genre d'idéologie qu'ils pensaient que les arrières aimeraient,

1881
01:19:43,080 --> 01:19:43,760
ce qui revient à dire, d'accord,

1882
01:19:44,720 --> 01:19:46,560
il est impossible que cela ne soit pas un test décisif politique.

1883
01:19:47,240 --> 01:19:52,100
Nous avons prouvé qu'il s'agit d'un test décisif politique et, école après école, on ajoute encore

1884
01:19:52,100 --> 01:19:57,100
ceux-ci à son processus de candidature pour rendre les écoles encore plus homogènes sur le plan idéologique.

1885
01:19:57,840 --> 01:19:58,560
Pourquoi cela a-t-il un effet négatif ?

1886
01:19:58,580 --> 01:20:00,180
Est-ce parce que

1887
01:20:01,180 --> 01:20:06,300
cela impose une sorte de réflexion de groupe où les gens ont peur,

1888
01:20:08,000 --> 01:20:11,800
je commence à avoir peur de penser et de parler

1889
01:20:12,980 --> 01:20:13,540
librement,

1890
01:20:14,280 --> 01:20:15,760
libéralement sur quoi que ce soit.

1891
01:20:16,240 --> 01:20:20,200
Eh bien, premièrement, il sélectionne les gens qui ont tendance à être plus à gauche,

1892
01:20:20,540 --> 01:20:22,160
euh, dans une situation où tu l'as déjà fait,

1893
01:20:22,460 --> 01:20:26,160
euh, les gens, une situation où les universités penchent décidément que

1894
01:20:26,180 --> 01:20:30,020
manière, mais il établit aussi essentiellement un ensemble d'idées sacrées

1895
01:20:30,920 --> 01:20:33,740
que si on vous demande si,

1896
01:20:34,100 --> 01:20:35,980
tu sais, ce que tu as fait pour avancer

1897
01:20:36,540 --> 01:20:37,900
anti-racisme,

1898
01:20:38,280 --> 01:20:39,380
euh, blessé, euh,

1899
01:20:39,680 --> 01:20:41,860
comment vous avez été conscient de l'intersectionnalité,

1900
01:20:42,480 --> 01:20:44,240
il est peu probable que vous puissiez réellement y entrer.

1901
01:20:44,320 --> 01:20:44,740
Et si tu disais,

1902
01:20:44,820 --> 01:20:47,700
au fait, je pense en fait que ce sont des concepts douteux.

1903
01:20:47,980 --> 01:20:48,720
Je pense qu'ils sont minces.

1904
01:20:48,980 --> 01:20:50,920
Je pense qu'ils ne sont pas très défendables, philosophiquement,

1905
01:20:51,160 --> 01:20:52,080
mais en gros, comme si,

1906
01:20:52,120 --> 01:20:53,080
si votre position était,

1907
01:20:53,700 --> 01:20:54,960
En fait, je suis en train de rejeter,

1908
01:20:55,220 --> 01:20:58,280
euh, ces concepts sont trop simples.

1909
01:20:59,220 --> 01:21:00,680
Euh, tu ne l'es pas, tu n'entreras pas.

1910
01:21:01,060 --> 01:21:02,180
Et, et, et je pense que,

1911
01:21:02,180 --> 01:21:03,320
euh, la personne que je

1912
01:21:03,320 --> 01:21:06,460
pense toujours que ce n'était pas un ailier droit qui serait comme,

1913
01:21:07,160 --> 01:21:07,780
va au diable.

1914
01:21:07,960 --> 01:21:10,660
Si vous, si vous lui avez fait remplir une de ces choses, c'est Feynman.

1915
01:21:11,420 --> 01:21:12,060
J'ai l'impression que si toi,

1916
01:21:12,140 --> 01:21:14,720
Si vous donniez une de ces choses à Richard Feynman, il dirait :

1917
01:21:15,240 --> 01:21:17,060
il le déchirerait en morceaux.

1918
01:21:18,360 --> 01:21:18,680
Ouais.

1919
01:21:18,780 --> 01:21:19,400
Et ne pas obtenir le poste.

1920
01:21:20,880 --> 01:21:24,940
Ouais, il y a un élément qui crée ça

1921
01:21:26,440 --> 01:21:28,220
difficile de cerner la peur.

1922
01:21:28,300 --> 01:21:29,560
Alors tu as dit comme le tir,

1923
01:21:30,100 --> 01:21:33,440
ce que je voulais dire, c'est de licencier une centaine ou 200 personnes.

1924
01:21:33,940 --> 01:21:36,180
Le but est même de virer une personne,

1925
01:21:36,280 --> 01:21:37,260
Je viens de le voir.

1926
01:21:37,280 --> 01:21:40,940
Cela peut créer cet effet d’entraînement discret de peur.

1927
01:21:40,980 --> 01:21:41,500
Oh bien sûr.

1928
01:21:41,960 --> 01:21:44,220
Ce seul licenciement d’une faculté.

1929
01:21:44,220 --> 01:21:44,840
Oh, absolument.

1930
01:21:45,120 --> 01:21:49,160
A un effet d’entraînement sur des dizaines de milliers de personnes,

1931
01:21:49,620 --> 01:21:50,300
des éducateurs,

1932
01:21:51,020 --> 01:21:52,500
de, de, euh, qui a été embauché,

1933
01:21:52,880 --> 01:21:55,020
quel genre de conversations ont eu, ont eu,

1934
01:21:55,380 --> 01:21:56,920
quel type de manuels sont choisis,

1935
01:21:57,440 --> 01:22:00,340
quel genre d'autocensure et différentes saveurs de cela se produisent.

1936
01:22:00,900 --> 01:22:01,840
C'est difficile à mesurer.

1937
01:22:02,420 --> 01:22:02,540
Ouais.

1938
01:22:02,540 --> 01:22:04,920
Je veux dire, quand tu demandes aux professeurs,

1939
01:22:05,280 --> 01:22:07,960
vous savez, sont-ils intimidés dans l’environnement actuel ?

1940
01:22:08,460 --> 01:22:11,080
Euh, la réponse est oui.

1941
01:22:11,080 --> 01:22:12,640
Et particulièrement les professeurs conservateurs,

1942
01:22:12,640 --> 01:22:14,180
tu sais, déjà, tu sais,

1943
01:22:14,940 --> 01:22:15,700
signalant qu'ils sont,

1944
01:22:16,460 --> 01:22:18,220
vous savez, ils ont peur pour leur emploi dans de nombreux cas différents.

1945
01:22:18,740 --> 01:22:20,500
Vous avez beaucoup de bonnes statistiques dans le livre,

1946
01:22:20,640 --> 01:22:21,720
des choses comme l'autocensure.

1947
01:22:22,460 --> 01:22:24,980
Lorsqu'on lui donne la définition de l'autocensure,

1948
01:22:25,040 --> 01:22:27,260
au moins un quart des étudiants déclarent s'autocensurer

1949
01:22:27,260 --> 01:22:30,160
assez souvent ou très souvent lors de conversations avec d'autres étudiants,

1950
01:22:30,540 --> 01:22:32,780
avec les professeurs et lors des discussions en classe,

1951
01:22:33,680 --> 01:22:36,880
25%, 27% et 28% respectivement.

1952
01:22:37,620 --> 01:22:39,680
Euh, un quart des étudiants ont également dit qu'ils

1953
01:22:39,700 --> 01:22:42,160
plus susceptibles de s'autocensurer sur le campus maintenant,

1954
01:22:43,080 --> 01:22:46,240
euh, au moment où ils ont été interrogés, ils

1955
01:22:46,240 --> 01:22:47,720
étaient quand ils ont commencé l’université.

1956
01:22:48,300 --> 01:22:51,720
Donc, en quelque sorte, les collèges inculquent cette idée de,

1957
01:22:52,020 --> 01:22:54,280
de, de censure, d'autocensure.

1958
01:22:54,320 --> 01:22:55,740
Et revenons à la comparaison Red Scare,

1959
01:22:55,960 --> 01:22:57,460
et c'est l'une des choses intéressantes à propos de

1960
01:22:57,460 --> 01:22:58,240
les données également,

1961
01:22:58,900 --> 01:22:59,220
est-ce

1962
01:22:59,740 --> 01:23:01,340
cette même étude dont je parlais,

1963
01:23:01,340 --> 01:23:03,360
l'étude la plus complète de la Peur Rouge,

1964
01:23:03,500 --> 01:23:06,140
il y a eu un sondage pour savoir si les professeurs étaient ou non

1965
01:23:06,160 --> 01:23:08,600
l'autocensure en raison de la peur de l'environnement.

1966
01:23:09,480 --> 01:23:12,620
Et 9% des professeurs déclarent s’autocensurer

1967
01:23:12,760 --> 01:23:14,360
leurs recherches et ce qu'ils disaient,

1968
01:23:15,380 --> 01:23:16,580
9%, c'est vraiment mauvais.

1969
01:23:17,820 --> 01:23:20,780
Euh, ça, c'est presque un dixième des professeurs qui disent qu'ils l'étaient en fait,

1970
01:23:20,840 --> 01:23:22,140
leur discours était glacial.

1971
01:23:23,080 --> 01:23:23,780
Quand nous avons fait ça

1972
01:23:23,780 --> 01:23:27,340
question pour les professeurs sur notre dernière enquête auprès des professeurs,

1973
01:23:28,000 --> 01:23:29,900
euh, quand vous prenez en compte ensemble, s'ils le sont,

1974
01:23:30,320 --> 01:23:33,200
nous leur avons demandé s'ils s'autocensuraient dans leurs recherches ou s'ils s'autocensuraient en classe,

1975
01:23:33,380 --> 01:23:34,720
ils s'autocensurent en ligne,

1976
01:23:34,880 --> 01:23:37,680
et cetera, c'était 90 % des professeurs.

1977
01:23:38,280 --> 01:23:41,920
Donc l'idée que nous sommes en réalité dans un environnement historique,

1978
01:23:42,220 --> 01:23:45,060
euh, en ce qui concerne la peur que les gens ont réellement de

1979
01:23:45,780 --> 01:23:46,980
exprimant des opinions controversées.

1980
01:23:47,240 --> 01:23:48,000
Je pense que c'est,

1981
01:23:48,580 --> 01:23:50,760
c'est la raison pour laquelle nous allons étudier cela

1982
01:23:51,400 --> 01:23:54,700
dans 50 ans, de la même manière, de la même manière que nous étudions la Peur Rouge.

1983
01:23:54,780 --> 01:23:57,860
Ce n'est pas l'idée que ça n'arrive pas,

1984
01:23:57,860 --> 01:24:00,100
sera simplement considéré à juste titre comme insensé.

1985
01:24:00,560 --> 01:24:01,760
Alors peut-être qu'on peut juste,

1986
01:24:01,760 --> 01:24:06,060
euh, discutez de la tendance, de la tendance actuelle du monde universitaire vers la gauche,

1987
01:24:06,480 --> 01:24:08,780
que vous décrivez sous différents angles.

1988
01:24:09,080 --> 01:24:10,940
Donc premièrement, il y a une inscription sur les listes électorales

1989
01:24:11,050 --> 01:24:13,880
tableau des ratios que vous avez par département,

1990
01:24:13,920 --> 01:24:14,900
ce que je trouve intéressant.

1991
01:24:15,740 --> 01:24:16,500
Pouvez-vous expliquer cela

1992
01:24:16,500 --> 01:24:18,460
graphique et pouvez-vous expliquer ce qu'il montre ?

1993
01:24:19,020 --> 01:24:20,980
Ouais, quand j'ai allumé le feu en 2001,

1994
01:24:20,980 --> 01:24:24,740
Je n'ai pas pris la question de la diversité des points de vue aussi au sérieux.

1995
01:24:24,760 --> 01:24:26,860
Je pensais que c’était juste quelque chose dont se plaignaient les gens de droite.

1996
01:24:27,980 --> 01:24:29,180
Euh, mais j'ai vraiment commencé à comprendre

1997
01:24:29,800 --> 01:24:33,360
que se passe-t-il quand vous avez une communauté avec un faible, euh,

1998
01:24:34,620 --> 01:24:36,180
avec une faible, euh, diversité de points de vue.

1999
01:24:36,680 --> 01:24:39,720
Et en fait, une grande partie des recherches qui m'intéressaient le plus étaient les suivantes :

2000
01:24:39,720 --> 01:24:43,320
euh, réalisé en collaboration avec le grand Cass Sunstein,

2001
01:24:43,540 --> 01:24:46,300
euh, qui écrit beaucoup sur la polarisation des groupes.

2002
01:24:46,300 --> 01:24:49,580
Parce que, comme les recherches à ce sujet sont très solides,

2003
01:24:49,900 --> 01:24:52,700
mais essentiellement quand vous avez des groupes avec, euh,

2004
01:24:53,580 --> 01:24:56,220
diversité politique, et cela se voit effectivement chez les juges, par exemple,

2005
01:24:56,740 --> 01:25:00,480
cela a tendance à produire, vous savez, des résultats plus modérés de manière fiable.

2006
01:25:00,940 --> 01:25:02,400
Euh, alors que les groupes qui le sont,

2007
01:25:02,400 --> 01:25:05,180
qui ont une faible diversité politique ont tendance à entrer dans une sorte de spirale,

2008
01:25:05,340 --> 01:25:07,020
partent en spirale dans leur propre direction.

2009
01:25:07,600 --> 01:25:11,840
Et quand vous avez une grande majorité de gens issus d’un seul point de vue politique,

2010
01:25:12,160 --> 01:25:13,820
c'est un problème pour la production d'idées.

2011
01:25:14,040 --> 01:25:16,140
Cela crée une situation où il y a des idées sacrées.

2012
01:25:16,900 --> 01:25:18,840
Euh, et quand vous regardez certains départements,

2013
01:25:18,840 --> 01:25:21,660
euh, tu sais, je pense que le S le

2014
01:25:21,660 --> 01:25:23,500
l'estimation du Crimson est que Harvard est,

2015
01:25:23,500 --> 01:25:24,880
compte 3% de conservateurs.

2016
01:25:25,460 --> 01:25:25,960
Mais quand tu regardes

2017
01:25:26,160 --> 01:25:29,920
dans différents départements, il y a des départements d'élite qui n'ont littéralement pas, euh,

2018
01:25:30,380 --> 01:25:31,700
euh, les conservateurs, euh, en eux.

2019
01:25:31,720 --> 01:25:32,220
Et je pense que c'est,

2020
01:25:32,580 --> 01:25:35,340
c'est dans un environnement intellectuel sain, euh,.

2021
01:25:35,720 --> 01:25:37,360
Le problème est définitivement pire.

2022
01:25:37,980 --> 01:25:39,100
Euh, à mesure que tu deviens plus élite,

2023
01:25:39,280 --> 01:25:41,160
euh, nous voyons certainement plus de cas de,

2024
01:25:41,760 --> 01:25:44,480
euh, les professeurs de gauche sont annulés dans les écoles moins élitistes.

2025
01:25:44,680 --> 01:25:45,920
C'est pire que toi,

2026
01:25:45,920 --> 01:25:47,320
en descendant du,

2027
01:25:47,320 --> 01:25:51,500
les écoles d'élite, c'est là qu'un tiers des tentatives pour obtenir, euh,

2028
01:25:51,860 --> 01:25:53,480
les professeurs punis qui réussissent,

2029
01:25:53,820 --> 01:25:55,520
vous savez, venez, venez de droite et en grande partie

2030
01:25:55,580 --> 01:25:56,640
de l'extérieur du campus, euh,

2031
01:25:57,460 --> 01:25:58,460
sources hors campus.

2032
01:25:58,480 --> 01:26:01,400
Et nous passons également beaucoup de temps à en parler dans le livre.

2033
01:26:01,990 --> 01:26:03,990
Euh, c'est quelque chose qui, à mon avis, est sous-estimé.

2034
01:26:04,980 --> 01:26:06,320
Euh, mais quand il s'agit du plus bas,

2035
01:26:06,320 --> 01:26:10,580
une faible diversité de points de vue, vous savez, cela fonctionne un peu comme on pourrait s'y attendre dans une certaine mesure,

2036
01:26:10,960 --> 01:26:12,920
tu sais, l'économie c'est quoi quatre

2037
01:26:12,920 --> 01:26:14,180
à un ou quelque chose comme ça.

2038
01:26:14,480 --> 01:26:15,260
Ce n'est pas si grave.

2039
01:26:15,540 --> 01:26:17,920
Hum, mais quand vous commencez à vous lancer dans les sciences humaines,

2040
01:26:18,220 --> 01:26:21,040
vous savez, il y a des départements qui n'en sont littéralement aucun.

2041
01:26:22,200 --> 01:26:23,760
Y a-t-il un bon pourquoi

2042
01:26:24,700 --> 01:26:29,300
Pourquoi l'administration du corps professoral de l'université s'est-elle déplacée vers la gauche ?

2043
01:26:29,760 --> 01:26:30,140
Ouais,

2044
01:26:30,960 --> 01:26:34,820
Je n'aime pas, et c'est un argument qu'on rencontrera parfois à gauche,

2045
01:26:35,140 --> 01:26:36,580
euh, juste l'argument selon lequel,

2046
01:26:36,840 --> 01:26:38,340
eh bien, les gens de gauche sont tout simplement plus intelligents.

2047
01:26:38,580 --> 01:26:39,040
Droite.

2048
01:26:39,300 --> 01:26:43,000
Et c'est comme, d'accord, c'est, c'est intéressant parce qu'au moins la recherche à ce jour

2049
01:26:43,980 --> 01:26:47,560
Il y a 10 ans, indiquait que si vous approfondissez cela un peu,

2050
01:26:47,700 --> 01:26:50,640
beaucoup de gens qui se considèrent à gauche ont tendance à être un peu plus à gauche.

2051
01:26:51,610 --> 01:26:52,160
Libertaire,

2052
01:26:53,040 --> 01:26:55,040
la chanson que Pinker, euh, tu sais,

2053
01:26:55,480 --> 01:26:58,520
a beaucoup écrit sur l'idée selon laquelle nous sommes simplement plus intelligents.

2054
01:26:59,440 --> 01:27:01,720
Ce n’est pas une opinion.

2055
01:27:02,080 --> 01:27:04,260
Moi, je suis au moins un peu à l'aise avec,

2056
01:27:04,540 --> 01:27:05,600
euh, je pense que,

2057
01:27:05,600 --> 01:27:07,740
c'est ce que les départements prennent en charge,

2058
01:27:08,040 --> 01:27:10,300
euh, l'élan quand ils deviennent un lieu

2059
01:27:10,370 --> 01:27:14,120
où vous vous dites, wow, ce serait vraiment désagréable pour moi de travailler dans ce département.

2060
01:27:14,220 --> 01:27:15,660
Si je suis le conservateur symbolique.

2061
01:27:15,680 --> 01:27:17,460
Et je pense que cela prend sa propre vie.

2062
01:27:17,860 --> 01:27:18,820
Il existe également des départements

2063
01:27:19,240 --> 01:27:22,920
où beaucoup d'idéologies sont explicitement

2064
01:27:23,680 --> 01:27:24,520
gauchiste.

2065
01:27:25,140 --> 01:27:26,420
Euh, vous regardez les écoles d'éducation,

2066
01:27:26,680 --> 01:27:27,340
beaucoup de,

2067
01:27:27,400 --> 01:27:31,560
beaucoup de choses qui sont en fait des restes de ce que l'on appelle à juste titre critique

2068
01:27:31,560 --> 01:27:33,500
les théories raciales sont présentes.

2069
01:27:33,580 --> 01:27:36,060
Et on finit par avoir cela dans un certain nombre de ministères.

2070
01:27:36,380 --> 01:27:37,120
Euh,

2071
01:27:37,580 --> 01:27:40,240
et ce serait très étrange d'être un,

2072
01:27:40,780 --> 01:27:43,460
dans de nombreux départements, un, vous savez, un travailleur social conservateur

2073
01:27:43,560 --> 01:27:44,000
professeur.

2074
01:27:44,180 --> 01:27:45,060
Je suis sûr qu'ils existent.

2075
01:27:45,300 --> 01:27:45,440
Euh,

2076
01:27:46,020 --> 01:27:46,160
mais

2077
01:27:47,120 --> 01:27:50,600
ça, il y a beaucoup de pression pour se taire si c'est le cas.

2078
01:27:51,360 --> 01:27:53,880
Donc le processus à gauche de l'annulation,

2079
01:27:53,880 --> 01:27:57,000
comme vous avez commencé à en parler avec la forteresse rhétorique parfaite,

2080
01:27:57,580 --> 01:27:59,220
la, la première étape est

2081
01:28:00,300 --> 01:28:01,360
renvoyer une personne.

2082
01:28:01,440 --> 01:28:02,480
S'ils sont justes, si tu peux

2083
01:28:03,060 --> 01:28:05,140
mettez-leur une étiquette de conservateur,

2084
01:28:05,540 --> 01:28:06,780
vous pouvez les renvoyer de cette façon.

2085
01:28:06,880 --> 01:28:13,060
Quoi, quels autres licenciements efficaces existe-t-il ?

2086
01:28:13,260 --> 01:28:15,300
On s'amuse un peu avec,

2087
01:28:15,300 --> 01:28:18,460
euh, euh, avec des chiffres démographiques, mais je calcule ça par hauteur.

2088
01:28:18,760 --> 01:28:20,980
Euh, euh, et je me souviens qu'il était un peu comme,

2089
01:28:20,980 --> 01:28:22,320
Je n'inclus pas, n'inclus pas le réel

2090
01:28:22,360 --> 01:28:22,660
pourcentage.

2091
01:28:22,740 --> 01:28:24,620
Je me dis non, nous devons inclure les pourcentages réels.

2092
01:28:24,720 --> 01:28:26,480
Parce que les gens sont vraiment mauvais

2093
01:28:26,620 --> 01:28:32,200
à estimer à quoi ressemble réellement la démographie des États-Unis, à droite comme à gauche, de différentes manières.

2094
01:28:32,840 --> 01:28:35,340
Euh, donc nous le mettons en chiffres et nous en parlons,

2095
01:28:35,340 --> 01:28:38,900
vous savez, euh, être licencié parce que vous êtes blanc ou être licencié pour,

2096
01:28:38,900 --> 01:28:41,780
euh, être hétéro ou être licencié parce qu'il est un homme.

2097
01:28:42,380 --> 01:28:45,260
Euh, et nous, euh, et vous pouvez déjà licencier des gens parce qu'ils sont conservateurs.

2098
01:28:45,580 --> 01:28:48,480
Et nous, donc nous, nous, nous donnons des exemples dans le livre de,

2099
01:28:48,480 --> 01:28:52,640
d'entre eux étant utilisés pour licencier des personnes et souvent sur des sujets sans rapport

2100
01:28:52,760 --> 01:28:55,120
au fait qu'il s'agit d'un homme ou qu'il s'agisse ou non d'une minorité.

2101
01:28:55,500 --> 01:28:56,260
Et puis nous arrivons à,

2102
01:28:56,360 --> 01:28:58,240
Je pense que c'est comme la couche six et nous nous disons,

2103
01:28:58,540 --> 01:28:59,280
surprise, devinez quoi ?

2104
01:28:59,680 --> 01:29:01,900
Vous n'êtes plus que 0,4% de la population et

2105
01:29:01,900 --> 01:29:02,660
rien de tout cela n’avait d’importance.

2106
01:29:02,740 --> 01:29:04,100
Parce que si vous avez une mauvaise opinion,

2107
01:29:04,300 --> 01:29:06,660
même si vous faites partie de ces 0,4 % du

2108
01:29:06,680 --> 01:29:09,380
la personne la plus intersectionnelle qui ait jamais vécu et vous avez une mauvaise opinion,

2109
01:29:09,700 --> 01:29:12,680
vous êtes un hérétique et vous serez probablement encore plus détesté.

2110
01:29:13,360 --> 01:29:15,440
Et la partie la plus intéressante du

2111
01:29:15,440 --> 01:29:19,960
la recherche que nous avons effectuée à cet effet consistait simplement à demander à toutes les personnalités importantes,

2112
01:29:20,260 --> 01:29:22,560
euh, noir conservateur et modéré

2113
01:29:22,640 --> 01:29:24,100
que nous connaissions personnellement,

2114
01:29:24,700 --> 01:29:26,340
t'a-t-on dit que tu n'étais pas vraiment

2115
01:29:26,900 --> 01:29:28,580
noir pour une opinion que tu avais

2116
01:29:29,160 --> 01:29:31,000
chacun d'eux était comme,

2117
01:29:31,000 --> 01:29:31,900
ah ouais, non.

2118
01:29:31,960 --> 01:29:32,740
Et c'est plutôt drôle parce que

2119
01:29:32,980 --> 01:29:34,920
c'est comme souvent les gauchers blancs

2120
01:29:35,460 --> 01:29:36,400
en leur disant que c'est comme,

2121
01:29:36,400 --> 01:29:37,540
oh, tu te considères comme noir ?

2122
01:29:37,840 --> 01:29:39,820
John McWhorter a parlé d'avoir un journaliste.

2123
01:29:39,820 --> 01:29:41,440
Euh, quand il en a parlé,

2124
01:29:41,500 --> 01:29:42,340
quand il a montré qu'il

2125
01:29:42,340 --> 01:29:43,300
en désaccord avec certains d'entre eux,

2126
01:29:43,740 --> 01:29:48,020
euh, ce qu'il a décrit comme un genre de racisme réveillé dans son livre, des idées réveillées,

2127
01:29:48,540 --> 01:29:49,420
le journaliste est en fait comme,

2128
01:29:49,500 --> 01:29:50,680
alors tu te considères comme noir ?

2129
01:29:50,980 --> 01:29:51,380
Il est comme,

2130
01:29:51,780 --> 01:29:53,160
il disait, de quoi es-tu fou ?

2131
01:29:53,180 --> 01:29:53,880
Bien sur que oui.

2132
01:29:54,160 --> 01:29:56,720
Et Coleman Hughes avait l’une des meilleures citations à ce sujet.

2133
01:29:56,840 --> 01:29:57,080
Il a dit,

2134
01:29:57,960 --> 01:30:00,780
On me dit constamment que la chose la plus importante,

2135
01:30:00,780 --> 01:30:03,300
euh, à quel point mon opinion est légitime,

2136
01:30:03,740 --> 01:30:04,100
est de savoir si,

2137
01:30:04,580 --> 01:30:05,460
euh, que je sois noir ou non,

2138
01:30:05,980 --> 01:30:07,800
mais quand j'ai une opinion dissidente,

2139
01:30:07,960 --> 01:30:09,500
On me dit que je ne suis pas vraiment noir.

2140
01:30:10,260 --> 01:30:11,260
Tellement parfait.

2141
01:30:11,820 --> 01:30:14,320
Comme il y a, il y a, il n'y a aucun moyen de falsifier, euh,

2142
01:30:14,640 --> 01:30:15,220
cet argument.

2143
01:30:15,680 --> 01:30:19,800
Euh, celle-là, vraiment, cette enquête m'a vraiment, vraiment frappé.

2144
01:30:19,900 --> 01:30:23,100
Donc, et vous expliquez très bien dans le livre qu'il y a ce processus qui consiste à dire :

2145
01:30:23,480 --> 01:30:24,320
es-tu conservateur ?

2146
01:30:24,400 --> 01:30:24,800
Oui.

2147
01:30:24,820 --> 01:30:26,940
Vous pouvez renvoyer la personne.

2148
01:30:27,580 --> 01:30:28,660
Es-tu blanc ?

2149
01:30:28,920 --> 01:30:29,680
Renvoyez la personne.

2150
01:30:29,820 --> 01:30:30,460
Êtes-vous un homme?

2151
01:30:30,540 --> 01:30:31,560
Vous pouvez renvoyer la personne.

2152
01:30:31,660 --> 01:30:34,780
Il y a ces catégories qui vous facilitent la tâche

2153
01:30:35,360 --> 01:30:36,080
de rejeter

2154
01:30:36,620 --> 01:30:37,880
les idées d'une personne basées sur cela.

2155
01:30:37,980 --> 01:30:38,500
Et comme tu l'as dit,

2156
01:30:38,500 --> 01:30:40,800
vous vous retrouvez dans ce petit pourcentage et vous pouvez toujours licencier.

2157
01:30:41,040 --> 01:30:41,960
Et il ne s'agit pas seulement de rejeter.

2158
01:30:42,200 --> 01:30:43,560
Moi, nous, nous en parlons d'un,

2159
01:30:43,860 --> 01:30:45,520
d'un point de vue pratique, la manière

2160
01:30:46,040 --> 01:30:49,120
les limites de la réalité et l’une d’elles est le temps.

2161
01:30:49,440 --> 01:30:51,420
Euh, et beaucoup de culture d'annulation,

2162
01:30:51,560 --> 01:30:54,200
euh, comme, comme, euh, comme normes culturelles,

2163
01:30:54,620 --> 01:30:55,720
comme cette façon de gagner

2164
01:30:55,720 --> 01:30:58,320
des arguments sans gagner des arguments, c'est manquer de temps.

2165
01:30:58,880 --> 01:30:59,440
Parce qu'au moment

2166
01:30:59,440 --> 01:31:01,380
tu descends au fond du,

2167
01:31:01,380 --> 01:31:02,700
euh, euh, du,

2168
01:31:03,020 --> 01:31:04,280
ou même pour faire quelques pas

2169
01:31:04,280 --> 01:31:06,180
dans la forteresse de disques parfaite et,

2170
01:31:06,340 --> 01:31:07,440
tu sais, où est passé le temps ?

2171
01:31:07,560 --> 01:31:08,100
Tu sais, comme

2172
01:31:08,690 --> 01:31:11,460
tu es, tu es, tu abandonnes probablement,

2173
01:31:11,840 --> 01:31:15,840
euh, essayer, euh, vous savez, essayer d'avoir une dispute et vous n'y parvenez jamais en premier lieu.

2174
01:31:16,040 --> 01:31:19,280
Toutes ces choses sont assez collantes sur les réseaux sociaux.

2175
01:31:19,400 --> 01:31:22,000
Les réseaux sociaux ont pratiquement inventé la forteresse rhétorique parfaite.

2176
01:31:22,480 --> 01:31:25,520
Pour que chacune de ces étapes ait une viralité.

2177
01:31:25,940 --> 01:31:28,840
Donc ça pourrait, ça pourrait rester et alors ça pourrait vraiment enthousiasmer les gens.

2178
01:31:29,160 --> 01:31:31,270
Cela vous permet de ressentir de l’indignation et de la supériorité.

2179
01:31:31,580 --> 01:31:31,880
Ouais.

2180
01:31:31,980 --> 01:31:35,900
De ce fait, cela à l’échelle de la viralité permet de ne jamais arriver au

2181
01:31:35,920 --> 01:31:37,360
discussion réelle sur ce point.

2182
01:31:37,780 --> 01:31:40,000
Euh, donc, mais tu sais, il n'y a pas que la gauche,

2183
01:31:40,060 --> 01:31:43,100
c'est aussi le droit, donc la forteresse rhétorique efficace,

2184
01:31:43,880 --> 01:31:44,220
euh,

2185
01:31:44,620 --> 01:31:46,860
il y a donc de quoi être fier à droite.

2186
01:31:46,980 --> 01:31:47,740
C'est plus efficace.

2187
01:31:49,760 --> 01:31:53,580
Vous n’êtes donc pas obligé d’écouter les libéraux et n’importe qui pourrait être qualifié de libéral si

2188
01:31:53,580 --> 01:31:54,820
ils ont une mauvaise opinion.

2189
01:31:55,740 --> 01:31:59,020
J'ai vu des libéraux, des gauchistes et des gauchistes tous utilisés comme,

2190
01:31:59,060 --> 01:32:00,280
du même genre de manière.

2191
01:32:00,660 --> 01:32:02,240
C'est un non-sens de gauche.

2192
01:32:02,660 --> 01:32:04,400
Vous n'êtes pas obligé d'écouter les experts,

2193
01:32:05,540 --> 01:32:08,220
même les experts conservateurs, s'ils ont une opinion erronée,

2194
01:32:08,820 --> 01:32:10,360
vous n'êtes pas obligé d'écouter les journalistes,

2195
01:32:10,480 --> 01:32:15,380
même les journalistes conservateurs, s'ils ont une mauvaise opinion et parmi l'aile MAGA,

2196
01:32:15,900 --> 01:32:17,080
il y a une quatrième proposition,

2197
01:32:17,740 --> 01:32:18,820
il y a une quatrième disposition.

2198
01:32:19,240 --> 01:32:22,260
Vous n’avez pas besoin d’écouter quiconque n’est pas pro Trump.

2199
01:32:22,820 --> 01:32:25,500
Ouais. Et nous l'appelons efficace parce qu'il élimine

2200
01:32:26,280 --> 01:32:27,400
beaucoup de gens vous probablement

2201
01:32:27,400 --> 01:32:28,720
devrait écouter au moins de temps en temps,

2202
01:32:28,720 --> 01:32:31,300
tu sais, comme nous le soulignons parfois, comme comment annuler

2203
01:32:31,300 --> 01:32:33,320
la culture peut interférer avec la foi et l’expertise.

2204
01:32:33,800 --> 01:32:36,960
Donc on commence à se méfier un peu des experts,

2205
01:32:37,440 --> 01:32:38,280
mais en même temps,

2206
01:32:38,280 --> 01:32:40,320
si vous suivez cela et que vous le suivez machinalement,

2207
01:32:40,320 --> 01:32:45,800
et vous savez, je pense que tout le monde aux États-Unis a probablement un oncle plus âgé,

2208
01:32:45,920 --> 01:32:48,340
euh, euh, qui exerce certains d'entre eux.

2209
01:32:49,140 --> 01:32:51,980
C'est un moyen très efficace de trier,

2210
01:32:52,320 --> 01:32:55,080
donc vous devez vous isoler du reste du monde et rejeter,

2211
01:32:55,080 --> 01:32:57,980
vous savez, au moins certaines personnes que vous devriez vraiment écouter.

2212
01:32:58,360 --> 01:32:59,340
La façon dont tu l'as présenté,

2213
01:32:59,460 --> 01:33:00,660
ça m'a fait réaliser que nous

2214
01:33:01,500 --> 01:33:03,220
occupent une grande partie de notre puissance cérébrale.

2215
01:33:03,820 --> 01:33:04,940
Ces choses,

2216
01:33:05,280 --> 01:33:06,260
il est littéralement temps.

2217
01:33:06,340 --> 01:33:07,460
Nous pourrions résoudre les problèmes.

2218
01:33:07,640 --> 01:33:08,360
Et tu as comme,

2219
01:33:08,500 --> 01:33:12,860
vous vous épuisez en quelque sorte à travers ce processus d'indignation basé sur

2220
01:33:12,860 --> 01:33:14,600
sur ces étiquettes et tu n'y parviens jamais,

2221
01:33:15,580 --> 01:33:17,420
il n'y a presque pas assez de temps pour l'empathie,

2222
01:33:17,820 --> 01:33:19,200
car c'est comme regarder une personne qui réfléchit,

2223
01:33:19,400 --> 01:33:20,220
eh bien, peut-être qu'ils ont raison.

2224
01:33:20,400 --> 01:33:23,460
Parce que tu es tellement occupé à les catégoriser.

2225
01:33:24,280 --> 01:33:25,220
Qu'est-ce qui est amusant dans l'empathie ?

2226
01:33:25,660 --> 01:33:27,640
Et je veux dire, ce qui est si intéressant là-dedans, c'est que

2227
01:33:28,440 --> 01:33:32,260
tellement, euh, l'énergie sociétale semble être dépensée pour ces

2228
01:33:33,100 --> 01:33:36,600
des désirs primordiaux désagréables dont une grande partie ressemble essentiellement à,

2229
01:33:36,680 --> 01:33:38,140
s'il te plaît, dis-moi qui j'ai le droit de détester.

2230
01:33:39,100 --> 01:33:41,500
Où puis-je légitimement être cruel ?

2231
01:33:41,680 --> 01:33:42,600
Où puis-je réellement

2232
01:33:42,600 --> 01:33:44,780
exercer une certaine agression contre quelqu'un ?

2233
01:33:45,400 --> 01:33:49,780
Euh, et il semble parfois qu'il s'agisse simplement de trouver de nouvelles justifications à cela.

2234
01:33:50,300 --> 01:33:51,260
Et c'est compréhensible,

2235
01:33:51,260 --> 01:33:55,060
tu sais, l'échec humain, euh, ça peut parfois être

2236
01:33:55,080 --> 01:33:56,720
utilisé pour défendre la justice.

2237
01:33:57,000 --> 01:33:59,440
Mais encore une fois, cela ne vous rapprochera jamais de la vérité.

2238
01:34:00,500 --> 01:34:04,840
Euh, un cas intéressant que vous évoquez en matière d'expertise est celui du COVID.

2239
01:34:05,000 --> 01:34:05,360
Ouais.

2240
01:34:05,700 --> 01:34:09,260
Alors, comment la Cancel Culture est-elle entrée en jeu sur le thème du COVID ?

2241
01:34:10,020 --> 01:34:17,640
Oui, je pense que le COVID a porté un coup dur à la foi et à l'expertise des gens et que la culture d'annulation a joué un grand rôle à cet égard.

2242
01:34:18,420 --> 01:34:21,700
Hum, je pense que l'un des meilleurs exemples est celui de Jennifer Say chez Levi's.

2243
01:34:21,960 --> 01:34:24,580
Hum, c'est une femme charmante.

2244
01:34:24,840 --> 01:34:27,740
Hum, elle était vice-présidente chez Levi's.

2245
01:34:27,740 --> 01:34:29,460
Euh, elle a parlé de potentiellement

2246
01:34:29,480 --> 01:34:31,160
être le président de Levi's Jeans.

2247
01:34:32,200 --> 01:34:35,440
Et elle était une grande défenseure des enfants.

2248
01:34:36,060 --> 01:34:36,980
Et quand ils ont commencé

2249
01:34:36,980 --> 01:34:38,020
fermer les écoles,

2250
01:34:38,680 --> 01:34:39,640
elle a commencé à dire,

2251
01:34:40,000 --> 01:34:41,620
ça va être un désastre.

2252
01:34:41,760 --> 01:34:42,780
Ça va faire mal,

2253
01:34:43,490 --> 01:34:45,980
euh, les enfants pauvres et défavorisés sont les plus touchés.

2254
01:34:46,700 --> 01:34:50,520
Hum, nous devons trouver un moyen de rouvrir les écoles.

2255
01:34:50,880 --> 01:34:53,120
Et c’était un point de vue tellement hérétique.

2256
01:34:53,680 --> 01:34:55,380
Et le genre typique de culture de l'annulation,

2257
01:34:55,930 --> 01:35:00,360
euh, wave a pris le relais car il avait toutes sortes de pétitions pour qu'elle soit renvoyée et qu'elle

2258
01:35:00,360 --> 01:35:02,060
j'avais besoin de m'excuser et tout ce genre de choses.

2259
01:35:02,700 --> 01:35:03,660
Et,

2260
01:35:04,040 --> 01:35:07,000
vous savez, on lui a proposé, je pense, une indemnité de départ d'un million de dollars,

2261
01:35:07,040 --> 01:35:09,520
qu'elle ne voulait pas prendre parce qu'elle voulait le dire au monde

2262
01:35:09,520 --> 01:35:10,960
ce qu'elle en pensait et,

2263
01:35:10,960 --> 01:35:13,100
et qu'elle voulait continuer à dire,

2264
01:35:13,100 --> 01:35:15,860
euh, qu'elle n'avait pas changé d'avis,

2265
01:35:15,980 --> 01:35:17,840
que c'était un désastre pour les jeunes.

2266
01:35:18,200 --> 01:35:20,180
Et maintenant, c'est un peu le

2267
01:35:20,200 --> 01:35:22,780
la sagesse conventionnelle et la recherche est jolie,

2268
01:35:22,820 --> 01:35:25,600
il est clair que cela a été dévastateur

2269
01:35:26,300 --> 01:35:28,660
aux jeunes particulièrement défavorisés.

2270
01:35:28,720 --> 01:35:30,200
Comme si les gens comprenaient cela comme

2271
01:35:30,200 --> 01:35:32,000
étant bien, elle avait probablement raison.

2272
01:35:32,400 --> 01:35:33,080
Mais l'un des,

2273
01:35:33,080 --> 01:35:34,420
un des aspects vraiment tristes

2274
01:35:34,420 --> 01:35:40,260
La culture de l'annulation est que les gens oublient pourquoi vous avez été annulé et savent simplement qu'ils vous détestent.

2275
01:35:40,660 --> 01:35:42,620
Euh, il y a ce genre de persistance,

2276
01:35:42,740 --> 01:35:43,400
eh bien, je n'ai pas besoin de prendre

2277
01:35:43,400 --> 01:35:44,220
eux plus sérieusement.

2278
01:35:44,480 --> 01:35:44,940
Mais d'ailleurs,

2279
01:35:44,960 --> 01:35:46,220
as-tu remarqué qu'ils avaient raison

2280
01:35:46,380 --> 01:35:47,940
sur quelque chose de très important ?

2281
01:35:48,860 --> 01:35:50,340
Maintenant, une chose amusante à propos de la liberté d'expression,

2282
01:35:51,260 --> 01:35:55,780
la liberté d'expression n'existerait pas si vous n'aviez pas également le droit de dire des choses qui ne sont pas bonnes.

2283
01:35:56,160 --> 01:35:56,720
Parce que si tu ne peux pas,

2284
01:35:57,220 --> 01:35:59,120
tu sais, lance-toi dans une idée pour toi,

2285
01:35:59,120 --> 01:36:00,820
si vous ne pouvez pas réellement spéculer,

2286
01:36:01,080 --> 01:36:03,540
vous n’arriverez jamais à quelque chose qui soit juste au départ.

2287
01:36:04,000 --> 01:36:05,440
Mais c'est particulièrement exaspérant

2288
01:36:05,740 --> 01:36:07,120
quand les gens qui avaient raison

2289
01:36:07,660 --> 01:36:08,440
ont été censurés

2290
01:36:09,060 --> 01:36:11,720
et vous, euh, et n'obtenez jamais le crédit qu'ils méritent.

2291
01:36:13,320 --> 01:36:16,920
Eh bien, cela pourrait être le bon endroit pour en poser un peu plus sur la liberté d’expression.

2292
01:36:18,100 --> 01:36:22,680
Et donc vous avez dit que la liberté d’expression inclut le fait de dire des choses fausses.

2293
01:36:22,940 --> 01:36:23,440
Ouais.

2294
01:36:23,860 --> 01:36:26,760
Euh, quel est votre point de vue sur le discours de haine ?

2295
01:36:27,840 --> 01:36:33,320
Le discours de haine est la meilleure campagne marketing de censure.

2296
01:36:33,440 --> 01:36:36,000
Euh, et ça vient du milieu universitaire,

2297
01:36:36,250 --> 01:36:38,260
euh, du, du 20ème siècle.

2298
01:36:38,460 --> 01:36:41,320
Et lorsque j'ai parlé du mouvement anti-liberté d'expression,

2299
01:36:41,800 --> 01:36:43,700
euh, c'était l'une de leurs premières inventions.

2300
01:36:43,900 --> 01:36:46,300
Euh, là-bas, on a beaucoup parlé de théorie critique de la race,

2301
01:36:46,400 --> 01:36:48,680
euh, et, et être contre la théorie critique de la race

2302
01:36:49,240 --> 01:36:55,040
et le feu vous poursuivra si vous dites que les gens ne peuvent pas le défendre, l'enseigner ou faire des recherches,

2303
01:36:55,640 --> 01:36:59,920
parce que vous avez absolument le droit de poursuivre vos études sur le plan académique.

2304
01:37:00,680 --> 01:37:01,140
Cependant,

2305
01:37:01,480 --> 01:37:08,660
chaque fois que quelqu'un évoque CRT, il faudrait aussi dire le tout premier projet des personnes qui ont fondé CRT,

2306
01:37:09,020 --> 01:37:11,500
euh, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, euh, et cetera,

2307
01:37:12,060 --> 01:37:15,360
devait disparaître, était de créer cette nouvelle catégorie de personnes non protégées

2308
01:37:15,460 --> 01:37:18,020
discours qualifié de discours de haine et de le faire interdire.

2309
01:37:18,780 --> 01:37:20,420
La personne qui a permis cette dérive,

2310
01:37:20,420 --> 01:37:22,760
bien sûr, c'était Herbert Marcuse en 1965,

2311
01:37:22,760 --> 01:37:25,700
vous savez, en se demandant essentiellement si la liberté d'expression devrait ou non être

2312
01:37:25,700 --> 01:37:26,820
une valeur sacrée à gauche.

2313
01:37:27,260 --> 01:37:29,640
Et il a été du côté des perdants pendant très longtemps.

2314
01:37:29,780 --> 01:37:30,540
Les libéraux,

2315
01:37:30,840 --> 01:37:31,940
tu sais, la façon dont j'ai grandi,

2316
01:37:32,120 --> 01:37:35,500
qui était fondamentalement pro-liberté d'expression était synonyme d'être

2317
01:37:35,960 --> 01:37:36,460
un libéral,

2318
01:37:36,920 --> 01:37:40,120
mais cela a commencé à être gravé sur le campus.

2319
01:37:40,660 --> 01:37:42,240
Et la façon dont c'était, c'était avec,

2320
01:37:42,580 --> 01:37:43,980
avec l'idée de discours de haine,

2321
01:37:44,260 --> 01:37:48,780
euh, ça, ça essentiellement, oh, mais tu devrais, euh, nous pouvons désigner particulièrement

2322
01:37:48,840 --> 01:37:52,060
mauvais discours car, euh, non protégé.

2323
01:37:52,320 --> 01:37:53,320
Euh, et, et

2324
01:37:53,920 --> 01:37:54,880
qui va le faire respecter ?

2325
01:37:54,880 --> 01:37:55,720
Qui va décider quoi

2326
01:37:55,840 --> 01:37:56,920
le discours de haine l'est-il vraiment ?

2327
01:37:57,500 --> 01:38:01,020
Eh bien, cela ne peut généralement se produire que dans un environnement

2328
01:38:01,020 --> 01:38:04,760
de très faible diversité de points de vue parce qu'il faut réellement se mettre d'accord sur,

2329
01:38:04,960 --> 01:38:07,320
sur quelles sont les choses les plus haineuses et les plus mauvaises.

2330
01:38:08,000 --> 01:38:10,580
Et il y a un principe fondamental.

2331
01:38:11,060 --> 01:38:16,600
Euh, on en parle dans une affaire intéressante concernant le drapeau brûlé dans le premier amendement qui, je pense,

2332
01:38:16,600 --> 01:38:17,680
le monde pourrait en bénéficier.

2333
01:38:18,140 --> 01:38:20,960
Vous ne pouvez pas interdire la parole simplement parce que c’est offensant.

2334
01:38:21,340 --> 01:38:22,640
C'est trop subjectif.

2335
01:38:22,940 --> 01:38:24,920
En gros, c'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles ces,

2336
01:38:24,920 --> 01:38:27,400
euh, ce genre de codes a été plus heureux

2337
01:38:27,400 --> 01:38:29,040
adopté dans des pays comme l'Europe,

2338
01:38:29,060 --> 01:38:31,320
où ils ont le sentiment qu'il y a comme un allemand modal

2339
01:38:31,320 --> 01:38:32,520
ou un Anglais modal.

2340
01:38:32,940 --> 01:38:36,360
Euh, et je pense que c'est offensant et donc je peux dire que c'est,

2341
01:38:36,680 --> 01:38:38,620
c'est faux dans un sens plus

2342
01:38:39,300 --> 01:38:42,480
multiculturel, dans un, dans un pays véritablement plus diversifié

2343
01:38:42,480 --> 01:38:47,180
qui n’a jamais vraiment pensé honnêtement qu’il existe un seul type d’Américain.

2344
01:38:47,520 --> 01:38:49,120
Il n'y a jamais eu de genre,

2345
01:38:49,500 --> 01:38:50,860
nous avons eu, nous avons eu l'idée de l'oncle Sam,

2346
01:38:50,880 --> 01:38:52,100
mais c'était toujours une sorte de blague.

2347
01:38:53,000 --> 01:38:57,580
Hum, Boston a toujours su que ce n'était pas Richmond a toujours su que ce n'était pas la Géorgie a toujours su que ce n'était pas, vous savez, l'Alaska.

2348
01:38:57,900 --> 01:39:03,180
Comme si nous avions toujours été un méli-mélo et que nous évoluions dans une société aussi diversifiée

2349
01:39:03,560 --> 01:39:04,260
que

2350
01:39:04,940 --> 01:39:07,180
on ne peut pas interdire des choses simplement parce qu'elles sont offensantes.

2351
01:39:07,180 --> 01:39:09,320
Euh, et c'est, c'est l'un des

2352
01:39:09,320 --> 01:39:12,560
raisons pour lesquelles le discours de haine n’est pas une catégorie de discours non protégée.

2353
01:39:12,940 --> 01:39:14,020
Et moi, et je vais plus loin,

2354
01:39:14,380 --> 01:39:18,400
ma théorie sur la liberté d’expression est légèrement différente de celle de la plupart des autres constitutionnalistes.

2355
01:39:19,560 --> 01:39:22,000
Euh, et je pense, et je pense que c'est en partie dû à certaines façons,

2356
01:39:22,120 --> 01:39:23,040
euh, certaines de ces théories,

2357
01:39:23,160 --> 01:39:26,040
même si beaucoup d'entre eux sont vraiment bons, ils sont inadéquats,

2358
01:39:26,500 --> 01:39:27,780
ils ne sont pas assez vastes.

2359
01:39:28,300 --> 01:39:29,720
Et j'appelle parfois ma théorie,

2360
01:39:29,740 --> 01:39:31,940
la pure théorie informationnelle de la liberté d’expression.

2361
01:39:32,400 --> 01:39:34,600
Euh, ou parfois quand je veux être chic,

2362
01:39:34,640 --> 01:39:38,340
le laboratoire et la théorie du miroir et c'est le plus

2363
01:39:38,340 --> 01:39:43,060
Le principe important est que si le but est le projet de connaissance humaine,

2364
01:39:43,200 --> 01:39:43,660
ce qui est de savoir

2365
01:39:43,680 --> 01:39:44,580
le monde qu'il est,

2366
01:39:44,900 --> 01:39:50,420
c'est qu'on ne peut pas connaître le monde tel qu'il est sans savoir ce que les gens pensent vraiment

2367
01:39:51,000 --> 01:39:54,920
et ce que les gens pensent réellement est un fait extrêmement important à connaître.

2368
01:39:55,780 --> 01:39:57,380
Donc à chaque fois que tu dis,

2369
01:39:58,040 --> 01:40:00,900
tu ne peux pas dire que tu te prives réellement de connaissances

2370
01:40:00,900 --> 01:40:07,020
de ce que les gens pensent vraiment que vous causez ce que Tim ou Karan, qui fait partie de notre conseil consultatif, appellent la falsification des préférences.

2371
01:40:07,380 --> 01:40:09,940
Hum, tu te retrouves avec une image inexacte du monde,

2372
01:40:10,160 --> 01:40:10,840
qui d'ailleurs,

2373
01:40:11,320 --> 01:40:12,300
dans de nombreux cas,

2374
01:40:12,700 --> 01:40:15,260
euh, parce qu'il y a des militants qui veulent restreindre davantage

2375
01:40:15,260 --> 01:40:18,620
discours, ils ont en fait tendance à penser que les gens ont plus de préjugés qu'eux,

2376
01:40:18,620 --> 01:40:19,960
euh, qu'ils pourraient l'être.

2377
01:40:19,960 --> 01:40:21,860
Euh, et en fait ce genre de restrictions,

2378
01:40:21,900 --> 01:40:23,120
il y avait un livre intitulé racial

2379
01:40:23,420 --> 01:40:29,420
la paranoïa, euh, qui est apparue il y a environ 15 ans et qui faisait valoir que l'imposition

2380
01:40:29,420 --> 01:40:33,060
Certains de ces codes peuvent parfois faire croire aux gens que la seule chose qui vous retient

2381
01:40:33,060 --> 01:40:35,060
Je reviens d'être un raciste enragé,

2382
01:40:35,620 --> 01:40:36,840
euh, ce sont ces codes.

2383
01:40:37,020 --> 01:40:38,060
Donc ça doit être vraiment le cas,

2384
01:40:38,060 --> 01:40:38,560
vraiment mauvais.

2385
01:40:38,600 --> 01:40:40,020
Cela peut en fait aggraver toutes ces choses.

2386
01:40:40,380 --> 01:40:41,880
Et un, dont nous parlons dans le livre,

2387
01:40:42,080 --> 01:40:44,800
une manière très pratique et très concrète d'aggraver les choses

2388
01:40:45,400 --> 01:40:46,700
c'est quand tu censures les gens,

2389
01:40:47,140 --> 01:40:49,200
cela ne change pas leur avis.

2390
01:40:49,440 --> 01:40:53,400
Cela les encourage simplement à ne pas le partager avec des personnes qui pourraient leur causer des ennuis.

2391
01:40:53,740 --> 01:40:58,800
Cela les amène donc à parler à des personnes avec lesquelles ils sont déjà d’accord et la polarisation du groupe prend son envol.

2392
01:40:59,360 --> 01:41:03,040
Nous avons donc des données intéressantes dans le livre, euh, sur la façon dont

2393
01:41:03,620 --> 01:41:06,200
chasser les gens de Twitter, par exemple, euh,

2394
01:41:06,540 --> 01:41:08,200
vous savez, euh, en 2017.

2395
01:41:08,200 --> 01:41:13,000
Euh, et puis encore une fois, je pense qu'en 2020, pousser les gens à bavarder a conduit à, vous savez,

2396
01:41:13,300 --> 01:41:15,420
une plus grande radicalisation parmi ces personnes.

2397
01:41:15,520 --> 01:41:17,860
C'est une force très prévisible.

2398
01:41:18,080 --> 01:41:20,180
La censure ne fait pas vraiment changer d'avis les gens et

2399
01:41:20,180 --> 01:41:23,240
cela les pousse dans des directions qui, en fait, sont très,

2400
01:41:23,240 --> 01:41:25,320
vous savez, des recherches solides permettront en fait

2401
01:41:25,320 --> 01:41:26,320
les rendre plus radicalisés.

2402
01:41:26,720 --> 01:41:28,180
Alors oui, je pense que le,

2403
01:41:28,460 --> 01:41:30,780
Je pense que la tentative d'interdire les discours de haine,

2404
01:41:31,080 --> 01:41:32,780
ça ne nous en protège pas vraiment,

2405
01:41:33,040 --> 01:41:34,040
mais cela donne au gouvernement

2406
01:41:34,680 --> 01:41:40,540
une arme si vaste à utiliser contre nous que nous regretterons de la lui avoir donnée.

2407
01:41:41,500 --> 01:41:42,220
Y a-t-il un moyen de

2408
01:41:42,800 --> 01:41:45,040
en quelque sorte, pour examiner des cas extrêmes,

2409
01:41:45,660 --> 01:41:47,120
pour tester un peu cette idée ?

2410
01:41:47,360 --> 01:41:48,520
Donc si nous regardons sur le campus,

2411
01:41:49,420 --> 01:41:54,520
que pensez-vous du fait d'autoriser, par exemple, les suprémacistes blancs sur le campus

2412
01:41:54,520 --> 01:41:55,760
faire, faire des discours ?

2413
01:41:55,920 --> 01:41:56,100
D'accord.

2414
01:41:56,980 --> 01:42:02,140
Je pense que vous devriez pouvoir étudier ce que pensent les gens.

2415
01:42:02,240 --> 01:42:04,620
Et je pense qu'il est important que nous le fassions réellement.

2416
01:42:05,340 --> 01:42:06,060
Donc je pense que,

2417
01:42:06,060 --> 01:42:08,080
vous savez, euh, prenons par exemple, QAnon.

2418
01:42:09,060 --> 01:42:09,880
Ouais, QAnon a tort.

2419
01:42:10,220 --> 01:42:13,060
Euh, mais d'où ça vient ?

2420
01:42:13,380 --> 01:42:14,520
Pourquoi pensaient-ils cela ?

2421
01:42:14,640 --> 01:42:15,720
Quelle est la motivation ?

2422
01:42:15,820 --> 01:42:16,800
Qui leur a appris ?

2423
01:42:16,800 --> 01:42:18,140
Qui a eu ces idées ?

2424
01:42:18,260 --> 01:42:20,220
C’est important pour comprendre l’histoire.

2425
01:42:20,360 --> 01:42:23,520
C’est important pour comprendre la politique américaine moderne.

2426
01:42:24,220 --> 01:42:26,420
Et donc si tu mets ton acte,

2427
01:42:26,420 --> 01:42:26,840
si tu mets ton

2428
01:42:26,860 --> 01:42:33,780
chapeau d'érudit et sur lequel vous devriez être curieux de savoir d'où ils viennent.

2429
01:42:34,440 --> 01:42:35,080
Darrell Davis,

2430
01:42:35,380 --> 01:42:38,960
et je suis sûr que vous le connaissez, une partie de son objectif était simplement

2431
01:42:38,960 --> 01:42:40,540
pour savoir d'où venaient les gens.

2432
01:42:40,600 --> 01:42:41,340
Et dans le processus,

2433
01:42:41,860 --> 01:42:43,080
il s'est en fait déradicalisé

2434
01:42:43,280 --> 01:42:46,660
un certain nombre de clients lorsqu'ils ont réalisé que cet homme noir

2435
01:42:47,260 --> 01:42:49,480
qui serait leur ami était en fait compatissant,

2436
01:42:49,600 --> 01:42:50,500
était une personne honnête.

2437
01:42:50,660 --> 01:42:51,520
Ils ont réalisé tout leur

2438
01:42:51,520 --> 01:42:52,460
les idées préconçues étaient fausses.

2439
01:42:52,540 --> 01:42:55,120
Cela peut donc avoir un facteur de déradicalisation,

2440
01:42:55,440 --> 01:42:56,440
mais même si ce n'est pas le cas,

2441
01:42:56,840 --> 01:43:00,720
il est toujours très important de savoir ce que pensent les mauvaises personnes de votre société.

2442
01:43:01,800 --> 01:43:03,640
Honnêtement, d'une certaine manière, c'est pour,

2443
01:43:03,740 --> 01:43:04,540
pour votre propre sécurité,

2444
01:43:04,560 --> 01:43:05,820
c'est probablement plus important

2445
01:43:05,820 --> 01:43:07,860
pour savoir ce que pensent réellement les mauvaises personnes de votre société.

2446
01:43:08,120 --> 01:43:10,760
Personnellement, je ne sais pas ce que vous en pensez,

2447
01:43:10,760 --> 01:43:12,120
mais je pense personnellement que la liberté

2448
01:43:12,120 --> 01:43:13,320
de parole dans des cas comme celui-là,

2449
01:43:13,400 --> 01:43:14,420
comme KKK et campus

2450
01:43:15,060 --> 01:43:17,800
peut faire plus de mal à court terme,

2451
01:43:18,660 --> 01:43:21,240
mais bien plus d'avantages à long terme.

2452
01:43:22,040 --> 01:43:24,000
Parce que tu peux parfois argumenter pour dire,

2453
01:43:24,180 --> 01:43:25,200
ça va faire mal.

2454
01:43:25,480 --> 01:43:25,820
Ouais.

2455
01:43:25,820 --> 01:43:26,620
A court terme.

2456
01:43:27,560 --> 01:43:30,540
Mais je veux dire, Harvey a dit que c'était comme considérer l'alternative.

2457
01:43:31,110 --> 01:43:34,180
Parce que tu as juste en quelque sorte fait valoir ce genre de chose,

2458
01:43:34,180 --> 01:43:35,520
ce serait potentiellement une bonne chose

2459
01:43:35,520 --> 01:43:36,900
chose même à court terme.

2460
01:43:37,160 --> 01:43:38,160
Et c'est souvent le cas, je pense,

2461
01:43:38,660 --> 01:43:40,620
surtout dans une société stable comme la nôtre,

2462
01:43:41,400 --> 01:43:44,640
euh, avec une classe moyenne forte, tout ce genre de choses où les gens ont comme le

2463
01:43:44,640 --> 01:43:46,060
le confort, la raison à travers les choses.

2464
01:43:46,260 --> 01:43:46,540
Ouais.

2465
01:43:46,660 --> 01:43:46,980
Euh,

2466
01:43:47,500 --> 01:43:49,700
mais tu sais, pour moi, c'est comme,

2467
01:43:50,060 --> 01:43:51,320
même si ça fait mal à court terme,

2468
01:43:51,700 --> 01:43:54,000
même si cela crée davantage de haine à court terme,

2469
01:43:54,560 --> 01:43:56,060
la liberté d'expression a ça

2470
01:43:56,800 --> 01:43:58,360
chose vraiment bénéfique,

2471
01:43:58,720 --> 01:44:00,480
c'est-à-dire que cela vous aide à avancer vers la vérité,

2472
01:44:00,480 --> 01:44:03,280
l'ensemble de la société vers une vision plus profonde,

2473
01:44:03,280 --> 01:44:05,400
compréhension plus précise de

2474
01:44:05,940 --> 01:44:09,740
la vie sur terre, la société, le fonctionnement des gens,

2475
01:44:10,460 --> 01:44:10,940
de l'éthique,

2476
01:44:11,300 --> 01:44:12,540
de la métaphysique, de tout.

2477
01:44:12,700 --> 01:44:15,980
Et cela, à long terme, représente un énorme avantage.

2478
01:44:16,340 --> 01:44:18,560
Cela élimine les nazis à long terme,

2479
01:44:18,680 --> 01:44:20,500
même si cela ajoute au nombre

2480
01:44:20,500 --> 01:44:21,720
des nazis à court terme.

2481
01:44:21,720 --> 01:44:21,820
Ouais.

2482
01:44:22,180 --> 01:44:26,000
Et bien, et en attendant, juste pour, et pour vérifier la réalité, les gens en parlent toujours,

2483
01:44:26,120 --> 01:44:27,140
qu'en est-il du clan sur le campus ?

2484
01:44:27,240 --> 01:44:27,840
Je suis comme,

2485
01:44:28,300 --> 01:44:29,200
ils ne sont jamais invités.

2486
01:44:30,200 --> 01:44:33,580
Euh, le, le, le, le, je n'ai pas vu de cas où ils ont été invités.

2487
01:44:34,040 --> 01:44:34,640
Euh,

2488
01:44:35,020 --> 01:44:40,120
généralement, l'argument du clan est rejeté lorsque les gens essaient de s'excuser.

2489
01:44:40,380 --> 01:44:42,220
Et c'est pourquoi nous avons critiqué Ben Shapiro.

2490
01:44:42,800 --> 01:44:45,620
Et c'est pourquoi vous ne pouvez pas avoir Bill Maher sur le campus.

2491
01:44:45,820 --> 01:44:48,200
C'est pour ça, tu sais, et c'est comme, d'accord.

2492
01:44:48,240 --> 01:44:51,940
Euh, vous savez, et c'est, c'est un peu ça, encore une fois, qu'en est-il duisme,

2493
01:44:52,020 --> 01:44:55,700
à propos de dire, eh bien, cette chose là-bas est terrible et donc ce comédien ne devrait pas venir.

2494
01:44:56,780 --> 01:44:59,640
Euh, j'ai donc une question peut-être à titre de conseil,

2495
01:45:00,540 --> 01:45:00,900
Vous savez,

2496
01:45:01,280 --> 01:45:02,940
interviewer des gens et voir

2497
01:45:02,950 --> 01:45:05,440
c'est comme un podcast comme plateforme

2498
01:45:07,320 --> 01:45:10,080
pour décider à qui parler ou pas,

2499
01:45:10,240 --> 01:45:12,760
ce n’est pas quelque chose avec lequel je dois me retrouver face à face à l’occasion.

2500
01:45:13,560 --> 01:45:17,220
Mon inclination naturelle avant de commencer le podcast était de parler à n'importe qui.

2501
01:45:18,000 --> 01:45:22,120
et y compris les gens qui m'intéressent toujours,

2502
01:45:22,480 --> 01:45:22,800
Vous savez,

2503
01:45:23,460 --> 01:45:24,300
les membres actuels du

2504
01:45:24,300 --> 01:45:24,720
KKK.

2505
01:45:24,720 --> 01:45:26,240
Et pour moi,

2506
01:45:26,940 --> 01:45:29,620
il y a une responsabilité de le faire avec compétence.

2507
01:45:29,660 --> 01:45:30,500
Ouais.

2508
01:45:31,260 --> 01:45:35,340
Euh, et cette responsabilité me pèse de plus en plus lourdement parce que

2509
01:45:35,340 --> 01:45:39,560
vous réalisez à quel point cela demande de compétences, car vous devez savoir,

2510
01:45:39,840 --> 01:45:40,980
pour comprendre autant de choses,

2511
01:45:41,360 --> 01:45:43,600
parce que j'ai, j'ai compris que le diable

2512
01:45:44,140 --> 01:45:45,700
sera toujours charismatique.

2513
01:45:46,140 --> 01:45:46,400
Ouais.

2514
01:45:46,900 --> 01:45:48,800
Hum, le diable ne ressemblera pas au diable.

2515
01:45:48,800 --> 01:45:51,080
Et donc tu dois réaliser que tu dois le faire,

2516
01:45:51,540 --> 01:45:52,820
tu ne peux pas toujours

2517
01:45:54,080 --> 01:45:57,280
venir à la table avec une profonde compassion pour un autre être humain.

2518
01:45:57,420 --> 01:45:58,000
Tu dois avoir,

2519
01:45:58,100 --> 01:46:00,140
tu sais, comme 90% de compassion et,

2520
01:46:01,080 --> 01:46:03,800
et 90 % de connaissances historiques approfondies

2521
01:46:03,800 --> 01:46:06,840
sur le contexte des batailles autour de cette question particulière.

2522
01:46:06,940 --> 01:46:08,360
Et cela prend juste un énorme

2523
01:46:08,360 --> 01:46:10,460
quantité d'efforts, mais je ne sais pas s'il y a

2524
01:46:11,080 --> 01:46:12,320
pensées que vous avez à ce sujet,

2525
01:46:12,520 --> 01:46:15,620
comment gérer la parole,

2526
01:46:16,860 --> 01:46:17,180
euh,

2527
01:46:17,820 --> 01:46:18,520
dans un sens

2528
01:46:19,640 --> 01:46:22,100
sans censurer, sans le faire remonter à la surface,

2529
01:46:22,400 --> 01:46:23,400
mais d'une manière qui crée

2530
01:46:23,400 --> 01:46:24,460
plus d'amour dans le monde.

2531
01:46:25,040 --> 01:46:26,000
Je me souviens, euh,

2532
01:46:26,780 --> 01:46:27,600
Steve Bannon

2533
01:46:28,160 --> 01:46:32,260
a été désinvité du festival New Yorker et de Jim Carrey

2534
01:46:32,260 --> 01:46:34,960
paniqué et toutes sortes d'autres personnes ont paniqué et il a été désinvité,

2535
01:46:35,280 --> 01:46:39,660
euh, de, de, et j'ai été invité à parler de cela avec un sourire narquois.

2536
01:46:40,480 --> 01:46:42,000
Et je disais, écoute,

2537
01:46:44,740 --> 01:46:49,080
vous n'avez personne à votre conférence parce que vous êtes d'accord avec eux.

2538
01:46:49,080 --> 01:46:53,980
Euh, comme si c'était le, le, nous devons sortir de cette idée que c'est parce qu'ils essayaient de réussir

2539
01:46:53,980 --> 01:46:55,540
on dirait que c'est une approbation de Steve Bannon.

2540
01:46:55,600 --> 01:46:56,480
Comme si c'était absurde.

2541
01:46:56,580 --> 01:46:59,020
Comme si vous regardiez réellement les opinions de toutes les personnes présentes,

2542
01:46:59,800 --> 01:47:01,040
tu ne peux pas approuver

2543
01:47:01,040 --> 01:47:03,860
toutes les opinions qu’ont réellement toutes ces autres personnes qui seront là.

2544
01:47:04,460 --> 01:47:06,420
Et puis, en train de présenter cet argument,

2545
01:47:06,640 --> 01:47:08,580
J'ai eu, euh, et, et aussi bien sûr,

2546
01:47:09,180 --> 01:47:12,660
le très classique, il est très précieux de savoir ce que pense quelqu'un Steve Bannon.

2547
01:47:12,660 --> 01:47:13,300
Tu devrais être curieux

2548
01:47:13,320 --> 01:47:13,980
à propos de ça.

2549
01:47:14,260 --> 01:47:16,080
Et je me souviens que quelqu'un avait répondu en disant :

2550
01:47:16,540 --> 01:47:17,940
eh bien, qu'est-ce que tu voudrais à quelqu'un

2551
01:47:17,940 --> 01:47:18,740
interviewer un djihadiste ?

2552
01:47:18,940 --> 01:47:21,020
Et je me dis, parce qu'en ce moment,

2553
01:47:21,200 --> 01:47:22,300
comme c'était le cas à l'époque où,

2554
01:47:22,300 --> 01:47:23,460
quand ISIS était vraiment là

2555
01:47:23,980 --> 01:47:24,260
en allant,

2556
01:47:24,700 --> 01:47:25,860
allez-y.

2557
01:47:25,880 --> 01:47:27,620
Euh, et j'étais comme,

2558
01:47:28,020 --> 01:47:29,480
tu ne voudrais pas y aller

2559
01:47:29,480 --> 01:47:32,980
à une conférence où quelqu'un essayait de comprendre ce qui motive certaines de ces personnes ?

2560
01:47:33,240 --> 01:47:36,160
Euh, parce que cela change votre cadrage, c'est essentiellement comme,

2561
01:47:36,220 --> 01:47:37,280
non, c'est de la curiosité.

2562
01:47:37,520 --> 01:47:40,200
C'est le remède à beaucoup de ces choses.

2563
01:47:40,200 --> 01:47:44,060
Et nous avons besoin de beaucoup plus de curiosité et de beaucoup moins de certitudes injustifiées.

2564
01:47:44,760 --> 01:47:45,920
Et il y a une question du genre,

2565
01:47:46,120 --> 01:47:48,000
comment mener de telles conversations ?

2566
01:47:48,740 --> 01:47:48,840
Et,

2567
01:47:49,540 --> 01:47:51,460
euh, je me sens profondément sous-qualifié.

2568
01:47:51,700 --> 01:47:53,100
Selon vous, qui est particulièrement doué pour ça ?

2569
01:47:54,100 --> 01:47:57,440
J’ai l’impression que les documentaristes font généralement un bien meilleur travail.

2570
01:47:57,860 --> 01:47:59,820
Et le meilleur travail est généralement réalisé par les biographes.

2571
01:48:00,320 --> 01:48:00,720
Ouais.

2572
01:48:00,720 --> 01:48:04,140
Ainsi, plus vous consacrez de temps à une conversation particulière,

2573
01:48:04,860 --> 01:48:06,660
comme une réflexion vraiment profonde et

2574
01:48:06,660 --> 01:48:09,920
contexte historique et étudier les gens, leur façon de penser,

2575
01:48:10,280 --> 01:48:10,900
je regarde tout différemment

2576
01:48:10,920 --> 01:48:13,300
perspectives, en regardant la psychologie de la personne,

2577
01:48:13,780 --> 01:48:16,540
l'éducation, leurs parents, leurs grands-parents, tout ça,

2578
01:48:17,100 --> 01:48:18,620
plus tu passes de temps avec ça,

2579
01:48:19,760 --> 01:48:20,700
euh, mieux c'est,

2580
01:48:21,500 --> 01:48:24,000
meilleure est la qualité de la conversation, car

2581
01:48:24,580 --> 01:48:25,520
vous apprenez à comprendre le,

2582
01:48:26,700 --> 01:48:29,360
vous apprenez vraiment à sympathiser avec la personne,

2583
01:48:29,740 --> 01:48:30,900
avec les personnes qu'il ou elle

2584
01:48:31,380 --> 01:48:34,340
représente, euh, et vous pouvez voir l'humanité commune,

2585
01:48:34,520 --> 01:48:35,160
tout ça.

2586
01:48:35,420 --> 01:48:38,900
Les intervieweurs ne font souvent pas ce travail.

2587
01:48:39,140 --> 01:48:39,420
Ouais.

2588
01:48:39,640 --> 01:48:43,840
Euh, donc les meilleures choses que j'ai vues, ce sont des interviews qui font partie d'un documentaire.

2589
01:48:43,920 --> 01:48:44,360
Ouais.

2590
01:48:44,640 --> 01:48:46,200
Mais même maintenant, les documentaires ressemblent à :

2591
01:48:46,220 --> 01:48:48,680
il y a une énorme incitation à agir le plus rapidement possible.

2592
01:48:48,820 --> 01:48:51,860
Il n’y a aucune incitation à passer vraiment du temps avec la personne.

2593
01:48:52,000 --> 01:48:55,820
Il y a un nouveau documentaire génial sur Floyd Abrams que je recommande vraiment.

2594
01:48:56,340 --> 01:48:59,160
Nous avons fait un documentaire sur Ira Glasser intitulé Mighty Ira,

2595
01:48:59,300 --> 01:49:01,900
euh, c'était ma vidéo

2596
01:49:01,900 --> 01:49:06,540
mon équipe et mon protégé Nico Perino, Chris Mulvey et Aaron Reese l'ont mis en place.

2597
01:49:07,140 --> 01:49:10,160
Et ça suit juste la vie et l'époque de, euh,

2598
01:49:10,600 --> 01:49:13,120
d'Ira Glasser, l'ancien chef de l'ACLU.

2599
01:49:13,540 --> 01:49:14,980
Si tu pouvais juste t'attarder là-dessus,

2600
01:49:15,040 --> 01:49:16,360
c'est une histoire fascinante.

2601
01:49:16,360 --> 01:49:16,860
Oh ouais.

2602
01:49:18,280 --> 01:49:18,440
Incroyable.

2603
01:49:18,660 --> 01:49:20,240
Euh, Ira, il n'était pas avocat.

2604
01:49:20,440 --> 01:49:23,300
Hum, il a commencé à travailler au NYCLU,

2605
01:49:23,480 --> 01:49:24,600
Union des libertés civiles de New York

2606
01:49:25,220 --> 01:49:26,460
de retour, je pense aux années soixante.

2607
01:49:26,600 --> 01:49:26,780
Il était,

2608
01:49:27,160 --> 01:49:30,540
euh, je pense que Robert Kennedy lui a recommandé d'aller dans cette direction.

2609
01:49:30,600 --> 01:49:31,200
Euh,

2610
01:49:32,520 --> 01:49:37,100
et il est devenu président de l'ACLU juste au moment où ils étaient, euh,

2611
01:49:37,480 --> 01:49:41,760
souffrant de, euh, défendre les nazis à Skokie et Nico,

2612
01:49:41,760 --> 01:49:46,980
euh, et, et, et, et Aaron et Chris ont monté ça et ils n'avaient jamais fait de documentaire auparavant.

2613
01:49:47,320 --> 01:49:49,420
Et ça s’est tellement bien passé.

2614
01:49:50,040 --> 01:49:53,100
Euh, et ça raconte l'histoire des nazis à Skokie.

2615
01:49:53,720 --> 01:49:57,760
Il raconte l'histoire de l'affaire qui l'entoure, il raconte l'histoire de l'ACLU à l'époque.

2616
01:49:57,760 --> 01:49:59,540
Et quel grand leader Ira Glasser était.

2617
01:49:59,840 --> 01:50:02,280
Et quelle est l'une des choses qui est si géniale, c'est :

2618
01:50:02,300 --> 01:50:03,420
quand tu pourras voir

2619
01:50:04,020 --> 01:50:04,980
les nazis à Skokie,

2620
01:50:05,600 --> 01:50:08,920
ils se présentent comme les idiots auxquels on pourrait s'attendre.

2621
01:50:09,020 --> 01:50:10,340
Il y a un moment où le,

2622
01:50:10,340 --> 01:50:14,410
quand le rallye ne se passe pas très bien et que le leader s'énerve.

2623
01:50:14,980 --> 01:50:17,340
Et on dirait presque qu'il va aimer crier un peu comme,

2624
01:50:17,420 --> 01:50:20,280
vous êtes, vous êtes, vous êtes, vous faites de ce rassemblement nazi une moquerie.

2625
01:50:20,300 --> 01:50:20,420
Et

2626
01:50:21,000 --> 01:50:26,760
cela montrait donc à quel point le fait de permettre aux nazis de s’exprimer à Skokie leur coupait le souffle.

2627
01:50:27,180 --> 01:50:29,180
Comme s'ils avaient tout le mouvement,

2628
01:50:30,040 --> 01:50:31,320
comme si tout le monde était gentil,

2629
01:50:31,320 --> 01:50:34,100
tout s'est en quelque sorte dissous après ça parce qu'ils ressemblaient à

2630
01:50:34,780 --> 01:50:36,120
des imbéciles racistes qu'ils étaient.

2631
01:50:36,280 --> 01:50:38,580
Ils étaient, vous savez, même les frères blues faisaient des blagues,

2632
01:50:38,580 --> 01:50:39,580
vous savez, des blagues à leur sujet.

2633
01:50:40,160 --> 01:50:45,360
Euh, et ça, et ça ne s'est pas transformé en le désastre que les gens pensaient que ça allait être juste en les laissant parler.

2634
01:50:45,920 --> 01:50:46,800
Et Ira Glasser, d'accord.

2635
01:50:46,820 --> 01:50:47,560
Il a donc

2636
01:50:48,380 --> 01:50:54,800
cette merveilleuse histoire sur la façon dont Jackie Robinson a rejoint les Brooklyn Dodgers et comment

2637
01:50:55,320 --> 01:50:57,980
il y a eu un moment où il voyait quelqu'un,

2638
01:50:58,360 --> 01:51:03,800
un Afro-Américain comme littéralement dans leur équipe et comment cela les a vraiment enthousiasmés

2639
01:51:03,800 --> 01:51:05,460
la cause de l’égalité raciale.

2640
01:51:05,660 --> 01:51:07,820
Et cela est devenu une grande partie de sa vie.

2641
01:51:08,700 --> 01:51:11,920
Et je pense juste à cela comme une si belle métaphore

2642
01:51:12,440 --> 01:51:14,540
élargir votre cercle et

2643
01:51:14,600 --> 01:51:19,920
voir plus de personnes faire littéralement partie de votre équipe est la solution à tant de ces problèmes.

2644
01:51:20,560 --> 01:51:24,260
Et je crains que l'une des choses qui soit absolument une réalité de la vie

2645
01:51:24,260 --> 01:51:25,440
en Amérique, c'est comme,

2646
01:51:26,000 --> 01:51:30,160
nous nous considérons davantage comme des camps ennemis plutôt que comme des membres de la même équipe.

2647
01:51:30,940 --> 01:51:32,720
Et c'était en fait quelque chose au début,

2648
01:51:33,060 --> 01:51:34,200
comme moi et Will Creely,

2649
01:51:34,260 --> 01:51:39,700
le directeur juridique de Fire a écrit sur les défis à venir en matière de liberté d'expression pour tous ceux qui sont sur Facebook.

2650
01:51:41,200 --> 01:51:46,300
Et une chose que j'espérais, c'est qu'à mesure que de plus en plus de gens exposaient

2651
01:51:46,300 --> 01:51:47,340
plus de leur vie,

2652
01:51:47,700 --> 01:51:49,720
nous réaliserions beaucoup de ces choses que nous connaissions intellectuellement,

2653
01:51:50,100 --> 01:51:52,780
comme si les enfants allaient au bar, se saoulaient et faisaient des choses stupides.

2654
01:51:53,380 --> 01:51:53,920
Euh,

2655
01:51:54,380 --> 01:51:55,460
ça, euh,

2656
01:51:55,780 --> 01:51:56,620
que quand nous avons commencé

2657
01:51:56,690 --> 01:52:01,500
en voyant la preuve qu'ils font des choses stupides qui pourraient nous choquer au début,

2658
01:52:01,520 --> 01:52:03,540
mais finalement, je deviens plus sophistiqué et je dis,

2659
01:52:03,540 --> 01:52:04,720
eh bien, allez, les gens sont comme ça.

2660
01:52:05,400 --> 01:52:06,960
Cela n’a jamais vraiment semblé se produire.

2661
01:52:07,300 --> 01:52:09,880
Euh, ça, ça, je ne pense pas que je pense

2662
01:52:09,920 --> 01:52:13,920
qu'il y a beaucoup de choses que nous savons sur la nature humaine et que nous savons des choses stupides

2663
01:52:13,920 --> 01:52:20,340
les gens disent, euh, et nous, nous avons réussi à créer un environnement où il n'y a que quelqu'un

2664
01:52:20,340 --> 01:52:22,220
là-bas, attendant d'être un peu comme,

2665
01:52:23,120 --> 01:52:24,300
Oh, souviens-toi de cette bêtise que tu as dit que nous étions

2666
01:52:24,300 --> 01:52:24,700
14 ?

2667
01:52:24,980 --> 01:52:26,620
Eh bien, je vais m'assurer que vous n'entrez pas dans le,

2668
01:52:26,720 --> 01:52:27,700
à l'école de tes rêves parce que

2669
01:52:27,720 --> 01:52:28,200
de ça.

2670
01:52:28,380 --> 01:52:29,680
Cette archéologie offensive.

2671
01:52:30,300 --> 01:52:31,140
Mais ce n'est pas mon terme.

2672
01:52:31,340 --> 01:52:32,040
C'est un excellent terme.

2673
01:52:32,080 --> 01:52:38,160
On vole les meilleurs en fouillant dans les commentaires passés de quelqu'un pour trouver un discours qui n'a pas bien vieilli.

2674
01:52:38,940 --> 01:52:39,760
Et celui-là est tactique.

2675
01:52:39,940 --> 01:52:41,380
Comme ça, celui-là n'est pas seulement quelqu'un qui n'est pas

2676
01:52:41,380 --> 01:52:41,880
empathique.

2677
01:52:41,960 --> 01:52:44,560
Ils disent, je vais te punir pour ça ou,

2678
01:52:44,740 --> 01:52:45,240
et c'est une des raisons

2679
01:52:45,240 --> 01:52:47,200
pourquoi j'ai été déprimé en écrivant ce livre

2680
01:52:47,720 --> 01:52:52,680
parce que tu sais, c'est déjà le cas, il y a déjà des gens qui ne m'aiment pas à cause de dorloter l'esprit américain,

2681
01:52:52,820 --> 01:52:54,300
généralement basé sur un malentendu

2682
01:52:54,440 --> 01:52:56,880
de ce que nous avons réellement dit et dorloté dans l'esprit américain, mais néanmoins.

2683
01:52:57,940 --> 01:53:04,280
Euh, mais sur celui-ci, vous savez, comme si j'appelais les gens parce qu'ils étaient très cruels dans beaucoup de cas,

2684
01:53:05,120 --> 01:53:09,240
mais en d'autres termes, mais une chose qui faisait vraiment peur dans le fait d'étudier beaucoup de

2685
01:53:09,240 --> 01:53:11,560
ces cas, c'est qu'une fois que vous avez cette cible sur votre dos,

2686
01:53:11,680 --> 01:53:14,220
la raison pour laquelle ils vont essayer de vous annuler pourrait être n'importe quoi.

2687
01:53:14,860 --> 01:53:17,100
Tu sais, ils pourraient retourner dans ton ancien,

2688
01:53:17,220 --> 01:53:20,840
vos vieux bateaux, retrouvez quelque chose que vous avez dit en 1995,

2689
01:53:21,040 --> 01:53:22,500
tu sais, fais quelque chose,

2690
01:53:23,020 --> 01:53:26,980
euh, là où en gros, on dirait que c'est tout autre chose,

2691
01:53:27,160 --> 01:53:28,500
mais vraiment ce qu'ils sont,

2692
01:53:28,500 --> 01:53:30,740
ce qui se passe, c'est qu'ils n'ont pas aimé votre opinion.

2693
01:53:30,820 --> 01:53:32,400
Ils n’aimaient pas votre point de vue sur quelque chose.

2694
01:53:32,620 --> 01:53:33,480
Et ils vont trouver un,

2695
01:53:33,560 --> 01:53:34,860
trouver un moyen qu'à partir de maintenant,

2696
01:53:34,920 --> 01:53:35,900
chaque fois que ton nom apparaît,

2697
01:53:36,220 --> 01:53:38,620
c'est comme, Oh, souviens-toi de ça, de cette chose que je n'aimais pas chez eux.

2698
01:53:39,100 --> 01:53:41,280
Et c'est encore une fois, c'est cruel.

2699
01:53:41,300 --> 01:53:42,980
Cela ne vous rapproche en rien de la vérité.

2700
01:53:43,340 --> 01:53:45,540
Et, mais c'est un peu effrayant de sortir le cou.

2701
01:53:46,700 --> 01:53:47,080
D'accord.

2702
01:53:47,160 --> 01:53:48,120
En termes de solutions,

2703
01:53:48,460 --> 01:53:49,700
Je vais vous demander quelques choses.

2704
01:53:50,020 --> 01:53:50,320
Donc un,

2705
01:53:51,440 --> 01:53:52,600
euh, être parent.

2706
01:53:52,860 --> 01:53:53,060
Ouais.

2707
01:53:54,080 --> 01:53:54,820
Cinq et sept ans.

2708
01:53:56,380 --> 01:53:58,240
Je suis donc sûr que vous avez tout compris.

2709
01:53:58,240 --> 01:53:59,160
Oh mon Dieu, non.

2710
01:53:59,340 --> 01:54:00,780
Du point de vue de la liberté d’expression.

2711
01:54:01,180 --> 01:54:01,600
Ouais.

2712
01:54:01,780 --> 01:54:03,860
Euh, du point de vue de la culture de la liberté d'expression,

2713
01:54:03,960 --> 01:54:04,760
comment être un bon parent.

2714
01:54:05,380 --> 01:54:05,600
Ouais.

2715
01:54:06,340 --> 01:54:10,780
Je pense que la première qualité que vous devriez cultiver chez vos enfants,

2716
01:54:10,780 --> 01:54:12,820
si vous voulez avoir une culture de liberté d'expression

2717
01:54:14,140 --> 01:54:15,200
c'est la curiosité

2718
01:54:16,100 --> 01:54:20,580
et une conscience de l'immensité qui sera toujours inconnue.

2719
01:54:21,560 --> 01:54:24,500
Et enthousiasmer mes enfants pour cette idée, c'est comme,

2720
01:54:24,640 --> 01:54:25,540
nous allons dépenser tout notre

2721
01:54:25,540 --> 01:54:26,600
vit en apprenant des choses.

2722
01:54:27,640 --> 01:54:32,680
Et c'est rapide et excitant et sans fin et nous n'y arriverons jamais

2723
01:54:32,680 --> 01:54:33,600
une grosse bosse dedans,

2724
01:54:33,660 --> 01:54:35,240
mais le voyage sera incroyable.

2725
01:54:36,120 --> 01:54:38,760
Mais seuls les imbéciles pensent tout savoir.

2726
01:54:39,560 --> 01:54:41,660
Euh, et parfois des imbéciles dangereux en plus.

2727
01:54:42,840 --> 01:54:44,560
Donc donner le sentiment d'humilité intellectuelle

2728
01:54:45,060 --> 01:54:45,680
tôt

2729
01:54:46,220 --> 01:54:47,960
étant aussi, tu sais,

2730
01:54:48,360 --> 01:54:50,380
dire des choses qui semblent vraiment démodées,

2731
01:54:50,760 --> 01:54:52,140
mais je dis des choses à mes enfants,

2732
01:54:52,540 --> 01:54:53,020
comme, écoute,

2733
01:54:53,780 --> 01:54:54,280
si tu

2734
01:54:55,540 --> 01:54:57,720
profiter des études et du travail,

2735
01:54:58,040 --> 01:54:59,480
deux choses que j'apprécie beaucoup,

2736
01:54:59,520 --> 01:55:00,320
Je le fais pour m'amuser.

2737
01:55:01,400 --> 01:55:04,220
Hum, ta vie va être géniale et facile.

2738
01:55:05,000 --> 01:55:07,900
Euh, donc certaines, vous savez, certaines de ces vertus à l'ancienne sont des choses

2739
01:55:07,900 --> 01:55:08,600
J'essaie de prêcher,

2740
01:55:08,900 --> 01:55:12,680
euh, des trucs contre-intuitifs comme passer du temps à jouer dehors,

2741
01:55:12,680 --> 01:55:16,720
euh, avoir du temps qui n'est pas une expérience intermédiaire est vraiment,

2742
01:55:16,760 --> 01:55:18,120
euh, c'est vraiment important.

2743
01:55:19,020 --> 01:55:19,440
Et

2744
01:55:20,120 --> 01:55:25,800
des petites choses comme, euh, dont je parle dans le livre quand mes enfants regardent quelque chose qui fait peur

2745
01:55:25,920 --> 01:55:28,320
et je ne parle pas de films de zombies,

2746
01:55:28,320 --> 01:55:30,240
tu sais, je parle comme d'un dessin animé

2747
01:55:30,240 --> 01:55:31,520
c'est un moment plutôt effrayant

2748
01:55:32,300 --> 01:55:34,220
et disant qu'ils veulent éteindre la télé.

2749
01:55:34,660 --> 01:55:36,960
Et moi, et je leur ai parlé et je dis, écoute,

2750
01:55:37,920 --> 01:55:40,180
Il me manque à côté de toi et nous allons finir ce spectacle

2751
01:55:41,080 --> 01:55:44,520
et je veux que tu me dises ce que tu en penses, après.

2752
01:55:45,220 --> 01:55:47,560
Et je me suis assis à côté de mes fils.

2753
01:55:48,300 --> 01:55:49,920
Euh, et à la fin,

2754
01:55:49,980 --> 01:55:51,380
à chaque fois que je,

2755
01:55:51,460 --> 01:55:52,460
tu sais, quand je leur ai demandé,

2756
01:55:52,580 --> 01:55:53,940
Est-ce que c'était aussi effrayant que tu le pensais ?

2757
01:55:54,660 --> 01:55:55,140
Et il y avait comme,

2758
01:55:55,240 --> 01:55:56,260
non papa, c'était bien.

2759
01:55:56,300 --> 01:55:58,460
Et je me dis que c'est l'une des grandes leçons de la vie.

2760
01:55:59,060 --> 01:56:00,060
La peur que tu ne le fasses pas

2761
01:56:00,800 --> 01:56:05,000
traverser devient beaucoup plus important dans votre tête que de simplement y faire face.

2762
01:56:05,620 --> 01:56:07,340
C'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles je me bats contre cette culture.

2763
01:56:07,500 --> 01:56:08,220
J'aime,

2764
01:56:08,540 --> 01:56:14,420
vous savez, pour que tous nos enfants puissent grandir dans un environnement où les gens vous donnent de la grâce et, vous savez,

2765
01:56:15,160 --> 01:56:17,860
accepter le fait que parfois les gens disent des choses qui vous énervent,

2766
01:56:18,100 --> 01:56:20,740
prendre au sérieux cette possibilité et se tromper et,

2767
01:56:20,740 --> 01:56:21,700
et, euh, sois curieux.

2768
01:56:22,260 --> 01:56:24,560
Eh bien, j'espère que la chose que vous avez mentionnée,

2769
01:56:24,560 --> 01:56:26,560
c'est parce que tant de jeunes

2770
01:56:26,560 --> 01:56:28,400
les affaires des gens sont sur Internet

2771
01:56:29,040 --> 01:56:31,600
qu'ils vont se donner une pause parce qu'alors

2772
01:56:31,600 --> 01:56:32,920
tout le monde est digne d’annuler.

2773
01:56:33,600 --> 01:56:35,700
La génération Z déteste le plus l’annulation de la culture.

2774
01:56:35,840 --> 01:56:37,860
Et c'est une autre raison pour laquelle c'est comme les gens

2775
01:56:37,960 --> 01:56:39,240
prétendant toujours que cela se produit.

2776
01:56:39,460 --> 01:56:39,720
C'est un peu comme,

2777
01:56:39,800 --> 01:56:41,520
non, tu peux réellement demander aux enfants

2778
01:56:41,980 --> 01:56:44,320
ce qu'ils pensent de l'annulation de la culture et ils détestent ça.

2779
01:56:44,600 --> 01:56:47,080
Ouais. Eh bien, je les considère en quelque sorte comme le système immunitaire.

2780
01:56:47,480 --> 01:56:47,600
C'est comme,

2781
01:56:48,360 --> 01:56:50,080
c'est la culture qui se réveille pour aimer,

2782
01:56:50,140 --> 01:56:51,000
non, ce n'est pas une bonne chose.

2783
01:56:51,260 --> 01:56:52,520
Je suis content cependant.

2784
01:56:52,620 --> 01:56:55,360
Je veux dire, je, je, je fais partie de ces enfants qui,

2785
01:56:55,360 --> 01:56:56,820
tu sais, je suis vraiment content que

2786
01:56:56,820 --> 01:57:01,620
J'étais un petit enfant dans les années 80 et un adolescent dans les années 90 car avoir tout

2787
01:57:01,760 --> 01:57:04,560
potentiellement en ligne, euh, c'est, ce n'est pas un,

2788
01:57:04,940 --> 01:57:05,520
une éducation.

2789
01:57:05,820 --> 01:57:05,980
J'envie.

2790
01:57:06,880 --> 01:57:11,080
Eh bien, moi, parce que vous pouvez aussi exercer la liberté d'expression absolue.

2791
01:57:11,920 --> 01:57:12,660
J'aime

2792
01:57:13,380 --> 01:57:20,000
menant là où j'espère pour l'avenir où beaucoup de nos insécurités,

2793
01:57:20,540 --> 01:57:20,860
défauts,

2794
01:57:21,580 --> 01:57:22,940
tout est là-bas.

2795
01:57:23,380 --> 01:57:25,700
Et pour être honnête avec ça,

2796
01:57:25,800 --> 01:57:28,600
euh, je pense que cela mène à un monde meilleur.

2797
01:57:28,840 --> 01:57:29,960
Parce que les défauts sont beaux.

2798
01:57:30,340 --> 01:57:32,120
Je veux dire, ce sont les défauts,

2799
01:57:32,120 --> 01:57:34,300
euh, les ingrédients de base de la connexion humaine.

2800
01:57:34,780 --> 01:57:35,400
Euh, Robert Wright,

2801
01:57:35,820 --> 01:57:37,000
il a écrit un livre sur,

2802
01:57:37,120 --> 01:57:38,280
euh, continuez, sur le bouddhisme.

2803
01:57:38,340 --> 01:57:40,100
Euh, et j'ai parlé d'essayer

2804
01:57:40,100 --> 01:57:41,940
utiliser les médias sociaux à partir d'un,

2805
01:57:42,080 --> 01:57:43,840
d'un point de vue bouddhiste et comme,

2806
01:57:44,000 --> 01:57:48,220
comme si vous étiez, comme si c'était l'inconscient collectif en train de méditer et

2807
01:57:48,800 --> 01:57:50,060
voir ces petits comme

2808
01:57:50,580 --> 01:57:56,820
des éléments en colère qui essaient de vous annuler ou de vous faire taire et qui aiment juste les laisser partir.

2809
01:57:56,820 --> 01:57:58,940
de la même manière, vous êtes censé regarder vos pensées s'éloigner.

2810
01:57:59,240 --> 01:58:02,700
J'adorerais voir ça visualisé quel que soit le,

2811
01:58:02,940 --> 01:58:04,520
quel que soit le drame qui se passe,

2812
01:58:04,800 --> 01:58:07,180
continue, juste en voyant la mer,

2813
01:58:07,180 --> 01:58:08,600
de la conscience collective,

2814
01:58:08,660 --> 01:58:11,220
je traite juste cela et j'ai

2815
01:58:11,220 --> 01:58:14,200
un peu comme une crise de panique et juste un peu comme,

2816
01:58:14,200 --> 01:58:16,860
ouais, en le lisant, en regardant le petit genre de haine,

2817
01:58:16,860 --> 01:58:18,360
des voix en colère surgissent et disent,

2818
01:58:18,480 --> 01:58:19,360
ok, tu y es.

2819
01:58:19,740 --> 01:58:21,220
Et je suis toujours concentré sur,

2820
01:58:21,220 --> 01:58:22,960
sur cette chose parce que c'est,

2821
01:58:23,600 --> 01:58:25,240
ça, c'est une des choses,

2822
01:58:26,280 --> 01:58:26,300
d'accord.

2823
01:58:26,480 --> 01:58:28,440
Ouais, en fait, c'est probablement tard dans le jeu,

2824
01:58:28,440 --> 01:58:30,740
pour donner ma grande théorie sur ce genre de choses.

2825
01:58:31,760 --> 01:58:32,600
Euh, mais,

2826
01:58:32,920 --> 01:58:34,580
euh, jamais trop tard.

2827
01:58:35,220 --> 01:58:35,360
Donc,

2828
01:58:35,720 --> 01:58:37,060
donc ce que j'étudiais,

2829
01:58:37,060 --> 01:58:39,740
euh, à la faculté de droit, quand j'ai manqué de cours de premier amendement,

2830
01:58:39,740 --> 01:58:42,620
euh, j'ai décidé d'étudier la censure pendant le tutorat

2831
01:58:42,620 --> 01:58:46,080
dynastie, euh, parce que c'est de là que viennent nos idées de retenue préalable,

2832
01:58:46,080 --> 01:58:49,220
euh, ça, ça vient de la licence de l'imprimerie,

2833
01:58:49,360 --> 01:58:51,040
euh, c'était quelque chose qu'Henri VIII

2834
01:58:51,040 --> 01:58:52,520
a été le premier à faire là où, en gros,

2835
01:58:53,060 --> 01:58:56,140
euh, l'idée était que si tu ne peux rien imprimer

2836
01:58:56,160 --> 01:58:58,360
en Angleterre, à moins que ce soit avec ceux-là, euh,

2837
01:58:59,200 --> 01:59:01,080
euh, votre majesté a approuvé les imprimeurs,

2838
01:59:01,580 --> 01:59:06,840
euh, cela empêchera les travaux hérétiques et les trucs anti-Henri huitième de sortir.

2839
01:59:07,060 --> 01:59:08,380
Je suis jolie, jolie, jolie, jolie,

2840
01:59:08,880 --> 01:59:10,000
jolie, euh,

2841
01:59:10,420 --> 01:59:11,700
idée efficace à tout le moins.

2842
01:59:12,400 --> 01:59:19,100
Euh, et moi toujours, alors il a commencé à se mettre en colère contre l'imprimerie vers 1521 et ensuite à passer quelque chose

2843
01:59:19,120 --> 01:59:23,880
qui exigeait que les imprimés soient avec le Parlement en, euh, 1538.

2844
01:59:24,620 --> 01:59:27,760
Euh, et je pense toujours à ça comme à l'endroit où nous en sommes actuellement,

2845
01:59:28,260 --> 01:59:29,560
euh, parce que nous avons ça,

2846
01:59:29,920 --> 01:59:33,040
nous avions la, à l'époque nous avions la technologie disruptive originale,

2847
01:59:33,160 --> 01:59:34,120
tu sais, écrire était probablement,

2848
01:59:34,420 --> 01:59:36,980
mais le suivant, qui était l'imprimerie,

2849
01:59:37,020 --> 01:59:38,340
ce qui était absolument calamiteux.

2850
01:59:38,560 --> 01:59:42,920
Et je veux dire, et moi, et je dis volontairement calamiteux parce qu'à court terme,

2851
01:59:43,380 --> 01:59:44,580
la chasse aux sorcières s'est intensifiée

2852
01:59:44,580 --> 01:59:49,060
comme un fou parce que l'imprimerie t'a permis d'obtenir ce manuel sur la façon de trouver les sorcières

2853
01:59:49,460 --> 01:59:52,540
que les guerres de religion sont devenues folles.

2854
01:59:52,780 --> 01:59:56,360
Hum, ça a conduit à toutes sortes de détresse, de désinformation,

2855
01:59:57,300 --> 01:59:57,700
méchanceté.

2856
01:59:58,460 --> 02:00:00,760
Et Henri VIII essayait de remettre le génie dans la bouteille.

2857
02:00:00,880 --> 02:00:01,980
Tu sais, il était un peu comme,

2858
02:00:01,980 --> 02:00:04,680
Je peux, je peux, je peux, je veux utiliser ça pour de bon.

2859
02:00:04,860 --> 02:00:06,380
Comme, euh, comme si j'avais l'impression que ça pourrait,

2860
02:00:06,500 --> 02:00:07,140
il pourrait être utilisé,

2861
02:00:07,780 --> 02:00:12,580
mais il se trouvait dans une période inévitable d’anarchie épistémique.

2862
02:00:13,320 --> 02:00:17,360
Vous ne pouvez rien faire pour que la période après la planche à billets arrive,

2863
02:00:17,560 --> 02:00:19,960
euh, il s'est avéré que c'était non perturbateur,

2864
02:00:20,180 --> 02:00:23,900
période non folle autre que le totalitarisme absolu

2865
02:00:23,900 --> 02:00:25,500
et détruisons toutes les presses à imprimer,

2866
02:00:25,880 --> 02:00:28,200
ce qui n’était tout simplement pas possible en Europe.

2867
02:00:28,920 --> 02:00:30,060
Alors j'ai l'impression

2868
02:00:30,060 --> 02:00:31,220
c'est un peu là où nous en sommes actuellement.

2869
02:00:32,140 --> 02:00:33,700
Cette perturbation est venue de l'ajout,

2870
02:00:33,900 --> 02:00:38,280
Je pense, vous savez, que plusieurs millions de personnes ont participé à la conversation européenne et qu'à terme, le monde

2871
02:00:38,280 --> 02:00:43,740
conversation, mais finalement c'est devenu le meilleur outil de non-confirmation,

2872
02:00:43,900 --> 02:00:47,320
euh, pour se débarrasser de la fausseté, pour repérer les mauvaises idées.

2873
02:00:48,420 --> 02:00:49,800
Et ce sont les avantages,

2874
02:00:49,900 --> 02:00:51,140
les avantages à long terme

2875
02:00:52,000 --> 02:00:54,940
de l'imprimerie sont calculables.

2876
02:00:55,780 --> 02:00:58,100
Euh, et c'est ce qui me donne un peu d'optimisme

2877
02:00:58,100 --> 02:00:59,940
où nous en sommes maintenant avec les médias sociaux,

2878
02:01:00,000 --> 02:01:02,580
parce que nous sommes dans cette période inévitablement anarchique.

2879
02:01:02,580 --> 02:01:04,440
Et je crains que, là-bas,

2880
02:01:05,180 --> 02:01:07,720
euh, euh, qu'il y a des tentatives dans les États pour faire adopter des choses

2881
02:01:07,720 --> 02:01:09,240
pour tenter de remettre le génie dans la bouteille.

2882
02:01:09,300 --> 02:01:13,160
Comme si on interdisait un tic tac ou qu'on disait ça,

2883
02:01:13,520 --> 02:01:15,880
euh, personne de moins de 18 ans ne peut être sur le,

2884
02:01:15,980 --> 02:01:17,940
sur internet, sauf autorisation parentale,

2885
02:01:18,660 --> 02:01:20,620
nous allons vers quelque chose qui

2886
02:01:22,140 --> 02:01:25,840
aucune approche descendante ne pourra résoudre le problème.

2887
02:01:26,000 --> 02:01:30,000
Nous devons nous adapter culturellement à ce fait, euh,

2888
02:01:30,420 --> 02:01:33,580
euh, d'une manière qui nous rend plus sages qu'en fait,

2889
02:01:33,580 --> 02:01:41,160
euh, et permettez-lui d'être potentiellement ce merveilleux moteur de non-confirmation dont nous sommes encore loin, d'ailleurs,

2890
02:01:41,560 --> 02:01:42,680
mais pense à

2891
02:01:43,300 --> 02:01:43,480
il.

2892
02:01:43,480 --> 02:01:46,040
Des millions d'yeux supplémentaires sur les problèmes,

2893
02:01:46,380 --> 02:01:48,060
euh, grâce à l'imprimerie, j'ai aidé

2894
02:01:48,060 --> 02:01:50,560
créer la révolution scientifique, les Lumières,

2895
02:01:50,960 --> 02:01:52,000
l'ignorance de la découverte.

2896
02:01:53,380 --> 02:01:55,800
Euh, nous avons maintenant ajouté des milliards

2897
02:01:56,360 --> 02:01:58,620
des yeux et des voix pour résoudre les problèmes.

2898
02:01:58,780 --> 02:02:01,320
Et nous les utilisons simplement pour des vidéos de chats et pour annuler.

2899
02:02:02,760 --> 02:02:05,660
Mais ce ne sont que les premiers jours de l’imprimerie.

2900
02:02:05,840 --> 02:02:08,460
Tout commence avec les chats et l'annulation.

2901
02:02:08,480 --> 02:02:11,900
Y a-t-il quelque chose à propos de X à propos de Twitter,

2902
02:02:12,640 --> 02:02:15,520
qui est peut-être le plus énergique

2903
02:02:16,140 --> 02:02:17,720
source de chats et annulation.

2904
02:02:17,900 --> 02:02:19,680
Cela ressemble à l’inconscient collectif de l’espèce.

2905
02:02:19,840 --> 02:02:28,980
Je veux dire, comme si c'était une de ces choses où la tendance à vouloir voir des modèles dans l'histoire peut parfois limiter

2906
02:02:30,220 --> 02:02:34,580
l’expérience complètement folle de ce qu’est réellement l’histoire.

2907
02:02:34,700 --> 02:02:38,620
Parce que oui, nous, nous, nous avons ces belles idées réconfortantes que ça va être comme la dernière fois.

2908
02:02:38,880 --> 02:02:39,700
Nous ne le savons pas.

2909
02:02:39,960 --> 02:02:41,860
Cela n'est pas encore arrivé.

2910
02:02:42,420 --> 02:02:43,300
Et je pense

2911
02:02:43,920 --> 02:02:49,340
à quel point Twitter est inhabituel parce que je le considère comme les enfants,

2912
02:02:49,460 --> 02:02:50,120
parce que les gens en parlent,

2913
02:02:50,800 --> 02:02:54,820
vous savez, l'écriture et les communications de masse et,

2914
02:02:54,900 --> 02:02:58,740
euh, comme augmentant la taille de notre cerveau collectif.

2915
02:02:59,400 --> 02:03:02,220
Mais maintenant, nous observons en quelque sorte notre cerveau collectif en temps réel.

2916
02:03:03,000 --> 02:03:07,860
Et il est rempli, tout comme notre propre cerveau, de toutes sortes de petites choses folles qui surgissent et,

2917
02:03:07,860 --> 02:03:11,720
et, et, et apparaissent comme des particules virtuelles un peu partout à la place des gens,

2918
02:03:12,020 --> 02:03:13,380
euh, tu sais,

2919
02:03:13,740 --> 02:03:15,440
réagir en temps réel aux choses.

2920
02:03:15,680 --> 02:03:18,580
Il n’y a jamais eu quelque chose de semblable, même vaguement.

2921
02:03:18,580 --> 02:03:20,320
Et ça peut être au pire,

2922
02:03:20,920 --> 02:03:21,180
horrible à voir.

2923
02:03:21,800 --> 02:03:22,900
À son meilleur,

2924
02:03:23,240 --> 02:03:29,640
Parfois, voir des gens simplement euphoriques à propos de quelque chose qui se passe et faire des blagues immédiates absolument géniales,

2925
02:03:29,660 --> 02:03:30,780
tu sais, en même temps,

2926
02:03:31,120 --> 02:03:31,960
ça peut être,

2927
02:03:32,620 --> 02:03:34,820
cela ne peut même pas être une expérience joyeuse.

2928
02:03:35,400 --> 02:03:36,080
Euh, je, j'ai l'impression,

2929
02:03:36,760 --> 02:03:44,880
euh, et je vis maintenant dans un quartier sur X où je traite principalement avec des gens que je pense vraiment attentionnés,

2930
02:03:44,940 --> 02:03:45,180
même si je ne suis pas d'accord avec eux.

2931
02:03:45,420 --> 02:03:45,820
Euh,

2932
02:03:47,020 --> 02:03:49,220
et, et ce n'est pas une si mauvaise expérience.

2933
02:03:49,600 --> 02:03:55,880
Il m'arrive parfois de tomber sur ce genre de quartiers que j'appelle sur X, où tout cela annule toute méchanceté.

2934
02:03:55,880 --> 02:03:57,940
Et c'est toujours une visite plutôt désagréable dans ces endroits.

2935
02:03:58,580 --> 02:04:00,540
Je ne dis pas que tout cela doit être le cas,

2936
02:04:00,540 --> 02:04:02,460
euh, comme mon expérience,

2937
02:04:02,820 --> 02:04:03,980
mais je pense que

2938
02:04:04,820 --> 02:04:12,120
la raison pour laquelle les gens continuent d'y revenir est qu'il révèle des aspects bruts de l'humanité que nous préférons parfois faire semblant de ne pas exister.

2939
02:04:12,560 --> 02:04:12,820
Ouais.

2940
02:04:13,500 --> 02:04:13,880
Ouais.

2941
02:04:13,880 --> 02:04:15,240
Mais c'est aussi totalement nouveau.

2942
02:04:15,460 --> 02:04:15,880
Comme tu as dis,

2943
02:04:16,260 --> 02:04:17,300
c'est juste une viralité,

2944
02:04:17,360 --> 02:04:22,380
la vitesse, les nouvelles voyagent, les opinions voyagent, la bataille des idées voyage.

2945
02:04:22,740 --> 02:04:23,860
La bataille de l’information aussi.

2946
02:04:24,160 --> 02:04:24,380
Ouais.

2947
02:04:24,440 --> 02:04:26,720
De ce qui est vrai et non des mensonges parcourus,

2948
02:04:27,160 --> 02:04:29,180
le vieux truc de Mark Twain assez vite sur le

2949
02:04:29,180 --> 02:04:29,440
chose.

2950
02:04:29,440 --> 02:04:29,940
Ouais.

2951
02:04:29,940 --> 02:04:33,800
Et puis cela change votre compréhension de la façon d'interpréter

2952
02:04:34,420 --> 02:04:35,140
information.

2953
02:04:35,260 --> 02:04:36,720
Cela vous stresse également sans fin.

2954
02:04:37,280 --> 02:04:38,760
Je me suis souvenu de m'en débarrasser parfois.

2955
02:04:39,060 --> 02:04:41,520
Les statistiques sont plutôt mauvaises sur la santé mentale, euh,

2956
02:04:41,960 --> 02:04:42,620
avec, avec, avec les jeunes.

2957
02:04:42,780 --> 02:04:46,540
Et je fais définitivement partie du camp de ceux qui pensent que les réseaux sociaux en font partie.

2958
02:04:46,700 --> 02:04:48,260
Je comprends le débat,

2959
02:04:48,300 --> 02:04:51,100
mais je suis assez persuadé que l'une des choses,

2960
02:04:51,160 --> 02:04:56,340
n'a pas été bon pour la santé mentale des gens, c'est simplement que cela est constamment exposé.

2961
02:04:56,920 --> 02:04:57,360
Ouais, absolument.

2962
02:04:57,540 --> 02:05:02,220
Je pense qu'il est possible de créer des médias sociaux qui génèrent un énorme

2963
02:05:02,220 --> 02:05:04,220
somme d'argent, ça rend les gens heureux pour moi,

2964
02:05:04,280 --> 02:05:07,490
comme s'il était possible d'aligner les incitations.

2965
02:05:08,260 --> 02:05:08,900
Donc en termes de,

2966
02:05:09,540 --> 02:05:10,580
ouais, faire des adolescents,

2967
02:05:10,920 --> 02:05:11,260
fabrication,

2968
02:05:11,760 --> 02:05:12,920
euh, chaque étape de la vie, donnant

2969
02:05:13,560 --> 02:05:19,320
votre épanouissement et votre bonheur à long terme dans votre existence physique en dehors des réseaux sociaux et sur les réseaux sociaux,

2970
02:05:19,860 --> 02:05:21,420
vous aider à grandir en tant qu'être humain,

2971
02:05:22,220 --> 02:05:25,640
euh, je vous aide à vous mettre au défi juste ce qu'il faut et juste ce qu'il faut de vidéos de chats,

2972
02:05:25,880 --> 02:05:29,180
tout ce qui donne cette riche expérience humaine.

2973
02:05:29,940 --> 02:05:30,760
Je pense que c'est juste

2974
02:05:31,340 --> 02:05:32,640
un problème d'apprentissage automatique.

2975
02:05:32,680 --> 02:05:35,700
C'est comme si ce n'était pas facile de créer un flux.

2976
02:05:36,380 --> 02:05:38,960
Le flux le plus simple que vous puissiez faire est donc de maximiser l'engagement.

2977
02:05:39,340 --> 02:05:39,740
Ouais.

2978
02:05:39,740 --> 02:05:41,020
Mais c'est comme un algorithme vraiment stupide.

2979
02:05:41,730 --> 02:05:42,280
Ouais.

2980
02:05:42,600 --> 02:05:43,800
C'est comme pour le,

2981
02:05:43,840 --> 02:05:48,240
pour que l'algorithme en sache suffisamment sur vous pour comprendre

2982
02:05:48,960 --> 02:05:52,360
ce qui vous rendra vraiment heureux en tant qu'être humain de grandir à long terme.

2983
02:05:52,860 --> 02:05:55,100
C'est tout simplement un problème très difficile à résoudre.

2984
02:05:55,720 --> 02:05:56,720
Tu as déjà regardé Fleabag ?

2985
02:05:57,340 --> 02:05:59,560
C'est absolument génial, un spectacle britannique.

2986
02:05:59,560 --> 02:06:01,940
Euh, et ça vous prépare.

2987
02:06:02,040 --> 02:06:05,920
L'une des raisons pour lesquelles les gens l'aiment tant, c'est que cela vous donne l'impression de regarder comme un,

2988
02:06:06,020 --> 02:06:07,940
un Sex and the City britannique torride,

2989
02:06:08,160 --> 02:06:10,060
sauf que le personnage principal est le plus important.

2990
02:06:11,080 --> 02:06:11,620
Euh,

2991
02:06:12,580 --> 02:06:13,400
c'est comme, d'accord.

2992
02:06:13,620 --> 02:06:16,480
Et tu roules un peu les yeux et c'est plutôt drôle et c'est plutôt mignon

2993
02:06:16,620 --> 02:06:18,480
et plutôt épicé.

2994
02:06:19,340 --> 02:06:24,140
Et puis vous réalisez que la personne souffre en fait et traverse une période difficile.

2995
02:06:24,800 --> 02:06:25,780
et ça devient

2996
02:06:26,620 --> 02:06:28,560
de plus en plus profond à mesure que le spectacle avance.

2997
02:06:28,960 --> 02:06:31,640
Et elle fera ces discours incroyables sur,

2998
02:06:32,080 --> 02:06:32,800
dis moi quoi faire.

2999
02:06:33,220 --> 02:06:35,400
Comme je viens de le dire, je sais qu'il y a des experts là-bas.

3000
02:06:35,500 --> 02:06:36,920
Je sais qu'il existe des connaissances.

3001
02:06:36,960 --> 02:06:38,320
Je sais qu'il existe une manière optimale

3002
02:06:38,880 --> 02:06:39,700
vivre ma vie.

3003
02:06:39,720 --> 02:06:42,320
Alors pourquoi personne ne peut-il me dire quoi faire ?

3004
02:06:42,460 --> 02:06:44,480
Et, et c'est merveilleusement comme ça,

3005
02:06:45,840 --> 02:06:46,540
euh,

3006
02:06:47,700 --> 02:06:52,120
précis, je pense, euh, aspect du désir humain, que se passerait-il si quelque chose pouvait

3007
02:06:52,120 --> 02:06:54,620
en fait, dites-moi la voie optimale à suivre ?

3008
02:06:55,120 --> 02:06:57,400
Parce que je pense qu'il y a un désir de donner

3009
02:06:57,400 --> 02:07:04,100
une certaine part de votre propre liberté et de votre discrétion afin qu'on vous dise de faire la bonne chose de manière optimale.

3010
02:07:04,540 --> 02:07:05,300
Mais ce chemin

3011
02:07:05,840 --> 02:07:07,180
ça me fait très peur.

3012
02:07:07,260 --> 02:07:09,000
Ouais, nous voyons la façon dont vous le formulez.

3013
02:07:09,220 --> 02:07:10,480
C'est vrai que ça me fait peur aussi.

3014
02:07:11,100 --> 02:07:12,520
Il y a donc plusieurs choses, celle-là,

3015
02:07:12,660 --> 02:07:14,540
vous pouvez être constamment distrait dans un

3016
02:07:14,540 --> 02:07:17,480
TikTok passe par les choses qui vous maintiennent engagé.

3017
02:07:17,480 --> 02:07:18,880
Donc supprimer ça

3018
02:07:19,480 --> 02:07:22,580
et vous offre constamment un tas d'options

3019
02:07:23,100 --> 02:07:29,080
et apprendre à long terme ce qui aboutit à votre bonheur réel à long terme.

3020
02:07:30,020 --> 02:07:33,920
Alors, quelle quantité d’idées stimulantes est bonne pour vous ?

3021
02:07:34,120 --> 02:07:34,260
Euh,

3022
02:07:35,480 --> 02:07:37,160
ça, tu sais, pour, pour quelqu'un comme moi,

3023
02:07:39,220 --> 02:07:42,120
mais il y a un numéro comme ça pour toi, Greg, comme

3024
02:07:42,720 --> 02:07:45,100
pour moi, ce chiffre est assez élevé.

3025
02:07:45,260 --> 02:07:45,560
J'aime

3026
02:07:46,240 --> 02:07:46,680
débat.

3027
02:07:46,860 --> 02:07:47,120
J'aime,

3028
02:07:47,660 --> 02:07:50,120
Moi, j'aime le sentiment de réaliser,

3029
02:07:50,420 --> 02:07:51,720
putain de merde, j'ai eu tort.

3030
02:07:51,940 --> 02:07:52,040
Oui.

3031
02:07:52,680 --> 02:07:57,680
Mais comme, vous savez, et j'aimerais que l'algorithme sache cela sur moi et m'aide,

3032
02:07:57,740 --> 02:07:59,040
mais en me donnant toujours des options.

3033
02:07:59,080 --> 02:08:01,760
Si je veux descendre dans les vidéos de chats, etc.

3034
02:08:01,760 --> 02:08:03,040
Eh bien, l’aspect éducatif.

3035
02:08:03,240 --> 02:08:03,520
Oui,

3036
02:08:03,840 --> 02:08:04,060
éducation.

3037
02:08:04,940 --> 02:08:08,180
J'aime l'idée d'aller à la vitesse dont vous avez besoin et de courir aussi vite que vous le souhaitez.

3038
02:08:08,180 --> 02:08:08,800
aussi vite que possible.

3039
02:08:09,080 --> 02:08:09,180
Ouais.

3040
02:08:09,660 --> 02:08:11,780
Vous savez, je veux dire, il y a ça, vous savez, toute cette histoire de flux.

3041
02:08:12,100 --> 02:08:15,240
Je ressens juste cette recommandation YouTube pour,

3042
02:08:15,580 --> 02:08:17,500
pour le meilleur ou pour le pire, s'il est utilisé correctement,

3043
02:08:18,220 --> 02:08:19,540
on a l'impression qu'il fait du très bon travail.

3044
02:08:20,160 --> 02:08:22,300
Chaque fois que je refuse de cliquer sur des trucs

3045
02:08:22,900 --> 02:08:26,460
c'est juste basé sur la dopamine et cliquez uniquement sur des choses éducatives,

3046
02:08:26,980 --> 02:08:29,000
la recommandation fournit un très bon résultat.

3047
02:08:29,360 --> 02:08:31,560
Donc j'ai l'impression que c'est une solution résoluble

3048
02:08:32,360 --> 02:08:35,460
problème, au moins dans l'espace d'éducation consistant à se mettre au défi,

3049
02:08:36,020 --> 02:08:38,820
mais aussi élargir votre domaine de connaissances et tout ce genre de choses.

3050
02:08:38,920 --> 02:08:40,460
Et je suis définitivement plus dans le,

3051
02:08:40,460 --> 02:08:45,620
nous sommes dans une période inévitablement anarchique et avons besoin de grands ajustements culturels.

3052
02:08:45,780 --> 02:08:48,380
Et il est impossible que cette transition ne soit pas difficile.

3053
02:08:49,020 --> 02:08:54,160
Y a-t-il des petites ou grandes choses spécifiques que vous aimeriez voir X faire, Twitter faire ?

3054
02:08:54,720 --> 02:08:56,420
J'ai beaucoup de réflexions à ce sujet.

3055
02:08:57,060 --> 02:09:00,180
Avec la presse à imprimer et des millions d'yeux supplémentaires sur n'importe quel problème

3056
02:09:00,420 --> 02:09:01,900
peut démolir n'importe quelle institution,

3057
02:09:02,140 --> 02:09:03,560
n'importe qui, n'importe quelle personne ou n'importe quelle idée.

3058
02:09:03,720 --> 02:09:05,020
Et c'est bien à certains égards,

3059
02:09:05,040 --> 02:09:07,480
car de nombreuses institutions médiévales ont dû être démolies.

3060
02:09:07,540 --> 02:09:08,400
Et certaines personnes l'ont fait aussi,

3061
02:09:08,540 --> 02:09:10,760
et beaucoup d'idées ont dû être démolies.

3062
02:09:11,140 --> 02:09:11,820
La même chose est vraie maintenant.

3063
02:09:11,900 --> 02:09:16,560
Des milliards d’yeux supplémentaires sur chaque problème peuvent détruire n’importe quelle personne, idée ou institution.

3064
02:09:17,100 --> 02:09:20,680
Et certaines, encore une fois, certaines de ces choses devaient être démolies,

3065
02:09:21,160 --> 02:09:22,400
mais il ne peut pas encore se construire.

3066
02:09:22,600 --> 02:09:23,080
Nous ne sommes pas au

3067
02:09:23,160 --> 02:09:24,160
étape qui peut encore se construire,

3068
02:09:24,340 --> 02:09:26,760
mais cela nous a montré à quel point nos connaissances étaient limitées.

3069
02:09:27,000 --> 02:09:29,480
C'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles nous sommes également conscients de la crise de la réplication.

3070
02:09:29,560 --> 02:09:30,540
C'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles nous sommes

3071
02:09:30,600 --> 02:09:33,240
également conscient de la mauvaise qualité de nos recherches,

3072
02:09:33,460 --> 02:09:35,940
à quel point notre classe d'experts est arrogante

3073
02:09:36,200 --> 02:09:41,920
dans de nombreux cas, mais les gens ne veulent pas vivre dans un monde où il n'y a pas de gens qui

3074
02:09:41,920 --> 02:09:43,600
ils respectent et ils peuvent regarder.

3075
02:09:43,900 --> 02:09:45,480
Et je pense à ce qui se passe

3076
02:09:46,200 --> 02:09:53,020
peut-être maintenant, mais cela continuera à se produire si les gens vont s'établir comme étant d'une grande intégrité,

3077
02:09:53,180 --> 02:09:54,240
qu'ils seront toujours honnêtes.

3078
02:09:54,260 --> 02:09:57,340
Je pense que vous vous établissez comme quelqu'un de très intègre,

3079
02:09:57,960 --> 02:09:59,940
où ils peuvent faire confiance à cette personne.

3080
02:10:00,060 --> 02:10:01,300
Un feu veut être,

3081
02:10:01,740 --> 02:10:03,460
vous savez, l'institution dans laquelle les gens peuvent venir est comme,

3082
02:10:03,620 --> 02:10:04,420
si c'est la liberté d'expression,

3083
02:10:04,500 --> 02:10:05,840
nous le défendrons, point final.

3084
02:10:06,520 --> 02:10:08,740
Et je pense que les gens ont besoin de nouveauté,

3085
02:10:09,720 --> 02:10:12,360
ils ont besoin d’autorités en qui ils peuvent réellement avoir confiance.

3086
02:10:12,540 --> 02:10:16,620
Et je pense que si vous aviez réellement un stream que les gens pourraient peut-être regarder en action,

3087
02:10:16,660 --> 02:10:18,860
mais pas inondé, tu sais,

3088
02:10:19,440 --> 02:10:21,800
des trucs stupides d'annulation de culture ou un chat stupide signifie,

3089
02:10:22,100 --> 02:10:23,240
où c'est en fait un problème sérieux

3090
02:10:23,240 --> 02:10:24,960
discussion limitée autour de règles,

3091
02:10:25,500 --> 02:10:26,740
pas de forteresse rhétorique parfaite,

3092
02:10:26,900 --> 02:10:30,200
pas de forteresse rhétorique efficace, aucune des méthodes stupides dont nous débattons.

3093
02:10:30,760 --> 02:10:33,460
Je pense que tu pourrais commencer à créer quelque chose

3094
02:10:33,460 --> 02:10:38,600
cela pourrait en fait être une amélioration majeure dans la rapidité avec laquelle nous proposons de nouveaux,

3095
02:10:38,700 --> 02:10:41,200
de meilleures idées et établir et séparer la vérité du faux.

3096
02:10:41,960 --> 02:10:42,240
Ouais.

3097
02:10:42,460 --> 02:10:43,900
Si c'est bien fait,

3098
02:10:43,920 --> 02:10:46,880
cela peut inciter un grand nombre de personnes à devenir de plus en plus haut

3099
02:10:46,900 --> 02:10:51,160
l’intégrité et cela peut créer l’intégrité en tant que valeur à atteindre.

3100
02:10:51,600 --> 02:10:56,640
Je veux dire, vous savez, il y a eu des projets sur Internet qui ont fait un

3101
02:10:56,640 --> 02:10:57,540
un travail incroyable,

3102
02:10:57,600 --> 02:10:59,220
mais ils ont également été très imparfaits.

3103
02:10:59,580 --> 02:11:01,920
Comme Wikipédia est un exemple d'un grand

3104
02:11:01,920 --> 02:11:03,800
faire un bond en avant en le faisant.

3105
02:11:03,840 --> 02:11:04,800
C'est sacrément impressionnant.

3106
02:11:04,940 --> 02:11:05,880
Quelle est votre opinion globale ?

3107
02:11:06,160 --> 02:11:07,600
Je veux dire, je suis surtout impressionné.

3108
02:11:07,780 --> 02:11:09,220
Donc il y en a vraiment quelques-uns

3109
02:11:10,080 --> 02:11:11,060
des idées puissantes

3110
02:11:11,600 --> 02:11:13,280
pour les personnes qui éditent Wikipédia.

3111
02:11:13,760 --> 02:11:15,300
Dont un est chacun

3112
02:11:15,580 --> 02:11:18,740
l'éditeur déclare en quelque sorte pour lui-même,

3113
02:11:19,040 --> 02:11:19,480
Vous savez,

3114
02:11:19,820 --> 02:11:24,340
Je fais de la politique et je suis plutôt un gars de gauche.

3115
02:11:24,780 --> 02:11:26,460
Donc je ne devrais vraiment pas éditer

3116
02:11:27,140 --> 02:11:29,300
des articles politiques parce que j'ai des préjugés.

3117
02:11:29,420 --> 02:11:31,220
Alors ils déclarent leurs préjugés

3118
02:11:31,220 --> 02:11:34,020
et ils font souvent du bon travail en déclarant les préjugés,

3119
02:11:34,100 --> 02:11:36,010
mais ils aimeront toujours,

3120
02:11:36,960 --> 02:11:39,160
ils trouveront un moyen de se justifier.

3121
02:11:39,320 --> 02:11:41,440
Comme si quelque chose allait les énerver et qu'ils voulaient

3122
02:11:41,540 --> 02:11:46,160
corrigez-le parce qu’ils aiment corriger le mensonge en vérité.

3123
02:11:46,780 --> 02:11:50,040
Mais la perspective de ce qui est vrai ou non est affectée par leurs préjugés.

3124
02:11:50,160 --> 02:11:51,280
La vérité est difficile à connaître.

3125
02:11:52,100 --> 02:11:56,720
Et il est vrai qu’il existe un parti pris de gauche à l’égard des éditeurs de Wikipédia.

3126
02:11:57,360 --> 02:11:57,780
Alors pour ça,

3127
02:11:58,860 --> 02:12:00,680
ce qui se passe, c'est sur les articles,

3128
02:12:00,780 --> 02:12:04,360
ce que j'apprécie surtout, qui n'a pas de caractère politique

3129
02:12:04,920 --> 02:12:05,860
aspect pour eux,

3130
02:12:06,280 --> 02:12:07,440
Vous savez,

3131
02:12:08,100 --> 02:12:11,220
euh, des articles scientifiques ou, euh, des articles techniques,

3132
02:12:11,840 --> 02:12:13,120
ils vont être vraiment forts,

3133
02:12:13,300 --> 02:12:17,400
même l'histoire, décrivant simplement les faits de l'histoire qui n'ont pas d'élément subjectif,

3134
02:12:18,000 --> 02:12:18,580
euh, fort.

3135
02:12:19,100 --> 02:12:19,280
Aussi

3136
02:12:19,900 --> 02:12:21,180
en utilisant juste mon propre cerveau,

3137
02:12:21,620 --> 02:12:22,980
Je peux en quelque sorte filtrer

3138
02:12:23,580 --> 02:12:24,220
si c'est,

3139
02:12:24,600 --> 02:12:26,780
euh, tu sais, si c'est à propos du 6 janvier ou quelque chose comme ça,

3140
02:12:27,120 --> 02:12:28,000
Je sais que je vais

3141
02:12:28,000 --> 02:12:30,200
sois comme, je ne suis pas ce qui se passe ici.

3142
02:12:30,280 --> 02:12:32,060
Je vais en quelque sorte le lire,

3143
02:12:32,720 --> 02:12:34,320
mais je vais surtout me tourner vers d'autres sources.

3144
02:12:34,320 --> 02:12:36,640
Je vais examiner un tas de perspectives différentes à ce sujet.

3145
02:12:36,740 --> 02:12:37,820
Cela va être très tendu.

3146
02:12:38,220 --> 02:12:39,940
Il y aura probablement une sorte de parti pris.

3147
02:12:40,000 --> 02:12:43,260
Peut-être qu'une certaine formulation sera telle,

3148
02:12:43,560 --> 02:12:44,180
ce qui est un mot.

3149
02:12:44,660 --> 02:12:46,980
C'est là que Wikipédia fait cette chose.

3150
02:12:47,540 --> 02:12:50,300
La façon dont ils formulent les choses sera biaisée,

3151
02:12:50,700 --> 02:12:51,640
le choix des mots,

3152
02:12:52,920 --> 02:12:56,400
mais les éditeurs de Wikipédia eux-mêmes sont tellement réfléchis.

3153
02:12:56,480 --> 02:13:01,020
Ils ont littéralement des articles décrivant ces mêmes effets sur la façon dont vous pouvez utiliser

3154
02:13:01,020 --> 02:13:05,800
des mots pour injecter des préjugés dans toutes les manières dont vous en parlez.

3155
02:13:05,800 --> 02:13:07,140
C'est plus sain que la plupart des environnements.

3156
02:13:07,500 --> 02:13:08,880
C'est incroyablement sain,

3157
02:13:09,200 --> 02:13:10,580
mais je pense que tu pourrais faire mieux.

3158
02:13:11,000 --> 02:13:12,880
Pour moi, l'un des gros défauts de Wikipédia,

3159
02:13:13,280 --> 02:13:19,060
Ce que les notes de la communauté sur X font mieux, c'est l'accessibilité de devenir éditeur.

3160
02:13:19,560 --> 02:13:24,240
Euh, c'est difficile de devenir éditeur et ce n'est pas aussi visible,

3161
02:13:24,240 --> 02:13:25,380
le processus d’édition.

3162
02:13:26,120 --> 02:13:26,820
Alors j'adorerais,

3163
02:13:27,140 --> 02:13:36,140
comme vous l'avez dit, un flux, tout le monde puisse observer ce débat entre personnes avec intégrité lorsqu'ils discutent de choses comme le 6 janvier,

3164
02:13:36,160 --> 02:13:43,500
un sujet très controversé pour voir comment se déroule le processus du débat au lieu d'être caché dans l'ombre,

3165
02:13:43,520 --> 02:13:44,800
ce qu'il se trouve actuellement sur Wikipédia.

3166
02:13:45,060 --> 02:13:45,780
Vous pouvez y accéder.

3167
02:13:45,820 --> 02:13:47,740
C'est juste difficile d'accès, mais,

3168
02:13:48,080 --> 02:13:51,520
et j'ai aussi vu comment ils vont utiliser certains articles,

3169
02:13:52,680 --> 02:13:53,680
comme sur certaines personnes,

3170
02:13:54,080 --> 02:14:01,140
comme des articles sur des personnes en qui j'ai appris à faire de moins en moins confiance parce qu'elles les utiliseront littéralement pour lancer des attaques personnelles.

3171
02:14:01,160 --> 02:14:02,420
Et c’est quelque chose sur lequel vous écrivez.

3172
02:14:03,060 --> 02:14:03,660
Ils utiliseront,

3173
02:14:04,340 --> 02:14:08,540
euh, des descriptions de différentes controverses pour dresser le portrait d'une personne qui est,

3174
02:14:09,840 --> 02:14:12,440
cela ne me semble pas du moins être une représentation précise

3175
02:14:12,640 --> 02:14:13,840
de la personne.

3176
02:14:14,100 --> 02:14:18,240
Et c'est comme écrire un article sur Einstein en mentionnant quelque chose sur,

3177
02:14:18,760 --> 02:14:22,880
euh, théorie de la relativité et ensuite dire qu'il était un coureur de jupons et un agresseur et un,

3178
02:14:22,880 --> 02:14:27,720
comme la controverse, tu sais, ouais, il est aussi Feynman,

3179
02:14:27,720 --> 02:14:32,780
vous savez, non, vous savez, c'était, vous savez, ils ne sont pas exactement des humains parfaits en termes de femmes,

3180
02:14:33,160 --> 02:14:39,060
mais comme il y a d'autres aspects de cet humain et pour capturer cet humain correctement,

3181
02:14:39,400 --> 02:14:40,860
il y a une certaine façon de le faire.

3182
02:14:41,000 --> 02:14:42,820
Je pense que Wikipédia penche souvent.

3183
02:14:43,520 --> 02:14:45,880
Ils essaient vraiment de réfléchir sur eux-mêmes et

3184
02:14:46,880 --> 02:14:47,800
essaie d'arrêter ça,

3185
02:14:47,880 --> 02:14:52,040
mais ils se pencheront sur le drame si cela correspond au parti pris.

3186
02:14:52,500 --> 02:14:52,940
Mais,

3187
02:14:53,960 --> 02:14:57,040
bien meilleur que le monde que je crois est bien meilleur.

3188
02:14:58,340 --> 02:14:58,480
Euh,

3189
02:14:58,900 --> 02:14:59,800
parce que Wikipédia existe,

3190
02:15:01,020 --> 02:15:03,660
mais maintenant que nous sommes dans ces stades d'adolescence,

3191
02:15:03,780 --> 02:15:05,690
nous grandissons et essayons de proposer différentes technologies.

3192
02:15:05,980 --> 02:15:08,000
L'idée d'un flux est vraiment,

3193
02:15:08,000 --> 02:15:12,720
vraiment intéressant car vous faites participer de plus en plus de gens à ce discours

3194
02:15:12,940 --> 02:15:14,680
là où se trouve la valeur,

3195
02:15:14,780 --> 02:15:16,120
essayons d'obtenir la vérité.

3196
02:15:17,080 --> 02:15:17,160
Ouais.

3197
02:15:17,420 --> 02:15:17,640
Ouais.

3198
02:15:17,640 --> 02:15:19,860
Et en gros, vous savez, vous obtenez les petites cartes pour,

3199
02:15:19,980 --> 02:15:21,320
Non, faux, non, faux.

3200
02:15:21,620 --> 02:15:22,400
Et le différent,

3201
02:15:22,720 --> 02:15:25,100
les différentes, les différentes techniques rhétoriques utilisées

3202
02:15:25,160 --> 02:15:26,460
pour éviter de réellement discuter.

3203
02:15:26,500 --> 02:15:26,800
Ouais.

3204
02:15:26,880 --> 02:15:29,460
Et je pense qu'en fait, vous pouvez rendre cela un peu plus amusant en ayant un nombre limité.

3205
02:15:29,460 --> 02:15:30,220
d'eux.

3206
02:15:30,220 --> 02:15:32,300
Euh, tu sais, c'est un peu comme,

3207
02:15:32,580 --> 02:15:33,940
vous en obtenez trois, que diriez-vous de quelques cartes.

3208
02:15:34,420 --> 02:15:35,420
Donc gamifier le tout.

3209
02:15:35,660 --> 02:15:36,560
Euh, absolument.

3210
02:15:36,760 --> 02:15:37,180
Ouais.

3211
02:15:37,220 --> 02:15:38,240
Euh, laissez-moi vous poser des questions,

3212
02:15:39,460 --> 02:15:42,480
euh, alors tu as mentionné avoir vécu des moments difficiles dans ta vie.

3213
02:15:42,520 --> 02:15:43,560
Euh,

3214
02:15:44,760 --> 02:15:45,740
quoi, quelle a été ta

3215
02:15:45,740 --> 02:15:47,980
une expérience avec, euh, avec, avec la dépression ?

3216
02:15:48,460 --> 02:15:50,220
Quelle a été votre expérience en sortant

3217
02:15:50,220 --> 02:15:51,020
de cela, le surmonter ?

3218
02:15:52,230 --> 02:15:52,380
Ouais.

3219
02:15:52,520 --> 02:15:54,840
Je veux dire, tout ça, tout le voyage, euh,

3220
02:15:55,240 --> 02:15:56,700
le th th th th th th th th

3221
02:15:56,700 --> 02:15:59,600
avec le dorlotage, l'esprit américain a commencé avec moi, euh,

3222
02:16:00,240 --> 02:16:02,340
au, à la psychiatrie de Belmont

3223
02:16:02,340 --> 02:16:05,760
établissement à Philadelphie en 2007, j'ai

3224
02:16:06,380 --> 02:16:09,760
j'avais appelé le 911 dans un moment de clarté parce que j'avais

3225
02:16:09,760 --> 02:16:12,620
Je suis allé à la quincaillerie pour, euh,

3226
02:16:13,740 --> 02:16:14,980
assurez-vous que quand je me suis suicidé,

3227
02:16:14,980 --> 02:16:16,000
que moi, ça coince.

3228
02:16:16,220 --> 02:16:17,160
Je voulais m'assurer que je,

3229
02:16:17,160 --> 02:16:19,160
vous savez, j'avais la tête enveloppée et tout.

3230
02:16:19,460 --> 02:16:22,000
Comme si tous les médicaments que j'avais prévu de prendre ne fonctionnaient pas,

3231
02:16:22,040 --> 02:16:22,580
que je ne pourrais pas

3232
02:16:22,600 --> 02:16:24,360
pour me frayer un chemin.

3233
02:16:25,300 --> 02:16:29,580
Ça a été une année vraiment difficile et j'ai toujours eu des problèmes de dépression.

3234
02:16:29,780 --> 02:16:31,580
euh, mais ils empiraient.

3235
02:16:32,280 --> 02:16:34,440
Et franchement, l'une des raisons pour lesquelles cette culture d'annulation

3236
02:16:34,440 --> 02:16:37,440
les choses sont tellement importantes pour moi, c'est ça

3237
02:16:38,820 --> 02:16:40,840
la chose sur laquelle je n'ai pas autant insisté en dorlotant

3238
02:16:40,840 --> 02:16:42,080
l'esprit américain, qui d'ailleurs,

3239
02:16:42,760 --> 02:16:44,240
cette description que je donne d'essayer de tuer

3240
02:16:44,260 --> 02:16:46,740
moi-même, c'était la première fois que je l'écrivais.

3241
02:16:47,280 --> 02:16:49,240
Personne dans ma famille n'était au courant, euh,

3242
02:16:49,600 --> 02:16:49,780
de comment,

3243
02:16:50,220 --> 02:16:51,580
euh, que ce soit comme ça.

3244
02:16:51,660 --> 02:16:52,980
Ma femme ne l'avait jamais vu.

3245
02:16:52,980 --> 02:16:55,140
Et en gros, la seule façon pour moi d'écrire ça, c'était,

3246
02:16:55,280 --> 02:16:57,640
en faisant, vous savez, comment vous pouvez en quelque sorte vous tromper.

3247
02:16:58,240 --> 02:16:59,840
Si, euh, et j'étais comme,

3248
02:17:00,140 --> 02:17:03,880
Je vais me convaincre que c'est juste entre moi et mon ordinateur et que personne ne le verra.

3249
02:17:03,880 --> 02:17:05,760
Et ce n’est probablement pas la chose la plus publique que j’ai jamais écrite.

3250
02:17:06,960 --> 02:17:12,840
Hum, mais ce que je n'ai pas souligné là-dedans, c'est à quel point la guerre culturelle a joué dans ma dépression,

3251
02:17:13,040 --> 02:17:14,180
parce que j'étais à l'origine

3252
02:17:14,200 --> 02:17:15,140
le directeur légal des incendies.

3253
02:17:15,360 --> 02:17:17,220
Puis je suis devenu président du feu en 2005,

3254
02:17:17,960 --> 02:17:19,680
J'ai déménagé à Philadelphie et c'est là que je suis déprimé.

3255
02:17:19,680 --> 02:17:23,360
Euh, et, euh, en fait, je n'ai pas de famille là-bas.

3256
02:17:23,580 --> 02:17:24,720
Il y a quelque chose dans la ville.

3257
02:17:24,820 --> 02:17:26,060
Ils n'ont pas l'air de m'apprécier beaucoup.

3258
02:17:26,480 --> 02:17:27,120
Euh,

3259
02:17:27,540 --> 02:17:28,480
mais l'essentiel

3260
02:17:28,480 --> 02:17:29,880
j'étais tout le temps dans le monde de la culture.

3261
02:17:29,920 --> 02:17:32,400
Euh, il y avait une fille avec qui je sortais.

3262
02:17:32,740 --> 02:17:33,190
Euh,

3263
02:17:33,540 --> 02:17:36,260
Je me souviens, vous savez, elle ne semblait pas vraiment approuver ce que je faisais.

3264
02:17:36,280 --> 02:17:36,940
Et beaucoup de monde

3265
02:17:36,940 --> 02:17:37,940
cela ne semblait pas vraiment le cas.

3266
02:17:38,220 --> 02:17:41,220
Et pendant ce temps, comme si je défendais les gens de gauche tout le temps

3267
02:17:41,400 --> 02:17:43,080
le temps et ils diraient,

3268
02:17:43,080 --> 02:17:44,300
Oh, c'est bien que tu défendes quelqu'un sur le

3269
02:17:44,300 --> 02:17:46,960
gauche, mais ils ne me pardonneraient toujours jamais d’avoir défendu quelqu’un de droite.

3270
02:17:47,260 --> 02:17:49,560
Et je me souviens avoir dit à quoi je ressemblais,

3271
02:17:49,680 --> 02:17:52,220
écoute, je suis comme, je suis, je suis un vrai croyant en ce genre de choses.

3272
02:17:52,280 --> 02:17:53,500
Je suis prêt à défendre les nazis.

3273
02:17:54,020 --> 02:17:55,430
Je suis certainement prêt à défendre les républicains.

3274
02:17:56,420 --> 02:17:57,880
Et elle a en fait dit :

3275
02:17:57,880 --> 02:17:59,380
Je pense que les Républicains pourraient être pires.

3276
02:18:00,040 --> 02:18:00,740
Euh,

3277
02:18:01,080 --> 02:18:03,640
et cela ne s'est pas produit, cette relation ne s'est pas très bien passée.

3278
02:18:04,000 --> 02:18:06,640
Et puis j'ai failli me battre plusieurs fois avec,

3279
02:18:06,640 --> 02:18:07,420
avec des gens sur le

3280
02:18:07,440 --> 02:18:07,760
droite.

3281
02:18:08,040 --> 02:18:11,500
Parce qu'ils ont découvert que je défendais les gens qui faisaient des blagues sur le 11 septembre.

3282
02:18:11,680 --> 02:18:13,240
Comme si cela s'était produit plus d'une fois.

3283
02:18:13,580 --> 02:18:15,500
Et ça, tu sais, quand j'aurai la vingtaine,

3284
02:18:15,580 --> 02:18:16,840
Je ne me bats plus au poing.

3285
02:18:17,820 --> 02:18:20,060
Euh, mais oui, c'était toujours comme ça.

3286
02:18:20,120 --> 02:18:22,040
Toi, toi, tu vois à quel point les gens sont hypocrites

3287
02:18:22,040 --> 02:18:22,640
peut être.

3288
02:18:22,740 --> 02:18:26,780
Vous pouvez voir comment vos amis peuvent se retourner contre vous s’ils n’aiment pas votre politique.

3289
02:18:27,120 --> 02:18:29,220
J'en ai donc eu un premier aperçu,

3290
02:18:29,300 --> 02:18:33,460
de, de, de la culture vers laquelle nous nous dirigeons en étant le

3291
02:18:33,480 --> 02:18:34,300
président du feu.

3292
02:18:34,360 --> 02:18:35,340
Et c'était épuisant.

3293
02:18:36,460 --> 02:18:39,500
Euh, et c'était l'une des choses principales

3294
02:18:39,500 --> 02:18:40,560
cela m'a amené à être,

3295
02:18:40,560 --> 02:18:41,720
tu sais, déprimé suicidaire,

3296
02:18:42,480 --> 02:18:44,180
euh, au centre Belmont.

3297
02:18:44,240 --> 02:18:48,420
Si tu me disais que ce serait le début d'une vie nouvelle et meilleure pour moi,

3298
02:18:48,740 --> 02:18:50,260
J'aurais ri si j'avais pu,

3299
02:18:50,600 --> 02:18:51,940
mais je le ferais, tu sais, je n'aime pas,

3300
02:18:52,360 --> 02:18:53,540
tu peux dire que je vais bien si je ris encore.

3301
02:18:54,220 --> 02:18:54,800
Et je ne riais pas,

3302
02:18:55,280 --> 02:18:56,280
euh, à ce stade.

3303
02:18:57,000 --> 02:19:01,880
Alors, j'ai consulté un médecin et j'ai commencé à suivre une thérapie cognitivo-comportementale.

3304
02:19:02,280 --> 02:19:07,480
J'ai commencé à avoir toutes ces voix dans ma tête qui étaient catastrophiques et,

3305
02:19:08,160 --> 02:19:10,100
euh, tu sais, ça m'a donné un coup de pouce,

3306
02:19:10,140 --> 02:19:16,900
à cause de la généralisation et, euh, euh, de la divination, vous savez, euh, de la lecture dans les pensées de toutes ces choses qu'on vous apprend à ne pas faire.

3307
02:19:17,580 --> 02:19:18,200
Et cela,

3308
02:19:18,580 --> 02:19:25,720
euh, et ce qu'ils, ce que vous faites dans la TCC, c'est essentiellement que quelque chose vous énerve et puis vous

3309
02:19:25,720 --> 02:19:27,020
écrivez quelle était la pensée.

3310
02:19:27,160 --> 02:19:29,920
Euh, et tu sais, quelque chose de mineur pourrait arriver dans ton

3311
02:19:29,940 --> 02:19:31,880
la réponse a été, tu sais, comme, euh,

3312
02:19:32,440 --> 02:19:32,600
Bien,

3313
02:19:33,300 --> 02:19:34,780
le rendez-vous ne semblait pas très bien se passer.

3314
02:19:34,920 --> 02:19:37,540
Euh, et c'est parce que je suis brisé et que nous mourrons seuls.

3315
02:19:37,640 --> 02:19:39,200
Et tu dis, d'accord, d'accord, d'accord.

3316
02:19:39,280 --> 02:19:40,860
Quoi, quoi, quels sont les suivants,

3317
02:19:40,860 --> 02:19:45,240
vous savez, euh, c'est catastrophique, c'est lire dans les pensées, c'est une divination, c'est tout ça.

3318
02:19:45,820 --> 02:19:48,520
Euh, et tu dois faire ça plusieurs fois par jour

3319
02:19:49,400 --> 02:19:49,740
pour toujours.

3320
02:19:49,820 --> 02:19:51,580
En fait, j'ai besoin de le rafraîchir en ce moment.

3321
02:19:51,580 --> 02:19:52,300
Euh,

3322
02:19:52,780 --> 02:19:54,840
et ça se termine lentement

3323
02:19:54,860 --> 02:19:58,880
des voix dans ma tête qui disaient horrible, tu sais,

3324
02:19:59,200 --> 02:19:59,960
horrible conversation interne,

3325
02:20:00,640 --> 02:20:02,380
ça n'avait plus l'air aussi convaincant,

3326
02:20:02,860 --> 02:20:05,240
ce qui était vraiment un effet subtil.

3327
02:20:05,300 --> 02:20:06,200
Comme si c'était juste un peu comme,

3328
02:20:06,260 --> 02:20:09,000
oh attends, je n'achète pas que je suis brisé.

3329
02:20:09,440 --> 02:20:11,100
Vous savez, ça ne semble pas vrai.

3330
02:20:11,340 --> 02:20:14,380
Cela ne ressemble plus à la vérité venant de Dieu comme avant.

3331
02:20:15,380 --> 02:20:18,020
Et neuf mois après j'étais

3332
02:20:19,000 --> 02:20:19,940
je prévois de me suicider,

3333
02:20:19,960 --> 02:20:22,060
J'étais probablement plus heureux que je ne l'avais été depuis une décennie.

3334
02:20:22,940 --> 02:20:26,140
Euh, et c'était une des choses qui,

3335
02:20:26,380 --> 02:20:30,660
vous savez, c'est la TCC qui m'a amené à remarquer cela dans mon propre travail,

3336
02:20:30,680 --> 02:20:32,120
que c'était comme si les administrateurs étaient

3337
02:20:32,760 --> 02:20:34,840
une sorte de vente de distorsions cognitives,

3338
02:20:34,940 --> 02:20:36,080
mais les étudiants n'achetaient pas encore.

3339
02:20:36,140 --> 02:20:40,040
Et puis, quand j'ai commencé à remarquer qu'ils semblaient déjà croire en beaucoup de ces choses,

3340
02:20:40,040 --> 02:20:41,080
que ce serait très dangereux.

3341
02:20:41,080 --> 02:20:43,620
Et cela a conduit à dorloter l’esprit américain et tout ça.

3342
02:20:44,640 --> 02:20:48,500
Mais ce qui était dur dans le fait d'écrire Hansling à partir de l'esprit américain,

3343
02:20:48,540 --> 02:20:50,440
Je l'aurais déjà mentionné plusieurs fois,

3344
02:20:50,720 --> 02:20:52,520
J'ai été vraiment déprimé l'année dernière,

3345
02:20:52,900 --> 02:20:54,060
euh, parce que j'étudiais,

3346
02:20:54,400 --> 02:20:56,180
tu sais, il y a un ami là-dedans

3347
02:20:56,180 --> 02:20:58,740
dont j'ai parlé, qui s'est suicidé après avoir été annulé.

3348
02:20:58,900 --> 02:21:00,020
Je lui ai parlé une semaine avant

3349
02:21:00,020 --> 02:21:01,900
il s'est suicidé et je ne l'avais pas vraiment, euh,

3350
02:21:03,120 --> 02:21:04,960
Je ne l'avais pas vraiment contacté parce que

3351
02:21:04,960 --> 02:21:06,000
il avait l'air si confiant.

3352
02:21:06,000 --> 02:21:08,140
Je pensais que ça irait très bien parce que lui, il

3353
02:21:08,800 --> 02:21:11,780
a eu un tweet insensible en juin 2020 et,

3354
02:21:11,940 --> 02:21:13,640
tu sais, j'ai été forcé de partir

3355
02:21:14,220 --> 02:21:15,320
d'une manière qui n'a pas réellement été le cas

3356
02:21:15,320 --> 02:21:16,940
ça a l'air aussi mauvais que beaucoup d'autres professeurs.

3357
02:21:16,940 --> 02:21:18,280
En fait, il a au moins reçu une indemnité de départ,

3358
02:21:18,440 --> 02:21:20,100
donc ils savaient qu'il poursuivrait en justice et gagnerait, euh,

3359
02:21:20,620 --> 02:21:21,400
parce qu'il l'avait déjà fait auparavant.

3360
02:21:22,360 --> 02:21:26,200
Et donc j'ai attendu de le voir parce que nous étions tellement submergés par la demande de

3361
02:21:26,200 --> 02:21:26,380
aide.

3362
02:21:26,380 --> 02:21:29,180
Et il disait que les gens venaient encore chez lui.

3363
02:21:29,360 --> 02:21:31,260
Et puis il s'est suicidé la semaine suivante.

3364
02:21:31,420 --> 02:21:36,360
Et certainement, et parce que tout le monde sait que je parle très publiquement de mes difficultés avec ce genre de choses,

3365
02:21:37,280 --> 02:21:37,620
tout le monde

3366
02:21:38,240 --> 02:21:41,040
ceux qui combattent ce genre de choses viennent me voir quand ils traversent une période difficile.

3367
02:21:41,100 --> 02:21:45,780
Et il s’agit d’un métier très éprouvant sur le plan psychologique.

3368
02:21:45,920 --> 02:21:47,400
Et même en l'admettant maintenant,

3369
02:21:48,840 --> 02:21:50,240
comme je pense à tout le monde,

3370
02:21:50,240 --> 02:21:51,180
tous les vautours là-bas,

3371
02:21:51,200 --> 02:21:52,080
ils vont s'amuser avec ça.

3372
02:21:52,120 --> 02:21:53,140
De la même manière quand,

3373
02:21:53,140 --> 02:21:54,400
quand, quand mon ami Mike Adams s'est suicidé,

3374
02:21:54,580 --> 02:21:56,480
il y avait des gens qui faisaient la fête sur Twitter,

3375
02:21:56,560 --> 02:21:58,620
euh, ça, qu'un homme était mort,

3376
02:21:59,400 --> 02:22:01,420
euh, parce qu'ils n'aimaient pas ses tweets.

3377
02:22:02,240 --> 02:22:06,640
Et, d’une manière ou d’une autre, cela les rendait compatissants envers une autre personne abstraite.

3378
02:22:07,420 --> 02:22:09,080
Donc je devenais un peu déprimé et anxieux.

3379
02:22:09,160 --> 02:22:13,560
Et ce qui m'a vraiment aidé plus que toute autre chose, euh,

3380
02:22:14,420 --> 02:22:16,200
je l'avouais à mon équipe

3381
02:22:17,070 --> 02:22:18,220
que je,

3382
02:22:18,560 --> 02:22:19,080
tu sais je,

3383
02:22:19,580 --> 02:22:20,660
Moi, les livres demandent beaucoup d'énergie.

3384
02:22:20,820 --> 02:22:22,520
Donc je savais qu’ils ne voulaient pas entendre ça.

3385
02:22:22,620 --> 02:22:24,920
Non seulement cela prenait beaucoup de temps au patron,

3386
02:22:25,400 --> 02:22:26,660
cela le rendait déprimé et anxieux.

3387
02:22:26,820 --> 02:22:29,860
Mais quand j'ai finalement dit à mes dirigeants de mon équipe,

3388
02:22:29,940 --> 02:22:32,860
euh, vous savez, les gens qui, même si j'essaie de maintenir

3389
02:22:32,860 --> 02:22:33,820
beaucoup de distance,

3390
02:22:34,220 --> 02:22:36,340
J'aime beaucoup, beaucoup, euh, ça a fait

3391
02:22:36,860 --> 02:22:37,440
une telle différence,

3392
02:22:37,920 --> 02:22:40,000
tu sais, euh, parce que je pourrais être ouvert à ce sujet.

3393
02:22:40,180 --> 02:22:41,880
Et l'autre chose était,

3394
02:22:41,960 --> 02:22:43,260
avez-vous entendu ce dialogue de conférence ?

3395
02:22:43,720 --> 02:22:44,160
Oh oui.

3396
02:22:44,420 --> 02:22:45,760
C'est comme une chose sur invitation seulement.

3397
02:22:46,060 --> 02:22:47,500
C'est Orrin Hoffman, euh,

3398
02:22:48,100 --> 02:22:48,440
le dirige.

3399
02:22:48,880 --> 02:22:50,440
Euh, il essaie intentionnellement d'obtenir

3400
02:22:50,460 --> 02:22:51,880
des gens de tous bords politiques,

3401
02:22:51,880 --> 02:22:53,140
euh, pour se réunir,

3402
02:22:53,700 --> 02:22:56,200
euh, et avoir des conversations officieuses sur de gros problèmes.

3403
02:22:57,160 --> 02:23:01,360
Et c'était agréable d'être dans une pièce où les libéraux conservateurs,

3404
02:23:01,800 --> 02:23:02,600
aucune des réponses ci-dessus,

3405
02:23:02,740 --> 02:23:05,180
nous nous disons tous, oh, Dieu merci, quelqu'un s'est lancé dans la culture de l'annulation.

3406
02:23:05,260 --> 02:23:06,640
Et là où j'avais l'impression, je

3407
02:23:07,440 --> 02:23:08,580
j'avais l'impression que peut-être

3408
02:23:09,200 --> 02:23:13,000
ce ne sera pas le désastre que j'étais pour moi et ma famille,

3409
02:23:13,000 --> 02:23:14,700
dont je commençais à avoir peur.

3410
02:23:14,840 --> 02:23:17,700
Il se pourrait que prendre ces choses en main puisse avoir une fin heureuse.

3411
02:23:18,160 --> 02:23:20,600
Eh bien, il y a une chose qui me démarque

3412
02:23:23,540 --> 02:23:29,200
C'est le cas, la douleur de l'annulation peut être vraiment intense.

3413
02:23:29,620 --> 02:23:33,480
Et cela ne signifie pas nécessairement perdre votre emploi, mais même,

3414
02:23:34,000 --> 02:23:36,040
vous pouvez appeler ça de l'intimidation, vous pouvez appeler n'importe quel nom,

3415
02:23:36,480 --> 02:23:39,120
mais juste un certain nombre de personnes sur Internet.

3416
02:23:40,060 --> 02:23:43,360
Et ce nombre peut être un petit dicton

3417
02:23:44,540 --> 02:23:45,820
de mauvaises choses pour toi.

3418
02:23:45,820 --> 02:23:46,000
Ouais.

3419
02:23:46,500 --> 02:23:49,540
Cela peut être une force assez puissante pour la psyché humaine,

3420
02:23:49,540 --> 02:23:51,160
ce qui est vrai, mais c'était très surprenant.

3421
02:23:51,600 --> 02:23:53,620
Et puis le revers de la médaille aussi,

3422
02:23:54,300 --> 02:23:56,960
euh, ça me fait vraiment plaisir

3423
02:23:56,960 --> 02:23:58,900
c'est triste à quel point les gens peuvent être cruels.

3424
02:23:59,360 --> 02:24:00,400
C'est tel,

3425
02:24:00,900 --> 02:24:05,680
penser que votre, votre cause est une justice sociale peut dans de nombreux cas conduire

3426
02:24:05,680 --> 02:24:09,520
les gens pensent que je peux être aussi cruel que je le souhaite dans cette poursuite.

3427
02:24:09,840 --> 02:24:10,560
Quand ça arrive, souvent

3428
02:24:10,740 --> 02:24:18,280
c'est juste une façon d'exprimer une certaine agressivité envers une personne que vous considérez uniquement comme une abstraction.

3429
02:24:18,980 --> 02:24:23,120
Donc je pense qu'il est important que les gens réalisent qu'ils sont, peu importe,

3430
02:24:23,820 --> 02:24:24,860
comme n'importe quoi,

3431
02:24:27,060 --> 02:24:31,100
quelle que soit l'énergie négative, quelle que soit la négativité que vous souhaitez diffuser,

3432
02:24:31,920 --> 02:24:33,140
comme s'il y avait de vraies personnes

3433
02:24:33,140 --> 02:24:34,060
cela peut être blessé.

3434
02:24:34,340 --> 02:24:37,060
Comme si tu pouvais vraiment attirer les gens,

3435
02:24:37,740 --> 02:24:40,180
euh, être la pire version de

3436
02:24:40,300 --> 02:24:42,100
eux-mêmes ou éventuellement de se suicider.

3437
02:24:42,220 --> 02:24:43,600
Et ce n'est pas

3438
02:24:44,540 --> 02:24:45,060
comme réel.

3439
02:24:45,880 --> 02:24:47,740
Ouais. Eh bien, c'est une des choses que nous faisons dans le livre,

3440
02:24:47,740 --> 02:24:54,560
euh, pour vraiment s'adresser aux gens qui essaient toujours de prétendre que ce n'est pas réel, nous citons simplement,

3441
02:24:55,500 --> 02:24:56,220
nous citons le Pape,

3442
02:24:56,540 --> 02:24:57,280
nous citons Obama,

3443
02:24:57,640 --> 02:24:58,680
nous citons James Carville,

3444
02:24:58,920 --> 02:25:01,000
nous citons Taylor Swift sur la culture d'annulation.

3445
02:25:01,780 --> 02:25:03,840
Genre, euh, et la citation suisse de Taylor est :

3446
02:25:04,020 --> 02:25:05,820
c'est essentiellement comment, derrière tout

3447
02:25:05,820 --> 02:25:07,800
ça, il y a le, quand ça devient particulièrement méchant,

3448
02:25:07,800 --> 02:25:09,880
c'est très clair, tu sais,

3449
02:25:10,440 --> 02:25:12,860
tue-toi en quelque sorte comme un courant sous-jacent.

3450
02:25:13,280 --> 02:25:14,580
Euh, et c'est,

3451
02:25:14,960 --> 02:25:15,560
c'est cruel.

3452
02:25:16,280 --> 02:25:20,360
Et le problème est que dans un environnement aussi ouvert,

3453
02:25:20,700 --> 02:25:22,220
il y en aura toujours

3454
02:25:22,240 --> 02:25:26,560
quelqu'un qui veut être si transgressif et dire le plus blessant, tu sais,

3455
02:25:26,980 --> 02:25:27,460
chose terrible.

3456
02:25:27,900 --> 02:25:30,660
Mais ensuite tu dois te rappeler de la fausse déclaration,

3457
02:25:30,780 --> 02:25:31,820
revenir aux vieux idiomes,

3458
02:25:32,500 --> 02:25:33,980
les bâtons et les pierres me briseront les os,

3459
02:25:34,120 --> 02:25:35,920
mais les noms ne me feront jamais de mal.

3460
02:25:36,260 --> 02:25:37,860
A été

3461
02:25:38,560 --> 02:25:42,940
réinventé dans les débats sur les campus de la manière la plus stupide.

3462
02:25:43,240 --> 02:25:44,960
Les gens diront littéralement des trucs comme :

3463
02:25:45,240 --> 02:25:46,600
mais maintenant nous savons que les mots peuvent faire mal.

3464
02:25:46,880 --> 02:25:49,080
Et c'est comme si maintenant nous savons que les mots peuvent faire mal.

3465
02:25:49,430 --> 02:25:50,180
Les gars,

3466
02:25:50,640 --> 02:25:55,420
vous n'aviez pas besoin d'inventer une petite chose spéciale que vous apprenez aux enfants à fabriquer

3467
02:25:55,420 --> 02:25:56,460
ses mots faisaient moins mal.

3468
02:25:56,600 --> 02:25:57,920
S'ils n'ont jamais fait mal en premier lieu,

3469
02:25:57,940 --> 02:25:58,960
cela n'aurait même pas de sens.

3470
02:25:59,380 --> 02:26:03,980
Le dicton c'est un dicton qu'on se répète pour se donner de la force.

3471
02:26:04,220 --> 02:26:07,180
Quand les tyrans ont remarqué que tu es un peu bizarre,

3472
02:26:07,440 --> 02:26:08,880
peut-être un peu personnel,

3473
02:26:09,400 --> 02:26:10,340
euh, le,

3474
02:26:10,800 --> 02:26:11,820
euh, et ça aide.

3475
02:26:12,160 --> 02:26:14,140
Ça aide vraiment d'être comme,

3476
02:26:14,160 --> 02:26:16,460
écoute, ok, les connards vont dire des trucs de connards.

3477
02:26:17,000 --> 02:26:20,260
Hum, et je ne peux pas les laisser avoir ce genre de pouvoir sur moi.

3478
02:26:20,560 --> 02:26:20,840
Ouais.

3479
02:26:21,580 --> 02:26:22,020
Ouais.

3480
02:26:22,060 --> 02:26:24,400
C'est toujours une expérience d'apprentissage parce que c'est le cas,

3481
02:26:24,720 --> 02:26:25,880
ça le fait, ça fait mal.

3482
02:26:26,280 --> 02:26:28,420
Mais pour les bonnes personnes qui, en fait,

3483
02:26:28,420 --> 02:26:30,560
tu sais, parfois je pense, je pense qu'ils se défoulent,

3484
02:26:30,680 --> 02:26:31,680
tu sais, réfléchis-y.

3485
02:26:31,700 --> 02:26:33,560
N'oubliez pas qu'il y a des gens de l'autre côté.

3486
02:26:35,100 --> 02:26:35,240
Ouais.

3487
02:26:35,240 --> 02:26:37,620
Pour moi, cela blesse ma foi en l’humanité.

3488
02:26:38,070 --> 02:26:39,160
Euh, je sais que ça ne devrait pas,

3489
02:26:39,160 --> 02:26:39,980
mais c'est le cas parfois

3490
02:26:40,620 --> 02:26:41,800
quand je vois juste des gens être

3491
02:26:41,860 --> 02:26:43,120
cool l'un envers l'autre, c'est en quelque sorte,

3492
02:26:44,700 --> 02:26:45,200
c'est,

3493
02:26:45,800 --> 02:26:46,620
euh, ça flotte

3494
02:26:47,620 --> 02:26:49,940
un nuage sur ma vision du monde.

3495
02:26:50,360 --> 02:26:52,820
Et ce n'est pas le cas, j'aurais aimé ne pas avoir à être là.

3496
02:26:53,280 --> 02:26:53,340
Ouais.

3497
02:26:53,340 --> 02:26:55,000
C'était toujours mon genre de désinvolture,

3498
02:26:55,120 --> 02:26:56,960
mais, euh, réponds à ça.

3499
02:26:57,180 --> 02:27:02,660
Si, si l'humanité est fondamentalement bonne ou fondamentalement mauvaise, c'est comme le plus grand débat de tous les temps,

3500
02:27:02,660 --> 02:27:04,200
dans, en philosophie et en étant comme,

3501
02:27:04,500 --> 02:27:06,440
eh bien, le problème avec le premier, c'est qu'il y a

3502
02:27:06,440 --> 02:27:08,080
rien de fondamental sur l'humanité.

3503
02:27:09,460 --> 02:27:09,800
Ouais.

3504
02:27:09,940 --> 02:27:12,600
Qu'est-ce qui te donne de l'espoir dans toute cette histoire,

3505
02:27:12,720 --> 02:27:16,080
à propos de cet état sombre dans lequel nous sommes

3506
02:27:16,080 --> 02:27:18,440
dedans, comme vous le décrivez, comment pouvons-nous en sortir ?

3507
02:27:18,460 --> 02:27:20,480
Qu'est-ce qui vous donne l'espoir que nous nous en sortirons ?

3508
02:27:21,300 --> 02:27:23,460
Je pense que les gens en ont marre.

3509
02:27:24,020 --> 02:27:26,280
Euh, je pense que les gens en ont marre

3510
02:27:27,080 --> 02:27:28,620
ne pas pouvoir être authentique.

3511
02:27:28,790 --> 02:27:31,600
Euh, et c'est vraiment, vous savez, ce qu'est la censure.

3512
02:27:31,780 --> 02:27:32,620
En gros, ça vous dit,

3513
02:27:32,760 --> 02:27:33,140
ne sois pas toi-même.

3514
02:27:33,420 --> 02:27:35,380
Ne dites pas vraiment ce que vous pensez.

3515
02:27:35,900 --> 02:27:37,360
Euh, ne montre pas ta personnalité.

3516
02:27:37,520 --> 02:27:38,280
Ne soyez pas en désaccord.

3517
02:27:38,500 --> 02:27:39,120
Ne sois pas bizarre.

3518
02:27:39,140 --> 02:27:39,840
Ne vous trompez pas.

3519
02:27:40,800 --> 02:27:42,020
Euh, et ce n'est pas durable.

3520
02:27:42,460 --> 02:27:43,120
je pense que

3521
02:27:44,400 --> 02:27:45,940
les gens en ont assez.

3522
02:27:46,050 --> 02:27:50,460
Euh, mais une chose que je veux vraiment dire à votre public est

3523
02:27:51,140 --> 02:27:53,680
ça ne peut pas être simplement

3524
02:27:53,680 --> 02:27:58,080
à nous, nos téléspectateurs, d'essayer de résoudre ce problème.

3525
02:27:58,760 --> 02:28:00,360
Euh, et je pense que,

3526
02:28:00,760 --> 02:28:03,280
et cela peut sembler être un problème sans rapport.

3527
02:28:03,880 --> 02:28:05,240
Je pense que s'il y avait

3528
02:28:06,220 --> 02:28:07,440
très respecté,

3529
02:28:07,760 --> 02:28:11,180
disons des moyens extrêmement difficiles de prouver cela

3530
02:28:11,180 --> 02:28:14,260
vous êtes extrêmement intelligent et travailleur et cela ne coûte rien ou peu,

3531
02:28:15,360 --> 02:28:16,540
ça peut effectivement donner

3532
02:28:17,660 --> 02:28:20,680
les Harvard et les Yale du monde entier à courir pour leur argent.

3533
02:28:20,780 --> 02:28:23,840
Je pense que c'est peut-être la chose la plus positive que nous puissions faire,

3534
02:28:23,840 --> 02:28:24,580
à, pour faire face à beaucoup de

3535
02:28:24,580 --> 02:28:28,700
ces problèmes et pourquoi je pense que le fait que nous soyons devenus

3536
02:28:29,320 --> 02:28:31,440
une Amérique bizarre avec un grand

3537
02:28:31,660 --> 02:28:35,060
la tradition anti-élitiste est devenue étrangement élitiste en la matière,

3538
02:28:35,340 --> 02:28:36,640
dans, euh, en ce qui concerne

3539
02:28:36,640 --> 02:28:38,300
nous non seulement encore une fois,

3540
02:28:38,320 --> 02:28:41,920
notre leadership venant de ces quelques écoles sophistiquées,

3541
02:28:42,480 --> 02:28:44,380
nous avons en fait une grande admiration pour eux.

3542
02:28:44,520 --> 02:28:45,700
Nous les admirons en quelque sorte,

3543
02:28:46,020 --> 02:28:47,340
mais je pense que nous en aurions beaucoup

3544
02:28:47,340 --> 02:28:49,740
Une société serait plus saine si les gens pouvaient prouver,

3545
02:28:50,380 --> 02:28:52,480
vous savez, leur excellence d'une manière qui est

3546
02:28:52,480 --> 02:28:54,600
venant de flux complètement différents et,

3547
02:28:54,840 --> 02:28:56,040
et ça, ça, ça sont très respectés.

3548
02:28:56,140 --> 02:28:56,960
J'en parle parfois,

3549
02:28:57,340 --> 02:29:00,540
il devrait y avoir un test que quiconque le réussit soit comme un,

3550
02:29:00,900 --> 02:29:01,120
Vous savez,

3551
02:29:01,580 --> 02:29:05,260
un BA en sciences humaines, c'est comme un super BA,

3552
02:29:06,020 --> 02:29:06,480
comme quelque chose,

3553
02:29:06,860 --> 02:29:08,000
comme quelqu'un, pas un GED.

3554
02:29:08,100 --> 02:29:09,040
Ce n'est pas de cela que je parle.

3555
02:29:09,180 --> 02:29:10,500
Je parle de quelque chose comme,

3556
02:29:11,580 --> 02:29:13,380
tu sais, un sur seulement deux,

3557
02:29:13,500 --> 02:29:16,860
comme si une centaine de personnes pouvaient passer par un autre chemin, en fait, euh,

3558
02:29:17,220 --> 02:29:21,160
euh, de ne pas passer par ces énormes institutions coûteuses et gonflées que les gens

3559
02:29:21,160 --> 02:29:22,240
peuvent lever la main et dire :

3560
02:29:22,240 --> 02:29:23,140
Je suis intelligent et travailleur.

3561
02:29:23,700 --> 02:29:26,340
Je pense que cela pourrait être une manière incroyablement saine.

3562
02:29:26,600 --> 02:29:29,740
Je pense que nous avons besoin de filières supplémentaires pour que les créatifs puissent résoudre les problèmes,

3563
02:29:29,820 --> 02:29:31,400
que ce soit sur X ou ailleurs.

3564
02:29:32,080 --> 02:29:35,720
Euh, je pense qu'il y a beaucoup de choses que la technologie pourrait faire pour vraiment aider

3565
02:29:35,720 --> 02:29:35,940
ce.

3566
02:29:36,160 --> 02:29:38,580
Je pense que certaines des choses sur lesquelles Sal Khan travaille,

3567
02:29:38,920 --> 02:29:40,020
euh, la Khan Academy pourrait vraiment aider.

3568
02:29:40,720 --> 02:29:42,380
Euh, donc je pense qu'il y a beaucoup de façons,

3569
02:29:42,480 --> 02:29:45,980
mais ils existent en grande partie autour de l'invention de nouvelles façons de faire les choses,

3570
02:29:46,120 --> 02:29:49,220
je ne m'attends pas seulement aux vieilles choses qui disent

3571
02:29:50,140 --> 02:29:51,860
40 milliards de dollars en banque

3572
02:29:52,440 --> 02:29:53,900
qu'ils vont se réformer.

3573
02:29:54,180 --> 02:29:56,600
Et voici mon, vous savez, je m'en prends beaucoup à Harvard,

3574
02:29:56,660 --> 02:29:57,700
mais je vais m'en occuper un peu plus.

3575
02:29:58,580 --> 02:29:58,660
Euh,

3576
02:29:59,180 --> 02:30:02,380
le, et, et, euh, je parle encore beaucoup de cours,

3577
02:30:02,640 --> 02:30:05,380
et tu sais, il y a un super livre intitulé Poison Ivy,

3578
02:30:05,380 --> 02:30:07,880
euh, d'Evan Mandry, que je recommande à tout le monde.

3579
02:30:07,880 --> 02:30:08,740
Et c'est scandaleux.

3580
02:30:08,780 --> 02:30:10,280
On dirait moi et une diatribe à Stanford,

3581
02:30:10,760 --> 02:30:14,620
euh, c'était, euh, et moi, et je pense que le statut, vous savez,

3582
02:30:15,080 --> 02:30:17,020
l’enseignement supérieur d’élite compte davantage d’enfants issus de

3583
02:30:17,020 --> 02:30:21,780
les 1% les plus riches que parmi les 50 ou 60% les plus pauvres selon l'école.

3584
02:30:22,580 --> 02:30:27,000
Euh, et quand vous regardez à quel point ils aiment réellement le privilège de classe de réplication,

3585
02:30:27,160 --> 02:30:28,640
c'est, c'est vraiment pénible.

3586
02:30:28,840 --> 02:30:30,300
Donc tout le monde devrait lire Poison Ivy.

3587
02:30:31,300 --> 02:30:32,280
Et surtout,

3588
02:30:32,480 --> 02:30:35,580
euh, si tu es bizarre, continue à l'être.

3589
02:30:37,620 --> 02:30:39,760
Et tu es l'un des plus intéressants,

3590
02:30:39,800 --> 02:30:41,560
l'un des plus étranges parmi les plus beaux

3591
02:30:41,560 --> 02:30:42,940
comme les gens se sont jamais rencontrés.

3592
02:30:43,000 --> 02:30:45,580
Greg, merci pour le travail vraiment important que vous faites.

3593
02:30:46,300 --> 02:30:48,820
C'était, c'est

3594
02:30:51,960 --> 02:30:55,220
j'apprécie le cours, tout le domaine que vous avez amené ici aujourd'hui,

3595
02:30:55,220 --> 02:30:55,600
homme.

3596
02:30:55,600 --> 02:30:57,280
Euh, c'est une conversation incroyable.

3597
02:30:57,540 --> 02:30:58,540
Merci pour le travail que vous faites.

3598
02:30:59,140 --> 02:30:59,840
Merci.

3599
02:30:59,860 --> 02:31:00,200
Merci.

3600
02:31:00,760 --> 02:31:04,260
Et pour moi, qui me soucie profondément de l'éducation, de l'enseignement supérieur,

3601
02:31:04,620 --> 02:31:08,520
merci de demander des comptes aux MIT et à Harvard,

3602
02:31:09,080 --> 02:31:09,980
euh, pour, euh,

3603
02:31:10,620 --> 02:31:12,020
faire le bien envers les gens qui

3604
02:31:12,620 --> 02:31:13,420
parcourir leurs couloirs.

3605
02:31:13,600 --> 02:31:15,480
Alors merci beaucoup de m'avoir parlé.

3606
02:31:16,040 --> 02:31:20,260
Merci d'avoir écouté cette conversation avec Greg Lukianoff pour soutenir ce podcast.

3607
02:31:20,680 --> 02:31:22,520
Veuillez consulter nos sponsors dans la description.

3608
02:31:22,660 --> 02:31:25,760
Et maintenant, permettez-moi de vous laisser avec quelques mots de Noam Chomsky.

3609
02:31:27,000 --> 02:31:28,520
Si vous croyez en la liberté d'expression,

3610
02:31:29,220 --> 02:31:31,440
vous croyez en la liberté d'expression des opinions, vous n'y croyez pas

3611
02:31:32,400 --> 02:31:34,060
comme. Gables était en faveur

3612
02:31:34,060 --> 02:31:36,020
de la liberté d'expression pour les opinions qui lui plaisaient.

3613
02:31:36,640 --> 02:31:37,360
Staline aussi.

3614
02:31:38,060 --> 02:31:39,700
Si vous êtes en faveur de la liberté d'expression,

3615
02:31:40,180 --> 02:31:44,330
cela signifie que vous êtes en faveur de la liberté d’expression précisément pour les opinions que vous méprisez.

3616
02:31:45,800 --> 02:31:48,620
Merci de votre écoute et j'espère vous revoir la prochaine fois.

Italian transcription text:

GREG: Se l’obiettivo è il progetto della conoscenza umana, che è conoscere il mondo com’è, non si può conoscere il mondo così com’è senza sapere cosa pensa veramente la gente. E ciò che la gente pensa veramente è un fatto incredibilmente importante da sapere. Quindi ogni volta che lo dici davvero, non puoi dire che ti stai effettivamente privando della conoscenza di ciò che la gente pensa veramente che tu stia causando ciò che Tim o Crown, che fa parte del nostro consiglio di amministrazione, chiama falsificazione delle preferenze. Si finisce con un'immagine imprecisa del mondo, che tra l'altro, in molti casi, poiché ci sono attivisti che vogliono limitare maggiormente la libertà di parola, in realtà tendono a pensare che le persone siano più prevenute di quanto potrebbero essere. E in realtà, un modo molto pratico per peggiorare le cose è che censurare le persone non cambia la loro opinione. Li incoraggia semplicemente a non condividerlo con persone che li metteranno nei guai. Quindi li porta a parlare con persone con cui sono già d'accordo e la polarizzazione del gruppo prende piede.

LEX: Quella che segue è una conversazione con Greg Lukianoff, sostenitore della libertà di parola, avvocato del primo emendamento, presidente e CEO di FIRE, il fondamento dei diritti e dell’espressione individuale. Ed è l'autore di Unleashing Liberty, coautore con Jonathan Haidt di Coddling of the American Mind e coautore con Ricky Schlott di un nuovo libro in uscita a ottobre. Dovrebbero assolutamente essere preordinati, ora intitolato Canceling of the American Mind, che è un resoconto definitivo della storia, del presente e del futuro della cultura dell'annullamento, un termine usato e abusato nel discorso pubblico, ma raramente studiato e compreso con la profondità e il rigore che Greg e Ricky fanno in questo libro e in parte in questa conversazione. La libertà di parola è importante, soprattutto nei campus universitari, proprio il luogo che dovrebbe fungere da campo di battaglia di idee, comprese quelle strane e controverse, che dovrebbero incoraggiare l’audace assunzione di rischi, non il conformismo. Questo è il podcast di Lex Friedman. Per sostenerlo, controlla i nostri sponsor nella descrizione. E ora, cari amici, ecco Greg Lukianoff. Cominciamo con la grande domanda. Cos'è la cultura dell'annullamento? Ora, hai detto che non ti piace il termine così com'è, citazione, trascinato nel fango e abusato all'infinito da tutta una serie di figure controverse. Tuttavia, abbiamo il termine. Di cosa si tratta?

GREG: La cultura dell'annullamento è l'aumento delle campagne, in particolare di quelle di successo, iniziate intorno al 2014 per far licenziare, espellere, rimuovere dalla piattaforma, eccetera, persone per discorsi che normalmente sarebbero protetti dal primo emendamento . E dico che sarebbe protetto perché stiamo parlando di circostanze in cui non è necessariamente il caso in cui si applica il primo emendamento. Ma quello che intendo è come dire, per analogia, cose per cui non potresti perdere il lavoro come dipendente pubblico, e anche il clima di paura che ne deriva, il fatto che puoi perdere il lavoro se hai un'opinione sbagliata . E non era un segreto che ci fosse un aumento in questo, in particolare nel campus intorno al 2014. John Ronson ha scritto un libro intitolato So You've Been Publicly Shamed. È uscito nel 2015, documentando già questo fenomeno. Ho scritto un libro intitolato Freedom From Speech nel 2014. Ma è stato davvero nel 2017 che hai iniziato a vederlo rivolto ai professori. E quando si tratta del numero di professori che abbiamo visto essere presi di mira e perdere il lavoro, faccio questo da 22 anni e non ho visto niente di simile.

LEX: Quindi c'è così molte cose voglio chiederti qui. Uno, in realtà, basta guardare l'organizzazione di FIRE. Puoi spiegare in cosa consiste l'organizzazione? Perché è interconnesso a tutta questa lotta e all'ascesa della cultura del cancro e alla lotta per la libertà di parola dal 2014 e prima.

GREG: Quindi FIRE è stata fondata nel 1999 da Harvey Silverglate. È un famoso avvocato specializzato in libertà civili. È un po' nello show. È la persona che mi ha scoperto nella mia felice vita a San Francisco, ma sapeva che stavo cercando un lavoro di primo emendamento. Avevo frequentato la facoltà di giurisprudenza appositamente per studiare il primo emendamento. E mi ha trovato, il che è stato davvero bello. La sua protetta, Kathleen Sullivan, era la preside della Stanford Law School. E questo rimane il miglior complimento che abbia mai ricevuto in vita mia: mi ha consigliato ad Harvey. E poiché questo è il motivo per cui ho frequentato la facoltà di giurisprudenza, ero entusiasta di far parte di questa nuova organizzazione. L'altro cofondatore di FIRE è Alan Charles Kors. E' semplicemente un genio assoluto. È uno dei massimi esperti al mondo dell'Illuminismo e in particolare di Voltaire. E se a qualcuno dei tuoi ascoltatori piacciono i grandi corsi, avrà una conferenza su Blaise Pascal. E Blaise, ovviamente, è famoso per la scommessa di Pascal. E l'ho lasciato così commosso, impressionato e con una profonda comprensione di quanto fosse importante questa persona.

LEX: Interessante. Mi hai detto offline connesso a questo che esiste un, almeno funziona in parallelo o c'è una connessione tra ilamore per la scienza e amore per la libertà di parola. SÌ. Puoi magari spiegare dov'è questa connessione?

GREG: Certo. Penso che per quelli di noi che hanno davvero dedicato la propria vita alla libertà di parola, una cosa che ci interessa, che lo sappiamo o no, è l'epistemologia, lo studio e la filosofia di conoscenza. Sapete, la libertà di parola ha molte dimensioni morali e filosofiche, ma da un punto di vista pragmatico è necessaria perché siamo creature con una conoscenza incredibilmente limitata. Ci stiamo incredibilmente ingannando. Ho sempre amato il fatto che Yuval Harari si riferisca all'Illuminismo come alla scoperta dell'ignoranza perché è esattamente quello che era. All'improvviso è stato come, wow, aspetta un secondo. Abbiamo ottenuto tutta questa saggezza popolare incredibilmente interessante, che tra l'altro può essere sorprendentemente affidabile qua e là. Quando inizi a testare molto, non ha senso e non regge. Anche le nostre idee su come vanno le cose, come ha stabilito Galileo, come anche le nostre intuizioni, sono semplicemente sbagliate. E quindi gran parte della storia iniziale della libertà di parola avvenne contemporaneamente a una sorta di rivoluzione scientifica. Quindi molti dei primi dibattiti sulla libertà di parola erano collegati. Quindi certamente Galileo, sai, sottolineo sempre che Keplero probabilmente era come l'idea ancora più radicale che non fossero nemmeno sfere perfette. Ma allo stesso tempo, soprattutto a causa dell’invenzione della stampa, si sono verificati anche tutti questi sviluppi politici. E, sapete, parlo sempre di Jan Hus, dal famoso eroe ceco che fu bruciato sul rogo, credo nel 1419. Ma fondamentalmente era Lutero prima della stampa. Prima che Lutero potesse dire la sua, non aveva alcuna possibilità. E proprio questo era Jan Hus. Ma un secolo dopo, grazie alla stampa, tutti potevano sapere cosa pensava Lutero e, ragazzi, lo sapevano. Ma ciò ha portato, ovviamente, a questo periodo completamente folle e sconvolgente nella storia europea.

LEX: Beh, hai accennato al Primo Emendamento, per fare un salto un po'. Prima di tutto, cos’è il Primo Emendamento e qual è per te il collegamento tra il Primo Emendamento, la libertà di parola e la cultura dell’annullamento? Certo.

GREG: Quindi sono un avvocato del Primo Emendamento, come ho già detto, ed è quello che, questa è la mia passione, è quello che ho studiato. E penso che la legge americana del Primo Emendamento sia incredibilmente interessante. In una frase, il Primo Emendamento tenta di eliminare praticamente tutte le ragioni per cui il genere umano si è ucciso a vicenda nel corso della sua intera esistenza. Che non avremmo più combattuto per le opinioni, che non avremmo più combattuto la religione, che hai il diritto di rivolgerti al tuo governo per la riparazione delle lamentele, che hai la libertà di associarti. Che tutte queste cose in una frase fossero come, no, il governo non interferirà più con il tuo diritto ad avere questi diritti umani fondamentali. E quindi una cosa che rende FIRE un po' diversa dalle altre organizzazioni è che, tuttavia, non siamo solo un'organizzazione del Primo Emendamento, siamo un'organizzazione per la libertà di parola. E così, ma allo stesso tempo, molto di ciò che penso sia la libertà di parola, può essere ben spiegato con riferimento a gran parte della legge del Primo Emendamento, in parte perché nella storia americana, alcune delle nostre persone più intelligenti hanno pensato a quali sono i parametri della libertà di parola in relazione al Primo Emendamento. E molti di questi principi si trasferiscono molto bene proprio come idee pragmatiche. Quindi, il peccato più grande in termini di censura si chiama discriminazione del punto di vista. Che essenzialmente permetti la libertà di parola, ad eccezione di quell'opinione. Ora lo è, e si è scoperto che è un po' più difendibile. E penso che sia logico che se tu, se crei un forum e simili, parleremo solo di economia per escludere persone che vogliono parlare di un argomento diverso, ma è considerato giustamente un affare più grande. Se avete creato un forum per l'economia, ma non permetteremo alla gente di parlare di quel tipo di economia o di avere quella opinione sull'economia, la maggior parte, in particolare. Quindi molti dei principi della legge del Primo Emendamento in realtà hanno molto senso filosofico come buoni principi per quando, come cosa è un discorso protetto e non protetto, cosa dovrebbe metterti nei guai, come effettivamente lo analizzi, ed è per questo che in realtà proviamo nella nostra definizione di cultura dell'annullamento per funzionare in alcune norme del Primo Emendamento, proprio nella definizione. Quindi non dobbiamo impantanarci anche su questi.

LEX: Stai dicendo così tante cose interessanti, ma se riesci a collegarti alla discriminazione dei punti di vista, c'è qualche area grigia di discussione lì? Ad esempio, cos'è e non è l'economia per l'esempio che hai fornito? Sì.È, c'è, voglio dire, è una scienza? Oppure è un'arte tracciare confini su ciò che non è, non è consentito?

GREG: Già. Sapete, se state dicendo che qualcosa è o non è economia, beh, potete dirlotutto è economia e quindi voglio parlare di poesia. Ci sarebbe qualche esercizio di disegno al tratto, ma diciamo subito che decidi di aprirlo anche alla poesia. C'è una grande differenza tra dire, okay, ora siamo aperti alla poesia, ma non puoi dire, sai, Dante era cattivo. Ad esempio, questa è un'opinione proibita ora ufficialmente presente, in questo forum altrimenti aperto, che immediatamente a livello intuitivo colpirebbe le persone come un problema più grande del semplice dire che la poesia non è economia.

LEX: Sì. Voglio dire, quel livello intuitivo a cui parli, spero che tutti noi abbiamo quel tipo di intuizione di base quando il limite viene oltrepassato, è la stessa cosa per la pornografia, giusto? Sai, quando lo vedi, penso che ci sia lo stesso livello di intuizione che dovrebbe essere applicato a tutti i livelli qui. Ed è quando quell'intuizione viene deformata da qualunque forza sociale, che inizia a sembrare una censura.

GREG: Sì. Voglio dire, le persone lo trovano una cosa diversa. Sai, se qualcuno perde il lavoro semplicemente per la sua opinione politica, anche se quel datore di lavoro ha tutto il diritto di licenziarti, penso che gli americani dovrebbero comunque pensare, beh, è vero. Hanno tutti i diritti del mondo e non sto sostenendo che forse non dovresti licenziare qualcuno per la sua opinione politica, ma pensaci bene. Ad esempio, che società vogliamo, in che tipo di società vogliamo vivere? Ed è stato divertente guardarlo, sai, e io, lo faccio notare. Sì, difenderò le imprese, i diritti di associazione del primo emendamento per poter avere il diritto legale di decidere, sai, chi lavora per loro. Ma da un punto di vista morale o filosofico, se si pensa alle implicazioni se ogni azienda in America diventasse un’associazione espressiva, oltre ad essere un’organizzazione che massimizza il profitto, sarebbe un disastro per la democrazia perché ci si troverebbe in una situazione dove le persone in realtà si direbbero, non penso di poter effettivamente dire quello che penso veramente e credere ancora di poter mantenere il mio lavoro. Ed è lì che mi preoccupavo. Mi sentivo come se fossimo andati avanti perché gran parte della risposta iniziale alle persone che venivano cancellate era molto semplice, sai, oh, ma hanno il diritto di sbarazzarsi di questa persona. E questa, e questa è la fine, l'inizio e la fine della discussione. E ho pensato che fosse una schivata. Pensavo che in realtà non fosse una cosa molto seria.

LEX: Se ti interessano sia il primo emendamento sia la libertà di parola di pensarlo, solo per chiarire il primo emendamento è una specie di un'incarnazione legale dell'ideale della libertà di parola e quindi della libertà di parola applicata al governo. Ed è molto specifico applicato al governo e alla libertà di parola è l'applicazione del principio di amare ogni cosa, compreso l'ideale filosofico di alto livello di ciò che è, del valore che le persone siano in grado di esprimere quello che pensano.

GREG: Sì. È un'idea più vecchia, più audace, più espansiva. E puoi avere una situazione. E parlo di paesi che hanno buone leggi sulla libertà di parola, ma non necessariamente una grande cultura della libertà di parola. E parlo di come quando a volte facciamo questa distinzione tra legge sulla libertà di parola e cultura della libertà di parola, pensiamo in un modo molto nebuloso. E ciò che intendo con questo è che la legge in generale, soprattutto in un paese di common law, è il riflesso delle norme. Anche quei giudici sono persone. E in molti casi, si suppone che il diritto comune prenda effettivamente le nostre idee intuitive di equità e le inserisca nella legge. Quindi, se hai una cultura che non apprezza la libertà di parola da un punto di vista filosofico, non sarà in grado di proteggere la libertà di parola a lungo termine, nemmeno attraverso la legge. Perché alla fine questo è uno dei motivi per cui mi preoccupo così tanto per alcuni di questi casi terribili che escono dalle facoltà di giurisprudenza. Perché temo che, anche se la legge americana sul primo emendamento per ora è fortemente protettiva nei confronti del primo emendamento, non rimarrà tale. Se ci sono generazioni di studenti di giurisprudenza che pensano davvero che non ci sia niente, che non ci sia obiettivo più alto che urlare, sei un avversario.

LEX: Sì. Ecco perché gran parte della tua attenzione, o gran parte della tua attenzione, è rivolta all'istruzione superiore o al periodo di istruzione perché l'istruzione è il fondamento della cultura.

GREG: Sì. C'è questa storia, sai, nel 64, c'è il movimento per la libertà di parola a Berkeley e nel 65 c'è la tolleranza repressiva di Herbert Marcuse, che era una dichiarazione di, tra l'altro, noi di sinistra, noi, non dovremmo, dovremmo avere la libertà di parola, ma dovremmo avere la libertà di parola per noi. Voglio dire, sono andato, sono tornato indietro e ho riletto, ehm, la tolleranza repressiva e quanto sia chiara.Avevo dimenticato di aver dimenticato che in realtà è un po' come, ehm, e questi cosiddetti conservatori e di destra, dobbiamo reprimerli perché sono pensatori regressivi. Davvero non viene fuoriqualcosa di più sofisticato della vecchissima idea che la nostra gente sia buona. Ottengono la libertà di parola. Dovremmo, dovrebbero mantenerlo. Male l'altro lato. Ehm, noi non avremmo dovuto... e dobbiamo riqualificare la società. E ovviamente, così, finisce per essere un altro, anche lui era un fan di Mao. Quindi non sorprende che lui, che ovviamente il sistema debba fare affidamento su una sorta di sistema totalitario. Uhm, ma quella era una posizione ridicola, sai, diciamo 30, 40 anni fa, l'idea che essenzialmente, sai, la libertà di parola per me, non per i grandi , sai, il campione della libertà di parola che Hentoff diceva era qualcosa di cui avresti dovuto essere imbarazzato. Ma l'ho visto quando ero alla facoltà di giurisprudenza nel 97, l'ho visto quando ero internato all'ACLU nel 99, um, che stava arrivando un disastro ferroviario al rallentatore che essenzialmente c'erano, um, questi brutti le idee del campus che avevano assunto sempre più forza praticamente senza libertà di parola per il mio avversario stavano in realtà diventando sempre più accettate come, e in parte perché, il mondo accademico stava diventando sempre meno diversificato dai punti di vista. Penso che, come sottolinea il mio coautore Jonathan Haidt, quando c'è una bassa diversità di punti di vista, le persone iniziano a pensare in un modo molto tribale. E se non hai dissidenti rispettati, non hai le persone a cui puoi indicare che dico, Ehi, questa è una persona intelligente. Ehm, è come se io fossi una persona intelligente, ragionevole e rispettabile con cui non sono d'accordo, quindi immagino che non tutti la pensino allo stesso modo su questo problema. Inizi a diventare molto più del tipo che solo, sai, solo le persone cattive, solo gli eretici, solo i blasfemi, solo gli esponenti della destra, sai, um, possono effettivamente pensare in questo modo.

LEX: Ogni volta che dì qualcosa, ho sempre un milione di pensieri e milioni di domande che mi vengono in mente. Ma dal momento che hai menzionato che c'è una sorta di deriva come scrivi nel libro e hai menzionato ora che c'è una deriva verso sinistra nel mondo accademico, ehm, forse anche qui faremo una distinzione tra sinistra e destra e l'annullamento La cultura come presenti nel tuo libro non è necessariamente associata a nessun punto di vista politico, ci sono meccanismi da entrambe le parti che risultano nella cancellazione e nella censura, uh, in violazione della libertà di parola.

GREG: Quindi una cosa Voglio essere molto chiaro sul fatto che il libro affronta la cultura dell'annullamento sia di destra che di sinistra. Sono diversi in molti modi e sicuramente, sai, cancellare la cultura della sinistra è più importante nel mondo accademico dove la sinistra domina maggiormente. Ehm, ma parliamo molto della cultura dell'annullamento proveniente dalle legislature. Parliamo molto della cultura dell'annullamento anche nel campus, perché anche se, ehm, la maggior parte dei tentativi che provengono dal campus di far cancellare le persone vengono ancora da sinistra, ci sono molti attacchi che provengono da destra. da, sai, i tentativi di diverse organizzazioni e, a volte, quando ci sono storie su Fox News, sai, come se perseguitassero i professori e circa un terzo dei tentativi di punire i professori che in realtà hanno successo vieni da destra. E parliamo di tentativi di vietare i libri. Ehm, nel, nel, nel libro di cui parliamo, ehm, e, uh, parlo di fare causa alla legislatura della Florida. Rhonda Santus aveva qualcosa chiamato atto dello stop wake, ehm, che abbiamo detto a tutti che è ridicolmente incostituzionale. Ehm, hanno provato a vietare, sai, argomenti particolari nell'istruzione superiore e noi diciamo, no, questo è uno scherzo. Come, come, questo, questo sarà deriso in tribunale. Ehm, e non ci hanno ascoltato e l'hanno portato, uh, l'hanno approvato e abbiamo fatto causa e abbiamo vinto. Ora ci stanno riprovando con qualcosa che è altrettanto incostituzionale e noi faremo nuovamente causa e lo faremo, e vinceremo.

LEX: Puoi approfondire un atto di stop wake? Quindi presumibilmente si cerca di limitare l'insegnamento di determinati argomenti a scuola.

GREG: Già. Fondamentalmente ho svegliato gli argomenti. Uhm, sai, è qualcosa di più, è venuto fuori da una sorta di tentativo di arrivare ad una teoria critica della razza. Ehm, quindi sono argomenti relativi alla razza, al genere, eccetera. Uhm, non ricordo esattamente come tentarono di passare al governo, al CRT. Ehm, ma in realtà la legge è ben consolidata secondo cui non si può dire all'istruzione superiore cosa è permesso insegnare senza violare, uh, senza violare il primo emendamento. E quando la cosa è arrivata di fronte a un giudice, era esattamente come, uh, era esattamente scettico al riguardo come pensavamo che fosse. Penso che lo abbia definito distopico. Ehm, e non c'è mancato poco.

LEX: Quindi, se sei contrario a questo tipo di insegnamento, il modo giusto per combatterlo è sostenere che non è una buona idea come parte del curriculum invece di bandirlo dal curriculum.

GREG: Sì.È solo che lo stato non ha il potere di dire semplicemente di vietare, um, sai, cosa, cosa insegnano, cosa insegnano i professori dell'istruzione superiore. Oradiventa un po' più complicato quando parli di K fino a 12, perché lo stato ha un ruolo nel decidere cosa insegna il pubblico da K a 12 perché sono i tuoi figli, loro, sono finanziati dai contribuenti. Ehm, e generalmente è coinvolto il legislatore. Ehm, c'è un controllo democratico di questo processo.

LEX: Quindi, dalle scuole elementari fino ai 12 anni, c'è anche una tendenza verso sinistra in termini di amministrazione che gestisce il curriculum?

GREG: Sì , um, ecco, ecco, c'è sicuramente, um, dalla scuola elementare alla 12, il, il, voglio dire, i miei figli vanno alla scuola pubblica. Uhm, ho un bambino di cinque e sette anni e hanno insegnanti adorabili. Ehm, ma abbiamo avuto molti problemi con le scuole in fiamme. Ehm, e molti diplomati delle scuole di educazione finirono per essere gli amministratori che repressero la libertà di parola nell'istruzione superiore. E quindi sto cercando di pensare a modi positivi per affrontare alcuni dei problemi che vedo dal K al 12. Pensavo che il tentativo di dettare e basta, non insegnerebbe i seguenti 10 libri, sai, oppure 20 o 200 libri era il modo sbagliato di farlo. Ora, quando si tratta di decidere quali libri includere nel curriculum, ancora una volta, è qualcosa in cui il legislatore in realtà, si sa, non può, non può avere voce in capitolo, e questo è abbastanza incontrovertibile, ehm, in termini di legge. Ma quando si tratta di come combatterlo, ho qualcosa che, poiché sono bloccato con una formula, ho chiamato potenziamento della mente americana. Uhm, ho dato principi che erano incoerenti, ehm, con il tipo di pensiero di gruppo e una forte enfasi sulla, uh, politica dell'identità, uh, di cui, um, sai, alcuni critici si lamentano giustamente dalla K alla 12. Uh , e noi, noi, in realtà stiamo cancellando la mente americana, ma ho una spiegazione più dettagliata che pubblicherò sul mio blog, l'idea eternamente radicale.

LEX : È possibile legalmente, è solo una domanda stupida, forse creare una protezione aggiuntiva per certi tipi di letteratura 1984 o qualcosa che rimanga nel curriculum. Voglio dire, è già tutto protetto, immagino. Sì. Immagino di proteggere gli amministratori dal manipolare troppo il curriculum, come stabilizzare il curriculum. Non so quale sia il meccanismo della scuola pubblica dalle scuole elementari fino ai 12 anni.

GREG: Dalle elementari alle 12, sai, le legislature statali, sai, um, ne fanno parte. Loro ne fanno parte e possono dire che dovresti insegnare i seguenti libri. Ora, ovviamente, le persone sono sempre un po' preoccupate che, um, se tu, uh, se dovessero raccomandare, sai, insegnare, uh, insegnare la dichiarazione di indipendenza, sai, che finirebbe per essere, beh, insegneranno che la dichiarazione di indipendenza è stata solo per proteggere la schiavitù, che non significava insegnare un argomento particolare, quali libri di testo scegliere, quale prospettiva assumere, tutto quel genere di cose.

LEX: C'è come se la religione iniziasse a insinuarsi nell'intera questione del tipo, come, sai, è permesso alla Bibbia di insegnare nelle aziende e nell'istruzione? Uh, non farlo, sì.

GREG: Voglio dire, sono, sono un ateo, uh, con un intenso interesse per la religione. In realtà ho letto tutta la Bibbia quest'anno solo perché faccio cose del genere. E in realtà non l'avevo mai letto dall'inizio alla fine. Uhm, poi ho letto il Corano perché lo sai, e proverò a scrivere il Libro di Mormon, ma lo sai.

LEX: Beh, hanno iniziato a farlo, sei così affascinante. Uhm, consigli di farlo?

GREG: Penso che dovresti, um, giusto per saperlo, perché è una pietra di paragone, um, nel modo in cui le persone parlano delle cose, può diventare piuttosto noioso , ma mi sono anche costretto a leggere tutte le istruzioni molto specifiche su quanto devono essere alte le diverse parti del tempio e quanto devono essere lunghi gli abiti e che forma devono avere e come, e quelli vanno su un quantità. Uhm, quello, quello, quello è un pezzo sorprendentemente, scusate, sorprendentemente grosso dell'Esodo. Ehm, pensavo che fosse più simile a Levitico e Deuteronomio. Uhm, ma poi arrivi a libri come Giobbe, sai, wow. Voglio dire, Giobbe è una lettura del genere e non è possibile che Giobbe originariamente avesse quel finale. Come è fondamentalmente Giobbe, inizia come una scommessa perversa tra Dio, ehm, e Satana sulla possibilità o meno di costringere un uomo buono a rinunciare a Dio. E inizialmente non possono, va tutto in modo molto prevedibile. E poi alla fine hanno davvero torturato Giobbe e lui si è trasformato nel migliore, perché Dio è crudele? Come potrebbe Dio esistere? Come potrebbe un Dio gentile fare queste cose? E picchia, diventa il miglior avvocato del mondo e sconfigge tutti, tutte le persone che vengono a discutere con lui. Lui, lui li toglie di dosso i pantaloni. E poi all'improvviso alla fine, Dio si presenta e dice, um, beh, sai, sono ovunque. E... è una risposta molto confusa.Dà una risposta del tipo: sono lì quando, quando, quando le leonesse partoriscono e io sono lì. E comunque, c'è questo mostro gigante, il Leviatano, che è moltogrande ed è molto spaventoso. E io, e io devo gestire l'universo. E io dico, Dio, stai dicendo che sei molto occupato? È questo, è essenzialmente questo il tuo argomento con Giobbe? E non menzioni tutto, non menzioni tutto, tipo, che ho scommesso che è per questo che ti stavo torturando, questo non viene fuori. E poi alla fine decide, Dio decide, come fa Giobbe, oh, no, hai assolutamente ragione. Mi sbagliavo totalmente. Ehi, scusa. Uhm, e, e Dio dice, punirò quelle persone che hanno provato a discutere con te e non l'hanno fatto, non hanno vinto. Quindi, um, quindi si sbarazza di, non so esattamente cosa gli faccia. Non ricordo. Ehm, e poi restituisce a Giobbe tutti i suoi soldi e tutto il resto, e questo li rende super prosperi. E io dico che non era assolutamente quello il finale originale di quel libro. Ad esempio, perché questo vorrebbe, questo era chiaramente un romanzo amato come loro, ma non può avere quel finale. Va bene. Quindi, quindi, quindi, quindi sì, quindi è un modo lungo per dire che in realtà penso che ne valga la pena. Uh, in parte era, sei sempre un po' sorpreso quando finisci per interpretare la parte, tipo, um, ci sono parti che ti arrivano di soppiatto, un po' come Isaiah's a trip, um, Ecclesiastes, Depeche modalità.

LEX: E l'hai fatto, hai detto anche, uh, il Corano. Sì. Il che era affascinante. Allora, sarebbe interessante chiedersi, c'è una tensione tra lo studio dei testi religiosi o il seguire la religione e il semplice credere in Dio e seguire i vari aspetti della religione con libertà di parola?

GREG: Uhm, nel primo emendamento, uh, noi, abbiamo qualcosa che chiamiamo clausola religiosa e non mi è mai piaciuto chiamarla così perché sono due cose brillanti una accanto all'altra. Lo Stato non può istituire una religione ufficiale, ma non può interferire con il tuo diritto di praticare la tua religione. Questo è bello. Due cose allo stesso tempo. E penso che lo siano, e penso che abbiano entrambi esattamente ragione. E penso che a volte la destra sia molto entusiasta della clausola di libero esercizio e la sinistra sia molto entusiasta dell’establishment. E mi è piaciuto il fatto che li abbiamo, li abbiamo entrambi insieme. Ora, che rapporto c’è con la libertà di parola? E avevo ragione rispetto al curriculum, come stavamo parlando. Ehm, in realtà penso che sarebbe fantastico se le scuole pubbliche potessero insegnare la Bibbia, nel senso di simile, leggerla come un documento storico. Ma quando ero all'ACLU, ogni volta che vedevo persone provare questo, si trasformava sempre in loro che in realtà sostenevano, sai, un cattolico o un protestante o qualche ortodosso anche una specie di lettura sulla religione. Ehm, quindi se lo trasformi effettivamente in qualcosa che sostiene una visione particolare della religione, allora entra nel lato della clausola istitutiva. Quindi gli americani non hanno trovato un modo per insegnarlo davvero. Quindi probabilmente è meglio che tu, sai, impari, impari al di fuori di una lezione della scuola pubblica.

LEX: Pensi che sia possibile insegnare la religione, um, da, uh, un corso sulle religioni del mondo, senza mancare di rispetto alle religioni?

GREG: Penso che la risposta dipenda da quale prospettiva.

LEX: Uhm, beh, come dicono i praticanti sei un seguace ortodosso di un particolare religione. È possibile non farti incazzare insegnando come tutte le principali religioni del mondo?

GREG: Per alcune persone, la conclusione è che devi insegnarlo come vero. Ah, um, e con quello in quelle condizioni, allora la risposta è no, non puoi insegnarlo senza, senza almeno offendere qualcuno.

LEX: Non puoi dire che queste persone credono che sia vero? Puoi riformarlo? Quindi devi camminare sulle uova, essenzialmente.

GREG: Puoi provarci veramente tanto e farai comunque arrabbiare alcune persone, ma le persone serie diranno, oh no, hai davvero cercato di essere giusto nei confronti degli altri. credenze qui. Ehm, e io, e cerco di essere rispettoso, um, il più possibile riguardo a, um, molto di questo, mi ritrovo ancora molto più attratto sia dal buddismo che dallo stoicismo. Bene, dove vado?

LEX: Beh, una cosa interessante per tornare ai campus universitari è, um, il fuoco mantiene le classifiche sulla libertà di parola del college su rankings .thefire .org. Sono molto orgoglioso di loro. Lo consiglio vivamente perché dimentica che anche solo la classifica, impari molto sulle università da una prospettiva completamente diversa da quella a cui le persone sono abituate quando vanno a scegliere l'università in cui vogliono andare. Fornisce semplicemente un’altra prospettiva sull’intera faccenda. E fornisce citazioni di persone che sono studenti lì e così via, come le loro esperienze. E, e la cosa è diversa, forse potresti parlare delle varie misure qui prima di parlare di chi è tra i primi cinque e chi è tra gli ultimi cinque.Quali, quali, quali sono i diversi parametri che concorrono alla valutazione?

GREG: Allora la gente mi chiede fin dal primo giorno di fare una classifica delle scuole, secondo la libertà di parola. E anche se lo avevamo, avevamo il miglior database esistentecodici discorsivi universitari, politiche delle università che violano il primo emendamento o le norme del primo emendamento. Abbiamo anche il miglior database che chiamiamo database di disinvito. Uhm, ma in realtà è, um, è meglio chiamarlo database di deplatforming, che è come lo chiameremo.

LEX: Uhm, e questi sono tutti casi in cui qualcuno è stato invitato come relatore campus e poi sono stati disinvitati.

GREG: Disinvitare o deplatforming include anche mangiare.

LEX: Uhm, quindi si sono presentati e non potevano davvero parlare.

GREG: Sì, esattamente. Ehm, e, e, uh, e quindi, ciò di cui avevamo veramente bisogno per avere delle scienze sociali serie per discutere davvero seriamente su quale fosse la classifica, um, era essere in grado di avere un'idea migliore di quanti professori furono effettivamente puniti durante questo periodo. Ehm, e poi, il più grande elemento mancante era poter, ehm, chiedere direttamente agli studenti com'era l'ambiente in quel campus per la libertà di parola. Ti senti a tuo agio nel non essere d'accordo l'uno con l'altro? Ti senti a tuo agio in disaccordo con i tuoi professori? Pensi che la violenza sia accettabile in risposta a un oratore? Pensi che urlare, uh, pensi che urlare a voce bassa sia ok? Pensi che bloccare l'accesso delle persone a un relatore sia giusto? Ehm, e una volta che siamo riusciti a mettere insieme tutti questi elementi, abbiamo fatto prima un giro di prova, credo nel 2019, circa 50. E lo facciamo ormai da quattro anni, cercando sempre di rendere la metodologia sempre più precisi per riflettere meglio l’ambiente reale di particolari scuole. E quest'anno la scuola numero uno è stata l'Università Tecnologica del Michigan, che è stata una bella sorpresa. Uh, la scuola numero due era in realtà l'università di Auburn. Ehm, è stato bello vedere, nella top 10, la scuola prestigiosa più conosciuta in realtà è la UVA, ehm, che è andata molto bene quest'anno. L'Università di Chicago non era contenta di non essere la numero uno, ma l'università di Chicago ha 13 anni ed era stata la numero uno o tra le prime tre per anni prima.

LEX: Quindi puoi spiegare, è quasi sorprendente. È a causa, uh, dei dipartimenti di economia davvero forti e cose del genere o cosa, perché?

GREG: Avevano un caso che coinvolgeva uno studente. Non avrebbero riconosciuto un capitolo di svolta negli Stati Uniti e hanno fatto un argomento molto classico, ehm, che noi, e classico nel modo cattivo in cui sentiamo parlare dei campus di tutto il paese. Oh, abbiamo un campus repubblicano, quindi non abbiamo bisogno di questo ulteriore gruppo conservatore. E noi diciamo, no, mi dispiace. Come se avessimo visto dozzine e dozzine, non centinaia, di tentativi di ottenere questo particolare studente conservatore, un gruppo studentesco, lo riconosci o non lo riconosci? E così abbiamo detto loro, ascolta, questo tipo, uh, abbiamo detto loro all'incendio che, uh, sai, lo consideriamo serio e non avrebbero riconosciuto il gruppo. Quindi questo è un punto sotto nella nostra classifica ed è stato sufficiente per eliminarli, probabilmente sarebbero stati il numero due in classifica. Uh, ma ora sono 13 su due 48. Sono ancora una delle migliori scuole del paese. Non ho problemi a dire che la scuola che non è andata così bene, uh, um, con un -10,69 -10,69 e abbiamo arrotondato per eccesso a zero è stata Harvard e Harvard non è stata, ehm, molto contenta di quel risultato .

LEX: L'unica scuola a ricevere una classifica pessima.

GREG: Già. E ci sono un paio di persone, oh, Harvard, oh, Harvard. E ci sono un paio di persone che in realtà, credo, hanno commesso un errore diventando molto Harvard, um, sembrando come, ho chiesto agli statistici di guardare questo e loro, e loro, loro, pensano la tua metodologia è uno scherzo. E... e vorrei sottolinearlo, questo caso non era così importante. E quello studioso non era quello studioso, come quello degli argomenti contro uno degli studiosi per cui li abbiamo contati, uh, la punizione era che quello non era uno studioso molto famoso o influente. E io sono un po' del tipo, quindi il tuo argomento sembra essere snobismo. Essenzialmente, come te, non capisci la nostra metodologia per prima cosa. E poi stai dicendo che in realtà quello studioso non era abbastanza importante da poter contare. E comunque, Harvard, comunque, Harvard, um, se noi, il campus di Harvard, sì. Se noi, anche se prendessimo per vere tutte le tue argomentazioni, anche se decidessimo di sbarazzarci di quei due professori, saresti comunque in numeri negativi. Saresti comunque morto per ultimo. Saresti ancora alla ricerca di Georgetown e Penn. E nessuna di queste scuole è favorevole alla libertà di parola.

LEX: Direi che le ultime cinque sono l'università della Pennsylvania, Nicosette Penn, l'università della Carolina del Sud, l'università di Georgetown e l'università di Fordham.

GREG: Tutto molto ben guadagnato. Ci sono così tanti casi gravi in tutte quelle scuole.

LEX: Qual è il modo migliore per ritrovarti in fondo?cinque?

GREG: Se sei un'università, qual è, qual è il modo più veloce per raggiungere quel negativo, quello zero, un sacco di piattaforme, ehm, quello, uh, quando abbiamo guardato gli ultimi cinque , uh, l'81% dei tentativi di rimuovere gli altoparlanti dalla piattaforma hanno avuto successo negli ultimi cinque posti. Ehm, c'erano un paio di scuole, penso che Penn abbia incluso, dove ogni singolo tentativo, ogni volta che uno studente, come si è opposto, un gruppo di studenti si è opposto all'arrivo di quell'oratore, hanno annullato questo, questo discorso. E penso, penso che Georgetown avesse un tasso di successo del cento per cento. Penso che Penn avesse una percentuale di successo del 100%. Penso che Harvard si sia schierata a favore di un paio, ma soprattutto, uh, anche lì le persone sono state deplatformate.

LEX: Allora come si fa a respingere il deplatforming? Ebbene, chi, chi lo farebbe? Sono altri studenti? E' facoltà? È l'amministrazione? Qual è la dinamica del respingere fondamentalmente, perché immagino che in parte sia culturale, ma immagino che ogni università abbia un gruppo di studenti che protesteranno praticamente contro ogni oratore. Ed è una questione di come rispondi a quella protesta.

GREG: Beh, ecco, ecco il piccolo sporco segreto riguardo al grande cambiamento del 2014. Uhm, e, e il fuoco, io e l'altezza, um, Sono stato molto chiaro sul fatto che il grande cambiamento che abbiamo visto nel campus è stato che per gran parte della mia carriera, gli studenti sono stati bravissimi in termini di libertà di parola. Erano il miglior collegio elettorale per la libertà di parola, in modo assolutamente inequivocabile fino al 2013, 2014 circa. Ed è stato solo nel 2014 che abbiamo avuto questa esperienza molto, sai, un po' triste per noi, in cui all'improvviso gli studenti erano quelli che sostenevano la deplatforming e la nuova libertà di parola. codici in un modo più o meno simile a quello che avevano fatto, diciamo, a metà degli anni ottanta, per esempio. Ma ecco il piccolo sporco segreto. Non sono loro, sono solo gli studenti, sono gli studenti e gli amministratori, a volte solo una manciata di loro, che lavorano insieme per creare alcuni di questi problemi. E questo fu esattamente quello che accadde a Stanford. Quando Kyle Duncan, uh, un giudice della quinta circoscrizione ha provato a parlare alla mia alma mater e un quinto della classe si è presentato per sgridarlo. Ehm, è stata una vera dimostrazione di cosa stava succedendo in quei 10 minuti dopo l'urlo di un quinto giudice di circoscrizione. E continuo a sottolineare che, poiché sono un avvocato costituzionale, i giudici del quinto circuito sono un grosso problema. Sono un livello sotto la Corte Suprema. Uhm, sai, circa un quinto della scuola si presenta per sgridarli dopo 10 minuti di sgridarli e l'amministratore, un amministratore del DEI si alza con un discorso preparato che lei, che ha scritto. È un discorso lungo sette minuti in cui parla della libertà di parola. Forse il succo non vale la pena spremerlo. Ed eravamo in questa scuola di legge dove le persone potevano imparare a sfidare queste norme. Quindi è chiaro che c'era coordinamento, sapete, tra alcuni di questi amministratori e, parlando con gli studenti lì, erano in riunioni, riunioni approfondite per molto tempo. Si presentano, gridano. Poi impiegano altri sette minuti per tenere una lezione all'oratore sulla libertà di parola, sul non essere, non sul succo della libertà di parola, sul non valere la pena. Uhm, e poi per il resto sono solo continue critiche. Ehm, dopo che lei, dopo che se ne è andata, questo è chiaramente, e questo, e qualcosa di molto simile, sai, è successo diverse volte a Yale dove era molto chiaro che gli amministratori stavano aiutando, con molte di queste interruzioni. Quindi penso che ogni volta che si sente un grido in un'università, l'indagine dovrebbe essere innanzitutto: gli amministratori hanno contribuito a creare questo problema? Hanno fatto qualcosa per fermarlo? Perché penso che gran parte di ciò che sta realmente accadendo qui sia l'iperburocratizzazione delle università con molte più persone ideologiche che pensano che il loro lavoro principale sia fondamentalmente come controllare il discorso, più o meno, incoraggiano gli studenti, scusate, sono incoraggiare gli studenti che hanno opinioni che gli piacciono, a gridare. Ehm, ed è per questo che hanno davvero bisogno di indagare su questo. Ed è, uh, a Stanford, l'amministratore che, che ha fatto le osservazioni preparate, ehm, sul fatto che il succo non valeva la pena di essere spremuto. Non è stata invitata di nuovo a Stanford, ma è uno dei pochi esempi a cui riesco a pensare quando queste cose accadono spesso in cui un amministratore ha chiaramente facilitato qualcosa che era un grido o un deplatforming o ha portato al licenziamento di un professore o ha portato a un studente espulso laddove l'amministratore se l'è cavata senza problemi o probabilmente in alcuni casi ha addirittura ottenuto una promozione.

LEX: E così un piccolo numero di amministratori, forse anche un singolo amministratore potrebbe partecipare all'incoraggiamento e alla promozione organizzazione e quindi potenziare l'intero processo.

GREG: Ed è qualcosa che ho visto durante tutta la mia carriera.E l'unica cosa è piuttosto difficile da cogliere sul fatto, per così dire. E questo è uno dei motivi per cui è utile che le persone lo sappiano, tulo so, perché è stato un caso fantastico. Questo era all'Università di Washington. Ehm, e in realtà lo abbiamo presentato in un documentario realizzato nel 2015, 20, uscito nel 2015, 2016 intitolato, possiamo fare uno scherzo? Ehm, è stato allora che abbiamo iniziato a notare che qualcosa stava cambiando nel campus. Abbiamo anche sentito che i comici dicevano che non potevano più usare il loro buon umore. Questo accadde proprio nel periodo in cui Jerry Seinfeld e Chris Rock dissero che non potevano, uh, non volevano suonare nei campus perché non potevano essere divertenti. Uh, ma abbiamo presentato il caso di un comico che voleva fare un musical chiamato La passione del musical, prendendo in giro la passione di Cristo con l'obiettivo dichiarato di offendere tutti, ogni gruppo allo stesso modo. È stata davvero una missione a South Park. Uhm, ed è un caso insolito perché in realtà abbiamo la documentazione di amministratori che acquistano biglietti per studenti arrabbiati e tengono un evento in cui loro, dove li addestrano, saltano in mezzo e gridano, sono offeso. Come loro, loro, hanno comprato loro i biglietti. Li hanno mandati a questa, questa cosa con l'obiettivo di farla tacere. Ora, non sorprende che quando mandi un gruppo di studenti arrabbiati a interrompere uno spettacolo, non finirà con il sentirmi offeso. Ehm, e si è surriscaldato. Sono state lanciate minacce di morte, uh, il, um, e poi la polizia del Pullman Washington ha detto a Chris, uh, Chris Lee, il ragazzo che aveva fatto finta che lui, in realtà non li avrebbero protetti. Ora, non capita tutti i giorni di avere quel tipo di prova concreta che, quello, quello, uh, di aver effettivamente visto gli amministratori, uh, sarebbe così, uh, così sfacciato che abbiano registrato il fatto di aver acquistato loro i biglietti e li ho inviati. Ma penso che molte di queste cose stiano accadendo. E penso che sia una buona scusa per ridurre uno dei grandi problemi dell'istruzione superiore oggi, ovvero l'iperburocratizzazione.

LEX: Nella tua esperienza, esiste una distinzione tra gli amministratori e facoltà in termini di autori di questo, di questo genere di cose? Quindi, se ci sbarazzassimo di tutto, come ha detto Harvey, uh, sbarazzandoci di una grande percentuale dell'amministrazione, questo aiuta a risolvere il problema o anche la piccola percentuale dei docenti fa parte dell'incoraggiamento nel organizzazione di questo tipo di annullamenti.

GREG: Già. E questo è qualcosa che è stato profondamente deludente. Ehm, è questo se si guarda all'enorme aumento dei tentativi di licenziare i professori che abbiamo visto negli ultimi 10 anni e in realtà negli ultimi 22 anni, per quanto risalgono ai nostri record. Ehm, prima sono guidati in stragrande maggioranza da amministratori, tentano di far punire i professori. Ehm, e quella è stata la maggior parte, sai, direi che la mia carriera fino al 2013 è stata quella di lottare contro gli eccessi amministrativi. Ehm, poi nel 2014 inizi ad avere il problema degli studenti che cercano di far cancellare le persone. Ehm, e questo ha davvero accelerato nel 2017 e il numero. Quindi uno, un modo, una cosa che rende più facile documentare sono le petizioni per far licenziare o punire i professori. Ehm, e quanto sproporzionatamente questi provengano effettivamente da studenti. Ma un altro grande aumento è stato quello che i colleghi professori hanno chiesto che i loro colleghi professori venissero puniti. E questo per me è un po' vergognoso. Tu, tu, non dovresti essere orgoglioso di firmare la petizione per catturare il tuo collega professore. E la cosa ancora più vergognosa è che questo è quasi diventato un cliché nel fuoco. Quando qualcuno si trova ad affrontare una di queste campagne di cancellazione come professore, ricevevo lettere da alcuni dei miei amici che dicevano: Mi dispiace tanto, ti è successo questo. E queste erano le stesse persone che firmarono pubblicamente la petizione per farli licenziare.

LEX: Già. Sì. Sì. L’integrità è una cosa importante in questo mondo. E penso che in parte, sono così sorpreso che le persone non si battano di più per questo perché ce n'è così tanta fame. E se come docente o amministratore hai il coraggio di alzarti davvero, alzarti con eloquenza, rigore, integrità, sento che è impossibile per chiunque fare qualcosa perché c'è una tale fame. È così rinfrescante. Sì. Penso che tutti siano d’accordo sul fatto che la libertà di parola è una buona cosa. Oh, non lo so, non lo so.

GREG: Beh, okay. Scusa scusa. Non sono d'accordo. La maggior parte delle persone, anche nelle università, sente la fame, ma è quasi come se ci fosse questo tipo di nervosismo perché c'è un piccolo numero di voci forti. Stanno urlando. Quindi, voglio dire, ancora una volta, è qui che entra in gioco una grande leadership. E quindi, sai, i presidenti delle università dovrebbero probabilmente fare chiare dichiarazioni del tipo, questo non è, questo è un luogo in cui diamo valore alla libertà di espressione .Quando, e questo è stato per tutta la mia carriera, un rettore, un rettore universitario che punta i piedi presto e dice, no, tusai, non abbiamo intenzione di licenziare questo professore. Non espelleremo lo studente. Termina il problema spesso molto velocemente. Anche se a volte, ed è qui che si nota davvero il coinvolgimento amministrativo, gli studenti fanno cose come assumere il controllo dell'ufficio del presidente. E poi l’acquisizione sarà gestita dall’università. La gente a volte lo fa notare come se fosse un po' come, oh, è chiaramente come, ehm, il mio amico Sam Abrams, quando hanno cercato di farlo licenziare al Sarah Lawrence College. Ehm, e quella è stata una delle volte in cui è stato usato come un tipo, oh, che era ostile all'università perché loro, gli studenti, hanno preso il controllo dell'ufficio del presidente. E io dico, no, hanno lasciato che prendessero il posto dell'ufficio del presidente. E non so se quello sia stato uno dei casi in cui l'acquisizione è stata soddisfatta, ma se mai ci fosse una specie di cartello del tipo, sì, questo non lo è, in realtà è davvero molto amichevole .

LEX: Beh, in un certo senso, protestare e avere opinioni davvero forti, anche se opinioni ridicole, folli e selvagge è una buona cosa. È solo che non dovrebbe portare al licenziamento o alla de-platforming delle persone. Come se fosse bello protestare. Non è giusto che l'università lo sostenga e agisca di conseguenza.

GREG: E questa è una di quelle tensioni nel Primo Emendamento che in realtà, penso che abbia un rilascio abbastanza semplice. Essenzialmente hai un'app, hai assolutamente il diritto di dedicare la tua vita a porre fine alla libertà di parola e al ridicolo come concetto. E ci sono persone che, che lo sono davvero, possono sembrare molto spregevoli anche riguardo alla filosofia della libertà di parola. Ehm, e difenderemo il tuo diritto di farlo. Anche noi non saremo d'accordo con te. E se provi a far licenziare un professore, saremo dall'altra parte. Ora, penso che tu avessi Randy Kennedy, che io davvero, lo amo. Penso che sia un bravo ragazzo, ma ci ha criticato per il nostro database deplatforming dicendo che questo significa che gli studenti non possono protestare contro gli oratori. Dico, okay, è sciocco. Uhm, licenziamo perché un'organizzazione ha sempre difeso il diritto di protestare. Difendiamo costantemente i diritti dei manifestanti per i diritti, non credendo che i manifestanti abbiano il diritto di dire ciò che vorrebbero, in fondo sarebbe quello. Punire gli oratori. Non chiediamo di punire i manifestanti, ma quello che stiamo dicendo è che non si può lasciare che i manifestanti vincano se chiedono che qualcuno venga licenziato per la loro libertà di parola.

LEX : Quindi il confine c'è tra i manifestanti che protestano e l'università che agisce sulla base della protesta.

GREG: Sì, esattamente. E, naturalmente, grida che si tratta solo di censura della folla. Ehm, ed è qualcosa in cui l'università, il modo in cui in realtà affronti quella tensione nella legge del primo emendamento, è essenzialmente un po' come l'unico dovere positivo che il governo ha. Il primo, il dovere negativo, la cosa che non è consentito fare è censurarti. Ehm, ma il mio dovere positivo è che se, se voglio dire cose orribili, o cose del genere, grandi cose che non sono popolari in un parco pubblico, ehm, non puoi lasciare che la folla mi metta a tacere. Uhm, non puoi permettere quello che viene chiamato il veto dei disturbatori.

LEX: È così interessante. Perché sento che questo entra in gioco anche sui social media. Perché, sai, c'è tutta questa discussione sulla censura e sulla libertà di parola, ma per me la questione della carota è quasi più interessante. Una volta stabilita la libertà di parola, come si può incentivare il dibattito e il disaccordo di alta qualità? Ci sto pensando molto.

GREG: E questa è una delle cose di cui parliamo quando si parla di cancellazione della mente americana, è discutere a favore della verità e che la cultura della cancellazione è crudele. È spietato. È anti-intellettuale, ma non ti porterà mai da nessuna parte nella tua verità. E sprecherai così tanto tempo distruggendo i tuoi avversari, um, in qualcosa che in realtà non potrà mai portarti alla verità attraverso il processo, ovviamente, non arriverai mai direttamente alla verità. Non fai altro che eliminare la falsità.

LEX: Sì. Ma per tutti coloro che hanno un megafono su Internet con l'anonimato, sembra che sia meglio della censura, ma sembra che ci siano degli incentivi oltre a ciò. Oltre a ciò, puoi costruire, ehm, sì, per incentivare un discorso migliore. Sì. È come incentivare qualcuno che fa uno sforzo enorme per sostenere anche le argomentazioni più ridicole, ma fondamentalmente quelle che non includono nessuna delle cose che metti in evidenza in termini di tutti i trucchi retorici per chiudere le conversazioni, ma fanno solo cose davvero buone argomenti per qualunque cosa.Non importa se è un comunismo per il fascismo, qualunque cosa tu voglia dire, ma fallo con la scala, con il contesto storico, con, uh, uh, con l'uomo d'acciaio dall'altra parte, tutti quei tipi di elementi.

GREG: Proviamo a farne trepunti principali del libro. Uno, ehm, è semplicemente che la cultura dell'annullamento è reale. È un'era storica, ed è su scala storica. La seconda è che dovresti pensare alla cultura dell'annullamento come parte di una, ehm, retorica, come un approccio retorico più ampio e pigro, uh, a cosa, cosa, cosa chiamiamo argomenti vincenti senza argomenti vincenti. E lo intendiamo in due sensi senza avere argomenti vincenti o senza avere effettivamente un argomento. E parliamo di tutte le diverse, quelle che chiamiamo fortezze retoriche che sia la sinistra che la destra hanno che ti impediscono di farlo, che ti permettono semplicemente di liquidare la persona, ehm, o di schivare l'argomento senza mai arrivare alla sostanza della questione. discussione. La terza parte è semplicemente, sai, come possiamo risolverlo? Ma la roba della fortezza retorica è in realtà qualcosa che mi appassiona, perché interferisce con la nostra capacità di arrivare alla verità e fa perdere tempo e, francamente, è anche un po' così, dato che la cultura dell'annullamento fa parte di quella tattica retorica, può anche rovinare vite umane.

LEX: Sarebbe davvero divertente parlare di questo particolare aspetto del libro. E ti consiglio vivamente, se stai ascoltando questo, di preordinare il libro adesso.

GREG: Uh, quando esce? 17 ottobre. Va bene. L'annullamento della mente americana. Va bene. Quindi nel libro c'è anche un elenco di tattiche retoriche a buon mercato che usano sia la sinistra che la destra. E poi hai un elenco di tattiche utilizzate dalla sinistra e dalla destra. Quindi c'è la retorica, la perfetta fortezza retorica che usa la sinistra e l'efficiente fortezza retorica che usa la destra.

LEX: Il primo è che dire dell'ismo. Forse possiamo esaminarne alcuni che catturano il tuo cuore in questo particolare momento mentre ne parliamo. E se, se puoi descriverne degli esempi o se, uh, ci sono aspetti che vedi lì, particolarmente efficaci efficaci. Quindi, uh, che dire dell'ismo è difendersi dalle critiche rivolte alla tua parte tirando fuori i presunti illeciti dell'altra parte.

GREG: Voglio creare delle piccole carte con queste, uh, tutte queste tattiche e iniziare a usare li su X tutto il tempo perché sono così comunemente distribuiti.

LEX: E per quanto riguarda ism, lo metto al primo posto per un motivo, sai, sarebbe un'idea interessante integrarlo effettivamente nella barra X di Twitter dove le persone, sai, invece di cliccare sul cuore, possono cliccare su quale delle tattiche retoriche si tratta. E poi, perché lo sai, in realtà ci sono le note della community. Non so se avete visto su X che voi potete contribuire con note ed è piuttosto affascinante. Funziona davvero, davvero bene, ma bisogna dargli un po' più di struttura. Sì. In realtà è un metodo davvero interessante.

GREG: Sì. In realtà, quando stavo pensando a come X potrebbe essere usato per argomentare a favore della verità, non vorrei che fosse così, sai, tutti sarebbero vincolati a ciò. Ma penso di immaginare quasi di essere come un flusso all'interno di X focalizzato sulla verità, che accetta alcune regole aggiuntive su come argomenterebbero. Sì, amico.

LEX: Mi piacerebbe. Dove c'è, in termini di flussi che si intersecano e possono essere separati, quello delle stronzate in cui le persone semplicemente si divertono a dire stronzate. Va bene. Provaci, amico. E poi c'è la verità e poi, uh, voglio dire, loro dicono, poi c'è l'umorismo, poi ci sono buone vibrazioni. Tipo, sai, non sono una persona che ha assolutamente bisogno di buone vibrazioni in ogni momento, ma a volte è bello averle, è bello semplicemente accedere e non dover vedere il dramma, i combattimenti, i litigi, il... le cancellazioni, le mamme, tutto questo. È bello vedere, ecco perché vado su Reddit o, per esempio, quali sono gli animali carini, se ci sono cuccioli e gattini carini.

GREG: Ed è come, voglio solo vedi Ryan Reynolds cantare con Will Farrell.

LEX: Voglio dire, a volte è tutto ciò di cui hai bisogno nel mio cuore. Sì. Non sempre, solo un po' e poi torniamo alla battaglia per la verità. Va bene. E allora che mi dici dell'ismo?

GREG: E come Mia? È ovunque. Ehm, quando, quando guardi, uh, quando guardi Twitter, quando guardi i social media in generale, um, e il primo, come quello che chiamiamo il percorso a ostacoli, è fondamentalmente testato nel tempo, vecchio stile, sai , espedienti argomentativi che usano tutti. E che dire dell'ASM è semplicemente sollevare qualcosa, sai, come se qualcuno discutesse, come se Biden fosse corrotto. E, e poi qualcuno dice, beh, Trump era peggio, sai, e questo non è un argomento illegittimo, sai, da recuperare, ma sembra che accada.Ogni volta che qualcuno fa un'affermazione, qualcuno fa semplicemente notare qualche altra cosa che stava succedendo e la cosa può essere sempre più attenuata da ciò che stai effettivamente cercando di discutere. E quando tu, e poi lo vedi continuamente sui social media ed è un po', sai, ero un grande fan dello show quotidiano di Jon Stewart, ma moltissimodi quale fosse l'umorismo e quale fosse la tattica per discutere era questa cosa qui. È come, Oh, sto discutendo di questo importante problema. Oh, in realtà, sai, ecco, c'è quest'altro problema qui che mi preoccupa di più. E questo, lo sai, e sul, sai, scegliamo a destra qui. Quindi il 6 gennaio, sai, guardavo tutti discutere di, um, trita, sai, come, um, uh, la parte occupata di Seattle o la parte occupata di Portland e il set, e fondamentalmente cercavano di piacere, Oh, parlerai della rivolta del 6 gennaio. Uhm, e comunque vivo a Capitol Hill. Quindi credimi, ero molto consapevole di quanto fosse spaventoso e brutto. Ehm, sai, come ho detto, mio padre è cresciuto in Jugoslavia e quella sera abbiamo cenato tutti nel seminterrato. Perché dico, "Oh, quando le cose vanno giù, mangia nel seminterrato". Era, era, era davvero spaventoso. E la gente cercherebbe di deviare dal fatto che il 6 gennaio è serio sostenendo che, oh, beh, stanno accadendo cose pazzesche e orribili in tutto il paese. Uh, sai, rivolte, uh, uh, um, che sono arrivate da alcune proteste per la giustizia sociale. E ovviamente la risposta è che puoi preoccuparti di entrambe queste cose e trovare entrambi i problemi. Ma sai, se sto discutendo di Chop, sai, qualcuno che parla del 6 gennaio non è molto rilevante al riguardo. O se sto discutendo del 6 gennaio, qualcuno che ha parlato delle rivolte del 2020, non è utile?

LEX: Abbiamo intrapreso un lungo viaggio oscuro da quello che riguarda l'ISM e, uh, correlato a quello è equipaggio di paglia e equipaggio di acciaio. Quindi travisando la prospettiva della prospettiva opposta. E anche questo è qualcosa, uh, immagino che sia molto diffuso ed è difficile fare il contrario, ovvero che l'equipaggio d'acciaio richiede empatia o richiede eloquenza. Richiede comprensione, fare effettivamente la ricerca e comprendere la, la, prospettiva alternativa.

GREG: Il mio, uh, meraviglioso dipendente, Angel ed Eduardo ha qualcosa che lui chiama star manning e mi ritrovo a fare questo un quantità. È bello avere, sai, due genitori immigrati, um, perché ricordo di essere stato a San Francisco, uh, sai, uh, in uno strano tipo di gruppo tipo ACLU slash burn man e di avere un amico lì che era un artista che parlerebbe di odiare il Kansas. E questa era la sua metafora per l'America centrale, ecco cosa intendeva con ciò. E poi era piuttosto fiero del fatto che odiava il Kansas. E io sono tipo, devi capire. Vi vedo ancora un po' come stranieri e penso, tipo, cambiare il nome del Kansas in Croazia, sapete, cambiare il nome del Kansas in, in, in alcuni. Questo è quello che mi sembra. E l'idea dell'equipaggio stellare, che mi piace, è l'idea di essere così, quindi stai dicendo che odi davvero la tua minoranza religiosa dominante, tipo, ed è allora che inizi a distaccarti un po' da essa , quanto l'America tipica sia eccezionale in molti modi, ma alcune delle nostre dinamiche sono incredibilmente tipiche. È uno dei motivi per cui, come quando le persone iniziano a leggere Thomas Soul, ad esempio, iniziano a rimanerne affascinati perché una delle cose che fa è fare analisi comparative dei problemi dei paesi e sottolineare che alcune di queste cose che pensiamo siano semplicemente esclusivi degli Stati Uniti esistono nel 75% del resto dei paesi del mondo. Il libro di Francis Fukuyama che sto leggendo proprio adesso, Le origini dell'ordine politico, fa in realtà questo meraviglioso lavoro nel sottolineare come non siamo speciali in una varietà di modi. In realtà questo è qualcosa che mi sta molto a cuore. E, uh, Fukuyama ovviamente, uh, è, è, è un libro fantastico. Non lo è, è un po' artificioso nella scrittura perché il suo termine per una delle cose che lo preoccupano e che distruggono le società è il rimpatrio, che è il ritorno a società in cui si favoriscono la famiglia e gli amici. E in realtà penso molto a quello che vedo in una sorta di, ehm, negli Stati Uniti, che mi fa preoccupare che potremmo attraversare un po' di un processo di rimpatrio. E penso che questo sia uno dei motivi per cui le persone sono così arrabbiate. Penso che avere una, penso che la prospettiva che noi, sai, sembra quasi che avremo un'elezione che sarebbe stata, sai, Jeb Bush contro Hillary Clinton. È come se fossimo un paese dinastico adesso? E' questo che sta succedendo? Ma è anche uno dei motivi per cui le persone sono così arrabbiate per le ammissioni di eredità, per quanto, sai, certe famiglie sembrano essere in grado di mantenere perennemente la loro gente nelle classi superiori degli Stati Uniti. E credetemi, come se fossi povero quando ero bambino e andavo, e dovevo andare, dovevo andare in uno dei locali notturni. Devo andare a Stanford.E ho potuto vedere come le persone ti trattano in modo diverso, in un modo quasi offensivo. Mi piace, fondamentalmente mi piaceimprovvisamente per un certo tipo di persone ero una persona legittima. E guardo quanto l'America fa affidamento su Harvard, su Yale per produrre la sua, userò un termine molto valido, classe dirigente. E questo è uno dei motivi per cui bisogna essere particolarmente preoccupati per ciò che accade in questi college d'élite. E questi college d’élite, ad eccezione dell’Università di Chicago e dell’UVA, si comportano davvero male per quanto riguarda la libertà di parola. E questo comporta ogni genere di problemi. Ciò non fa ben sperare per il futuro della protezione della libertà di parola per il resto della società.

LEX: Quindi puoi anche entrare in empatia con le persone che hanno votato per Donald Trump? Perché proprio questo è una resistenza a questo tipo di slancio della classe dominante, questa regalità che trasmette il dominio di generazione in generazione.

GREG: Faccio davvero del mio meglio per entrare in empatia con tutti, in una certa misura, e provare per vedere davvero da dove vengono e la rabbia a destra. Ho capito. Voglio dire, mi sento come se il libro, quindi catturare la mente americana fosse un libro che, in una certa misura, avrebbe potuto piacere al pubblico, in parte perché intendevamo davvero quello che abbiamo detto nel sottotitolo che questi sono buone intenzioni e cattive idee che feriscono le persone. E se lo capisci e leggi il libro, puoi dire che è come, okay, non è nessuno che si comporta in modo malizioso. Sai, queste sono persone che cercano di proteggere i propri figli. Lo stanno facendo in un modo che in realtà può portare a maggiore ansia, depressione e, stranamente, alla fine rappresentare una minaccia alla libertà di parola. Ma in questo non possiamo essere del tutto, io e il mio, oh, non ho nemmeno menzionato il mio brillante coautore, Ricky Schlott, un genio di 23 anni. Lei è, lei è, lei è fantastica. Ho iniziato a lavorare con lei quando aveva 20 anni, chi è, chi è il mio coautore di questo libro. Quindi quando dico "noi" parlo di me e Ricky. È un libertario. Giornalista libertario.

LEX: E un giornalista. Sì. Una mente brillante.

GREG: Sì. E, ma in realtà non possiamo scriverlo in un modo troppo gentile perché i cancellatori non sono gentili. C'è una crudeltà e una spietatezza in questo. Voglio dire, ho iniziato a sentirmi davvero depresso l'anno scorso mentre lo scrivevo e non volevo nemmeno dire al mio staff perché stavo diventando così ansioso e depresso. In parte è perché sto parlando di persone che, sai, in alcuni dei casi di cui stiamo parlando, verranno a casa tua e prenderanno di mira i tuoi figli. Quindi, quindi questo è un lungo modo per dirlo, in un certo senso posso capire che tipo di cose fa impazzire in una certa misura in questo. Ho la sensazione che si sentano costantemente presi dal gas. L’istruzione d’élite è davvero un insulto per la classe operaia. Piace, parte dell'ideologia dominante in questo momento, in un certo senso, quasi il 70% del pubblico americano, come loro, abbiamo pensato di svilupparlo un po' nella perfetta fortezza retorica, come lo sono per alcuni, in qualche modo illegittimo e non degno di rispetto o compassione.

LEX: Già. L'elitarismo generale che si irradia, un elitarismo autoalimentato che si irradia dalle persone che frequentano queste istituzioni.

GREG: E la cosa divertente è che l'elitarismo è stato riconfezionato come una sorta di si maschera da compassione infinita, ma essenzialmente si basa su una sorta di, per essere sinceri, un'ideologia eccessivamente semplice e eccessivamente semplicistica, una semplice spiegazione del mondo e dividere le persone in gruppi e giudicare le persone in base a quanto sono oppresse da sole, all’incrocio delle loro diverse identità. E si è arrivati a questo, penso inizialmente con, con, con un appello da un nucleo compassionevole, ma viene usato in un modo che può essere molto crudele, molto sprezzante, privo di compassione e ti permette di non prenderlo sul serio la maggior parte dei tuoi simili.

LEX: È davvero strano come sia successo. Forse puoi esplorare il motivo per cui una cosa che all'inizio suona bene. Sì. Può essere, può creare, può diventare un’arma così crudele per cancellare, ferire le persone e ignorarle. Voglio dire, questo è quello che hai descritto con la perfetta fortezza retorica. Sì. Che è una serie di domande. Forse puoi approfondire quale sia la fortezza retorica perfetta.

GREG: Già. Quindi la fortezza retorica perfetta è il modo in cui è stato sviluppato dalla sinistra per non arrivare mai alla vera argomentazione di qualcuno. Voglio creare un grafico, come un diagramma di flusso di questo, ecco l'argomento ed ecco questa fortezza perfetta che ti distoglierà ogni volta dall'arrivare all'argomento. E ho iniziato a notarlo sicuramente quando, quando frequentavo la facoltà di giurisprudenza, che c'erano molti modi diversi in cui potevi licenziare le persone e perfezionare la fortezza retorica passo uno. E posso attestarlo perché anch'io ero colpevole di questo, che puoi licenziare le persone se puoi sostenere che sono conservatrici.Non devono essere conservatori per essere chiari. Devi solo dire che lo sono. Quindi non ho mai letto Thomas Sowell perché era un'ala destra. Non ho letto Camille Pogliaperché ero, io, qualcuno mi aveva convinto che fosse un'ala destra. C'erano molti autori che, e quando frequentavo la facoltà di giurisprudenza, tra molte persone molto brillanti, era già un'abitudine intellettuale che se potessi designare qualcosa di conservatore, allora non dovevi davvero pensare a molto più o prenderlo particolarmente sul serio. Questo è un modo infantile di discutere, ma ciononostante mi sono impegnato. Era una tattica comune. Ho anche menzionato nel libro che c'è stato un tempo in cui un amico attivista gay che era, credo decisamente alla mia sinistra, ma che comunque aveva quell'esperienza pragmatica di essere effettivamente un attivista, ha detto qualcosa del tipo, beh, solo perché il conservatore di qualcuno non lo fa non significa che abbiano torto. E ricordo di essermi sentito un po' scandalizzato a un certo livello, semplicemente pensando, beh, è un po', non è questo il punto quando diciamo che sono solo delle persone cattive con cattive idee.

LEX: Puoi semplicemente lanciare un, oh, quel ragazzo è un'ala destra. Puoi semplicemente lanciarlo.

GREG: Non devi più pensare a te.

LEX: Già. E poi può, se sei abbastanza popolare, può essere quello, può essere un po' appiccicoso. Sì.

GREG: Tipo, ed è strano perché, poiché è efficace, ecco perché continua ad abituarsi essenzialmente, avrebbe dovuto colpire qualcuno perché, perché io, sai, ho un grande liberale pedigree, sai, di tutto, dal lavoro all'ACLU al diritto dei rifugiati nell'Europa dell'Est, ho fatto parte di un programma di tutoraggio ambientale per ragazzi delle scuole superiori dei centri urbani di Washington. Sai, sono stato, sono stato, io, io, posso, sai, difendermi perché sono di sinistra, ma odio farlo perché c'è anche una parte di me che dice, okay, e allora, tipo, stai davvero dicendo che se riesci magicamente a farmi discutere o a convincerti che ho ragione, non devi più ascoltarmi? E ancora una volta è litigare come bambini. E il motivo per cui è diventato così popolare è perché anche tra, o forse, forse soprattutto tra le élite, funziona in modo così efficace come un’arma perfetta che puoi usare acriticamente. Se solo potessi dimostrare che hai ragione, non devo, non devo pensare a te. Non c'è da meravigliarsi che all'improvviso inizi a vedere persone chiamare di destra l'ACLU e chiamare di destra il New York Times perché è stato un modo davvero efficace per delegittimare le persone come pensatori. Abbiamo, sai, Stephen Pinker, che è nel nostro consiglio di amministrazione, si riferisce al mondo accademico come al polo sinistro che essenzialmente è, è una posizione che, da quel punto di vista, tutto guarda alla sua destra, sembra come se fosse a destra. Ma una volta che diventa una tattica che accettiamo, e questo è uno dei motivi per cui, sai, sono più a sinistra, ma penso di essere a sinistra del centro liberale. Ricky è, sai, un libertario più conservatore. E inizialmente pensavo, dovrei davvero scrivere qualcosa con qualcuno che è più a destra? E io sono tipo, assolutamente dovrei esserlo. Devo effettivamente essere all'altezza di ciò in cui credo su queste cose perché è ridicolo che abbiamo questa idea primitiva secondo cui puoi licenziare qualcuno non appena affermi, a torto o a ragione, che è dalla parte della destra.

LEX: Beh, mi sembra, correggimi se sbaglio, ma mi sembra che di recente tu sia stato chiamato fuoco di destra, forse tu per associazione a causa di quel dibattito.

GREG: Oh, il LA Times . L'LA Times. Parliamo del LA Times.

LEX: Quindi sì, c'è un articolo, c'è un dibattito. Non vedo l'ora di guardarlo perché non credo che sia ancora disponibile per la visione in video. Devi partecipare di persona. Non posso aspettare di vederlo. Uh, ma il fuoco era in parte di supporto e poi il LA Times ha scritto, ehm, un articolo feroce sul fatto che, uh, tutti nel dibattito avevano sostanzialmente ragione, inclinandosi a destra. Okay.

GREG: Uh, c'è così tanto da disfare le valigie lì. Uh, sai, Barry Weiss ha questo, sai, un grande, grande progetto, la stampa libera. Sono rimasto molto colpito. Si tratta di raccontare storie che molti media di destra o di sinistra non sono disposti a coprire. E abbiamo organizzato un dibattito con lei. Ehm, e noi volevamo renderlo il più divertente e controverso possibile. Uh, quindi il fuoco e la libertà di stampa hanno ospitato un dibattito. La rivoluzione sessuale è fallita? Quindi il dibattito è stato davvero emozionante, davvero divertente. La parte che sosteneva che la rivoluzione sessuale non era un fallimento, quella su cui si trovavano Grimes e Sarah Hader. Una... è stata, sai, una serata piacevole, carnosa e premurosa. E abbiamo avuto un rev, c'era una recensione che era piuttosto severa sull'intera faccenda. E includeva una frase che diceva che, uh, il fuoco, che afferma di credere nella libertà di parola, ma difende i punti di vista solo fino a un certo punto. Non posso credere che sia persino apparso sulla rivista.Perché non si tratta solo di chiamarci. Perché ovviamente, sai, l'implicazione ovviamente, che siamo di destra, ehm, cosa che in realtà non siamo, lo staff tende decisamente più a sinistra eA destra. Ehm, ma difendiamo anche persone di tutto lo spettro, sempre. Come se fosse qualcosa che anche la più minima ricerca su Google avrebbe risolto. Quindi, come se avessimo dato un po' di calore a Los Angeles su questo perché è come, sì, se lo dicessi. Secondo me, sono di destra, avremmo ribattuto, sai, um, dicendo, beh, qui, qui, ecco i seguenti 50.000 esempi di noi che non lo siamo, ma quando realizzi davvero siamo d'accordo con l'affermazione fattuale secondo cui difendiamo solo le opinioni, prima di tutto, non c'è modo per noi di essere d'accordo. Non c'è modo per noi di essere d'accordo con le opinioni perché in realtà abbiamo uno staff politicamente diversificato che non è nemmeno d'accordo su quali opinioni siano buone e quali opinioni abbiamo. Ma sì, ho dovuto farlo, io, in un momento in cui qualcuno ha fatto qualcosa del genere ed era solo un po' irriverente riguardo al fatto che la libertà di parola va bene. Ho scritto un thread lungo 70 tweet, sai, dicendo semplicemente: Ehi, pensi davvero che vada bene? Ho deciso di non farlo, ehm, su questo particolare. Ma la cosa bella è che ha dimostrato che due parti del libro cancellano la mente americana. Se non di più, uno di loro sta licenziando qualcuno perché è conservatore. Uh, e poiché questa era l'implicazione, non dobbiamo ascoltare il fuoco perché sono conservatori. Ma l’altro è qualcosa, un termine che ho inventato appositamente per il modo in cui le persone discutono su Twitter, che è una proiezione di ipocrisia. Ciao, sono una persona a cui importa solo un lato della barricata politica. E penso che tutti gli altri siano ipocriti. E comunque, non ho fatto nessuna ricerca vera e propria a riguardo, ma presumo che tutti gli altri siano ipocriti. E lo vedi accadere continuamente. Il, il e questo capita spesso di sparare dove qualcuno si chiederà, dov'è il fuoco in questo caso? E noi diciamo che siamo letteralmente citati nel link che hai appena inviato, ma in realtà non abbiamo letto. Oppure è come, dov'è il fuoco su questo? È come se, ecco la nostra causa a riguardo di sei mesi fa. Uhm, quindi è una delle cose che preferisco. E anche il programma quotidiano di John Stewart, come il, il, il, il, um, uh, che dire dell'ismo e l'idea simile secondo cui queste persone devono essere ipocrite è qualcosa di davvero comico, ma in realtà è una tattica retorica che ti porterà alla verità, dare per scontato che il tuo avversario o semplicemente accusarlo di essere sempre un ipocrita non è una buona tattica per ottenere la verità. Ma a proposito, tende a provenire sempre da persone che non sono effettivamente coerenti riguardo alla libertà di parola.

LEX: Quindi questo passa la proiezione, ma fondamentalmente non fanno la ricerca se la persona è o è Non è un ipocrita e supporre che gli altri siano una grande frazione di altri che lo leggono, non farà nemmeno la ricerca. E quindi questo tipo di affermazione diventa una sorta di veridicità senza fondamento nella realtà effettiva. Abbatte la barriera tra ciò che è e ciò che non è vero perché se, se la folla dice che qualcosa è vero, lo è, ci vuole troppo sforzo per correggerlo.

GREG: E ci sono tre modi in cui voglio voglio rispondere a questo, che è solo dare un esempio dopo l'altro di tempi in cui abbiamo difeso persone su entrambi i lati di ogni maggioranza, praticamente di ogni questione importante, che si tratti di Israele, Palestina, che si tratti di terrorismo , che si tratti di matrimonio gay, siamo stati aborti. Abbiamo difeso entrambi i lati di questa argomentazione. L'altra parte, e io li chiamo gli orfani della guerra culturale. Voglio davvero esortare i media a iniziare a preoccuparsi dei casi di libertà di parola che in realtà non hanno una valenza politica e che in realtà sono solo un buon vecchio esercizio di potere contro il piccoletto, la ragazzina o il gruppetto nel campus o fuori dal campus per quella materia. Perché questi casi accadono. Molte delle nostre controversie riguardano solo piccole persone, persone normali a cui viene detto che non possono protestare, che non possono tenere cartelli. E poi l'ultima parte dell'argomentazione che voglio che le persone comprendano davvero è, sì. E comunque, anche gli esponenti della destra finiscono nei guai. Ehm, ci sono attacchi da sinistra e dovresti prendere sul serio anche quelli. Dovrebbe interessarti quando i repubblicani si mettono nei guai. Dovresti preoccuparti quando la California ha un DEI, un programma che lo richiede ai college della comunità della California ha una politica del programma DEI che in realtà richiede anche ai professori di chimica di lavorare su idee DEI diverse dall'intersezionalità all'antirazzismo nella loro classe, nel loro programma di studio , eccetera. Questa è una grave violazione della libertà accademica. È altrettanto brutto dire ai professori ciò che non possono dire. Come se avessimo combattuto e sconfitto in Florida. È ancora peggio dire loro quello che devono dire. Questo è decisamente totalitario. E stiamo facendo causa contro questo.E quello che sto, quello che sto dicendo è che, quando congedi qualcuno semplicemente perché si trova dall'altra parte, dall'altra parte del recinto politico, in un certo senso stai anche affermando, affermando che nessuno di questi casi importa altrettanto. E voglio le personepreoccuparsi della censura anche quando è contro le persone che odiano.

LEX: La censura è censura. Se possiamo prendere brevemente la tangente con il DEI, diversità, equità e inclusione, qual è il bene e qual è il danno di tali programmi?

GREG: DEI, conosco persone che sono consulenti del DEI o qualcuno, in realtà ho un caro amico che amo moltissimo, ehm, che fa DEI. Persone assolutamente perbene. Quello che vogliono fare è creare legami di comprensione, amicizia, compassione tra le persone, le persone diverse. Sfortunatamente, la ricerca su ciò che fa effettivamente gran parte del DEI è spesso l’opposto di ciò. E penso che sia in parte un problema con alcune ideologie che provengono da una teoria critica della razza, che è una cosa reale, tra l'altro, che informa molto il DEI, che in realtà lo rende qualcosa che ha più probabilità di dividere che unire. Ne parliamo per coccolare la mente americana come la differenza tra la politica dell’identità comune dell’umanità e la politica dell’identità del nemico comune. E penso che, uh, conosco alcune delle persone che conosco che, che fanno il DEI, vogliono davvero che diventi una politica identitaria comune per l'umanità, ma alcuni dei presupposti ideologici reali che sono incorporati possono effettivamente far sì che le persone si sentano più alienati gli uni dagli altri. Ora, quando ho iniziato a lavorare al FIRE, i miei primi casi riguardavano gli orari dalle 9 all'11. Ehm, ed è stato brutto. Uh, i professori venivano presi di mira. I professori perdevano il lavoro per aver detto cose insensibili sull'11 settembre e sia da destra che da sinistra, in realtà in quel caso, a volte di più, molto di più da destra. Uhm, ed è stato davvero brutto. E circa cinque professori hanno perso il lavoro. Questo è male. Cinque professori licenziati in un periodo di tempo relativamente breve per un'opinione politica. Questo è qualcosa che, sai, sarebbe stato scritto nei decenni precedenti. Stiamo ora valutando quanti professori sono stati presi di mira per la cancellazione tra il 2014 e la metà di quest'anno, il luglio del 2023. Siamo a circa più di mille tentativi di convincere i professori... licenziati o puniti, di solito guidati da studenti e amministratori, spesso anche da professori, purtroppo. Circa due terzi di questi comportano una punizione del professore in qualche modo. Ehm, di tutto, dalla rimozione del loro articolo alla sospensione, eccetera. Circa un quinto di questi comporta il licenziamento dei professori. Quindi in questo momento siamo quasi 200, circa 190 professori licenziati. Ehm, quindi voglio fornire un po' di contesto qui. Uh, il, il Terrore Rosso è generalmente considerato, uh, dal 1947 al 1957. A proposito, finì nel 57 quando divenne finalmente chiaro, ehm, grazie al primo emendamento che non si poteva licenziare la gente per le loro ideologie. Prima di ciò, molte università pensavano di poterlo fare. Dicevano, questo ragazzo è un comunista molto doc, dottrinario. Uh, sai, non si può semplicemente aspettare. Li licenzierò. Pensavano di poterlo fare davvero. Ehm, ed erano solo 57 quando fu istituita la legge. Quindi, come adesso, questi stanno accadendo in un ambiente in cui la libertà di parola e la libertà accademica sono chiaramente protette, ehm, nelle università pubbliche degli Stati Uniti. E stiamo ancora vedendo questo tipo di numeri. Ehm, durante, durante il Red Scare, lo studio più grande che è stato fatto su quello che stava succedendo è che penso che questo sia uscito intorno a 55. E la valutazione era che c'erano circa 62 professori licenziati per, per, per essere comunisti e per Nel complesso, 90 professori licenziati per opinioni politiche. Uhm, di solito è così, viene riportato come circa 100. Uhm, quindi 60, 90, 100, a seconda di come lo guardi, penso che il numero sia in realtà più alto. Ehm, ma è solo a causa del senno di poi. Ad esempio, quello che intendo con il senno di poi è che possiamo guardare indietro e scoprire che in realtà ci sono stati più professori licenziati, come rivela il tempo, siamo a 190 professori licenziati. E devo ancora sopportare che la gente dica che tutto questo non sta nemmeno accadendo. E penso che nei nove anni e mezzo di cultura dell'annullamento, 190 professori licenziati negli 11 anni di, uh, del Red Scare, probabilmente, sai, da qualche parte intorno a un centinaio, forse probabilmente di più, il numero continuerà a salire. Ehm, ma a differenza del Red Scare in cui le persone potevano chiaramente dire che qualcosa stava succedendo, la cosa più folle della cultura dell'annullamento è che alcuni hanno ancora a che fare con persone che dicono che tutto ciò non sta accadendo affatto. E non è stato discreto nel campus. E sappiamo che si tratta di una sottostima, tra l'altro, perché quando noi, quando abbiamo intervistato i professori, il 17% di loro ha detto di essere stati minacciati di... minacciati di indagini o effettivamente indagati per quello che avevano insegnato, detto o le loro ricerca. E un terzo di loro ha affermato che gli amministratori gli avevano detto di non intraprendere ricerche controverse.Quindi, estrapolandolo, è un numero enorme. E il motivo per cui non sentirete parlare di molti di questi casi è perché ce ne sono così tantidiversi meccanismi che inducono al conformismo nell'intera faccenda. Sì. E questo è uno dei motivi per cui l'idea di aggiungere qualcosa come una D, come richiedere una dichiarazione DEI per essere assunti o per entrare in una scuola nell'ambiente attuale è così completamente folle. Negli ultimi tempi abbiamo avuto una vera e propria crisi della libertà accademica, in particolare dal 2017 nei campus, tanto per cominciare la diversità dei punti di vista è molto bassa. E in queste circostanze, gli amministratori iniziano a dire: sai qual è il problema? Abbiamo un pensiero troppo eterogeneo. Sì, non siamo abbastanza omogenei. In realtà abbiamo bisogno, sapete, di un'altra cartina di tornasole politica, il che è pazzesco. E questo è ciò che effettivamente è un'affermazione DEI. Perché non c'è modo di compilare effettivamente una dichiarazione dei DEI senza che qualcuno ti valuti sulla tua politica. È cristallino. È cristallino. Abbiamo anche fatto un esperimento su questo Nate Honeycutt. Ha convinto circa 3000 professori a partecipare alla valutazione di diversi tipi di dichiarazioni del DEI. Ehm, e uno era fondamentalmente come il tipo standard di intersezionalità della politica dell'identità, uno riguardava la diversità dei punti di vista. Uno riguardava la diversità religiosa e l’altro la diversità socioeconomica. E per quanto mi riguarda, è che abbiamo troppo poca diversità socioeconomica, in particolare nell'istruzione superiore d'élite, ma anche nel periodo dell'istruzione. Quindi l'esperimento ha avuto una grande partecipazione ed è stato organizzato in modo davvero interessante. E ha cercato di modellare il modo in cui molte di queste politiche DEI venivano effettivamente implementate. E uno dei modi in cui questi sono stati implementati, e penso che in alcune scuole della California sia che gli amministratori esaminino prima le dichiarazioni del DEI. Qualcun altro li guarda e poi elimina le persone dall'alto, a seconda di come, come si sentono riguardo alle loro dichiarazioni del DEI e a quella sulla diversità dei punti di vista. Penso che metà delle persone che lo hanno recensito lo eliminerebbero del tutto. Ehm, e penso che sia stato sostanzialmente lo stesso per la diversità religiosa. Era leggermente meglio, tipo 40% per la diversità socioeconomica, ma questo mi uccide. Mi piace l'idea che, sì, in realtà è il tipo di diversità di cui penso abbiamo bisogno molto di più, nell'istruzione superiore. Puoi essere d'accordo che non è ostile agli altri tipi, comunque. Uhm, ma l'idea che abbiamo bisogno di più persone dal basso, sai, tre quarti della società americana, come nell'istruzione superiore, penso che dovrebbe essere qualcosa che tutti potremmo aggirare. Ma l'unica che ha davvero avuto successo è stata quella che è riemersa esattamente il tipo di, sai, ideologia che pensavano sarebbe piaciuta alle retrovie, che è come, okay, non è possibile che questo non possa essere un politico prova del nove. Abbiamo dimostrato che si tratta di una cartina di tornasole politica e ancora scuola dopo scuola li aggiunge al suo processo di candidatura per rendere le scuole ancora più ideologicamente omogenee.

LEX: Perché questo ha un effetto negativo? È perché impone una sorta di pensiero di gruppo in cui le persone hanno paura, iniziano ad avere paura di pensare e parlare liberamente, liberamente di qualsiasi cosa.

GREG: Beh, primo, seleziona le persone che tendono ad essere più a sinistra, ehm, in una situazione in cui ci sono già, uh, persone, una situazione in cui le università si inclinano decisamente in quella direzione, ma stabilisce anche essenzialmente un insieme di idee sacre su cui se ti viene chiesto se, tu sai, quello che hai fatto per promuovere l'antirazzismo, um, ferito, uh, come sei stato consapevole dell'intersezionalità, è improbabile che tu possa davvero entrare. E se lo dicessi, a proposito, in realtà penso questi sono concetti dubbi. Penso che siano magri. Penso che siano filosoficamente non molto difendibili, ma fondamentalmente come se, se la tua posizione fosse, in realtà rifiutassi, ehm, questi concetti perché troppo semplici. Uhm, non lo farai, non entrerai. E, e, e penso che, um, la persona a cui penso sempre non fosse un'ala destra che sarebbe come, vai all'inferno. Se tu, se gli hai fatto compilare una di queste cose, è Feynman. Ho la sensazione che se tu, se dessi una di queste cose a Richard Feynman, lui direbbe che la farebbe a pezzi.

LEX: Sì. E non ottenere il lavoro. Sì, ecco, c'è qualche elemento che crea questa paura difficile da definire. Quindi hai detto, come il licenziamento, quello che volevo dire è licenziare un centinaio o 200 persone. Il punto è addirittura licenziare una persona, l'ho appena visto. Può creare questo silenzioso effetto a catena della paura. Oh, certo. Quell'unico licenziamento di una facoltà. Oh, assolutamente. Ha un effetto a catena su decine di migliaia di persone, di educatori, di chi è stato assunto, che tipo di conversazioni si sono svolte, che tipo di libri di testo sono stati scelti, che tipo di autocensura e diversi tipi di questo sta succedendo.È difficile misurarlo. Sì.

GREG: Voglio dire, quando chiedi ai professori, sai, se sono intimiditi dall'attualeambiente? Ehm, la risposta è sì. E i professori particolarmente conservatori, sai, già, sai, riferiscono di aver paura per il loro lavoro in molti casi diversi.

LEX: Ci sono molte buone statistiche nel libro, cose come l'autocensura. Quando viene fornita la definizione di autocensura, almeno un quarto degli studenti afferma di autocensurarsi abbastanza spesso o molto spesso durante le conversazioni con altri studenti, con i professori e durante le discussioni in classe, rispettivamente il 25%, 27% e 28%. Uh, un quarto degli studenti ha anche detto che è più probabile che si autocensurino nel campus ora, uh, nel momento in cui sono stati intervistati rispetto a quando hanno iniziato l'università. Quindi in un certo senso i college instillano questa idea di censura, autocensura.

GREG: E torniamo al confronto con la Paura Rossa, e anche questa è una delle cose interessanti riguardo ai dati, è che quello stesso studio di cui stavo parlando, lo studio più completo sulla Paura Rossa, è stato condotto un sondaggio per stabilire se i professori si autocensurassero o meno a causa della paura dell'ambiente. E il 9% dei professori ha affermato di autocensurare la propria ricerca e che ciò che diceva, per il 9%, era davvero pessimo. Ehm, quello è quasi un decimo dei professori che affermano di esserlo, in realtà il loro discorso era freddo. Quando abbiamo fatto questa domanda per i professori nel nostro ultimo sondaggio tra docenti, um, quando consideriamo insieme, se sono, abbiamo chiesto loro, si autocensurano nelle loro ricerche o si autocensurano in classe, sono auto- a censurare online, eccetera, lo ha fatto il 90% dei professori. Quindi l'idea che ci troviamo effettivamente in un ambiente storico, in termini di quanto le persone abbiano effettivamente paura di esprimere opinioni controverse. Penso che sia, è il motivo per cui lo studieremo tra 50 anni, nello stesso modo in cui studiamo la Paura Rossa. Uhm, non è l'idea che ciò non stia accadendo, sarà semplicemente considerata folle.

LEX: Quindi forse possiamo semplicemente, uh, discutere della tendenza, dell'attuale tendenza del mondo accademico verso sinistra , che descrivi in diverse prospettive. Quindi, c'è un grafico del rapporto di registrazione degli elettori che hai per dipartimento, che penso sia interessante. Puoi spiegare questo grafico e cosa mostra?

GREG: Sì, quando ho appiccato il fuoco nel 2001, non ho preso sul serio la questione della diversità dei punti di vista. Pensavo fosse semplicemente una cosa di cui si lamentavano gli esponenti della destra. Ehm, ma ho davvero iniziato a capire cosa succede quando hai una comunità con una bassa, ehm, con una bassa, uh, diversità di punti di vista. E in realtà molte delle ricerche che mi interessavano di più sono state condotte in collaborazione con il grande Cass Sunstein, che scrive molto sulla polarizzazione dei gruppi. Ehm, perché, uh, e la ricerca su questo è molto approfondita, ma essenzialmente quando ci sono gruppi con, ehm, diversità politica, e puoi vederlo effettivamente nei giudici, per esempio, tende a produrre, sai, in modo affidabile risultati più moderati. Ehm, mentre i gruppi che lo sono, che hanno una bassa diversità politica tendono ad avere una sorta di spirale, una spirale nella propria direzione. E quando si ha una stragrande maggioranza di persone da una sola prospettiva politica, questo è un problema per la produzione di idee. Crea una situazione in cui ci sono idee sacre. Ehm, e quando guardi alcuni dipartimenti, um, sai, penso che la S stima del Crimson sia che Harvard sia, ha il 3% di conservatori. Ma quando guardi i diversi dipartimenti, ci sono dipartimenti d'élite che non hanno letteralmente nessun conservatore al loro interno. E penso che sia un ambiente intellettuale sano. Il problema è decisamente peggiore. Ehm, man mano che diventi più d'élite, vediamo sicuramente più casi di professori di sinistra che vengono cancellati da scuole meno d'élite. Le cose peggiorano man mano che scendi dalle scuole d'élite, è lì che gran parte di un terzo dei tentativi di punire i professori che hanno successo, sai, provengono da destra e in gran parte da fonti esterne al campus. E passiamo molto tempo a parlarne anche nel libro. Ehm, è qualcosa che penso sia sottovalutato. Uh, ma quando si tratta della diversità di punti di vista bassa, bassa, è, sai, funziona un po' come ti aspetteresti in una certa misura, sai, l'economia è quattro a uno o qualcosa del genere. Non è così male. Ehm, ma poi quando inizi ad addentrarti in alcune discipline umanistiche, sai, come se ci fossero dipartimenti che non sono letteralmente nessuno.

LEX: C'è una buona ragione per cui l'amministrazione dei docenti universitari si è spostata a sinistra?

GREG: Sì, non mi piace, e questo è un argomento che tu' A volte mi imbatterò nella sinistra, uh, proprio nell'argomentazione secondo cui, beh, le persone di sinistra sono semplicemente più intelligenti. Giusto. Ed è come, ok, è interessante perché almeno la ricerca a partire dal 10anni fa indicava che se si scava un po’ più a fondo, molte delle persone che si considerano di sinistra tendono ad essere un po’ di più. Libertarian, la canzone che Pinker, sai, ha scritto parecchio sull'idea che siamo semplicemente più intelligenti. Non è, non è un'opinione. Io, almeno mi sento un po' a mio agio con, um, penso che, che, uh, che i dipartimenti prendano, um, slancio quando diventano un posto dove sei tipo, wow, sarebbe davvero spiacevole per me lavorare in questo dipartimento. Se sono un conservatore simbolico. E penso che questo abbia una vita propria. Ci sono anche dipartimenti in cui molte ideologie sono esplicitamente di sinistra. Ehm, guardi alle scuole di istruzione, molte, molte cose che in realtà sono rimaste da quelle che vengono correttamente chiamate teorie critiche sulla razza sono presenti. E finisci per averlo in un certo numero di dipartimenti. Ehm, e sarebbe molto strano essere, in molti dipartimenti, un professore conservatore di assistente sociale. Sono sicuro che esistano. Uhm, ma c'è molta pressione per stare zitto se lo sei.

LEX: Quindi il processo di cancellazione a sinistra, di cui hai iniziato a parlare con la perfetta fortezza retorica, il, il primo il passo è licenziare una persona. Se sono giusti, se puoi etichettarli come conservatori, puoi liquidarli in quel modo. Cosa, quale altro licenziamento efficiente o quale altro licenziamento efficace ci sono?

GREG: Ci divertiamo un po' con, uh, uh, i numeri demografici, ma lo faccio in base all'altezza. Uhm, e ricordo che diceva tipo: "Non includo, non includo la percentuale effettiva". Io dico, no, dobbiamo includere le percentuali effettive. Perché le persone sono davvero pessime nello stimare come appaiono effettivamente i dati demografici degli Stati Uniti sia a destra che a sinistra in modi diversi. Ehm, quindi lo mettiamo nei numeri e parliamo di, sai, um, di essere licenziato perché bianco o di essere licenziato perché etero o di essere licenziato perché maschio. Ehm, e noi, e tu puoi già licenziare le persone perché sono conservatrici. E noi, quindi noi, noi, diamo esempi nel libro di, di questi usati per licenziare le persone e spesso su argomenti non legati al fatto che sono maschi o se appartengono o meno a una minoranza. E poi arriviamo, penso che sia come il livello sei e diciamo, sorpresa, indovina un po'? Siamo scesi allo 0,4% della popolazione e niente di tutto questo ha importanza. Perché se hai un'opinione sbagliata, anche se fai parte di quello 0,4% delle persone più intersezionali mai vissute e hai un'opinione sbagliata, sei un eretico e probabilmente verrai odiato ancora di più. E la parte più interessante della ricerca che abbiamo fatto per questo è stato semplicemente chiedere a ogni eminente conservatore e moderato nero che conoscevamo personalmente, se ti è stato detto che non sei veramente nero per l'opinione che avevi ognuno di loro era come, oh sì, no. Ed è piuttosto divertente perché è come se spesso i mancini bianchi dicessero loro che è come, oh, ti consideri nero? John McWhorter ha parlato di avere un giornalista. Ehm, quando ha parlato di, quando ha mostrato di dissentire da alcuni di, uh, quello che ha descritto come una specie di risveglio del razzismo nel suo libro, risveglio delle idee, il giornalista in realtà ha detto, quindi ti consideri nero? Era tipo, era tipo, cosa sei pazzo? Certo che lo faccio. E Coleman Hughes aveva una delle migliori citazioni al riguardo. Ha detto, mi viene costantemente detto che la cosa più importante, uh, per quanto sia legittima la mia opinione, è se, uh, sono nero o no, ma poi quando ho un'opinione dissenziente, capisco ho detto che non sono veramente nero. Così perfetta. Come se non ci fosse modo di falsificare questo argomento. Uhm, quella davvero, quell'indagine davvero, mi ha davvero colpito.

LEX: Quindi, e tu lo esponi molto bene nel libro che c'è questo processo per dire, sei conservatore? SÌ. Puoi licenziare la persona. Sei bianco? Congedare la persona. Sei maschio? Puoi licenziare la persona. Ci sono queste categorie che ti rendono più facile respingere le idee di una persona in base a ciò. E come hai detto tu, finisci in quella piccola percentuale e puoi ancora licenziare.

GREG: E non si tratta solo di licenziare. Io, noi, ne parliamo da un punto di vista pratico, del modo in cui i limiti della realtà e uno di questi è il tempo. Ehm, e un sacco di cultura dell'annullamento, um, come, come, uh, come norme culturali, poiché questo modo di vincere discussioni senza vincere discussioni significa far scadere il tempo.Perché quando arrivi al fondo del, uh, uh, del, o addirittura fai un paio di passi nella perfetta fortezza del record e, sai, dov'è finito il tempo? Sai, come se fossi, probabilmente ti arrendi, uh, cercando di, uh, sai, provare ad avere una discussione vera e propria e non arrivi mai alla discussione in primo luogo.

LEX: Tutte queste cose sono piuttosto persistenti sui social media.

GREG: Social mediapraticamente ha inventato la fortezza retorica perfetta.

LEX: In modo che ognuna di queste fasi abbia una sua viralità. Quindi potrebbe, potrebbe restare e poi può emozionare davvero le persone.

GREG: Ti permette di provare indignazione e superiorità. Sì.

LEX: Per questo motivo, a livello di viralità, non puoi mai arrivare alla vera discussione del punto. Uhm, quindi, ma sai, non è solo la sinistra, è anche la destra, quindi l'efficiente fortezza retorica, uh, quindi c'è qualcosa di cui essere orgogliosi a destra.

GREG: È più efficiente .

LEX: Quindi non devi ascoltare i liberali e chiunque potrebbe essere etichettato come liberale se ha un'opinione sbagliata. Ho visto liberale e di sinistra e di sinistra tutti usati come, nello stesso modo. Questa è una sciocchezza di sinistra. Non devi ascoltare gli esperti, anche gli esperti conservatori, se hanno l'opinione sbagliata, non devi ascoltare i giornalisti, anche i giornalisti conservatori, se hanno l'opinione sbagliata e nell'ala MAGA ce n'è una quarta proposizione, c'è una quarta disposizione. Non hai bisogno di ascoltare chi non è pro Trump.

GREG: Sì. E lo chiamiamo efficiente perché elimina molte persone che probabilmente dovresti ascoltare almeno qualche volta, sai, come sottolineiamo a volte, come la cultura dell'annullamento può interferire con la fede e la competenza. Quindi diventiamo un po' sospettosi nei confronti degli esperti, ma allo stesso tempo, se lo segui e lo segui meccanicamente, e sicuramente, sai, penso che tutti negli Stati Uniti probabilmente abbiano qualche zio più grande, um, uh, chi esercita alcuni di questi. È un modo davvero efficiente per, in un certo senso, di isolarti dal resto del mondo e di licenziare, sai, almeno alcune persone che dovresti davvero ascoltare.

LEX: Il modo in cui l'hai esposto mi ha fatto capire che utilizziamo così tanta energia cerebrale. Queste cose, è letteralmente ora. Potremmo risolvere le cose. E diventi, in un certo senso esaurisci te stesso attraverso questo processo di indignazione basato su queste etichette e non ci arrivi mai, in realtà, non c'è quasi abbastanza tempo per l'empatia, per guardare una persona che pensa, beh, forse ha ragione . Perché sei così impegnato a classificarli.

GREG: Qual è il divertimento nell'empatia? E voglio dire, la cosa così interessante è che così tanta, ehm, energia sociale sembra essere spesa per questi cattivi desideri primordiali dove essenzialmente gran parte è come, per favore dimmi chi posso odiare. Dove posso legittimamente essere crudele? Dove posso effettivamente esercitare una certa aggressività contro qualcuno? Ehm, e sembra che a volte si tratti semplicemente di trovare nuove giustificazioni per questo. Ed è un comprensibile fallimento umano, che a volte può essere usato per difendere la giustizia. Ma ancora una volta, non ti porterà mai vicino alla verità.

LEX: Uh, un caso interessante di cui ti occupi in termini di competenza è con COVID. Sì. Allora come è entrata in gioco la cultura dell'annullamento sul tema del COVID?

GREG: Sì, penso che il COVID sia stato un duro colpo per la fede e l'esperienza delle persone e la cultura dell'annullamento ha giocato un ruolo importante in questo. Ehm, penso che uno dei migliori esempi di questo sia Jennifer Say da Levi's. Uhm, è una donna adorabile. Ehm, era vicepresidente di Levi's. Uh, ha parlato della possibilità di diventare il presidente della Levi's Jeans. Ed era una grande sostenitrice dei bambini. E quando hanno iniziato a chiudere le scuole, ha iniziato a dire, sarà un disastro. Questo danneggerà soprattutto i bambini poveri e svantaggiati. Dobbiamo trovare un modo per riaprire le scuole. E quello era un punto di vista davvero eretico. E il tipico tipo di cultura dell'annullamento, uh, l'onda ha preso il sopravvento poiché aveva tutti i tipi di petizioni per farla licenziare e che lei avesse bisogno di scusarsi e tutto questo genere di cose. E, sai, le è stato offerto, penso una liquidazione da un milione di dollari, che non avrebbe accettato perché voleva dire al mondo cosa pensava a riguardo e, e che voleva continuare a dire, um, che lei non aveva cambiato idea, che questo era un disastro per i giovani. E visto che questa è un po' la saggezza convenzionale e la ricerca è carina, è abbastanza chiaro che questo è stato devastante per i giovani particolarmente svantaggiati. Come se la gente lo capisse come se fosse ok, probabilmente aveva ragione. Ma uno degli aspetti davvero tristi della cultura dell’annullamento è che le persone dimenticano il motivo per cui sei stato cancellato e sanno semplicemente che ti odiano. Uhm, c'è questo persistente tipo, beh, non devo più prenderli sul serio. Ma a proposito, hai notato che avevano ragione su qualcosa di molto importante? Ora, una cosa divertente della libertà di parola: la libertà di parola non esisterebbe se non avessi anche il diritto di dire cose sbagliate.Perché se non puoi, sai, impegnarti in un'idea per te, se non puoi effettivamente speculare, non arriverai mai a qualcosa che sia giusto in primo luogo. Ma è particolarmente irritantequando le persone che avevano ragione venivano censurate e tu, uh, e non ottenevi mai il credito che meritavano.

LEX: Beh, questo potrebbe essere un buon posto per chiedere qualcosa in più sulla libertà di parola. E quindi hai detto che è incluso nella libertà di parola dire cose sbagliate.

GREG: Sì.

LEX: Uhm, qual è il tuo punto di vista sull'incitamento all'odio?

GREG: L'incitamento all'odio è la migliore campagna di marketing per la censura. Ehm, e proviene dal mondo accademico, ehm, del, del 20° secolo. E quando ho parlato del movimento contro la libertà di parola, quella è stata una delle loro prime invenzioni. Ehm, lì, si è parlato molto della teoria critica della razza, ehm, e, essere contro la teoria critica della razza e il fuoco ti farà causa se dici che le persone non possono sostenerla, insegnarla o ricercarla, perché lo fai hanno assolutamente il diritto di perseguirlo accademicamente. Tuttavia, ogni volta che qualcuno menziona CRT, dovrebbe anche dire che il primo progetto delle persone che hanno fondato CRT, um, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, um, eccetera, era quello di creare questa nuova categoria di discorso non protetto chiamata incitamento all’odio e a vietarlo. La persona che ha consentito questa deriva, ovviamente, è stato Herbert Marcuse nel 1965, fondamentalmente chiedendosi se la libertà di parola dovesse o meno essere un valore sacro per la sinistra. Ed è stato dalla parte dei perdenti per molto tempo. I liberali, sai, per come sono cresciuto, essere fondamentalmente a favore della libertà di parola era sinonimo di essere un liberale, ma questo ha iniziato a essere impresso nel campus. E il modo in cui è stato, era con, con l'idea di incitamento all'odio, um, quello, essenzialmente, oh, ma dovresti, um, possiamo designare discorsi particolarmente cattivi come, uh, non protetti. Uhm, e... e chi lo imporrà? Chi deciderà cosa sia effettivamente l’incitamento all’odio? Beh, di solito ciò può accadere in modo schiacciante solo in un ambiente con una diversità di punti di vista molto bassa perché devi essere effettivamente d'accordo su quali siano le cose più odiose e sbagliate. E c'è un principio fondamentale. Ehm, si fa riferimento a questo in un grande caso sull'incendio delle bandiere nel primo emendamento da cui penso che tutto il mondo potrebbe trarre beneficio. Non puoi vietare la parola solo perché è offensiva. E' troppo soggettivo. Fondamentalmente, è uno dei motivi per cui questo tipo di codici sono stati adottati più felicemente in posti come l'Europa, dove hanno la sensazione che esista un tedesco modale o un inglese modale. Ehm, e penso che questo sia offensivo e quindi posso dire che è sbagliato in un paese più multiculturale, in un paese veramente più diversificato che non ha mai avuto un pensiero onesto sull'esistenza di un unico tipo di americano. Non c'è mai stato, come se avessimo avuto l'idea dello zio Sam, ma è sempre stato una specie di scherzo. Uhm, Boston ha sempre saputo che non era Richmond, ha sempre saputo che non era la Georgia, ha sempre saputo che non era, sai, l'Alaska. Come se fossimo sempre stati un miscuglio e ci trovassimo in una società così diversificata che non puoi vietare le cose semplicemente perché sono offensive. Ehm, e questo è uno dei motivi per cui l'incitamento all'odio non è una categoria di discorso non protetta. E io, e vado oltre, la mia teoria sulla libertà di parola è leggermente diversa da quella della maggior parte degli altri giuristi costituzionalisti. Ehm, e penso, e penso che sia in parte dovuto al fatto che alcune di queste teorie, sebbene molte di loro siano davvero buone, sono inadeguate, non sono abbastanza espansive. E a volte chiamo la mia teoria la pura teoria informativa della libertà di parola. Uhm, o qualche volta quando voglio essere fantasioso, la teoria del laboratorio e dello specchio e il suo inquilino più importante è che se l'obiettivo è il progetto della conoscenza umana, che è conoscere il mondo in cui si trova, non puoi conoscere il mondo così com'è senza sapere cosa pensa veramente la gente e cosa pensa veramente la gente è un fatto incredibilmente importante da sapere. Quindi ogni volta che lo dici davvero, non puoi dire che ti stai effettivamente privando della conoscenza di ciò che la gente pensa veramente che tu stia causando ciò che Tim o Karan, che fa parte del nostro consiglio di amministrazione, chiama falsificazione delle preferenze. Uhm, si finisce con un'immagine imprecisa del mondo, che tra l'altro, in molti casi, ehm, poiché ci sono attivisti che vogliono limitare maggiormente la libertà di parola, in realtà tendono a pensare che le persone siano più prevenute di loro, uh, di quanto potrebbero essere. Ehm, e in realtà questo tipo di restrizioni, c'era un libro intitolato Paranoia razziale, uscito circa 15 anni fa, che sottolineava che l'imposizione di alcuni di questi codici a volte può far pensare alle persone che l'unica cosa che tiene sei tornato dall'essere un razzista furioso, um, sono questi codici. Quindi deve essere davvero, davvero brutto. Può effettivamente peggiorare tutte queste cose.E uno, di cui parliamo nel libro, un modo molto pratico per peggiorare le cose è che censurare le persone non cambia la loro opinione. Li incoraggia semplicemente a non condividerlo con persone che li metteranno nei guai. Così èli porta a parlare con persone con cui sono già d'accordo e la polarizzazione del gruppo decolla. Quindi abbiamo alcuni dati interessanti nel libro, um, su come allontanare le persone da Twitter, ad esempio, um, sai, uh, nel 2017. Ehm, e poi di nuovo, penso che nel 2020 spingere le persone a chiacchierare abbia portato a, sai, una maggiore radicalizzazione tra quelle persone. È una forza molto prevedibile. La censura in realtà non cambia la mente delle persone e le spinge in direzioni che in realtà, grazie a una ricerca molto solida, le renderanno effettivamente più radicalizzate. Quindi sì, penso che il tentativo di vietare l'incitamento all'odio non ci protegga veramente da esso, ma dà al governo un'arma così vasta da usare contro di noi che ci pentiremo di avergli dato .

LEX: C'è un modo per esaminare casi estremi, per testare un po' questa idea? Quindi, se guardiamo al campus, qual è la tua opinione sul permettere, diciamo, ai suprematisti bianchi del campus di fare discorsi? Ok.

GREG: Penso che dovresti essere in grado di studiare cosa pensa la gente. E penso che sia importante che lo facciamo davvero. Quindi penso che, sai, prendiamo ad esempio QAnon. Sì, QAnon ha torto. Uhm, ma da dove viene? Perché lo pensavano? Qual è la motivazione? Chi glielo ha insegnato?

LEX: Chi ha avuto queste idee?

GREG: Questo è importante per capire la storia. Questo è poco importante per comprendere la politica americana moderna. E quindi se metti la tua recitazione, se indossi il tuo cappello da studioso e dovresti essere curioso di sapere da dove vengono. Darrell Davis, che sono sicuro tu conosca, parte del suo obiettivo era semplicemente quello di conoscere da dove provenivano le persone. E nel processo, ha effettivamente deradicalizzato un certo numero di membri dei clienti quando si sono resi conto che quest'uomo di colore che sarebbe stato loro amico in realtà era compassionevole, era una persona perbene. Si sono resi conto che tutti i loro preconcetti erano sbagliati. Quindi può avere un fattore deradicalizzante, ma anche quando non lo fa, è comunque molto importante sapere cosa pensano le persone cattive nella tua società. Onestamente, in un certo senso è per la tua sicurezza che è probabilmente più importante sapere cosa pensano realmente le persone cattive nella tua società.

LEX: Personalmente, non so cosa ne pensi tu , ma personalmente penso che la libertà di parola in casi come questi, come il KKK e il campus, possa causare più danni a breve termine, ma molti più benefici a lungo termine. Perché a volte puoi discutere per cose del genere, questo farà male. Sì. A breve termine. Ma voglio dire, Harvey ha detto che è come considerare l'alternativa. Perché in un certo senso hai semplicemente sostenuto una cosa del genere, questa potenzialmente sarebbe una buona cosa anche a breve termine. E lo è spesso, credo, soprattutto in una società stabile come la nostra, con una forte classe media, con tutto questo genere di cose in cui le persone hanno le comodità, la ragione attraverso le cose. Sì. Uhm, ma sai, per me è come se, anche se fa male a breve termine, anche se crea più odio a breve termine, la libertà di parola ha questa cosa davvero benefica, cioè ti aiuta a muoverti verso il verità, l’intera società verso una comprensione più profonda e accurata della vita sulla terra, della società, del funzionamento delle persone, dell’etica, della metafisica, di tutto. E questo a lungo termine rappresenta un enorme vantaggio. Si sbarazza dei nazisti nel lungo termine, anche se ne aumenta il numero nel breve termine. Sì.

GREG: Beh, e nel frattempo, giusto per, e la verifica della realtà di questa parte è che la gente tira sempre fuori, che mi dici del clan nel campus? Dico che non vengono mai invitati. Uhm, il, il, il, il, non ho visto un caso in cui siano stati invitati. Uhm, di solito questa discussione sul clan viene respinta quando le persone cercano di scusarsi. Ed è per questo che abbiamo sgridato Ben Shapiro. Ed è per questo che non puoi avere Bill Maher nel campus. Ecco perché, lo sai, ed è come, okay. Uhm, sai, ed è, è un po' di quella cosa che riguarda di nuovo l'ismo, di essere come, beh, quella cosa laggiù è terribile e quindi questo comico non dovrebbe venire.

LEX: Uh, quindi Ho una domanda forse a titolo di consiglio, sai, intervistare le persone e vedere questo come un podcast come una piattaforma per decidere con chi parlare e no, non qualcosa con cui devo confrontarmi faccia a faccia di tanto in tanto. La mia inclinazione naturale prima di iniziare il podcast era di parlare con chiunque, comprese le persone, cosa che mi interessa ancora, chi sono, sai, gli attuali membri del KKK. E per me c'è la responsabilità di farlo con abilità. Sì.Uhm, e quella responsabilità mi sta pesando sempre di più perché ti rendi conto di quanta abilità ci vuole perché devi sapere, capire così tanto, perché ho, sono arrivato a capire che il diavolo è sempre in giro essere carismatico. Sì. Ehm, il diavolo non assomiglierà al diavolo. E quindi devi renderti conto che devi farlo, non puoi semprevenire al tavolo con una profonda compassione per un altro essere umano. Devi avere, sai, circa il 90% di compassione e, e un altro 90% di profonda conoscenza storica sul contesto delle battaglie attorno a questo particolare problema. E questo richiede uno sforzo enorme, ma non so se hai dei pensieri su questo, su come gestire il discorso, um, in un modo senza censura, portandolo in superficie, ma in un modo che crei di più amore nel mondo.

GREG: Ricordo che, um, Steve Bannon è stato disinvitato dal festival del New Yorker e Jim Carrey è andato fuori di testa e ogni sorta di altra gente ha dato di matto e lui è stato disinvitato, um, da, da il, e sono stato invitato a parlarci con un sorrisetto di questo. E stavo dicendo, ascolta, non hai persone alla tua conferenza perché sei d'accordo con loro. Ehm, è così che dobbiamo uscire da questa idea perché stavano cercando di far sembrare che fosse un'approvazione di Steve Bannon. Come se fosse una sciocchezza. Ad esempio, se guardi davvero le opinioni di tutte le persone che sono lì, non puoi assolutamente approvare tutte le opinioni che hanno effettivamente tutte queste altre persone che saranno lì. E poi nel processo di argomentazione, ho capito, um, e, e anche, ovviamente, il classico, è molto prezioso sapere cosa pensa qualcuno Steve Bannon. Dovresti essere curioso a riguardo. E ricordo che qualcuno ribatté dicendo: beh, cosa vorresti che qualcuno intervistasse un jihadista? E io dico, perché in questo momento, come se fosse nel momento in cui, quando l'ISIS era davvero in azione, ci stava provando. Ehm, e ho pensato, non vorresti andare a un discorso in cui qualcuno stava cercando di capire cosa fa funzionare alcune di queste persone? Ehm, perché questo cambia la tua inquadratura che essenzialmente è come, no, è curiosità. È la cura per molte di queste cose. E abbiamo bisogno di molta più curiosità e di molte meno certezze ingiustificate.

LEX: E c'è una domanda del tipo: come conduci queste conversazioni? E mi sento profondamente sottoqualificato. Chi pensi sia particolarmente bravo in questo? Penso che i registi di documentari di solito facciano un lavoro molto migliore. E il lavoro migliore lo fanno solitamente i biografi. Sì. Quindi, più tempo dedichi a una conversazione particolare, ad esempio pensieri profondi e contesto storico e studiando le persone, come pensano, guardando tutte le diverse prospettive, osservando la psicologia della persona, l'educazione, i suoi genitori, i suoi nonni, tutto di questo, più tempo passi con quello, migliore è la qualità della conversazione perché riesci a capire, riesci a entrare davvero in empatia con la persona, con le persone che lui o lei rappresenta, um, e puoi vedere l'umanità comune, tutto questo. Spesso gli intervistatori non fanno quel lavoro.

GREG: Sì. Ehm, quindi la cosa migliore che ho visto sono le interviste che fanno parte di un documentario. Sì.

LEX: Ma anche adesso i documentari sono come se ci fosse un enorme incentivo a realizzarli il più velocemente possibile. Non c'è un incentivo a trascorrere davvero del tempo con quella persona.

GREG: C'è un nuovo fantastico documentario su Floyd Abrams che consiglio vivamente. Abbiamo realizzato un documentario su Ira Glasser intitolato mighty Ira, um, che era il mio team video e il mio protetto Nico Perino, Chris Mulvey e Aaron Reese lo hanno messo insieme. E segue semplicemente la vita e i tempi di, ehm, Ira Glasser, l'ex capo dell'ACLU.

LEX: Se potessi soffermarti su questo, è una storia affascinante. Oh sì.

GREG: Incredibile. Uhm, Ira, non era un avvocato. Ehm, ha iniziato a lavorare al NYCLU, il sindacato per le libertà civili di New York, credo negli anni Sessanta. Penso che Robert Kennedy gli abbia raccomandato di andare in quella direzione. Ehm, e divenne il presidente dell'ACLU proprio nel momento in cui stavano, ehm, soffrendo, uh, difendendo i nazisti a Skokie e Nico, uh, e, e, e, e Aaron e Chris hanno messo insieme questo e loro non avevo mai fatto un documentario prima. Ed è venuta così, così bene. Ehm, e racconta la storia dei nazisti in Skokie. Racconta la storia del caso in cui racconta la storia dell'ACLU dell'epoca. E che grande leader era Ira Glasser. E qual è una delle cose più grandiose è che, quando vedi i nazisti a Skokie, vengono fuori come gli idioti che ti aspetteresti da loro. C'è un momento in cui la manifestazione non sta andando molto bene e il leader si agita. E sembra quasi che gli piacerà gridare in un certo senso, stai, stai, stai, stai trasformando questa manifestazione nazista in una presa in giro. E così ha dimostrato come permettere ai nazisti di parlare a Skokie in un certo senso gli abbia tolto il vento dalle vele.Come se avessero avuto l'intero movimento, come lo erano tutti, poi tutto si sarebbe dissolto perché sembravano degli sciocchi razzisti quali erano. Erano, sai, anche i fratelli blues facevano battute, sai, battute su di loro. Ehm, e questo, e non si è trasformato in un disastroche la gente pensava che sarebbe successo semplicemente lasciandoli parlare. E Ira Glasser, ok. Quindi ha questa meravigliosa storia su come Jackie Robinson si è unito ai Brooklyn Dodgers e come c'è stato un momento in cui vedeva qualcuno, un afroamericano, letteralmente nella loro squadra e come questo li ha davvero entusiasti della causa dell'uguaglianza razziale. E quella divenne una parte importante della sua vita. E penso che una metafora così fantastica sia espandere la tua cerchia e vedere più persone come se fossero letteralmente nella tua squadra è la soluzione a tanti di questi problemi. E temo che una delle cose assolutamente normali della vita in America sia che ci vediamo più come campi nemici che come persone nella stessa squadra. E in realtà era qualcosa nei primi giorni, come me e Will Creely, il direttore legale del fuoco, scrivemmo delle imminenti sfide alla libertà di parola di tutti coloro che erano su Facebook. E una cosa che speravo era che, man mano che sempre più persone esponevano la propria vita, ci rendessimo conto di molte di queste cose che sapevamo intellettualmente, come i ragazzi che vanno al bar, si ubriacano e fanno cose stupide. Ehm, quello, uh, che quando abbiamo iniziato a vedere le prove di loro che facevano cose stupide all'inizio potremmo rimanere scioccati, ma poi alla fine diventiamo più sofisticati e diciamo, beh, andiamo, le persone sono così. Sembra che ciò non sia mai realmente accaduto. Uhm, quello, quello, quello, non penso che ci siano molte cose che sappiamo sulla natura umana e sappiamo delle cose stupide che la gente dice, uh, e noi, siamo riusciti a creare un ambiente dove c'è qualcuno là fuori che aspetta di dire, "Oh, ricordi quella cosa stupida che hai detto quando avevamo 14 anni?" Beh, mi assicurerò che tu non entri nella, nella scuola dei tuoi sogni per questo motivo.

LEX: Questa archeologia del reato.

GREG: Non è il mio termine Anche se. È un termine fantastico. Rubiamo al meglio scavando tra i commenti passati di qualcuno per trovare un discorso che non è invecchiato bene. E questo è tattico. In questo modo, quello non è solo qualcuno che non è empatico. Dicono, ti punirò per questo oppure, e questo è uno dei motivi per cui mi sono depresso scrivendo questo libro perché sai, c'è già, ci sono già persone che non mi amano perché coccolo l'americano mente, di solito basata su un malinteso di ciò che abbiamo effettivamente detto e coccolando la mente americana, ma comunque. Uh, ma su questo, sai, sto accusando le persone di essere molto crudeli in molti casi, ma per dirla, ma una cosa che è stata davvero spaventosa nello studiare molti di questi casi è che una volta che hai capito bersaglio sulla tua schiena, ciò per cui cercheranno di cancellarti potrebbe essere qualsiasi cosa. Sapete, potrebbero tornare nelle vostre vecchie, vecchie barche, trovare qualcosa che avete detto nel 1995, sapete, fare qualcosa, um, dove essenzialmente sembra che sia tutta un'altra cosa, ma in realtà cosa sono, cosa sono quello che succede è che non gli è piaciuta la tua opinione. A loro non piaceva il tuo punto di vista su qualcosa. E troveranno un, troveranno un modo in cui d'ora in poi, ogni volta che verrà fuori il tuo nome, sarà come, Oh, ricorda questo, questa cosa che non mi piaceva di loro. Ed è ancora una volta crudele. Non ti avvicina minimamente alla verità. E, ma è un po' spaventoso rischiare il collo.

LEX: Okay. In termini di soluzioni, ti chiederò alcune cose. Quindi uno, uh, genitorialità.

GREG: Sì. Cinque e sette anni.

LEX: Quindi sono sicuro che allora hai capito tutto. Oh Dio, no.

GREG: Dal punto di vista della libertà di parola. Sì. Uh, dal punto di vista della cultura della libertà di parola, come essere un buon genitore. Sì. Penso che la prima qualità che dovresti coltivare nei tuoi figli, se vuoi avere una cultura della libertà di parola, sia la curiosità e la consapevolezza della vastità che sarà sempre sconosciuta. E far entusiasmare i miei figli all'idea che passeremo tutta la vita a imparare cose. Ed è veloce, emozionante e infinito e non ne faremo mai un grosso danno, ma il viaggio sarà fantastico. Ma solo gli sciocchi pensano di sapere tutto. Ehm, e talvolta sono degli sciocchi pericolosi. Quindi dare subito un senso di umiltà intellettuale anche, sai, dire cose che in realtà suonano un po' antiquate, tipo, ma dico cose ai miei figli, tipo, ascolta, se ti piace studiare e lavorare, entrambe le cose che Mi diverto moltissimo, lo faccio per divertimento. Uhm, la tua vita sarà fantastica e sarà facile. Ehm, quindi alcune di, alcune, sai, alcune di quelle virtù vecchio stile sono cose che cerco di predicare, um, cose controintuitive come il tempo all'aria aperta giocando, um, avere del tempo che non sia un'esperienza intermedia è davvero, uh, davvero importante .E piccole cose come, um, di cui parlo nel libro di quando i miei figli guardano qualcosa di spaventoso e non sto parlando di film di zombie, sai, sto parlando di come un cartone animato che ha una specie di spaventoso momento e dicendo che lorovuoi spegnere la TV. E io, e ho parlato con loro e ho detto, ascolta, mi manca accanto a te e finiremo questo spettacolo e voglio che tu mi dica cosa ne pensi, di questo dopo. E mi sono seduto accanto ai miei figli. Uhm, e alla fine, ogni volta che, sai, quando glielo chiedevo, era così spaventoso come pensavi che sarebbe stato? E c'era tipo, no papà, andava bene. E io penso che questa sia una delle grandi lezioni della vita. La paura che non affronti diventa molto più grande nella tua testa rispetto al semplice fatto di affrontarla. Questo è uno dei motivi per cui sto combattendo contro questa cultura. Adoro, sai, che tutti i nostri figli possano crescere in un ambiente in cui le persone ti danno grazia e, sai, accettano il fatto che a volte le persone diranno cose che ti fanno incazzare, prendi sul serio questa possibilità e sbagliarsi e, uh, essere curioso.

LEX: Beh, spero che la cosa che hai menzionato, ovvero perché gran parte delle cose dei giovani sono su Internet che loro ci daremo una pausa a vicenda perché poi tutti saranno degni di cancellare.

GREG: La generazione Z odia di più la cultura della cancellazione. E questo è un altro motivo per cui è come se la gente continuasse a sostenere che ciò stesse accadendo. È un po' come, no, in realtà puoi chiedere ai ragazzi cosa pensano della cultura dell'annullamento e loro la odiano.

LEX: Sì. Beh, li considero come il sistema immunitario. E' così, questa è la cultura che si sta svegliando per dire, no, questa non è una buona cosa.

GREG: Sono contento però. Voglio dire, io, io, sono uno di quei ragazzi che, sai, è davvero contento di essere stato un ragazzino negli anni Ottanta e un adolescente negli anni Novanta perché avere tutto potenzialmente online, uh, non è una cosa , un'educazione.

LEX: Invidio. Bene, io, perché puoi anche fare la libertà di parola assoluta. Mi piace entrare in ciò dove spero in un futuro in cui molte delle nostre insicurezze, difetti, tutto è là fuori. E ad essere sincero, penso che questo porti a un mondo migliore. Perché i difetti sono belli. Voglio dire, questi sono i difetti, gli ingredienti base della connessione umana.

GREG: Uh, Robert Wright, ha scritto un libro sul buddismo. Ehm, e ho parlato di provare a usare i social media da una prospettiva buddista e come se tu fossi, come se fosse l'inconscio collettivo che medita e vede quei piccoli frammenti di rabbia che cercano di cancellarti o di prenderti stare zitto e lasciarli andare nello stesso modo in cui dovresti guardare i tuoi pensieri svanire.

LEX: Mi piacerebbe vederlo visualizzato qualunque sia, qualunque sia il dramma che sta accadendo avanti, andando avanti, vedendone il mare, la coscienza collettiva, elaborandolo e avendo un piccolo attacco di panico e proprio come, sì, leggendolo, guardando quelle piccole voci piene di odio e arrabbiate di saltare fuori e dire, okay, ecco qua.

GREG: E sono ancora concentrato su, su quella cosa perché è, quella, quella è una delle cose, okay. Sì, in realtà probabilmente è tardi, per dare la mia grande teoria su queste cose. Uhm, ma... non è mai troppo tardi. Quindi, quello che stavo studiando, um, alla facoltà di giurisprudenza, quando ho finito le lezioni di primo emendamento, um, ho deciso di studiare la censura durante la dinastia dei tutori, uh, perché è da lì che prendiamo le nostre idee sulla restrizione preventiva, uh, quello, deriva dalla concessione di licenze per la tipografia, um, che era qualcosa che Enrico VIII fu il primo a fare dove fondamentalmente, um, l'idea era che se non puoi stampare nulla in Inghilterra, a meno che non sia con questi, uh, uh, vostra maestà ha approvato le tipografie, ehm, impedirà che vengano pubblicati lavori eretici e materiale anti Enrico VIII. Sono carina, carina, carina, carina, carina, um, un'idea efficiente se non altro. Ehm, e io sempre, quindi ha iniziato ad arrabbiarsi con la macchina da stampa intorno al 1521 e poi ha approvato qualcosa che richiedeva che le stampe fossero insieme al parlamento nel, uh, 1538. Uh, e penso sempre a questo come a un po' dove siamo ora, um, perché abbiamo questo, avevamo, allora avevamo la tecnologia dirompente originale, sai, la scrittura probabilmente lo era, ma quella successiva, che era la macchina da stampa, che fu assolutamente disastrosa. E intendo dire, e io, e dico calamitoso apposta perché nel breve termine, la caccia alle streghe è aumentata all'impazzata perché la tipografia ti ha permesso di avere quel manuale su come trovare le streghe che le guerre di religione hanno fatto impazzire. Ehm, ha portato a ogni sorta di disagio, disinformazione, cattiveria. Ed Enrico VIII stava cercando di rimettere il genio nella lampada. Sai, era un po' come, posso, posso, posso, voglio usarlo per sempre. Come, uh, come sento che potrebbe, potrebbe essere usato, ma era in un inevitabile periodo di anarchia epistemica.Non c'è niente che tu possa fare per far sì che il periodo successivo alla stampa si sia rivelato un periodo non dirompente e non folle se non come assolutototalitarismo e distruggere tutte le macchine da stampa, cosa semplicemente impossibile in Europa. Quindi sento che è un po' come dove siamo adesso. Questa rottura è derivata dall’aggiunta, penso, di diversi milioni di persone al dibattito europeo e poi al dibattito globale, ma alla fine è diventato lo strumento migliore per la disconferma, per sbarazzarsi delle falsità, per individuare le cattive idee. E i benefici, i benefici a lungo termine della macchina da stampa sono calcolabilmente grandi. Ehm, e questo è ciò che mi dà un po' di ottimismo riguardo a dove siamo ora con i social media, perché siamo in quel periodo inevitabilmente anarchico. E mi preoccupo che ci siano tentativi negli Stati Uniti di far passare le cose per cercare di rimettere il genio nella bottiglia. Ad esempio, se vietiamo un tic tac o diciamo che, ehm, nessuno sotto i 18 anni può essere su Internet, a meno che non abbia il permesso dei genitori, stiamo andando verso qualcosa che nessuna sorta di top down sarà mai in grado di risolverlo. Dobbiamo adattarci culturalmente a questa realtà, um, uh, in modi che ci rendano più saggi che in realtà, um, e gli permettano potenzialmente di essere quel meraviglioso motore di disconferma a cui non siamo ancora vicini, comunque, ma pensaci. Altri milioni di occhi puntati sui problemi, ehm, grazie alla stampa hanno contribuito a creare la rivoluzione scientifica, l'illuminazione, la scoperta dell'ignoranza. Ehm, ora abbiamo aggiunto miliardi di occhi e voci per risolvere i problemi. E li stiamo usando solo per video di gatti e cancellazioni.

LEX: Ma questi sono solo i primi giorni della stampa. Tutto inizia con i gatti e la cancellazione. C'è qualcosa in X riguardo a Twitter, che è forse la fonte più energetica di gatti e cancellazioni.

GREG: Sembra l'inconscio collettivo della specie. Voglio dire, come se fosse una di quelle cose in cui la tendenza a voler vedere degli schemi nella storia a volte può limitare l'esperienza davvero folle di cosa sia realmente la storia. Perché sì, noi, noi, abbiamo queste belle idee confortanti che sarà come l'ultima volta. Non lo sappiamo. Non è ancora successo. E penso quanto sia insolito Twitter perché lo considero come i bambini, perché la gente parla, sai, di scrittura e di comunicazioni di massa e, uh, di espandere le dimensioni del nostro cervello collettivo. Ma ora guardiamo il nostro cervello collettivo in tempo reale. Ed è pieno, proprio come il nostro cervello, di ogni sorta di piccole cose pazze che compaiono e, e, e, e appaiono come particelle virtuali ovunque, di persone, um, sai, che reagiscono in tempo reale alle cose. Non c'è mai stato niente, nemmeno vagamente simile. E può essere nella peggiore delle ipotesi, terribile da vedere. Nella migliore delle ipotesi, a volte vedere le persone semplicemente euforiche per qualcosa che sta succedendo e fare battute immediate e assolutamente brillanti, sai, allo stesso tempo, può essere, non può nemmeno essere un'esperienza gioiosa. Uhm, mi sento come se, uh, ora vivo in un quartiere su X dove ho a che fare principalmente con persone che penso siano effettivamente premurose, anche se non sono d'accordo con loro. Ehm, e, e non è una brutta esperienza. Di tanto in tanto mi imbatto in quegli altri tipi di quelli che chiamo quartieri su X dove tutto cancella tutta la cattiveria. Ed è sempre una visita spiacevole in quei posti. Non sto dicendo che tutta la faccenda debba essere, uh, come la mia esperienza, ma penso che il motivo per cui le persone continuano a tornarci è che rivela aspetti crudi dell'umanità che a volte preferiamo fingere di non vedere. Non esiste.

LEX: Già. Sì. Ma è anche totalmente nuovo. Come hai detto tu, è semplicemente una viralità, la velocità, le notizie viaggiano, le opinioni viaggiano, la battaglia sulle idee viaggia.

GREG: Anche la battaglia sulle informazioni.

LEX: Sì . Di ciò che è vero e non di bugie viaggiate, il vecchio Mark Twain è piuttosto veloce sulla cosa. Sì. E poi cambia la tua comprensione di come interpretare le informazioni.

GREG: Inoltre ti stressa a non finire. Mi sono ricordato di scendere a volte. Le statistiche sono pessime sulla salute mentale dei giovani. E io sono sicuramente nel campo di persone che pensano che i social media siano parte di tutto ciò. Capisco il dibattito, ma sono abbastanza convinto che una delle cose che non è stata eccezionale per la salute mentale delle persone è che questo viene costantemente esposto.

LEX: Sì, assolutamente. Penso che sia possibile creare social media che facciano guadagnare un'enorme quantità di denaro e rendano felici le persone secondo me, così come è possibile allineare gli incentivi.Quindi, in termini di, sì, diventare adolescenti, creare, uh, ogni fase della vita, darti soddisfazione e felicità a lungo termine con la tua esistenza fisica al di fuori dei social media e sui social media, aiutandoti a crescere come essere umano, uh , aiutandoti a sfidarti con la giusta quantità e la giusta quantità di video di gatti, qualunque cosa offra questa ricca esperienza umana. Penso che sia solo un problema di machine learning. È come,non è facile creare un feed. Quindi il feed più semplice che potresti fare è massimizzare il coinvolgimento. Sì. Ma è proprio come un algoritmo davvero stupido. Sì. È come se l'algoritmo imparasse abbastanza su di te per capire cosa ti renderà veramente felice come essere umano per crescere a lungo termine. Questo è semplicemente un problema molto difficile da risolvere.

GREG: Hai mai guardato Fleabag? È assolutamente geniale, uno spettacolo britannico. Uhm, e questo ti prepara. Uno dei motivi per cui la gente lo adora così tanto è che ti fa pensare che stai guardando un volgare Sex and the City britannico, tranne per il fatto che il personaggio principale è il più importante. Uhm, è come, okay. E alzi un po' gli occhi al cielo ed è piuttosto divertente, carino e un po' piccante. E poi ti rendi conto che la persona in realtà sta soffrendo e sta attraversando un momento difficile e diventa sempre più profondo man mano che lo spettacolo va avanti. E farà questi discorsi incredibili, dimmi cosa devo fare. Come ho appena fatto, so che ci sono esperti là fuori. So che c'è conoscenza là fuori. So che esiste un modo ottimale di vivere la mia vita. Allora perché qualcuno non può semplicemente dirmi cosa fare? E, ed è questo aspetto meravigliosamente, um, accurato, penso, uh, del desiderio umano che e se qualcosa potesse effettivamente dirmi la strada ottimale da percorrere? Perché penso che ci sia il desiderio di rinunciare a una parte della propria libertà e discrezione per sentirsi dire di fare la cosa giusta in modo ottimale. Ma quel percorso mi spaventa a morte.

LEX: Sì, vediamo come lo dici. Cioè, spaventa anche me. Quindi ci sono molte cose che puoi essere costantemente distratto in modo TikTok da cose che ti tengono impegnato. Quindi rimuovilo e offriti costantemente un sacco di opzioni e impara dal lungo termine ciò che si traduce nella tua effettiva felicità a lungo termine. Quindi, ad esempio, quali quantità di idee stimolanti sono buone per te? Uh, quello, sai, per qualcuno come me, ma c'è un numero del genere per te, Greg, come per me, quel numero è piuttosto alto. Adoro il dibattito. Amo, amo la sensazione di realizzare, porca miseria, di aver sbagliato.

GREG: Sì. Ma tipo, sai, e mi piacerebbe che l'algoritmo lo sapesse di me e mi aiutasse, ma dandomi sempre delle opzioni. Se voglio scendere nei video sui gatti e così via. Beh, l'aspetto educativo.

LEX: Sì, l'istruzione. Mi piace l'idea di andare alla velocità di cui hai bisogno e correre il più velocemente possibile. Sì. Sai, voglio dire, c'è tutta questa faccenda del flusso. Sento solo che i consigli di YouTube, nel bene e nel male, se usati correttamente, sembrano fare un ottimo lavoro. Ogni volta che mi rifiuto di fare clic su cose che sono solo basate sulla dopamina e faccio clic solo su cose educative, la raccomandazione fornisce davvero qualcosa di dannatamente buono. Quindi penso che sia un problema risolvibile, almeno nello spazio dell'educazione in cui si mette alla prova se stessi, ma anche si espande il proprio regno di conoscenza e tutto questo genere di cose.

GREG: E sono decisamente più interessato al , ci troviamo in un periodo inevitabilmente anarchico e necessitiamo di grandi aggiustamenti culturali. E non c'è alcuna possibilità che questa transizione non sarà difficile.

LEX: C'è qualche piccola o grande cosa specifica che ti piacerebbe vedere fare da X e da Twitter? Ho molti pensieri a riguardo.

GREG: Con la stampa e milioni di occhi in più su qualsiasi problema si può abbattere qualsiasi istituzione, qualsiasi persona o qualsiasi idea. E questo in un certo senso è positivo, perché molte istituzioni medievali dovevano essere demolite. E anche alcune persone lo fecero, e molte idee dovettero essere demolite. La stessa cosa è vera adesso. Un miliardo in più di occhi puntati su ogni problema può abbattere qualsiasi persona, idea o istituzione. E alcune, ancora una volta, alcune di quelle cose dovevano essere demolite, ma non si può ancora costruire. Non siamo ancora nella fase in cui possiamo costruire, ma questo ci ha mostrato quanto fossero scarse le nostre conoscenze. È uno dei motivi per cui siamo anche consapevoli della crisi della replicazione. È uno dei motivi per cui siamo anche consapevoli di quanto sia scadente la nostra ricerca, di quanto la nostra classe di esperti sia arrogante in molti casi, ma le persone non vogliono vivere in un mondo in cui non ci sono persone che rispettano e possono guardare. E penso che ciò che forse sta accadendo ora, ma continuerà ad accadere, è che le persone si affermeranno come persone con un'elevata integrità, che saranno sempre oneste. Penso che ti stai affermando come qualcuno che ha un'elevata integrità, dove possono fidarsi di quella persona. Un fuoco vuole essere, sai, l'istituzione a cui le persone possono rivolgersi è come, se è libertà di parola, la difenderemo, punto. E penso che le persone abbiano bisogno di novità, di avere autorità di cui possano davvero fidarsi.E penso che se in realtà avessi uno streaming che forse le persone possono guardare in azione, ma non inondato da, sai, stupide cose sulla cultura della cancellazione o stupidi gatti significa, dove in realtà è una discussione seria limitata da regole, nessuna fortezza retorica perfetta , non efficientefortezza retorica, nessuna delle sciocchezze in cui discutiamo. Penso che potresti iniziare a creare effettivamente qualcosa che potrebbe effettivamente rappresentare un notevole miglioramento nella velocità con cui arriviamo a idee nuove e migliori e stabiliamo e separiamo la verità dalla falsità.

LEX: Sì. Se fatto bene, può ispirare un gran numero di persone a diventare sempre più integre e può creare l'integrità come valore a cui tendere. Voglio dire, sai, ci sono stati progetti su Internet che hanno fatto un lavoro incredibile, ma sono stati anche molto imperfetti. Ad esempio, Wikipedia è un esempio di un grande passo avanti in questo senso.

GREG: È dannatamente impressionante. Qual è la tua opinione generale? Voglio dire, sono davvero impressionato.

LEX: Quindi ci sono alcune idee davvero potenti per le persone che modificano Wikipedia. Uno dei quali è che ogni editore dichiara per conto suo, sai, mi piace la politica e sono davvero un ragazzo di sinistra. Quindi non dovrei davvero modificare articoli politici perché ho dei pregiudizi. Quindi dichiarano i loro pregiudizi e spesso fanno un buon lavoro nel dichiararli effettivamente, ma gli piacerà comunque, troveranno un modo per giustificarsi. Come se qualcosa li facesse incazzare e volessero correggerlo perché amano correggere la falsità in verità. Ma la prospettiva di ciò che è vero e di ciò che non lo è è influenzata dai loro pregiudizi. La verità è difficile da sapere. Ed è vero che c'è un pregiudizio di sinistra tra gli editori di Wikipedia. Quindi, quello che succede è sugli articoli, che apprezzo soprattutto perché non hanno un aspetto politico, sai, articoli scientifici o articoli tecnici, saranno davvero forti, anche la storia , semplicemente descrivendo fatti della storia che non hanno un elemento soggettivo, ehm, forte. Inoltre, usando solo il mio cervello, posso filtrare se si tratta, uh, sai, se si tratta di qualcosa che riguarda il 6 gennaio o qualcosa del genere, so che dirò, non sono quello che sta succedendo qui . Lo leggerò, ma soprattutto cercherò altre fonti. Esaminerò un sacco di prospettive diverse al riguardo. Sarà molto teso. Probabilmente ci sarà una sorta di pregiudizio. Forse alcune parole saranno tali, che è una parola. È qui che Wikipedia fa questa cosa. Il modo in cui esprimono le cose sarà parziale, la scelta delle parole, ma gli stessi editori di Wikipedia sono così autoriflessivi. Hanno letteralmente articoli che descrivono proprio questi effetti su come usare le parole per iniettare pregiudizi in tutti i modi in cui se ne parla.

GREG: È più salutare della maggior parte degli ambienti.

LEX: È incredibilmente sano, ma penso che potresti fare di meglio. Secondo me, uno dei grandi difetti di Wikipedia, ovvero che le note della community su X funzionano meglio, è l'accessibilità di diventare un editore. Ehm, è difficile diventare un editore e non è così visibile il processo di editing. Quindi mi piacerebbe, come hai detto tu, che tutti potessero osservare in streaming questo dibattito tra le persone con integrità quando discutono di cose come il 6 gennaio, un argomento molto controverso per vedere come va il processo del dibattito invece di essere nascosto nell'ombra, che attualmente è su Wikipedia. Puoi accedervi. È semplicemente difficile accedervi, ma, e ho anche visto come useranno certi articoli, ad esempio su certe persone, come articoli su persone di cui ho imparato a fidarmi sempre meno perché li useranno letteralmente per rendere personali attacchi. E questo è qualcosa di cui scrivi. Utilizzeranno descrizioni di diverse controversie per dipingere un'immagine di una persona che, almeno a me, non sembra una rappresentazione accurata della persona. Ed è come scrivere un articolo su Einstein menzionando qualcosa sulla teoria della relatività e poi dicendo che era un donnaiolo e violentatore e una specie di controversia, sai, sì, è anche Feynman, sai, no, sai , era che, sai, non sono esattamente l'essere umano perfetto in termini di donne, ma come se ci fossero altri aspetti di questo essere umano e per catturarlo correttamente, c'è un certo modo per farlo. Penso che Wikipedia spesso si inclinerà. Cercano davvero di essere autoriflessivi e cercano di fermare tutto questo, ma si appoggeranno al dramma se corrisponde al pregiudizio. Ma ancora una volta, molto meglio del mondo che credo sia molto migliore. Uh, perché Wikipedia esiste, ma ora che siamo in questa fase adolescenziale, stiamo crescendo e stiamo cercando di inventare tecnologie diverse. L'idea di uno streaming è davvero, davvero interessante poiché coinvolgi sempre più persone in questo discorso secondo cui dove sta il valore, proviamo a ottenere la verità.

GREG: Sì. Sì. E fondamentalmente, sai, ottieni le piccole carte per, No, sbagliato, no, sbagliato.

LEX: E le diverse, le diverse, le diverse tecniche retoriche che vengono utilizzate per evitare di discutere effettivamente.

GREG: Già. E penso che in realtà potresti renderlo un po' divertente avendone un numero limitato. Uhm, sai, è un po' come...ne ottieni tre, e che ne dici di alcune carte.

LEX: Quindi giochiamo l'intera faccenda.

GREG: Uh, assolutamente.

LEX: Sì. Uh, lascia che ti chieda, uh, quindi hai menzionato alcuni momenti difficili della tua vita. Ehm, qual è stata la tua esperienza con la depressione? Qual è stata la tua esperienza nel venirne fuori, nel superarlo?

GREG: Sì. Voglio dire, l'intera faccenda, l'intero viaggio, ehm, con il coccolare la mente americana è iniziato con me, ehm, nel, presso la struttura psichiatrica Belmont a Filadelfia nel 2007 , avevo chiamato i servizi di emergenza sanitaria in un momento di lucidità perché ero andato al, uh, il negozio di ferramenta per, ehm, assicurarmi che quando mi sono ucciso, quello, si fosse bloccato. Volevo assicurarmi, sai, di avere la testa fasciata e tutto il resto. Quindi, come se tutti i farmaci che avevo intenzione di prendere non avessero funzionato, non sarei riuscito a trovare una via d'uscita. È stato un anno davvero difficile e ho sempre avuto problemi di depressione, um, ma stavano peggiorando. E francamente, uno dei motivi per cui questa questione della cultura dell'annullamento è così, um, importante per me è che la cosa che non ho enfatizzato tanto nel coccolare la mente americana, che tra l'altro, la descrizione che do del provare uccidermi era la prima volta che lo scrivevo. Nessuno nella mia famiglia era a conoscenza di come... fosse andata così. Mia moglie non l'aveva mai visto. E fondamentalmente l'unico modo in cui sono riuscito a scriverlo è stato, facendo, sai, come puoi ingannare te stesso. Se, ehm, pensassi, mi convincerò che è solo una cosa tra me e il mio computer e nessuno lo vedrà. E probabilmente non è la cosa più pubblica che abbia mai scritto. Ehm, ma quello che non ho sottolineato è quanto la guerra culturale abbia influito sulla mia depressione, perché originariamente ero il direttore legale dei vigili del fuoco. Poi sono diventato presidente dei vigili del fuoco nel 2005, mi sono trasferito a Filadelfia ed è lì che mi sono depresso. Ehm, e... semplicemente, non ho famiglia lì. C'è qualcosa nella città. Non sembra che gli piaccio molto. Ehm, ma la cosa più importante era essere sempre nel mondo della cultura. Uhm, c'era una ragazza con cui uscivo. Uhm, ricordo che, sai, non sembrava approvare davvero quello che avevo fatto. E molte persone non sembravano saperlo davvero. E nel frattempo, come se difendessi sempre le persone di sinistra e loro dicessero, Oh, è un bene che tu difenda qualcuno di sinistra, ma comunque non mi perdonerebbero mai per aver difeso qualcuno di destra. E ricordo di aver detto quale punto sono, ascolta, sono tipo, sono, sono un vero sostenitore di queste cose. Sono disposto a difendere i nazisti. Sono certamente disposto a difendere i repubblicani. E in realtà ha detto: penso che i repubblicani potrebbero essere peggio. Ehm, e non è andata così, quella relazione non è andata molto bene. E poi ho rischiato di fare a pugni un paio di volte con persone della destra. Ehm, perché hanno scoperto che difendevo persone che scherzano sull'11 settembre. Come se questo fosse successo più di una volta. E questo, sai, quando avrò vent'anni, non combatterò più a pugni. Uhm, ma sì, è sempre stato così. Tu, tu, vedi quanto possono essere ipocrite le persone. Puoi vedere come gli amici possono rivoltarsi contro di te se non gli piace la tua politica. Quindi ho avuto un'anteprima di questo, di, di, di quale cultura ci stiamo dirigendo essendo il presidente del fuoco. Ed è stato estenuante. Uhm, e questa è stata una delle cose principali che mi ha portato ad avere una depressione suicida, uh, al centro di Belmont. Se mi avessi detto che quello sarebbe stato l'inizio di una vita nuova e migliore per me, avrei riso se avessi potuto, ma lo farei, sai, non mi piace, puoi dire che sto bene se sto ancora ridendo. E non stavo ridendo, ehm, a quel punto. Quindi, ho chiamato un medico e ho iniziato a fare terapia cognitivo comportamentale. Ho iniziato ad avere tutte queste voci nella mia testa che erano catastrofizzanti e, um, sai, mi ha dato una esagerata generalizzazione e, um, uh, predizione del futuro, sai, uh, lettura mentale di tutte queste cose che insegnano non devi farlo. E quello, quello che fai nella CBT è essenzialmente che hai qualcosa che ti fa arrabbiare e poi scrivi semplicemente quale fosse il pensiero. Ehm, e sai, potrebbe succedere qualcosa di minore importanza nella tua risposta, sai, tipo, um, beh, l'appuntamento non sembrava andare molto bene. Ehm, e questo perché sono distrutto e moriremo da soli. E tu dici, okay, okay, okay. Cosa, cosa, quali sono le seguenti cose, sai, uh, è catastrofico, è leggere nel pensiero, è predire il futuro, è tutta questa roba. Ehm, e devi farlo più volte al giorno per sempre. In realtà ho bisogno di rispolverarlo in questo momento.Ehm, e lentamente nel tempo le voci nella mia testa che dicevano orribili, sai, orribili discorsi interni, semplicemente non sembravano più così convincenti, il che era davvero un effetto sottile. Come se fosse un po' come, oh aspetta, non credo di essere rotto. Sai, così non sembraVERO. Questa non sembra più la verità proveniente da Dio come una volta. E nove mesi dopo aver pensato di suicidarmi, probabilmente ero più felice di quanto non fossi stato negli ultimi dieci anni. Ehm, e questa è stata una delle cose che, sai, la CBT è ciò che mi ha portato a notare questo nel mio lavoro, che sembrava che gli amministratori vendessero distorsioni cognitive, ma gli studenti non stavano ancora comprando. E poi quando ho iniziato a notare che sembravano entrare già credendo in molte di queste cose, ho capito che sarebbe stato molto pericoloso. E questo ha portato a coccolare la mente americana e tutta quella roba. Ma la cosa più dura nello scrivere Hansling of the American Mind, l'avrei già menzionato un paio di volte, mi sono davvero depresso l'anno scorso, um, perché stavo studiando, sai, c'è un amico lì dentro che Ho parlato di chi si è ucciso dopo essere stato cancellato. Gli ho parlato una settimana prima che si suicidasse e in realtà non avevo... non avevo parlato con lui perché sembrava così sicuro di sé. Pensavo che sarebbe andato tutto bene perché lui, ha ricevuto un tweet insensibile nel giugno del 2020 e, sai, è stato costretto a dimettersi in un modo che in realtà non sembrava così grave come molti altri professori. In realtà almeno ha ricevuto una buonuscita, quindi sapevano che avrebbe fatto causa e avrebbe vinto, um, perché l'aveva già fatto prima. E così ho aspettato di controllarlo perché eravamo così sopraffatti dalla richiesta di aiuto. E diceva che la gente veniva ancora a casa sua. E poi si è sparato la settimana successiva. E sicuramente, e poiché tutti sanno che sono così pubblico riguardo alle mie lotte con queste cose, tutti quelli che combattono queste cose vengono da me quando stanno attraversando un momento difficile. E questo è un affare psicologicamente molto faticoso in cui trovarsi. E anche ammettendolo proprio adesso, come penso a tutti, tutti gli avvoltoi là fuori, si divertiranno con questo. Proprio come quando, quando, quando il mio amico Mike Adams si è suicidato, c'erano persone che festeggiavano su Twitter, uhm, che un uomo era morto, uh, perché non gli piacevano i suoi tweet. E, ma in qualche modo questo li ha resi compassionevoli verso qualche altra persona astratta. Quindi stavo diventando un po’ depresso e ansioso. E la cosa che mi ha davvero aiutato più di ogni altra cosa, ehm, è stato confessare al mio staff che io, sai, io, io, i libri richiedono molta energia. Quindi sapevo che non volevano sentirlo. Non solo questo richiedeva molto tempo al capo, ma lo rendeva depresso e ansioso. Ma quando finalmente l'ho detto ai miei dirigenti, alla dirigenza del mio staff, a persone dalle quali, anche se cerco di mantenere molta distanza, amo moltissimo, ha fatto una tale differenza, sapete , um, perché potrei essere aperto al riguardo. E l'altra cosa era: hai sentito il dialogo della conferenza? Oh si. È come una cosa solo su invito. È Orrin Hoffman, ehm, a dirigerlo. Ehm, cerca intenzionalmente di convincere le persone oltre lo spettro politico, a riunirsi, e ad avere conversazioni ufficiose su grandi questioni. Ed è stato bello essere in una stanza dove i conservatori liberali, nessuno dei precedenti, siamo tutti tipo, oh, grazie a Dio qualcuno ha adottato la cultura dell'annullamento. E quando sembrava, sentivo che forse questo non sarebbe stato il disastro per me e la mia famiglia che ero, di cui stavo iniziando ad avere paura. Sarebbe che accettare il materiale potrebbe effettivamente avere un lieto fine.

LEX: Beh, una cosa che mi distingue è che il dolore della cancellazione può essere davvero intenso. E questo non significa necessariamente perdere il lavoro, ma anche, puoi chiamarlo bullismo, puoi chiamare qualunque nome, ma solo un certo numero di persone su Internet. E quel numero può essere un piccolo messaggio che ti dice cose cattive.

GREG: Sì. Può essere una forza piuttosto potente per la psiche umana, il che lo è, ma è stato molto sorprendente. E poi c'è anche il rovescio della medaglia, ehm, mi rende davvero triste quanto possano essere crudeli le persone. È così, pensare che la tua, la tua causa sia una giustizia sociale in molti casi può portare le persone a pensare che posso essere crudele quanto voglio nel perseguimento di questo. Quando lo fa, molte volte è solo un modo per sfogare un po' di aggressività su una persona che consideri solo come un'astrazione.

LEX: Quindi penso che sia importante che le persone si rendano conto che sono qualunque cosa, qualunque cosa, qualunque energia negativa, qualunque negatività tu voglia mettere là fuori, come se ci fossero persone vere che possono farsi male. Come se potessi davvero convincere le persone a essere la versione peggiore di se stesse o forse a togliersi la vita. E non è così reale.

GREG: Sì. Bene, questa è una delle cose che facciamo nel libro, um, per rivolgerci davvero alle persone che cercano ancora di affermare che tutto ciò non è reale, citiamo semplicemente, citiamo il Papa, citiamo Obama, citiamo James Carville, citiamo Taylor Swift sulla cultura dell'annullamento.Ad esempio, e la citazione svizzera di Taylor è, essenzialmente riguarda come dietro tutto questo, c'è, quando diventa particolarmente brutto, c'è questo molto chiaro, sai, uccidite stesso in una sorta di corrente sotterranea. Uhm, ed è... è crudele. E il problema è che in un ambiente così aperto, ci sarà sempre qualcuno che vorrà essere così trasgressivo e dire la cosa più offensiva, terribile. Ma poi devi ricordare il travisamento, tornare ai vecchi idiomi, bastoni e pietre mi spezzeranno le ossa, ma i nomi non mi faranno mai, mai del male. È stato reimmaginato nei dibattiti universitari nel modo più assurdo. Le persone diranno letteralmente cose del genere, ma ora sappiamo che le parole possono ferire. Ed è come se ora sappiamo che le parole possono ferire. Ragazzi, non era necessario inventare una piccola cosa speciale da insegnare ai bambini per far sì che le sue parole ferissero meno. Se non facessero mai male fin dall'inizio, non avrebbe nemmeno senso. Il detto è un detto che ripeti a te stesso per darti forza. Quando i bulli si accorgono che sei un po' strano, forse un po' personale, um, il, uh, e aiuta. Aiuta davvero dire, ascolta, okay, gli stronzi diranno cose da stronzi. Uhm, e non posso lasciare che abbiano quel tipo di potere su di me.

LEX: Sì. Sì. È comunque un'esperienza di apprendimento perché fa, fa, fa male.

GREG: Ma per le brave persone là fuori che in realtà, sai, solo a volte pensano, pensano di sfogarsi, tu lo so, pensaci. Ricorda che ci sono persone dall'altra parte.

LEX: Sì. Per me, ferisce il mio tipo di fede nell’umanità. Uhm, so che non dovrebbe, ma a volte succede quando vedo le persone che si comportano bene l'una con l'altra, è come se aleggiasse una nuvola sulla mia prospettiva del mondo. E quello no, vorrei non dover essere lì.

GREG: Già. Questo è sempre stato il mio modo irriverente, ma, uh, rispondi a questo. Se, se l'umanità è fondamentalmente buona o fondamentalmente malvagia, essendo come il più grande dibattito in filosofia ed essendo come, beh, il problema con, uh, il primo è che non c'è nulla di fondamentale nell'umanità.

LEX: Sì. Cosa ti dà speranza riguardo a tutta questa faccenda, riguardo a questo stato oscuro in cui ci troviamo, come descrivi, come possiamo uscirne? Cosa ti dà speranza che ne usciremo?

GREG: Penso che la gente ne sia stufa. Ehm, penso che le persone siano stanche di non riuscire a essere autentiche. Ehm, e questo è davvero, sai, cos'è la censura. Fondamentalmente ti sta dicendo di non essere te stesso. Non essere effettivamente per dire quello che pensi. Uhm, non mostrare la tua personalità. Non dissentire. Non essere strano. Non sbagliarti. Ehm, e questo non è sostenibile. Penso che la gente ne abbia abbastanza. Uh, ma una cosa che voglio assolutamente dire al tuo pubblico è che non può dipendere solo da noi, dai nostri spettatori, cercare di risolvere questo problema. Ehm, e lo penso, e questo potrebbe sembrare un problema non correlato. Penso che se ci fossero metodi altamente rispettati, diciamo estremamente difficili, per dimostrare che sei estremamente intelligente e laborioso, che costano poco o niente, e che in realtà potrebbero far correre i soldi ad Harvard e Yale del mondo. Penso che potrebbe essere la cosa più positiva che potremmo fare per affrontare molti di questi problemi e perché penso che il fatto che siamo diventati un'America strana con una grande tradizione antielitaria sia diventato stranamente elitario in questo, nel rispetto che non solo, ancora una volta, la nostra leadership proviene da queste poche scuole fantasiose, ma nutriamo anche una grande ammirazione per loro. In un certo senso li stimiamo, ma penso che avremmo una società molto più sana se le persone potessero dimostrare, sai, la loro eccellenza in modi che provengono da flussi completamente diversi e, e che, che, che sono altamente rispettata. A volte dico che dovrebbe esserci un test in cui chiunque lo superi ottenga come, sai, un BA in discipline umanistiche che è come un super BA, come qualcosa, come qualcuno, non un GED. Non è di questo che sto parlando. Sto parlando di qualcosa che tipo, sai, una persona su un paio, tipo un centinaio, può passare in qualche altro modo per non passare attraverso queste enormi e costose istituzioni in cui le persone possono alzare la mano e dire che sono intelligente e laborioso. Penso che potrebbe essere un modo incredibilmente salutare. Penso che abbiamo bisogno di flussi aggiuntivi affinché le persone creative risolvano i problemi, sia su X che da qualche altra parte. Ehm, penso che ci siano molte cose che la tecnologia potrebbe fare per aiutare davvero in questo. Penso che alcune delle cose su cui Sal Khan sta lavorando, la Khan Academy, potrebbero davvero aiutare. Ehm, quindi penso che ci siano molti modi, ma esistono in gran parte per inventare nuovi modi di fare le cose, non solo aspettandosi che le vecchie cose che hanno detto 40 miliardi di dollari in banca si riformeranno da sole. Ed ecco il mio, sai, ho preso molto in giro Harvard, ma prenderò in considerazione loro un po' di più.Ehm, il, e, e, parlo di nuovo molto delle lezioni, e sai, c'è un bellissimo libro intitolato Poison Ivy, um, di Evan Mandry, che consiglio a tutti. Ed è scandaloso. Sembra mee uno sfogo a Stanford, ehm, che era, uh, e io, e penso che lo status, sai, l'istruzione superiore d'élite ha più ragazzi dell'1% più ricco che del 50 o 60% più povero a seconda della scuola . Ehm, e quando guardi quanto a loro piace davvero replicare i privilegi di classe, è davvero angosciante. Quindi tutti dovrebbero leggere Poison Ivy.

LEX: E soprattutto, uh, se sei strano, continua a esserlo. E tu sei una delle persone più interessanti, una delle più strane e belle che le persone abbiano mai incontrato. Greg, grazie per il lavoro davvero importante che fai.

GREG: Questo è stato, apprezzo la lezione, l'intera area che hai portato qui oggi, amico.

LEX: Uhm, questa è una conversazione fantastica. Grazie per il lavoro che fai. Grazie. Grazie. E per me, che ho profondamente a cuore l'istruzione, l'istruzione superiore, grazie per aver ritenuto responsabili il MIT e Harvard, per aver agito bene nei confronti delle persone che camminano nei loro corridoi. Quindi grazie mille per aver parlato con me. Grazie per aver ascoltato questa conversazione con Greg Lukianoff per supportare questo podcast. Si prega di controllare i nostri sponsor nella descrizione. E ora lasciate che vi lasci con alcune parole di Noam Chomsky. Se credi nella libertà di parola, credi nella libertà di parola per le opinioni, non ti piace. Gables era a favore della libertà di parola per le opinioni che gli piacevano. Così era Stalin. Se sei a favore della libertà di parola, significa che sei a favore della libertà di parola proprio per le opinioni che disprezzi. Grazie per l'ascolto e spero alla prossima volta.

Italian transcription subtitles:

0
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,240
Se lo scopo è il progetto della conoscenza umana,

1
00:00:02,700 --> 00:00:04,320
che significa conoscere il mondo che è,

2
00:00:04,740 --> 00:00:10,140
non puoi conoscere il mondo così com'è senza sapere cosa pensa veramente la gente.

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:14,440
E ciò che la gente pensa veramente è un fatto incredibilmente importante da sapere.

4
00:00:15,040 --> 00:00:16,780
Quindi ogni volta che dici davvero:

5
00:00:17,460 --> 00:00:26,400
non puoi dire che ti stai effettivamente privando della conoscenza di ciò che la gente pensa veramente che tu stia causando ciò che Tim o Crown, che fa parte del nostro consiglio di amministrazione, chiama falsificazione delle preferenze.

6
00:00:27,140 --> 00:00:29,400
Alla fine ti ritroverai con un'immagine imprecisa del mondo,

7
00:00:29,460 --> 00:00:30,240
che tra l'altro

8
00:00:30,720 --> 00:00:31,640
in molti casi,

9
00:00:32,220 --> 00:00:35,040
perché ci sono attivisti che vogliono limitare maggiormente la libertà di parola,

10
00:00:35,340 --> 00:00:38,380
in realtà tendono a pensare che le persone siano più prevenute di quanto potrebbero essere.

11
00:00:38,520 --> 00:00:43,840
E in realtà, un modo molto pratico per peggiorare le cose è quando censuri le persone,

12
00:00:44,200 --> 00:00:46,340
non cambia la loro opinione.

13
00:00:46,340 --> 00:00:50,440
Li incoraggia semplicemente a non condividerlo con persone che li metteranno nei guai.

14
00:00:50,880 --> 00:00:55,920
Quindi li porta a parlare con persone con cui sono già d'accordo e la polarizzazione del gruppo decolla.

15
00:00:58,660 --> 00:01:01,100
Quella che segue è una conversazione con Greg Lukianoff,

16
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:02,520
sostenitore della libertà di parola,

17
00:01:03,020 --> 00:01:03,940
avvocato del primo emendamento,

18
00:01:04,440 --> 00:01:05,980
presidente e amministratore delegato di FIRE,

19
00:01:06,320 --> 00:01:08,460
il fondamento dei diritti e dell’espressione individuale.

20
00:01:09,020 --> 00:01:11,360
Ed è l'autore di Unleashing Liberty,

21
00:01:11,880 --> 00:01:15,520
coautore con Jonathan Haidt di Coddling of the American

22
00:01:15,680 --> 00:01:21,200
Mind e coautore con Ricky Schlott di un nuovo libro in uscita a ottobre.

23
00:01:21,540 --> 00:01:26,060
Dovrebbero assolutamente essere preordinati ora chiamato Cancelling of the American Mind,

24
00:01:26,600 --> 00:01:29,100
che è un resoconto definitivo della storia,

25
00:01:29,420 --> 00:01:31,260
presente e futuro della cultura dell'annullamento,

26
00:01:31,680 --> 00:01:34,700
un termine usato e abusato nel discorso pubblico,

27
00:01:35,260 --> 00:01:40,220
ma raramente studiato e compreso con la profondità e il rigore di Greg e Ricky

28
00:01:40,680 --> 00:01:43,820
in questo libro e in parte in questa conversazione.

29
00:01:45,080 --> 00:01:46,480
La libertà di parola è importante,

30
00:01:46,980 --> 00:01:48,580
soprattutto nei campus universitari,

31
00:01:49,700 --> 00:01:52,980
proprio il luogo che dovrebbe fungere da campo di battaglia delle idee,

32
00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:55,460
compresi quelli strani e controversi

33
00:01:56,100 --> 00:01:58,420
che dovrebbe incoraggiare una coraggiosa assunzione di rischi,

34
00:01:58,820 --> 00:02:00,460
non conformità.

35
00:02:01,500 --> 00:02:03,140
Questo è il podcast di Lex Friedman.

36
00:02:03,540 --> 00:02:03,940
Per sostenerlo,

37
00:02:04,340 --> 00:02:06,280
controlla i nostri sponsor nella descrizione.

38
00:02:06,720 --> 00:02:07,160
E adesso,

39
00:02:07,480 --> 00:02:07,900
Cari amici,

40
00:02:08,460 --> 00:02:09,960
ecco Greg Lukianoff.

41
00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:12,760
Cominciamo con la grande domanda.

42
00:02:13,000 --> 00:02:14,360
Cos'è la cultura dell'annullamento?

43
00:02:14,880 --> 00:02:17,240
Ora, hai detto che non ti piace il termine così com'è,

44
00:02:17,380 --> 00:02:22,500
citazione, trascinata nel fango e abusata all'infinito da tutta una serie di figure controverse.

45
00:02:23,040 --> 00:02:24,280
Tuttavia, abbiamo il termine.

46
00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:25,380
Che cos'è?

47
00:02:25,480 --> 00:02:30,480
La cultura dell'annullamento è l'incremento delle campagne, in particolare delle campagne di successo,

48
00:02:30,920 --> 00:02:34,120
a partire dal 2014 per far licenziare le persone,

49
00:02:34,780 --> 00:02:35,220
espulso,

50
00:02:35,580 --> 00:02:36,780
deplatformed, eccetera,

51
00:02:37,420 --> 00:02:39,280
per un discorso che sarebbe

52
00:02:39,280 --> 00:02:41,100
normalmente essere tutelato dal primo emendamento.

53
00:02:41,640 --> 00:02:43,620
E io dico che saremmo protetti perché lo siamo

54
00:02:43,740 --> 00:02:48,160
parlando di circostanze in cui non è necessariamente il caso in cui si applica il primo emendamento.

55
00:02:48,460 --> 00:02:55,180
Ma quello che intendo è come dire, per analogia, cose per cui non potresti perdere il lavoro come dipendente pubblico,

56
00:02:55,560 --> 00:03:00,720
e anche il clima di paura che ne è derivato,

57
00:03:00,820 --> 00:03:03,080
il fatto che puoi perdere il lavoro se hai un'opinione sbagliata.

58
00:03:03,500 --> 00:03:04,900
E non era una cosa sottile

59
00:03:04,900 --> 00:03:06,360
c'è stato un miglioramento in questo,

60
00:03:06,760 --> 00:03:08,640
in particolare nel campus intorno al 2014.

61
00:03:09,840 --> 00:03:11,140
John Ronson ha scritto un libro

62
00:03:11,160 --> 00:03:12,700
chiamato Quindi sei stato pubblicamente svergognato.

63
00:03:12,800 --> 00:03:13,980
È uscito nel 2015,

64
00:03:14,180 --> 00:03:15,740
già documentano questo fenomeno.

65
00:03:16,420 --> 00:03:19,020
Ho scritto un libro intitolato Freedom From Speech nel 2014.

66
00:03:19,640 --> 00:03:22,360
Ma è stato davvero nel 2017 che hai iniziato a vedere

67
00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:23,660
questo sia rivolto ai professori.

68
00:03:24,600 --> 00:03:28,380
E quando si tratta del numero di professori che abbiamo visto essere

69
00:03:28,460 --> 00:03:29,820
presi di mira e perdono il lavoro,

70
00:03:30,420 --> 00:03:34,160
Faccio questo da 22 anni e non ho visto niente di simile.

71
00:03:34,560 --> 00:03:36,940
Quindi ci sono così tante cose che voglio chiederti qui.

72
00:03:37,300 --> 00:03:38,980
Uno, in realtà, basta guardare l'organizzazione di

73
00:03:39,000 --> 00:03:39,380
FUOCO.

74
00:03:39,420 --> 00:03:41,220
Puoi spiegare in cosa consiste l'organizzazione?

75
00:03:41,260 --> 00:03:42,960
Perché è interconnesso a tutto questo

76
00:03:43,760 --> 00:03:49,580
la lotta e l’ascesa della cultura del cancro e la lotta per la libertà di parola dal 2014 e prima.

77
00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:54,100
Quindi FIRE è stata fondata nel 1999 da Harvey Silverglate.

78
00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:56,480
È un famoso avvocato specializzato in libertà civili.

79
00:03:56,720 --> 00:03:58,360
È un po' nello show.

80
00:03:58,620 --> 00:04:03,040
È la persona che mi ha scoperto nella mia felice vita a San Francisco,

81
00:04:03,040 --> 00:04:05,720
ma sapevo che stavo cercando un lavoro di primo emendamento.

82
00:04:05,900 --> 00:04:09,200
Avevo frequentato la facoltà di giurisprudenza appositamente per studiare il primo emendamento.

83
00:04:10,520 --> 00:04:11,780
E mi ha trovato,

84
00:04:11,960 --> 00:04:12,700
il che è stato davvero bello.

85
00:04:13,100 --> 00:04:16,600
La sua protetta, Kathleen Sullivan, era la preside della Stanford Law School.

86
00:04:16,720 --> 00:04:19,820
E questo rimane il miglior complimento che abbia mai ricevuto in vita mia,

87
00:04:19,920 --> 00:04:22,820
è che mi ha raccomandato ad Harvey.

88
00:04:23,800 --> 00:04:26,200
E visto che questo è il motivo per cui ho studiato legge,

89
00:04:26,200 --> 00:04:28,240
Ero entusiasta di far parte di questa nuova organizzazione.

90
00:04:29,040 --> 00:04:32,060
L'altro co-fondatore di FIRE è Alan Charles Kors.

91
00:04:32,760 --> 00:04:34,400
E' semplicemente un genio assoluto.

92
00:04:34,680 --> 00:04:40,520
È uno dei massimi esperti al mondo dell'Illuminismo e in particolare di Voltaire.

93
00:04:41,280 --> 00:04:43,760
E se a qualcuno dei tuoi ascoltatori piacciono gli ottimi corsi,

94
00:04:45,000 --> 00:04:47,620
tiene una conferenza su Blaise Pascal.

95
00:04:48,080 --> 00:04:50,840
E Blaise, ovviamente, è famoso per la scommessa di Pascal.

96
00:04:51,660 --> 00:04:54,900
E l'ho lasciato così commosso e impressionato

97
00:04:54,900 --> 00:04:57,880
e con una profonda comprensione di quanto sia importante questa persona

98
00:04:58,400 --> 00:04:58,740
era.

99
00:04:59,720 --> 00:05:00,320
Interessante.

100
00:05:00,600 --> 00:05:04,330
Mi hai menzionato offline in relazione a questo che esiste un,

101
00:05:05,060 --> 00:05:09,160
almeno corre in parallelo o c'è una connessione tra l'amore per la scienza e

102
00:05:09,160 --> 00:05:10,460
l'amore per la libertà di parola.

103
00:05:10,540 --> 00:05:11,040
SÌ.

104
00:05:11,420 --> 00:05:14,160
Puoi magari spiegare dov'è questa connessione?

105
00:05:14,480 --> 00:05:14,980
Sicuro.

106
00:05:15,260 --> 00:05:17,820
Penso che per quelli di noi che lo sono davvero,

107
00:05:18,180 --> 00:05:20,480
sai, che abbiamo dedicato la nostra vita alla libertà di

108
00:05:20,480 --> 00:05:22,840
discorso, una cosa che ci interessa,

109
00:05:22,840 --> 00:05:23,880
che lo sappiamo o no,

110
00:05:24,660 --> 00:05:25,440
è l'epistemologia,

111
00:05:25,960 --> 00:05:28,660
sai, lo studio e la filosofia della conoscenza.

112
00:05:29,540 --> 00:05:31,280
Sai, la libertà di parola ne ha molta

113
00:05:32,620 --> 00:05:34,400
dimensioni morali e filosofiche,

114
00:05:34,520 --> 00:05:36,400
ma da un punto di vista pragmatico,

115
00:05:36,940 --> 00:05:38,600
è necessario perché

116
00:05:38,600 --> 00:05:40,760
siamo creature dalla conoscenza incredibilmente limitata.

117
00:05:41,040 --> 00:05:43,140
Ci stiamo incredibilmente ingannando.

118
00:05:43,640 --> 00:05:45,480
Ho sempre amato il fatto che Yuval Harari

119
00:05:46,060 --> 00:05:49,180
si riferisce all'Illuminismo come alla scoperta dell'ignoranza

120
00:05:49,580 --> 00:05:51,400
perché era esattamente quello che era.

121
00:05:51,560 --> 00:05:53,000
All'improvviso era come,

122
00:05:53,540 --> 00:05:54,420
wow, aspetta un secondo.

123
00:05:55,140 --> 00:05:58,040
Tutta questa saggezza popolare incredibilmente interessante che abbiamo,

124
00:05:58,080 --> 00:06:01,700
che tra l'altro può essere sorprendentemente affidabile qua e là.

125
00:06:02,440 --> 00:06:07,040
Quando inizi a testare molto, non ha senso e non regge.

126
00:06:07,600 --> 00:06:09,820
Anche le nostre idee su come vanno le cose,

127
00:06:09,820 --> 00:06:14,400
sai, come ha stabilito Galileo, come anche le nostre intuizioni, sono semplicemente sbagliate.

128
00:06:15,680 --> 00:06:19,340
E così gran parte della storia antica della libertà di parola,

129
00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:23,420
stava accadendo contemporaneamente a una sorta di rivoluzione scientifica.

130
00:06:24,060 --> 00:06:28,140
Quindi molti dei primi dibattiti sulla libertà di parola erano collegati.

131
00:06:28,660 --> 00:06:30,160
Quindi certamente Galileo,

132
00:06:30,480 --> 00:06:31,080
Sai,

133
00:06:31,900 --> 00:06:36,420
Sottolineo sempre che Keplero probabilmente aveva l'idea ancora più radicale che non fossero nemmeno sfere perfette.

134
00:06:37,120 --> 00:06:38,500
Ma allo stesso tempo,

135
00:06:39,000 --> 00:06:40,720
in gran parte a causa dell’invenzione della stampa,

136
00:06:41,080 --> 00:06:42,840
ci sono stati anche tutti questi sviluppi politici.

137
00:06:43,160 --> 00:06:45,120
E tu sai,

138
00:06:45,460 --> 00:06:46,800
Parlo sempre di Jan Hus,

139
00:06:47,000 --> 00:06:52,420
sai, dal famoso eroe ceco che era

140
00:06:52,780 --> 00:06:55,420
bruciato sul rogo e credo nel 1419.

141
00:06:56,420 --> 00:07:01,020
Ma in fondo era Lutero prima della stampa.

142
00:07:01,720 --> 00:07:03,460
Prima che Lutero potesse pronunciare la sua parola,

143
00:07:03,600 --> 00:07:05,000
sai, non aveva alcuna possibilità.

144
00:07:05,120 --> 00:07:06,080
E proprio così

145
00:07:06,080 --> 00:07:06,880
cos'era Jan Hus.

146
00:07:07,060 --> 00:07:07,960
Ma un secolo dopo,

147
00:07:08,320 --> 00:07:09,260
grazie alla stampa,

148
00:07:10,000 --> 00:07:10,540
tutti potevano sapere cosa

149
00:07:10,660 --> 00:07:11,920
Lutero pensò e, ragazzo,

150
00:07:12,340 --> 00:07:12,700
hanno.

151
00:07:13,160 --> 00:07:13,860
Ma ciò ha portato a

152
00:07:13,920 --> 00:07:16,260
ovviamente, questo è completamente pazzesco,

153
00:07:16,940 --> 00:07:19,780
periodo estremamente turbolento della storia europea.

154
00:07:20,500 --> 00:07:23,080
Beh, hai detto di fare un salto in giro,

155
00:07:23,260 --> 00:07:23,860
il Primo Emendamento.

156
00:07:23,940 --> 00:07:27,680
Prima di tutto, cos’è il Primo Emendamento e qual è il collegamento tra voi

157
00:07:28,700 --> 00:07:31,220
il Primo Emendamento, la libertà di parola e la cultura della cancellazione?

158
00:07:31,320 --> 00:07:31,660
Sicuro.

159
00:07:32,480 --> 00:07:33,640
Quindi sono un Primo Emendamento

160
00:07:33,720 --> 00:07:35,180
avvocato, come ho detto,

161
00:07:35,620 --> 00:07:36,680
ed è quello che io,

162
00:07:36,680 --> 00:07:38,180
questa è la mia passione, questo è ciò che ho studiato.

163
00:07:38,280 --> 00:07:40,640
E penso che la legge americana del Primo Emendamento sia incredibilmente interessante.

164
00:07:41,320 --> 00:07:42,480
In una frase,

165
00:07:43,080 --> 00:07:44,580
il Primo Emendamento ci sta provando

166
00:07:44,580 --> 00:07:50,440
sbarazzarsi di praticamente tutte le ragioni per cui il genere umano si è ucciso a vicenda per tutta la sua esistenza.

167
00:07:51,060 --> 00:07:53,300
Che non avremmo più litigato per le opinioni,

168
00:07:53,480 --> 00:07:54,640
non avremmo più litigato

169
00:07:54,800 --> 00:07:58,200
religione, che hai il diritto di rivolgerti al tuo governo per la riparazione delle lamentele,

170
00:07:58,620 --> 00:08:00,420
che hai la libertà di associarti.

171
00:08:00,760 --> 00:08:03,340
Che tutte queste cose in una frase fossero come, no,

172
00:08:03,800 --> 00:08:11,040
il governo non interferirà più con il tuo diritto a godere di questi diritti umani fondamentali.

173
00:08:12,280 --> 00:08:16,800
Quindi una cosa che rende FIRE un po' diversa dalle altre organizzazioni è:

174
00:08:17,040 --> 00:08:19,480
tuttavia, non siamo solo un'organizzazione basata sul Primo Emendamento,

175
00:08:20,100 --> 00:08:21,940
siamo un'organizzazione per la libertà di parola.

176
00:08:22,900 --> 00:08:24,300
E così, e,

177
00:08:24,700 --> 00:08:25,660
ma allo stesso tempo,

178
00:08:25,860 --> 00:08:29,420
molto di ciò che penso sia la libertà di parola,

179
00:08:29,900 --> 00:08:31,120
può essere ben spiegato

180
00:08:31,640 --> 00:08:33,800
con riferimento a molte leggi del Primo Emendamento,

181
00:08:34,160 --> 00:08:36,300
in parte perché nella storia americana,

182
00:08:36,440 --> 00:08:37,260
alcuni dei nostri più intelligenti

183
00:08:37,340 --> 00:08:42,660
le persone hanno riflettuto su quali siano i parametri della libertà di parola in relazione

184
00:08:42,700 --> 00:08:43,280
il Primo Emendamento.

185
00:08:43,420 --> 00:08:44,400
E molti di questi principi

186
00:08:44,480 --> 00:08:48,000
si trasferiscono molto bene proprio come idee pragmatiche.

187
00:08:48,420 --> 00:08:52,720
Quindi, il peccato più grande in termini di censura si chiama discriminazione del punto di vista.

188
00:08:53,060 --> 00:08:54,560
Che essenzialmente permetti la libertà di parola,

189
00:08:54,840 --> 00:08:55,940
tranne quell'opinione.

190
00:08:56,780 --> 00:08:59,060
Adesso lo è, e si è scoperto che è gentile

191
00:08:59,080 --> 00:09:00,040
di più difendibile.

192
00:09:00,140 --> 00:09:01,940
E penso che sia logico che se tu,

193
00:09:01,940 --> 00:09:02,980
se crei un forum e metti mi piace,

194
00:09:03,160 --> 00:09:07,020
parleremo solo di economia per escludere chi vuole parlare di un argomento diverso,

195
00:09:07,620 --> 00:09:11,160
ma è considerato giustamente un affare più grande.

196
00:09:11,460 --> 00:09:12,860
Se hai creato un forum per l'economia,

197
00:09:13,240 --> 00:09:17,920
ma non permetteremo che la gente parli di quel tipo di economia o abbia quella opinione sull'economia,

198
00:09:18,260 --> 00:09:20,020
la maggior parte, soprattutto.

199
00:09:20,700 --> 00:09:27,400
Quindi molti dei principi della legge del Primo Emendamento in realtà hanno molto senso filosofico come buoni principi per quando,

200
00:09:27,520 --> 00:09:29,900
come ciò che è discorso protetto e non protetto,

201
00:09:30,000 --> 00:09:31,160
cosa dovrebbe metterti nei guai,

202
00:09:31,760 --> 00:09:33,440
come lo analizzi effettivamente,

203
00:09:33,480 --> 00:09:37,400
ed è per questo che proviamo a lavorare nella nostra definizione di cultura dell'annullamento

204
00:09:37,540 --> 00:09:38,700
alcune norme del Primo Emendamento,

205
00:09:38,800 --> 00:09:39,620
proprio nella definizione.

206
00:09:39,900 --> 00:09:41,820
Quindi non dobbiamo impantanarci anche su di loro.

207
00:09:42,400 --> 00:09:43,400
Stai dicendo così tante cose interessanti,

208
00:09:43,400 --> 00:09:45,540
ma se riesci a collegarti alla discriminazione del punto di vista,

209
00:09:46,400 --> 00:09:49,360
c'è qualche zona grigia di discussione lì?

210
00:09:49,400 --> 00:09:52,460
Ad esempio, cos'è e non è l'economia per l'esempio che hai fornito?

211
00:09:52,560 --> 00:09:53,100
Sì.

212
00:09:53,760 --> 00:09:54,600
È, è lì,

213
00:09:55,400 --> 00:09:56,580
Voglio dire, è una scienza?

214
00:09:56,690 --> 00:09:59,400
Oppure è un'arte tracciare linee di ciò che non lo è,

215
00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:00,160
non è consentito?

216
00:10:00,360 --> 00:10:00,520
Sì.

217
00:10:00,700 --> 00:10:02,380
Sai, se dici che qualcosa è,

218
00:10:02,380 --> 00:10:03,240
o non è economia,

219
00:10:03,300 --> 00:10:06,200
beh si può dire che tutto è economia e quindi voglio parlare di poesia.

220
00:10:06,460 --> 00:10:07,300
Ci sarebbe una certa linea

221
00:10:07,300 --> 00:10:08,400
esercizio di disegno lì dentro,

222
00:10:08,660 --> 00:10:14,520
ma diciamo subito che decidi di aprirlo anche alla poesia.

223
00:10:16,060 --> 00:10:17,420
C'è una grande differenza tra dire

224
00:10:17,460 --> 00:10:18,620
okay, ora siamo aperti alla poesia,

225
00:10:18,860 --> 00:10:20,040
ma non puoi dirlo

226
00:10:20,440 --> 00:10:21,920
sai, Dante era cattivo.

227
00:10:22,780 --> 00:10:25,840
Come se questa fosse un'opinione proibita ora ufficialmente in vigore,

228
00:10:25,840 --> 00:10:29,720
in questo forum altrimenti aperto ciò colpirebbe immediatamente a livello intuitivo

229
00:10:29,740 --> 00:10:33,980
le persone come un problema più grande del semplice dire che la poesia non è economia.

230
00:10:35,060 --> 00:10:35,320
Sì. Intendo,

231
00:10:35,880 --> 00:10:38,240
quel livello intuitivo con cui parli,

232
00:10:39,780 --> 00:10:40,280
Spero

233
00:10:41,580 --> 00:10:42,800
che tutti noi abbiamo

234
00:10:42,800 --> 00:10:45,300
quel tipo di intuizione di base quando si oltrepassa il limite,

235
00:10:45,380 --> 00:10:46,460
è la stessa cosa per

236
00:10:46,460 --> 00:10:47,780
come la pornografia, giusto?

237
00:10:47,780 --> 00:10:48,880
Sai, quando lo vedi,

238
00:10:48,880 --> 00:10:52,620
Penso che ci sia lo stesso livello di intuizione

239
00:10:52,620 --> 00:10:54,220
dovrebbe essere applicato a tutti i livelli qui.

240
00:10:54,930 --> 00:10:56,320
Ed è quando

241
00:10:57,060 --> 00:11:00,280
che l'intuizione viene deformata da qualunque forza della società,

242
00:11:00,340 --> 00:11:02,540
è allora che inizia a sembrare una censura.

243
00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:03,020
Sì.

244
00:11:03,220 --> 00:11:05,280
Voglio dire, le persone lo trovano una cosa diversa.

245
00:11:05,680 --> 00:11:07,240
Sai, se qualcuno perde il lavoro semplicemente

246
00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:08,440
per la loro opinione politica,

247
00:11:08,780 --> 00:11:11,400
anche se quel datore di lavoro ha tutto il diritto di licenziarti,

248
00:11:11,880 --> 00:11:13,520
Penso che gli americani dovrebbero continuare a pensare:

249
00:11:13,520 --> 00:11:14,300
Beh è vero.

250
00:11:14,520 --> 00:11:15,220
Hanno tutto il diritto di entrarci

251
00:11:15,220 --> 00:11:17,900
il mondo e non sto portando avanti una causa legale che forse non dovresti

252
00:11:19,100 --> 00:11:20,680
licenziare qualcuno per la sua opinione politica,

253
00:11:21,120 --> 00:11:21,960
ma pensaci bene.

254
00:11:22,420 --> 00:11:24,020
Ad esempio, cosa, quale società vogliamo?

255
00:11:24,040 --> 00:11:25,860
in che tipo di società vogliamo vivere?

256
00:11:26,160 --> 00:11:27,660
Ed è stato divertente guardare

257
00:11:29,160 --> 00:11:30,440
lo sai, ed io, lo faccio notare.

258
00:11:30,600 --> 00:11:32,600
Sì, difenderò le imprese,

259
00:11:33,520 --> 00:11:35,960
primo emendamento dei diritti di associazione

260
00:11:35,960 --> 00:11:37,880
in grado di avere il diritto legale di decidere,

261
00:11:38,140 --> 00:11:39,440
sai, chi lavora per loro.

262
00:11:39,680 --> 00:11:42,280
Ma da una questione morale o filosofica,

263
00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:44,600
se pensi alle implicazioni di,

264
00:11:44,860 --> 00:11:46,640
se ogni azienda in

265
00:11:46,640 --> 00:11:49,160
L’America diventa un’associazione espressiva,

266
00:11:49,240 --> 00:11:52,360
oltre ad essere un'organizzazione che massimizza il profitto,

267
00:11:53,120 --> 00:11:57,080
sarebbe un disastro per la democrazia perché ci troveremmo in una situazione in cui le persone

268
00:11:57,080 --> 00:11:58,620
in realtà direbbero a se stessi,

269
00:11:59,100 --> 00:12:01,500
Non penso di poter dire veramente quello che penso

270
00:12:01,500 --> 00:12:03,900
pensare e credere ancora di poter mantenere il mio lavoro.

271
00:12:04,340 --> 00:12:05,600
Ed è lì che mi preoccupavo.

272
00:12:05,620 --> 00:12:12,290
Mi sentivo come se fossimo andati a buon fine perché gran parte della risposta iniziale alle persone che venivano cancellate era molto negativa

273
00:12:12,600 --> 00:12:13,000
semplicemente,

274
00:12:13,380 --> 00:12:15,860
sai, Oh, ma hanno il diritto di sbarazzarsi di questa persona.

275
00:12:16,060 --> 00:12:20,100
E questa, e questa è la fine, l'inizio e la fine della discussione.

276
00:12:20,680 --> 00:12:22,420
E ho pensato che fosse una schivata.

277
00:12:22,660 --> 00:12:25,760
Pensavo che in realtà non fosse una cosa molto seria.

278
00:12:25,780 --> 00:12:29,790
Se hai a cuore sia il primo emendamento che la libertà di parola, pensaci bene

279
00:12:29,900 --> 00:12:31,160
a te, solo per

280
00:12:32,380 --> 00:12:34,920
chiarire che il primo emendamento è una specie di

281
00:12:35,840 --> 00:12:38,980
un'incarnazione legale dell'ideale

282
00:12:38,980 --> 00:12:41,280
della libertà di parola e poi libertà di parola applicata al governo.

283
00:12:41,840 --> 00:12:47,360
Ed è molto specifico applicato al governo e la libertà di parola ne è l'applicazione

284
00:12:47,500 --> 00:12:49,560
il principio di amare tutto,

285
00:12:50,040 --> 00:12:51,960
incluso un tipo di livello elevato

286
00:12:52,720 --> 00:12:54,220
ideale filosofico

287
00:12:54,720 --> 00:12:59,160
di cosa si tratta, del valore che le persone siano in grado di esprimere la propria opinione.

288
00:12:59,380 --> 00:12:59,580
Sì.

289
00:12:59,660 --> 00:13:03,640
È un'idea più vecchia, più audace, più espansiva.

290
00:13:04,020 --> 00:13:05,680
E puoi avere una situazione.

291
00:13:05,820 --> 00:13:08,540
E parlo di paesi che hanno buone leggi sulla libertà di parola,

292
00:13:08,720 --> 00:13:10,580
ma non necessariamente una grande cultura della libertà di parola.

293
00:13:11,100 --> 00:13:15,160
E parlo di come a volte facciamo questa distinzione tra libertà di parola

294
00:13:15,180 --> 00:13:16,420
diritto e cultura della libertà di parola,

295
00:13:17,140 --> 00:13:19,920
stiamo pensando in un modo molto nebuloso.

296
00:13:21,160 --> 00:13:21,640
E cosa intendo

297
00:13:21,640 --> 00:13:24,140
con ciò significa che la legge è generalmente,

298
00:13:24,180 --> 00:13:25,500
soprattutto in un paese di diritto comune,

299
00:13:26,000 --> 00:13:27,200
è il riflesso

300
00:13:27,780 --> 00:13:28,520
delle norme.

301
00:13:29,480 --> 00:13:31,200
Anche quei giudici sono persone.

302
00:13:31,360 --> 00:13:32,140
E in molti casi,

303
00:13:32,240 --> 00:13:33,000
si suppone il diritto comune

304
00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:37,880
prendere effettivamente le nostre idee intuitive di equità e inserirle nella legge.

305
00:13:38,720 --> 00:13:39,660
Quindi, se in realtà

306
00:13:39,660 --> 00:13:43,260
hanno una cultura che non apprezza la libertà di parola da un punto di vista filosofico,

307
00:13:43,580 --> 00:13:46,640
non sarà in grado di proteggere la libertà di parola a lungo termine,

308
00:13:46,720 --> 00:13:47,640
anche nella legge.

309
00:13:47,880 --> 00:13:50,940
Perché alla fine questo è uno dei motivi per cui mi preoccupo così tanto di alcuni di questi terribili

310
00:13:50,940 --> 00:13:52,600
casi provenienti dalle facoltà di giurisprudenza.

311
00:13:52,940 --> 00:13:56,640
Perché temo che, anche se sicuramente prima americano

312
00:13:56,640 --> 00:13:59,040
la legge di emendamento protegge fortemente il primo emendamento

313
00:13:59,700 --> 00:14:00,040
per adesso,

314
00:14:00,500 --> 00:14:01,880
non rimarrà così.

315
00:14:01,960 --> 00:14:06,480
Se ci sono generazioni di studenti di giurisprudenza che si laureano e pensano davvero

316
00:14:06,580 --> 00:14:09,860
non c'è niente, non c'è obiettivo più alto che urlare, sei un avversario.

317
00:14:10,600 --> 00:14:10,800
Sì.

318
00:14:10,920 --> 00:14:12,800
Ecco perché ti concentri così tanto

319
00:14:14,080 --> 00:14:22,620
Se gran parte della tua attenzione è rivolta all’istruzione superiore o al periodo di istruzione è perché l’istruzione è il fondamento della cultura.

320
00:14:23,120 --> 00:14:23,240
Sì.

321
00:14:23,500 --> 00:14:24,360
Hai questa storia,

322
00:14:24,460 --> 00:14:26,000
sai, 64,

323
00:14:26,320 --> 00:14:30,320
c'è il movimento per la libertà di parola a Berkeley e negli anni '65,

324
00:14:30,600 --> 00:14:32,720
educazione ciò che possono insegnare senza violare,

325
00:14:33,000 --> 00:14:34,240
ehm, senza violare il primo

326
00:14:34,780 --> 00:14:37,660
emendamento.

327
00:14:38,180 --> 00:14:39,460
E quando la cosa arrivò davanti al giudice,

328
00:14:39,520 --> 00:14:41,240
era esattamente come,

329
00:14:41,740 --> 00:14:44,040
uh, era esattamente scettico al riguardo quanto pensavamo.

330
00:14:44,400 --> 00:14:45,680
Penso che lo abbia definito distopico.

331
00:14:46,200 --> 00:14:47,540
Ehm, e non è stato un rischio imminente.

332
00:14:47,660 --> 00:14:50,240
Quindi, se sei contrario a questo tipo di insegnamento, il modo giusto per combatterlo è creare il

333
00:14:50,340 --> 00:14:52,600
caso in cui non sia una buona idea come parte del curriculum invece di bandirlo dal curriculum.

334
00:14:52,880 --> 00:14:55,580
Sì.

335
00:14:55,980 --> 00:14:59,680
È solo che lo Stato non ha il potere di dire semplicemente:

336
00:15:00,080 --> 00:15:01,940
per, per vietare, um, sai, cosa, cosa insegnano, cosa insegnano i professori dell'istruzione superiore.

337
00:15:02,320 --> 00:15:03,420
Ora diventa un po' più complicato quando parli da K a 12,

338
00:15:03,820 --> 00:15:04,760
Perché

339
00:15:05,800 --> 00:15:07,180
lo stato ha un ruolo nel decidere cosa insegna il pubblico dalla scuola elementare fino ai 12 anni perché sono i tuoi figli,

340
00:15:07,820 --> 00:15:08,840
loro, è finanziato dai contribuenti.

341
00:15:08,980 --> 00:15:10,900
Ehm, e generalmente è coinvolto il legislatore.

342
00:15:11,040 --> 00:15:13,220
Ehm, esiste un controllo democratico di quel processo.

343
00:15:13,560 --> 00:15:15,000
Quindi, da K a 12,

344
00:15:15,160 --> 00:15:16,320
c'è anche propensione verso il

345
00:15:16,580 --> 00:15:20,160
sinistra rispetto all’amministrazione che gestisce il curriculum?

346
00:15:20,860 --> 00:15:21,500
Sì, ecco, ecco, c'è sicuramente, ehm, dalla K alla 12,

347
00:15:22,640 --> 00:15:25,780
il, il, voglio dire,

348
00:15:26,160 --> 00:15:33,300
i miei figli vanno alla scuola pubblica.

349
00:15:33,960 --> 00:15:39,400
Uhm, ho un bambino di cinque e sette anni,

350
00:15:39,400 --> 00:15:40,260
uh, e hanno insegnanti adorabili.

351
00:15:40,980 --> 00:15:43,460
Uhm, ma ci siamo imbattuti in un

352
00:15:43,460 --> 00:15:44,700
molti problemi con,

353
00:15:44,880 --> 00:15:46,180
con le scuole scolastiche in fiamme.

354
00:15:46,200 --> 00:15:47,500
Ehm, e molti laureati di

355
00:15:48,580 --> 00:15:52,420
Le scuole di istruzione finirono per essere gli amministratori che repressero la libertà di parola nell’istruzione superiore.

356
00:15:52,420 --> 00:15:56,200
E quindi ho cercato di pensare a modi positivi per affrontare alcuni dei...

357
00:15:56,980 --> 00:15:58,780
alcuni dei problemi che vedo dalla K alla 12.

358
00:15:58,780 --> 00:16:03,780
Pensavo che il tentativo fosse giusto

359
00:16:03,860 --> 00:16:09,640
dettare,

360
00:16:09,740 --> 00:16:15,180
non insegnerai i seguenti 10 libri,

361
00:16:15,280 --> 00:16:18,260
sai, oppure 20 o 200 libri era il modo sbagliato di farlo.

362
00:16:18,780 --> 00:16:21,280
Ora, quando si tratta di decidere quali libri inserire nel curriculum,

363
00:16:21,340 --> 00:16:22,080
ancora una volta, questo è qualcosa che spetta al legislatore

364
00:16:22,080 --> 00:16:23,260
in realtà, sai, non posso, non posso avere voce in capitolo,

365
00:16:23,340 --> 00:16:24,650
e questo è abbastanza incontrovertibile,

366
00:16:24,780 --> 00:16:25,660
ehm, in termini di legge.

367
00:16:26,100 --> 00:16:26,740
Ma quando si tratta di come combatterlo,

368
00:16:26,960 --> 00:16:28,120
Avevo qualcosa che, dato che sono bloccato con una formula,

369
00:16:28,180 --> 00:16:31,800
Ho chiamato empowerment della mente americana.

370
00:16:32,380 --> 00:16:35,180
Uhm, ho dato principi che erano incoerenti,

371
00:16:35,600 --> 00:16:36,580
ehm, con quel tipo di pensiero di gruppo e con una forte enfasi su,

372
00:16:37,020 --> 00:16:41,220
uh, la politica dell'identità, uh, quello,

373
00:16:41,540 --> 00:16:42,180
ehm, sai, alcuni critici si lamentano giustamente dal K al 12.

374
00:16:42,580 --> 00:16:44,000
Uh, e noi, noi,

375
00:16:44,000 --> 00:16:47,320
questo in realtà significa cancellare la mente americana,

376
00:16:47,320 --> 00:16:47,640
ma ho una spiegazione più dettagliata

377
00:16:47,800 --> 00:16:52,300
è quello che pubblicherò sul mio blog,

378
00:16:52,300 --> 00:16:55,140
l’idea eternamente radicale.

379
00:16:55,780 --> 00:16:57,340
È possibile legalmente,

380
00:16:57,440 --> 00:17:01,440
è solo una domanda stupida,

381
00:17:01,440 --> 00:17:06,280
forse creare una protezione aggiuntiva per certi tipi di letteratura

382
00:17:06,640 --> 00:17:09,260
1984 o qualcosa da restare nel curriculum.

383
00:17:09,820 --> 00:17:11,360
Voglio dire, è già tutto protetto, immagino.

384
00:17:12,020 --> 00:17:13,260
Sì.

385
00:17:13,800 --> 00:17:18,160
Suppongo

386
00:17:18,520 --> 00:17:21,080
per proteggersi dagli amministratori da

387
00:17:21,080 --> 00:17:27,040
giocherellare troppo

388
00:17:27,800 --> 00:17:31,320
con il curriculum,

389
00:17:31,480 --> 00:17:32,200
come stabilizzare il curriculum.

390
00:17:32,220 --> 00:17:35,120
Non so di cosa si tratta

391
00:17:35,440 --> 00:17:37,560
la scuola pubblica dalle K alle 12.

392
00:17:38,320 --> 00:17:39,180
Da K a 12,

393
00:17:39,180 --> 00:17:42,460
sai, le legislature statali, sai, ne fanno parte.

394
00:17:42,740 --> 00:17:43,620
Loro ne fanno parte e possono dire tipo:

395
00:17:43,620 --> 00:17:45,720
dovresti insegnare i seguenti libri.

396
00:17:45,720 --> 00:17:47,770
Ora, ovviamente, le persone sono sempre un po' preoccupate che...

397
00:17:47,960 --> 00:17:51,720
se tu, uh, se lo consigliassero,

398
00:17:51,940 --> 00:17:58,120
Sai,

399
00:17:58,140 --> 00:18:00,400
insegnare,

400
00:18:00,760 --> 00:18:01,880
uh, insegna la dichiarazione di indipendenza,

401
00:18:01,880 --> 00:18:03,440
lo sai, finirà per essere,

402
00:18:03,440 --> 00:18:05,980
beh, insegneranno che la dichiarazione di indipendenza è stata solo per proteggere la schiavitù,

403
00:18:06,040 --> 00:18:09,020
Quale

404
00:18:09,260 --> 00:18:10,520
non insegnava un argomento particolare,

405
00:18:10,760 --> 00:18:12,880
quali libri di testo scegli,

406
00:18:13,500 --> 00:18:17,160
quale prospettiva prendi,

407
00:18:17,320 --> 00:18:19,200
tutto quel genere di cose.

408
00:18:19,200 --> 00:18:21,800
C'è come se la religione iniziasse a insinuarsi in tutta la questione del come, sai,

409
00:18:21,880 --> 00:18:22,800
è consentito alla Bibbia insegnare allo stesso modo nell’ambito aziendale e nell’istruzione?

410
00:18:23,040 --> 00:18:23,280
ehm,

411
00:18:23,720 --> 00:18:25,340
non farlo, sì.

412
00:18:26,580 --> 00:18:29,320
Voglio dire, sono, sono ateo,

413
00:18:29,600 --> 00:18:32,640
uh, con un intenso interesse per la religione.

414
00:18:33,160 --> 00:18:35,800
In realtà ho letto tutta la Bibbia quest'anno solo perché faccio cose del genere.

415
00:18:35,800 --> 00:18:38,680
E in realtà non l'avevo mai letto

416
00:18:38,680 --> 00:18:39,540
dall'inizio alla fine.

417
00:18:39,700 --> 00:18:41,700
Uhm, poi ho letto il Corano perché sai,

418
00:18:41,960 --> 00:18:43,340
e proverò a farlo

419
00:18:44,040 --> 00:18:45,980
libro di Mormon, ma lo sai.

420
00:18:45,980 --> 00:18:46,340
Beh, hanno iniziato a farlo, sei così affascinante.

421
00:18:46,420 --> 00:18:48,140
Ehm, consigli di farlo?

422
00:18:48,240 --> 00:18:50,500
Penso che dovresti,

423
00:18:50,640 --> 00:18:52,600
ehm, solo per saperlo, perché è davvero una pietra di paragone,

424
00:18:52,700 --> 00:18:55,620
ehm, nel modo in cui la gente parla delle cose,

425
00:18:55,660 --> 00:18:56,580
può diventare piuttosto noioso,

426
00:18:56,600 --> 00:18:59,880
ma mi sono anche costretto a leggere fino in fondo

427
00:18:59,880 --> 00:19:01,580
tutte le istruzioni molto specifiche su quanto devono essere alte le diverse parti del tempio

428
00:19:02,140 --> 00:19:04,000
e quanto devono essere lunghi gli abiti e che forma devono avere e cosa tipo,

429
00:19:04,380 --> 00:19:07,560
e quelli vanno avanti molto.

430
00:19:07,560 --> 00:19:11,140
Uhm, quello, quello, sorprendentemente,

431
00:19:11,700 --> 00:19:12,680
scusa, pezzo sorprendentemente grande di Exodus.

432
00:19:12,680 --> 00:19:13,040
Uhm, pensavo che fosse più simile a Levitico e Deuteronomio.

433
00:19:13,300 --> 00:19:15,240
Uhm, ma poi arrivi a libri come Giobbe,

434
00:19:15,280 --> 00:19:16,500
Sai,

435
00:19:16,500 --> 00:19:20,580
Oh.

436
00:19:20,680 --> 00:19:21,980
Voglio dire, Giobbe è una lettura del genere e non è possibile che Giobbe originariamente avesse quel finale.

437
00:19:22,980 --> 00:19:24,680
Come Giobbe è fondamentalmente,

438
00:19:24,760 --> 00:19:30,080
inizia come una scommessa perversa tra Dio,

439
00:19:30,080 --> 00:19:34,460
ehm, e Satana sul fatto o meno

440
00:19:34,540 --> 00:19:34,660
possono effettivamente indurre un uomo buono a rinunciare a Dio.

441
00:19:35,020 --> 00:19:37,480
E inizialmente non possono,

442
00:19:37,720 --> 00:19:42,640
sta andando tutto in modo molto prevedibile.

443
00:19:43,080 --> 00:19:45,840
E poi finalmente torturarono davvero Giobbe

444
00:19:46,400 --> 00:19:46,880
e si trasforma nel migliore,

445
00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:52,120
perché Dio è crudele?

446
00:19:52,800 --> 00:19:53,960
Come potrebbe Dio esistere?

447
00:19:54,520 --> 00:19:57,260
Come potrebbe un Dio gentile fare queste cose?

448
00:19:57,420 --> 00:19:59,900
E batte, diventa il miglior avvocato del mondo e sconfigge tutti,

449
00:20:00,640 --> 00:20:01,700
tutte le persone che

450
00:20:01,760 --> 00:20:03,420
vieni a discutere con lui.

451
00:20:03,420 --> 00:20:06,060
Lui, lui li toglie di dosso i pantaloni.

452
00:20:06,120 --> 00:20:09,480
E poi all'improvviso, alla fine, Dio si presenta

453
00:20:09,820 --> 00:20:10,920
e lui dice:

454
00:20:11,760 --> 00:20:13,000
ehm, beh, sai, sono ovunque.

455
00:20:13,340 --> 00:20:15,160
E, ehm,

456
00:20:16,200 --> 00:20:19,540
è una risposta molto confusa.

457
00:20:19,720 --> 00:20:21,660
Dà una risposta del tipo:

458
00:20:21,660 --> 00:20:22,380
Sono lì quando,

459
00:20:22,600 --> 00:20:23,780
quando, quando le leonesse partoriscono e io sono lì.

460
00:20:24,340 --> 00:20:26,000
E comunque,

461
00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:30,120
c'è questo mostro gigante, il Leviatano, che è molto grande ed è molto spaventoso.

462
00:20:31,040 --> 00:20:35,300
E io, e io devo gestire l'universo.

463
00:20:35,520 --> 00:20:37,440
E io sono un po' come se

464
00:20:37,640 --> 00:20:38,860
Dio, stai dicendo che sei molto

465
00:20:39,500 --> 00:20:39,950
Occupato?

466
00:20:40,560 --> 00:20:43,020
È questo, è essenzialmente questo il tuo argomento con Giobbe?

467
00:20:43,300 --> 00:20:46,340
E non menzioni tutto,

468
00:20:46,540 --> 00:20:48,960
non dici tutto il genere di cose del genere,

469
00:20:49,060 --> 00:20:50,360
che ho scommesso, è per questo che ti stavo torturando,

470
00:20:50,360 --> 00:20:52,700
questo non viene fuori.

471
00:20:52,700 --> 00:20:54,480
E poi alla fine decide,

472
00:20:54,480 --> 00:20:55,560
Dio decide, come fa Giobbe, oh, no, hai assolutamente ragione.

473
00:20:56,220 --> 00:20:57,580
Mi sbagliavo totalmente.

474
00:20:57,780 --> 00:21:00,300
Ehi, scusa.

475
00:21:00,740 --> 00:21:02,860
Uhm, e, e Dio dice, punirò quelle persone che hanno provato a discutere con te e non l'hanno fatto, non hanno vinto.

476
00:21:02,860 --> 00:21:05,560
Quindi, um, quindi si sbarazza di...

477
00:21:05,960 --> 00:21:10,020
Non so esattamente cosa faccia loro.

478
00:21:10,040 --> 00:21:13,000
Non ricordo.

479
00:21:13,400 --> 00:21:16,580
Uhm, e poi restituisce a Giobbe tutti i suoi soldi e tutto il resto...

480
00:21:17,100 --> 00:21:18,600
e li rende super prosperi.

481
00:21:19,160 --> 00:21:21,900
E io dico che non era assolutamente quello il finale originale di quel libro.

482
00:21:21,960 --> 00:21:23,820
Tipo, perché questo vorrebbe,

483
00:21:23,820 --> 00:21:26,000
era chiaramente un romanzo amato e loro dicevano:

484
00:21:26,260 --> 00:21:27,280
ma non può avere quel finale.

485
00:21:27,840 --> 00:21:29,080
Va bene.

486
00:21:29,080 --> 00:21:30,760
Quindi, quindi, quindi, quindi sì, quindi è un modo lungo per dire:

487
00:21:31,000 --> 00:21:34,780
In realtà penso che ne valga la pena.

488
00:21:35,410 --> 00:21:38,440
Uh, in parte era...

489
00:21:38,700 --> 00:21:40,280
sei sempre un po' sorpreso quando finisci per interpretare la parte,

490
00:21:40,560 --> 00:21:40,800
tipo, ehm,

491
00:21:40,800 --> 00:21:41,440
ci sono parti di esso che ti coglieranno di sorpresa,

492
00:21:42,140 --> 00:21:44,540
un po' come se Isaiah fosse in viaggio, um,

493
00:21:45,220 --> 00:21:46,280
Ecclesiaste,

494
00:21:46,900 --> 00:21:47,880
Modalità Depeche.

495
00:21:48,220 --> 00:21:49,400
E l'hai fatto, l'hai detto anche tu,

496
00:21:49,700 --> 00:21:51,400
uh, il Corano.

497
00:21:51,940 --> 00:21:53,900
Sì.

498
00:21:54,000 --> 00:21:54,840
Il che era affascinante.

499
00:21:54,980 --> 00:21:57,860
Allora cosa c'è,

500
00:21:57,940 --> 00:21:59,540
sarebbe interessante chiedere,

501
00:21:59,660 --> 00:22:01,060
c'è una tensione tra

502
00:22:01,160 --> 00:22:03,400
lo studio dei religiosi

503
00:22:03,760 --> 00:22:05,980
testi o seguire la religione e semplicemente credere in Dio e seguire le varie

504
00:22:06,500 --> 00:22:06,840
aspetti della religione con la libertà di parola?

505
00:22:07,200 --> 00:22:07,540
Uhm, nel primo emendamento,

506
00:22:07,860 --> 00:22:09,740
ehm, noi, abbiamo

507
00:22:09,920 --> 00:22:11,120
qualcosa che chiamiamo clausola religiosa e non mi è mai piaciuto chiamarla proprio così

508
00:22:11,180 --> 00:22:14,040
perché sono due cose brillanti una accanto all'altra.

509
00:22:14,440 --> 00:22:14,700
Lo Stato non può stabilirlo

510
00:22:15,030 --> 00:22:17,700
una religione ufficiale, ma non può interferire con il tuo diritto di praticare la tua religione.

511
00:22:17,800 --> 00:22:18,980
Questo è bello.

512
00:22:19,200 --> 00:22:20,240
Due cose allo stesso tempo.

513
00:22:20,340 --> 00:22:21,120
E penso che siano,

514
00:22:21,120 --> 00:22:25,280
e penso che abbiano entrambi esattamente ragione.

515
00:22:25,640 --> 00:22:29,000
E penso che a volte la destra sia molto entusiasta della clausola di libero esercizio

516
00:22:29,020 --> 00:22:29,180
e la sinistra è molto entusiasta dell’establishment.

517
00:22:30,180 --> 00:22:30,660
E mi è piaciuto il fatto che abbiamo,

518
00:22:30,840 --> 00:22:32,660
li abbiamo entrambi insieme.

519
00:22:33,280 --> 00:22:35,080
Ora, che rapporto c’è con la libertà di parola?

520
00:22:35,240 --> 00:22:38,140
E avevo ragione sul curriculum,

521
00:22:38,420 --> 00:22:39,480
come stavamo parlando.

522
00:22:39,480 --> 00:22:40,500
Ehm, in realtà penso che sarebbe fantastico se le scuole pubbliche potessero insegnare

523
00:22:40,680 --> 00:22:42,420
la Bibbia, come nel senso di simile,

524
00:22:42,420 --> 00:22:43,480
leggetelo come un documento storico.

525
00:22:43,480 --> 00:22:44,540
Ma quando ero al

526
00:22:44,680 --> 00:22:46,420
ACLU, ogni volta che vedevo qualcuno provarlo,

527
00:22:46,780 --> 00:22:48,360
si è sempre trasformato in loro che in realtà sostenevano,

528
00:22:48,700 --> 00:22:50,040
sai, un cattolico o un protestante o anche qualche ortodosso legge qualcosa sulla religione.

529
00:22:50,040 --> 00:22:53,200
Ehm, quindi

530
00:22:53,460 --> 00:22:55,940
se lo trasformi effettivamente in qualcosa che sostiene una visione particolare della religione,

531
00:22:56,360 --> 00:22:57,800
poi passa dal lato della clausola istitutiva.

532
00:22:58,080 --> 00:23:00,460
Quindi gli americani non hanno trovato un modo per insegnarlo davvero.

533
00:23:00,500 --> 00:23:06,120
Quindi probabilmente è meglio che tu,

534
00:23:06,120 --> 00:23:10,380
sai, impara, impara al di fuori di una lezione della scuola pubblica.

535
00:23:10,620 --> 00:23:12,880
Pensi che sia possibile insegnare la religione?

536
00:23:13,300 --> 00:23:14,660
da come,

537
00:23:15,080 --> 00:23:16,880
uh, le religioni del mondo, ovviamente,

538
00:23:17,100 --> 00:23:19,980
senza mancare di rispetto alle religioni?

539
00:23:20,600 --> 00:23:22,340
Penso che la risposta sia: dipende da quale prospettiva.

540
00:23:22,860 --> 00:23:23,240
Uhm, beh, come dicono i praticanti, sei un seguace ortodosso di un particolare

541
00:23:23,580 --> 00:23:23,960
religione.

542
00:23:24,360 --> 00:23:28,260
È possibile

543
00:23:29,140 --> 00:23:30,260
per non farti incazzare nell'insegnamento come tutti i maggiori

544
00:23:30,760 --> 00:23:34,020
religioni del mondo?

545
00:23:34,020 --> 00:23:36,760
Per alcune persone,

546
00:23:36,800 --> 00:23:39,080
la conclusione è che devi insegnarlo come vero.

547
00:23:39,160 --> 00:23:40,060
Ah, ehm, e con quello in quelle condizioni,

548
00:23:40,060 --> 00:23:41,340
allora la risposta è no,

549
00:23:41,900 --> 00:23:44,460
non puoi insegnarlo

550
00:23:45,160 --> 00:23:46,760
senza, senza offendere almeno qualcuno.

551
00:23:47,960 --> 00:23:49,040
Non puoi dire che queste persone credono che sia vero?

552
00:23:49,120 --> 00:23:50,600
Puoi riformarlo?

553
00:23:50,640 --> 00:23:52,120
Quindi devi camminare sui gusci d'uovo,

554
00:23:52,360 --> 00:23:56,820
essenzialmente.

555
00:23:57,120 --> 00:23:57,780
Puoi provarci davvero tanto e farai comunque arrabbiare alcune persone,

556
00:23:57,780 --> 00:23:58,440
ma le persone serie diranno, oh no, in realtà hai cercato di essere onesto con le convinzioni qui.

557
00:23:58,620 --> 00:24:00,780
Ehm, e io, e cerco di essere rispettoso,

558
00:24:00,900 --> 00:24:02,800
ehm, per quanto posso,

559
00:24:03,340 --> 00:24:04,380
ehm,

560
00:24:04,880 --> 00:24:08,420
molto di questo,

561
00:24:08,980 --> 00:24:09,860
Mi trovo ancora molto più attratto sia dal buddismo che dallo stoicismo.

562
00:24:10,560 --> 00:24:11,880
BENE,

563
00:24:11,900 --> 00:24:13,040
dove vado?

564
00:24:13,200 --> 00:24:14,360
Bene, una cosa interessante

565
00:24:14,360 --> 00:24:16,660
tornare ai campus universitari è,

566
00:24:16,840 --> 00:24:17,360
ehm, il fuoco mantiene le classifiche sulla libertà di parola del college su rankings.thefire.org.

567
00:24:17,400 --> 00:24:21,400
Sono molto orgoglioso di loro.

568
00:24:21,400 --> 00:24:23,260
Lo consiglio vivamente perché dimenticate che anche solo la classifica,

569
00:24:23,580 --> 00:24:24,280
puoi imparare a

570
00:24:24,300 --> 00:24:26,300
molte cose sulle università da questa prospettiva completamente diversa da quella delle persone

571
00:24:26,300 --> 00:24:26,680
erano soliti quando andavano a scegliere l'università in cui volevano andare.

572
00:24:26,960 --> 00:24:30,560
Fornisce semplicemente un’altra prospettiva sull’intera faccenda.

573
00:24:31,000 --> 00:24:32,480
E fornisce citazioni di studenti lì e così via,

574
00:24:32,820 --> 00:24:34,440
come le loro esperienze.

575
00:24:34,880 --> 00:24:37,300
E, e dà diverso,

576
00:24:37,300 --> 00:24:38,160
forse potresti parlare delle varie misure qui prima di parlare di chi è tra i primi cinque e chi è tra gli ultimi cinque.

577
00:24:38,540 --> 00:24:39,940
Quali, quali, quali sono i diversi parametri che concorrono alla valutazione?

578
00:24:40,180 --> 00:24:42,520
Quindi la gente mi ha chiesto fin dal primo giorno di fare una classifica delle scuole,

579
00:24:42,520 --> 00:24:43,460
secondo la libertà di parola.

580
00:24:43,480 --> 00:24:44,140
E anche se avessimo avuto,

581
00:24:44,340 --> 00:24:49,360
avevamo il miglior database esistente di codici vocali del campus, uh,

582
00:24:49,720 --> 00:24:51,440
politiche adottate dalle università che violano il primo emendamento o le norme del primo emendamento.

583
00:24:51,440 --> 00:24:52,920
Abbiamo anche il miglior database di,

584
00:24:52,920 --> 00:24:53,480
di... chiamiamo database di disinvito.

585
00:24:54,000 --> 00:24:56,860
Uhm, ma in realtà è il...

586
00:24:57,020 --> 00:24:58,460
ehm, è meglio chiamarlo database deplatforming,

587
00:24:58,620 --> 00:25:02,440
è così che lo chiameremo.

588
00:25:02,500 --> 00:25:03,860
Ehm, e questi sono tutti casi in cui qualcuno è stato invitato come relatore al campus e poi è stato revocato l'invito.

589
00:25:03,940 --> 00:25:06,420
Disinvitare o abbandonare la piattaforma include anche il rimpinzarsi.

590
00:25:06,480 --> 00:25:07,540
Uhm, quindi si sono presentati

591
00:25:07,740 --> 00:25:07,940
e non potevano davvero parlare.

592
00:25:08,180 --> 00:25:10,040
Si Esattamente.

593
00:25:10,300 --> 00:25:11,560
Ehm, e, e, uh,

594
00:25:11,660 --> 00:25:12,620
e quindi, avendolo,

595
00:25:12,620 --> 00:25:15,160
ciò di cui avevamo veramente bisogno per avere delle scienze sociali serie che potessero discutere seriamente quale fosse la classifica,

596
00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:16,160
ehm, era poterne uno,

597
00:25:17,160 --> 00:25:19,260
avere un'idea migliore di quanti professori sono stati effettivamente puniti durante questo periodo.

598
00:25:19,380 --> 00:25:21,060
Uhm, e poi l'elemento mancante più grande era poter...

599
00:25:21,380 --> 00:25:22,100
ehm, chiedi direttamente agli studenti com'era l'ambiente in quel campus per la libertà di parola.

600
00:25:22,580 --> 00:25:23,000
Ti senti a tuo agio nel non essere d'accordo l'uno con l'altro?

601
00:25:24,280 --> 00:25:25,520
Ti senti a tuo agio nel non essere d'accordo con il tuo,

602
00:25:25,520 --> 00:25:26,640
eh, con i tuoi professori?

603
00:25:26,740 --> 00:25:26,860
Pensi che la violenza sia accettabile in risposta a un oratore?

604
00:25:26,860 --> 00:25:27,520
Pensi che gridare

605
00:25:28,040 --> 00:25:29,460
uh, pensi che urlare ad alta voce sia ok?

606
00:25:29,460 --> 00:25:30,340
Pensi che bloccare l'accesso delle persone a un relatore sia giusto?

607
00:25:30,380 --> 00:25:32,160
Uhm, e una volta che siamo riusciti a mettere insieme tutti questi elementi,

608
00:25:32,900 --> 00:25:34,280
prima abbiamo fatto un giro di prova,

609
00:25:34,380 --> 00:25:41,400
Penso che nel 2019,

610
00:25:41,420 --> 00:25:43,560
circa 50.

611
00:25:44,260 --> 00:25:45,740
E lo facciamo ormai da quattro anni,

612
00:25:46,000 --> 00:25:46,860
cercando sempre di rendere la metodologia sempre più precisa per riflettere meglio l'ambiente reale di particolari scuole.

613
00:25:47,220 --> 00:25:50,700
E quest'anno la scuola numero uno è stata la Michigan Technology University,

614
00:25:50,820 --> 00:25:53,400
che è stata una bella sorpresa.

615
00:25:54,200 --> 00:25:55,880
Uh, la scuola numero due era in realtà l'università di Auburn.

616
00:25:55,880 --> 00:26:00,100
Ehm, è stato bello vedere tra i primi 10,

617
00:26:00,700 --> 00:26:01,440
la scuola più prestigiosa e conosciuta

618
00:26:01,840 --> 00:26:03,360
in realtà è UVA, che è andata molto bene quest'anno.

619
00:26:03,360 --> 00:26:04,000
L'Università di Chicago non era contenta

620
00:26:04,000 --> 00:26:05,580
che non erano i numeri uno,

621
00:26:06,060 --> 00:26:09,640
ma l'università di Chicago ha 13 anni ed erano i numeri uno

622
00:26:09,660 --> 00:26:11,780
o tra i primi tre negli anni precedenti.

623
00:26:12,200 --> 00:26:13,440
Quindi puoi spiegare,

624
00:26:13,480 --> 00:26:14,820
è quasi sorprendente.

625
00:26:15,240 --> 00:26:16,940
È a causa di

626
00:26:17,640 --> 00:26:18,960
uh, come quello veramente forte

627
00:26:19,000 --> 00:26:20,040
dipartimenti di economia e cose del genere o cosa, perché?

628
00:26:21,220 --> 00:26:25,720
Avevano un caso che coinvolgeva uno studente.

629
00:26:26,300 --> 00:26:28,120
Non riconoscerebbero un capitolo di svolta negli Stati Uniti e

630
00:26:28,200 --> 00:26:29,520
hanno fatto una discussione molto classica, ehm,

631
00:26:30,060 --> 00:26:31,160
che noi, e classico nel cattivo modo in cui sentiamo

632
00:26:31,160 --> 00:26:33,460
campus in tutto il paese.

633
00:26:33,680 --> 00:26:36,760
Oh, abbiamo un campus repubblicano,

634
00:26:36,900 --> 00:26:42,620
quindi non abbiamo bisogno di questo ulteriore gruppo conservatore.

635
00:26:43,260 --> 00:26:43,560
E noi diciamo, no, mi dispiace.

636
00:26:44,000 --> 00:26:47,500
Come se ne avessimo visti dozzine e

637
00:26:47,640 --> 00:26:50,360
decine e non centinaia di tentativi per ottenere questo particolare,

638
00:26:50,900 --> 00:26:53,120
ehm, studente conservatore, un gruppo di studenti, lo riconosci o non lo riconosci?

639
00:26:53,440 --> 00:26:54,920
E così abbiamo detto loro:

640
00:26:54,920 --> 00:26:57,580
ascolta, è come se avessimo detto loro durante l'incendio che...

641
00:26:57,580 --> 00:27:02,020
uh, sai, lo consideriamo serio e

642
00:27:02,700 --> 00:27:02,960
non riconoscerebbero il gruppo.

643
00:27:03,780 --> 00:27:06,120
Quindi questo è un punto in basso nel nostro

644
00:27:06,780 --> 00:27:09,340
classifica ed è bastato buttarli giù,

645
00:27:09,920 --> 00:27:12,220
probabilmente sarebbero stati i numeri due

646
00:27:13,320 --> 00:27:17,320
le classifiche.

647
00:27:17,320 --> 00:27:17,760
Uh, ma adesso sono 13 su due 48.

648
00:27:17,760 --> 00:27:20,060
Sono ancora una delle migliori scuole

649
00:27:20,640 --> 00:27:24,360
nel paese.

650
00:27:24,360 --> 00:27:25,120
Non ho problemi a dirlo

651
00:27:25,180 --> 00:27:26,100
la scuola che non è andata tanto bene, uh, um,

652
00:27:27,040 --> 00:27:30,080
a un negativo 10,69 negativo 10,69 e abbiamo arrotondato allo zero era Harvard e

653
00:27:30,340 --> 00:27:33,800
Harvard non è stata molto contenta di questo risultato.

654
00:27:33,800 --> 00:27:34,940
L'unica scuola a ricevere la classifica abissale.

655
00:27:34,940 --> 00:27:35,360
Sì. E ci sono un paio di persone,

656
00:27:35,380 --> 00:27:38,200
oh, Harvard, oh, Harvard.

657
00:27:38,380 --> 00:27:40,680
E ci sono un paio di persone che sono state davvero,

658
00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:41,920
Penso che, commettendo un errore diventando molto Harvard,

659
00:27:41,920 --> 00:27:43,420
uhm, suona come se,

660
00:27:43,500 --> 00:27:43,740
Ho chiesto agli statistici di esaminarlo e loro,

661
00:27:43,960 --> 00:27:48,060
e loro, loro, pensano che la tua metodologia sia uno scherzo.

662
00:27:48,340 --> 00:27:52,580
E, ehm, e vorrei sottolineare,

663
00:27:52,780 --> 00:27:54,800
e questo caso non era così importante.

664
00:27:54,800 --> 00:27:56,360
E quello studioso non era quello studioso, come quello degli argomenti contro uno degli studiosi quello

665
00:27:56,700 --> 00:27:57,660
contavamo contro di loro perché,

666
00:27:58,080 --> 00:27:58,440
uh, la punizione era che non era molto famoso o

667
00:27:58,520 --> 00:28:01,040
studioso influente.

668
00:28:01,300 --> 00:28:01,420
E io sono un po' come se

669
00:28:03,360 --> 00:28:05,860
quindi il tuo argomento sembra essere snobismo.

670
00:28:07,040 --> 00:28:09,100
Come essenzialmente quello come te,

671
00:28:09,640 --> 00:28:11,420
per prima cosa non capisci la nostra metodologia.

672
00:28:11,420 --> 00:28:17,000
E poi stai dicendo che in realtà quello studioso non era abbastanza importante per farlo

673
00:28:17,200 --> 00:28:18,060
contare.

674
00:28:18,180 --> 00:28:20,840
E comunque, Harvard,

675
00:28:20,840 --> 00:28:21,600
a proposito, Harvard,

676
00:28:21,600 --> 00:28:25,780
ehm,

677
00:28:25,780 --> 00:28:29,180
se noi, il campus di Harvard,

678
00:28:29,220 --> 00:28:32,080
Sì.

679
00:28:32,260 --> 00:28:35,340
Se noi,

680
00:28:35,540 --> 00:28:36,600
anche se considerassimo vere tutte le tue argomentazioni,

681
00:28:37,320 --> 00:28:38,300
anche se decidessimo di sbarazzarci di quei due professori,

682
00:28:38,580 --> 00:28:44,620
ehm, saresti ancora in numeri negativi.

683
00:28:45,220 --> 00:28:49,880
Saresti comunque morto per ultimo.

684
00:28:50,600 --> 00:28:54,200
Saresti ancora alla ricerca di Georgetown e Penn.

685
00:28:54,480 --> 00:28:55,360
E nessuna di queste scuole è favorevole alla libertà di parola.

686
00:28:55,720 --> 00:28:56,920
Dovrei dire che,

687
00:28:57,300 --> 00:29:01,880
l'ultima cinque è l'Università della Pennsylvania,

688
00:29:02,920 --> 00:29:06,600
Nicosette Penn,

689
00:29:07,200 --> 00:29:08,920
uh, l'università della Carolina del Sud,

690
00:29:08,920 --> 00:29:11,040
Università di Georgetown e Università di Fordham.

691
00:29:11,330 --> 00:29:13,240
Tutto molto ben guadagnato.

692
00:29:13,240 --> 00:29:15,400
Ci sono così tanti casi gravi in tutte quelle scuole.

693
00:29:15,480 --> 00:29:16,900
Qual è il modo migliore per ritrovarti tra gli ultimi cinque?

694
00:29:17,260 --> 00:29:23,740
Se sei un'università,

695
00:29:23,860 --> 00:29:26,740
qual è, qual è il modo più veloce per arrivare a quel negativo,

696
00:29:27,340 --> 00:29:28,120
fino a quello zero, un sacco di platform, um, quello,

697
00:29:28,680 --> 00:29:30,000
uh, quando abbiamo guardato gli ultimi cinque,

698
00:29:30,180 --> 00:29:30,760
uh, l'81% dei tentativi di rimuovere gli altoparlanti dalla piattaforma ha avuto successo negli ultimi cinque.

699
00:29:31,480 --> 00:29:32,940
Uhm, c'erano un paio di scuole,

700
00:29:33,640 --> 00:29:34,740
Penso che Penn abbia incluso ogni singolo tentativo,

701
00:29:35,240 --> 00:29:41,040
ogni volta che uno studente,

702
00:29:41,640 --> 00:29:43,500
come obiettato, un gruppo di studenti si oppose alla venuta di quell'oratore,

703
00:29:43,720 --> 00:29:48,140
hanno cancellato questo, questo discorso.

704
00:29:48,220 --> 00:29:53,480
E penso, penso che Georgetown avesse un tasso di successo del cento per cento.

705
00:29:53,480 --> 00:29:58,420
Penso che Penn avesse una percentuale di successo del 100%.

706
00:29:58,920 --> 00:30:00,760
Penso che Harvard abbia difeso un paio di cose,

707
00:30:00,800 --> 00:30:02,400
ma soprattutto, anche lì le persone sono state deplatformate.

708
00:30:02,400 --> 00:30:03,400
Allora come respingere il deplatforming?

709
00:30:03,880 --> 00:30:07,200
Ebbene, chi, chi lo farebbe?

710
00:30:07,380 --> 00:30:08,220
Sono altri studenti?

711
00:30:08,480 --> 00:30:10,060
E' facoltà?

712
00:30:10,140 --> 00:30:13,640
È l'amministrazione?

713
00:30:14,300 --> 00:30:16,900
Qual è la dinamica di, di,

714
00:30:17,480 --> 00:30:20,200
uh, respingendo

715
00:30:20,200 --> 00:30:21,380
fondamentalmente, perché immagino

716
00:30:21,600 --> 00:30:22,340
in parte è cultura,

717
00:30:22,640 --> 00:30:24,280
ma immagino che ogni università abbia un gruppo di studenti che lo faranno

718
00:30:24,360 --> 00:30:31,820
protesta praticamente ogni oratore.

719
00:30:32,360 --> 00:30:36,160
Ed è una questione di come rispondi a quella protesta.

720
00:30:36,280 --> 00:30:38,380
Bene, ecco, ecco il piccolo sporco segreto riguardo al grande cambiamento del 2014.

721
00:30:38,560 --> 00:30:41,180
Uhm, e, e il fuoco, io e l'altezza,

722
00:30:41,440 --> 00:30:45,720
ehm, sono stato molto chiaro riguardo al grande cambiamento che noi

723
00:30:45,900 --> 00:30:47,440
Ho visto nel campus che per gran parte della mia carriera gli studenti erano fantastici,

724
00:30:47,440 --> 00:30:50,000
ehm, sulla libertà di parola.

725
00:30:50,700 --> 00:30:52,400
Erano il miglior collegio elettorale per la libertà di parola,

726
00:30:52,400 --> 00:30:53,760
in modo assolutamente inequivocabile fino al 2013, 2014 circa.

727
00:30:53,920 --> 00:30:57,800
Ed è stato solo nel 2014 che abbiamo avuto proprio questo,

728
00:30:57,800 --> 00:31:00,280
sai, è un po' triste per la nostra esperienza

729
00:31:00,620 --> 00:31:01,320
dove improvvisamente gli studenti erano quelli che sostenevano il deplatforming e nuovi tipi di codici vocali

730
00:31:01,420 --> 00:31:02,320
in un modo simile a quello che facevano, diciamo, a metà degli anni ottanta, per esempio.

731
00:31:02,340 --> 00:31:03,220
Ma ecco il piccolo sporco segreto.

732
00:31:03,240 --> 00:31:04,520
Non sono loro, sono solo gli studenti

733
00:31:04,530 --> 00:31:06,740
sono studenti e amministratori,

734
00:31:07,360 --> 00:31:09,220
a volte però solo una manciata di essi,

735
00:31:09,480 --> 00:31:12,700
lavorare insieme per realizzare,

736
00:31:12,700 --> 00:31:15,420
uh, per creare alcuni di questi problemi.

737
00:31:15,920 --> 00:31:18,060
E questo fu esattamente quello che accadde a Stanford.

738
00:31:18,200 --> 00:31:19,420
Quando Kyle Duncan,

739
00:31:19,740 --> 00:31:21,200
uh, un giudice di quinta circoscrizione ha provato a parlare alla mia alma mater

740
00:31:21,700 --> 00:31:23,920
e un quinto del

741
00:31:24,280 --> 00:31:25,900
la classe si presentò per sgridarlo.

742
00:31:25,960 --> 00:31:27,560
Ehm, è stata una vera dimostrazione del...

743
00:31:27,560 --> 00:31:30,440
di cosa era, cosa stava succedendo in quei 10 minuti dopo l'urlo di un quinto giudice di circoscrizione.

744
00:31:30,440 --> 00:31:35,780
E continuo a sottolinearlo perché sono un avvocato costituzionale,

745
00:31:36,440 --> 00:31:38,560
I giudici del quinto circuito sono grandi affari.

746
00:31:38,700 --> 00:31:41,640
Sono un livello sotto la Corte Suprema.

747
00:31:41,780 --> 00:31:43,860
Uhm, sai, circa un quinto della scuola si presenta per zittirli

748
00:31:43,860 --> 00:31:45,220
dopo 10 minuti di

749
00:31:45,380 --> 00:31:48,800
urlandoli giù e amministratore,

750
00:31:48,800 --> 00:31:50,660
un amministratore del DEI si alza preparato

751
00:31:51,100 --> 00:31:52,660
discorso che lei, che ha scritto.

752
00:31:52,660 --> 00:31:53,160
È un discorso lungo sette minuti in cui parla di...

753
00:31:53,320 --> 00:31:55,560
ehm, libertà di parola.

754
00:31:56,040 --> 00:31:57,160
Forse il succo non vale la pena spremerlo.

755
00:31:57,160 --> 00:31:57,720
Ed eravamo in questa scuola di legge dove le persone potevano imparare a sfidare queste norme.

756
00:31:57,900 --> 00:31:59,480
Quindi è chiaro che c'era coordinamento,

757
00:32:00,080 --> 00:32:03,140
sai, tra alcuni di questi

758
00:32:03,800 --> 00:32:11,660
amministratori e parlando con gli studenti lì,

759
00:32:11,660 --> 00:32:15,320
erano alle riunioni,

760
00:32:15,460 --> 00:32:17,580
riunioni approfondite per lungo tempo.

761
00:32:18,400 --> 00:32:19,900
Si presentano, gridano.

762
00:32:20,000 --> 00:32:21,380
Poi impiegano altri sette minuti per,

763
00:32:21,600 --> 00:32:23,500
a, per tenere una conferenza gratuita all'oratore

764
00:32:23,700 --> 00:32:26,780
la parola, il non essere, non il succo della libertà di parola,

765
00:32:27,020 --> 00:32:28,880
non valere la pena.

766
00:32:28,880 --> 00:32:30,620
Uhm, e poi per il resto...

767
00:32:30,620 --> 00:32:32,340
è solo un continuo disturbo.

768
00:32:32,430 --> 00:32:34,160
Uhm, dopo che lei, dopo che se ne sarà andata,

769
00:32:34,420 --> 00:32:35,580
questo è chiaramente, e questo, e qualcosa di molto simile,

770
00:32:35,580 --> 00:32:39,780
sai, è successo diverse volte a Yale dove

771
00:32:39,780 --> 00:32:41,180
era molto chiaro che gli amministratori stavano aiutando,

772
00:32:41,580 --> 00:32:45,400
con molte di queste interruzioni.

773
00:32:45,400 --> 00:32:46,220
Quindi penso che ogni volta che si sente un grido in un'università,

774
00:32:46,360 --> 00:32:47,300
l'indagine dovrebbe essere

775
00:32:47,580 --> 00:32:51,200
innanzitutto,

776
00:32:51,200 --> 00:32:53,220
hanno fatto gli amministratori

777
00:32:53,220 --> 00:32:55,620
contribuire a creare questo problema?

778
00:32:56,080 --> 00:32:59,920
Hanno fatto qualcosa?

779
00:32:59,920 --> 00:33:00,020
per fermarlo?

780
00:33:00,280 --> 00:33:01,200
Perché penso che gran parte di ciò che sta realmente accadendo qui sia l'iperburocratizzazione

781
00:33:01,900 --> 00:33:03,140
di università con molte più persone ideologiche che pensano al loro lavoro primario come fondamentalmente

782
00:33:04,060 --> 00:33:04,600
come un discorso di polizia, più o meno,

783
00:33:05,020 --> 00:33:06,260
stanno incoraggiando gli studenti,

784
00:33:06,620 --> 00:33:06,720
scusa, incoraggiano gli studenti che hanno opinioni che gli piacciono,

785
00:33:07,360 --> 00:33:08,120
ehm, per gridare.

786
00:33:08,840 --> 00:33:11,280
Uhm, ed è per questo che loro

787
00:33:11,500 --> 00:33:14,260
ho davvero bisogno di indagare su questo.

788
00:33:14,460 --> 00:33:17,120
Ed è proprio a Stanford l'amministratore che, a pronunciare le osservazioni preparate,

789
00:33:17,300 --> 00:33:18,720
ehm, riguardo al succo, non vale la pena spremerlo.

790
00:33:18,860 --> 00:33:20,780
Non è stata invitata di nuovo a Stanford,

791
00:33:20,940 --> 00:33:23,260
ma lei è uno dei pochi esempi a cui riesco a pensare quando queste cose accadono spesso

792
00:33:23,280 --> 00:33:23,980
dove un amministratore ha chiaramente facilitato qualcosa di simile

793
00:33:23,980 --> 00:33:26,280
era un grido o

794
00:33:26,800 --> 00:33:27,300
deplatforming o ha portato al licenziamento di un professore o ha portato alla creazione di uno studente

795
00:33:27,740 --> 00:33:29,900
essere espulso dove si trova l'amministratore

796
00:33:30,180 --> 00:33:32,000
se la sono cavata senza problemi o probabilmente in alcuni

797
00:33:32,640 --> 00:33:33,620
casi hanno anche ottenuto una promozione.

798
00:33:33,840 --> 00:33:36,260
E così un piccolo numero di amministratori,

799
00:33:36,400 --> 00:33:39,640
forse anche un singolo amministratore potrebbe

800
00:33:39,640 --> 00:33:40,680
partecipare all'incoraggiamento e all'organizzazione e quindi potenziare il tutto

801
00:33:40,900 --> 00:33:42,720
processi.

802
00:33:42,860 --> 00:33:46,480
Ed è qualcosa che ho visto durante tutta la mia carriera.

803
00:33:47,060 --> 00:33:48,520
E l'unica cosa è piuttosto difficile da cogliere sul fatto,

804
00:33:48,720 --> 00:33:54,400
per così dire.

805
00:33:54,580 --> 00:33:55,800
E questo è uno dei motivi per cui è utile che le persone lo sappiano, sai,

806
00:33:55,940 --> 00:33:58,240
ehm, perché

807
00:33:58,860 --> 00:33:59,820
è stato questo caso straordinario.

808
00:33:59,900 --> 00:34:03,260
Questo era all'Università di Washington.

809
00:34:03,340 --> 00:34:04,540
Ehm, e in realtà l'abbiamo presentato in un documentario realizzato nel 2015,

810
00:34:05,120 --> 00:34:07,440
20, avvenuto nel 2015, 2016

811
00:34:07,520 --> 00:34:10,080
chiamato, possiamo fare uno scherzo?

812
00:34:10,180 --> 00:34:12,400
Ehm,

813
00:34:12,560 --> 00:34:15,460
ed è stato allora che abbiamo iniziato a notare qualcosa

814
00:34:15,540 --> 00:34:17,980
stava cambiando nel campus.

815
00:34:18,580 --> 00:34:19,960
Abbiamo anche sentito che i comici dicevano che non potevano usarlo

816
00:34:19,980 --> 00:34:21,280
il loro buon umore più.

817
00:34:21,640 --> 00:34:22,360
Questo avvenne proprio nel periodo in cui Jerry Seinfeld e Chris Rock

818
00:34:22,520 --> 00:34:23,580
hanno detto che non potevano,

819
00:34:23,780 --> 00:34:25,260
uh, non volevano suonare nei campus perché...

820
00:34:25,600 --> 00:34:26,340
non potevano, loro, loro, non potevano essere divertenti.

821
00:34:27,080 --> 00:34:29,380
Uh, ma abbiamo presentato il caso di un comico che voleva

822
00:34:30,140 --> 00:34:32,600
fare un musical chiamato la passione del musical,

823
00:34:33,200 --> 00:34:35,960
scherzando sulla passione di Cristo

824
00:34:35,960 --> 00:34:37,540
con l’obiettivo dichiarato di offendere tutti,

825
00:34:37,740 --> 00:34:39,760
ogni gruppo allo stesso modo.

826
00:34:40,340 --> 00:34:44,620
È stata davvero una missione a South Park.

827
00:34:44,740 --> 00:34:47,520
Ehm,

828
00:34:47,580 --> 00:34:50,400
ed è un caso insolito perché abbiamo effettivamente la documentazione

829
00:34:50,400 --> 00:34:53,700
di amministratori che acquistano biglietti per studenti arrabbiati e organizzano un evento in cui loro,

830
00:34:54,060 --> 00:34:55,360
dove li addestrano,

831
00:34:55,580 --> 00:34:57,440
saltarci in mezzo e gridare:

832
00:34:58,100 --> 00:35:01,600
Sono offeso.

833
00:35:02,400 --> 00:35:04,820
Come loro, loro, hanno comprato loro i biglietti.

834
00:35:04,820 --> 00:35:06,800
Li hanno mandati a questo,

835
00:35:06,820 --> 00:35:11,860
questa cosa con l'obiettivo

836
00:35:11,880 --> 00:35:15,880
di urlarlo.

837
00:35:16,300 --> 00:35:17,320
Ora, non sorprende, quando mandi un gruppo di studenti arrabbiati a chiudere

838
00:35:18,040 --> 00:35:20,240
giù una commedia, non finirà proprio

839
00:35:20,760 --> 00:35:22,200
Sono offeso.

840
00:35:23,140 --> 00:35:24,740
Ehm, e si è surriscaldato.

841
00:35:24,900 --> 00:35:26,120
Sono state lanciate minacce di morte,

842
00:35:26,680 --> 00:35:27,760
uh, la... e poi la polizia del Pullman Washington

843
00:35:28,120 --> 00:35:30,100
ha detto a Chris, uh, Chris Lee, il ragazzo che ha fatto la commedia, che lui,

844
00:35:30,420 --> 00:35:31,400
in realtà non proteggerebbero

845
00:35:31,860 --> 00:35:34,660
loro.

846
00:35:35,220 --> 00:35:36,100
Ora, non capita tutti i giorni di avere quel tipo di prove concrete che,

847
00:35:36,120 --> 00:35:37,680
quello, quello, uh, di incontrare effettivamente gli amministratori,

848
00:35:38,320 --> 00:35:40,480
uh, sarebbe stato così, uh, così sfacciato che avessero registrato

849
00:35:40,540 --> 00:35:45,980
il fatto che abbiano comprato loro i biglietti e li abbiano spediti.

850
00:35:46,000 --> 00:35:48,120
Ma penso molto a queste cose

851
00:35:48,280 --> 00:35:49,980
è che sta succedendo.

852
00:35:50,640 --> 00:35:52,320
E penso che sia il,

853
00:35:53,140 --> 00:35:55,820
quindi, è una buona scusa per ridurne uno

854
00:35:56,540 --> 00:35:57,420
dei grandi problemi dell’istruzione superiore oggi,

855
00:35:57,420 --> 00:35:59,020
che è iper-burocratizzazione.

856
00:35:59,140 --> 00:36:01,560
Nella tua esperienza, esiste una distinzione tra amministratori e docenti in termini di,

857
00:36:01,580 --> 00:36:03,200
uh, autori di questo, di questo genere di cose?

858
00:36:03,380 --> 00:36:06,460
Quindi se, se ci liberassimo di tutto,

859
00:36:06,900 --> 00:36:07,460
come se Harvey avesse parlato di sbarazzarsi di un'ampia percentuale dell'amministrazione,

860
00:36:07,760 --> 00:36:09,400
questo aiuta a risolvere il problema o anche la facoltà è piccola

861
00:36:09,900 --> 00:36:14,220
ne fa parte anche la percentuale dei docenti

862
00:36:15,080 --> 00:36:16,840
dell'incoraggiamento nell'organizzazione di questo tipo di annullamento.

863
00:36:16,840 --> 00:36:18,580
Sì.

864
00:36:18,580 --> 00:36:20,620
E questo è qualcosa che è stato profondamente deludente.

865
00:36:20,620 --> 00:36:21,660
Ehm, è questo se si considera l'enorme aumento dei tentativi di licenziare i professori che abbiamo visto

866
00:36:22,320 --> 00:36:23,440
gli ultimi 10 anni

867
00:36:23,780 --> 00:36:25,100
e in realtà negli ultimi 22 anni,

868
00:36:25,660 --> 00:36:28,940
fin da quando arrivano i nostri record.

869
00:36:28,940 --> 00:36:31,040
Innanzitutto sono guidati in stragrande maggioranza da amministratori,

870
00:36:31,060 --> 00:36:33,940
tentativi di far punire i professori.

871
00:36:33,960 --> 00:36:35,040
Ehm, e

872
00:36:35,980 --> 00:36:37,580
direi che è stata la maggior parte della mia carriera fino al 2013,

873
00:36:37,580 --> 00:36:39,160
stava lottando contro gli eccessi amministrativi.

874
00:36:39,420 --> 00:36:41,580
Ehm, poi nel 2014 inizi ad avere il problema degli studenti che ci provano

875
00:36:41,960 --> 00:36:44,560
per far cancellare le persone.

876
00:36:44,560 --> 00:36:46,660
Ehm, e questo ha davvero accelerato nel 2017 e il numero.

877
00:36:46,660 --> 00:36:49,820
Quindi uno, in un modo, quello,

878
00:36:49,820 --> 00:36:51,120
una cosa che rende più facile la documentazione è,

879
00:36:51,420 --> 00:36:55,020
sono le petizioni per far licenziare o punire i professori.

880
00:36:55,740 --> 00:36:57,180
Ehm, e quanto sproporzionatamente questi provengano effettivamente da studenti.

881
00:36:57,740 --> 00:36:58,540
Ma un altro grande aumento è stato che i colleghi professori hanno chiesto che i loro colleghi professori ottenessero

882
00:36:59,160 --> 00:37:00,060
punito.

883
00:37:01,220 --> 00:37:02,860
E questo per me,

884
00:37:03,060 --> 00:37:03,900
è un po' vergognoso.

885
00:37:03,900 --> 00:37:04,940
Tu, tu, non dovresti essere fiero di firmare il

886
00:37:05,200 --> 00:37:08,520
petizione per ottenere il tuo collega professore.

887
00:37:08,560 --> 00:37:13,940
E cosa c'è di più?

888
00:37:13,940 --> 00:37:15,600
ancora più vergognoso è questo

889
00:37:16,440 --> 00:37:17,500
otteniamo, questo, questo è, questo è quasi diventato un cliché nel fuoco.

890
00:37:17,840 --> 00:37:20,360
Quando qualcuno si trova di fronte a uno di

891
00:37:20,780 --> 00:37:22,580
queste campagne di cancellazione come professore,

892
00:37:22,760 --> 00:37:24,340
Ricevevo lettere da alcuni dei miei amici che dicevano:

893
00:37:24,420 --> 00:37:25,780
Mi dispiace tanto,

894
00:37:26,640 --> 00:37:31,900
ti è successo questo

895
00:37:31,900 --> 00:37:33,880
E queste erano le stesse persone che firmarono pubblicamente

896
00:37:33,900 --> 00:37:35,660
la petizione per farli licenziare.

897
00:37:36,160 --> 00:37:39,940
Sì.

898
00:37:40,300 --> 00:37:42,880
Sì.

899
00:37:43,540 --> 00:37:44,660
Sì.

900
00:37:44,660 --> 00:37:48,480
L’integrità è una cosa importante in questo mondo.

901
00:37:48,480 --> 00:37:51,640
E penso che in parte,

902
00:37:52,380 --> 00:37:54,360
Sono così sorpreso che le persone non si battano di più per questo perché ce n'è così tanta fame.

903
00:37:54,380 --> 00:37:55,440
E se come docente o amministratore hai il coraggio di resistere davvero,

904
00:37:56,080 --> 00:37:58,100
in piedi,

905
00:37:58,760 --> 00:38:01,130
eh,

906
00:38:01,480 --> 00:38:05,860
con eloquenza,

907
00:38:05,860 --> 00:38:06,220
con rigore,

908
00:38:06,340 --> 00:38:08,320
con integrità, mi sembra

909
00:38:08,400 --> 00:38:11,400
è impossibile

910
00:38:11,640 --> 00:38:12,140
perché chiunque possa fare qualsiasi cosa

911
00:38:12,160 --> 00:38:14,940
perché c'è una tale fame.

912
00:38:15,700 --> 00:38:17,020
È così rinfrescante.

913
00:38:17,680 --> 00:38:19,220
Sì.

914
00:38:19,320 --> 00:38:20,520
Penso che tutti siano d'accordo

915
00:38:20,820 --> 00:38:24,340
che la libertà di parola è una buona cosa.

916
00:38:24,920 --> 00:38:26,620
Oh, non lo so, non lo so.

917
00:38:27,340 --> 00:38:28,460
Allora ok.

918
00:38:28,660 --> 00:38:29,080
Scusa scusa.

919
00:38:29,380 --> 00:38:31,140
Non sono d'accordo.

920
00:38:31,140 --> 00:38:32,340
La maggior parte delle persone

921
00:38:32,560 --> 00:38:34,840
anche nelle università che c'è fame,

922
00:38:34,840 --> 00:38:35,860
ma è quasi come se

923
00:38:36,420 --> 00:38:39,180
questo tipo di nervosismo intorno perché c'è un piccolo numero di voci forti.

924
00:38:39,520 --> 00:38:40,380
Stanno urlando.

925
00:38:40,720 --> 00:38:42,540
Quindi, voglio dire, ancora una volta, è qui che entra in gioco la grande leadership.

926
00:38:42,540 --> 00:38:44,320
E quindi, probabilmente i presidenti delle università dovrebbero essere...

927
00:38:45,120 --> 00:38:48,620
uh, facendo chiare dichiarazioni come,

928
00:38:48,720 --> 00:38:51,060
non è così, questo è un luogo in cui diamo valore alla libertà di espressione.

929
00:38:51,160 --> 00:38:52,280
Quando, e tutto questo durante tutta la mia carriera, un presidente,

930
00:38:52,440 --> 00:38:55,380
un rettore universitario che punta i piedi presto e dice, no,

931
00:38:55,820 --> 00:38:56,700
Sai,

932
00:38:56,840 --> 00:38:58,800
non ci divertiremo a licenziare questo professore.

933
00:38:58,960 --> 00:38:59,240
Non espelleremo lo studente.

934
00:39:00,360 --> 00:39:04,960
Termina il problema spesso molto velocemente.

935
00:39:04,980 --> 00:39:10,980
Anche se a volte, ed è qui che si nota davvero il coinvolgimento amministrativo,

936
00:39:11,420 --> 00:39:12,860
ehm, gli studenti faranno cose come assumere il controllo dell'ufficio del presidente.

937
00:39:13,080 --> 00:39:15,140
E poi l’acquisizione sarà gestita dall’università.

938
00:39:15,200 --> 00:39:15,940
Le persone a volte lo indicheranno come se fosse un po' come,

939
00:39:15,980 --> 00:39:17,600
oh, è chiaramente come se, ehm, il mio amico Sam Abrams,

940
00:39:17,960 --> 00:39:18,880
quando hanno cercato di ottenere,

941
00:39:18,880 --> 00:39:20,360
uh, ho provato a farlo sparare,

942
00:39:20,360 --> 00:39:22,000
al Sarah Lawrence College.

943
00:39:22,340 --> 00:39:26,600
Uhm, e quella è stata una di quelle volte in cui...

944
00:39:26,600 --> 00:39:29,400
che veniva usato in un certo senso,

945
00:39:30,000 --> 00:39:30,740
oh, era ostile all'università perché loro,

946
00:39:31,160 --> 00:39:32,460
gli studenti hanno assunto l'ufficio del presidente.

947
00:39:32,760 --> 00:39:34,140
E io dico, no, hanno lasciato che prendessero il controllo del

948
00:39:34,140 --> 00:39:38,440
ufficio del presidente.

949
00:39:38,590 --> 00:39:42,380
E non so se quello fosse uno dei casi in cui,

950
00:39:42,420 --> 00:39:43,440
l'acquisizione è stata soddisfatta,

951
00:39:43,520 --> 00:39:43,720
ma se mai ci fosse una specie di segno, in un certo senso è così

952
00:39:43,860 --> 00:39:46,960
tipo, sì, non lo è, in realtà è davvero piuttosto amichevole.

953
00:39:47,080 --> 00:39:49,600
Beh, in un certo senso, come protestare e avere opinioni davvero forti, anche se

954
00:39:49,640 --> 00:39:52,760
opinioni ridicole, folli e selvagge è una buona cosa.

955
00:39:52,760 --> 00:39:54,640
È solo che non dovrebbe portare alla realtà

956
00:39:55,080 --> 00:39:56,200
licenziamento o deplatforming di persone.

957
00:39:56,300 --> 00:39:58,320
Come se fosse bello protestare.

958
00:39:58,320 --> 00:39:59,460
Non è proprio bello,

959
00:39:59,460 --> 00:40:01,800
uh, che l'università lo sostenga e agisca in base ad esso.

960
00:40:01,800 --> 00:40:03,440
E questo è uno di,

961
00:40:03,520 --> 00:40:04,800
uno di quelli come,

962
00:40:05,760 --> 00:40:09,440
ehm, tensioni nel primo emendamento

963
00:40:10,060 --> 00:40:13,160
in realtà, penso che abbia un rilascio piuttosto semplice.

964
00:40:13,180 --> 00:40:15,160
Essenzialmente hai un'app,

965
00:40:15,320 --> 00:40:19,380
ne hai assolutamente il diritto,

966
00:40:19,460 --> 00:40:24,280
uh, dedica la tua vita a

967
00:40:25,220 --> 00:40:26,960
porre fine alla libertà di parola e al ridicolo come concetto.

968
00:40:26,960 --> 00:40:29,580
E, e ci sono persone che,

969
00:40:30,060 --> 00:40:30,520
chi lo è davvero, può risultare molto spregevole anche riguardo alla filosofia della libertà di parola.

970
00:40:30,560 --> 00:40:33,500
Ehm, e difenderemo il tuo diritto di farlo.

971
00:40:33,720 --> 00:40:38,980
Anche noi non saremo d'accordo con te.

972
00:40:39,000 --> 00:40:39,880
E se provi a far licenziare un professore,

973
00:40:41,060 --> 00:40:42,840
noi saremo dall'altra parte.

974
00:40:43,080 --> 00:40:45,080
Ora, penso che tu avessi Randy Kennedy,

975
00:40:46,460 --> 00:40:49,880
chi sono davvero, lo amo.

976
00:40:49,880 --> 00:40:52,220
Penso che sia un bravo ragazzo,

977
00:40:52,260 --> 00:40:53,700
ma ci ha criticato per il nostro database deplatforming dicendo:

978
00:40:54,120 --> 00:40:57,540
questo significa che gli studenti non possono protestare contro gli oratori.

979
00:40:57,540 --> 00:40:59,720
Sono come,

980
00:41:00,000 --> 00:41:03,540
okay, è sciocco.

981
00:41:03,560 --> 00:41:04,580
Uhm, licenziamo perché un'organizzazione ha sempre difeso il diritto di protestare.

982
00:41:04,960 --> 00:41:07,720
Difendiamo costantemente i diritti di coloro che manifestano i diritti,

983
00:41:08,080 --> 00:41:09,460
non credendo che i manifestanti abbiano il diritto di dire questo vorrei,

984
00:41:09,460 --> 00:41:11,400
in fondo sarebbe così.

985
00:41:11,620 --> 00:41:14,060
Punire gli oratori.

986
00:41:14,540 --> 00:41:17,620
Non chiediamo di punire,

987
00:41:18,280 --> 00:41:24,300
ehm, i manifestanti, ma quello che stiamo dicendo

988
00:41:24,300 --> 00:41:24,520
è che non puoi lasciare che i manifestanti vincano se chiedono che qualcuno venga licenziato

989
00:41:24,720 --> 00:41:25,280
per la loro libertà di parola.

990
00:41:25,660 --> 00:41:27,280
Quindi il confine c’è tra manifestanti che protestano e

991
00:41:27,700 --> 00:41:30,420
l'università agisce sulla base della protesta.

992
00:41:30,600 --> 00:41:32,160
Si Esattamente.

993
00:41:32,780 --> 00:41:34,400
E, naturalmente, grida che si tratta solo di censura della folla.

994
00:41:35,000 --> 00:41:36,680
Uhm, ed è qualcosa in cui l'università,

995
00:41:36,680 --> 00:41:40,180
nel modo in cui in realtà,

996
00:41:40,580 --> 00:41:41,780
affrontare quella tensione nella legge del primo emendamento è essenzialmente un po’ come l’unico dovere positivo che ha il governo.

997
00:41:41,780 --> 00:41:43,360
Il primo, il dovere negativo, la cosa che non è consentito fare è censurarti.

998
00:41:43,860 --> 00:41:47,260
Uhm, ma il dovere positivo è che se,

999
00:41:47,440 --> 00:41:48,420
che se voglio dire cose orribili,

1000
00:41:48,420 --> 00:41:49,620
o del resto,

1001
00:41:50,340 --> 00:41:52,260
grandi cose che non sono popolari in un parco pubblico,

1002
00:41:52,280 --> 00:41:54,000
ehm, non puoi lasciare che la folla mi metta a tacere.

1003
00:41:56,020 --> 00:41:56,200
Uhm, non puoi permettere quello che viene chiamato il veto del disturbatore.

1004
00:41:56,200 --> 00:41:56,540
È così interessante.

1005
00:41:57,760 --> 00:41:58,120
Perché sento che questo entra in gioco anche sui social media.

1006
00:41:58,160 --> 00:42:01,800
Causa,

1007
00:42:02,500 --> 00:42:04,280
uh, sai, c'è tutta questa discussione sulla censura e sulla libertà di parola,

1008
00:42:06,140 --> 00:42:11,840
ma per me la questione della carota

1009
00:42:11,980 --> 00:42:15,400
è quasi di più

1010
00:42:15,740 --> 00:42:16,240
interessante.

1011
00:42:17,440 --> 00:42:17,620
Una volta stabilita la libertà di parola, come si può incentivare l'alta qualità?

1012
00:42:18,150 --> 00:42:19,980
dibattito e disaccordo?

1013
00:42:21,060 --> 00:42:21,720
Ci sto pensando molto.

1014
00:42:22,440 --> 00:42:23,780
E questa è una delle cose di cui parliamo per cancellare la mente americana: argomentare verso la verità

1015
00:42:24,440 --> 00:42:25,640
e che la cultura dell’annullamento sia crudele.

1016
00:42:26,300 --> 00:42:27,480
È spietato.

1017
00:42:27,920 --> 00:42:29,260
È anti-intellettuale

1018
00:42:29,540 --> 00:42:30,580
ma non ti porterà mai da nessuna parte nella tua verità.

1019
00:42:30,720 --> 00:42:30,980
E perderai così tanto tempo distruggendo i tuoi avversari,

1020
00:42:31,180 --> 00:42:32,960
ehm, in qualcosa che in realtà non potrà mai portarti alla verità attraverso il processo, ovviamente, di,

1021
00:42:33,540 --> 00:42:36,320
in realtà non arrivi mai direttamente alla verità.

1022
00:42:36,520 --> 00:42:37,360
Non fai altro che eliminare la falsità.

1023
00:42:37,540 --> 00:42:38,160
Sì.

1024
00:42:38,260 --> 00:42:38,600
Ma tutti quelli che hanno un megafono su internet in anonimato,

1025
00:42:38,660 --> 00:42:39,220
sembra che

1026
00:42:39,660 --> 00:42:41,180
è meglio della censura,

1027
00:42:41,380 --> 00:42:43,260
ma sembra che ci siano degli incentivi in più.

1028
00:42:43,260 --> 00:42:43,620
Oltre a ciò,

1029
00:42:44,160 --> 00:42:49,580
puoi costruire per, um,

1030
00:42:49,640 --> 00:42:50,860
sì, per incentivare un discorso migliore.

1031
00:42:51,900 --> 00:42:54,780
Sì.

1032
00:42:54,980 --> 00:42:57,960
È come incentivare qualcuno che fa uno sforzo enorme per rendere anche il più ridicolo

1033
00:42:58,620 --> 00:43:00,820
argomenti, ma fondamentalmente argomenti che non includono nessuna delle cose che metti in evidenza in termini di tutti i trucchi retorici per chiudere le conversazioni,

1034
00:43:01,100 --> 00:43:05,220
fai solo ottimi argomenti per qualunque cosa.

1035
00:43:05,740 --> 00:43:09,040
Non importa se è un comunismo per il fascismo,

1036
00:43:09,360 --> 00:43:11,940
qualunque cosa tu voglia dire,

1037
00:43:12,380 --> 00:43:13,120
ma fallo con la scala, con il contesto storico,

1038
00:43:14,200 --> 00:43:16,780
con, uh, uh, con Steel Man dall'altra parte,

1039
00:43:16,940 --> 00:43:18,120
tutti questi tipi di elementi.

1040
00:43:18,520 --> 00:43:21,300
Cerchiamo di sottolineare tre punti principali del libro.

1041
00:43:21,760 --> 00:43:24,740
Uno, ehm, è semplicemente cancellare la cultura

1042
00:43:25,720 --> 00:43:28,460
vero.

1043
00:43:29,000 --> 00:43:31,720
È un'epoca storica

1044
00:43:32,220 --> 00:43:34,180
ehm, ed è su scala storica.

1045
00:43:34,220 --> 00:43:37,420
Il secondo è

1046
00:43:37,520 --> 00:43:38,260
dovresti pensare alla cultura dell'annullamento come parte di...

1047
00:43:38,320 --> 00:43:39,540
retorica, come una retorica più ampia e pigra,

1048
00:43:39,540 --> 00:43:41,280
uh, approccio a cosa, cosa, cosa chiamiamo argomenti vincenti senza argomenti vincenti.

1049
00:43:42,080 --> 00:43:45,080
E lo intendiamo in due sensi senza avere argomenti vincenti o senza avere effettivamente un argomento.

1050
00:43:45,080 --> 00:43:46,700
E parliamo di tutti i diversi,

1051
00:43:46,740 --> 00:43:49,360
quelle che chiamiamo fortezze retoriche che hanno sia la sinistra che la destra e che ti impediscono di,

1052
00:43:49,780 --> 00:43:51,380
che ti permettono semplicemente di licenziare la persona,

1053
00:43:51,420 --> 00:43:53,280
ehm, o schivare l'argomento senza mai arrivare alla sostanza dell'argomento.

1054
00:43:53,280 --> 00:43:53,900
La terza parte è semplicemente

1055
00:43:53,980 --> 00:43:56,780
sai, come lo risolviamo?

1056
00:43:56,780 --> 00:43:57,980
Ma la roba della fortezza retorica è in realtà qualcosa che ho fatto,

1057
00:43:57,980 --> 00:44:00,000
Ne sono molto appassionato perché interferisce con la nostra capacità di arrivare alla verità

1058
00:44:00,000 --> 00:44:03,200
perde tempo e, francamente,

1059
00:44:03,280 --> 00:44:06,860
è anche un po' perché la cultura dell'annullamento ne fa parte

1060
00:44:07,540 --> 00:44:09,900
tattica retorica, può anche rovinare vite umane.

1061
00:44:10,000 --> 00:44:11,720
Sarebbe davvero divertente parlare di questo particolare aspetto del libro.

1062
00:44:12,460 --> 00:44:14,200
E ti consiglio vivamente, se stai ascoltando questo,

1063
00:44:14,240 --> 00:44:15,280
vai a preordinare il libro adesso.

1064
00:44:15,440 --> 00:44:17,400
ehm,

1065
00:44:17,400 --> 00:44:19,920
Quando ci si esce?

1066
00:44:20,120 --> 00:44:20,680
17 ottobre.

1067
00:44:20,680 --> 00:44:21,560
Va bene.

1068
00:44:21,560 --> 00:44:23,860
L'annullamento della mente americana.

1069
00:44:23,860 --> 00:44:25,730
Va bene.

1070
00:44:25,760 --> 00:44:27,400
Quindi dentro,

1071
00:44:27,440 --> 00:44:30,040
eh,

1072
00:44:30,380 --> 00:44:32,200
nel libro, hai anche

1073
00:44:32,200 --> 00:44:35,060
un elenco di tattiche retoriche a buon mercato che usano sia la sinistra che la destra.

1074
00:44:35,160 --> 00:44:37,440
E poi hai

1075
00:44:37,440 --> 00:44:42,480
un elenco di tattiche utilizzate dalla sinistra e dalla destra.

1076
00:44:42,940 --> 00:44:44,740
Quindi c'è la retorica, la perfetta fortezza retorica che usa la sinistra e l'efficiente fortezza retorica

1077
00:44:45,100 --> 00:44:47,660
che la destra usa.

1078
00:44:47,660 --> 00:44:49,460
Il primo riguarda l'ismo.

1079
00:44:49,460 --> 00:44:50,940
Forse possiamo esaminarne alcuni che catturano

1080
00:44:51,120 --> 00:44:52,720
il tuo cuore in questo momento particolare mentre ne parliamo.

1081
00:44:52,840 --> 00:44:54,420
E se, se puoi

1082
00:44:54,540 --> 00:44:55,660
descrivine degli esempi o se ci sono aspetti che vedi lì, particolarmente efficaci ed efficaci.

1083
00:44:56,140 --> 00:45:01,400
Allora, che dire dell'ismo è difendersi dalle critiche rivolte alla propria parte tirando fuori quella dell'altra parte?

1084
00:45:01,500 --> 00:45:04,100
presunto illecito.

1085
00:45:04,160 --> 00:45:04,880
Voglio fare dei bigliettini con questi, uh,

1086
00:45:05,500 --> 00:45:06,240
di tutte queste tattiche e iniziare

1087
00:45:06,940 --> 00:45:11,660
usandoli sempre su X perché sono così comunemente distribuiti.

1088
00:45:11,800 --> 00:45:14,440
E che dire di ism?

1089
00:45:15,060 --> 00:45:18,880
prima per una ragione,

1090
00:45:18,940 --> 00:45:20,000
sai, sarebbe un'idea interessante integrarlo effettivamente nella barra X di Twitter

1091
00:45:20,620 --> 00:45:21,620
dove le persone, sai, invece di cliccare sul cuore,

1092
00:45:21,820 --> 00:45:23,340
possono fare clic su quale dei

1093
00:45:23,340 --> 00:45:26,060
uh, uh, di quale tattica retorica si tratta?

1094
00:45:26,060 --> 00:45:29,620
Poi,

1095
00:45:30,040 --> 00:45:30,740
perché sai, in realtà ci sono note della community.

1096
00:45:30,760 --> 00:45:35,940
Non so se hai visto

1097
00:45:36,560 --> 00:45:40,100
su X che voi potete contribuire con note ed è abbastanza

1098
00:45:40,220 --> 00:45:40,560
affascinante.

1099
00:45:40,840 --> 00:45:43,440
Funziona davvero, davvero bene,

1100
00:45:44,080 --> 00:45:46,060
ma per dargli un po' più di struttura.

1101
00:45:46,280 --> 00:45:47,980
Sì.

1102
00:45:48,060 --> 00:45:52,900
In realtà è un metodo davvero interessante.

1103
00:45:53,190 --> 00:45:57,560
Sì.

1104
00:45:58,400 --> 00:46:00,120
In realtà, quando stavo pensando ai modi

1105
00:46:00,160 --> 00:46:02,320
X potrebbe essere usato per argomentare verso la verità,

1106
00:46:02,620 --> 00:46:03,160
Non vorrei che fosse così,

1107
00:46:03,300 --> 00:46:05,520
sai, tutti sarebbero obbligati a farlo.

1108
00:46:06,060 --> 00:46:08,760
Ma penso che immagino di essere quasi come un flusso all'interno di X

1109
00:46:09,060 --> 00:46:11,780
era focalizzato sulla verità,

1110
00:46:14,280 --> 00:46:15,180
che accetta alcune regole aggiuntive su come argomenterebbero.

1111
00:46:15,200 --> 00:46:17,420
Sì amico.

1112
00:46:17,440 --> 00:46:17,980
Mi piacerebbe che.

1113
00:46:18,920 --> 00:46:22,140
Dove c'è in termini di flussi che si intersecano e possono essere

1114
00:46:22,500 --> 00:46:25,780
ha separato quello delle stronzate in cui le persone semplicemente si divertono a dire stronzate.

1115
00:46:26,360 --> 00:46:27,060
Va bene. Provaci, amico.

1116
00:46:28,000 --> 00:46:28,540
E poi c'è la verità

1117
00:46:28,560 --> 00:46:32,580
e poi, uh, voglio dire, poi c'è l'umorismo,

1118
00:46:32,580 --> 00:46:33,640
poi ci sono buone vibrazioni.

1119
00:46:33,880 --> 00:46:35,140
Come, sai,

1120
00:46:35,880 --> 00:46:39,320
Non sono uno che ha assolutamente bisogno del bene

1121
00:46:40,060 --> 00:46:43,060
vibrazioni in continuazione,

1122
00:46:43,460 --> 00:46:43,780
ma a volte è bello avere,

1123
00:46:44,300 --> 00:46:45,900
è bello semplicemente accedere e non dover vedere

1124
00:46:46,240 --> 00:46:48,340
come il dramma, i litigi, i litigi, le cancellazioni, le mamme, tutto questo.

1125
00:46:48,640 --> 00:46:51,460
È bello solo vedere,

1126
00:46:52,640 --> 00:46:56,640
uh, ecco perché vado su Reddit o cose del genere,

1127
00:46:57,040 --> 00:46:58,420
uh, quali sono gli animali carini,

1128
00:46:58,540 --> 00:46:59,440
se ci sono cuccioli e gattini carini.

1129
00:47:00,600 --> 00:47:00,780
Ed è come se volessi solo vedere Ryan Reynolds cantare con Will Farrell.

1130
00:47:01,100 --> 00:47:04,500
Intendo,

1131
00:47:05,440 --> 00:47:06,480
a volte è tutto ciò di cui hai bisogno nel mio cuore.

1132
00:47:07,240 --> 00:47:08,460
Sì.

1133
00:47:10,540 --> 00:47:13,540
Non tutto il tempo,

1134
00:47:13,800 --> 00:47:14,300
solo un po' e si torna subito alla battaglia

1135
00:47:15,000 --> 00:47:17,000
per la verità.

1136
00:47:17,680 --> 00:47:19,620
Va bene.

1137
00:47:19,620 --> 00:47:19,800
E allora che dire dell'ismo?

1138
00:47:20,200 --> 00:47:25,340
E come Mia?

1139
00:47:25,860 --> 00:47:34,960
È ovunque.

1140
00:47:35,200 --> 00:47:38,320
Uhm, quando, quando lo guardi,

1141
00:47:38,560 --> 00:47:41,140
uh, quando guardi Twitter,

1142
00:47:41,260 --> 00:47:42,540
quando guardi i social media in generale, ehm,

1143
00:47:43,120 --> 00:47:45,720
e il primo, come quello che chiamiamo percorso a ostacoli, è fondamentalmente testato nel tempo,

1144
00:47:47,140 --> 00:47:49,300
vecchio stile, sai,

1145
00:47:49,360 --> 00:47:50,240
espedienti argomentativi che usano tutti.

1146
00:47:50,620 --> 00:47:52,620
E che dire dell'ASM è giusto

1147
00:47:52,960 --> 00:47:55,820
sollevare qualcosa, sai, come se qualcuno discutesse,

1148
00:47:55,820 --> 00:47:56,080
come se Biden fosse corrotto.

1149
00:47:56,220 --> 00:47:57,820
E, e poi qualcuno dice,

1150
00:47:57,820 --> 00:47:59,540
beh, Trump era peggio, sai, tipo...

1151
00:48:00,180 --> 00:48:00,980
e questo non è illegittimo,

1152
00:48:01,240 --> 00:48:04,480
sai, argomento da ribattere, ma è così,

1153
00:48:05,060 --> 00:48:09,100
sembra che accada.

1154
00:48:09,100 --> 00:48:13,520
Ogni volta che qualcuno fa un

1155
00:48:14,220 --> 00:48:18,660
affermazione, qualcuno semplicemente sottolinea qualche altra cosa che stava succedendo e da cui può essere sempre più attenuata,

1156
00:48:19,400 --> 00:48:21,060
da, da ciò che stai effettivamente cercando di discutere.

1157
00:48:21,140 --> 00:48:25,760
E quando tu, e poi vedi

1158
00:48:26,100 --> 00:48:28,560
questo accade continuamente sui social media ed è una specie di,

1159
00:48:29,300 --> 00:48:33,720
sai, ero un grande fan di Jon Stewart

1160
00:48:33,880 --> 00:48:34,580
spettacolo quotidiano, ma gran parte dell'umorismo e della tattica per discutere era questo

1161
00:48:34,800 --> 00:48:36,040
cosa qui.

1162
00:48:36,240 --> 00:48:38,680
È come, Oh, sto discutendo di questo importante problema.

1163
00:48:38,920 --> 00:48:43,840
Oh, in realtà, sai, ecco, c'è quest'altro problema qui che mi preoccupa di più.

1164
00:48:43,840 --> 00:48:45,620
E questo, lo sai, e sul, sai, scegliamo a destra qui.

1165
00:48:45,800 --> 00:48:48,640
Quindi il 6 gennaio

1166
00:48:48,650 --> 00:48:50,180
sai, guardare tutti che discutono su, um, Chop,

1167
00:48:51,320 --> 00:48:54,460
sai, come, um, uh, la parte occupata di Seattle o

1168
00:48:54,500 --> 00:48:56,780
la parte occupata di Portland e il set,

1169
00:48:56,980 --> 00:48:59,020
e fondamentalmente cercando di piacere,

1170
00:49:00,040 --> 00:49:00,220
Oh, stai parlando del, del,

1171
00:49:00,600 --> 00:49:01,440
la rivolta del 6 gennaio.

1172
00:49:01,700 --> 00:49:02,340
Uhm, e comunque,

1173
00:49:02,340 --> 00:49:02,540
Vivo a Capitol Hill.

1174
00:49:02,680 --> 00:49:03,840
Quindi credimi, ero molto consapevole di quanto fosse spaventoso e brutto.

1175
00:49:04,240 --> 00:49:04,380
Ehm,

1176
00:49:04,440 --> 00:49:05,140
sai, come ho detto, mio padre è cresciuto in Jugoslavia e quella era una sera in cui cenavamo tutti nel seminterrato.

1177
00:49:05,540 --> 00:49:05,640
Perché dico, "Oh, quando le cose vanno giù,"

1178
00:49:06,360 --> 00:49:07,820
mangiare nel seminterrato.

1179
00:49:08,340 --> 00:49:12,720
Era, era, era davvero spaventoso.

1180
00:49:13,100 --> 00:49:13,960
E la gente cercherebbe di deviare dal fatto che il 6 gennaio è serio, sostenendo che, in realtà,

1181
00:49:14,620 --> 00:49:19,060
Oh, beh, stanno accadendo cose pazzesche e orribili in tutto il paese.

1182
00:49:19,440 --> 00:49:25,620
Uh, sai, rivolte, uh, uh, um, che sono arrivate da alcune proteste per la giustizia sociale.

1183
00:49:25,880 --> 00:49:26,560
E ovviamente la risposta è che puoi preoccuparti di entrambe queste cose e,

1184
00:49:27,340 --> 00:49:29,560
e trova entrambi i problemi.

1185
00:49:29,740 --> 00:49:32,230
Ma sai, se sto discutendo di Chop,

1186
00:49:32,240 --> 00:49:35,000
sai, qualcuno che parla del 6 gennaio non è molto rilevante al riguardo.

1187
00:49:35,320 --> 00:49:36,200
Oppure, se sto discutendo del 6 gennaio,

1188
00:49:37,260 --> 00:49:43,840
qualcuno ha parlato delle rivolte del 2020,

1189
00:49:44,180 --> 00:49:48,960
non è utile?

1190
00:49:49,710 --> 00:49:51,400
Abbiamo intrapreso un lungo viaggio oscuro per quanto riguarda l'ismo e,

1191
00:49:51,600 --> 00:49:53,960
uh, è legato a quello

1192
00:49:54,280 --> 00:49:56,200
equipaggio di paglia e equipaggio di acciaio.

1193
00:49:56,200 --> 00:50:00,300
Quindi travisando la prospettiva della prospettiva opposta.

1194
00:50:00,380 --> 00:50:01,760
E anche questo è qualcosa

1195
00:50:01,760 --> 00:50:02,800
uh, immagino che sia molto diffuso ed è difficile fare il contrario,

1196
00:50:03,020 --> 00:50:07,160
che è equipaggio d'acciaio

1197
00:50:07,860 --> 00:50:10,100
richiede empatia o richiede eloquenza.

1198
00:50:10,140 --> 00:50:12,340
Richiede comprensione,

1199
00:50:12,540 --> 00:50:15,360
facendo effettivamente la ricerca e comprendendo il,

1200
00:50:15,700 --> 00:50:16,140
la prospettiva alternativa.

1201
00:50:16,560 --> 00:50:18,060
Il mio meraviglioso impiegato, Angel ed Eduardo, ha qualcosa che lui chiama equipaggio da star

1202
00:50:18,200 --> 00:50:19,200
e mi ritrovo a farlo spesso.

1203
00:50:19,940 --> 00:50:23,860
È bello avere

1204
00:50:24,060 --> 00:50:24,560
sai, due genitori immigrati, perché ricordo che ero a San Francisco,

1205
00:50:24,840 --> 00:50:25,920
uh, sai, uh, in uno strano tipo di coorte come ACLU slash burn man e avere un

1206
00:50:26,240 --> 00:50:28,240
amico lì che era un artista che parlava di odiare il Kansas.

1207
00:50:28,320 --> 00:50:28,760
E questa era la sua metafora per l'America centrale, ecco cosa intendeva con ciò.

1208
00:50:28,780 --> 00:50:30,220
E poi era piuttosto fiero del fatto che odiava il Kansas.

1209
00:50:30,500 --> 00:50:30,700
E io sono tipo, devi capire.

1210
00:50:30,780 --> 00:50:32,600
Vi vedo ancora un po' tutti stranieri e

1211
00:50:33,100 --> 00:50:35,320
pensa a cambiare il nome del Kansas in Croazia,

1212
00:50:35,860 --> 00:50:37,480
sai, cambia il nome del Kansas in,

1213
00:50:37,480 --> 00:50:39,340
a, ad alcuni.

1214
00:50:39,620 --> 00:50:43,740
Questo è quello che mi sembra.

1215
00:50:44,020 --> 00:50:45,700
E l'idea dell'equipaggio stellare,

1216
00:50:45,700 --> 00:50:48,760
che io, che mi piace è,

1217
00:50:48,820 --> 00:50:49,400
è l'idea di essere come,

1218
00:50:49,400 --> 00:50:50,240
quindi stai dicendo che odi davvero la tua minoranza religiosa dominante,

1219
00:50:50,840 --> 00:50:54,640
tipo, ed è allora che inizi a distaccarti un po' da esso, che tipico

1220
00:50:54,640 --> 00:50:59,320
L’America è eccezionale in molti modi,

1221
00:50:59,700 --> 00:51:00,220
ma alcune delle nostre dinamiche sono incredibilmente

1222
00:51:00,260 --> 00:51:01,320
tipico.

1223
00:51:01,840 --> 00:51:05,640
È uno dei motivi per cui,

1224
00:51:06,660 --> 00:51:08,240
come quando la gente inizia a leggere l'anima di Thomas,

1225
00:51:08,760 --> 00:51:09,220
per esempio, iniziano ad appassionarsi perché una delle cose che fa è lui

1226
00:51:09,560 --> 00:51:11,660
fa un'analisi comparativa dei problemi dei paesi e sottolinea che alcuni di questi

1227
00:51:11,680 --> 00:51:12,820
esistono cose che pensiamo siano esclusive degli Stati Uniti,

1228
00:51:12,860 --> 00:51:14,380
sai, il 75% del resto dei paesi del mondo.

1229
00:51:14,440 --> 00:51:17,580
Il libro di Francis Fukuyama che sto leggendo proprio adesso,

1230
00:51:17,960 --> 00:51:23,160
origini dell’ordine politico in realtà fa questo meraviglioso lavoro di indicazione

1231
00:51:23,220 --> 00:51:24,240
capire come non siamo speciali in vari modi.

1232
00:51:24,820 --> 00:51:28,680
In realtà questo è qualcosa che mi sta molto a cuore.

1233
00:51:28,680 --> 00:51:30,420
E, uh, Fukuyama ovviamente, uh, è, è, è un libro fantastico.

1234
00:51:30,640 --> 00:51:32,000
Non è,

1235
00:51:32,240 --> 00:51:34,960
è un po' artificioso nella scrittura

1236
00:51:35,080 --> 00:51:35,260
perché il suo termine per una delle cose che lo preoccupano

1237
00:51:35,880 --> 00:51:38,020
su ciò che distrugge le società è il rimpatrio,

1238
00:51:38,060 --> 00:51:38,260
che è il ritorno alle società in cui

1239
00:51:38,800 --> 00:51:39,620
favorisci la tua famiglia e i tuoi amici.

1240
00:51:39,640 --> 00:51:42,420
E in realtà penso molto a quello che vedo in una sorta di,

1241
00:51:42,940 --> 00:51:43,280
ehm, negli Stati Uniti,

1242
00:51:44,040 --> 00:51:44,300
mi fa preoccupare che potremmo attraversare un po'

1243
00:51:44,360 --> 00:51:45,220
un po' di un processo di rimpatrio.

1244
00:51:45,300 --> 00:51:46,040
E penso che questo sia uno dei motivi per cui le persone sono così

1245
00:51:46,140 --> 00:51:46,920
arrabbiato.

1246
00:51:47,080 --> 00:51:48,460
Penso che avere un,

1247
00:51:48,460 --> 00:51:49,540
Penso che la prospettiva che noi,

1248
00:51:49,580 --> 00:51:51,660
sai, sembra che siamo molto, molto vicini ad avere un'elezione che sarebbe stata,

1249
00:51:52,020 --> 00:51:56,480
sai, Jeb Bush contro Hillary Clinton.

1250
00:51:56,560 --> 00:51:58,400
È come se fossimo un paese dinastico adesso?

1251
00:51:59,220 --> 00:52:00,800
E' questo che sta succedendo?

1252
00:52:01,380 --> 00:52:02,360
Ma è anche uno dei motivi per cui la gente è così arrabbiata per le ammissioni di eredità,

1253
00:52:02,360 --> 00:52:05,440
più o meno quanto, sai,

1254
00:52:05,580 --> 00:52:06,640
alcune famiglie sembrano essere in grado di mantenere la propria gente in casa

1255
00:52:06,900 --> 00:52:08,060
classi superiori degli Stati Uniti perennemente.

1256
00:52:08,140 --> 00:52:09,460
E credimi, come se fossi povero quando lo ero

1257
00:52:10,080 --> 00:52:12,760
io e un bambino siamo andati a,

1258
00:52:13,080 --> 00:52:15,400
e devo andare a,

1259
00:52:15,820 --> 00:52:16,820
Devo andare a uno dei divertimenti.

1260
00:52:16,980 --> 00:52:17,780
Devo andare a Stanford.

1261
00:52:17,780 --> 00:52:22,120
E ho avuto modo di vedere come le persone,

1262
00:52:22,440 --> 00:52:24,060
ti trattano diversamente in un modo quasi offensivo.

1263
00:52:24,680 --> 00:52:25,920
Come fondamentalmente come all'improvviso per un certo tipo di persona,

1264
00:52:25,920 --> 00:52:28,980
Ero una persona legittima.

1265
00:52:29,080 --> 00:52:31,080
E guardo quanto l'America fa affidamento su Harvard,

1266
00:52:31,080 --> 00:52:36,140
su Yale per produrlo,

1267
00:52:36,280 --> 00:52:36,820
Utilizzerò un file molto

1268
00:52:37,060 --> 00:52:39,320
segna un termine sonoro, classe dirigente.

1269
00:52:39,860 --> 00:52:43,800
E questo è uno dei motivi per cui devi esserlo particolarmente

1270
00:52:44,460 --> 00:52:47,780
preoccupato per quello che succede in questi college d'élite.

1271
00:52:48,340 --> 00:52:49,340
E questi college d'élite con il

1272
00:52:49,860 --> 00:52:53,260
ad eccezione dell’Università di Chicago e dell’UVA, si comportano davvero male per quanto riguarda la libertà di parola.

1273
00:52:53,600 --> 00:52:57,060
E questo comporta ogni genere di problemi.

1274
00:52:57,060 --> 00:52:59,220
Ciò non fa ben sperare per il futuro della tutela

1275
00:52:59,260 --> 00:53:00,580
della libertà di parola per il resto della società.

1276
00:53:00,660 --> 00:53:01,900
Quindi puoi anche entrare in empatia lì

1277
00:53:02,240 --> 00:53:03,580
con le persone che hanno votato per Donald Trump?

1278
00:53:04,060 --> 00:53:04,620
Perché proprio questo come resistenza a questo tipo di

1279
00:53:04,660 --> 00:53:05,640
slancio della classe dominante,

1280
00:53:05,760 --> 00:53:09,260
questa regalità che passa

1281
00:53:09,620 --> 00:53:10,200
sulla regola di generazione in generazione.

1282
00:53:10,700 --> 00:53:15,320
Cerco davvero di entrare in empatia con tutti in una certa misura e di provare a vedere davvero dove sono

1283
00:53:15,380 --> 00:53:17,300
proveniente da e la rabbia a destra.

1284
00:53:17,540 --> 00:53:18,060
Ho capito.

1285
00:53:18,760 --> 00:53:20,600
Voglio dire, mi sento come se il... il

1286
00:53:20,600 --> 00:53:26,360
libro,

1287
00:53:26,480 --> 00:53:30,160
quindi catturare la mente americana era un libro che io,

1288
00:53:30,280 --> 00:53:35,060
potrebbe essere una specie di piacere per la folla

1289
00:53:35,660 --> 00:53:39,700
in una certa misura, in parte perché intendevamo veramente quello che abbiamo detto nel sottotitolo che sono

1290
00:53:39,700 --> 00:53:41,240
buone intenzioni e cattive idee che feriscono le persone.

1291
00:53:41,460 --> 00:53:44,040
E se lo capisci e leggi il

1292
00:53:44,300 --> 00:53:47,500
libro, puoi dire, è come, okay, non c'è nessuno che sia malizioso.

1293
00:53:47,780 --> 00:53:49,200
Sai, queste sono persone che cercano di proteggere i propri figli.

1294
00:53:49,340 --> 00:53:51,980
Lo fanno in un modo che in realtà può portare a maggiore ansia, depressione,

1295
00:53:52,540 --> 00:53:53,040
e stranamente alla fine rappresentano una minaccia alla libertà di parola.

1296
00:53:53,320 --> 00:53:56,580
Ma in questo,

1297
00:53:56,580 --> 00:53:57,620
non possiamo essere del tutto,

1298
00:53:57,640 --> 00:53:59,680
io e il mio... oh, non ho nemmeno menzionato il mio brillante coautore, Ricky Schlott,

1299
00:53:59,840 --> 00:54:04,860
un 23enne

1300
00:54:05,440 --> 00:54:06,880
genio.

1301
00:54:07,440 --> 00:54:13,180
Lei è, lei è, lei è fantastica.

1302
00:54:13,300 --> 00:54:14,360
Ho iniziato a lavorare con lei quando lei

1303
00:54:14,400 --> 00:54:16,380
avevo 20 anni, chi è, chi è il mio coautore di questo libro.

1304
00:54:16,420 --> 00:54:17,480
Quindi, quando dico che noi,

1305
00:54:18,500 --> 00:54:20,660
Sto parlando di me e Ricky.

1306
00:54:20,960 --> 00:54:22,580
È un libertario.

1307
00:54:23,480 --> 00:54:27,060
Giornalista libertario.

1308
00:54:27,640 --> 00:54:29,720
E un giornalista.

1309
00:54:29,840 --> 00:54:30,700
Sì.

1310
00:54:30,700 --> 00:54:34,860
Una mente brillante.

1311
00:54:34,860 --> 00:54:44,240
Sì.

1312
00:54:44,240 --> 00:54:48,060
E, ma in realtà non possiamo scriverlo in un modo che sia troppo gentile perché i cancellatori non sono gentili.

1313
00:54:48,310 --> 00:54:52,380
C'è una crudeltà e una spietatezza in questo.

1314
00:54:53,020 --> 00:54:56,180
Voglio dire, ho iniziato a sentirmi davvero depresso

1315
00:54:56,880 --> 00:54:58,630
l'anno scorso mentre lo stavo scrivendo e non volevo nemmeno dire al mio staff perché stavo diventando così ansioso e depresso.

1316
00:54:58,900 --> 00:55:02,240
In parte è perché sto parlando di persone che lo faranno,

1317
00:55:03,040 --> 00:55:06,600
sai, in alcuni dei casi di cui stiamo parlando,

1318
00:55:06,840 --> 00:55:09,260
vai a casa tua, prendi di mira i tuoi figli.

1319
00:55:09,280 --> 00:55:09,920
Quindi, quindi è lungo

1320
00:55:10,200 --> 00:55:11,600
modo di dire,

1321
00:55:11,860 --> 00:55:13,460
In un certo senso riesco a capire cosa fa impazzire i giusti in una certa misura in questo.

1322
00:55:13,640 --> 00:55:14,980
Ho la sensazione che si sentano costantemente presi dal gas.

1323
00:55:15,140 --> 00:55:15,740
L’istruzione d’élite è davvero un insulto per la classe operaia.

1324
00:55:16,000 --> 00:55:19,900
Piace, parte dell'ideologia dominante in questo momento è una sorta di dolcetto,

1325
00:55:20,300 --> 00:55:25,140
quasi il 70% del pubblico americano,

1326
00:55:25,700 --> 00:55:27,780
così come sono, abbiamo pensato di svilupparlo un po' nella perfetta fortezza retorica, come loro

1327
00:55:28,060 --> 00:55:30,840
per alcuni, in qualche modo illegittimo e non degno di rispetto o compassione.

1328
00:55:30,840 --> 00:55:31,280
Sì.

1329
00:55:31,420 --> 00:55:32,300
L’elitarismo generale che irradia,

1330
00:55:32,460 --> 00:55:34,340
elitarismo autoalimentante che si irradia dalle persone che si rivolgono a queste istituzioni.

1331
00:55:34,400 --> 00:55:37,460
E la cosa divertente è che,

1332
00:55:37,460 --> 00:55:41,500
l'elitarismo è stato riconfezionato come una sorta di

1333
00:55:41,500 --> 00:55:44,300
si maschera da una sorta di compassione infinita,

1334
00:55:45,500 --> 00:55:48,140
ma essenzialmente si basa su una sorta di molto,

1335
00:55:48,560 --> 00:55:51,460
francamente,

1336
00:55:51,500 --> 00:55:54,900
ideologia eccessivamente semplice e eccessivamente semplicistica,

1337
00:55:54,900 --> 00:55:56,820
una semplice spiegazione del mondo e della rottura delle persone

1338
00:55:57,200 --> 00:55:59,260
in gruppi e giudicare le persone in base a quanto sono oppresse nei loro confronti,

1339
00:56:00,420 --> 00:56:04,880
all’incrocio delle loro diverse identità.

1340
00:56:05,240 --> 00:56:05,580
E si arrivò a questo,

1341
00:56:06,460 --> 00:56:08,200
Penso che inizialmente con,

1342
00:56:08,940 --> 00:56:11,100
con, con un, appello da un nucleo compassionevole,

1343
00:56:11,120 --> 00:56:14,560
ma viene utilizzato in un certo senso,

1344
00:56:15,240 --> 00:56:21,780
può essere molto crudele, molto sprezzante,

1345
00:56:21,780 --> 00:56:23,280
compassionevole e ti permette di non prendere sul serio la maggior parte delle cose

1346
00:56:23,840 --> 00:56:28,240
i tuoi simili esseri umani.

1347
00:56:28,280 --> 00:56:29,900
È davvero strano come sia successo.

1348
00:56:30,020 --> 00:56:31,740
Forse puoi esplorare il motivo per cui una cosa ha

1349
00:56:31,740 --> 00:56:33,260
all'inizio suona bene.

1350
00:56:33,840 --> 00:56:35,560
Sì.

1351
00:56:35,640 --> 00:56:36,000
Può essere,

1352
00:56:36,200 --> 00:56:36,920
può creare,

1353
00:56:37,240 --> 00:56:39,080
può diventare un’arma così crudele per cancellare, ferire le persone e ignorarle.

1354
00:56:39,080 --> 00:56:43,700
Voglio dire, questo è quello che hai descritto con la perfetta fortezza retorica.

1355
00:56:43,700 --> 00:56:46,180
Sì.

1356
00:56:46,420 --> 00:56:48,680
Che è una serie di domande.

1357
00:56:48,680 --> 00:56:50,220
Forse puoi spiegare quale sia la fortezza retorica perfetta.

1358
00:56:50,780 --> 00:56:54,320
Sì.

1359
00:56:54,780 --> 00:56:56,160
Quindi la fortezza retorica perfetta è il modo in cui è stato sviluppato

1360
00:56:56,540 --> 00:57:00,140
a sinistra per non farlo

1361
00:57:00,140 --> 00:57:02,540
mai arrivare alla vera argomentazione di qualcuno.

1362
00:57:02,700 --> 00:57:05,220
Voglio fare un grafico,

1363
00:57:05,360 --> 00:57:06,400
come un diagramma di flusso di questo tipo,

1364
00:57:06,400 --> 00:57:07,360
ecco l'argomentazione e

1365
00:57:07,500 --> 00:57:08,800
ecco questa fortezza perfetta che ti distoglierà ogni volta dall'arrivare alla discussione.

1366
00:57:08,880 --> 00:57:09,620
E ho iniziato a notarlo certamente quando,

1367
00:57:11,170 --> 00:57:15,240
quando frequentavo la facoltà di giurisprudenza,

1368
00:57:16,440 --> 00:57:19,640
che c'erano molti modi diversi per licenziare le persone e il primo passo della fortezza retorica perfetta.

1369
00:57:20,060 --> 00:57:23,660
E posso confermarlo perché anch'io sono stato colpevole di questo,

1370
00:57:23,660 --> 00:57:25,140
che puoi licenziare le persone

1371
00:57:25,540 --> 00:57:28,720
se puoi sostenere che sono conservatori.

1372
00:57:29,200 --> 00:57:31,080
Non devono essere conservatori per essere chiari.

1373
00:57:31,780 --> 00:57:32,500
Devi solo dire che lo sono.

1374
00:57:32,520 --> 00:57:34,200
Quindi non ho mai letto Thomas Sowell

1375
00:57:35,100 --> 00:57:37,880
perché era di destra.

1376
00:57:37,880 --> 00:57:40,420
Non ho letto Camille Poglia

1377
00:57:40,820 --> 00:57:42,260
perché ero, io, qualcuno mi aveva convinto che fosse una cosa giusta

1378
00:57:42,260 --> 00:57:48,460
ala.

1379
00:57:48,880 --> 00:57:50,960
C'erano molti autori che, e

1380
00:57:52,420 --> 00:57:55,260
quando frequentavo la facoltà di giurisprudenza,

1381
00:57:55,260 --> 00:57:56,980
esso, tra un sacco di persone molto brillanti,

1382
00:57:58,040 --> 00:57:59,920
in realtà era già un'abitudine intellettuale che se così si potesse designare

1383
00:58:00,480 --> 00:58:02,520
qualcosa di conservatore, allora non dovevi più pensarci molto o

1384
00:58:04,480 --> 00:58:10,160
prenderlo particolarmente sul serio.

1385
00:58:11,060 --> 00:58:13,000
Questo è un modo infantile di discutere,

1386
00:58:14,600 --> 00:58:16,220
ma nonostante ciò, mi sono impegnato.

1387
00:58:16,220 --> 00:58:19,760
Era una tattica comune.

1388
00:58:20,160 --> 00:58:25,660
Ho anche menzionato nel libro,

1389
00:58:25,740 --> 00:58:29,440
c'è stato un tempo in cui

1390
00:58:29,800 --> 00:58:30,440
a, un amico attivista gay che era,

1391
00:58:30,780 --> 00:58:33,490
Penso decisamente alla mia sinistra,

1392
00:58:33,860 --> 00:58:34,400
ma ciononostante l'esperienza pragmatica di essere effettivamente un attivista ha detto qualcosa del tipo:

1393
00:58:35,200 --> 00:58:37,560
beh, solo perché qualcuno è conservatore non significa che abbia torto.

1394
00:58:37,560 --> 00:58:39,280
E ricordo di essermi sentito gentile

1395
00:58:39,580 --> 00:58:45,910
di scandalizzarsi a un certo livello di essere semplicemente come,

1396
00:58:46,140 --> 00:58:49,660
beh, è un po' così, non è forse tutto ciò che diciamo che sono semplicemente cattive persone con pessime idee.

1397
00:58:49,940 --> 00:58:51,820
Puoi semplicemente lanciare un

1398
00:58:51,840 --> 00:58:56,280
oh, quel ragazzo è un'ala destra.

1399
00:58:56,700 --> 00:58:58,640
Puoi semplicemente lanciarlo.

1400
00:58:58,660 --> 00:59:03,220
Non devo più pensare a te.

1401
00:59:04,340 --> 00:59:07,180
Sì.

1402
00:59:08,020 --> 00:59:09,040
E poi può,

1403
00:59:09,400 --> 00:59:10,360
se sei abbastanza popolare,

1404
00:59:10,920 --> 00:59:13,960
possono essere quelli,

1405
00:59:14,280 --> 00:59:15,180
può essere un po' appiccicoso.

1406
00:59:16,640 --> 00:59:17,120
Sì.

1407
00:59:17,460 --> 00:59:18,580
Come,

1408
00:59:18,620 --> 00:59:19,420
ed è strano perché, poiché è efficace,

1409
00:59:19,440 --> 00:59:21,900
ecco perché continua ad arrivare

1410
00:59:21,900 --> 00:59:23,500
ero abituato essenzialmente a questo,

1411
00:59:23,520 --> 00:59:24,520
avrebbe dovuto colpire qualcuno perché,

1412
00:59:24,640 --> 00:59:25,860
perché io, sai, ho un grande

1413
00:59:25,960 --> 00:59:26,580
pedigree liberale, sai, di tutto, dal lavoro all'ACLU a

1414
00:59:27,140 --> 00:59:28,060
applicare la legge sui rifugiati nell’Europa orientale per,

1415
00:59:28,440 --> 00:59:28,640
Facevo parte di un tutoraggio ambientale

1416
00:59:28,720 --> 00:59:29,520
programma per i ragazzi delle scuole superiori dei centri urbani di Washington.

1417
00:59:30,200 --> 00:59:30,380
Sai, sono stato, sono stato,

1418
00:59:30,400 --> 00:59:34,780
Io, io, posso, sai, difendermi come se fossi di sinistra,

1419
00:59:35,420 --> 00:59:38,100
ma odio farlo perché

1420
00:59:38,300 --> 00:59:39,920
c'è anche una parte di me che dice, okay,

1421
00:59:40,260 --> 00:59:44,580
e allora,

1422
00:59:45,080 --> 00:59:47,520
Piace,

1423
00:59:48,560 --> 00:59:50,580
lo stai dicendo veramente?

1424
00:59:51,300 --> 00:59:53,140
se puoi magicamente farmi discutere o convincerti che,

1425
00:59:54,860 --> 00:59:56,180
che sono sulla destra,

1426
00:59:56,180 --> 00:59:57,360
che non devi più ascoltarmi?

1427
00:59:58,880 --> 01:00:03,200
E ancora una volta è litigare come bambini.

1428
01:00:03,400 --> 01:00:06,500
E il motivo per cui questo è diventato così popolare è perché anche tra,

1429
01:00:08,320 --> 01:00:12,260
o forse, forse soprattutto tra le élite, che funziona in modo così efficace come un’arma perfetta

1430
01:00:12,720 --> 01:00:16,620
che puoi usare acriticamente.

1431
01:00:17,210 --> 01:00:19,460
Se solo potessi dimostrare che hai ragione,

1432
01:00:19,740 --> 01:00:23,400
non devo,

1433
01:00:23,980 --> 01:00:30,060
Non devo pensare a te.

1434
01:00:30,620 --> 01:00:30,720
Non c'è da meravigliarsi che all'improvviso inizi a vedere la gente che chiama

1435
01:00:30,820 --> 01:00:33,940
l'ala destra dell'ACLU e chiamando il New York Times di destra perché è stato così

1436
01:00:35,600 --> 01:00:39,900
modo efficace per delegittimare le persone come pensatori.

1437
01:00:40,320 --> 01:00:41,780
Abbiamo Stephen Pinker, che fa parte del nostro consiglio di amministrazione,

1438
01:00:41,780 --> 01:00:45,580
si riferisce al mondo accademico come al polo sinistro che essenzialmente è,

1439
01:00:48,740 --> 01:00:50,680
è una posizione da cui,

1440
01:00:50,920 --> 01:00:53,940
da questo punto di vista,

1441
01:00:54,980 --> 01:00:55,380
tutto guarda a destra,

1442
01:00:56,180 --> 01:00:58,620
sembra che sia sulla destra.

1443
01:00:58,840 --> 01:01:01,940
Ma una volta che diventa una tattica che accettiamo,

1444
01:01:01,940 --> 01:01:06,480
Esso,

1445
01:01:06,680 --> 01:01:08,660
e questo è uno dei motivi per cui, sai, sono...

1446
01:01:10,400 --> 01:01:12,200
Sono, sono più a sinistra,

1447
01:01:12,280 --> 01:01:13,420
ma penso di essere di sinistra, di centro liberale.

1448
01:01:13,420 --> 01:01:16,240
Ricky è, sai, un libertario più conservatore.

1449
01:01:17,040 --> 01:01:19,660
E inizialmente pensavo tipo:

1450
01:01:19,660 --> 01:01:22,160
dovrei davvero scrivere qualcosa con qualcuno che è più a destra?

1451
01:01:23,400 --> 01:01:27,960
E io sono tipo, assolutamente dovrei esserlo.

1452
01:01:27,960 --> 01:01:28,700
Devo effettivamente essere all'altezza di ciò in cui credo al riguardo

1453
01:01:29,280 --> 01:01:30,560
roba perché è ridicolo avere questa idea primitiva di poter licenziare qualcuno

1454
01:01:30,680 --> 01:01:34,680
non appena dici,

1455
01:01:35,880 --> 01:01:36,980
giusto o sbagliato che siano di destra.

1456
01:01:37,120 --> 01:01:38,080
BENE,

1457
01:01:38,480 --> 01:01:39,080
sento, correggimi se sbaglio,

1458
01:01:39,900 --> 01:01:40,220
ma mi sembra che di recente tu sia stato definito di destra

1459
01:01:41,420 --> 01:01:46,660
fuoco,

1460
01:01:47,020 --> 01:01:49,860
forse tu per associazione a causa di quel dibattito.

1461
01:01:50,000 --> 01:01:50,300
Oh, il Los Angeles Times.

1462
01:01:50,320 --> 01:01:51,260
L'LA Times.

1463
01:01:51,280 --> 01:01:55,000
Parliamo del LA Times.

1464
01:01:55,220 --> 01:01:55,460
Quindi sì, c'è un articolo, c'è un dibattito.

1465
01:01:55,540 --> 01:01:59,960
Non vedo l'ora di guardarlo perché non credo che sia ancora disponibile per la visione in video.

1466
01:02:00,640 --> 01:02:02,600
Devi partecipare di persona.

1467
01:02:02,720 --> 01:02:04,400
Non posso aspettare di vederlo.

1468
01:02:05,100 --> 01:02:06,480
Uh, ma il fuoco era in parte di supporto e poi il LA Times ha scritto, um,

1469
01:02:06,520 --> 01:02:08,000
un articolo feroce su quello che tutti i partecipanti al dibattito lo erano

1470
01:02:08,100 --> 01:02:08,880
sostanzialmente giusto

1471
01:02:08,880 --> 01:02:13,740
pendente a destra.

1472
01:02:14,400 --> 01:02:16,560
Va bene.

1473
01:02:16,620 --> 01:02:17,680
Uh, c'è così tanto da disfare le valigie lì.

1474
01:02:17,980 --> 01:02:22,860
Uh, sai, Barry Weiss ha questo,

1475
01:02:23,800 --> 01:02:26,980
sai, grande, grande progetto, la stampa libera.

1476
01:02:27,440 --> 01:02:28,780
Sono rimasto molto colpito.

1477
01:02:29,300 --> 01:02:31,540
Si tratta di storie che,

1478
01:02:31,700 --> 01:02:34,120
che molti media di destra o di sinistra non sono disposti a coprire.

1479
01:02:34,620 --> 01:02:36,280
Ehm, e abbiamo fatto un...

1480
01:02:36,760 --> 01:02:38,620
uh, abbiamo ospitato un dibattito con lei.

1481
01:02:39,160 --> 01:02:40,220
Ehm, e noi volevamo renderlo il più divertente e controverso possibile.

1482
01:02:40,960 --> 01:02:42,380
Uh, quindi il fuoco e la libertà di stampa hanno ospitato un dibattito.

1483
01:02:43,160 --> 01:02:45,540
La rivoluzione sessuale è fallita?

1484
01:02:45,540 --> 01:02:45,700
Quindi il dibattito è stato davvero emozionante,

1485
01:02:45,820 --> 01:02:47,860
molto divertente.

1486
01:02:48,500 --> 01:02:49,740
La parte che sosteneva che la rivoluzione sessuale non era un fallimento,

1487
01:02:50,340 --> 01:02:52,640
quello, che Grimes e Sarah Hader erano presenti.

1488
01:02:53,160 --> 01:02:57,420
Uno,

1489
01:02:57,430 --> 01:03:00,820
ehm, era...

1490
01:03:00,900 --> 01:03:01,920
sai, un bel,

1491
01:03:02,440 --> 01:03:05,020
notte carnosa e premurosa.

1492
01:03:05,560 --> 01:03:07,160
E abbiamo avuto un rev, c'era una recensione che era piuttosto severa sull'intera faccenda.

1493
01:03:07,160 --> 01:03:07,900
E includeva una riga che diceva che,

1494
01:03:08,380 --> 01:03:09,360
uh, il fuoco, che afferma di credere nella libertà di parola,

1495
01:03:09,480 --> 01:03:10,260
ma difende i punti di vista solo fino a un certo punto.

1496
01:03:10,260 --> 01:03:14,460
Non posso credere che sia persino apparso sulla rivista.

1497
01:03:14,500 --> 01:03:15,720
Perché non si tratta solo di chiamarci.

1498
01:03:15,900 --> 01:03:20,760
Perché ovviamente, sai, l'implicazione ovviamente,

1499
01:03:20,880 --> 01:03:22,740
che siamo di destra,

1500
01:03:23,420 --> 01:03:24,160
ehm, cosa che non siamo in realtà il personale pende decisamente più a sinistra che a destra.

1501
01:03:24,160 --> 01:03:27,180
Uhm,

1502
01:03:27,260 --> 01:03:31,180
Ma

1503
01:03:31,400 --> 01:03:33,160
difendiamo anche le persone in tutto lo spettro,

1504
01:03:33,260 --> 01:03:34,140
tutto il tempo.

1505
01:03:34,460 --> 01:03:35,340
Come se fosse qualcosa che,

1506
01:03:35,430 --> 01:03:36,920
che anche la più minima ricerca su Google avrebbe risolto.

1507
01:03:37,180 --> 01:03:37,420
Quindi, come se ci fosse stato dato un po' di calore al Times di Los Angeles su questo perché è come,

1508
01:03:37,420 --> 01:03:38,280
sì, se lo dici tu.

1509
01:03:38,780 --> 01:03:39,600
Secondo me sono di destra, avremmo ribatteto,

1510
01:03:39,620 --> 01:03:40,220
sai, um, dicendo, beh, qui, ecco, ecco i seguenti 50.000 esempi di,

1511
01:03:40,440 --> 01:03:41,440
di, di noi che non siamo,

1512
01:03:41,740 --> 01:03:42,040
ma quando in realtà affermi che noi difendiamo solo le opinioni,

1513
01:03:42,110 --> 01:03:42,860
siamo d'accordo, prima di tutto non c'è modo per noi di essere d'accordo.

1514
01:03:43,780 --> 01:03:46,060
Non c'è modo per noi di essere d'accordo con le opinioni perché in realtà abbiamo una situazione politicamente diversificata

1515
01:03:46,440 --> 01:03:47,720
personale che non sarà nemmeno d'accordo su quali opinioni siano buone e quali opinioni abbiamo.

1516
01:03:47,720 --> 01:03:49,400
Ma si,

1517
01:03:49,620 --> 01:03:51,420
Dovevo,

1518
01:03:51,420 --> 01:03:53,380
Io, una volta, quando qualcuno fece qualcosa del genere ed erano giusti

1519
01:03:54,460 --> 01:03:57,400
essere un po' irriverente riguardo al fatto che la libertà di parola va bene.

1520
01:03:57,420 --> 01:03:59,220
Ho fatto un thread lungo 70 tweet,

1521
01:03:59,380 --> 01:04:01,710
sai, dire semplicemente: Ehi, pensi davvero che vada bene?

1522
01:04:01,900 --> 01:04:04,260
Ho deciso di non farlo,

1523
01:04:04,800 --> 01:04:06,060
ehm, su questo in particolare.

1524
01:04:06,740 --> 01:04:10,240
Ma

1525
01:04:10,620 --> 01:04:13,200
la cosa bella è che mostra due parti del libro,

1526
01:04:13,200 --> 01:04:15,120
uh, cancellazione dell'American

1527
01:04:15,740 --> 01:04:16,280
mente.

1528
01:04:17,200 --> 01:04:17,420
Se non di più,

1529
01:04:17,760 --> 01:04:18,960
uno di loro sta licenziando qualcuno perché è conservatore.

1530
01:04:18,960 --> 01:04:23,300
Uh, e poiché questa era l'implicazione, non dobbiamo ascoltare il fuoco perché sono conservatori.

1531
01:04:23,340 --> 01:04:24,200
Ma l'altro è qualcosa, un termine che ho inventato appositamente per il modo in cui le persone discutono su Twitter,

1532
01:04:24,640 --> 01:04:25,940
che è una proiezione di ipocrisia.

1533
01:04:26,320 --> 01:04:27,840
Ciao, sono una persona a cui importa solo un lato della barricata politica.

1534
01:04:28,500 --> 01:04:32,040
E penso che tutti gli altri siano ipocriti.

1535
01:04:32,340 --> 01:04:37,120
Uhm, e comunque,

1536
01:04:37,200 --> 01:04:38,560
Non ho fatto alcuna ricerca vera e propria su questo,

1537
01:04:38,580 --> 01:04:39,820
ma presumo che tutti gli altri siano ipocriti.

1538
01:04:39,920 --> 01:04:40,420
E lo vedi accadere continuamente.

1539
01:04:40,420 --> 01:04:41,560
Il, il, e questo accade spesso in cui qualcuno dice,

1540
01:04:42,140 --> 01:04:45,020
dov'è il fuoco in questo caso?

1541
01:04:45,020 --> 01:04:50,220
E noi diciamo,

1542
01:04:50,220 --> 01:04:53,940
siamo letteralmente citati nel link che hai appena inviato,

1543
01:04:54,580 --> 01:04:58,100
ma in realtà non ho letto.

1544
01:04:58,500 --> 01:05:02,840
Oppure è come, dov'è il fuoco su questo?

1545
01:05:02,840 --> 01:05:03,980
È come se, ecco la nostra causa a riguardo di sei mesi fa.

1546
01:05:04,320 --> 01:05:05,180
Uhm, quindi è una delle cose che preferisco.

1547
01:05:05,240 --> 01:05:06,880
E anche lo spettacolo quotidiano di John Stewart,

1548
01:05:06,920 --> 01:05:08,220
come il, il, il, il, um, uh, che dire dell'ismo e dell'idea simile secondo cui queste persone devono essere ipocrite è qualcosa che

1549
01:05:09,240 --> 01:05:12,360
la più grande commedia, ma in realtà è una tattica retorica che ti porterà alla verità,

1550
01:05:12,920 --> 01:05:12,980
dando semplicemente per scontato che il tuo avversario o semplicemente accusando il tuo avversario di essere sempre un

1551
01:05:13,340 --> 01:05:15,240
l'ipocrita non è una buona tattica per ottenere la verità.

1552
01:05:15,880 --> 01:05:17,020
Ma a proposito,

1553
01:05:17,160 --> 01:05:18,980
tende a provenire sempre da persone che non sono effettivamente coerenti riguardo alla libertà di parola.

1554
01:05:20,460 --> 01:05:23,160
Quindi questo passa alla proiezione,

1555
01:05:23,620 --> 01:05:24,580
ma fondamentalmente non faccio ricerche sul fatto che

1556
01:05:24,580 --> 01:05:27,220
persona è o non è un'ipocrita e presupponendo che gli altri siano una grande frazione degli altri che lo leggono,

1557
01:05:27,280 --> 01:05:29,560
uh, inoltre non farò la ricerca.

1558
01:05:29,640 --> 01:05:31,900
E quindi questo tipo di

1559
01:05:31,900 --> 01:05:35,920
l'affermazione diventa una sorta di veridicità senza a

1560
01:05:36,060 --> 01:05:37,460
radicamento nella realtà reale.

1561
01:05:38,140 --> 01:05:39,640
Abbatte la barriera tra ciò che è e ciò che non è vero perché se,

1562
01:05:40,120 --> 01:05:40,340
se lo dice la folla

1563
01:05:41,220 --> 01:05:42,280
qualcosa è vero, è vero, ci vuole troppo sforzo per correggerlo.

1564
01:05:42,360 --> 01:05:45,000
E ci sono tre modi in cui lo voglio,

1565
01:05:45,740 --> 01:05:46,580
tipo, sai, voglio rispondere a questo,

1566
01:05:47,000 --> 01:05:50,120
che è solo dare un esempio dopo l'altro di,

1567
01:05:50,980 --> 01:05:51,920
di volte in cui abbiamo difeso persone su entrambi i fronti di ogni maggioranza,

1568
01:05:51,940 --> 01:05:52,660
praticamente ogni questione importante,

1569
01:05:53,040 --> 01:05:54,100
che si tratti di Israele, della Palestina, del terrorismo, del matrimonio gay,

1570
01:05:54,640 --> 01:05:56,440
abbiamo abortito.

1571
01:05:57,080 --> 01:06:01,560
Abbiamo difeso entrambi i lati di questa argomentazione.

1572
01:06:01,620 --> 01:06:02,500
L'altra parte, e io li chiamo gli orfani della guerra culturale.

1573
01:06:02,820 --> 01:06:04,140
Voglio davvero esortare i media a iniziare a preoccuparsi dei casi di libertà di parola che esistono

1574
01:06:04,400 --> 01:06:07,100
che in realtà non hanno una valenza politica e che in realtà sono semplicemente un buon vecchio stile

1575
01:06:08,180 --> 01:06:12,020
esercizio di potere contro il piccoletto, la ragazzina o il gruppetto nel campus o fuori

1576
01:06:12,620 --> 01:06:13,760
campus per quella materia.

1577
01:06:14,380 --> 01:06:15,080
Perché questi casi accadono.

1578
01:06:15,420 --> 01:06:15,540
Gran parte dei nostri contenziosi riguardano solo piccole persone

1579
01:06:15,840 --> 01:06:17,120
mentre alle persone normali viene detto che non possono protestare,

1580
01:06:17,660 --> 01:06:19,520
che non possono trattenere i segni.

1581
01:06:19,520 --> 01:06:21,100
E poi l'ultima parte dell'argomentazione che voglio che le persone comprendano davvero è, sì.

1582
01:06:21,220 --> 01:06:22,140
E comunque,

1583
01:06:22,400 --> 01:06:23,820
eh, anche gli esponenti della destra finiscono nei guai.

1584
01:06:23,820 --> 01:06:26,940
Ehm, e ci sono attacchi da sinistra

1585
01:06:28,200 --> 01:06:29,620
e dovresti prendere sul serio anche quelli.

1586
01:06:29,840 --> 01:06:31,460
Dovresti preoccuparti quando entreranno i repubblicani

1587
01:06:31,900 --> 01:06:36,600
guaio.

1588
01:06:37,260 --> 01:06:39,800
Dovrebbe interessarti quando la California avrà un DEI,

1589
01:06:40,240 --> 01:06:41,720
un programma che lo richiede nei college della comunità della California

1590
01:06:42,300 --> 01:06:44,340
ha una politica del programma DEI che in realtà richiede anche

1591
01:06:44,340 --> 01:06:44,960
i professori di chimica lavorano in idee DEI diverse dall'intersezionalità a

1592
01:06:45,120 --> 01:06:48,440
antirazzismo nella loro classe,

1593
01:06:48,440 --> 01:06:50,080
nel loro programma di studio, eccetera.

1594
01:06:50,530 --> 01:06:51,080
Questo è un

1595
01:06:51,860 --> 01:06:52,420
grave violazione della libertà accademica.

1596
01:06:52,740 --> 01:06:53,720
È altrettanto brutto dire ai professori ciò che non possono dire.

1597
01:06:54,500 --> 01:06:55,260
Come se avessimo combattuto e sconfitto in Florida.

1598
01:06:55,960 --> 01:07:00,320
È ancora peggio dire loro quello che devono dire.

1599
01:07:00,500 --> 01:07:02,420
Questo è decisamente totalitario.

1600
01:07:02,940 --> 01:07:05,080
E stiamo facendo causa contro questo.

1601
01:07:05,120 --> 01:07:06,880
E quello che sono, quello che sto dicendo è

1602
01:07:08,080 --> 01:07:10,100
che,

1603
01:07:10,120 --> 01:07:11,100
quando licenzi qualcuno per giusto motivo

1604
01:07:11,100 --> 01:07:12,580
essere dall'altro,

1605
01:07:12,580 --> 01:07:13,420
dall’altra parte del recinto politico,

1606
01:07:13,500 --> 01:07:18,260
anche tu sei gentile

1607
01:07:18,920 --> 01:07:19,320
affermare, affermare che anche nessuno di questi casi ha importanza.

1608
01:07:19,940 --> 01:07:20,240
E voglio che le persone si preoccupino della censura anche quando è contro persone che odiano.

1609
01:07:20,820 --> 01:07:23,060
La censura è censura.

1610
01:07:23,180 --> 01:07:23,880
Se possiamo prendere brevemente la tangente con il DEI,

1611
01:07:24,100 --> 01:07:25,040
diversità, equità e inclusione,

1612
01:07:25,040 --> 01:07:27,620
qual è il bene e qual è il danno di tali programmi?

1613
01:07:27,840 --> 01:07:30,560
DEI, conosco persone che sono DEI, um,

1614
01:07:30,840 --> 01:07:31,700
consulenti o altro,

1615
01:07:32,280 --> 01:07:35,180
in realtà ho un caro amico a cui voglio molto bene,

1616
01:07:35,520 --> 01:07:40,400
ehm, chi fa DEI.

1617
01:07:40,400 --> 01:07:41,880
Persone assolutamente perbene.

1618
01:07:42,160 --> 01:07:45,660
Ciò che vogliono fare è creare legami di comprensione,

1619
01:07:45,680 --> 01:07:47,320
amicizia, compassione tra la gente,

1620
01:07:47,340 --> 01:07:51,240
persone che sono diverse.

1621
01:07:51,320 --> 01:07:56,260
Purtroppo,

1622
01:07:56,780 --> 01:07:57,280
la ricerca su ciò che fa effettivamente gran parte del DEI

1623
01:07:57,680 --> 01:07:58,000
spesso è il contrario.

1624
01:07:58,400 --> 01:08:01,680
E penso che sia in parte un problema con alcune ideologie che derivano da una teoria critica della razza,

1625
01:08:01,680 --> 01:08:04,620
che è una cosa reale,

1626
01:08:04,780 --> 01:08:07,360
a proposito, questo informa molto il DEI,

1627
01:08:07,360 --> 01:08:09,760
questo in realtà lo rende qualcosa che ha più probabilità di dividere che di unire.

1628
01:08:10,280 --> 01:08:11,820
Ne parliamo in coccole all'americana

1629
01:08:11,820 --> 01:08:13,400
mente come la differenza tra la politica identitaria comune dell’umanità e la politica identitaria comune del nemico.

1630
01:08:13,660 --> 01:08:13,940
E penso che,

1631
01:08:14,520 --> 01:08:18,420
uh, conosco alcune delle persone che conosco che,

1632
01:08:18,880 --> 01:08:19,720
chi fa il DEI, vuole davvero che diventi una politica dell'identità comune dell'umanità,

1633
01:08:19,720 --> 01:08:20,000
ma alcuni dei reali

1634
01:08:20,160 --> 01:08:20,720
I presupposti ideologici radicati possono effettivamente far sì che le persone si sentano più alienate le une dalle altre.

1635
01:08:21,200 --> 01:08:23,320
Ora, quando ho iniziato a FIRE,

1636
01:08:23,540 --> 01:08:27,160
i miei primi casi riguardavano l'11 settembre.

1637
01:08:27,380 --> 01:08:33,280
Uhm, ed è stato brutto.

1638
01:08:33,720 --> 01:08:35,080
Uh, i professori venivano presi di mira.

1639
01:08:35,340 --> 01:08:39,480
I professori perdevano il lavoro per aver detto

1640
01:08:39,500 --> 01:08:42,520
cose insensibili sull'11 settembre e su entrambi,

1641
01:08:43,320 --> 01:08:43,760
da destra e da sinistra,

1642
01:08:43,840 --> 01:08:45,440
in realtà in quel caso,

1643
01:08:45,800 --> 01:08:48,400
in realtà a volte di più, molto di più da destra.

1644
01:08:48,580 --> 01:08:50,080
Ehm, e

1645
01:08:50,320 --> 01:08:52,920
è stato davvero brutto.

1646
01:08:52,920 --> 01:08:54,260
E circa cinque professori hanno perso il lavoro.

1647
01:08:54,320 --> 01:08:54,640
Questo è male.

1648
01:08:54,960 --> 01:08:58,440
Cinque professori in un periodo relativamente breve di

1649
01:08:58,640 --> 01:09:00,180
volta essere licenziato per un'opinione politica.

1650
01:09:00,980 --> 01:09:02,540
E' qualcosa che, sai, verrebbe scritto

1651
01:09:02,580 --> 01:09:06,540
in eventuali decenni precedenti.

1652
01:09:07,200 --> 01:09:09,540
Ora stiamo valutando quanti professori sono stati presi di mira

1653
01:09:09,740 --> 01:09:11,700
per cancellazione tra il 2014 e...

1654
01:09:12,200 --> 01:09:18,600
metà di quest'anno,

1655
01:09:19,120 --> 01:09:23,020
Luglio del, del, del 2023.

1656
01:09:23,400 --> 01:09:28,200
Stiamo facendo più di mille tentativi per trovare professori,

1657
01:09:28,200 --> 01:09:30,980
uh, licenziati o puniti, di solito guidati da studenti e amministratori,

1658
01:09:31,080 --> 01:09:31,720
spesso guidati anche dai professori, purtroppo.

1659
01:09:31,800 --> 01:09:36,080
Circa due terzi di quelli

1660
01:09:37,020 --> 01:09:38,640
comportare che il professore venga punito in qualche modo.

1661
01:09:39,140 --> 01:09:41,820
Ehm, di tutto, dalla rimozione del loro articolo alla sospensione, eccetera.

1662
01:09:41,820 --> 01:09:47,520
Circa un quinto di questi risultano essere professori

1663
01:09:48,300 --> 01:09:49,980
licenziato.

1664
01:09:50,140 --> 01:09:51,640
Quindi in questo momento siamo,

1665
01:09:52,420 --> 01:09:55,220
sono, sono quasi 200, sono circa 190,

1666
01:09:55,220 --> 01:09:56,520
ehm, i professori vengono licenziati.

1667
01:09:56,800 --> 01:10:00,740
Ehm, quindi voglio fornire un po' di contesto qui.

1668
01:10:00,740 --> 01:10:01,660
Uh, si ritiene generalmente che lo spavento rosso sia stato...

1669
01:10:01,660 --> 01:10:04,320
ehm, dal 1947 al 1957.

1670
01:10:04,480 --> 01:10:06,340
Tutto finì nel 57 quando finalmente divenne chiaro,

1671
01:10:06,360 --> 01:10:08,860
ehm, grazie al primo emendamento non potevi licenziare le persone per le loro ideologie.

1672
01:10:08,940 --> 01:10:11,180
Prima di ciò,

1673
01:10:11,320 --> 01:10:14,900
molte università pensavano di poterlo fare.

1674
01:10:15,000 --> 01:10:16,340
Dicevano, questo ragazzo è un vero dottore,

1675
01:10:16,440 --> 01:10:19,900
ehm, comunista dottrinario.

1676
01:10:20,420 --> 01:10:21,720
Uh, sai, non si può semplicemente aspettare.

1677
01:10:22,000 --> 01:10:24,360
Li licenzierò.

1678
01:10:24,980 --> 01:10:28,240
Pensavano di poterlo fare davvero.

1679
01:10:29,020 --> 01:10:34,320
Ehm, ed erano solo 57 quando fu istituita la legge.

1680
01:10:34,340 --> 01:10:38,740
Quindi, come adesso, questi stanno accadendo in un ambiente in cui la libertà di parola,

1681
01:10:38,780 --> 01:10:45,580
la libertà accademica sia chiaramente tutelata,

1682
01:10:45,580 --> 01:10:46,420
ehm, nei college pubblici negli Stati Uniti.

1683
01:10:46,660 --> 01:10:47,460
E stiamo ancora vedendo questo tipo di numeri.

1684
01:10:47,840 --> 01:10:49,820
Ehm, durante...

1685
01:10:50,580 --> 01:10:52,820
durante lo spavento rosso,

1686
01:10:52,840 --> 01:10:53,960
il più grande studio che

1687
01:10:54,440 --> 01:10:57,760
è stato fatto quello che stava succedendo, penso che sia uscito intorno al 55.

1688
01:10:58,100 --> 01:10:59,400
E la valutazione era

1689
01:10:59,740 --> 01:11:01,080
per cui furono licenziati circa 62 professori,

1690
01:11:01,300 --> 01:11:03,480
per, per essere comunista e circa 90

1691
01:11:03,560 --> 01:11:05,520
qualcosa che i professori hanno licenziato per le loro opinioni politiche in generale.

1692
01:11:05,900 --> 01:11:08,080
Uhm, di solito è così, si dice che siano circa 100.

1693
01:11:08,080 --> 01:11:08,220
Uhm, quindi 60, 90,

1694
01:11:08,500 --> 01:11:12,100
100, a seconda di come lo guardi,

1695
01:11:12,100 --> 01:11:15,680
Penso che il numero sia effettivamente più alto.

1696
01:11:16,260 --> 01:11:20,260
Ehm, ma è solo a causa del senno di poi.

1697
01:11:20,260 --> 01:11:25,820
Come quello che intendo per senno di poi

1698
01:11:25,820 --> 01:11:27,900
è che possiamo guardare indietro e scoprire che in realtà c'erano più professori licenziati, come rivela il tempo,

1699
01:11:28,040 --> 01:11:29,160
siamo a 190 professori licenziati.

1700
01:11:29,640 --> 01:11:30,240
E devo ancora sopportare la gente che dice

1701
01:11:30,920 --> 01:11:32,580
questo non sta nemmeno accadendo.

1702
01:11:33,160 --> 01:11:36,980
E penso che nei nove anni e mezzo di cultura dell'annullamento,

1703
01:11:37,060 --> 01:11:38,920
190 professori licenziati negli 11 anni di

1704
01:11:39,340 --> 01:11:41,520
ehm, dello spavento rosso,

1705
01:11:41,560 --> 01:11:42,880
probabilmente, sai, circa un centinaio, forse probabilmente di più

1706
01:11:43,360 --> 01:11:44,220
è così, il numero continuerà a salire.

1707
01:11:44,400 --> 01:11:46,540
Uhm, ma a differenza del periodo della Paura Rossa, in cui la gente poteva chiaramente dire che stava succedendo qualcosa,

1708
01:11:47,060 --> 01:11:48,620
la cosa più folle della cultura dell'annullamento è che alcuni hanno ancora a che fare

1709
01:11:49,400 --> 01:11:50,860
persone che dicono che questo non sta accadendo affatto.

1710
01:11:50,860 --> 01:11:51,500
E non è stato discreto nel campus.

1711
01:11:51,500 --> 01:11:52,780
E sappiamo che è una cifra decisamente sottostimata,

1712
01:11:53,540 --> 01:11:55,040
comunque, perché quando noi, quando abbiamo intervistato i professori,

1713
01:11:55,040 --> 01:11:58,420
Il 17% di loro

1714
01:11:58,500 --> 01:12:04,390
hanno detto che erano stati minacciati di...

1715
01:12:05,800 --> 01:12:07,080
minacciati di indagini o effettivamente indagati per ciò che hanno insegnato, hanno detto,

1716
01:12:08,710 --> 01:12:13,360
o la loro ricerca.

1717
01:12:13,820 --> 01:12:15,040
E un terzo di loro ha affermato che gli amministratori gli avevano detto di non intraprendere ricerche controverse.

1718
01:12:16,540 --> 01:12:20,340
Quindi, come estrapolarlo,

1719
01:12:20,840 --> 01:12:23,340
è un numero enorme.

1720
01:12:23,700 --> 01:12:24,740
E il motivo per cui non sentirete parlare di molti di questi casi è perché ci sono così tanti diversi meccanismi che inducono al conformismo nell'intera faccenda.

1721
01:12:25,400 --> 01:12:28,000
Sì.

1722
01:12:28,000 --> 01:12:29,240
E questo è uno dei motivi per cui l'idea di aggiungere qualcosa come una D,

1723
01:12:30,180 --> 01:12:31,640
come richiedere una dichiarazione DEI per essere assunti o per entrare in una scuola nell'ambiente attuale è così completamente folle.

1724
01:12:32,280 --> 01:12:37,000
Negli ultimi anni abbiamo avuto una vera e propria crisi della libertà accademica,

1725
01:12:37,520 --> 01:12:39,480
sai, in particolare dal 2017 nei campus,

1726
01:12:39,580 --> 01:12:40,140
tanto per cominciare abbiamo una diversità di punti di vista molto bassa.

1727
01:12:40,950 --> 01:12:41,500
E in queste circostanze,

1728
01:12:41,920 --> 01:12:44,620
gli amministratori inizino a dire:

1729
01:12:45,200 --> 01:12:46,480
sai qual è il problema?

1730
01:12:46,900 --> 01:12:53,240
Abbiamo un pensiero troppo eterogeneo.

1731
01:12:53,800 --> 01:12:54,560
Sì, non siamo abbastanza omogenei.

1732
01:12:54,700 --> 01:12:57,280
In realtà abbiamo bisogno, sapete, di un'altra cartina di tornasole politica, il che è pazzesco.

1733
01:12:57,300 --> 01:12:59,960
E questo è ciò che effettivamente è un'affermazione DEI.

1734
01:13:00,320 --> 01:13:03,440
Perché non c'è modo di compilare effettivamente una dichiarazione dei DEI senza che qualcuno ti valuti sulla tua politica.

1735
01:13:03,440 --> 01:13:08,920
È cristallino.

1736
01:13:09,560 --> 01:13:10,380
È cristallino.

1737
01:13:10,760 --> 01:13:13,040
Abbiamo anche fatto un esperimento su questo Nate Honeycutt.

1738
01:13:13,040 --> 01:13:17,520
Ha convinto a partecipare qualcosa come quasi 3000 professori

1739
01:13:17,700 --> 01:13:18,960
valutare diversi tipi di dichiarazioni DEI.

1740
01:13:19,000 --> 01:13:25,300
Ehm,

1741
01:13:26,060 --> 01:13:27,680
e uno era fondamentalmente come il tipo standard di intersezionalità della politica dell'identità,

1742
01:13:28,020 --> 01:13:30,280
uno riguardava la diversità dei punti di vista.

1743
01:13:31,040 --> 01:13:32,660
Uno riguardava la diversità religiosa e l’altro la diversità socioeconomica.

1744
01:13:33,300 --> 01:13:34,620
E per quanto riguarda il mio cuore,

1745
01:13:34,800 --> 01:13:37,180
è che abbiamo troppo poca diversità socioeconomica,

1746
01:13:37,200 --> 01:13:40,420
in particolare nell'istruzione superiore d'élite,

1747
01:13:40,420 --> 01:13:41,340
ma anche nel periodo formativo.

1748
01:13:41,420 --> 01:13:42,440
Quindi l'esperimento prevedeva una grande partecipazione,

1749
01:13:42,560 --> 01:13:44,580
allestito davvero in modo interessante.

1750
01:13:45,160 --> 01:13:46,200
E ha cercato di modellare il modo in cui molte di queste politiche DEI venivano effettivamente implementate.

1751
01:13:46,840 --> 01:13:47,640
E uno dei modi in cui questi sono stati implementati,

1752
01:13:48,240 --> 01:13:50,160
e penso che in alcuni dei

1753
01:13:50,640 --> 01:13:51,480
Le scuole della California sono amministratori e esaminano prima le dichiarazioni dei DEI.

1754
01:13:51,740 --> 01:13:54,000
Qualcun altro li guarda e poi elimina le persone dai vertici, a seconda di come,

1755
01:13:54,000 --> 01:13:55,720
cosa pensano delle loro dichiarazioni del DEI

1756
01:13:56,200 --> 01:13:58,420
e quello sulla diversità dei punti di vista.

1757
01:13:58,480 --> 01:13:59,780
Penso che la metà delle persone che lo hanno recensito lo farebbero,

1758
01:14:00,800 --> 01:14:04,300
lo eliminerei del tutto.

1759
01:14:04,520 --> 01:14:07,660
Ehm, e penso che sia stato sostanzialmente lo stesso per la diversità religiosa.

1760
01:14:08,220 --> 01:14:09,060
Era leggermente meglio,

1761
01:14:09,360 --> 01:14:11,600
come il 40% per la diversità socioeconomica,

1762
01:14:12,320 --> 01:14:15,660
ma questo mi uccide.

1763
01:14:16,140 --> 01:14:20,520
Mi piace l'idea che tipo,

1764
01:14:21,080 --> 01:14:23,100
sì, in realtà questo è il tipo di diversità di cui penso abbiamo bisogno molto di più,

1765
01:14:23,960 --> 01:14:26,220
nell'istruzione superiore.

1766
01:14:26,220 --> 01:14:28,880
Puoi essere d'accordo che non è ostile agli altri tipi,

1767
01:14:29,120 --> 01:14:34,180
A proposito.

1768
01:14:35,080 --> 01:14:38,380
Uhm, ma l'idea che abbiamo bisogno di più persone dal basso,

1769
01:14:38,740 --> 01:14:39,280
sai, tre quarti della società americana,

1770
01:14:39,520 --> 01:14:40,240
come in un'istruzione superiore,

1771
01:14:40,300 --> 01:14:42,240
Penso che dovrebbe essere qualcosa che tutti potremmo aggirare.

1772
01:14:42,540 --> 01:14:43,740
Ma l'unico che ha davvero avuto successo è stato quello,

1773
01:14:44,260 --> 01:14:46,540
che è ricresciuto esattamente

1774
01:14:47,300 --> 01:14:50,000
il tipo di ideologia che pensavano sarebbe piaciuta alle retrovie,

1775
01:14:50,260 --> 01:14:52,240
che è come, okay,

1776
01:14:52,460 --> 01:14:55,940
non è possibile che questa non possa essere una cartina di tornasole politica.

1777
01:14:55,940 --> 01:15:00,480
Abbiamo dimostrato che è una cartina di tornasole politica e ancora scuola dopo scuola si aggiunge

1778
01:15:00,620 --> 01:15:01,140
questi al suo processo di candidatura per rendere le scuole ancora più ideologicamente omogenee.

1779
01:15:02,120 --> 01:15:03,360
Perché ha un effetto negativo?

1780
01:15:03,600 --> 01:15:05,040
È perché

1781
01:15:05,300 --> 01:15:06,140
impone una sorta di pensiero di gruppo in cui le persone hanno paura,

1782
01:15:06,280 --> 01:15:07,920
iniziare ad avere paura di pensare e parlare

1783
01:15:08,160 --> 01:15:09,280
liberamente,

1784
01:15:09,680 --> 01:15:11,420
liberamente su qualunque cosa.

1785
01:15:12,180 --> 01:15:14,620
Beh, uno, seleziona le persone che tendono ad essere più a sinistra,

1786
01:15:14,660 --> 01:15:18,040
ehm, in una situazione in cui hai già,

1787
01:15:18,360 --> 01:15:20,380
uh, gente, una situazione in cui le università si appoggiano decisamente a questo

1788
01:15:20,700 --> 01:15:23,360
modo, ma stabilisce anche essenzialmente un insieme di idee sacre

1789
01:15:23,360 --> 01:15:24,880
che se ti chiedono se,

1790
01:15:25,740 --> 01:15:26,460
sai, cosa hai fatto per avanzare

1791
01:15:26,880 --> 01:15:28,080
antirazzismo,

1792
01:15:28,400 --> 01:15:29,360
ehm, ferito, ehm,

1793
01:15:29,360 --> 01:15:32,840
come sei stato consapevole dell'intersezionalità,

1794
01:15:33,420 --> 01:15:35,620
è improbabile che tu possa davvero entrare.

1795
01:15:35,640 --> 01:15:39,700
E se dicessi

1796
01:15:39,700 --> 01:15:42,300
a proposito, in realtà penso che questi siano concetti dubbi.

1797
01:15:42,860 --> 01:15:45,840
Penso che siano magri.

1798
01:15:46,720 --> 01:15:50,560
Penso che siano filosoficamente poco difendibili,

1799
01:15:51,860 --> 01:15:53,500
ma fondamentalmente come se,

1800
01:15:53,820 --> 01:15:55,160
se la tua posizione fosse,

1801
01:15:55,160 --> 01:15:56,880
In realtà mi rifiuto, in realtà

1802
01:15:57,280 --> 01:15:59,680
ehm, questi concetti sono troppo semplici.

1803
01:15:59,800 --> 01:16:01,200
Uhm, non entrerai, non entrerai.

1804
01:16:01,200 --> 01:16:06,500
E, e, e penso che,

1805
01:16:07,560 --> 01:16:10,300
ehm, la persona che io

1806
01:16:10,300 --> 01:16:11,900
pensa sempre che non fosse un'ala destra che direbbe,

1807
01:16:11,900 --> 01:16:12,980
vai all'inferno.

1808
01:16:13,000 --> 01:16:15,220
Se tu, se gli hai fatto compilare una di queste cose, è Feynman.

1809
01:16:15,680 --> 01:16:19,300
Mi sento come se tu,

1810
01:16:19,300 --> 01:16:20,920
se dessi una di queste cose a Richard Feynman, direbbe:

1811
01:16:21,820 --> 01:16:24,440
lo avrebbe fatto a pezzi.

1812
01:16:25,000 --> 01:16:27,060
Sì.

1813
01:16:27,400 --> 01:16:30,980
E non ottenere il lavoro.

1814
01:16:31,360 --> 01:16:33,980
Sì, ecco, c'è qualche elemento che crea questo

1815
01:16:33,980 --> 01:16:35,720
difficile definire la paura.

1816
01:16:36,020 --> 01:16:38,300
Quindi hai detto come lo sparo,

1817
01:16:38,620 --> 01:16:39,820
la cosa che volevo dire è licenziare un centinaio o 200 persone.

1818
01:16:39,880 --> 01:16:42,120
Il punto è addirittura licenziare una persona,

1819
01:16:43,160 --> 01:16:44,540
L'ho appena visto.

1820
01:16:45,240 --> 01:16:47,600
Può creare questo silenzioso effetto a catena della paura.

1821
01:16:48,160 --> 01:16:52,480
Oh, certo.

1822
01:16:52,920 --> 01:16:53,720
Quell'unico licenziamento di una facoltà.

1823
01:16:54,380 --> 01:17:00,620
Oh, assolutamente.

1824
01:17:01,300 --> 01:17:02,980
Ha un effetto a catena su decine di migliaia di persone,

1825
01:17:02,980 --> 01:17:03,940
degli educatori,

1826
01:17:03,960 --> 01:17:10,920
di, di, uh, chi è stato assunto,

1827
01:17:11,140 --> 01:17:11,500
che tipo di conversazioni si stanno avendo, avuto,

1828
01:17:11,760 --> 01:17:15,060
che tipo di libri di testo vengono scelti,

1829
01:17:15,220 --> 01:17:22,040
che tipo di autocensura e diversi tipi di ciò sta accadendo.

1830
01:17:22,740 --> 01:17:25,680
È difficile misurarlo.

1831
01:17:25,820 --> 01:17:28,740
Sì.

1832
01:17:29,340 --> 01:17:31,740
Voglio dire, quando chiedi informazioni ai professori,

1833
01:17:32,380 --> 01:17:34,180
sai, sono intimiditi dall'ambiente attuale?

1834
01:17:34,420 --> 01:17:35,660
Ehm, la risposta è sì.

1835
01:17:35,920 --> 01:17:36,640
E soprattutto i professori conservatori,

1836
01:17:36,860 --> 01:17:40,080
lo sai, già, lo sai,

1837
01:17:40,280 --> 01:17:41,660
segnalando che sono,

1838
01:17:41,840 --> 01:17:46,040
sai, hanno paura per il proprio lavoro in molti casi diversi.

1839
01:17:46,720 --> 01:17:49,000
Nel libro ci sono molte buone statistiche,

1840
01:17:49,140 --> 01:17:54,660
cose come l'autocensura.

1841
01:17:55,040 --> 01:17:55,640
Quando viene fornita la definizione di autocensura,

1842
01:17:55,660 --> 01:17:56,380
almeno un quarto degli studenti ha affermato di autocensurarsi

1843
01:17:56,880 --> 01:17:59,800
abbastanza spesso o molto spesso durante le conversazioni con altri studenti,

1844
01:18:00,720 --> 01:18:04,240
con i professori e durante i dibattiti in aula,

1845
01:18:04,840 --> 01:18:07,920
rispettivamente 25%, 27% e 28%.

1846
01:18:08,720 --> 01:18:09,020
Uh, anche un quarto degli studenti ha detto di sì

1847
01:18:09,420 --> 01:18:14,260
ora è più probabile che si autocensurino nel campus,

1848
01:18:14,640 --> 01:18:17,200
uh, all'epoca erano stati intervistati rispetto a loro

1849
01:18:17,500 --> 01:18:21,560
erano quando iniziarono per la prima volta il college.

1850
01:18:21,660 --> 01:18:23,320
Quindi una specie di college instillano questa idea di,

1851
01:18:23,640 --> 01:18:26,060
di, di censura, autocensura.

1852
01:18:26,300 --> 01:18:27,140
E torniamo al paragone Red Scare,

1853
01:18:27,160 --> 01:18:29,000
e questa è una delle cose interessanti

1854
01:18:30,040 --> 01:18:34,120
anche i dati

1855
01:18:34,340 --> 01:18:35,400
è questo

1856
01:18:35,520 --> 01:18:39,180
quello stesso studio di cui stavo parlando,

1857
01:18:39,900 --> 01:18:41,860
lo studio più completo del, del Red Scare,

1858
01:18:41,960 --> 01:18:43,000
si è svolto un sondaggio per stabilire se i professori lo fossero o meno

1859
01:18:43,000 --> 01:18:48,480
autocensura per paura dell’ambiente.

1860
01:18:49,460 --> 01:18:53,220
E il 9% dei professori ha affermato di autocensurarsi

1861
01:18:54,040 --> 01:18:56,920
la loro ricerca e quello che dicevano,

1862
01:18:57,500 --> 01:19:01,100
Il 9% è davvero pessimo.

1863
01:19:01,560 --> 01:19:04,120
Ehm, quello è quasi un decimo dei professori che dicono di essere in realtà,

1864
01:19:04,380 --> 01:19:05,180
il loro discorso era freddo.

1865
01:19:06,060 --> 01:19:08,380
Quando l'abbiamo fatto

1866
01:19:09,460 --> 01:19:10,680
domanda per i professori sul nostro ultimo sondaggio tra docenti,

1867
01:19:10,860 --> 01:19:14,620
ehm, quando li metti insieme, se sono,

1868
01:19:14,820 --> 01:19:15,880
abbiamo chiesto loro, si autocensurano nelle loro ricerche o si autocensurano in classe,

1869
01:19:15,960 --> 01:19:16,920
si autocensurano online,

1870
01:19:16,960 --> 01:19:20,560
eccetera, era il 90% dei professori.

1871
01:19:20,560 --> 01:19:21,280
Quindi l'idea che ci troviamo effettivamente in un ambiente storico,

1872
01:19:21,380 --> 01:19:24,200
ehm, in termini di quanto siano effettivamente spaventate le persone

1873
01:19:24,240 --> 01:19:24,940
esprimere opinioni controverse.

1874
01:19:24,940 --> 01:19:27,880
Penso che sia,

1875
01:19:27,980 --> 01:19:30,820
è il motivo per cui lo studieremo davvero

1876
01:19:30,960 --> 01:19:32,640
tra 50 anni, nello stesso modo in cui studiamo lo spavento rosso.

1877
01:19:32,680 --> 01:19:33,560
Uhm, il punto non è che questo non stia accadendo, è...

1878
01:19:33,580 --> 01:19:37,000
sarà semplicemente visto correttamente come pazzo.

1879
01:19:37,000 --> 01:19:38,460
Quindi forse possiamo semplicemente,

1880
01:19:38,460 --> 01:19:42,680
uh, parliamo della tendenza, dell'attuale tendenza del mondo accademico verso sinistra,

1881
01:19:43,080 --> 01:19:43,760
che descrivi in diverse prospettive.

1882
01:19:44,720 --> 01:19:46,560
Quindi, c'è una registrazione degli elettori

1883
01:19:47,240 --> 01:19:52,100
grafico dei rapporti che hai per dipartimento,

1884
01:19:52,100 --> 01:19:57,100
che penso sia interessante.

1885
01:19:57,840 --> 01:19:58,560
Puoi spiegarlo?

1886
01:19:58,580 --> 01:20:00,180
grafico e puoi spiegare cosa mostra?

1887
01:20:01,180 --> 01:20:06,300
Sì, quando ho appiccato il fuoco nel 2001,

1888
01:20:08,000 --> 01:20:11,800
Non ho preso sul serio la questione della diversità dei punti di vista.

1889
01:20:12,980 --> 01:20:13,540
Pensavo fosse semplicemente qualcosa di cui si lamentavano gli esponenti della destra.

1890
01:20:14,280 --> 01:20:15,760
Uhm, ma ho davvero iniziato a capire

1891
01:20:16,240 --> 01:20:20,200
cosa succede quando hai una comunità con bassi...

1892
01:20:20,540 --> 01:20:22,160
con una bassa diversità di punti di vista.

1893
01:20:22,460 --> 01:20:26,160
E in realtà molte delle ricerche che mi interessavano di più riguardavano:

1894
01:20:26,180 --> 01:20:30,020
uh, fatto insieme al grande Cass Sunstein,

1895
01:20:30,920 --> 01:20:33,740
ehm, che scrive molto sulla polarizzazione dei gruppi.

1896
01:20:34,100 --> 01:20:35,980
Ehm, perché, e la ricerca su questo argomento è molto approfondita,

1897
01:20:36,540 --> 01:20:37,900
ma essenzialmente quando hai gruppi con...

1898
01:20:38,280 --> 01:20:39,380
diversità politica, e lo si può vedere effettivamente nei giudici, ad esempio,

1899
01:20:39,680 --> 01:20:41,860
tende a produrre risultati attendibilmente più moderati.

1900
01:20:42,480 --> 01:20:44,240
Uhm, mentre i gruppi che sono,

1901
01:20:44,320 --> 01:20:44,740
che hanno una bassa diversità politica tendono a creare una sorta di spirale,

1902
01:20:44,820 --> 01:20:47,700
spirale nella propria direzione.

1903
01:20:47,980 --> 01:20:48,720
E quando si ha una stragrande maggioranza di persone da un solo punto di vista politico,

1904
01:20:48,980 --> 01:20:50,920
questo è un problema per la produzione di idee.

1905
01:20:51,160 --> 01:20:52,080
Crea una situazione in cui ci sono idee sacre.

1906
01:20:52,120 --> 01:20:53,080
E quando guardi alcuni dipartimenti,

1907
01:20:53,700 --> 01:20:54,960
ehm, sai, penso che la S the

1908
01:20:55,220 --> 01:20:58,280
stima del Crimson è che Harvard è,

1909
01:20:59,220 --> 01:21:00,680
ha il 3% di conservatori.

1910
01:21:01,060 --> 01:21:02,180
Ma quando guardi

1911
01:21:02,180 --> 01:21:03,320
in diversi dipartimenti, ci sono dipartimenti d'élite che non hanno letteralmente, um,

1912
01:21:03,320 --> 01:21:06,460
uh, conservatori, uh, in loro.

1913
01:21:07,160 --> 01:21:07,780
E penso che sia,

1914
01:21:07,960 --> 01:21:10,660
questo è un ambiente intellettuale sano.

1915
01:21:11,420 --> 01:21:12,060
Il problema è decisamente peggiore.

1916
01:21:12,140 --> 01:21:14,720
Uhm, man mano che diventi più elitario,

1917
01:21:15,240 --> 01:21:17,060
uh, vediamo sicuramente più casi di,

1918
01:21:18,360 --> 01:21:18,680
uh, i professori di sinistra vengono cancellati dalle scuole meno elitarie.

1919
01:21:18,780 --> 01:21:19,400
Diventa peggio quando tu,

1920
01:21:20,880 --> 01:21:24,940
mentre scendi dal,

1921
01:21:26,440 --> 01:21:28,220
le scuole d'élite, è lì che gran parte di un terzo dei tentativi di ottenere, uh,

1922
01:21:28,300 --> 01:21:29,560
professori puniti che hanno successo,

1923
01:21:30,100 --> 01:21:33,440
sai, vieni da destra e in gran parte

1924
01:21:33,940 --> 01:21:36,180
da fuori dal campus, uh,

1925
01:21:36,280 --> 01:21:37,260
fonti esterne al campus.

1926
01:21:37,280 --> 01:21:40,940
E passiamo molto tempo a parlarne anche nel libro.

1927
01:21:40,980 --> 01:21:41,500
Ehm, è qualcosa che penso sia sottovalutato.

1928
01:21:41,960 --> 01:21:44,220
Uh, ma quando si arriva al minimo,

1929
01:21:44,220 --> 01:21:44,840
bassa diversità di punti di vista, sai, funziona più o meno come ti aspetteresti, in una certa misura,

1930
01:21:45,120 --> 01:21:49,160
sai, l'economia è la cosa quattro

1931
01:21:49,620 --> 01:21:50,300
a uno o qualcosa del genere.

1932
01:21:51,020 --> 01:21:52,500
Non è così male.

1933
01:21:52,880 --> 01:21:55,020
Uhm, ma poi quando inizi ad interessarti ad alcune discipline umanistiche,

1934
01:21:55,380 --> 01:21:56,920
sai, come se ci fossero dipartimenti che non sono letteralmente nessuno.

1935
01:21:57,440 --> 01:22:00,340
C'è un buon perché?

1936
01:22:00,900 --> 01:22:01,840
al motivo per cui l'amministrazione delle facoltà universitarie dell'università si è spostata a sinistra?

1937
01:22:02,420 --> 01:22:02,540
Sì,

1938
01:22:02,540 --> 01:22:04,920
Non amo, e questo è un argomento in cui a volte ti imbatti a sinistra,

1939
01:22:05,280 --> 01:22:07,960
uh, solo l'argomentazione secondo cui,

1940
01:22:08,460 --> 01:22:11,080
beh, le persone di sinistra sono semplicemente più intelligenti.

1941
01:22:11,080 --> 01:22:12,640
Giusto.

1942
01:22:12,640 --> 01:22:14,180
Ed è come, okay, è interessante perché almeno la ricerca a partire da

1943
01:22:14,940 --> 01:22:15,700
10 anni fa indicava che se si scava un po' più a fondo,

1944
01:22:16,460 --> 01:22:18,220
molte delle persone che si considerano di sinistra tendono ad essere un po’ di più.

1945
01:22:18,740 --> 01:22:20,500
libertario,

1946
01:22:20,640 --> 01:22:21,720
la canzone che Pinker, sai,

1947
01:22:22,460 --> 01:22:24,980
ha scritto parecchio sull'idea che siamo semplicemente più intelligenti.

1948
01:22:25,040 --> 01:22:27,260
Non è, non è un'opinione.

1949
01:22:27,260 --> 01:22:30,160
Io, almeno, mi sento un po' a mio agio con,

1950
01:22:30,540 --> 01:22:32,780
ehm, penso proprio che...

1951
01:22:33,680 --> 01:22:36,880
quello, uh, che i dipartimenti si assumono,

1952
01:22:37,620 --> 01:22:39,680
ehm, slancio quando diventano un luogo

1953
01:22:39,700 --> 01:22:42,160
dove dici, wow, sarebbe davvero spiacevole per me lavorare in questo dipartimento.

1954
01:22:43,080 --> 01:22:46,240
Se sono un conservatore simbolico.

1955
01:22:46,240 --> 01:22:47,720
E penso che questo abbia una vita propria.

1956
01:22:48,300 --> 01:22:51,720
Ci sono anche dei dipartimenti

1957
01:22:52,020 --> 01:22:54,280
dove molte ideologie sono esplicitamente

1958
01:22:54,320 --> 01:22:55,740
di sinistra.

1959
01:22:55,960 --> 01:22:57,460
Uhm, guarda le scuole di istruzione,

1960
01:22:57,460 --> 01:22:58,240
molti dei,

1961
01:22:58,900 --> 01:22:59,220
molte delle cose che in realtà sono rimaste da ciò che viene correttamente chiamato critico

1962
01:22:59,740 --> 01:23:01,340
le teorie della razza sono presenti.

1963
01:23:01,340 --> 01:23:03,360
E finisci per averlo in un certo numero di dipartimenti.

1964
01:23:03,500 --> 01:23:06,140
Ehm,

1965
01:23:06,160 --> 01:23:08,600
e sarebbe molto strano essere un,

1966
01:23:09,480 --> 01:23:12,620
in molti dipartimenti, un assistente sociale conservatore

1967
01:23:12,760 --> 01:23:14,360
Professore.

1968
01:23:15,380 --> 01:23:16,580
Sono sicuro che esistano.

1969
01:23:17,820 --> 01:23:20,780
Ehm,

1970
01:23:20,840 --> 01:23:22,140
Ma

1971
01:23:23,080 --> 01:23:23,780
se lo sei, c'è molta pressione per stare zitto.

1972
01:23:23,780 --> 01:23:27,340
Quindi il processo di cancellazione a sinistra,

1973
01:23:28,000 --> 01:23:29,900
quando hai iniziato a parlare con la perfetta fortezza retorica,

1974
01:23:30,320 --> 01:23:33,200
il, il primo passo è

1975
01:23:33,380 --> 01:23:34,720
licenziare una persona.

1976
01:23:34,880 --> 01:23:37,680
Se sono giusti, se puoi

1977
01:23:38,280 --> 01:23:41,920
metti loro un'etichetta di conservatore,

1978
01:23:42,220 --> 01:23:45,060
puoi licenziarli in questo modo.

1979
01:23:45,780 --> 01:23:46,980
Cosa, quale altro licenziamento efficiente o quale altro licenziamento effettivo ci sono?

1980
01:23:47,240 --> 01:23:48,000
Ci divertiamo un po' con

1981
01:23:48,580 --> 01:23:50,760
uh, uh, con i numeri demografici, ma lo faccio in base all'altezza.

1982
01:23:51,400 --> 01:23:54,700
Uhm, e ricordo che era un po' come,

1983
01:23:54,780 --> 01:23:57,860
Non, non, non includo l'effettivo

1984
01:23:57,860 --> 01:24:00,100
percentuale.

1985
01:24:00,560 --> 01:24:01,760
Io dico, no, dobbiamo includere le percentuali effettive.

1986
01:24:01,760 --> 01:24:06,060
Perché le persone sono davvero cattive

1987
01:24:06,480 --> 01:24:08,780
a stimare come appaiono effettivamente i dati demografici degli Stati Uniti sia a destra che a sinistra in modi diversi.

1988
01:24:09,080 --> 01:24:10,940
Uhm, quindi lo mettiamo nei numeri e parliamo di...

1989
01:24:11,050 --> 01:24:13,880
sai, essere licenziato perché bianco o essere licenziato perché,

1990
01:24:13,920 --> 01:24:14,900
uh, essere etero o essere licenziato perché maschio.

1991
01:24:15,740 --> 01:24:16,500
Ehm, e noi, e tu puoi già licenziare le persone perché sono conservatrici.

1992
01:24:16,500 --> 01:24:18,460
E noi, quindi noi, noi, diamo esempi nel libro di,

1993
01:24:19,020 --> 01:24:20,980
di questi vengono utilizzati per licenziare le persone e spesso su argomenti non correlati

1994
01:24:20,980 --> 01:24:24,740
al fatto che siano maschi o se appartengano o meno a una minoranza.

1995
01:24:24,760 --> 01:24:26,860
E poi arriviamo a

1996
01:24:27,980 --> 01:24:29,180
Penso che sia come il livello sei e noi diciamo,

1997
01:24:29,800 --> 01:24:33,360
sorpresa, indovina un po'?

1998
01:24:34,620 --> 01:24:36,180
Sei sceso allo 0,4% della popolazione e

1999
01:24:36,680 --> 01:24:39,720
niente di tutto ciò aveva importanza.

2000
01:24:39,720 --> 01:24:43,320
Perché se hai un'opinione sbagliata,

2001
01:24:43,540 --> 01:24:46,300
anche se sei in quello 0,4% del

2002
01:24:46,300 --> 01:24:49,580
la persona più intersezionale mai vissuta e tu hai un'opinione sbagliata,

2003
01:24:49,900 --> 01:24:52,700
sei un eretico e anzi probabilmente sarai odiato ancora di più.

2004
01:24:53,580 --> 01:24:56,220
E la parte più interessante del

2005
01:24:56,740 --> 01:25:00,480
la ricerca che abbiamo fatto a questo scopo consisteva semplicemente nel chiedere a tutti gli eminenti,

2006
01:25:00,940 --> 01:25:02,400
uh, nero conservatore e moderato

2007
01:25:02,400 --> 01:25:05,180
che conoscevamo personalmente,

2008
01:25:05,340 --> 01:25:07,020
ti è stato detto che non lo sei davvero?

2009
01:25:07,600 --> 01:25:11,840
nero per un'opinione che avevi

2010
01:25:12,160 --> 01:25:13,820
ognuno di loro diceva:

2011
01:25:14,040 --> 01:25:16,140
oh sì, no.

2012
01:25:16,900 --> 01:25:18,840
Ed è una causa piuttosto divertente

2013
01:25:18,840 --> 01:25:21,660
è come spesso i mancini bianchi

2014
01:25:21,660 --> 01:25:23,500
dicendo loro che è come,

2015
01:25:23,500 --> 01:25:24,880
oh, ti consideri nero?

2016
01:25:25,460 --> 01:25:25,960
John McWhorter ha parlato di avere un giornalista.

2017
01:25:26,160 --> 01:25:29,920
Ehm, quando ha parlato di...

2018
01:25:30,380 --> 01:25:31,700
quando ha mostrato che lui

2019
01:25:31,720 --> 01:25:32,220
dissentito da alcuni di,

2020
01:25:32,580 --> 01:25:35,340
uh, quello che nel suo libro ha descritto come una specie di risveglio del razzismo, risveglio delle idee,

2021
01:25:35,720 --> 01:25:37,360
il giornalista in realtà dice:

2022
01:25:37,980 --> 01:25:39,100
quindi ti consideri nero?

2023
01:25:39,280 --> 01:25:41,160
E' tipo,

2024
01:25:41,760 --> 01:25:44,480
era tipo, cosa sei pazzo?

2025
01:25:44,680 --> 01:25:45,920
Certo che lo faccio.

2026
01:25:45,920 --> 01:25:47,320
E Coleman Hughes aveva una delle migliori citazioni al riguardo.

2027
01:25:47,320 --> 01:25:51,500
Egli ha detto:

2028
01:25:51,860 --> 01:25:53,480
Mi viene costantemente detto che la cosa più importante,

2029
01:25:53,820 --> 01:25:55,520
uh, a quanto sia legittima la mia opinione,

2030
01:25:55,580 --> 01:25:56,640
è se,

2031
01:25:57,460 --> 01:25:58,460
uh, che io sia nero o no,

2032
01:25:58,480 --> 01:26:01,400
ma poi quando ho un'opinione dissenziente,

2033
01:26:01,990 --> 01:26:03,990
Mi viene detto che non sono veramente nero.

2034
01:26:04,980 --> 01:26:06,320
Così perfetta.

2035
01:26:06,320 --> 01:26:10,580
Come se non ci fosse, non ci fosse modo di falsificare, uh,

2036
01:26:10,960 --> 01:26:12,920
questo argomento.

2037
01:26:12,920 --> 01:26:14,180
Uhm, quella davvero, quell'indagine davvero, mi ha davvero colpito.

2038
01:26:14,480 --> 01:26:15,260
Quindi, e nel libro lo spieghi molto bene che c'è questo processo per dire,

2039
01:26:15,540 --> 01:26:17,920
sei conservatore?

2040
01:26:18,220 --> 01:26:21,040
SÌ.

2041
01:26:22,200 --> 01:26:23,760
Puoi licenziare la persona.

2042
01:26:24,700 --> 01:26:29,300
Sei bianco?

2043
01:26:29,760 --> 01:26:30,140
Congedare la persona.

2044
01:26:30,960 --> 01:26:34,820
Sei maschio?

2045
01:26:35,140 --> 01:26:36,580
Puoi licenziare la persona.

2046
01:26:36,840 --> 01:26:38,340
Ci sono queste categorie che ti rendono più facile

2047
01:26:38,580 --> 01:26:39,040
dismettere

2048
01:26:39,300 --> 01:26:43,000
le idee di una persona basate su quello.

2049
01:26:43,980 --> 01:26:47,560
E come hai detto tu,

2050
01:26:47,700 --> 01:26:50,640
finisci in quella piccola percentuale e puoi ancora licenziare.

2051
01:26:51,610 --> 01:26:52,160
E non si tratta solo di licenziare.

2052
01:26:53,040 --> 01:26:55,040
Io, noi, ne parliamo da un,

2053
01:26:55,480 --> 01:26:58,520
da un punto di vista pratico, insomma

2054
01:26:59,440 --> 01:27:01,720
i limiti della realtà e uno di questi è il tempo.

2055
01:27:02,080 --> 01:27:04,260
Ehm, e un sacco di cultura dell'annullamento,

2056
01:27:04,540 --> 01:27:05,600
ehm, come, come, uh, come norme culturali,

2057
01:27:05,600 --> 01:27:07,740
come questo modo di vincere

2058
01:27:08,040 --> 01:27:10,300
discutere senza vincere significa esaurire il tempo.

2059
01:27:10,370 --> 01:27:14,120
Perché per il momento

2060
01:27:14,220 --> 01:27:15,660
arrivi fino in fondo,

2061
01:27:15,680 --> 01:27:17,460
ehm, del,

2062
01:27:17,860 --> 01:27:18,820
o addirittura per fare un paio di passi

2063
01:27:19,240 --> 01:27:22,920
nella perfetta fortezza dei record e,

2064
01:27:23,680 --> 01:27:24,520
sai, dov'è finito il tempo?

2065
01:27:25,140 --> 01:27:26,420
Sai, tipo

2066
01:27:26,680 --> 01:27:27,340
tu, tu, probabilmente ti arrendi e basta,

2067
01:27:27,400 --> 01:27:31,560
uh, cercando di, sai, cercando di avere una discussione vera e propria e non arrivi mai alla discussione in primo luogo.

2068
01:27:31,560 --> 01:27:33,500
Tutte queste cose sono piuttosto appiccicose sui social media.

2069
01:27:33,580 --> 01:27:36,060
I social media hanno praticamente inventato la perfetta fortezza retorica.

2070
01:27:36,380 --> 01:27:37,120
In modo che ognuna di queste fasi abbia una sua viralità.

2071
01:27:37,580 --> 01:27:40,240
Quindi potrebbe, potrebbe rimanere e quindi può entusiasmare davvero le persone.

2072
01:27:40,780 --> 01:27:43,460
Ti permette di provare indignazione e superiorità.

2073
01:27:43,560 --> 01:27:44,000
Sì.

2074
01:27:44,180 --> 01:27:45,060
Per questo motivo, la scala della viralità ti consente di non arrivare mai al

2075
01:27:45,300 --> 01:27:45,440
discussione effettiva del punto.

2076
01:27:46,020 --> 01:27:46,160
Uhm, quindi, ma sai, non è solo la sinistra,

2077
01:27:47,120 --> 01:27:50,600
è anche il diritto, quindi l'efficiente fortezza retorica,

2078
01:27:51,360 --> 01:27:53,880
eh,

2079
01:27:53,880 --> 01:27:57,000
quindi c'è qualcosa di cui essere orgogliosi a destra.

2080
01:27:57,580 --> 01:27:59,220
È più efficiente.

2081
01:28:00,300 --> 01:28:01,360
Quindi non devi ascoltare i liberali e chiunque potrebbe essere etichettato come liberale se

2082
01:28:01,440 --> 01:28:02,480
hanno un'opinione sbagliata.

2083
01:28:03,060 --> 01:28:05,140
Ho visto liberali, di sinistra e di sinistra tutti usati come,

2084
01:28:05,540 --> 01:28:06,780
nello stesso modo.

2085
01:28:06,880 --> 01:28:13,060
Questa è una sciocchezza di sinistra.

2086
01:28:13,260 --> 01:28:15,300
Non devi ascoltare gli esperti,

2087
01:28:15,300 --> 01:28:18,460
anche gli esperti conservatori, se hanno un’opinione sbagliata,

2088
01:28:18,760 --> 01:28:20,980
non devi ascoltare i giornalisti,

2089
01:28:20,980 --> 01:28:22,320
anche i giornalisti conservatori, se hanno un'opinione sbagliata e nell'ala MAGA,

2090
01:28:22,360 --> 01:28:22,660
c'è una quarta proposta,

2091
01:28:22,740 --> 01:28:24,620
c'è una quarta disposizione.

2092
01:28:24,720 --> 01:28:26,480
Non è necessario ascoltare chi non è pro Trump.

2093
01:28:26,620 --> 01:28:32,200
Sì. E lo chiamiamo efficiente perché elimina

2094
01:28:32,840 --> 01:28:35,340
molte persone probabilmente

2095
01:28:35,340 --> 01:28:38,900
dovrebbe ascoltare almeno qualche volta,

2096
01:28:38,900 --> 01:28:41,780
sai, come facciamo notare a volte, ad esempio come annullare

2097
01:28:42,380 --> 01:28:45,260
la cultura può interferire con la fede e la competenza.

2098
01:28:45,580 --> 01:28:48,480
Quindi diventiamo un po' sospettosi nei confronti degli esperti,

2099
01:28:48,480 --> 01:28:52,640
ma allo stesso tempo,

2100
01:28:52,760 --> 01:28:55,120
se lo segui e lo segui meccanicamente,

2101
01:28:55,500 --> 01:28:56,260
e sicuramente, sai, penso che tutti negli Stati Uniti probabilmente abbiano qualche zio più grande,

2102
01:28:56,360 --> 01:28:58,240
ehm, chi esercita alcuni di questi.

2103
01:28:58,540 --> 01:28:59,280
È un modo davvero efficiente per, in un certo senso,

2104
01:28:59,680 --> 01:29:01,900
quindi devi isolarti dal resto del mondo e respingere...

2105
01:29:01,900 --> 01:29:02,660
sai, almeno alcune persone che dovresti davvero ascoltare.

2106
01:29:02,740 --> 01:29:04,100
Il modo in cui l'hai esposto,

2107
01:29:04,300 --> 01:29:06,660
mi ha fatto capire che semplicemente

2108
01:29:06,680 --> 01:29:09,380
occupano gran parte del nostro potere cerebrale.

2109
01:29:09,700 --> 01:29:12,680
Queste cose,

2110
01:29:13,360 --> 01:29:15,440
è letteralmente ora.

2111
01:29:15,440 --> 01:29:19,960
Potremmo risolvere le cose.

2112
01:29:20,260 --> 01:29:22,560
E tu dici,

2113
01:29:22,640 --> 01:29:24,100
in un certo senso ti esaurisci attraverso questo processo di indignazione

2114
01:29:24,700 --> 01:29:26,340
su queste etichette e in realtà non arrivi mai,

2115
01:29:26,900 --> 01:29:28,580
non c'è quasi abbastanza tempo per l'empatia,

2116
01:29:29,160 --> 01:29:31,000
come guardare una persona che pensa,

2117
01:29:31,000 --> 01:29:31,900
beh, forse hanno ragione.

2118
01:29:31,960 --> 01:29:32,740
Perché sei così impegnato a classificarli.

2119
01:29:32,980 --> 01:29:34,920
Qual è il divertimento nell'empatia?

2120
01:29:35,460 --> 01:29:36,400
E voglio dire, la cosa così interessante è questo

2121
01:29:36,400 --> 01:29:37,540
così tanta energia sociale sembra essere spesa per questi

2122
01:29:37,840 --> 01:29:39,820
desideri primordiali disgustosi in cui essenzialmente la maggior parte è come,

2123
01:29:39,820 --> 01:29:41,440
per favore dimmi chi posso odiare.

2124
01:29:41,500 --> 01:29:42,340
Dove posso legittimamente essere crudele?

2125
01:29:42,340 --> 01:29:43,300
Dove posso effettivamente?

2126
01:29:43,740 --> 01:29:48,020
esercitare una certa aggressività contro qualcuno?

2127
01:29:48,540 --> 01:29:49,420
Ehm, e sembra che a volte si tratti semplicemente di trovare nuove giustificazioni per questo.

2128
01:29:49,500 --> 01:29:50,680
Ed è comprensibile,

2129
01:29:50,980 --> 01:29:51,380
sai, il fallimento umano, uh, a volte può essere

2130
01:29:51,780 --> 01:29:53,160
utilizzato per difendere la giustizia.

2131
01:29:53,180 --> 01:29:53,880
Ma ancora una volta, non ti porterà mai vicino alla verità.

2132
01:29:54,160 --> 01:29:56,720
Uh, un caso interessante di cui ti occupi riguardo alla competenza riguarda il COVID.

2133
01:29:56,840 --> 01:29:57,080
Sì.

2134
01:29:57,960 --> 01:30:00,780
Allora come è entrata in gioco la cultura dell’annullamento sul tema del COVID?

2135
01:30:00,780 --> 01:30:03,300
Sì, penso che il COVID sia stato un duro colpo per la fede e la competenza delle persone e la cultura dell'annullamento ha giocato un ruolo importante in questo.

2136
01:30:03,740 --> 01:30:04,100
Ehm, penso che uno dei migliori esempi di questo sia Jennifer Say da Levi's.

2137
01:30:04,580 --> 01:30:05,460
Ehm, è una donna adorabile.

2138
01:30:05,980 --> 01:30:07,800
Ehm, era vicepresidente di Levi's.

2139
01:30:07,960 --> 01:30:09,500
Uh, ha parlato di realtà potenzialmente

2140
01:30:10,260 --> 01:30:11,260
essere il presidente dei jeans Levi's.

2141
01:30:11,820 --> 01:30:14,320
Ed era una grande sostenitrice dei bambini.

2142
01:30:14,640 --> 01:30:15,220
E quando hanno iniziato

2143
01:30:15,680 --> 01:30:19,800
chiudere le scuole,

2144
01:30:19,900 --> 01:30:23,100
ha iniziato a dire,

2145
01:30:23,480 --> 01:30:24,320
sarà un disastro

2146
01:30:24,400 --> 01:30:24,800
Questo farà male,

2147
01:30:24,820 --> 01:30:26,940
uh, i bambini più poveri e svantaggiati.

2148
01:30:27,580 --> 01:30:28,660
Dobbiamo trovare un modo per riaprire le scuole.

2149
01:30:28,920 --> 01:30:29,680
E quello era un punto di vista davvero eretico.

2150
01:30:29,820 --> 01:30:30,460
E il tipico tipo di cultura dell'annullamento,

2151
01:30:30,540 --> 01:30:31,560
uh, Wave ha preso il sopravvento perché aveva ogni sorta di petizioni per farla licenziare e che lei

2152
01:30:31,660 --> 01:30:34,780
dovevo scusarmi e tutto questo genere di cose.

2153
01:30:35,360 --> 01:30:36,080
E,

2154
01:30:36,620 --> 01:30:37,880
sai, le è stato offerto, credo, una liquidazione da un milione di dollari,

2155
01:30:37,980 --> 01:30:38,500
che non avrebbe accettato perché voleva dirlo al mondo

2156
01:30:38,500 --> 01:30:40,800
cosa ne pensava e,

2157
01:30:41,040 --> 01:30:41,960
e che voleva continuare a dire,

2158
01:30:42,200 --> 01:30:43,560
ehm, che non aveva cambiato idea,

2159
01:30:43,860 --> 01:30:45,520
che questo è stato un disastro per i giovani.

2160
01:30:46,040 --> 01:30:49,120
E ora è una specie di

2161
01:30:49,440 --> 01:30:51,420
saggezza convenzionale e la ricerca è carina,

2162
01:30:51,560 --> 01:30:54,200
è abbastanza chiaro che questo è stato devastante

2163
01:30:54,620 --> 01:30:55,720
ai giovani particolarmente svantaggiati.

2164
01:30:55,720 --> 01:30:58,320
Come se la gente lo capisse come

2165
01:30:58,880 --> 01:30:59,440
stando bene, probabilmente aveva ragione.

2166
01:30:59,440 --> 01:31:01,380
Ma uno dei,

2167
01:31:01,380 --> 01:31:02,700
uno degli aspetti davvero tristi

2168
01:31:03,020 --> 01:31:04,280
La cultura dell'annullamento è che le persone dimenticano il motivo per cui sei stato cancellato e sanno semplicemente che ti odiano.

2169
01:31:04,280 --> 01:31:06,180
Uhm, c'è questo tipo di persistente tipo,

2170
01:31:06,340 --> 01:31:07,440
beh, non devo prenderlo

2171
01:31:07,560 --> 01:31:08,100
loro più sul serio.

2172
01:31:08,690 --> 01:31:11,460
Ma a proposito,

2173
01:31:11,840 --> 01:31:15,840
hai notato che avevano ragione?

2174
01:31:16,040 --> 01:31:19,280
su qualcosa di molto importante?

2175
01:31:19,400 --> 01:31:22,000
Ora, una cosa divertente sulla libertà di parola,

2176
01:31:22,480 --> 01:31:25,520
la libertà di parola non esisterebbe se non si avesse anche il diritto di dire cose sbagliate.

2177
01:31:25,940 --> 01:31:28,840
Perché se non puoi,

2178
01:31:29,160 --> 01:31:31,270
sai, impegnati in un'idea per te,

2179
01:31:31,580 --> 01:31:31,880
se non puoi davvero speculare,

2180
01:31:31,980 --> 01:31:35,900
non arriverai mai a qualcosa che sia giusto in primo luogo.

2181
01:31:35,920 --> 01:31:37,360
Ma è particolarmente irritante

2182
01:31:37,780 --> 01:31:40,000
quando le persone che avevano ragione

2183
01:31:40,060 --> 01:31:43,100
sono stati censurati

2184
01:31:43,880 --> 01:31:44,220
e tu, uh, e non otterrai mai davvero il credito che meritano.

2185
01:31:44,620 --> 01:31:46,860
Bene, questo potrebbe essere un buon posto per chiedere qualcosa in più sulla libertà di parola.

2186
01:31:46,980 --> 01:31:47,740
E così lei ha detto che nella libertà di parola rientra anche il dire cose sbagliate.

2187
01:31:49,760 --> 01:31:53,580
Sì.

2188
01:31:53,580 --> 01:31:54,820
Ehm, qual è il tuo punto di vista sull'incitamento all'odio?

2189
01:31:55,740 --> 01:31:59,020
L’incitamento all’odio è la migliore campagna di marketing per la censura.

2190
01:31:59,060 --> 01:32:00,280
Ehm, e veniva dal mondo accademico,

2191
01:32:00,660 --> 01:32:02,240
ehm, del, del 20° secolo.

2192
01:32:02,660 --> 01:32:04,400
E che quando ho parlato del movimento contro la libertà di parola,

2193
01:32:05,540 --> 01:32:08,220
uh, quella è stata una delle loro prime invenzioni.

2194
01:32:08,820 --> 01:32:10,360
Ehm, lì si è parlato molto della teoria critica della razza,

2195
01:32:10,480 --> 01:32:15,380
ehm, e, ed essere contrario alla teoria critica della razza

2196
01:32:15,900 --> 01:32:17,080
e il fuoco farà causa se dici che le persone non possono sostenerlo, insegnarlo o ricercarlo,

2197
01:32:17,740 --> 01:32:18,820
perché hai assolutamente il diritto di perseguirlo accademicamente.

2198
01:32:19,240 --> 01:32:22,260
Tuttavia,

2199
01:32:22,820 --> 01:32:25,500
ogni volta che qualcuno menziona CRT, dovrebbe dire anche il primissimo progetto delle persone che hanno fondato CRT,

2200
01:32:26,280 --> 01:32:27,400
ehm, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, ehm, eccetera,

2201
01:32:27,400 --> 01:32:28,720
Doveva andare, era creare questa nuova categoria di non protetti

2202
01:32:28,720 --> 01:32:31,300
discorso chiamato incitamento all’odio e di farlo vietare.

2203
01:32:31,300 --> 01:32:33,320
La persona che ha permesso questa deriva,

2204
01:32:33,800 --> 01:32:36,960
ovviamente, era Herbert Marcuse nel 1965,

2205
01:32:37,440 --> 01:32:38,280
sai, fondamentalmente chiedendosi se la libertà di parola dovrebbe essere o meno

2206
01:32:38,280 --> 01:32:40,320
un valore sacro a sinistra.

2207
01:32:40,320 --> 01:32:45,800
Ed è stato dalla parte dei perdenti per molto tempo.

2208
01:32:45,920 --> 01:32:48,340
I liberali,

2209
01:32:49,140 --> 01:32:51,980
sai, il modo in cui sono cresciuto,

2210
01:32:52,320 --> 01:32:55,080
fondamentalmente essere a favore della libertà di parola era sinonimo di essere

2211
01:32:55,080 --> 01:32:57,980
un liberale,

2212
01:32:58,360 --> 01:32:59,340
ma questo ha iniziato a essere inciso nel campus.

2213
01:32:59,460 --> 01:33:00,660
E il modo in cui era, era con,

2214
01:33:01,500 --> 01:33:03,220
con l’idea dell’incitamento all’odio,

2215
01:33:03,820 --> 01:33:04,940
ehm, quello, quello essenzialmente, oh, ma dovresti, ehm, possiamo designarlo in modo particolare

2216
01:33:05,280 --> 01:33:06,260
brutto discorso perché, uh, non protetto.

2217
01:33:06,340 --> 01:33:07,460
Ehm, e, e

2218
01:33:07,640 --> 01:33:08,360
chi lo imporrà?

2219
01:33:08,500 --> 01:33:12,860
Chi deciderà cosa

2220
01:33:12,860 --> 01:33:14,600
l'incitamento all'odio è davvero?

2221
01:33:15,580 --> 01:33:17,420
Beh, di solito, nella stragrande maggioranza dei casi, ciò può accadere solo in un ambiente

2222
01:33:17,820 --> 01:33:19,200
di diversità di punti di vista davvero bassa perché devi effettivamente essere d'accordo,

2223
01:33:19,400 --> 01:33:20,220
su quali siano le cose più odiose e sbagliate.

2224
01:33:20,400 --> 01:33:23,460
E c'è un principio fondamentale.

2225
01:33:24,280 --> 01:33:25,220
Ehm, si fa riferimento a questo in un grande caso sull'incendio della bandiera nel primo emendamento che penso sia tutto

2226
01:33:25,660 --> 01:33:27,640
il mondo potrebbe trarne beneficio.

2227
01:33:28,440 --> 01:33:32,260
Non puoi vietare la parola solo perché è offensiva.

2228
01:33:33,100 --> 01:33:36,600
E' troppo soggettivo.

2229
01:33:36,680 --> 01:33:38,140
Fondamentalmente è uno dei motivi per cui questi,

2230
01:33:39,100 --> 01:33:41,500
uh, i codici sono stati più felici

2231
01:33:41,680 --> 01:33:42,600
adottato in luoghi come l’Europa,

2232
01:33:42,600 --> 01:33:44,780
dove hanno la sensazione che esista una specie di tedesco modale

2233
01:33:45,400 --> 01:33:49,780
o un inglese modale.

2234
01:33:50,300 --> 01:33:51,260
Ehm, e penso che questo sia offensivo e quindi posso dire che è così,

2235
01:33:51,260 --> 01:33:55,060
questo è sbagliato in più

2236
01:33:55,080 --> 01:33:56,720
multiculturale, in un paese veramente più diversificato

2237
01:33:57,000 --> 01:33:59,440
non ha mai avuto il pensiero onesto che esista un unico tipo di americano.

2238
01:34:00,500 --> 01:34:04,840
Non c'è mai stato come,

2239
01:34:05,000 --> 01:34:05,360
abbiamo avuto, abbiamo avuto l'idea dello zio Sam,

2240
01:34:05,700 --> 01:34:09,260
ma era sempre una specie di scherzo.

2241
01:34:10,020 --> 01:34:17,640
Uhm, Boston ha sempre saputo che non era Richmond, ha sempre saputo che non era la Georgia, ha sempre saputo che non era, sai, l'Alaska.

2242
01:34:18,420 --> 01:34:21,700
Come se fossimo sempre stati un miscuglio e ci trovassimo in una società così diversificata

2243
01:34:21,960 --> 01:34:24,580
Quello

2244
01:34:24,840 --> 01:34:27,740
non puoi vietare cose semplicemente perché sono offensive.

2245
01:34:27,740 --> 01:34:29,460
Uhm, e questo è uno dei

2246
01:34:29,480 --> 01:34:31,160
ragioni per cui l’incitamento all’odio non è una categoria di discorso non protetta.

2247
01:34:32,200 --> 01:34:35,440
E io, e vado oltre,

2248
01:34:36,060 --> 01:34:36,980
la mia teoria sulla libertà di parola è leggermente diversa da quella della maggior parte degli altri giuristi costituzionalisti.

2249
01:34:36,980 --> 01:34:38,020
Ehm, e penso, e penso che sia in parte dovuto al fatto che in alcuni modi,

2250
01:34:38,680 --> 01:34:39,640
uh, alcune di queste teorie,

2251
01:34:40,000 --> 01:34:41,620
anche se molti di loro sono davvero buoni sono inadeguati,

2252
01:34:41,760 --> 01:34:42,780
non sono abbastanza espansivi.

2253
01:34:43,490 --> 01:34:45,980
E a volte chiamo la mia teoria,

2254
01:34:46,700 --> 01:34:50,520
la teoria puramente informazionale della libertà di parola.

2255
01:34:50,880 --> 01:34:53,120
Uhm, o qualche volta, quando voglio essere elegante,

2256
01:34:53,680 --> 01:34:55,380
il laboratorio e la teoria dello specchio ed è il massimo

2257
01:34:55,930 --> 01:35:00,360
inquilino importante è che se l’obiettivo è il progetto della conoscenza umana,

2258
01:35:00,360 --> 01:35:02,060
che è sapere

2259
01:35:02,700 --> 01:35:03,660
il mondo che è,

2260
01:35:04,040 --> 01:35:07,000
è che non puoi conoscere il mondo così com'è senza sapere cosa pensa veramente la gente

2261
01:35:07,040 --> 01:35:09,520
e ciò che la gente pensa veramente è un fatto incredibilmente importante da sapere.

2262
01:35:09,520 --> 01:35:10,960
Quindi ogni volta che dici davvero:

2263
01:35:10,960 --> 01:35:13,100
non puoi dire che ti stai effettivamente privando della conoscenza

2264
01:35:13,100 --> 01:35:15,860
di ciò che la gente pensa veramente che tu stia causando ciò che Tim o Karan, che fa parte del nostro consiglio di amministrazione, chiama falsificazione delle preferenze.

2265
01:35:15,980 --> 01:35:17,840
Uhm, ti ritrovi con un'immagine imprecisa del mondo,

2266
01:35:18,200 --> 01:35:20,180
che tra l'altro

2267
01:35:20,200 --> 01:35:22,780
in molti casi,

2268
01:35:22,820 --> 01:35:25,600
ehm, perché ci sono attivisti che vogliono limitare di più

2269
01:35:26,300 --> 01:35:28,660
discorso, in realtà tendono a pensare che le persone abbiano più pregiudizi di loro,

2270
01:35:28,720 --> 01:35:30,200
uh, di quanto potrebbero essere.

2271
01:35:30,200 --> 01:35:32,000
Ehm, e in realtà questo tipo di restrizioni,

2272
01:35:32,400 --> 01:35:33,080
c'era un libro intitolato razziale

2273
01:35:33,080 --> 01:35:34,420
paranoia, um, emersa circa 15 anni fa che sottolineava l'imposizione

2274
01:35:34,420 --> 01:35:40,260
di alcuni di questi codici a volte può far pensare alle persone che sia l'unica cosa a trattenerti

2275
01:35:40,660 --> 01:35:42,620
tornato dall'essere un razzista furioso,

2276
01:35:42,740 --> 01:35:43,400
ehm, sono questi codici.

2277
01:35:43,400 --> 01:35:44,220
Quindi deve essere davvero,

2278
01:35:44,480 --> 01:35:44,940
davvero pessimo.

2279
01:35:44,960 --> 01:35:46,220
Può effettivamente peggiorare tutte queste cose.

2280
01:35:46,380 --> 01:35:47,940
E uno, di cui parliamo nel libro,

2281
01:35:48,860 --> 01:35:50,340
un modo molto pratico e concreto per peggiorare le cose

2282
01:35:51,260 --> 01:35:55,780
è quando censuri le persone,

2283
01:35:56,160 --> 01:35:56,720
non cambia la loro opinione.

2284
01:35:57,220 --> 01:35:59,120
Li incoraggia semplicemente a non condividerlo con persone che li metteranno nei guai.

2285
01:35:59,120 --> 01:36:00,820
Quindi li porta a parlare con persone con cui sono già d'accordo e la polarizzazione del gruppo decolla.

2286
01:36:01,080 --> 01:36:03,540
Quindi abbiamo alcuni dati interessanti nel libro, ehm, su come

2287
01:36:04,000 --> 01:36:05,440
allontanare le persone da Twitter, ad esempio, um,

2288
01:36:05,740 --> 01:36:07,120
sai, nel 2017.

2289
01:36:07,660 --> 01:36:08,440
E poi ancora, penso che nel 2020 spingere le persone a parlare a vanvera abbia portato, sai,

2290
01:36:09,060 --> 01:36:11,720
maggiore radicalizzazione tra quelle persone.

2291
01:36:13,320 --> 01:36:16,920
È una forza molto prevedibile.

2292
01:36:18,100 --> 01:36:22,680
La censura in realtà non cambia la mente delle persone e

2293
01:36:22,940 --> 01:36:23,440
li spinge in direzioni che in realtà sono molto,

2294
01:36:23,860 --> 01:36:26,760
sai, una solida ricerca in realtà lo farà

2295
01:36:27,840 --> 01:36:33,320
renderli più radicalizzati.

2296
01:36:33,440 --> 01:36:36,000
Quindi sì, penso che,

2297
01:36:36,250 --> 01:36:38,260
Penso che il tentativo di vietare l’incitamento all’odio

2298
01:36:38,460 --> 01:36:41,320
non ci protegge davvero da esso,

2299
01:36:41,800 --> 01:36:43,700
ma dà al governo

2300
01:36:43,900 --> 01:36:46,300
un'arma così potente da usare contro di noi che ci pentiremo di avergliela data.

2301
01:36:46,400 --> 01:36:48,680
C'è un modo per?

2302
01:36:49,240 --> 01:36:55,040
più o meno, per considerare casi estremi,

2303
01:36:55,640 --> 01:36:59,920
per testare un po' questa idea?

2304
01:37:00,680 --> 01:37:01,140
Quindi, se guardiamo al campus,

2305
01:37:01,480 --> 01:37:08,660
qual è la tua opinione riguardo al permettere ai suprematisti bianchi di entrare nel campus?

2306
01:37:09,020 --> 01:37:11,500
fare, fare discorsi?

2307
01:37:12,060 --> 01:37:15,360
Va bene.

2308
01:37:15,460 --> 01:37:18,020
Penso che dovresti essere in grado di studiare cosa pensa la gente.

2309
01:37:18,780 --> 01:37:20,420
E penso che sia importante che lo facciamo davvero.

2310
01:37:20,420 --> 01:37:22,760
Quindi penso che,

2311
01:37:22,760 --> 01:37:25,700
sai, prendiamo ad esempio QAnon.

2312
01:37:25,700 --> 01:37:26,820
Sì, QAnon ha torto.

2313
01:37:27,260 --> 01:37:29,640
Uhm, ma da dove viene?

2314
01:37:29,780 --> 01:37:30,540
Perché lo pensavano?

2315
01:37:30,840 --> 01:37:31,940
Qual è la motivazione?

2316
01:37:32,120 --> 01:37:35,500
Chi glielo ha insegnato?

2317
01:37:35,960 --> 01:37:36,460
Chi ha avuto queste idee?

2318
01:37:36,920 --> 01:37:40,120
Questo è importante per capire la storia.

2319
01:37:40,660 --> 01:37:42,240
Questo è poco importante per comprendere la politica americana moderna.

2320
01:37:42,580 --> 01:37:43,980
E quindi se metti in scena la tua recitazione,

2321
01:37:44,260 --> 01:37:48,780
se metti il tuo

2322
01:37:48,840 --> 01:37:52,060
cappello da studioso e dovresti essere curioso di sapere da dove vengono.

2323
01:37:52,320 --> 01:37:53,320
Darrell Davis,

2324
01:37:53,920 --> 01:37:54,880
che sono sicuro tu conosca, parte del suo obiettivo era semplicemente semplice

2325
01:37:54,880 --> 01:37:55,720
per sapere da dove provenivano le persone.

2326
01:37:55,840 --> 01:37:56,920
E nel processo,

2327
01:37:57,500 --> 01:38:01,020
in realtà si è deradicalizzato

2328
01:38:01,020 --> 01:38:04,760
un certo numero di clienti membri quando si sono effettivamente resi conto che quest'uomo di colore

2329
01:38:04,960 --> 01:38:07,320
chi sarebbe stato loro amico in realtà era compassionevole,

2330
01:38:08,000 --> 01:38:10,580
era una persona perbene.

2331
01:38:11,060 --> 01:38:16,600
Hanno realizzato tutto il loro

2332
01:38:16,600 --> 01:38:17,680
i preconcetti erano sbagliati.

2333
01:38:18,140 --> 01:38:20,960
Quindi può avere un fattore deradicalizzante, comunque,

2334
01:38:21,340 --> 01:38:22,640
ma anche quando non è così,

2335
01:38:22,940 --> 01:38:24,920
è comunque molto importante sapere cosa pensano le persone cattive nella tua società.

2336
01:38:24,920 --> 01:38:27,400
Onestamente, in un certo senso è per...

2337
01:38:27,400 --> 01:38:29,040
per la tua sicurezza,

2338
01:38:29,060 --> 01:38:31,320
probabilmente è più importante

2339
01:38:31,320 --> 01:38:32,520
per sapere cosa pensano realmente le persone cattive nella tua società.

2340
01:38:32,940 --> 01:38:36,360
Personalmente non so cosa ne pensi,

2341
01:38:36,680 --> 01:38:38,620
ma personalmente penso che la libertà

2342
01:38:39,300 --> 01:38:42,480
del discorso in casi come questi,

2343
01:38:42,480 --> 01:38:47,180
come KKK e campus

2344
01:38:47,520 --> 01:38:49,120
può causare più danni a breve termine,

2345
01:38:49,500 --> 01:38:50,860
ma molti più benefici a lungo termine.

2346
01:38:50,880 --> 01:38:52,100
Perché a volte puoi discutere per qualcosa del genere,

2347
01:38:53,000 --> 01:38:57,580
Questo farà male.

2348
01:38:57,900 --> 01:39:03,180
Sì.

2349
01:39:03,560 --> 01:39:04,260
A breve termine.

2350
01:39:04,940 --> 01:39:07,180
Ma voglio dire, Harvey ha detto che è come considerare l'alternativa.

2351
01:39:07,180 --> 01:39:09,320
Perché in un certo senso hai semplicemente sostenuto una tesi del genere,

2352
01:39:09,320 --> 01:39:12,560
questo potenzialmente sarebbe un bene

2353
01:39:12,940 --> 01:39:14,020
cosa anche a breve termine.

2354
01:39:14,380 --> 01:39:18,400
E spesso lo è, penso,

2355
01:39:19,560 --> 01:39:22,000
soprattutto in una società stabile come la nostra,

2356
01:39:22,120 --> 01:39:23,040
uh, con una forte classe media, tutto questo genere di cose in cui le persone hanno come...

2357
01:39:23,160 --> 01:39:26,040
le comodità, la ragione attraverso le cose.

2358
01:39:26,500 --> 01:39:27,780
Sì.

2359
01:39:28,300 --> 01:39:29,720
Ehm,

2360
01:39:29,740 --> 01:39:31,940
ma sai, per me è come,

2361
01:39:32,400 --> 01:39:34,600
anche se fa male a breve termine,

2362
01:39:34,640 --> 01:39:38,340
anche se crea più odio nel breve termine,

2363
01:39:38,340 --> 01:39:43,060
la libertà di parola ha questo

2364
01:39:43,200 --> 01:39:43,660
cosa davvero utile,

2365
01:39:43,680 --> 01:39:44,580
cioè ti aiuta ad andare verso la verità,

2366
01:39:44,900 --> 01:39:50,420
l’intera società verso una visione più profonda,

2367
01:39:51,000 --> 01:39:54,920
comprensione più accurata di

2368
01:39:55,780 --> 01:39:57,380
della vita sulla terra, della società, del funzionamento delle persone,

2369
01:39:58,040 --> 01:40:00,900
di etica,

2370
01:40:00,900 --> 01:40:07,020
della metafisica, di tutto.

2371
01:40:07,380 --> 01:40:09,940
E questo a lungo termine rappresenta un enorme vantaggio.

2372
01:40:10,160 --> 01:40:10,840
Si sbarazza dei nazisti a lungo termine,

2373
01:40:11,320 --> 01:40:12,300
anche se aggiunge al numero

2374
01:40:12,700 --> 01:40:15,260
dei nazisti a breve termine.

2375
01:40:15,260 --> 01:40:18,620
Sì.

2376
01:40:18,620 --> 01:40:19,960
Bene, e nel frattempo, solo per il fatto che la gente tira fuori sempre,

2377
01:40:19,960 --> 01:40:21,860
che mi dici del clan nel campus?

2378
01:40:21,900 --> 01:40:23,120
Sono come,

2379
01:40:23,420 --> 01:40:29,420
non sono mai invitati.

2380
01:40:29,420 --> 01:40:33,060
Uhm, il, il, il, il, non ho visto un caso in cui siano stati invitati.

2381
01:40:33,060 --> 01:40:35,060
Ehm,

2382
01:40:35,620 --> 01:40:36,840
di solito questo argomento del clan viene respinto quando le persone cercano di scusarsi.

2383
01:40:37,020 --> 01:40:38,060
Ed è per questo che abbiamo sgridato Ben Shapiro.

2384
01:40:38,060 --> 01:40:38,560
Ed è per questo che non puoi avere Bill Maher nel campus.

2385
01:40:38,600 --> 01:40:40,020
Ecco perché, lo sai, ed è come, okay.

2386
01:40:40,380 --> 01:40:41,880
Uhm, sai, ed è, è un po' di quella cosa che riguarda l'ismo, ancora una volta,

2387
01:40:42,080 --> 01:40:44,800
di dire, beh, quella cosa laggiù è terribile e quindi questo comico non dovrebbe venire.

2388
01:40:45,400 --> 01:40:46,700
Uh, quindi ho una domanda, forse a titolo di consiglio,

2389
01:40:47,140 --> 01:40:49,200
Sai,

2390
01:40:49,440 --> 01:40:53,400
intervistare gente e vedere

2391
01:40:53,740 --> 01:40:58,800
questo come un podcast come piattaforma

2392
01:40:59,360 --> 01:41:03,040
nel decidere con chi parlare e no,

2393
01:41:03,620 --> 01:41:06,200
non è qualcosa con cui devo trovarmi faccia a faccia ogni tanto.

2394
01:41:06,540 --> 01:41:08,200
La mia inclinazione naturale prima di iniziare il podcast era di parlare con chiunque

2395
01:41:08,200 --> 01:41:13,000
e incluse le persone, che mi interessa ancora, chi sono,

2396
01:41:13,300 --> 01:41:15,420
Sai,

2397
01:41:15,520 --> 01:41:17,860
gli attuali membri del

2398
01:41:18,080 --> 01:41:20,180
KKK.

2399
01:41:20,180 --> 01:41:23,240
E per me,

2400
01:41:23,240 --> 01:41:25,320
c'è la responsabilità di farlo con abilità.

2401
01:41:25,320 --> 01:41:26,320
Sì.

2402
01:41:26,720 --> 01:41:28,180
Ehm, e quella responsabilità mi ha pesato sempre più pesante perché

2403
01:41:28,460 --> 01:41:30,780
ti rendi conto di quanta abilità ci vuole perché devi sapere,

2404
01:41:31,080 --> 01:41:32,780
per capire così tanto,

2405
01:41:33,040 --> 01:41:34,040
perché ho, sono arrivato a capire che il diavolo

2406
01:41:34,680 --> 01:41:40,540
sarà sempre carismatico.

2407
01:41:41,500 --> 01:41:42,220
Sì.

2408
01:41:42,800 --> 01:41:45,040
Ehm, il diavolo non assomiglierà al diavolo.

2409
01:41:45,660 --> 01:41:47,120
E quindi devi realizzare che devi,

2410
01:41:47,360 --> 01:41:48,520
non puoi sempre

2411
01:41:49,420 --> 01:41:54,520
venire al tavolo con una profonda compassione per un altro essere umano.

2412
01:41:54,520 --> 01:41:55,760
Tu devi avere,

2413
01:41:55,920 --> 01:41:56,100
sai, tipo il 90% di compassione e,

2414
01:41:56,980 --> 01:42:02,140
e un'altra conoscenza storica approfondita del 90%.

2415
01:42:02,240 --> 01:42:04,620
sul contesto delle battaglie attorno a questa particolare questione.

2416
01:42:05,340 --> 01:42:06,060
E questo richiede solo un enorme

2417
01:42:06,060 --> 01:42:08,080
sforzo, ma non so se c'è

2418
01:42:09,060 --> 01:42:09,880
pensieri che hai a riguardo,

2419
01:42:10,220 --> 01:42:13,060
come gestire il discorso,

2420
01:42:13,380 --> 01:42:14,520
ehm,

2421
01:42:14,640 --> 01:42:15,720
in un modo

2422
01:42:15,820 --> 01:42:16,800
senza censurarlo, portandolo in superficie,

2423
01:42:16,800 --> 01:42:18,140
ma in un modo che crea

2424
01:42:18,260 --> 01:42:20,220
più amore nel mondo.

2425
01:42:20,360 --> 01:42:23,520
Ricordo, ehm,

2426
01:42:24,220 --> 01:42:26,420
Steve Bannon

2427
01:42:26,420 --> 01:42:26,840
è stato disinvitato dal festival del New Yorker e da Jim Carrey

2428
01:42:26,860 --> 01:42:33,780
ha dato di matto e tutta una serie di altre persone hanno dato di matto e lui è stato revocato dall'invito,

2429
01:42:34,440 --> 01:42:35,080
ehm, da, da, e sono stato invitato a parlarci con un sorrisetto di questo.

2430
01:42:35,380 --> 01:42:38,960
E stavo dicendo, tipo, ascolta,

2431
01:42:38,960 --> 01:42:40,540
non hai persone alla tua conferenza perché sei d'accordo con loro.

2432
01:42:40,600 --> 01:42:41,340
Uhm, è così che dobbiamo uscire da questa idea che è perché stavano cercando di farcela

2433
01:42:41,860 --> 01:42:43,080
sembra che sia un'approvazione di Steve Bannon.

2434
01:42:43,280 --> 01:42:46,660
Come se fosse una sciocchezza.

2435
01:42:47,260 --> 01:42:49,480
Ad esempio, se guardi effettivamente le opinioni di tutte le persone presenti,

2436
01:42:49,600 --> 01:42:50,500
non puoi assolutamente approvare

2437
01:42:50,660 --> 01:42:51,520
tutte le opinioni che hanno effettivamente tutte le altre persone che saranno lì.

2438
01:42:51,520 --> 01:42:52,460
E poi, nel processo di argomentazione,

2439
01:42:52,540 --> 01:42:55,120
Ho ricevuto, ehm, e, e anche, ovviamente,

2440
01:42:55,440 --> 01:42:56,440
il più classico, è molto prezioso sapere cosa pensa qualcuno Steve Bannon.

2441
01:42:56,840 --> 01:43:00,720
Dovresti essere curioso

2442
01:43:01,800 --> 01:43:03,640
a tale proposito.

2443
01:43:03,740 --> 01:43:04,540
E ricordo che qualcuno ribatteva dicendo:

2444
01:43:04,560 --> 01:43:05,820
beh, cosa vorresti da qualcuno?

2445
01:43:05,820 --> 01:43:07,860
intervistare un jihadista?

2446
01:43:08,120 --> 01:43:10,760
E io dico, perché al momento,

2447
01:43:10,760 --> 01:43:12,120
come avvenne all'epoca in cui,

2448
01:43:12,120 --> 01:43:13,320
quando l'Isis era davvero al potere

2449
01:43:13,400 --> 01:43:14,420
andando,

2450
01:43:15,060 --> 01:43:17,800
provarci.

2451
01:43:18,660 --> 01:43:21,240
Ehm, e io ho pensato,

2452
01:43:22,040 --> 01:43:24,000
non vorresti andare

2453
01:43:24,180 --> 01:43:25,200
a un discorso in cui qualcuno stava cercando di capire cosa spinge alcune di queste persone?

2454
01:43:25,480 --> 01:43:25,820
Uhm, perché questo cambia la tua inquadratura che essenzialmente è come,

2455
01:43:25,820 --> 01:43:26,620
no, è curiosità.

2456
01:43:27,560 --> 01:43:30,540
È la cura per molte di queste cose.

2457
01:43:31,110 --> 01:43:34,180
E abbiamo bisogno di molta più curiosità e di molte meno certezze ingiustificate.

2458
01:43:34,180 --> 01:43:35,520
E c'è una domanda tipo,

2459
01:43:35,520 --> 01:43:36,900
come conduci tali conversazioni?

2460
01:43:37,160 --> 01:43:38,160
E,

2461
01:43:38,660 --> 01:43:40,620
ehm, mi sento profondamente sottoqualificato.

2462
01:43:41,400 --> 01:43:44,640
Chi pensi sia particolarmente bravo in questo?

2463
01:43:44,640 --> 01:43:46,060
Penso che i registi di documentari di solito facciano un lavoro molto migliore.

2464
01:43:46,260 --> 01:43:46,540
E il lavoro migliore lo fanno solitamente i biografi.

2465
01:43:46,660 --> 01:43:46,980
Sì.

2466
01:43:47,500 --> 01:43:49,700
Quindi, più tempo dedichi a una conversazione particolare,

2467
01:43:50,060 --> 01:43:51,320
come un pensiero davvero profondo e

2468
01:43:51,700 --> 01:43:54,000
contesto storico e studiare le persone, come pensano,

2469
01:43:54,560 --> 01:43:56,060
guardando tutto diverso

2470
01:43:56,800 --> 01:43:58,360
prospettive, guardando la psicologia della persona,

2471
01:43:58,720 --> 01:44:00,480
l'educazione, i loro genitori, i loro nonni, tutto questo,

2472
01:44:00,480 --> 01:44:03,280
più tempo passi con quello,

2473
01:44:03,280 --> 01:44:05,400
eh, meglio è

2474
01:44:05,940 --> 01:44:09,740
migliore è la qualità della conversazione perché

2475
01:44:10,460 --> 01:44:10,940
riesci a capire il,

2476
01:44:11,300 --> 01:44:12,540
riesci a entrare davvero in empatia con quella persona,

2477
01:44:12,700 --> 01:44:15,980
con le persone lui o lei

2478
01:44:16,340 --> 01:44:18,560
rappresenta... e puoi vedere l'umanità comune,

2479
01:44:18,680 --> 01:44:20,500
tutto questo.

2480
01:44:20,500 --> 01:44:21,720
Gli intervistatori spesso non svolgono quel lavoro.

2481
01:44:21,720 --> 01:44:21,820
Sì.

2482
01:44:22,180 --> 01:44:26,000
Ehm, quindi la cosa migliore che ho visto sono le interviste che fanno parte di un documentario.

2483
01:44:26,120 --> 01:44:27,140
Sì.

2484
01:44:27,240 --> 01:44:27,840
Ma anche adesso i documentari sono come,

2485
01:44:28,300 --> 01:44:29,200
c'è un enorme incentivo a farlo il più rapidamente possibile.

2486
01:44:30,200 --> 01:44:33,580
Non c'è un incentivo a trascorrere davvero del tempo con quella persona.

2487
01:44:34,040 --> 01:44:34,640
C'è un nuovo fantastico documentario su Floyd Abrams che consiglio vivamente.

2488
01:44:35,020 --> 01:44:40,120
Abbiamo fatto un documentario su Ira Glasser intitolato mighty Ira,

2489
01:44:40,380 --> 01:44:42,220
ehm, che era il mio video

2490
01:44:42,800 --> 01:44:45,620
team e il mio protetto Nico Perino, Chris Mulvey e Aaron Reese lo hanno messo insieme.

2491
01:44:45,820 --> 01:44:48,200
E segue semplicemente la vita e i tempi di...

2492
01:44:48,240 --> 01:44:51,940
di Ira Glasser, ex capo dell'ACLU.

2493
01:44:52,020 --> 01:44:55,700
Se solo potessi soffermarti su questo,

2494
01:44:56,780 --> 01:44:59,640
è una storia affascinante.

2495
01:45:00,540 --> 01:45:00,900
O si.

2496
01:45:01,280 --> 01:45:02,940
Sorprendente.

2497
01:45:02,950 --> 01:45:05,440
Uhm, Ira, non era un avvocato.

2498
01:45:07,320 --> 01:45:10,080
Uhm, ha iniziato a lavorare alla NYCLU,

2499
01:45:10,240 --> 01:45:12,760
Unione per le libertà civili di New York

2500
01:45:13,560 --> 01:45:17,220
indietro nel tempo, penso negli anni Sessanta.

2501
01:45:18,000 --> 01:45:22,120
È stato,

2502
01:45:22,480 --> 01:45:22,800
uh, penso che Robert Kennedy gli abbia raccomandato di andare in quella direzione.

2503
01:45:23,460 --> 01:45:24,300
Ehm,

2504
01:45:24,300 --> 01:45:24,720
e divenne presidente dell'ACLU proprio nel momento in cui erano, um,

2505
01:45:24,720 --> 01:45:26,240
soffrendo per aver difeso i nazisti a Skokie e Nico,

2506
01:45:26,940 --> 01:45:29,620
uh, e, e, e, e Aaron e Chris hanno messo insieme questo e non avevano mai fatto un documentario prima.

2507
01:45:29,660 --> 01:45:30,500
Ed è venuta così, così bene.

2508
01:45:31,260 --> 01:45:35,340
Ehm, e racconta la storia dei nazisti in Skokie.

2509
01:45:35,340 --> 01:45:39,560
Racconta la storia del caso in cui racconta la storia dell'ACLU dell'epoca.

2510
01:45:39,840 --> 01:45:40,980
E che grande leader era Ira Glasser.

2511
01:45:41,360 --> 01:45:43,600
E qual è una delle cose più grandiose è,

2512
01:45:44,140 --> 01:45:45,700
quando potrai vedere

2513
01:45:46,140 --> 01:45:46,400
i nazisti a Skokie,

2514
01:45:46,900 --> 01:45:48,800
vengono fuori come gli idioti che ti aspetteresti da loro.

2515
01:45:48,800 --> 01:45:51,080
C'è un momento in cui,

2516
01:45:51,540 --> 01:45:52,820
quando la manifestazione non sta andando molto bene e il leader si agita.

2517
01:45:54,080 --> 01:45:57,280
E sembra quasi che gli piacerà gridare in un certo senso,

2518
01:45:57,420 --> 01:45:58,000
stai, stai, stai, stai trasformando questa manifestazione nazista in una presa in giro.

2519
01:45:58,100 --> 01:46:00,140
E

2520
01:46:01,080 --> 01:46:03,800
quindi ha mostrato come consentire ai nazisti di parlare a Skokie in un certo senso ha tolto il vento dalle loro vele.

2521
01:46:03,800 --> 01:46:06,840
Come se avessero tutto il movimento,

2522
01:46:06,940 --> 01:46:08,360
come se tutti fossero un po',

2523
01:46:08,360 --> 01:46:10,460
dopo si è tutto dissolto perché sembravano

2524
01:46:11,080 --> 01:46:12,320
sciocchi razzisti che erano.

2525
01:46:12,520 --> 01:46:15,620
Erano, sai, anche i fratelli blues facevano battute,

2526
01:46:16,860 --> 01:46:17,180
sai, si scherza su di loro.

2527
01:46:17,820 --> 01:46:18,520
Ehm, e questo, e non si è trasformato nel disastro che la gente pensava sarebbe stato solo lasciandoli parlare.

2528
01:46:19,640 --> 01:46:22,100
E Ira Glasser, ok.

2529
01:46:22,400 --> 01:46:23,400
Così ha fatto

2530
01:46:23,400 --> 01:46:24,460
questa meravigliosa storia su come Jackie Robinson si è unito ai Brooklyn Dodgers e come

2531
01:46:25,040 --> 01:46:26,000
c'è stato un momento in cui vedeva qualcuno,

2532
01:46:26,780 --> 01:46:27,600
un afroamericano come se fosse letteralmente nella loro squadra e come questo li abbia davvero entusiasti

2533
01:46:28,160 --> 01:46:32,260
la causa dell’uguaglianza razziale.

2534
01:46:32,260 --> 01:46:34,960
E quella divenne una parte importante della sua vita.

2535
01:46:35,280 --> 01:46:39,660
E penso che sia una metafora così fantastica

2536
01:46:40,480 --> 01:46:42,000
espandere la tua cerchia e

2537
01:46:44,740 --> 01:46:49,080
vedere più persone letteralmente nella tua squadra è la soluzione a tanti di questi problemi.

2538
01:46:49,080 --> 01:46:53,980
E temo che sia una delle cose assolutamente solo un dato di fatto

2539
01:46:53,980 --> 01:46:55,540
in America è come,

2540
01:46:55,600 --> 01:46:56,480
ci vediamo più come campi nemici che come persone nella stessa squadra.

2541
01:46:56,580 --> 01:46:59,020
E in realtà era qualcosa nei primi tempi,

2542
01:46:59,800 --> 01:47:01,040
come me e Will Creely,

2543
01:47:01,040 --> 01:47:03,860
il direttore legale del fuoco ha scritto delle imminenti sfide alla libertà di parola di chiunque sia su Facebook.

2544
01:47:04,460 --> 01:47:06,420
E una cosa che speravo era che più persone si esponessero

2545
01:47:06,640 --> 01:47:08,580
più della loro vita,

2546
01:47:09,180 --> 01:47:12,660
realizzeremmo molte di queste cose che sapevamo intellettualmente,

2547
01:47:12,660 --> 01:47:13,300
come i bambini che vanno al bar, si ubriacano e fanno cose stupide.

2548
01:47:13,320 --> 01:47:13,980
Ehm,

2549
01:47:14,260 --> 01:47:16,080
quello, ehm,

2550
01:47:16,540 --> 01:47:17,940
quello quando abbiamo iniziato

2551
01:47:17,940 --> 01:47:18,740
vedere le prove che fanno cose stupide che all'inizio potremmo rimanere scioccati,

2552
01:47:18,940 --> 01:47:21,020
ma poi alla fine diventi più sofisticato e dici:

2553
01:47:21,200 --> 01:47:22,300
beh, andiamo, la gente è così.

2554
01:47:22,300 --> 01:47:23,460
Sembra che ciò non sia mai realmente accaduto.

2555
01:47:23,980 --> 01:47:24,260
Uhm, quello, quello, quello non penso di pensare

2556
01:47:24,700 --> 01:47:25,860
che sappiamo molte cose sulla natura umana e sappiamo cose stupide

2557
01:47:25,880 --> 01:47:27,620
la gente dice, uh, e noi siamo riusciti a entrare in un ambiente in cui c'è semplicemente qualcuno

2558
01:47:28,020 --> 01:47:29,480
là fuori in attesa di essere un po' come,

2559
01:47:29,480 --> 01:47:32,980
Oh, ricorda quella cosa stupida che dicevi che fossimo

2560
01:47:33,240 --> 01:47:36,160
14?

2561
01:47:36,220 --> 01:47:37,280
Beh, mi assicurerò che tu non entri nel...

2562
01:47:37,520 --> 01:47:40,200
alla scuola dei tuoi sogni perché

2563
01:47:40,200 --> 01:47:44,060
di quella.

2564
01:47:44,760 --> 01:47:45,920
Questa archeologia del reato.

2565
01:47:46,120 --> 01:47:48,000
Non è il mio termine però.

2566
01:47:48,740 --> 01:47:48,840
È un termine fantastico.

2567
01:47:49,540 --> 01:47:51,460
Rubiamo al meglio scavando tra i commenti passati di qualcuno per trovare un discorso che non è invecchiato bene.

2568
01:47:51,700 --> 01:47:53,100
E questo è tattico.

2569
01:47:54,100 --> 01:47:57,440
In questo modo, quello non è semplicemente qualcuno che non esiste

2570
01:47:57,860 --> 01:47:59,820
empatico.

2571
01:48:00,320 --> 01:48:00,720
Dicono, ti punirò per questo oppure,

2572
01:48:00,720 --> 01:48:04,140
e questo è uno dei motivi

2573
01:48:04,860 --> 01:48:06,660
perché mi sono depresso scrivendo questo libro

2574
01:48:06,660 --> 01:48:09,920
perché sai, c'è già, c'è già gente che non mi ama perché coccolo la mente americana,

2575
01:48:10,280 --> 01:48:10,900
di solito sulla base di un malinteso

2576
01:48:10,920 --> 01:48:13,300
di ciò che abbiamo effettivamente detto e coccolare la mente americana, ma comunque.

2577
01:48:13,780 --> 01:48:16,540
Uh, ma su questo, sai, in molti casi sto accusando le persone di essere molto crudeli,

2578
01:48:17,100 --> 01:48:18,620
ma metti, ma una cosa che era davvero spaventosa nello studiare molto

2579
01:48:19,760 --> 01:48:20,700
questi casi è che una volta che hai quel bersaglio sulla schiena,

2580
01:48:21,500 --> 01:48:24,000
ciò per cui cercheranno di cancellarti potrebbe essere qualsiasi cosa.

2581
01:48:24,580 --> 01:48:25,520
Sai, potrebbero tornare al tuo vecchio,

2582
01:48:26,700 --> 01:48:29,360
le tue vecchie barche, trova qualcosa che hai detto nel 1995,

2583
01:48:29,740 --> 01:48:30,900
sai, fai qualcosa,

2584
01:48:31,380 --> 01:48:34,340
ehm, dove essenzialmente sembra che sia tutta un'altra cosa,

2585
01:48:34,520 --> 01:48:35,160
ma in realtà cosa sono,

2586
01:48:35,420 --> 01:48:38,900
il fatto è che a loro non piaceva la tua opinione.

2587
01:48:39,140 --> 01:48:39,420
A loro non piaceva il tuo punto di vista su qualcosa.

2588
01:48:39,640 --> 01:48:43,840
E troveranno un,

2589
01:48:43,920 --> 01:48:44,360
trova un modo che da ora in poi,

2590
01:48:44,640 --> 01:48:46,200
ogni volta che viene fuori il tuo nome,

2591
01:48:46,220 --> 01:48:48,680
è come, Oh, ricorda questo, questa cosa che non mi piaceva di loro.

2592
01:48:48,820 --> 01:48:51,860
Ed è ancora una volta crudele.

2593
01:48:52,000 --> 01:48:55,820
Non ti avvicina minimamente alla verità.

2594
01:48:56,340 --> 01:48:59,160
E, ma è un po' spaventoso rischiare il collo.

2595
01:48:59,300 --> 01:49:01,900
Va bene.

2596
01:49:01,900 --> 01:49:06,540
In termini di soluzioni,

2597
01:49:07,140 --> 01:49:10,160
Ti chiederò alcune cose.

2598
01:49:10,600 --> 01:49:13,120
Così uno,

2599
01:49:13,540 --> 01:49:14,980
ehm, genitorialità.

2600
01:49:15,040 --> 01:49:16,360
Sì.

2601
01:49:16,360 --> 01:49:16,860
Cinque e sette anni.

2602
01:49:18,280 --> 01:49:18,440
Quindi sono sicuro che avrai capito tutto allora.

2603
01:49:18,660 --> 01:49:20,240
Oh Dio, no.

2604
01:49:20,440 --> 01:49:23,300
Dal punto di vista della libertà di parola.

2605
01:49:23,480 --> 01:49:24,600
Sì.

2606
01:49:25,220 --> 01:49:26,460
Uh, dal punto di vista della cultura della libertà di parola,

2607
01:49:26,600 --> 01:49:26,780
come essere un buon genitore.

2608
01:49:27,160 --> 01:49:30,540
Sì.

2609
01:49:30,600 --> 01:49:31,200
Penso che la prima qualità che dovresti coltivare nei tuoi figli,

2610
01:49:32,520 --> 01:49:37,100
se vuoi avere una cultura della libertà di parola

2611
01:49:37,480 --> 01:49:41,760
è curiosità

2612
01:49:41,760 --> 01:49:46,980
e una consapevolezza della vastità che sarà sempre sconosciuta.

2613
01:49:47,320 --> 01:49:49,420
E far entusiasmare i miei figli all'idea, è come se

2614
01:49:50,040 --> 01:49:53,100
spenderemo tutto il nostro

2615
01:49:53,720 --> 01:49:57,760
vive imparando cose.

2616
01:49:57,760 --> 01:49:59,540
Ed è veloce, emozionante e infinito e non ce la faremo mai

2617
01:49:59,840 --> 01:50:02,280
c'è una grossa ammaccatura,

2618
01:50:02,300 --> 01:50:03,420
ma il viaggio sarà fantastico.

2619
01:50:04,020 --> 01:50:04,980
Ma solo gli sciocchi pensano di sapere tutto.

2620
01:50:05,600 --> 01:50:08,920
Ehm, e talvolta sono degli sciocchi pericolosi.

2621
01:50:09,020 --> 01:50:10,340
Quindi dando il senso di umiltà intellettuale

2622
01:50:10,340 --> 01:50:14,410
presto

2623
01:50:14,980 --> 01:50:17,340
essendo anche, sai,

2624
01:50:17,420 --> 01:50:20,280
dire cose che in realtà sembrano un po' antiquate,

2625
01:50:20,300 --> 01:50:20,420
tipo, ma dico delle cose ai miei figli,

2626
01:50:21,000 --> 01:50:26,760
come, ascolta,

2627
01:50:27,180 --> 01:50:29,180
se tu

2628
01:50:30,040 --> 01:50:31,320
goditi lo studio e il lavoro,

2629
01:50:31,320 --> 01:50:34,100
entrambe le cose che mi piacciono molto,

2630
01:50:34,780 --> 01:50:36,120
Lo faccio per divertimento.

2631
01:50:36,280 --> 01:50:38,580
Uhm, la tua vita sarà fantastica e sarà facile.

2632
01:50:38,580 --> 01:50:39,580
Ehm, quindi alcune di, alcune, sai, alcune di quelle virtù vecchio stile sono cose

2633
01:50:40,160 --> 01:50:45,360
Cerco di predicare,

2634
01:50:45,920 --> 01:50:46,800
cose controintuitive come giocare all'aria aperta,

2635
01:50:46,820 --> 01:50:47,560
ehm, avere del tempo che non sia un'esperienza intermedia è davvero...

2636
01:50:48,380 --> 01:50:54,800
ehm, è davvero importante.

2637
01:50:55,320 --> 01:50:57,980
E

2638
01:50:58,360 --> 01:51:03,800
piccole cose come, um, di cui parlo nel libro di quando i miei figli guardano qualcosa di spaventoso

2639
01:51:03,800 --> 01:51:05,460
e non sto parlando di film sugli zombie,

2640
01:51:05,660 --> 01:51:07,820
sai, sto parlando di un cartone animato

2641
01:51:08,700 --> 01:51:11,920
ha una specie di momento spaventoso

2642
01:51:12,440 --> 01:51:14,540
e dicendo che vogliono spegnere la TV.

2643
01:51:14,600 --> 01:51:19,920
E io, e ho parlato con loro e dico, ascolta,

2644
01:51:20,560 --> 01:51:24,260
Mi manca accanto a te e finiremo questo spettacolo

2645
01:51:24,260 --> 01:51:25,440
e voglio che tu mi dica cosa ne pensi dopo.

2646
01:51:26,000 --> 01:51:30,160
E mi sono seduto accanto ai miei figli.

2647
01:51:30,940 --> 01:51:32,720
Ehm, e alla fine,

2648
01:51:33,060 --> 01:51:34,200
ogni volta che io,

2649
01:51:34,260 --> 01:51:39,700
sai, quando gliel'ho chiesto,

2650
01:51:41,200 --> 01:51:46,300
è stato così spaventoso come pensavi?

2651
01:51:46,300 --> 01:51:47,340
E c'era come,

2652
01:51:47,700 --> 01:51:49,720
no papà, andava bene.

2653
01:51:50,100 --> 01:51:52,780
E io penso che questa sia una delle grandi lezioni della vita.

2654
01:51:53,380 --> 01:51:53,920
La paura di non farlo

2655
01:51:54,380 --> 01:51:55,460
affrontare diventa molto più grande nella tua testa che semplicemente affrontarlo.

2656
01:51:55,780 --> 01:51:56,620
Questo è uno dei motivi per cui sto combattendo contro questa cultura.

2657
01:51:56,690 --> 01:52:01,500
Io amo,

2658
01:52:01,520 --> 01:52:03,540
sai, affinché tutti i nostri figli possano crescere in un ambiente in cui le persone ti danno grazia e, sai,

2659
01:52:03,540 --> 01:52:04,720
accetta il fatto che a volte le persone diranno cose che ti fanno incazzare,

2660
01:52:05,400 --> 01:52:06,960
prendere sul serio la possibilità e sbagliarsi e,

2661
01:52:07,300 --> 01:52:09,880
e... sii curioso.

2662
01:52:09,920 --> 01:52:13,920
Beh, spero che la cosa che hai menzionato,

2663
01:52:13,920 --> 01:52:20,340
il che è dovuto al fatto che sono così giovane

2664
01:52:20,340 --> 01:52:22,220
le cose delle persone sono su Internet

2665
01:52:23,120 --> 01:52:24,300
che si daranno una pausa a vicenda perché allora

2666
01:52:24,300 --> 01:52:24,700
tutti sono degni di cancellazione.

2667
01:52:24,980 --> 01:52:26,620
La generazione Z odia di più la cancellazione della cultura.

2668
01:52:26,720 --> 01:52:27,700
E questo è un altro motivo per cui è come le persone

2669
01:52:27,720 --> 01:52:28,200
continua a sostenere che questo sta accadendo.

2670
01:52:28,380 --> 01:52:29,680
È un po' come se

2671
01:52:30,300 --> 01:52:31,140
no, in realtà puoi chiedere ai bambini

2672
01:52:31,340 --> 01:52:32,040
quello che pensano della cultura dell'annullamento e la odiano.

2673
01:52:32,080 --> 01:52:38,160
Sì. Beh, li considero come il sistema immunitario.

2674
01:52:38,940 --> 01:52:39,760
E' come se

2675
01:52:39,940 --> 01:52:41,380
questa è la cultura che si sveglia e apprezza,

2676
01:52:41,380 --> 01:52:41,880
no, questa non è una buona cosa.

2677
01:52:41,960 --> 01:52:44,560
Sono contento però.

2678
01:52:44,740 --> 01:52:45,240
Voglio dire, io, io, io sono uno di quei ragazzi che,

2679
01:52:45,240 --> 01:52:47,200
sai, ne sono davvero felice

2680
01:52:47,720 --> 01:52:52,680
Ero un ragazzino negli anni Ottanta e un adolescente negli anni Novanta perché avevo tutto

2681
01:52:52,820 --> 01:52:54,300
potenzialmente online, uh, non è un,

2682
01:52:54,440 --> 01:52:56,880
un'educazione.

2683
01:52:57,940 --> 01:53:04,280
Invidio.

2684
01:53:05,120 --> 01:53:09,240
Bene, io, perché puoi anche fare la libertà di parola assoluta.

2685
01:53:09,240 --> 01:53:11,560
mi piace

2686
01:53:11,680 --> 01:53:14,220
conducendoci dove spero in un futuro in cui molte delle nostre insicurezze,

2687
01:53:14,860 --> 01:53:17,100
screpolatura,

2688
01:53:17,220 --> 01:53:20,840
è tutto là fuori.

2689
01:53:21,040 --> 01:53:22,500
E ad essere sincero,

2690
01:53:23,020 --> 01:53:26,980
uh, penso che questo porti a un mondo migliore.

2691
01:53:27,160 --> 01:53:28,500
Perché i difetti sono belli.

2692
01:53:28,500 --> 01:53:30,740
Voglio dire, questo è il difetto,

2693
01:53:30,820 --> 01:53:32,400
uh, gli ingredienti base della connessione umana.

2694
01:53:32,620 --> 01:53:33,480
Ehm, Robert Wright,

2695
01:53:33,560 --> 01:53:34,860
ha scritto un libro su

2696
01:53:34,920 --> 01:53:35,900
uh, sul Buddismo.

2697
01:53:36,220 --> 01:53:38,620
Uhm, e ho parlato di provarci

2698
01:53:39,100 --> 01:53:41,280
utilizzare i social media da a,

2699
01:53:41,300 --> 01:53:42,980
da una prospettiva buddista e simili,

2700
01:53:43,340 --> 01:53:45,540
come se fossi, come se fosse l'inconscio collettivo che medita e

2701
01:53:46,700 --> 01:53:47,080
vedere quei piccoli simili

2702
01:53:47,160 --> 01:53:48,120
pezzi di rabbia che stanno cercando di cancellarti o di farti stare zitto e un po' come lasciarli andare

2703
01:53:48,460 --> 01:53:49,700
nello stesso modo in cui dovresti guardare i tuoi pensieri svanire.

2704
01:53:50,020 --> 01:53:50,320
Mi piacerebbe vederlo come visualizzato qualunque sia il,

2705
01:53:51,440 --> 01:53:52,600
qualunque sia il dramma in corso,

2706
01:53:52,860 --> 01:53:53,060
succedendo, solo vedendone il mare,

2707
01:53:54,080 --> 01:53:54,820
della coscienza collettiva,

2708
01:53:56,380 --> 01:53:58,240
semplicemente elaborando questo e avendo

2709
01:53:58,240 --> 01:53:59,160
un po' come un attacco di panico e un po' come,

2710
01:53:59,340 --> 01:54:00,780
sì, leggendolo, guardando quel piccolo tipo di odioso,

2711
01:54:01,180 --> 01:54:01,600
voci arrabbiate compaiono e dicono,

2712
01:54:01,780 --> 01:54:03,860
ok, eccoti qui.

2713
01:54:03,960 --> 01:54:04,760
E sono ancora concentrato su

2714
01:54:05,380 --> 01:54:05,600
su quella cosa perché cioè,

2715
01:54:06,340 --> 01:54:10,780
questa, questa è una delle cose,

2716
01:54:10,780 --> 01:54:12,820
Va bene.

2717
01:54:14,140 --> 01:54:15,200
Sì, in realtà probabilmente è tardi,

2718
01:54:16,100 --> 01:54:20,580
a dare la mia grande teoria su questa roba.

2719
01:54:21,560 --> 01:54:24,500
Ehm, ma...

2720
01:54:24,640 --> 01:54:25,540
ehm, mai troppo tardi.

2721
01:54:25,540 --> 01:54:26,600
COSÌ,

2722
01:54:27,640 --> 01:54:32,680
quindi quello che stavo studiando,

2723
01:54:32,680 --> 01:54:33,600
ehm, alla facoltà di giurisprudenza, quando ho finito le lezioni di Primo Emendamento,

2724
01:54:33,660 --> 01:54:35,240
ehm, ho deciso di studiare la censura durante il tutoraggio

2725
01:54:36,120 --> 01:54:38,760
dinastia, uh, perché è da lì che prendiamo le nostre idee sulla restrizione preventiva,

2726
01:54:39,560 --> 01:54:41,660
uh, quello, che deriva dalla licenza della tipografia,

2727
01:54:42,840 --> 01:54:44,560
ehm, che era qualcosa che Enrico VIII

2728
01:54:45,060 --> 01:54:45,680
è stato il primo a farlo dove fondamentalmente,

2729
01:54:46,220 --> 01:54:47,960
ehm, l'idea era che se non puoi stampare nulla

2730
01:54:48,360 --> 01:54:50,380
in Inghilterra, a meno che non sia con questi...

2731
01:54:50,760 --> 01:54:52,140
uh, Vostra Maestà ha approvato le stampanti,

2732
01:54:52,540 --> 01:54:53,020
ehm, impedirà che vengano pubblicati lavori eretici e anti-Enrico ottavo.

2733
01:54:53,780 --> 01:54:54,280
Sono carina, carina, carina, carina,

2734
01:54:55,540 --> 01:54:57,720
carino, ehm,

2735
01:54:58,040 --> 01:54:59,480
un'idea efficiente se non altro.

2736
01:54:59,520 --> 01:55:00,320
Ehm, e io sempre, quindi ha iniziato ad arrabbiarsi con la macchina da stampa intorno al 1521 e poi ha passato qualcosa

2737
01:55:01,400 --> 01:55:04,220
ciò richiedeva che le stampe fossero insieme al parlamento nel, uh, 1538.

2738
01:55:05,000 --> 01:55:07,900
Uh, e penso sempre a questo come a dove siamo adesso,

2739
01:55:07,900 --> 01:55:08,600
ehm, perché abbiamo questo,

2740
01:55:08,900 --> 01:55:12,680
avevamo la tecnologia dirompente originale,

2741
01:55:12,680 --> 01:55:16,720
sai, scrivere probabilmente era,

2742
01:55:16,760 --> 01:55:18,120
ma il successivo, che era la tipografia,

2743
01:55:19,020 --> 01:55:19,440
il che è stato assolutamente disastroso.

2744
01:55:20,120 --> 01:55:25,800
E intendo dire, e io, e dico calamitoso apposta perché a breve termine,

2745
01:55:25,920 --> 01:55:28,320
la caccia alle streghe aumentò

2746
01:55:28,320 --> 01:55:30,240
come un matto perché la macchina da stampa ti ha permesso di ottenere quel manuale su come trovare le streghe

2747
01:55:30,240 --> 01:55:31,520
che le guerre di religione impazzarono.

2748
01:55:32,300 --> 01:55:34,220
Ehm, ha portato a ogni sorta di disagio, disinformazione,

2749
01:55:34,660 --> 01:55:36,960
cattiveria.

2750
01:55:37,920 --> 01:55:40,180
Ed Enrico VIII stava cercando di rimettere il genio nella lampada.

2751
01:55:41,080 --> 01:55:44,520
Sai, era un po' come,

2752
01:55:45,220 --> 01:55:47,560
Posso, posso, posso, voglio usarlo per sempre.

2753
01:55:48,300 --> 01:55:49,920
Come, uh, come se potessi,

2754
01:55:49,980 --> 01:55:51,380
potrebbe essere usato,

2755
01:55:51,460 --> 01:55:52,460
ma si trovava in un inevitabile periodo di anarchia epistemica.

2756
01:55:52,580 --> 01:55:53,940
Non c'è niente che tu possa fare per far sì che arrivi il periodo successivo alla stampa,

2757
01:55:54,660 --> 01:55:55,140
uh, si è rivelato un non-disturbo,

2758
01:55:55,240 --> 01:55:56,260
periodo non folle se non come totalitarismo assoluto

2759
01:55:56,300 --> 01:55:58,460
e distruggere tutte le macchine da stampa,

2760
01:55:59,060 --> 01:56:00,060
cosa che semplicemente non era possibile in Europa.

2761
01:56:00,800 --> 01:56:05,000
Quindi mi sento come se

2762
01:56:05,620 --> 01:56:07,340
è più o meno dove siamo adesso.

2763
01:56:07,500 --> 01:56:08,220
Questa interruzione è derivata dall'aggiunta di:

2764
01:56:08,540 --> 01:56:14,420
Penso che diversi milioni di persone parteciperanno al dibattito europeo e, alla fine, a quello globale

2765
01:56:15,160 --> 01:56:17,860
conversazione, ma alla fine è diventato lo strumento migliore per la disconferma,

2766
01:56:18,100 --> 01:56:20,740
ehm, per sbarazzarsi della falsità, per individuare le cattive idee.

2767
01:56:20,740 --> 01:56:21,700
E sono i vantaggi,

2768
01:56:22,260 --> 01:56:24,560
i benefici a lungo termine

2769
01:56:24,560 --> 01:56:26,560
della macchina da stampa sono calcolabilmente grandi.

2770
01:56:26,560 --> 01:56:28,400
Uhm, e questo è ciò che mi dà un po' di ottimismo

2771
01:56:29,040 --> 01:56:31,600
per dove siamo ora con i social media,

2772
01:56:31,600 --> 01:56:32,920
perché siamo in quel periodo inevitabilmente anarchico.

2773
01:56:33,600 --> 01:56:35,700
E mi preoccupo che, che lì,

2774
01:56:35,840 --> 01:56:37,860
ehm, che ci sono tentativi negli Stati di far passare le cose

2775
01:56:37,960 --> 01:56:39,240
per provare a rimettere il genio nella bottiglia.

2776
01:56:39,460 --> 01:56:39,720
Ad esempio se vietassimo un tic tac o lo dicessimo,

2777
01:56:39,800 --> 01:56:41,520
ehm, nessuno sotto i 18 anni può partecipare,

2778
01:56:41,980 --> 01:56:44,320
su Internet, a meno che non abbiano il permesso dei genitori,

2779
01:56:44,600 --> 01:56:47,080
stiamo andando verso qualcosa del genere

2780
01:56:47,480 --> 01:56:47,600
nessuna sorta di top down sarà in grado di risolverlo.

2781
01:56:48,360 --> 01:56:50,080
Dobbiamo adattarci culturalmente a questa realtà, um...

2782
01:56:50,140 --> 01:56:51,000
uh, in modi che ci rendono più saggi che in realtà,

2783
01:56:51,260 --> 01:56:52,520
ehm, e consentirgli potenzialmente di diventare quel meraviglioso motore di disconferma a cui non siamo ancora vicini, comunque,

2784
01:56:52,620 --> 01:56:55,360
ma pensaci

2785
01:56:55,360 --> 01:56:56,820
Esso.

2786
01:56:56,820 --> 01:57:01,620
Altri milioni di occhi puntati sui problemi,

2787
01:57:01,760 --> 01:57:04,560
ehm, grazie alla macchina da stampa ha aiutato

2788
01:57:04,940 --> 01:57:05,520
creare la rivoluzione scientifica, l’illuminismo,

2789
01:57:05,820 --> 01:57:05,980
l'ignoranza della scoperta.

2790
01:57:06,880 --> 01:57:11,080
Uhm, ora abbiamo aggiunto miliardi

2791
01:57:11,920 --> 01:57:12,660
di occhi e voci per risolvere i problemi.

2792
01:57:13,380 --> 01:57:20,000
E li stiamo semplicemente usando per video di gatti e cancellazioni.

2793
01:57:20,540 --> 01:57:20,860
Ma questi sono solo gli albori della stampa.

2794
01:57:21,580 --> 01:57:22,940
Tutto inizia con i gatti e la cancellazione.

2795
01:57:23,380 --> 01:57:25,700
C'è qualcosa di X su Twitter,

2796
01:57:25,800 --> 01:57:28,600
che è forse il più energico

2797
01:57:28,840 --> 01:57:29,960
fonte di gatti e cancellazione.

2798
01:57:30,340 --> 01:57:32,120
Sembra l'inconscio collettivo della specie.

2799
01:57:32,120 --> 01:57:34,300
Voglio dire, come se fosse una di quelle cose in cui la tendenza a voler vedere degli schemi nella storia a volte può limitare

2800
01:57:34,780 --> 01:57:35,400
la vera e propria pazzesca esperienza di cosa sia realmente la storia.

2801
01:57:35,820 --> 01:57:37,000
Perché sì, noi, noi, abbiamo queste belle idee confortanti che sarà come l'ultima volta.

2802
01:57:37,120 --> 01:57:38,280
Non lo sappiamo.

2803
01:57:38,340 --> 01:57:40,100
Non è ancora successo.

2804
01:57:40,100 --> 01:57:41,940
E io penso

2805
01:57:42,080 --> 01:57:43,840
quanto sia insolito Twitter perché lo considero un po' come i bambini,

2806
01:57:44,000 --> 01:57:48,220
perché la gente parla

2807
01:57:48,800 --> 01:57:50,060
sai, la scrittura e le comunicazioni di massa e,

2808
01:57:50,580 --> 01:57:56,820
uh, come se espandesse le dimensioni del nostro cervello collettivo.

2809
01:57:56,820 --> 01:57:58,940
Ma ora guardiamo il nostro cervello collettivo in tempo reale.

2810
01:57:59,240 --> 01:58:02,700
Ed è pieno, proprio come il nostro cervello, di ogni sorta di piccole cose pazze che compaiono e,

2811
01:58:02,940 --> 01:58:04,520
e, e, e appaiono come particelle virtuali ovunque nel luogo delle persone,

2812
01:58:04,800 --> 01:58:07,180
ehm, lo sai,

2813
01:58:07,180 --> 01:58:08,600
reagire in tempo reale alle cose.

2814
01:58:08,660 --> 01:58:11,220
Non c'è mai stato niente, nemmeno vagamente simile.

2815
01:58:11,220 --> 01:58:14,200
E può essere nella peggiore delle ipotesi,

2816
01:58:14,200 --> 01:58:16,860
terribile da vedere.

2817
01:58:16,860 --> 01:58:18,360
Al suo meglio,

2818
01:58:18,480 --> 01:58:19,360
a volte vedere le persone si sente semplicemente euforico per qualcosa che sta succedendo e fa battute immediate assolutamente brillanti,

2819
01:58:19,740 --> 01:58:21,220
sai, allo stesso tempo,

2820
01:58:21,220 --> 01:58:22,960
può essere,

2821
01:58:23,600 --> 01:58:25,240
non può nemmeno essere un'esperienza gioiosa.

2822
01:58:26,280 --> 01:58:26,300
Uhm, mi sento come se

2823
01:58:26,480 --> 01:58:28,440
uh, e ora vivo in un quartiere su X dove ho a che fare soprattutto con persone che penso siano davvero premurose,

2824
01:58:28,440 --> 01:58:30,740
anche se non sono d'accordo con loro.

2825
01:58:31,760 --> 01:58:32,600
Ehm,

2826
01:58:32,920 --> 01:58:34,580
e, e non è una brutta esperienza.

2827
01:58:35,220 --> 01:58:35,360
Di tanto in tanto mi imbatto in quegli altri tipi di quelli che chiamo quartieri su X dove tutto cancella tutta la cattiveria.

2828
01:58:35,720 --> 01:58:37,060
Ed è sempre una visita spiacevole in quei posti.

2829
01:58:37,060 --> 01:58:39,740
Non sto dicendo che tutto debba essere così,

2830
01:58:39,740 --> 01:58:42,620
uh, come, come la mia esperienza,

2831
01:58:42,620 --> 01:58:46,080
ma lo penso

2832
01:58:46,080 --> 01:58:49,220
il motivo per cui le persone continuano a tornarci è che rivela aspetti crudi dell'umanità che a volte preferiamo far finta che non esistano.

2833
01:58:49,360 --> 01:58:51,040
Sì.

2834
01:58:51,040 --> 01:58:52,520
Sì.

2835
01:58:53,060 --> 01:58:56,140
Ma è anche totalmente nuovo.

2836
01:58:56,160 --> 01:58:58,360
Come hai detto,

2837
01:58:59,200 --> 01:59:01,080
è solo una viralità,

2838
01:59:01,580 --> 01:59:06,840
la velocità, che viaggiano le notizie, che viaggiano le opinioni, che viaggia la battaglia sulle idee.

2839
01:59:07,060 --> 01:59:08,380
Anche la battaglia sull’informazione.

2840
01:59:08,880 --> 01:59:10,000
Sì.

2841
01:59:10,420 --> 01:59:11,700
Di ciò che è vero e non di bugie viaggiate,

2842
01:59:12,400 --> 01:59:19,100
la vecchia cosa di Mark Twain piuttosto veloce sul

2843
01:59:19,120 --> 01:59:23,880
cosa.

2844
01:59:24,620 --> 01:59:27,760
Sì.

2845
01:59:28,260 --> 01:59:29,560
E poi cambia la tua comprensione di come interpretare

2846
01:59:29,920 --> 01:59:33,040
informazione.

2847
01:59:33,160 --> 01:59:34,120
Inoltre ti stressa a non finire.

2848
01:59:34,420 --> 01:59:36,980
Mi sono ricordato di scendere a volte.

2849
01:59:37,020 --> 01:59:38,340
Le statistiche sono pessime per quanto riguarda la salute mentale, uh,

2850
01:59:38,560 --> 01:59:42,920
con, con, con i giovani.

2851
01:59:43,380 --> 01:59:44,580
E io sono sicuramente nel campo di persone che pensano che i social media siano parte di tutto ciò.

2852
01:59:44,580 --> 01:59:49,060
Capisco il dibattito,

2853
01:59:49,460 --> 01:59:52,540
ma sono abbastanza convinto che una delle cose che è,

2854
01:59:52,780 --> 01:59:56,360
non è stato eccezionale per la salute mentale delle persone, è solo che viene costantemente esposto.

2855
01:59:57,300 --> 01:59:57,700
Sì, assolutamente.

2856
01:59:58,460 --> 02:00:00,760
Penso che sia possibile creare social media che generino enormi profitti

2857
02:00:00,880 --> 02:00:01,980
somma di denaro, rende le persone felici per me,

2858
02:00:01,980 --> 02:00:04,680
come se fosse possibile allineare gli incentivi.

2859
02:00:04,860 --> 02:00:06,380
Quindi, in termini di

2860
02:00:06,500 --> 02:00:07,140
sì, fare adolescenti,

2861
02:00:07,780 --> 02:00:12,580
fabbricazione,

2862
02:00:13,320 --> 02:00:17,360
uh, ogni fase della vita, dare

2863
02:00:17,560 --> 02:00:19,960
la tua realizzazione e felicità a lungo termine con la tua esistenza fisica al di fuori dei social media e sui social media,

2864
02:00:20,180 --> 02:00:23,900
aiutandoti a crescere come essere umano,

2865
02:00:23,900 --> 02:00:25,500
uh, aiutandoti a sfidarti con la giusta quantità e la giusta quantità di video di gatti,

2866
02:00:25,880 --> 02:00:28,200
qualunque cosa dia questa piena e ricca esperienza umana.

2867
02:00:28,920 --> 02:00:30,060
Penso che sia giusto

2868
02:00:30,060 --> 02:00:31,220
un problema di apprendimento automatico.

2869
02:00:32,140 --> 02:00:33,700
È come se non fosse facile creare un feed.

2870
02:00:33,900 --> 02:00:38,280
Quindi il feed più semplice che potresti fare è massimizzare il coinvolgimento.

2871
02:00:38,280 --> 02:00:43,740
Sì.

2872
02:00:43,900 --> 02:00:47,320
Ma è proprio come un algoritmo davvero stupido.

2873
02:00:48,420 --> 02:00:49,800
Sì.

2874
02:00:49,900 --> 02:00:51,140
È come per il,

2875
02:00:52,000 --> 02:00:54,940
affinché l'algoritmo impari abbastanza su di te per capire

2876
02:00:55,780 --> 02:00:58,100
cosa ti renderà veramente felice come essere umano per crescere a lungo termine.

2877
02:00:58,100 --> 02:00:59,940
Questo è solo un problema molto difficile da risolvere.

2878
02:01:00,000 --> 02:01:02,580
Hai mai guardato Fleabag?

2879
02:01:02,580 --> 02:01:04,440
È assolutamente geniale, uno spettacolo britannico.

2880
02:01:05,180 --> 02:01:07,720
Uhm, e questo ti prepara.

2881
02:01:07,720 --> 02:01:09,240
Uno dei motivi per cui le persone lo adorano così tanto è che ti fa pensare che stai guardando come,

2882
02:01:09,300 --> 02:01:13,160
un volgare Sex and the City britannico,

2883
02:01:13,520 --> 02:01:15,880
tranne che il personaggio principale è il più importante.

2884
02:01:15,980 --> 02:01:17,940
Ehm,

2885
02:01:18,660 --> 02:01:20,620
è come, okay.

2886
02:01:22,140 --> 02:01:25,840
E alzi un po' gli occhi al cielo ed è piuttosto divertente ed è piuttosto carino

2887
02:01:26,000 --> 02:01:30,000
e un po' piccante.

2888
02:01:30,420 --> 02:01:33,580
E poi ti rendi conto che quella persona in realtà soffre e sta attraversando un periodo difficile

2889
02:01:33,580 --> 02:01:41,160
e ottiene

2890
02:01:41,560 --> 02:01:42,680
sempre più profondo man mano che lo spettacolo va avanti.

2891
02:01:43,300 --> 02:01:43,480
E farà questi discorsi incredibili su,

2892
02:01:43,480 --> 02:01:46,040
Dimmi cosa fare.

2893
02:01:46,380 --> 02:01:48,060
Come ho appena fatto, so che ci sono esperti là fuori.

2894
02:01:48,060 --> 02:01:50,560
So che c'è conoscenza là fuori.

2895
02:01:50,960 --> 02:01:52,000
So che esiste un modo ottimale

2896
02:01:53,380 --> 02:01:55,800
per vivere la mia vita.

2897
02:01:56,360 --> 02:01:58,620
Allora perché qualcuno non può semplicemente dirmi cosa fare?

2898
02:01:58,780 --> 02:02:01,320
E, ed è meravigliosamente così,

2899
02:02:02,760 --> 02:02:05,660
ehm,

2900
02:02:05,840 --> 02:02:08,460
accurato, penso, uh, aspetto del desiderio umano che e se qualcosa potesse

2901
02:02:08,480 --> 02:02:11,900
effettivamente dirmi la strada ottimale da percorrere?

2902
02:02:12,640 --> 02:02:15,520
Perché penso che ci sia il desiderio di dare

2903
02:02:16,140 --> 02:02:17,720
aumentare una certa quantità della tua libertà e discrezione per sentirti dire di fare la cosa giusta in modo ottimale.

2904
02:02:17,900 --> 02:02:19,680
Ma quel percorso

2905
02:02:19,840 --> 02:02:28,980
mi spaventa a morte.

2906
02:02:30,220 --> 02:02:34,580
Sì, vediamo come lo dici.

2907
02:02:34,700 --> 02:02:38,620
Cioè, spaventa anche me.

2908
02:02:38,880 --> 02:02:39,700
Quindi ci sono molte cose che una,

2909
02:02:39,960 --> 02:02:41,860
puoi essere costantemente distratto in a

2910
02:02:42,420 --> 02:02:43,300
TikTok dalle cose che ti tengono impegnato.

2911
02:02:43,920 --> 02:02:49,340
Quindi rimuovendolo

2912
02:02:49,460 --> 02:02:50,120
e offrendoti costantemente un sacco di opzioni

2913
02:02:50,800 --> 02:02:54,820
e imparare dal lungo termine ciò che si traduce nella tua effettiva felicità a lungo termine.

2914
02:02:54,900 --> 02:02:58,740
Quindi, ad esempio, quali quantità di idee stimolanti sono buone per te?

2915
02:02:59,400 --> 02:03:02,220
ehm,

2916
02:03:03,000 --> 02:03:07,860
che, sai, per, per qualcuno come me,

2917
02:03:07,860 --> 02:03:11,720
ma c'è un numero simile per te, Greg, tipo

2918
02:03:12,020 --> 02:03:13,380
per me, quel numero è piuttosto alto.

2919
02:03:13,740 --> 02:03:15,440
io amo

2920
02:03:15,680 --> 02:03:18,580
discussione.

2921
02:03:18,580 --> 02:03:20,320
Io amo,

2922
02:03:20,920 --> 02:03:21,180
Io, amo la sensazione di realizzare,

2923
02:03:21,800 --> 02:03:22,900
porca miseria, mi sono sbagliato.

2924
02:03:23,240 --> 02:03:29,640
SÌ.

2925
02:03:29,660 --> 02:03:30,780
Ma tipo, sai, e mi piacerebbe che l'algoritmo sapesse questo di me e mi aiutasse,

2926
02:03:31,120 --> 02:03:31,960
ma dandomi sempre delle opzioni.

2927
02:03:32,620 --> 02:03:34,820
Se voglio scendere nei video sui gatti e così via.

2928
02:03:35,400 --> 02:03:36,080
Beh, l'aspetto educativo.

2929
02:03:36,760 --> 02:03:44,880
SÌ,

2930
02:03:44,940 --> 02:03:45,180
formazione scolastica.

2931
02:03:45,420 --> 02:03:45,820
Mi piace l'idea di andare alla velocità di cui hai bisogno e correre come

2932
02:03:47,020 --> 02:03:49,220
più veloce che puoi.

2933
02:03:49,600 --> 02:03:55,880
Sì.

2934
02:03:55,880 --> 02:03:57,940
Sai, voglio dire, c'è tutta questa faccenda del flusso.

2935
02:03:58,580 --> 02:04:00,540
Sento solo che il consiglio di YouTube per,

2936
02:04:00,540 --> 02:04:02,460
nel bene e nel male, se usato correttamente,

2937
02:04:02,820 --> 02:04:03,980
sembra che faccia un buon lavoro.

2938
02:04:04,820 --> 02:04:12,120
Ogni volta che mi rifiuto semplicemente di fare clic su qualcosa

2939
02:04:12,560 --> 02:04:12,820
è solo basato sulla dopamina e fa clic solo su argomenti educativi,

2940
02:04:13,500 --> 02:04:13,880
la raccomandazione fornisce davvero dannatamente bene.

2941
02:04:13,880 --> 02:04:15,240
Quindi sento che è risolvibile

2942
02:04:15,460 --> 02:04:15,880
problema, almeno nello spazio educativo di sfidare se stessi,

2943
02:04:16,260 --> 02:04:17,300
ma anche espandere il tuo regno di conoscenza e tutto questo genere di cose.

2944
02:04:17,360 --> 02:04:22,380
E sono decisamente più interessato a,

2945
02:04:22,740 --> 02:04:23,860
siamo in un periodo inevitabilmente anarchico e necessitiamo di grandi aggiustamenti culturali.

2946
02:04:24,160 --> 02:04:24,380
E non c'è modo che questa non sia una transizione difficile.

2947
02:04:24,440 --> 02:04:26,720
C'è qualche piccola o grande cosa specifica che ti piacerebbe vedere fare da X e da Twitter?

2948
02:04:27,160 --> 02:04:29,180
Ho molti pensieri a riguardo.

2949
02:04:29,180 --> 02:04:29,440
Con la macchina da stampa e milioni di occhi in più puntati su ogni problema

2950
02:04:29,440 --> 02:04:29,940
può demolire qualsiasi istituzione,

2951
02:04:29,940 --> 02:04:33,800
qualsiasi, qualsiasi persona o qualsiasi idea.

2952
02:04:34,420 --> 02:04:35,140
E questo è positivo in un certo senso,

2953
02:04:35,260 --> 02:04:36,720
perché molte istituzioni medievali dovevano essere demolite.

2954
02:04:37,280 --> 02:04:38,760
E anche alcune persone lo hanno fatto,

2955
02:04:39,060 --> 02:04:41,520
e molte idee dovevano essere demolite.

2956
02:04:41,960 --> 02:04:42,620
La stessa cosa è vera adesso.

2957
02:04:42,780 --> 02:04:46,540
Un miliardo in più di occhi puntati su ogni problema può abbattere qualsiasi persona, idea o istituzione.

2958
02:04:46,700 --> 02:04:48,260
E alcune, ancora una volta, alcune di quelle cose dovevano essere demolite,

2959
02:04:48,300 --> 02:04:51,100
ma non può ancora essere costruito.

2960
02:04:51,160 --> 02:04:56,340
Non siamo al

2961
02:04:56,920 --> 02:04:57,360
palcoscenico che può ancora costruire,

2962
02:04:57,540 --> 02:05:02,220
ma ci ha mostrato quanto scarsa fosse la nostra conoscenza.

2963
02:05:02,220 --> 02:05:04,220
È uno dei motivi per cui siamo anche consapevoli della crisi della replicazione.

2964
02:05:04,280 --> 02:05:07,490
È uno dei motivi per cui lo siamo

2965
02:05:08,260 --> 02:05:08,900
anche consapevole di quanto sia scadente la nostra ricerca,

2966
02:05:09,540 --> 02:05:10,580
quanto la nostra classe di esperti è arrogante

2967
02:05:10,920 --> 02:05:11,260
in molti casi, ma le persone non vogliono vivere in un mondo in cui non hanno persone che lo facciano

2968
02:05:11,760 --> 02:05:12,920
rispettano e possono guardare.

2969
02:05:13,560 --> 02:05:19,320
E penso a cosa sta succedendo

2970
02:05:19,860 --> 02:05:21,420
forse ora, ma ciò continuerà ad accadere se le persone si affermeranno come persone con elevata integrità,

2971
02:05:22,220 --> 02:05:25,640
che saranno sempre onesti.

2972
02:05:25,880 --> 02:05:29,180
Penso che tu ti stia affermando come qualcuno con un'elevata integrità,

2973
02:05:29,940 --> 02:05:30,760
dove possono fidarsi di quella persona.

2974
02:05:31,340 --> 02:05:32,640
Un fuoco vuole essere,

2975
02:05:32,680 --> 02:05:35,700
sai, l'istituzione in cui le persone possono venire è come,

2976
02:05:36,380 --> 02:05:38,960
se è libertà di parola,

2977
02:05:39,340 --> 02:05:39,740
lo difenderemo, punto.

2978
02:05:39,740 --> 02:05:41,020
E penso che le persone abbiano bisogno di novità,

2979
02:05:41,730 --> 02:05:42,280
hanno bisogno di autorità di cui possano effettivamente fidarsi.

2980
02:05:42,600 --> 02:05:43,800
E penso che se avessi davvero uno streaming che forse le persone potrebbero guardare in azione,

2981
02:05:43,840 --> 02:05:48,240
ma non inondarlo, sai,

2982
02:05:48,960 --> 02:05:52,360
stupide cose sulla cultura della cancellazione o stupidi mezzi per gatti,

2983
02:05:52,860 --> 02:05:55,100
dove in realtà è una cosa seria

2984
02:05:55,720 --> 02:05:56,720
discussione incentrata sulle regole,

2985
02:05:57,340 --> 02:05:59,560
nessuna fortezza retorica perfetta,

2986
02:05:59,560 --> 02:06:01,940
nessuna fortezza retorica efficiente, nessuna delle sciocchezze in cui discutiamo.

2987
02:06:02,040 --> 02:06:05,920
Penso che potresti iniziare a creare davvero qualcosa

2988
02:06:06,020 --> 02:06:07,940
potrebbe effettivamente rappresentare un notevole miglioramento nella velocità con cui creiamo nuovi,

2989
02:06:08,160 --> 02:06:10,060
idee migliori e stabilire e separare la verità dalla falsità.

2990
02:06:11,080 --> 02:06:11,620
Sì.

2991
02:06:12,580 --> 02:06:13,400
Se è fatto bene,

2992
02:06:13,620 --> 02:06:16,480
può ispirare un gran numero di persone a diventare sempre più in alto

2993
02:06:16,620 --> 02:06:18,480
integrità e può creare l’integrità come valore a cui tendere.

2994
02:06:19,340 --> 02:06:24,140
Voglio dire, sai, ci sono stati progetti su Internet che hanno fatto un

2995
02:06:24,800 --> 02:06:25,780
lavoro incredibile,

2996
02:06:26,620 --> 02:06:28,560
ma sono stati anche molto imperfetti.

2997
02:06:28,960 --> 02:06:31,640
Come Wikipedia è un esempio di un grande

2998
02:06:32,080 --> 02:06:32,800
fare un salto in avanti nel farlo.

2999
02:06:33,220 --> 02:06:35,400
È dannatamente impressionante.

3000
02:06:35,500 --> 02:06:36,920
Qual è la tua opinione generale?

3001
02:06:36,960 --> 02:06:38,320
Voglio dire, sono soprattutto impressionato.

3002
02:06:38,880 --> 02:06:39,700
Quindi ce ne sono alcuni davvero

3003
02:06:39,720 --> 02:06:42,320
idee potenti

3004
02:06:42,460 --> 02:06:44,480
per le persone che modificano Wikipedia.

3005
02:06:45,840 --> 02:06:46,540
Uno dei quali è ciascuno

3006
02:06:47,700 --> 02:06:52,120
l'editor in un certo senso dichiara per se stesso,

3007
02:06:52,120 --> 02:06:54,620
Sai,

3008
02:06:55,120 --> 02:06:57,400
Mi occupo di politica e sono davvero un tipo di sinistra.

3009
02:06:57,400 --> 02:07:04,100
Quindi davvero non dovrei modificare

3010
02:07:04,540 --> 02:07:05,300
articoli politici perché ho dei pregiudizi.

3011
02:07:05,840 --> 02:07:07,180
Quindi dichiarano i loro pregiudizi

3012
02:07:07,260 --> 02:07:09,000
e spesso fanno un buon lavoro nel dichiarare effettivamente i pregiudizi,

3013
02:07:09,220 --> 02:07:10,480
ma gli piacerà comunque,

3014
02:07:11,100 --> 02:07:12,520
troveranno un modo per giustificarsi.

3015
02:07:12,660 --> 02:07:14,540
Come se qualcosa li facesse incazzare e loro lo vogliono

3016
02:07:14,540 --> 02:07:17,480
correggilo perché amano correggere la falsità in verità.

3017
02:07:17,480 --> 02:07:18,880
Ma la prospettiva di ciò che è vero e di ciò che non lo è è influenzata dai loro pregiudizi.

3018
02:07:19,480 --> 02:07:22,580
La verità è difficile da sapere.

3019
02:07:23,100 --> 02:07:29,080
Ed è vero che c'è un pregiudizio di sinistra tra gli editori di Wikipedia.

3020
02:07:30,020 --> 02:07:33,920
Quindi per questo,

3021
02:07:34,120 --> 02:07:34,260
quello che succede è sugli articoli,

3022
02:07:35,480 --> 02:07:37,160
che apprezzo soprattutto che non abbia una politica

3023
02:07:39,220 --> 02:07:42,120
aspetto a loro,

3024
02:07:42,720 --> 02:07:45,100
Sai,

3025
02:07:45,260 --> 02:07:45,560
ehm, articoli scientifici o, ehm, articoli tecnici,

3026
02:07:46,240 --> 02:07:46,680
saranno davvero forti,

3027
02:07:46,860 --> 02:07:47,120
anche la storia, semplicemente descrivendo i fatti della storia che non hanno un elemento soggettivo,

3028
02:07:47,660 --> 02:07:50,120
eh, forte.

3029
02:07:50,420 --> 02:07:51,720
Anche

3030
02:07:51,940 --> 02:07:52,040
usando semplicemente il mio cervello,

3031
02:07:52,680 --> 02:07:57,680
Posso filtrare

3032
02:07:57,740 --> 02:07:59,040
se è,

3033
02:07:59,080 --> 02:08:01,760
uh, sai, se si tratta del 6 gennaio o qualcosa del genere,

3034
02:08:01,760 --> 02:08:03,040
So che lo farò

3035
02:08:03,240 --> 02:08:03,520
sii come, non sono quello che sta succedendo qui.

3036
02:08:03,840 --> 02:08:04,060
Lo leggerò, tipo

3037
02:08:04,940 --> 02:08:08,180
ma soprattutto cercherò altre fonti.

3038
02:08:08,180 --> 02:08:08,800
Esaminerò un sacco di prospettive diverse al riguardo.

3039
02:08:09,080 --> 02:08:09,180
Sarà molto teso.

3040
02:08:09,660 --> 02:08:11,780
Probabilmente ci sarà una sorta di pregiudizio.

3041
02:08:12,100 --> 02:08:15,240
Forse alcune parole saranno tali,

3042
02:08:15,580 --> 02:08:17,500
che è una parola.

3043
02:08:18,220 --> 02:08:19,540
È qui che Wikipedia fa questa cosa.

3044
02:08:20,160 --> 02:08:22,300
Il modo in cui esprimono le cose sarà parziale,

3045
02:08:22,900 --> 02:08:26,460
la scelta delle parole,

3046
02:08:26,980 --> 02:08:29,000
ma gli stessi editori di Wikipedia sono così autoriflessivi.

3047
02:08:29,360 --> 02:08:31,560
Hanno letteralmente articoli che descrivono proprio questi effetti su come puoi usarli

3048
02:08:32,360 --> 02:08:35,460
parole per iniettare pregiudizi in tutti i modi in cui ne parli.

3049
02:08:36,020 --> 02:08:38,820
È più sano della maggior parte degli ambienti.

3050
02:08:38,920 --> 02:08:40,460
È incredibilmente salutare,

3051
02:08:40,460 --> 02:08:45,620
ma penso che potresti fare di meglio.

3052
02:08:45,780 --> 02:08:48,380
Per me uno dei grandi difetti di Wikipedia è

3053
02:08:49,020 --> 02:08:54,160
quello che le note della community su X fanno meglio è l'accessibilità di diventare un editor.

3054
02:08:54,720 --> 02:08:56,420
Ehm, è difficile diventare un editore e non è così visibile,

3055
02:08:57,060 --> 02:09:00,180
il processo di modifica.

3056
02:09:00,420 --> 02:09:01,900
Quindi mi piacerebbe,

3057
02:09:02,140 --> 02:09:03,560
come hai detto tu, un flusso, affinché tutti possano osservare questo dibattito tra le persone con integrità quando discutono di cose come il 6 gennaio,

3058
02:09:03,720 --> 02:09:05,020
un argomento molto controverso per vedere come va il processo del dibattito invece di rimanere nascosto nell'ombra,

3059
02:09:05,040 --> 02:09:07,480
che attualmente si trova su Wikipedia.

3060
02:09:07,540 --> 02:09:08,400
Puoi accedervi.

3061
02:09:08,540 --> 02:09:10,760
È solo difficile accedervi, ma...

3062
02:09:11,140 --> 02:09:11,820
e ho anche visto come utilizzeranno determinati articoli,

3063
02:09:11,900 --> 02:09:16,560
come su certe persone,

3064
02:09:17,100 --> 02:09:20,680
come articoli su persone di cui ho imparato a fidarmi sempre meno perché li useranno letteralmente per sferrare attacchi personali.

3065
02:09:21,160 --> 02:09:22,400
E questo è qualcosa di cui scrivi.

3066
02:09:22,600 --> 02:09:23,080
Utilizzeranno,

3067
02:09:23,160 --> 02:09:24,160
uh, descrizioni di diverse controversie per dipingere l'immagine di una persona che è,

3068
02:09:24,340 --> 02:09:26,760
questa non mi sembra almeno una rappresentazione accurata

3069
02:09:27,000 --> 02:09:29,480
della persona.

3070
02:09:29,560 --> 02:09:30,540
Ed è come scrivere un articolo su Einstein menzionando qualcosa che riguarda...

3071
02:09:30,600 --> 02:09:33,240
uh, la teoria della relatività e poi dire che era un donnaiolo e violentatore e un...

3072
02:09:33,460 --> 02:09:35,940
come polemica, sai, sì, anche lui è Feynman,

3073
02:09:36,200 --> 02:09:41,920
sai, non, sai, era che, sai, non sono esattamente l'essere umano perfetto in termini di donne,

3074
02:09:41,920 --> 02:09:43,600
ma come se ci fossero altri aspetti di questo essere umano e per catturarlo correttamente,

3075
02:09:43,900 --> 02:09:45,480
c'è un certo modo per farlo.

3076
02:09:46,200 --> 02:09:53,020
Penso che Wikipedia spesso si inclinerà.

3077
02:09:53,180 --> 02:09:54,240
Cercano davvero di essere autoriflessivi e

3078
02:09:54,260 --> 02:09:57,340
prova a fermare tutto questo,

3079
02:09:57,960 --> 02:09:59,940
ma si appoggeranno al dramma se corrisponde al pregiudizio.

3080
02:10:00,060 --> 02:10:01,300
Ma ancora una volta,

3081
02:10:01,740 --> 02:10:03,460
molto meglio del mondo che credo sia molto migliore.

3082
02:10:03,620 --> 02:10:04,420
ehm,

3083
02:10:04,500 --> 02:10:05,840
perché Wikipedia esiste,

3084
02:10:06,520 --> 02:10:08,740
ma ora che siamo in questa fase adolescenziale,

3085
02:10:09,720 --> 02:10:12,360
stiamo crescendo e cercando di inventare tecnologie diverse.

3086
02:10:12,540 --> 02:10:16,620
L'idea di un flusso è davvero,

3087
02:10:16,660 --> 02:10:18,860
davvero interessante poiché coinvolgi sempre più persone in questo discorso

3088
02:10:19,440 --> 02:10:21,800
quello dove sta il valore,

3089
02:10:22,100 --> 02:10:23,240
proviamo a scoprire la verità.

3090
02:10:23,240 --> 02:10:24,960
Sì.

3091
02:10:25,500 --> 02:10:26,740
Sì.

3092
02:10:26,900 --> 02:10:30,200
E fondamentalmente, sai, ottieni le cartoline per,

3093
02:10:30,760 --> 02:10:33,460
No, sbagliato, no, sbagliato.

3094
02:10:33,460 --> 02:10:38,600
E il diverso,

3095
02:10:38,700 --> 02:10:41,200
il diverso, le diverse tecniche retoriche che vengono utilizzate

3096
02:10:41,960 --> 02:10:42,240
per evitare di discutere davvero.

3097
02:10:42,460 --> 02:10:43,900
Sì.

3098
02:10:43,920 --> 02:10:46,880
E penso che in realtà potresti renderlo un po' più divertente avendo un numero limitato

3099
02:10:46,900 --> 02:10:51,160
di loro.

3100
02:10:51,600 --> 02:10:56,640
Uhm, sai, è un po' come...

3101
02:10:56,640 --> 02:10:57,540
ne prendi tre, che ne dici di alcune carte.

3102
02:10:57,600 --> 02:10:59,220
Quindi giochiamo il tutto.

3103
02:10:59,580 --> 02:11:01,920
Ehm, assolutamente.

3104
02:11:01,920 --> 02:11:03,800
Sì.

3105
02:11:03,840 --> 02:11:04,800
Uh, lascia che ti chieda...

3106
02:11:04,940 --> 02:11:05,880
uh, quindi hai menzionato alcuni momenti difficili della tua vita.

3107
02:11:06,160 --> 02:11:07,600
Ehm,

3108
02:11:07,780 --> 02:11:09,220
cosa, cosa è stato il tuo

3109
02:11:10,080 --> 02:11:11,060
esperienza con la depressione?

3110
02:11:11,600 --> 02:11:13,280
Qual è stata la tua esperienza uscendo?

3111
02:11:13,760 --> 02:11:15,300
di esso, superandolo?

3112
02:11:15,580 --> 02:11:18,740
Sì.

3113
02:11:19,040 --> 02:11:19,480
Voglio dire, l'intera faccenda, l'intero viaggio, um,

3114
02:11:19,820 --> 02:11:24,340
th th th th th th th th th th th

3115
02:11:24,780 --> 02:11:26,460
con le coccole la mente americana ha cominciato con me, um,

3116
02:11:27,140 --> 02:11:29,300
nel, presso il manicomio psichiatrico di Belmont

3117
02:11:29,420 --> 02:11:31,220
stabilimento di Filadelfia nel 2007, I

3118
02:11:31,220 --> 02:11:34,020
avevo chiamato i servizi di emergenza sanitaria in un momento di lucidità perché lo avrei fatto

3119
02:11:34,100 --> 02:11:36,010
andato al, uh, il negozio di ferramenta a, ehm,

3120
02:11:36,960 --> 02:11:39,160
assicurati che quando mi sono ucciso,

3121
02:11:39,320 --> 02:11:41,440
che io, si è bloccato.

3122
02:11:41,540 --> 02:11:46,160
Volevo assicurarmi che io,

3123
02:11:46,780 --> 02:11:50,040
sai, mi avevano fasciato la testa e tutto il resto.

3124
02:11:50,160 --> 02:11:51,280
Quindi, come se tutti i farmaci che avevo intenzione di prendere non avessero funzionato,

3125
02:11:52,100 --> 02:11:56,720
che non ne sarei capace

3126
02:11:57,360 --> 02:11:57,780
per uscire con gli artigli.

3127
02:11:58,860 --> 02:12:00,680
È stato un anno davvero difficile e ho sempre avuto problemi con la depressione,

3128
02:12:00,780 --> 02:12:04,360
ehm, ma stavano peggiorando.

3129
02:12:04,920 --> 02:12:05,860
E francamente, uno dei motivi per cui questa cultura dell'annullamento

3130
02:12:06,280 --> 02:12:07,440
le cose sono così... importanti per me è questo

3131
02:12:08,100 --> 02:12:11,220
la cosa che non ho sottolineato tanto nel coccolare

3132
02:12:11,840 --> 02:12:13,120
la mente americana, che tra l'altro,

3133
02:12:13,300 --> 02:12:17,400
quella descrizione che do del tentativo di uccidere

3134
02:12:18,000 --> 02:12:18,580
io stesso era la prima volta che lo scrivevo.

3135
02:12:19,100 --> 02:12:19,280
Nessuno nella mia famiglia era a conoscenza

3136
02:12:19,900 --> 02:12:21,180
di come,

3137
02:12:21,620 --> 02:12:22,980
ehm, che sia così.

3138
02:12:23,580 --> 02:12:24,220
Mia moglie non l'aveva mai visto.

3139
02:12:24,600 --> 02:12:26,780
E fondamentalmente l'unico modo in cui sono riuscito a scriverlo è stato,

3140
02:12:27,120 --> 02:12:28,000
facendo, sai, come puoi ingannare te stesso.

3141
02:12:28,000 --> 02:12:30,200
Se... e io dicessi:

3142
02:12:30,280 --> 02:12:32,060
Mi convincerò che questa cosa riguarda solo me e il mio computer e nessuno lo vedrà.

3143
02:12:32,720 --> 02:12:34,320
E probabilmente non è la cosa più pubblica che abbia mai scritto.

3144
02:12:34,320 --> 02:12:36,640
Uhm, ma quello che non ho sottolineato è quanto la guerra culturale abbia influito sulla mia depressione.

3145
02:12:36,740 --> 02:12:37,820
perché lo ero originariamente

3146
02:12:38,220 --> 02:12:39,940
il direttore legale dei vigili del fuoco.

3147
02:12:40,000 --> 02:12:43,260
Poi sono diventato presidente dei vigili del fuoco nel 2005,

3148
02:12:43,560 --> 02:12:44,180
trasferirmi a Filadelfia è il luogo in cui mi deprimo.

3149
02:12:44,660 --> 02:12:46,980
Ehm, e... semplicemente, non ho famiglia lì.

3150
02:12:47,540 --> 02:12:50,300
C'è qualcosa nella città.

3151
02:12:50,700 --> 02:12:51,640
Non sembra che gli piaccio molto.

3152
02:12:52,920 --> 02:12:56,400
Ehm,

3153
02:12:56,480 --> 02:13:01,020
ma la cosa principale

3154
02:13:01,020 --> 02:13:05,800
era sempre nel mondo della cultura.

3155
02:13:05,800 --> 02:13:07,140
Uhm, c'era una ragazza con cui uscivo.

3156
02:13:07,500 --> 02:13:08,880
Ehm,

3157
02:13:09,200 --> 02:13:10,580
Ricordo che non sembrava approvare davvero quello che facevo.

3158
02:13:11,000 --> 02:13:12,880
E molte persone

3159
02:13:13,280 --> 02:13:19,060
non sembrava proprio.

3160
02:13:19,560 --> 02:13:24,240
E nel frattempo, come se stessi difendendo tutte le persone di sinistra

3161
02:13:24,240 --> 02:13:25,380
tempo e direbbero:

3162
02:13:26,120 --> 02:13:26,820
Oh, è un bene che tu stia difendendo qualcuno sul

3163
02:13:27,140 --> 02:13:36,140
a sinistra, ma comunque non mi perdonerebbero mai se difendessi qualcuno a destra.

3164
02:13:36,160 --> 02:13:43,500
E ricordo di aver detto qual è il mio punto,

3165
02:13:43,520 --> 02:13:44,800
ascolta, sono tipo, sono, sono un vero sostenitore di queste cose.

3166
02:13:45,060 --> 02:13:45,780
Sono disposto a difendere i nazisti.

3167
02:13:45,820 --> 02:13:47,740
Sono certamente disposto a difendere i repubblicani.

3168
02:13:48,080 --> 02:13:51,520
E lei in realtà ha detto:

3169
02:13:52,680 --> 02:13:53,680
Penso che i repubblicani potrebbero essere peggio.

3170
02:13:54,080 --> 02:14:01,140
Ehm,

3171
02:14:01,160 --> 02:14:02,420
e così non è stato, quella relazione non è andata molto bene.

3172
02:14:03,060 --> 02:14:03,660
E poi ho rischiato di fare a pugni un paio di volte con,

3173
02:14:04,340 --> 02:14:08,540
con le persone sul

3174
02:14:09,840 --> 02:14:12,440
Giusto.

3175
02:14:12,640 --> 02:14:13,840
Perché hanno scoperto che difendevo gente che fa battute sull'11 settembre.

3176
02:14:14,100 --> 02:14:18,240
Come se questo fosse successo più di una volta.

3177
02:14:18,760 --> 02:14:22,880
E questo, sai, quando avrò vent'anni,

3178
02:14:22,880 --> 02:14:27,720
Non combatterò di nuovo a pugni.

3179
02:14:27,720 --> 02:14:32,780
Uhm, ma sì, è sempre stato così.

3180
02:14:33,160 --> 02:14:39,060
Tu, tu, vedi come sono ipocrite le persone

3181
02:14:39,400 --> 02:14:40,860
può essere.

3182
02:14:41,000 --> 02:14:42,820
Puoi vedere come gli amici possono rivoltarsi contro di te se non gli piace la tua politica.

3183
02:14:43,520 --> 02:14:45,880
Quindi ne ho avuto un'anteprima,

3184
02:14:46,880 --> 02:14:47,800
di, di, di quale sia la cultura verso cui ci stiamo dirigendo essendo il

3185
02:14:47,880 --> 02:14:52,040
presidente del fuoco.

3186
02:14:52,500 --> 02:14:52,940
Ed è stato estenuante.

3187
02:14:53,960 --> 02:14:57,040
Uhm, e quella era una delle cose principali

3188
02:14:58,340 --> 02:14:58,480
che mi ha portato ad essere,

3189
02:14:58,900 --> 02:14:59,800
sai, depresso suicida,

3190
02:15:01,020 --> 02:15:03,660
ehm, al centro di Belmont.

3191
02:15:03,780 --> 02:15:05,690
Se mi dicessi che quello sarebbe l'inizio di una vita nuova e migliore per me,

3192
02:15:05,980 --> 02:15:08,000
Avrei riso se avessi potuto,

3193
02:15:08,000 --> 02:15:12,720
ma lo farei, sai, non mi piace,

3194
02:15:12,940 --> 02:15:14,680
puoi dire che sto bene se sto ancora ridendo.

3195
02:15:14,780 --> 02:15:16,120
E non stavo ridendo,

3196
02:15:17,080 --> 02:15:17,160
ehm, a quel punto.

3197
02:15:17,420 --> 02:15:17,640
Quindi, ho chiamato un medico e ho iniziato a fare terapia cognitivo comportamentale.

3198
02:15:17,640 --> 02:15:19,860
Ho iniziato ad avere tutte queste voci nella mia testa che erano catastrofizzanti e,

3199
02:15:19,980 --> 02:15:21,320
ehm, sai, mi ha dato una scossa,

3200
02:15:21,620 --> 02:15:22,400
sulla generalizzazione e, um, uh, predizione del futuro, sai, uh, lettura del pensiero tutte queste cose che ti insegnano a non fare.

3201
02:15:22,720 --> 02:15:25,100
Ed esso,

3202
02:15:25,160 --> 02:15:26,460
uh, e quello che loro, quello che fai nella CBT è essenzialmente che hai qualcosa che ti fa arrabbiare e poi semplicemente

3203
02:15:26,500 --> 02:15:26,800
scrivi qual era il pensiero.

3204
02:15:26,880 --> 02:15:29,460
Ehm, e sai, potrebbe succedere qualcosa di minore nel tuo...

3205
02:15:29,460 --> 02:15:30,220
la risposta è stata, sai, tipo, um,

3206
02:15:30,220 --> 02:15:32,300
BENE,

3207
02:15:32,580 --> 02:15:33,940
l'appuntamento non sembrava andare molto bene.

3208
02:15:34,420 --> 02:15:35,420
Ehm, e questo perché sono distrutto e moriremo da soli.

3209
02:15:35,660 --> 02:15:36,560
E tu dici, okay, okay, okay.

3210
02:15:36,760 --> 02:15:37,180
Cosa, cosa, quali sono i seguenti,

3211
02:15:37,220 --> 02:15:38,240
sai, è catastrofico, è leggere nel pensiero, è predire il futuro, è tutta questa roba.

3212
02:15:39,460 --> 02:15:42,480
Ehm, e devi farlo più volte al giorno

3213
02:15:42,520 --> 02:15:43,560
per sempre.

3214
02:15:44,760 --> 02:15:45,740
In realtà ho bisogno di rispolverarlo in questo momento.

3215
02:15:45,740 --> 02:15:47,980
Ehm,

3216
02:15:48,460 --> 02:15:50,220
e lentamente finisce

3217
02:15:50,220 --> 02:15:51,020
voci nella mia testa che dicevano cose orribili, sai,

3218
02:15:52,230 --> 02:15:52,380
orribile discorso interno,

3219
02:15:52,520 --> 02:15:54,840
semplicemente non sembrava più così convincente,

3220
02:15:55,240 --> 02:15:56,700
che era davvero un effetto sottile.

3221
02:15:56,700 --> 02:15:59,600
Come se fosse un po' come se

3222
02:16:00,240 --> 02:16:02,340
oh aspetta, non ci credo che sono rotto.

3223
02:16:02,340 --> 02:16:05,760
Sai, così non sembra vero.

3224
02:16:06,380 --> 02:16:09,760
Questa non sembra la verità proveniente da Dio come una volta.

3225
02:16:09,760 --> 02:16:12,620
E nove mesi dopo lo ero

3226
02:16:13,740 --> 02:16:14,980
progettando di uccidermi,

3227
02:16:14,980 --> 02:16:16,000
Probabilmente ero più felice di quanto non fossi stato negli ultimi dieci anni.

3228
02:16:16,220 --> 02:16:17,160
Uhm, e quella era una delle cose che...

3229
02:16:17,160 --> 02:16:19,160
sai, che la CBT è ciò che mi ha portato a notare questo nel mio lavoro,

3230
02:16:19,460 --> 02:16:22,000
che sembrava che lo fossero gli amministratori

3231
02:16:22,040 --> 02:16:22,580
tipo di vendita di distorsioni cognitive,

3232
02:16:22,600 --> 02:16:24,360
ma gli studenti non stavano ancora comprando.

3233
02:16:25,300 --> 02:16:29,580
E poi quando ho iniziato a notare che sembravano già credere in molte di queste cose,

3234
02:16:29,780 --> 02:16:31,580
che sarebbe molto pericoloso.

3235
02:16:32,280 --> 02:16:34,440
E questo ha portato a coccolare la mente americana e tutta quella roba.

3236
02:16:34,440 --> 02:16:37,440
Ma la cosa più dura nello scrivere Hansling dalla mente americana,

3237
02:16:38,820 --> 02:16:40,840
Lo avrei già menzionato un paio di volte,

3238
02:16:40,840 --> 02:16:42,080
Mi sono davvero depresso l'anno scorso,

3239
02:16:42,760 --> 02:16:44,240
ehm, perché stavo studiando,

3240
02:16:44,260 --> 02:16:46,740
sai, c'è un amico lì dentro

3241
02:16:47,280 --> 02:16:49,240
di cui ho parlato chi si è ucciso dopo essere stato cancellato.

3242
02:16:49,600 --> 02:16:49,780
Gli ho parlato una settimana prima

3243
02:16:50,220 --> 02:16:51,580
si è ucciso e io in realtà non avevo...

3244
02:16:51,660 --> 02:16:52,980
In realtà non avevo fatto il check-in con lui perché

3245
02:16:52,980 --> 02:16:55,140
sembrava così fiducioso.

3246
02:16:55,280 --> 02:16:57,640
Pensavo che sarebbe andato tutto bene perché lui, lui

3247
02:16:58,240 --> 02:16:59,840
ha avuto un tweet insensibile nel giugno del 2020 e,

3248
02:17:00,140 --> 02:17:03,880
sai, sono stato costretto a uscire

3249
02:17:03,880 --> 02:17:05,760
in un modo che in realtà non è stato così

3250
02:17:06,960 --> 02:17:12,840
sembra pessimo come molti altri professori.

3251
02:17:13,040 --> 02:17:14,180
In realtà almeno ha ricevuto una buonuscita,

3252
02:17:14,200 --> 02:17:15,140
quindi sapevano che avrebbe fatto causa e avrebbe vinto, um,

3253
02:17:15,360 --> 02:17:17,220
perché lo aveva già fatto prima.

3254
02:17:17,960 --> 02:17:19,680
E così ho aspettato per controllarlo perché eravamo così sopraffatti dalla richiesta di

3255
02:17:19,680 --> 02:17:23,360
aiuta.

3256
02:17:23,580 --> 02:17:24,720
E diceva che la gente veniva ancora a casa sua.

3257
02:17:24,820 --> 02:17:26,060
E poi si è sparato la settimana successiva.

3258
02:17:26,480 --> 02:17:27,120
E sicuramente, e poiché tutti sanno che sono così pubblico riguardo ai miei problemi con queste cose,

3259
02:17:27,540 --> 02:17:28,480
tutti

3260
02:17:28,480 --> 02:17:29,880
chi combatte queste cose viene da me quando è in difficoltà.

3261
02:17:29,920 --> 02:17:32,400
E questo è un business molto difficile, psicologicamente faticoso in cui trovarsi.

3262
02:17:32,740 --> 02:17:33,190
E anche ammettendolo adesso,

3263
02:17:33,540 --> 02:17:36,260
come penso a tutto il,

3264
02:17:36,280 --> 02:17:36,940
tutti gli avvoltoi là fuori,

3265
02:17:36,940 --> 02:17:37,940
si divertiranno.

3266
02:17:38,220 --> 02:17:41,220
Proprio come quando,

3267
02:17:41,400 --> 02:17:43,080
quando, quando il mio amico Mike Adams si suicidò,

3268
02:17:43,080 --> 02:17:44,300
c'erano persone che festeggiavano su Twitter,

3269
02:17:44,300 --> 02:17:46,960
ehm, quello, che un uomo era morto,

3270
02:17:47,260 --> 02:17:49,560
uh, perché a loro non piacevano i suoi tweet.

3271
02:17:49,680 --> 02:17:52,220
E, ma in qualche modo questo li ha resi compassionevoli per qualche altra persona astratta.

3272
02:17:52,280 --> 02:17:53,500
Quindi stavo diventando un po’ depresso e ansioso.

3273
02:17:54,020 --> 02:17:55,430
E la cosa che mi ha davvero aiutato più di ogni altra cosa è...

3274
02:17:56,420 --> 02:17:57,880
stava confessando al mio staff

3275
02:17:57,880 --> 02:17:59,380
che io,

3276
02:18:00,040 --> 02:18:00,740
mi conosci,

3277
02:18:01,080 --> 02:18:03,640
Io, i libri richiedono molta energia.

3278
02:18:04,000 --> 02:18:06,640
Quindi sapevo che non volevano sentirlo.

3279
02:18:06,640 --> 02:18:07,420
Non solo questo richiedeva molto tempo al capo,

3280
02:18:07,440 --> 02:18:07,760
questo lo rendeva depresso e ansioso.

3281
02:18:08,040 --> 02:18:11,500
Ma quando finalmente l'ho detto ai miei dirigenti,

3282
02:18:11,680 --> 02:18:13,240
ehm, sai, persone che, anche se cerco di mantenere

3283
02:18:13,580 --> 02:18:15,500
molta distanza da,

3284
02:18:15,580 --> 02:18:16,840
Mi piace molto, moltissimo, um, ha fatto

3285
02:18:17,820 --> 02:18:20,060
una tale differenza,

3286
02:18:20,120 --> 02:18:22,040
sai, um, perché potrei essere aperto al riguardo.

3287
02:18:22,040 --> 02:18:22,640
E l'altra cosa era che

3288
02:18:22,740 --> 02:18:26,780
hai sentito questo dialogo della conferenza?

3289
02:18:27,120 --> 02:18:29,220
Oh si.

3290
02:18:29,300 --> 02:18:33,460
È come una cosa solo su invito.

3291
02:18:33,480 --> 02:18:34,300
Sono Orrin Hoffman, ehm,

3292
02:18:34,360 --> 02:18:35,340
lo esegue.

3293
02:18:36,460 --> 02:18:39,500
Uhm, cerca intenzionalmente di ottenere

3294
02:18:39,500 --> 02:18:40,560
persone di tutto lo spettro politico,

3295
02:18:40,560 --> 02:18:41,720
ehm, per riunirci,

3296
02:18:42,480 --> 02:18:44,180
uh, e avere conversazioni non registrate su grandi questioni.

3297
02:18:44,240 --> 02:18:48,420
Ed è stato bello trovarsi in una stanza dove i conservatori liberali,

3298
02:18:48,740 --> 02:18:50,260
nessuna delle precedenti,

3299
02:18:50,600 --> 02:18:51,940
siamo tutti tipo, oh, grazie a Dio qualcuno ha adottato la cultura dell'annullamento.

3300
02:18:52,360 --> 02:18:53,540
E dove mi sembrava, io

3301
02:18:54,220 --> 02:18:54,800
mi sentivo come se forse

3302
02:18:55,280 --> 02:18:56,280
questo non sarà il disastro che ero per me e la mia famiglia,

3303
02:18:57,000 --> 02:19:01,880
di cui cominciavo ad avere paura.

3304
02:19:02,280 --> 02:19:07,480
Sarebbe che assumere la roba potrebbe effettivamente avere un lieto fine.

3305
02:19:08,160 --> 02:19:10,100
Beh, c'è una cosa che mi distingue

3306
02:19:10,140 --> 02:19:16,900
ecco, il dolore della cancellazione può essere davvero intenso.

3307
02:19:17,580 --> 02:19:18,200
E questo non significa necessariamente perdere il lavoro, ma anche...

3308
02:19:18,580 --> 02:19:25,720
puoi chiamarlo bullismo, puoi chiamarlo con qualsiasi nome,

3309
02:19:25,720 --> 02:19:27,020
ma solo un certo numero di persone su Internet.

3310
02:19:27,160 --> 02:19:29,920
E quel numero può essere un piccolo modo di dire

3311
02:19:29,940 --> 02:19:31,880
cose brutte per te.

3312
02:19:32,440 --> 02:19:32,600
Sì.

3313
02:19:33,300 --> 02:19:34,780
Può essere una forza piuttosto potente per la psiche umana,

3314
02:19:34,920 --> 02:19:37,540
il che è, ma è stato molto sorprendente.

3315
02:19:37,640 --> 02:19:39,200
E poi c'è anche il rovescio della medaglia,

3316
02:19:39,280 --> 02:19:40,860
ehm, mi rende davvero felice

3317
02:19:40,860 --> 02:19:45,240
triste quanto possano essere crudeli le persone.

3318
02:19:45,820 --> 02:19:48,520
È così

3319
02:19:49,400 --> 02:19:49,740
pensare che la tua, la tua causa sia una giustizia sociale in molti casi può portare

3320
02:19:49,820 --> 02:19:51,580
la gente pensa che posso essere crudele quanto voglio nel perseguire questo obiettivo.

3321
02:19:51,580 --> 02:19:52,300
Quando lo fa, molte volte

3322
02:19:52,780 --> 02:19:54,840
è solo un modo per sfogare un po' di aggressività su una persona che consideri solo come un'astrazione.

3323
02:19:54,860 --> 02:19:58,880
Quindi penso che sia importante che le persone si rendano conto che sono qualunque cosa,

3324
02:19:59,200 --> 02:19:59,960
come qualunque cosa,

3325
02:20:00,640 --> 02:20:02,380
qualunque energia negativa, qualunque negatività tu voglia mettere là fuori,

3326
02:20:02,860 --> 02:20:05,240
come se ci fossero persone vere

3327
02:20:05,300 --> 02:20:06,200
che può farsi male.

3328
02:20:06,260 --> 02:20:09,000
Come se potessi davvero conquistare le persone,

3329
02:20:09,440 --> 02:20:11,100
ehm, essere la versione peggiore di

3330
02:20:11,340 --> 02:20:14,380
se stessi o eventualmente di togliersi la vita.

3331
02:20:15,380 --> 02:20:18,020
E non lo è

3332
02:20:19,000 --> 02:20:19,940
come reale.

3333
02:20:19,960 --> 02:20:22,060
Sì. Beh, questa è una delle cose che facciamo nel libro,

3334
02:20:22,940 --> 02:20:26,140
ehm, per rivolgerci veramente alle persone che ancora provano a sostenere che tutto ciò non è reale, citiamo semplicemente,

3335
02:20:26,380 --> 02:20:30,660
citiamo il Papa,

3336
02:20:30,680 --> 02:20:32,120
citiamo Obama,

3337
02:20:32,760 --> 02:20:34,840
citiamo James Carville,

3338
02:20:34,940 --> 02:20:36,080
citiamo Taylor Swift sulla cultura dell'annullamento.

3339
02:20:36,140 --> 02:20:40,040
Tipo, ehm, e la citazione svizzera di Taylor è:

3340
02:20:40,040 --> 02:20:41,080
è essenzialmente come dietro a tutto

3341
02:20:41,080 --> 02:20:43,620
questo, c'è il, quando diventa particolarmente brutto,

3342
02:20:44,640 --> 02:20:48,500
questo è molto chiaro, sai,

3343
02:20:48,540 --> 02:20:50,440
ucciditi in un certo senso.

3344
02:20:50,720 --> 02:20:52,520
Ehm, ed è...

3345
02:20:52,900 --> 02:20:54,060
è crudele.

3346
02:20:54,400 --> 02:20:56,180
E il problema è che in un ambiente così aperto,

3347
02:20:56,180 --> 02:20:58,740
ci sarà sempre

3348
02:20:58,900 --> 02:21:00,020
qualcuno che vuole essere così trasgressivo e dire la cosa più offensiva, sai,

3349
02:21:00,020 --> 02:21:01,900
cosa terribile.

3350
02:21:03,120 --> 02:21:04,960
Ma poi devi ricordare la falsa dichiarazione,

3351
02:21:04,960 --> 02:21:06,000
tornare ai vecchi idiomi,

3352
02:21:06,000 --> 02:21:08,140
bastoni e pietre mi spezzeranno le ossa,

3353
02:21:08,800 --> 02:21:11,780
ma i nomi non mi faranno mai, mai del male.

3354
02:21:11,940 --> 02:21:13,640
È stato

3355
02:21:14,220 --> 02:21:15,320
reimmaginato nei dibattiti universitari nel modo più assurdo.

3356
02:21:15,320 --> 02:21:16,940
La gente dirà letteralmente cose del tipo:

3357
02:21:16,940 --> 02:21:18,280
ma ora sappiamo che le parole possono ferire.

3358
02:21:18,440 --> 02:21:20,100
Ed è come se ora sappiamo che le parole possono ferire.

3359
02:21:20,620 --> 02:21:21,400
Ragazzi,

3360
02:21:22,360 --> 02:21:26,200
non dovevi inventare una piccola cosa speciale da insegnare ai bambini a fare

3361
02:21:26,200 --> 02:21:26,380
le sue parole ferivano meno.

3362
02:21:26,380 --> 02:21:29,180
Se non fanno mai male fin dall'inizio,

3363
02:21:29,360 --> 02:21:31,260
non avrebbe nemmeno senso.

3364
02:21:31,420 --> 02:21:36,360
Il detto è un detto che ripeti a te stesso per darti forza.

3365
02:21:37,280 --> 02:21:37,620
Quando i bulli si sono accorti che sei un po' strano,

3366
02:21:38,240 --> 02:21:41,040
forse un po' personale,

3367
02:21:41,100 --> 02:21:45,780
ehm, il,

3368
02:21:45,920 --> 02:21:47,400
eh, e aiuta.

3369
02:21:48,840 --> 02:21:50,240
Aiuta davvero essere come,

3370
02:21:50,240 --> 02:21:51,180
ascolta, okay, gli stronzi diranno cose da stronzi.

3371
02:21:51,200 --> 02:21:52,080
Uhm, e non posso lasciare che abbiano quel tipo di potere su di me.

3372
02:21:52,120 --> 02:21:53,140
Sì.

3373
02:21:53,140 --> 02:21:54,400
Sì.

3374
02:21:54,580 --> 02:21:56,480
È comunque un'esperienza di apprendimento perché lo fa,

3375
02:21:56,560 --> 02:21:58,620
lo fa, fa male.

3376
02:21:59,400 --> 02:22:01,420
Ma per le brave persone là fuori che in realtà,

3377
02:22:02,240 --> 02:22:06,640
sai, a volte penso, penso che si stiano sfogando,

3378
02:22:07,420 --> 02:22:09,080
sai, pensaci.

3379
02:22:09,160 --> 02:22:13,560
Ricorda che ci sono persone dall'altra parte.

3380
02:22:14,420 --> 02:22:16,200
Sì.

3381
02:22:17,070 --> 02:22:18,220
Per me, ferisce il mio tipo di fede nell’umanità.

3382
02:22:18,560 --> 02:22:19,080
Uhm, so che non dovrebbe,

3383
02:22:19,580 --> 02:22:20,660
ma a volte lo fa

3384
02:22:20,820 --> 02:22:22,520
quando vedo semplicemente le persone essere

3385
02:22:22,620 --> 02:22:24,920
bello l'uno con l'altro, in un certo senso,

3386
02:22:25,400 --> 02:22:26,660
suo,

3387
02:22:26,820 --> 02:22:29,860
ehm, galleggia

3388
02:22:29,940 --> 02:22:32,860
una nuvola sulla mia prospettiva del mondo.

3389
02:22:32,860 --> 02:22:33,820
E quello no, vorrei non dover essere lì.

3390
02:22:34,220 --> 02:22:36,340
Sì.

3391
02:22:36,860 --> 02:22:37,440
Questo è sempre stato il mio modo irriverente,

3392
02:22:37,920 --> 02:22:40,000
ma... rispondi a questa domanda.

3393
02:22:40,180 --> 02:22:41,880
Se, se l'umanità è fondamentalmente buona o fondamentalmente cattiva, come nel più grande dibattito in corso,

3394
02:22:41,960 --> 02:22:43,260
nella, nella filosofia e nell'essere come,

3395
02:22:43,720 --> 02:22:44,160
beh, il problema con il primo è che c'è

3396
02:22:44,420 --> 02:22:45,760
niente di fondamentale nell'umanità.

3397
02:22:46,060 --> 02:22:47,500
Sì.

3398
02:22:48,100 --> 02:22:48,440
Cosa ti dà speranza riguardo a tutta questa faccenda?

3399
02:22:48,880 --> 02:22:50,440
riguardo a questo stato oscuro in cui ci troviamo

3400
02:22:50,460 --> 02:22:51,880
dentro, come descrivi, come possiamo uscire?

3401
02:22:51,880 --> 02:22:53,140
Cosa ti dà la speranza che ne usciremo?

3402
02:22:53,700 --> 02:22:56,200
Penso che la gente ne sia stufa.

3403
02:22:57,160 --> 02:23:01,360
Uhm, penso che la gente sia stufa

3404
02:23:01,800 --> 02:23:02,600
non riuscire ad essere autentico.

3405
02:23:02,740 --> 02:23:05,180
Ehm, e questo è davvero, sai, cos'è la censura.

3406
02:23:05,260 --> 02:23:06,640
Fondamentalmente ti sta dicendo,

3407
02:23:07,440 --> 02:23:08,580
non essere te stesso.

3408
02:23:09,200 --> 02:23:13,000
Non essere effettivamente per dire quello che pensi.

3409
02:23:13,000 --> 02:23:14,700
Uhm, non mostrare la tua personalità.

3410
02:23:14,840 --> 02:23:17,700
Non dissentire.

3411
02:23:18,160 --> 02:23:20,600
Non essere strano.

3412
02:23:23,540 --> 02:23:29,200
Non sbagliarti.

3413
02:23:29,620 --> 02:23:33,480
Ehm, e questo non è sostenibile.

3414
02:23:34,000 --> 02:23:36,040
penso che

3415
02:23:36,480 --> 02:23:39,120
la gente ne ha abbastanza.

3416
02:23:40,060 --> 02:23:43,360
Uh, ma una cosa che voglio assolutamente dire al tuo pubblico è

3417
02:23:44,540 --> 02:23:45,820
non può essere semplicemente

3418
02:23:45,820 --> 02:23:46,000
spetta a noi, i nostri spettatori, provare a risolvere questo problema.

3419
02:23:46,500 --> 02:23:49,540
Ehm, e penso che...

3420
02:23:49,540 --> 02:23:51,160
e questo potrebbe sembrare un problema non correlato.

3421
02:23:51,600 --> 02:23:53,620
Penso che se ci fossero

3422
02:23:54,300 --> 02:23:56,960
altamente rispettato,

3423
02:23:56,960 --> 02:23:58,900
diciamo modi estremamente difficili per dimostrarlo

3424
02:23:59,360 --> 02:24:00,400
sei estremamente intelligente e laborioso che costa poco o niente,

3425
02:24:00,900 --> 02:24:05,680
che effettivamente può dare

3426
02:24:05,680 --> 02:24:09,520
gli Harvard e gli Yale del mondo correranno per i loro soldi.

3427
02:24:09,840 --> 02:24:10,560
Penso che potrebbe essere la cosa più positiva che potremmo fare,

3428
02:24:10,740 --> 02:24:18,280
a, occuparsi di molto

3429
02:24:18,980 --> 02:24:23,120
questi problemi e perché penso al fatto che siamo diventati

3430
02:24:23,820 --> 02:24:24,860
una strana America con un grande

3431
02:24:27,060 --> 02:24:31,100
la tradizione antielitaria è diventata stranamente elitaria in questo,

3432
02:24:31,920 --> 02:24:33,140
in, um, rispetto a quello

3433
02:24:33,140 --> 02:24:34,060
non solo ancora una volta,

3434
02:24:34,340 --> 02:24:37,060
la nostra leadership proviene da queste poche scuole di lusso,

3435
02:24:37,740 --> 02:24:40,180
in realtà abbiamo una grande ammirazione per loro.

3436
02:24:40,300 --> 02:24:42,100
In un certo senso li ammiriamo,

3437
02:24:42,220 --> 02:24:43,600
ma penso che ne avremmo molto

3438
02:24:44,540 --> 02:24:45,060
una società più sana se le persone potessero dimostrare,

3439
02:24:45,880 --> 02:24:47,740
sai, la loro eccellenza in modi che lo sono

3440
02:24:47,740 --> 02:24:54,560
provenienti da flussi completamente diversi e,

3441
02:24:55,500 --> 02:24:56,220
e quello, quello, che sono molto rispettati.

3442
02:24:56,540 --> 02:24:57,280
A volte parlo di

3443
02:24:57,640 --> 02:24:58,680
dovrebbe esserci un test in cui chiunque lo superi diventi come un,

3444
02:24:58,920 --> 02:25:01,000
Sai,

3445
02:25:01,780 --> 02:25:03,840
una laurea in discipline umanistiche che è come una super laurea,

3446
02:25:04,020 --> 02:25:05,820
come qualcosa,

3447
02:25:05,820 --> 02:25:07,800
come qualcuno, non un GED.

3448
02:25:07,800 --> 02:25:09,880
Non è di questo che sto parlando.

3449
02:25:10,440 --> 02:25:12,860
Sto parlando di qualcosa del genere,

3450
02:25:13,280 --> 02:25:14,580
sai, uno su un paio soltanto,

3451
02:25:14,960 --> 02:25:15,560
come se un centinaio di persone potessero passare in qualche altro modo per...

3452
02:25:16,280 --> 02:25:20,360
uh, di non passare attraverso queste enormi e costose istituzioni che la gente

3453
02:25:20,700 --> 02:25:22,220
possono alzare la mano e dire:

3454
02:25:22,240 --> 02:25:26,560
Sono intelligente e laborioso.

3455
02:25:26,980 --> 02:25:27,460
Penso che potrebbe essere un modo incredibilmente salutare.

3456
02:25:27,900 --> 02:25:30,660
Penso che abbiamo bisogno di ulteriori flussi affinché le persone creative risolvano i problemi,

3457
02:25:30,780 --> 02:25:31,820
che sia su X o da qualche altra parte.

3458
02:25:32,500 --> 02:25:33,980
Ehm, penso che ci siano molte cose che la tecnologia potrebbe fare per aiutare davvero

3459
02:25:34,120 --> 02:25:35,920
Questo.

3460
02:25:36,260 --> 02:25:37,860
Penso che alcune delle cose su cui Sal Khan sta lavorando,

3461
02:25:38,560 --> 02:25:42,940
uh, la Khan Academy potrebbe davvero aiutare.

3462
02:25:43,240 --> 02:25:44,960
Uhm, quindi penso che ci siano molti modi,

3463
02:25:45,240 --> 02:25:46,600
ma esistono principalmente per inventare nuovi modi di fare le cose,

3464
02:25:46,880 --> 02:25:49,080
non solo aspettandomi le vecchie cose che hanno da dire

3465
02:25:49,430 --> 02:25:50,180
40 miliardi di dollari in banca

3466
02:25:50,640 --> 02:25:55,420
che si riformeranno.

3467
02:25:55,420 --> 02:25:56,460
Ed ecco il mio, sai, me la sono presa spesso con Harvard,

3468
02:25:56,600 --> 02:25:57,920
ma li prenderò in considerazione ancora un po'.

3469
02:25:57,940 --> 02:25:58,960
Ehm,

3470
02:25:59,380 --> 02:26:03,980
il, e, e, uh, parlo di nuovo molto della lezione,

3471
02:26:04,220 --> 02:26:07,180
e sai, c'è un bellissimo libro intitolato Poison Ivy,

3472
02:26:07,440 --> 02:26:08,880
ehm, di Evan Mandry, che consiglio a tutti.

3473
02:26:09,400 --> 02:26:10,340
Ed è scandaloso.

3474
02:26:10,800 --> 02:26:11,820
Sembra che io e uno sfogo a Stanford,

3475
02:26:12,160 --> 02:26:14,140
ehm, che era, uh, e io, e penso che lo status, sai,

3476
02:26:14,160 --> 02:26:16,460
l'istruzione superiore d'élite ha più figli

3477
02:26:17,000 --> 02:26:20,260
l’1% più ricco rispetto al 50 o 60% più povero a seconda della scuola.

3478
02:26:20,560 --> 02:26:20,840
E se guardi a quanto a loro piace replicare i privilegi di classe,

3479
02:26:21,580 --> 02:26:22,020
è... è davvero angosciante.

3480
02:26:22,060 --> 02:26:24,400
Quindi tutti dovrebbero leggere Poison Ivy.

3481
02:26:24,720 --> 02:26:25,880
E soprattutto,

3482
02:26:26,280 --> 02:26:28,420
uh, se sei strano, continua ad essere strano.

3483
02:26:28,420 --> 02:26:30,560
E tu sei uno dei più interessanti,

3484
02:26:30,680 --> 02:26:31,680
uno dei più strani nel più bello

3485
02:26:31,700 --> 02:26:33,560
modo in cui le persone si sono mai incontrate.

3486
02:26:35,100 --> 02:26:35,240
Greg, grazie per il lavoro davvero importante che svolgi.

3487
02:26:35,240 --> 02:26:37,620
Questo era, questo è

3488
02:26:38,070 --> 02:26:39,160
apprezzo la classe, l'intera area che hai portato qui oggi,

3489
02:26:39,160 --> 02:26:39,980
Uomo.

3490
02:26:40,620 --> 02:26:41,800
Uhm, questa è una conversazione fantastica.

3491
02:26:41,860 --> 02:26:43,120
Grazie per il lavoro che fai.

3492
02:26:44,700 --> 02:26:45,200
Grazie.

3493
02:26:45,800 --> 02:26:46,620
Grazie.

3494
02:26:47,620 --> 02:26:49,940
E per me, che ho profondamente a cuore l’istruzione, l’istruzione superiore,

3495
02:26:50,360 --> 02:26:52,820
grazie per aver ritenuto responsabili il MIT e Harvard,

3496
02:26:53,280 --> 02:26:53,340
ehm, per, ehm,

3497
02:26:53,340 --> 02:26:55,000
facendo bene alle persone che

3498
02:26:55,120 --> 02:26:56,960
passeggiare per i loro corridoi.

3499
02:26:57,180 --> 02:27:02,660
Quindi grazie mille per aver parlato con me.

3500
02:27:02,660 --> 02:27:04,200
Grazie per aver ascoltato questa conversazione con Greg Lukianoff per supportare questo podcast.

3501
02:27:04,500 --> 02:27:06,440
Si prega di controllare i nostri sponsor nella descrizione.

3502
02:27:06,440 --> 02:27:08,080
E ora lasciate che vi lasci con alcune parole di Noam Chomsky.

3503
02:27:09,460 --> 02:27:09,800
Se credi nella libertà di parola,

3504
02:27:09,940 --> 02:27:12,600
tu credi nella libertà di parola per le opinioni, non è così

3505
02:27:12,720 --> 02:27:16,080
Piace. Gables era favorevole

3506
02:27:16,080 --> 02:27:18,440
della libertà di parola per le opinioni che gli piacevano.

3507
02:27:18,460 --> 02:27:20,480
Così era Stalin.

3508
02:27:21,300 --> 02:27:23,460
Se sei a favore della libertà di parola,

3509
02:27:24,020 --> 02:27:26,280
ciò significa che sei a favore della libertà di parola proprio per le opinioni che disprezzi.

3510
02:27:27,080 --> 02:27:28,620
Grazie per l'ascolto e spero di vederci la prossima volta.

3511
02:27:28,790 --> 02:27:31,600

3512
02:27:31,780 --> 02:27:32,620

Portuguese transcription text:

GREG: Se o objetivo é o projeto do conhecimento humano, que é conhecer o mundo que ele é, não é possível conhecer o mundo como ele é sem saber o que as pessoas realmente pensam. E o que as pessoas realmente pensam é um fato extremamente importante de se saber. Então, toda vez que você está realmente dizendo, você não pode dizer que está realmente se privando do conhecimento do que as pessoas realmente pensam que você está causando, o que Tim ou Crown, que está em nosso conselho consultivo, chama de falsificação de preferência. Você acaba com uma imagem imprecisa do mundo, que, aliás, em muitos casos, porque há ativistas que querem restringir mais o discurso, eles na verdade tendem a pensar que as pessoas são mais preconceituosas do que poderiam ser. E, na verdade, uma maneira muito prática de piorar as coisas é quando você censura as pessoas, isso não muda a opinião delas. Isso apenas os incentiva a não compartilhar isso com pessoas que lhes causarão problemas. Portanto, isso os leva a conversar com pessoas com quem já concordam e a polarização de grupo decola.

LEX: A seguir está uma conversa com Greg Lukianoff, defensor da liberdade de expressão, advogado da Primeira Emenda, presidente e CEO da FIRE, a base para os direitos e a expressão individuais. E ele é o autor de Unleashing Liberty, coautor com Jonathan Haidt de Coddling of the American Mind e coautor com Ricky Schlott de um novo livro que será lançado em outubro. Eles deveriam definitivamente pré-encomendar o agora chamado Cancelamento da Mente Americana, que é um relato definitivo da história, presente e futuro da cultura do cancelamento, um termo usado e excessivamente usado no discurso público, mas raramente estudado e compreendido com a profundidade e rigor que Greg e Ricky fazem neste livro e em parte nesta conversa. A liberdade de expressão é importante, especialmente nos campi universitários, o mesmo lugar que deveria servir como campo de batalha de ideias, incluindo ideias estranhas e controversas que deveriam encorajar a assunção de riscos ousados, e não a conformidade. Este é o podcast de Lex Friedman. Para apoiá-lo, confira nossos patrocinadores na descrição. E agora, queridos amigos, aqui está Greg Lukianoff. Vamos começar com a grande questão. O que é a cultura do cancelamento? Agora, você disse que não gosta do termo tal como ele tem sido, entre aspas, arrastado na lama e abusado interminavelmente por uma série de figuras controversas. No entanto, temos o termo. O que é isso?

GREG: A cultura do cancelamento é o aumento de campanhas, especialmente campanhas bem-sucedidas, começando por volta de 2014 para fazer com que pessoas sejam demitidas, expulsas, destituídas de plataforma, etc., por discursos que normalmente seriam protegidos pela Primeira Emenda . E digo que seria protegido porque estamos falando de circunstâncias em que não é necessariamente onde a Primeira Emenda se aplica. Mas o que quero dizer é como um análogo para dizer coisas pelas quais você não poderia perder o emprego como funcionário público, e também o clima de medo que resulta desse fenômeno, o fato de que você pode perder o emprego por ter uma opinião errada . E não foi sutil que tenha havido um aumento nisso, especialmente no campus por volta de 2014. John Ronson escreveu um livro chamado Então você foi publicamente envergonhado. Foi lançado em 2015, já documentando esse fenômeno. Escrevi um livro chamado Freedom From Speech em 2014. Mas foi realmente em 2017 que você começou a ver isso sendo direcionado aos professores. E quando se trata do número de professores que vimos serem alvo de ataques e perderem seus empregos, faço isso há 22 anos e não vi nada parecido.

LEX: Então há tanta coisa muitas coisas eu quero te perguntar aqui. Na verdade, basta olhar para a organização do FIRE. Você pode explicar o que é a organização? Porque está interligado a toda esta luta e à ascensão da cultura do cancro e à luta pela liberdade de expressão desde 2014 e antes.

GREG: Então o FIRE foi fundado em 1999 por Harvey Silverglate. Ele é um famoso advogado de liberdades civis. Ele está um pouco no show. Ele é a pessoa que realmente me descobriu em minha vida muito feliz em São Francisco, mas sabia que eu estava procurando um emprego de primeira emenda. Eu fui para a faculdade de direito especificamente para fazer a Primeira Emenda. E ele me encontrou, o que foi muito legal. Sua protegida, Kathleen Sullivan, foi reitora da Faculdade de Direito de Stanford. E este continua sendo o melhor elogio que já recebi na minha vida: ela me recomendou ao Harvey. E como essa foi a razão pela qual fui para a faculdade de direito, fiquei entusiasmado por fazer parte desta nova organização. O outro cofundador do FIRE é Alan Charles Kors. Ele é simplesmente um gênio absoluto. Ele é um dos maiores especialistas do mundo no Iluminismo e particularmente em Voltaire. E se algum de seus ouvintes gostar dos ótimos cursos, ele dá uma palestra sobre Blaise Pascal. E Blaise, claro, é famoso pela Aposta de Pascal. E saí tão emocionado e impressionado e com uma profunda compreensão de quão importante essa pessoa era.

LEX: Isso é interessante. Você mencionou para mim off-line conectado a isso que existe, pelo menos ele funciona em paralelo ou há uma conexão entre oo amor pela ciência e o amor pela liberdade de expressão. Sim. Você pode explicar onde está essa conexão?

GREG: Claro. Acho que para aqueles de nós que realmente dedicamos nossas vidas à liberdade de expressão, uma coisa que gostamos, quer saibamos ou não, é a epistemologia, você sabe, o estudo e a filosofia de conhecimento. Você sabe, a liberdade de expressão tem muitas dimensões morais e filosóficas, mas de um ponto de vista pragmático, é necessária porque somos criaturas de conhecimento incrivelmente limitado. Somos incrivelmente autoenganadores. Sempre adorei o fato de Yuval Harari se referir ao Iluminismo como a descoberta da ignorância, porque era exatamente isso que era. De repente, estava tipo, uau, espere um segundo. Obtivemos toda essa sabedoria popular incrivelmente interessante, que, aliás, pode ser surpreendentemente confiável aqui e ali. Quando você começa a testar muito, isso é um absurdo e não se sustenta. Até as nossas ideias sobre a forma como as coisas acontecem, como Galileu estabeleceu, como até as nossas intuições, estão simplesmente erradas. E assim, grande parte da história inicial da liberdade de expressão aconteceu ao mesmo tempo que uma espécie de revolução científica. Portanto, muitos dos primeiros debates sobre liberdade de expressão estavam interligados. Então, certamente Galileu, você sabe, eu sempre aponto que Kepler era provavelmente a ideia ainda mais radical de que eles nem eram esferas perfeitas. Mas ao mesmo tempo, em grande parte devido à invenção da imprensa, também tivemos todos estes desenvolvimentos políticos. E, você sabe, eu sempre falo sobre Jan Hus, você sabe, do famoso herói tcheco que foi queimado na fogueira, acho que em 1419. Mas ele era basicamente Lutero antes da imprensa. Antes que Luther pudesse espalhar sua palavra, você sabe, ele não teve a menor chance. E foi exatamente isso que Jan Hus foi. Mas um século depois, graças à imprensa, todos podiam saber o que Lutero pensava e, cara, eles sabiam. Mas isso levou, é claro, a este período completamente louco e hiper-perturbado na história europeia.

LEX: Bem, você mencionou pular um pouco, a Primeira Emenda. Em primeiro lugar, o que é a Primeira Emenda e qual é a ligação entre a Primeira Emenda, a liberdade de expressão e a cultura do cancelamento? Claro.

GREG: Então, sou um advogado da Primeira Emenda, como mencionei, e é isso que eu, essa é a minha paixão, é isso que estudei. E acho que a lei americana da Primeira Emenda é incrivelmente interessante. Numa frase, a Primeira Emenda está a tentar livrar-se de basicamente todas as razões pelas quais a humanidade se matou durante toda a sua existência. Que não iríamos mais lutar por opinião, não iríamos mais lutar contra religião, que você tem o direito de abordar seu governo para reparação de queixas, que você tem a liberdade de se associar. Que todas essas coisas em uma frase eram como, não, o governo não irá mais interferir no seu direito de ter esses direitos humanos fundamentais. E então uma coisa que torna o FIRE um pouco diferente de outras organizações é que não somos apenas uma organização da Primeira Emenda, somos uma organização de liberdade de expressão. E assim, e, mas ao mesmo tempo, muito do que eu acho que é liberdade de expressão pode ser bem explicado com referência a muitas leis da Primeira Emenda, em parte porque na história americana, algumas de nossas pessoas mais inteligentes têm pensado sobre quais são os parâmetros da liberdade de expressão em relação à Primeira Emenda. E muitos desses princípios são transferidos muito bem, assim como ideias pragmáticas. Assim como o maior pecado em termos de censura é chamado de discriminação de ponto de vista. Que essencialmente você permite a liberdade de expressão, exceto aquela opinião. Agora é, e é considerado mais defensável. E acho que faz sentido que se você criar um fórum e gostar, só falaremos sobre economia para excluir pessoas que querem falar sobre um assunto diferente, mas é considerado um assunto maior por direito. Se você criou um fórum para economia, mas não vamos permitir que as pessoas falem sobre esse tipo de economia ou tenham essa opinião sobre economia, muito, muito particularmente. Portanto, muitos dos princípios da lei da Primeira Emenda na verdade fazem muito sentido filosófico como bons princípios para quando, como o que é discurso protegido e desprotegido, o que deve causar problemas, como você realmente analisa isso, e é por isso que realmente tentamos em nossa definição de cultura de cancelamento para funcionar em algumas das normas da Primeira Emenda, apenas na definição. Portanto, não precisamos nos preocupar com eles também.

LEX: Você está dizendo tantas coisas interessantes, mas se você puder vincular o ponto de vista da discriminação, há alguma área cinzenta de discussão aí? Tipo, o que é e não é economia para o exemplo que você deu? Sim.É, existe, quero dizer, é uma ciência? Ou é uma arte traçar limites do que não é, não é permitido?

GREG: Sim. Você sabe, se você está dizendo que algo é ou não é economia, bem, você pode dizertudo é economia e por isso quero falar de poesia. Haveria algum exercício de desenho de linha ali, mas digamos que imediatamente você decida abri-lo até mesmo para a poesia. É uma grande diferença entre dizer, ok, agora estamos abertos à poesia, mas você não pode dizer, você sabe, Dante era mau. Como se essa fosse uma opinião proibida agora oficialmente neste fórum aberto que imediatamente, em um nível intuitivo, pareceria às pessoas um problema maior do que apenas dizer que poesia não é economia.

LEX: Sim. Quer dizer, nesse nível intuitivo com o qual você fala, espero que todos nós tenhamos esse tipo de intuição básica quando a linha é ultrapassada, é a mesma coisa para a pornografia, certo? Você sabe, quando você vê isso, acho que há o mesmo nível de intuição que deveria ser aplicado aqui. E é quando essa intuição é deformada por quaisquer forças da sociedade que começa a parecer censura.

GREG: Sim. Quer dizer, as pessoas acham uma coisa diferente. Você sabe, se alguém perde o emprego simplesmente por causa de sua opinião política, mesmo que esse empregador tenha todo o direito do mundo de demiti-lo, acho que os americanos ainda deveriam pensar, bem, é verdade. Eles têm todos os direitos do mundo e não estou defendendo legalmente que talvez você não deva demitir alguém por sua opinião política, mas pense bem nisso. Tipo, que sociedade queremos, em que tipo de sociedade queremos viver? E tem sido engraçado assistir, você sabe, e eu aponto isso. Sim, defenderei as empresas, os direitos de associação da primeira emenda para poder ter o direito legal de decidir, você sabe, quem trabalha para elas. Mas de uma questão moral ou filosófica, se pensarmos nas implicações de, se todas as empresas na América se tornarem numa associação expressiva, além de serem uma organização que maximiza o lucro, isso seria um desastre para a democracia porque acabaríamos numa situação onde as pessoas estariam realmente dizendo para si mesmas, não acho que posso dizer o que realmente penso e ainda acreditar que posso manter meu emprego. E foi aí que fiquei preocupado. Eu senti que estávamos indo porque grande parte da resposta inicial às pessoas sendo canceladas foi muito simplesmente, você sabe, ah, mas eles têm o direito de se livrar dessa pessoa. E isso, e isso é o fim, o começo e o fim da discussão. E eu pensei que isso era uma esquiva. Achei que essa não era realmente uma forma muito séria de fazer isso.

LEX: Se você se preocupa tanto com a Primeira Emenda quanto com a liberdade de expressão de pensar sobre isso, apenas para esclarecer a Primeira Emenda é uma espécie de uma personificação legal do ideal de liberdade de expressão e, em seguida, liberdade de expressão aplicada ao governo. E é muito específico aplicado ao governo e à liberdade de expressão é a aplicação do princípio de gostar de tudo, inclusive gostar de uma espécie de ideal filosófico de alto nível sobre o que é, do valor de as pessoas serem capazes de expressar o que pensam.

GREG: Sim. É uma ideia mais antiga, mais ousada e mais expansiva. E você pode ter uma situação. E falo sobre países que têm boas leis de liberdade de expressão, mas não necessariamente uma grande cultura de liberdade de expressão. E falo sobre como, quando às vezes fazemos esta distinção entre a lei da liberdade de expressão e a cultura da liberdade de expressão, pensamos de uma forma muito nebulosa. E o que quero dizer com isso é que a lei é geralmente, particularmente num país de direito consuetudinário, o reflexo das normas. Esses juízes também são pessoas. E em muitos casos, supõe-se que o direito consuetudinário pegue nas nossas ideias intuitivas de justiça e coloque-as na lei. Então, se você realmente tem uma cultura que não aprecia a liberdade de expressão do ponto de vista filosófico, ela não será capaz de proteger a liberdade de expressão a longo prazo, mesmo na lei. Porque, eventualmente, essa é uma das razões pelas quais me preocupo tanto com alguns desses casos terríveis que surgem nas faculdades de direito. Porque temo que, embora a lei americana da Primeira Emenda proteja fortemente a Primeira Emenda por enquanto, ela não continuará assim. Se você tem gerações de estudantes de direito se formando que realmente pensam que não há nada, não há objetivo maior do que gritar, você é um oponente.

LEX: Sim. É por isso que grande parte do seu foco ou grande fração do seu foco está no ensino superior ou no período educacional, porque a educação é a base da cultura.

GREG: Sim. Você tem essa história, você sabe, 64, você tem o movimento pela liberdade de expressão em Berkeley e em 65, você tem tolerância repressiva de Herbert Marcuse, que foi uma declaração de, a propósito, hum, nós da esquerda, nós, não deveríamos, deveríamos ter liberdade de expressão, mas deveríamos ter liberdade de expressão para nós. Quer dizer, eu fui, voltei e reli, hum, uh, tolerância repressiva e como ela é clara.Eu esqueci, tinha esquecido que realmente é tipo, hum, e esses chamados conservadores e direitistas, precisamos reprimi-los porque eles são pensadores regressivos. Realmente não sai paranada mais sofisticado do que a velha ideia de que nosso pessoal é bom. Eles obtêm liberdade de expressão. Nós deveríamos, eles deveriam mantê-lo. O outro lado é ruim. Hum, nós, não deveríamos ter, uh, e temos que reciclar a sociedade. E claro, assim, acaba sendo outro, ele também era fã do Mao. Portanto, não é de surpreender que, claro, o sistema teria que contar com algum tipo de sistema totalitário. Hum, mas essa era uma posição ridícula, hum, uh, você sabe, digamos, 30, 40 anos atrás, a ideia de que essencialmente, você sabe, liberdade de expressão para mim, não para o, uh, como, como o grande , você sabe, o defensor da liberdade de expressão que Hentoff costumava dizer era algo que deveria deixar você envergonhado. Mas eu vi isso quando estava na faculdade de direito em 97, vi isso quando estava estagiando na ACLU em 99, hum, que havia um acidente de trem em câmera lenta chegando e essencialmente havia, hum, esses problemas ruins ideias do campus que vinham ganhando cada vez mais força, basicamente sem liberdade de expressão para meu oponente, estavam na verdade se tornando cada vez mais aceitas, e em parte porque a academia estava se tornando cada vez menos diversificada em termos de pontos de vista. Acho que, como meu coautor Jonathan Haidt aponta, quando há baixa diversidade de pontos de vista, as pessoas começam a pensar de uma forma muito tribal. E se você não tem dissidentes respeitados, você não tem as pessoas que você pode apontar e eu digo: Ei, essa é uma pessoa inteligente. Hum, isso é uma pessoa inteligente, razoável e decente de quem eu discordo, então acho que nem todo mundo pensa da mesma forma sobre esse assunto. Você começa a ficar muito mais tipo, você sabe, apenas pessoas más, apenas hereges, apenas blasfemadores, apenas direitistas, você sabe, hum, podem realmente pensar dessa maneira.

LEX: Toda vez que você diga alguma coisa, sempre tenho um milhão de pensamentos e milhões de perguntas que surgem. Mas já que você mencionou que há uma espécie de desvio conforme você escreve no livro e você mencionou agora que há um desvio para a esquerda na academia, hum, que talvez também façamos uma distinção aqui entre a esquerda e a direita e o cancelamento a cultura que você apresenta em seu livro não está necessariamente associada a nenhum ponto de vista político, que existem mecanismos em ambos os lados que resultam em cancelamento e censura, uh, em violação da liberdade de expressão.

GREG: Então, uma coisa Quero deixar bem claro que o livro aborda a cultura de cancelamento tanto da direita quanto da esquerda. Eles são diferentes, em muitos aspectos e definitivamente, você sabe, cancelar a cultura da esquerda é mais importante na academia, onde a esquerda domina mais. Hum, mas falamos muito sobre cancelar a cultura vinda das legislaturas. Falamos muito sobre a cultura do cancelamento no campus também, porque embora, hum, a maioria das tentativas que vêm do campus para fazer com que as pessoas sejam canceladas ainda sejam da esquerda, há muitos ataques que vêm da direita e que vêm de, você sabe, uh, as tentativas de diferentes organizações e, uh, às vezes quando há histórias na Fox News, você sabe, como se eles fossem atrás de professores e cerca de um terço das tentativas de punir professores que são bem-sucedidas, na verdade vem da direita. E falamos sobre tentativas de proibir livros. Hum, no, no livro sobre o qual falamos, hum, e, uh, eu falo sobre processar a legislatura da Flórida. Rhonda Santus tinha algo chamado ato de parar de acordar, hum, que dissemos a todos que isso é ridiculamente inconstitucional. Hum, eles tentaram proibir, você sabe, tópicos específicos no ensino superior e nós pensamos, não, isso é uma piada. Tipo, tipo, isso vai, isso vai ser ridicularizado fora do tribunal. Hum, e eles não nos ouviram e trouxeram, uh, eles aprovaram e nós processamos e ganhamos. Agora eles estão tentando novamente com algo que é igualmente inconstitucional e nós iremos processar novamente e nós o faremos, e nós venceremos.

LEX: Você pode elaborar um ato de parar de acordar? Então, presumivelmente, isso é uma tentativa de limitar o ensino de certos tópicos na escola.

GREG: Sim. Basicamente despertou tópicos. Hum, você sabe, é mais, surgiu de uma espécie de tentativa de chegar a uma teoria racial crítica. Hum, então são tópicos relacionados a raça, gênero, etc. Hum, não me lembro exatamente como eles tentaram transformar o gabinete em, hum, uh, no CRT. Hum, mas quando você, na verdade, a lei está muito bem estabelecida, você não pode dizer ao ensino superior o que eles podem ensinar sem violar, uh, sem violar a Primeira Emenda. E quando isso chegou a um juiz, foi exatamente como, uh, ele estava tão cético quanto pensávamos que ele seria. Acho que ele chamou isso de distópico. Hum, e não foi por pouco.

LEX: Então, se você é contra esse tipo de ensino, a maneira certa de combatê-lo é argumentando que não é uma boa ideia como parte do currículo em vez de bani-lo do currículo.

GREG: Sim.Acontece que o estado não tem o poder de simplesmente dizer, proibir, hum, você sabe, o que, o que ensina, o que os professores do ensino superior ensinam. Agora éfica um pouco mais complicado quando você fala sobre K até 12, porque o estado tem um papel em decidir o que o público K até 12 ensina porque eles são seus filhos, eles são financiados pelos contribuintes. Hum, e geralmente a legislatura está envolvida. Hum, há supervisão democrática desse processo.

LEX: Então, do ensino fundamental ao 12º, há também uma inclinação para a esquerda em termos da administração que gerencia o currículo?

GREG: Sim , hum, pronto, definitivamente existe, hum, do jardim ao 12º ano, o, o, quero dizer, meus filhos vão para a escola pública. Hum, eu tenho filhos de cinco e sete anos, uh, e eles têm professores adoráveis. Hum, mas tivemos muitos problemas com escolas de educação pegando fogo. Hum, e muitos dos graduados em educação acabaram sendo os administradores que reprimiram a liberdade de expressão no ensino superior. E então estou tentando pensar em maneiras positivas de resolver alguns dos problemas que vejo do jardim ao 12. Achei que a tentativa de apenas ditar não ensinaria os 10 livros a seguir, você sabe, ou 20 livros ou 200 livros era a maneira errada de fazer isso. Agora, quando se trata de decidir quais livros estão no currículo, novamente, isso é algo que o legislador na verdade, você sabe, não pode, não pode ter alguma palavra a dizer, e isso é bastante incontroverso, hum, em termos de lei. Mas quando se trata de como você luta contra isso, eu tinha algo que, como estou preso a uma fórmula, chamei de empoderamento da mente americana. Hum, eu dei princípios que eram inconsistentes, hum, com o tipo de pensamento de grupo e forte ênfase em, uh, política de identidade, uh, que, hum, você sabe, alguns dos críticos estão reclamando com razão de K a 12. Uh , e nós, nós, isso na verdade está cancelando a mente americana, mas tenho uma explicação mais detalhada disso que colocarei no meu blog, a ideia eternamente radical.

LEX : É possível legalmente, essa é apenas uma pergunta boba, talvez criar uma proteção extra para certos tipos de literatura de 1984 ou algo assim permanecer no currículo. Quer dizer, já está, está tudo protegido, eu acho. Sim. Acho que para proteger os administradores de mexerem demais no currículo, como estabilizar o currículo. Não sei qual é o mecanismo da escola pública do ensino fundamental ao 12º ano.

GREG: Do ensino fundamental ao 12º ano, você sabe, as legislaturas estaduais, você sabe, hum, elas fazem parte disso. Eles fazem parte disso e podem dizer, tipo, você deveria ensinar os livros a seguir. Agora, é claro, as pessoas estão sempre um pouco preocupadas que, hum, se você, uh, se eles recomendassem, você sabe, ensinassem, uh, ensinassem a declaração de independência, você sabe, isso acabaria sendo, bem, eles vão ensinar que a declaração de independência foi apenas para proteger a escravidão, que não estava ensinando um assunto específico, quais livros você escolhe, qual perspectiva você adota, todo esse tipo de coisa.

LEX: É como se a religião começasse a se infiltrar em toda a questão de como, você sabe, a Bíblia pode ensinar nas empresas e na educação? Uh, não, sim.

GREG: Quer dizer, eu sou ateu, uh, com um interesse intenso em religião. Na verdade, li a Bíblia inteira este ano só porque faço coisas assim. E na verdade nunca o li do começo ao fim. Hum, então eu li o Alcorão porque você sabe, e vou tentar fazer o livro de Mórmon, mas você sabe.

LEX: Bem, eles começaram a ler, você é tão fascinante. Hum, você recomenda fazer isso?

GREG: Eu acho que você deveria, hum, só para saber, porque é uma pedra de toque, hum, na maneira como as pessoas falam sobre as coisas, pode ficar muito tedioso , mas até me obriguei a ler todas as instruções muito específicas sobre qual a altura que as diferentes partes do templo precisam ter e quanto tempo as vestimentas precisam ter e que formato elas precisam ter e como, e essas vão em um muito. Hum, isso, isso, isso é surpreendentemente, desculpe, surpreendentemente grande parte do Êxodo. Hum, pensei que fosse mais parecido com Levítico e Deuteronômio. Hum, mas então você chega a livros como Jó, você sabe, uau. Quero dizer, Jó é uma leitura e de jeito nenhum Jó originalmente teve esse final. Como Jó é basicamente, tudo começa como uma aposta perversa entre Deus, hum, e Satanás sobre se eles podem ou não realmente fazer um homem bom renunciar a Deus. E inicialmente eles não conseguem, tudo está indo de forma muito previsível. E então eles finalmente torturaram Jó de verdade e ele se tornou o melhor, por que Deus é cruel? Como poderia Deus existir? Como poderia um Deus bondoso fazer essas coisas? E ele vence, vira o melhor advogado do mundo inteiro e derrota todo mundo, todas as pessoas que vêm discutir com ele. Ele, ele argumenta até tirar as calças deles. E então, de repente, no final, Deus aparece e diz, hum, bem, você sabe, uh, eu estou em todo lugar. E, uh, é uma resposta muito confusa.Ele dá uma resposta tipo, eu estou lá quando, quando, quando as leoas dão à luz e eu estou lá. E por falar nisso, tem esse monstro gigante, o Leviatã, que é muitogrande e é muito assustador. E eu, e eu tenho que administrar o universo. E eu fico tipo, Deus, você está dizendo que está muito ocupado? Esse é essencialmente o seu argumento para Jó? E você não menciona o todo, não menciona o todo, tipo, que eu aposto que é por isso que estava torturando você, isso não aparece. E então, no final, ele decide, Deus decide, como Jó, tipo, ah, não, você está totalmente certo. Eu estava totalmente errado. Ah, desculpe. Hum, e, e Deus diz, vou punir aquelas pessoas que tentaram discutir com você e não venceram. Então, hum, então ele se livra dos, não sei exatamente o que ele faz com eles. Eu não me lembro. Hum, e então ele devolve a Jó todo o seu dinheiro e tudo, e isso os torna super prósperos. E eu pensei, de jeito nenhum esse foi o final original daquele livro. Tipo, porque isso gostaria, esse era claramente um romance amado que eles gostavam, mas não pode ter esse final. OK. Então, então, então, então, sim, é um longo caminho para dizer, eu realmente acho que vale a pena. Uh, parte disso foi, você sempre fica meio surpreso quando acaba no papel, tipo, hum, há partes disso que vão aparecer furtivamente em você, como se fosse uma viagem de Isaías, hum, Eclesiastes, Depeche mode.

LEX: E você fez, você disse que também, uh, o, o Alcorão. Sim. O que foi fascinante. Então, seria interessante perguntar: existe uma tensão entre o estudo de textos religiosos ou seguir a religião e simplesmente acreditar em Deus e seguir os vários aspectos da religião com liberdade de expressão?

GREG: Hum, na primeira emenda, uh, nós, temos algo que chamamos de cláusula religiosa e nunca gostei de chamá-la assim porque são duas coisas brilhantes próximas uma da outra. O estado não pode estabelecer uma religião oficial, mas não pode interferir no seu direito de praticar a sua religião. Isso é lindo. Duas coisas ao mesmo tempo. E eu acho que eles estão, e acho que ambos estão exatamente certos. E acho que às vezes a direita fica muito entusiasmada com a cláusula de livre exercício e a esquerda fica muito entusiasmada com o establishment. E gostei do fato de termos, temos os dois juntos. Agora, como isso se relaciona com a liberdade de expressão? E eu estava certo quanto ao currículo, como estávamos conversando. Hum, na verdade acho que seria ótimo se as escolas públicas pudessem ensinar a Bíblia, tipo, no sentido de gostar, lê-la como um documento histórico. Mas quando eu estava na ACLU, toda vez que via pessoas tentando isso, sempre se transformava em pessoas que realmente defendiam, você sabe, um católico ou protestante ou algum tipo de leitura ortodoxa sobre religião. Hum, então se você realmente transformar isso em algo que defende uma visão específica sobre religião, então isso passa para o lado da cláusula de estabelecimento. Portanto, os americanos ainda não descobriram uma maneira de realmente ensiná-lo. Então provavelmente é melhor que você, você sabe, aprenda, aprenda fora das aulas de uma escola pública.

LEX: Você acha que é possível ensinar religião, hum, de tipo, uh, religiões mundiais, é claro, sem desrespeitar as religiões?

GREG: Acho que a resposta é que depende da perspectiva de quem.

LEX: Hum, bem, como dizem os praticantes, você é como um seguidor ortodoxo de um determinada religião. É possível não irritá-lo ao ensinar como todas as principais religiões do mundo?

GREG: Para algumas pessoas, o resultado final é que você tem que ensinar isso como verdadeiro. Ah, hum, e com isso nessas condições, então a resposta é não, você não pode ensinar sem, pelo menos, ofender alguém.

LEX: Você não pode dizer que essas pessoas acreditam que é verdade? Você pode reformá-lo? Então você tem que pisar em ovos, essencialmente.

GREG: Você pode se esforçar muito e ainda vai deixar algumas pessoas com raiva, mas pessoas sérias vão dizer, ah, não, você realmente tentou ser justo com o crenças aqui. Hum, e eu, e tento ser respeitoso, hum, tanto quanto posso sobre, hum, muito disso, ainda me sinto muito mais atraído pelo budismo e pelo estoicismo. Bem, para onde eu vou?

LEX: Bem, uma coisa interessante para voltar aos campi universitários é, hum, o fogo mantém as classificações de liberdade de expressão das faculdades em rankings .thefire .org. Estou muito orgulhoso deles. Eu recomendo fortemente porque esqueça que mesmo apenas com a classificação, você aprende muito sobre as universidades a partir de uma perspectiva totalmente diferente daquela a que as pessoas estão acostumadas quando vão escolher a universidade que desejam estudar. Isso apenas dá outra perspectiva sobre a coisa toda. E dá citações de pessoas que são estudantes lá e assim por diante, sobre suas experiências. E, e é diferente, talvez você pudesse falar sobre as várias medidas aqui antes de falarmos sobre quem está entre os cinco primeiros e quem está entre os cinco últimos.Quais, quais, quais são os diferentes parâmetros que contribuem para a avaliação?

GREG: Então as pessoas têm me pedido desde o primeiro dia para fazer um ranking das escolas, de acordo com a liberdade de expressão. E mesmo que tivéssemos, tínhamos o melhor banco de dados existente decódigos de discurso do campus, uh, políticas que as universidades têm que violam a Primeira Emenda ou as normas da Primeira Emenda. Também temos o melhor banco de dados de, uh, chamamos de banco de dados de desconvite. Hum, mas na verdade é, hum, é melhor chamá-lo de banco de dados deplataforma, que é como vamos chamá-lo.

LEX: Hum, e todos esses são casos em que alguém foi convidado como palestrante para campus e depois foram desconvidados.

GREG: Desconvidado ou deplataforma também inclui chowding down.

LEX: Hum, então eles apareceram e não conseguiram falar.

GREG: Sim, exatamente. Hum, e, e, uh, e tendo isso, o que realmente precisávamos para ter alguma ciência social séria para realmente apresentar um argumento sério sobre qual era a classificação, hum, era ser capaz de ter uma noção melhor de quantos professores estavam realmente sendo punidos durante esse período. Hum, e então o maior elemento que faltava era poder, hum, perguntar diretamente aos alunos como era o ambiente naquele campus para a liberdade de expressão. Você se sente confortável em discordar um do outro? Você se sente confortável em discordar de seus professores? Você acha que a violência é aceitável em resposta a um orador? Você acha que gritar, uh, você acha que gritar está certo? Você acha que bloquear o acesso das pessoas a um alto-falante é correto? Hum, e assim que conseguimos reunir todos esses elementos, fizemos primeiro um teste, acho que em 2019, cerca de 50. E já fazemos isso há quatro anos, sempre tentando fazer a metodologia cada vez mais precisos para refletir melhor o ambiente real em escolas específicas. Hum, e este ano, a escola número um foi a Universidade Tecnológica de Michigan, o que foi uma boa surpresa. Uh, a escola número dois era na verdade a Universidade de Auburn. Hum, o que foi, uh, bom ver, uh, no top 10, a escola de prestígio mais conhecida é na verdade a UVA, hum, que se saiu muito bem este ano. A Universidade de Chicago não ficou feliz por não ter sido a número um, mas a universidade de Chicago tem 13 anos e foi a número um ou entre as três primeiras nos anos anteriores.

LEX: Então você pode explicar, é quase surpreendente. É por causa dos departamentos de economia realmente fortes e coisas assim ou o quê, por quê?

GREG: Eles tiveram um caso envolvendo um estudante. Eles não reconheceriam um capítulo de virada nos EUA e apresentaram um argumento muito clássico, hum, que nós, e clássico da maneira ruim que ouvimos nos campi em todo o país. Ah, temos um campus de republicanos, então não precisamos desse grupo conservador adicional. E nós pensamos, não, me desculpe. Como se tivéssemos visto dezenas e dezenas, não centenas de tentativas de fazer com que este determinado, hum, estudante conservador, um grupo de estudantes, uh, você reconhece ou não é reconhecido? E então nós dissemos a eles, ouça, isso, uh, nós dissemos a eles no incêndio que, uh, você sabe, consideramos isso sério e eles não reconheceriam o grupo. Então isso, isso é um ponto abaixo no nosso ranking e foi o suficiente para derrubá-los, eles provavelmente teriam ficado em segundo lugar no ranking. Uh, mas agora são 13 em 2 48. Ainda são uma das melhores escolas do país. Não tenho nenhum problema em dizer que a escola que não se saiu tão bem, hum, com menos 10,69, menos 10,69 e arredondamos para zero foi Harvard e Harvard não ficou, hum, muito feliz com esse resultado .

LEX: A única escola a receber a classificação péssima.

GREG: Sim. E há algumas pessoas, ah, Harvard, ah, Harvard. E há algumas pessoas que realmente, eu acho, cometeram um erro ao se tornarem muito Harvard, hum, soando como, eu fiz estatísticos olharem para isso e eles, e eles, eles, eles pensam sua metodologia é uma piada. E, uh, e gostaria de salientar, e este caso não era tão importante. E aquele estudioso não era aquele estudioso, como aquele dos argumentos contra um dos estudiosos que contamos contra eles, uh, punir foi aquele não ser um estudioso muito famoso ou influente. E eu fico tipo, então seu argumento parece ser esnobismo. Basicamente, assim como você, você não está entendendo nossa metodologia para começar. E então você está dizendo que na verdade aquele estudioso não era importante o suficiente para contar. E a propósito, Harvard, a propósito, Harvard, hum, se nós, o campus de Harvard, sim. Se nós, mesmo que considerássemos todos os seus argumentos verdadeiros, mesmo que decidíssemos nos livrar desses dois professores, hum, você ainda estaria em números negativos. Você ainda estaria em último lugar. Você ainda estaria atrás de Georgetown e Penn. E nenhuma dessas escolas é boa para a liberdade de expressão.

LEX: Devo dizer que as cinco últimas são a universidade da Pensilvânia, Nicosette Penn, uh, a universidade da Carolina do Sul, a universidade de Georgetown e a universidade de Fordham.

GREG: Tudo muito bem merecido. Eles têm tantos casos graves em todas essas escolas.

LEX: Qual é a melhor maneira de se encontrar no fundo do poçocinco?

GREG: Se você é uma universidade, qual é, qual é o caminho mais rápido para esse negativo, para aquele zero, muita plataforma, hum, isso, uh, quando olhamos para os cinco últimos , uh, 81% das tentativas de desplataformar os alto-falantes foram bem-sucedidas entre os cinco últimos. Hum, havia algumas escolas, acho que Penn incluiu onde cada tentativa, cada vez que um aluno, como se opôs, um grupo de estudantes se opôs à vinda daquele orador, eles cancelaram este, este discurso. E eu acho que Georgetown teve uma taxa de sucesso de cem por cento. Acho que Penn teve uma taxa de sucesso de cem por cento. Acho que Harvard defendeu alguns, mas principalmente, uh, as pessoas também ficaram deplataformadas lá.

LEX: Então, como você evita a deplataforma? Bem, quem, quem faria isso? São outros alunos? É faculdade? É a administração? Qual é a dinâmica de, uh, recuar basicamente, porque imagino que parte disso seja cultura, mas imagino que toda universidade tenha um grupo de estudantes que protestarão basicamente contra todos os palestrantes. E é uma questão de como você responde a esse protesto.

GREG: Bem, aqui está, aqui está o segredinho sujo sobre a grande mudança em 2014. Hum, e, e fogo e eu e altura, hum, Tenho deixado bem claro que a grande mudança que vimos no campus foi que, durante a maior parte da minha carreira, os alunos foram ótimos, hum, em liberdade de expressão. Eles eram o melhor eleitorado para a liberdade de expressão, de forma absolutamente inequívoca até cerca de 2013, 2014. E foi apenas em 2014 que tivemos essa experiência muito, você sabe, meio triste para nós, onde de repente os estudantes foram os que defenderam a deplataforma e o novo discurso códigos de maneira semelhante ao que faziam em meados dos anos oitenta, por exemplo. Mas aqui está o segredinho sujo. Não são apenas os alunos, são os alunos e os administradores, às vezes apenas um punhado deles, trabalhando juntos para criar alguns desses problemas. E foi exatamente isso que aconteceu em Stanford. Quando Kyle Duncan, um juiz do quinto circuito tentou falar na minha alma mater e um quinto da turma apareceu para gritar com ele. Hum, foi uma demonstração real do que estava acontecendo naqueles 10 minutos após o grito de um juiz do quinto circuito. E continuo enfatizando que, por ser um advogado constitucional, os juízes do quinto circuito são grandes negócios. Eles estão um nível abaixo da Suprema Corte. Hum, você sabe, cerca de um quinto da escola aparece para gritar depois de 10 minutos gritando e o administrador, um administrador do DEI se levanta com um discurso preparado que ela, que ela escreveu. É um discurso de sete minutos onde ela fala sobre, uh, liberdade de expressão. Talvez o suco não valha a pena ser espremido. E estávamos nesta faculdade de direito onde as pessoas podiam aprender a desafiar estas normas. Então fica claro que houve uma coordenação né, entre alguns desses gestores e pelas conversas com os alunos lá, eles estiveram em reuniões, reuniões extensas por muito tempo. Eles aparecem, gritam. Em seguida, eles levam mais sete minutos para dar um sermão ao orador sobre liberdade de expressão, não sendo, não o suco da liberdade de expressão, não valendo a pena ser pressionado. Hum, e o resto, são apenas reclamações constantes. Hum, depois que ela, depois que ela saiu, isso é claro, e isso, e algo muito semelhante, você sabe, aconteceu várias vezes em Yale, onde ficou muito claro que os administradores estavam ajudando, com muitas dessas interrupções. Então eu acho que toda vez que há uma reclamação em uma universidade, a investigação deveria ser em primeiro lugar: os administradores ajudaram a criar esse problema? Eles fizeram alguma coisa para impedir isso? Porque eu acho que muito do que realmente está acontecendo aqui é a hiperburocratização das universidades com muito mais pessoas ideológicas que pensam em seu trabalho principal basicamente como policiar o discurso, mais ou menos, eles estão incentivando os estudantes, desculpe, eles são incentivando os alunos que têm opiniões que gostam, hum, a gritar. Hum, e é por isso que eles realmente precisam investigar isso. E foi, uh, em Stanford, o administrador que fez os comentários preparados, hum, sobre o suco, não valer a pena. Ela não foi convidada a voltar para Stanford, mas é um dos únicos exemplos em que consigo pensar quando essas coisas acontecem com frequência, em que um administrador facilitou claramente algo que foi uma gritaria ou uma desplataforma, ou resultou na demissão de um professor ou resultou em uma aluno sendo expulso onde o administrador saiu impune ou provavelmente em alguns casos até conseguiu uma promoção.

LEX: E então um pequeno número de administradores, talvez até um único administrador poderia participar do incentivo e do organização e, assim, capacitar todo o processo.

GREG: E isso é algo que tenho visto ao longo de toda a minha carreira.E a única coisa que é meio difícil é pegar esse tipo de coisa em flagrante, por assim dizer. E essa é uma das razões pelas quais é útil que as pessoas saibam sobre isso, vocêsabe, uh, porque foi um caso incrível. Isso foi na Universidade de Washington. Hum, e na verdade apresentamos isso em um documentário feito em 2015, 20, que foi lançado em 2015, 2016 chamado, podemos fazer uma piada? Hum, e foi aí que começamos a perceber que algo estava mudando no campus. Também ouvimos que os comediantes diziam que não podiam mais usar o bom humor. Isso foi bem na época em que Jerry Seinfeld e Chris Rock disseram que não podiam, uh, eles não queriam tocar nos campi porque eles, eles não podiam, eles, eles, eles não podiam ser engraçados. Uh, mas apresentamos o caso de um comediante que queria fazer um musical chamado a paixão do musical, zombando da paixão de Cristo com o objetivo declarado de ofender a todos, todos os grupos igualmente. Foi muito, muito uma missão de South Park. Hum, e é um caso incomum porque na verdade temos documentação de administradores comprando ingressos para estudantes irritados e realizando um evento onde eles, onde os treinam, pulam no meio de tudo e gritam, estou ofendido. Como eles, eles, eles compraram ingressos para eles. Eles os enviaram para isso, essa coisa com o objetivo de calar tudo. Agora, sem surpresa, quando você envia um grupo furioso de estudantes para encerrar uma peça, isso não vai terminar apenas com estou ofendido. Hum, e esquentou. Houve ameaças de morte sendo lançadas, uh, o, hum, e então a polícia do Pullman Washington disse a Chris, uh, Chris Lee, o cara que fez a peça que ele, eles não os protegeriam de verdade. Agora, não é todo dia que você terá esse tipo de evidência concreta de que, de que, de realmente ver os administradores, seria tão, uh, tão descarado que eles registrassem o fato de que compraram os ingressos e os enviou. Mas acho que muitas dessas coisas estão acontecendo. E eu acho que é uma boa desculpa para reduzir um dos grandes problemas do ensino superior hoje, que é a hiperburocratização.

LEX: Na sua experiência, há uma distinção entre administradores e corpo docente em termos de, uh, perpetradores disso, desse tipo de coisa? Então, se nos livrarmos de tudo, como Harvey falou sobre, uh, nos livrarmos de uma grande porcentagem da administração, isso ajudaria a resolver o problema ou o corpo docente também é uma pequena porcentagem do corpo docente também parte do incentivo no organização desses tipos de cancelamento.

GREG: Sim. E isso é algo que tem sido profundamente decepcionante. Hum, é isso quando você olha para o enorme aumento nas tentativas de demissão de professores que vimos nos últimos 10 anos e, na verdade, nos últimos 22 anos, desde que nossos registros vão. Hum, primeiro eles são liderados esmagadoramente por administradores, tentativas de punir os professores. Hum, e isso foi mais, você sabe, eu diria que essa foi a minha carreira até 2013, foi lutar contra os excessos administrativos. Hum, então você começa a ter o problema em 2014 de estudantes tentando fazer com que as pessoas sejam canceladas. Hum, e isso realmente acelerou em 2017 e no número. Então, uma maneira que torna mais fácil documentar são as petições para demitir ou punir professores. Hum, e quão desproporcionalmente eles realmente vêm de estudantes. Mas outro grande aumento foi o de colegas professores exigindo que seus colegas fossem punidos. E isso para mim é meio vergonhoso. Você, você, você não deveria se orgulhar de assinar a petição para contratar seu colega professor. E o que é ainda mais, uh, mais, mais vergonhoso é que conseguimos, isso, isso é, isso quase se tornou um clichê dentro do fogo. Quando alguém enfrenta uma dessas campanhas de cancelamento como professor, recebo cartas de alguns de meus amigos dizendo: Sinto muito, isso aconteceu com você. E essas foram as mesmas pessoas que assinaram publicamente a petição para demiti-los.

LEX: Sim. Sim. Sim. Integridade Integridade é uma coisa importante neste mundo. E acho que, em parte, estou tão surpreso que as pessoas não defendam mais isso porque há muita fome por isso. E se você tem coragem, como docente ou administrador, de realmente se posicionar, se levantar, com eloqüência, com rigor, com integridade, sinto que é impossível para alguém fazer qualquer coisa porque há muita fome. É tão refrescante. Sim. Acho que todos concordam que a liberdade de expressão é uma coisa boa. Ah, não, não.

GREG: Bem, ok. Desculpe, desculpe. Eu não concordo. A, a maioria das pessoas, mesmo nas universidades, há fome, mas é quase como, uh, esse tipo de nervosismo em torno disso porque há um pequeno número de vozes altas. Eles estão gritando. Então, quero dizer, novamente, é aí que entra a grande liderança. E então, você sabe, os presidentes das universidades provavelmente deveriam estar, uh, fazendo declarações claras do tipo, este não é, este é um lugar onde valorizamos a liberdade de expressão .Quando, e isso foi durante toda a minha carreira, hum, um reitor, um reitor de universidade que bate o pé cedo e diz, não, vocêsabe, não estamos pensando em demitir esse professor. Não estamos expulsando o aluno. Muitas vezes, o problema termina muito rapidamente. Embora às vezes, e é aqui que você realmente pode perceber o envolvimento administrativo, os alunos farão coisas como assumir o gabinete do presidente. E então essa aquisição será atendida pela universidade. As pessoas vão apontar isso às vezes como sendo tipo, ah, é claramente como, hum, meu amigo Sam Abrams, quando eles tentaram fazer com que ele fosse demitido, na, uh, faculdade de Sarah Lawrence. Hum, e, uh, essa foi uma das vezes que foi usado como uma espécie de, ah, isso foi hostil à universidade porque eles, os estudantes, assumiram o cargo de presidente. E eu digo, não, eles os deixaram assumir o cargo de presidente. E eu não sei se esse foi um dos casos em que a aquisição foi atendida, mas se alguma vez houve algum tipo de sinal do tipo, sim, isso não é, isso é realmente muito amigável .

LEX: Bem, em certo sentido, protestar e ter opiniões realmente fortes, mesmo que sejam opiniões ridículas, malucas e selvagens, é uma coisa boa. Acontece que isso não deveria levar à demissão ou à desplataforma de pessoas. Como se fosse bom protestar. Simplesmente não é bom, uh, que a universidade apoie isso e tome medidas com base nisso.

GREG: E esta é uma daquelas como, hum, tensões na, na, na Primeira Emenda isso, na verdade, acho que tem um lançamento bem fácil. Essencialmente, você tem um aplicativo, você tem absolutamente o direito de, uh, dedicar sua vida para acabar com a liberdade de expressão e o ridículo como conceito. E há pessoas que, que realmente o são, podem parecer muito desprezíveis até mesmo em relação à filosofia da liberdade de expressão. Hum, e defenderemos seu direito de fazer isso. Também discordaremos de você. E se você tentar fazer com que um professor seja demitido, estaremos do outro lado disso. Agora, acho que você tinha Randy Kennedy, que eu realmente o amo. Eu acho que ele é um cara legal, mas ele nos criticou por nosso banco de dados deplataforma, dizendo: isso significa que os estudantes não podem protestar contra os oradores. Eu fico tipo, ok, isso é bobagem. Hum, uh, nós demitimos porque uma organização defendeu o direito de protestar o tempo todo. Estamos constantemente defendendo os direitos dos manifestantes, não acreditando que os manifestantes tenham o direito de dizer o que gostaria, basicamente o que seria. Punir os oradores. Não estamos pedindo a punição dos manifestantes, mas o que estamos dizendo é que você não pode deixar os manifestantes vencerem se eles estão exigindo que alguém seja demitido por sua liberdade de expressão.

LEX : Portanto, existe uma linha entre os manifestantes protestando e a universidade agindo com base no protesto.

GREG: Sim, exatamente. E, claro, grite que isso é apenas censura da multidão. Hum, e isso é algo em que a universidade, a maneira como você realmente lida com essa tensão na lei da Primeira Emenda é essencialmente como o único dever positivo que o governo tem. O primeiro, o dever negativo, aquilo que não é permitido fazer é censurar você. Hum, mas o dever positivo é que se eu quiser dizer coisas horríveis, ou, nesse caso, grandes coisas que não são populares em um parque público, hum, você não pode deixar a multidão simplesmente gritar comigo. Hum, você não pode permitir o que é chamado de veto do questionador.

LEX: Isso é tão interessante. Porque sinto que isso também acontece nas redes sociais. Porque, você sabe, há toda essa discussão sobre censura e liberdade de expressão, mas para mim, a questão da cenoura é quase mais interessante. Uma vez estabelecida a liberdade de expressão, como incentivar debates e divergências de alta qualidade? Estou pensando muito sobre isso.

GREG: E essa é uma das coisas sobre as quais falamos ao cancelar a mente americana: argumentar em direção à verdade e que cancelar a cultura é cruel. É impiedoso. É anti-intelectual, mas também nunca o levará a lugar nenhum na sua verdade. E você vai perder muito tempo destruindo seus oponentes, hum, em algo que na verdade nunca poderá levá-lo à verdade através do processo, é claro, de, você nunca chegará diretamente à verdade. Você simplesmente elimina a falsidade.

LEX: Sim. Mas todo mundo ter um megafone na internet com anonimato, parece que é melhor que a censura, mas parece que há incentivos em cima disso. Além disso, você pode construir para, hum, sim, incentivar um discurso melhor. Sim. É como incentivar alguém que se esforça muito para apresentar até os argumentos mais ridículos, mas basicamente aqueles que não incluem nenhuma das coisas que você destaca em termos de todos os truques retóricos para encerrar conversas, apenas faça algo realmente bom. argumentos para qualquer coisa.Não importa se é um comunismo para o fascismo, seja lá o que você queira dizer, mas faça isso com escala, com contexto histórico, com, uh, uh, com o homem de aço do outro lado, todos esses tipos de elementos.

GREG: Tentamos fazer trêspontos principais do livro. Um, hum, é simplesmente cancelar que a cultura é real. É uma era histórica, hum, e está em uma escala histórica. A segunda é que você deve pensar na cultura do cancelamento como parte de uma, hum, retórica, como uma abordagem retórica preguiçosa maior, uh, do que, o que, o que chamamos de argumentos vencedores sem argumentos vencedores. E queremos dizer isso em dois sentidos, sem ter argumentos vencedores ou sem realmente ter um argumento. E falamos sobre todos os diferentes, o que chamamos de fortalezas retóricas que tanto a esquerda quanto a direita têm, que impedem você de, que permitem que você simplesmente rejeite a pessoa, hum, ou evite o argumento sem realmente chegar à substância do argumento. argumento. A terceira parte é apenas, você sabe, como podemos consertar isso? Mas a questão da fortaleza retórica é na verdade algo que tenho feito, sou muito apaixonado porque interfere na nossa capacidade de chegar à verdade e é uma perda de tempo e, francamente, também, já que cancelar a cultura faz parte dessa tática retórica, também pode arruinar vidas.

LEX: Na verdade, seria muito divertido falar sobre esse aspecto específico do livro. E eu recomendo fortemente que se você estiver ouvindo isso, faça a pré-encomenda do livro agora.

GREG: Uh, quando ele será lançado? 17 de outubro. OK. O cancelamento da mente americana. OK. Então, no livro, você também tem uma lista de táticas retóricas baratas que tanto a esquerda quanto a direita usam. E então você tem uma lista de táticas que a esquerda usa e a direita usa. Portanto, há a fortaleza retórica, a fortaleza retórica perfeita que a esquerda usa e a fortaleza retórica eficiente que a direita usa.

LEX: A primeira é sobre o ismo. Talvez possamos repassar alguns deles que capturam seu coração neste momento específico enquanto falamos sobre isso. E se, se você puder descrever exemplos disso ou se, uh, há aspectos disso que você vê aí, especialmente eficazes. Então, uh, o que dizer do ismo é se defender contra as críticas do seu lado, trazendo à tona as supostas irregularidades do outro lado.

GREG: Quero fazer pequenos cartões com essas, uh, de todas essas táticas e começar a usar eles estão no X o tempo todo porque eles são comumente implantados.

LEX: E quanto ao ism, coloquei em primeiro lugar por uma razão, você sabe, seria uma ideia interessante realmente integrar isso na barra X do Twitter onde as pessoas, você sabe, em vez de clicar no coração, elas podem clicar em qual das, uh, uh, qual das táticas retóricas é essa. E então, porque você sabe, há notas da comunidade. Não sei se vocês viram no X que vocês podem contribuir com notas e isso é bastante fascinante. Funciona muito, muito bem, mas para dar um pouco mais de estrutura. Sim. Na verdade, esse é um método realmente interessante.

GREG: Sim. Na verdade, quando estava pensando em maneiras pelas quais X poderia ser usado para argumentar em favor da verdade, eu não gostaria que isso acontecesse para que, você sabe, todos estivessem vinculados a isso. Mas acho que imagino ser quase como um fluxo dentro de X que era focado na verdade, que concorda com algumas regras adicionais sobre como eles argumentariam. Sim, cara.

LEX: Eu adoraria isso. Onde há, em termos de fluxos que se cruzam e podem ser separados, aquele de falar merda onde as pessoas simplesmente gostam de falar merda. OK. Vá em frente, cara. E então há a verdade e então, uh, quero dizer, eles ficam tipo, então há humor, então há boas vibrações. Tipo, você sabe, eu não sou alguém que precisa de boas vibrações o tempo todo, mas às vezes é bom ter, é bom apenas fazer login e não ter que ver o drama, a briga, a briga, o, os cancelamentos, as mães, tudo isso. É bom ver, uh, é por isso que vou ao Reddit ou tipo, uh, quais são os animais fofos, se há cachorrinhos e gatinhos fofos.

GREG: E é tipo, eu só quero veja Ryan Reynolds cantando com Will Farrell.

LEX: Quero dizer, às vezes isso é tudo que você precisa em meu coração. Sim. Não o tempo todo, só um pouquinho e de volta à batalha pela verdade. OK. Então, e o ismo?

GREG: E como Mia? Isso está em todo lugar. Hum, quando, quando você olha para isso, uh, quando você olha para o Twitter, quando você olha para as mídias sociais em geral, hum, e o primeiro, como o que chamamos de pista de obstáculos, é basicamente testado pelo tempo, antiquado, você sabe , esquivas argumentativas que todo mundo usa. E quanto a asm é apenas trazer algo à tona, você sabe, como se alguém discutisse, como se Biden fosse corrupto. E, e então alguém diz, bem, Trump foi pior, você sabe, tipo, e isso não é um argumento ilegítimo, você sabe, para revidar, mas acontece, parece que acontece.Cada vez que alguém faz uma afirmação, alguém apenas aponta alguma outra coisa que estava acontecendo e isso pode ficar cada vez mais atenuado pelo que você está realmente tentando argumentar. E quando você, e então você vê isso o tempo todo nas redes sociais e é tipo, você sabe, eu era um grande fã do programa diário de Jon Stewart, mas muitode qual era o humor e qual era a tática para discutir era essa coisa aqui. É como, Oh, estou argumentando sobre um problema importante. Ah, na verdade, você sabe, há outro problema aqui que me preocupa mais. E isso, isso, você sabe, e, você sabe, vamos, vamos escolher o certo aqui. Então, 6 de janeiro, você sabe, assistindo todo mundo discutindo sobre, hum, cortar, você sabe, como a, hum, uh, a parte ocupada de Seattle ou a parte ocupada de Portland e set, e basicamente tentando gostar, Oh, você está trazendo à tona o motim de 6 de janeiro. Hum, e a propósito, eu moro no Capitólio. Então, acredite, eu estava muito ciente de como isso era assustador e ruim. Hum, você sabe, como eu disse, meu pai cresceu na Iugoslávia e foi uma noite em que todos jantamos no porão. Porque eu fico tipo, ah, quando a merda acontecer, coma no porão. Foi, foi, foi genuinamente assustador. E as pessoas tentariam evitar que o dia 6 de janeiro fosse sério, argumentando que, bem, há coisas malucas e horríveis acontecendo em todo o país. Uh, você sabe, tumultos, uh, uh, hum, que vieram de alguns dos protestos por justiça social. E, claro, a resposta é que você pode se preocupar com essas duas coisas e encontrar os dois problemas. Mas você sabe, se estou discutindo sobre chop, você sabe, alguém mencionando o dia 6 de janeiro não é muito relevante para isso. Ou se estou discutindo sobre 6 de janeiro, alguém trazendo à tona os tumultos em 2020, isso não ajuda? tripulação de palha e tripulação de aço. Deturpando assim a, a, a, a perspectiva da, da, perspectiva oposta. E isso também é algo, uh, eu acho que é muito prevalente e é difícil fazer o inverso disso, que é a tripulação de aço que requer empatia ou eloqüência. Requer compreensão, realmente fazer a pesquisa e compreender a, a, a perspectiva alternativa.

GREG: Meu, uh, funcionário maravilhoso, Angel e Eduardo, tem algo que ele chama de star manning e eu me vejo fazendo isso de uma maneira muito. É bom ter, você sabe, dois pais imigrantes, hum, porque eu me lembro de estar em São Francisco, uh, você sabe, uh, no tipo estranho de coorte da ACLU e de ter um amigo lá que era um artista que falaria sobre odiar o Kansas. E essa foi a sua metáfora para a América central, foi isso que ele quis dizer com isso. E, mas ele estava meio orgulhoso do fato de odiar o Kansas. E eu digo, você tem que entender. Ainda vejo todos vocês um pouco como estrangeiros e penso em mudar o nome do Kansas para Croácia, sabe, mudar o nome do Kansas para, para, para alguns. Isso é o que parece para mim. E a ideia de ser uma estrela, que eu, que eu gosto, é a ideia de ser assim, então você está dizendo que realmente odeia sua minoria religiosa dominante, tipo, e é aí que você começa a se distanciar um pouco dela. , quão típica a América é excepcional em vários aspectos, mas algumas de nossas dinâmicas são incrivelmente típicas. É uma das razões pelas quais, como quando as pessoas começam a ler Thomas Soul, por exemplo, elas começam a ficar fisgadas porque uma das coisas que ele faz é fazer análises comparativas dos problemas dos países e apontar que algumas dessas coisas que pensamos são apenas exclusivos dos Estados Unidos existem, você sabe, em 75% do resto dos países do mundo. O livro de Francis Fukuyama, hum, que estou lendo agora, Origens da Ordem Política, na verdade faz esse trabalho maravilhoso de apontar como não somos especiais em vários aspectos. Na verdade, isso é algo que está muito em minha mente. E, uh, Fukuyama, claro, uh, é um ótimo livro. Não é, é um pouco afetado na escrita porque o termo que ele usa para designar uma das coisas que o preocupa e que destrói as sociedades é a repatriação, que é o retorno a sociedades nas quais você favorece sua família e amigos. E eu realmente acho que muito do que estou vendo, hum, uh, nos Estados Unidos, me deixa preocupado que possamos estar passando por um pequeno processo de repatriação. E acho que essa é uma das razões pelas quais as pessoas estão tão irritadas. Acho que tenho uma perspectiva de que nós, você sabe, nós muito, quase parecemos ter uma eleição que seria, você sabe, Jeb Bush contra Hillary Clinton. É tipo, somos um país dinástico agora? É isso que está acontecendo? Mas também é uma das razões pelas quais as pessoas estão tão irritadas com as admissões herdadas, com o quanto, você sabe, certas famílias parecem ser capazes de manter seu povo nas classes altas dos Estados Unidos perpetuamente. E acredite em mim, como se eu fosse pobre quando era criança e fui, e tive que ir, tive que ir a uma das fantasias. Eu tenho que ir para Stanford.E pude ver como as pessoas tratam você de maneira diferente, de uma forma que é quase um insulto. Tipo basicamente gostode repente, para um certo tipo de pessoa, eu era uma pessoa legítima. E vejo o quanto a América depende de Harvard, de Yale para produzir a sua, vou usar um termo muito sonoro, classe dominante. E essa é uma das razões pelas quais você deve estar particularmente preocupado com o que acontece nessas faculdades de elite. E essas faculdades de elite, com exceção da Universidade de Chicago e da UVA, têm um desempenho muito ruim em relação à liberdade de expressão. E isso tem todos os tipos de problemas. Não é um bom presságio para o futuro da proteção da liberdade de expressão para o resto da sociedade.

LEX: Então você também pode ter empatia com as pessoas que votaram em Donald Trump? Porque é precisamente isso que é uma resistência a este tipo de impulso da classe dominante, esta realeza que passa o governo de geração em geração.

GREG: Eu tento muito ter empatia até certo ponto com todos e tento para realmente ver de onde eles vêm e a raiva da direita. Entendo. Quero dizer, tipo, eu sinto que o livro, então copping the American mind era um livro que eu, que poderia agradar a todos até certo ponto, em parte porque realmente quisemos dizer o que dissemos no subtítulo que estes são boas intenções e más ideias que estão prejudicando as pessoas. E se você entender e ler o livro, você pode dizer, ok, isso não é ninguém sendo malicioso. Você sabe, são pessoas tentando proteger seus filhos. Eles estão apenas fazendo isso de uma maneira que pode realmente levar a maior ansiedade, depressão e, estranhamente, eventualmente representar uma ameaça à liberdade de expressão. Mas neste, não podemos ser exatamente, eu e meu, ah, nem mencionei meu brilhante co-autor, Ricky Schlott, um gênio de 23 anos. Ela é, ela é, ela é incrível. Comecei a trabalhar com ela quando ela tinha 20 anos, quem é minha coautora neste livro. Então, quando digo nós, estou falando sobre mim e Ricky. Ele é um libertário. Jornalista libertário.

LEX: E jornalista. Sim. Uma mente brilhante.

GREG: Sim. E, na verdade, não podemos escrever isso de uma forma muito gentil, porque os canceladores não são gentis. Há uma crueldade e uma impiedade nisso. Quer dizer, comecei a ficar muito deprimido no ano passado, quando estava escrevendo e nem queria contar à minha equipe por que estava ficando tão ansioso e deprimido. Em parte é porque estou falando de pessoas que, você sabe, em alguns dos casos de que estamos falando, irão até sua casa e terão como alvo seus filhos. Então, isso é um longo caminho para dizer, eu meio que consigo entender o que deixa os malucos certos nisso. Eu sinto que eles estão constantemente se sentindo como se estivessem sendo iluminados a gás. A educação de elite é realmente um insulto à classe trabalhadora. Tipo, parte da ideologia que é dominante no momento trata, quase 70% do público americano, como eles, pensamos que desenvolvemos isso um pouco na fortaleza retórica perfeita, como eles são para alguns, de alguma forma ilegítimo e não digno de respeito ou compaixão.

LEX: Sim. O, o elitismo geral que irradia, o elitismo autoalimentado que irradia das pessoas que vão para essas instituições.

GREG: E o que é engraçado é que o, o, o elitismo foi reembalado como uma espécie de, ele disfarça-se como uma espécie de compaixão infinita, mas essencialmente baseia-se numa espécie de ideologia muito, para ser franco, demasiado simples e demasiado simples, numa explicação simples do mundo e na divisão das pessoas em grupos e no julgamento das pessoas pelo quão oprimidas elas são, na intersecção de suas diversas identidades. E chegou a isso, acho que inicialmente com, com, com um apelo de um núcleo compassivo, mas é usado de uma forma que pode ser muito cruel, muito desdenhoso, sem compaixão, e permite que você não leve a sério a maioria de seus semelhantes.

LEX: É muito estranho como isso aconteceu. Talvez você possa explorar por que algo que parece bom no início. Sim. Pode ser, pode criar, pode se tornar uma arma tão cruel para cancelar e ferir pessoas e ignorá-las. Quero dizer, isso é o que você descreveu com a fortaleza retórica perfeita. Sim. Que é um conjunto de perguntas. Talvez você possa explicar qual é a fortaleza retórica perfeita.

GREG: Sim. Portanto, a fortaleza retórica perfeita é a maneira que foi desenvolvida pela esquerda para nunca chegar ao argumento real de alguém. Eu quero fazer um gráfico, como um fluxograma sobre isso, aqui está o argumento e aqui está essa fortaleza perfeita que irá desviar você sempre de chegar à discussão. E comecei a perceber isso certamente quando eu, quando estava na faculdade de direito, que havia muitas maneiras diferentes de demitir pessoas e aperfeiçoar a fortaleza retórica, primeiro passo. E posso atestar isso porque também fui culpado disso, de que você pode demitir pessoas se argumentar que elas são conservadoras.Eles não precisam ser conservadores para serem claros. Você apenas tem que dizer que eles são. Então, nunca li Thomas Sowell porque ele era um ponta-direita. Eu não li Camille Pogliaporque eu era, eu, alguém me convenceu de que ela era de direita. Havia muitos autores que, e quando eu estava na faculdade de direito, entre muitas pessoas muito brilhantes, já era um hábito intelectual que se você pudesse designar algo conservador, então você realmente não precisava pensar sobre isso. muito mais ou levá-lo particularmente a sério. Esta é uma maneira infantil de argumentar, mas, mesmo assim, eu me envolvi nela. Era uma tática comum. Eu até mencionei no livro que houve um tempo em que um amigo ativista gay que estava, acho, decididamente à minha esquerda, mas mesmo assim teve aquela experiência pragmática de realmente ser um ativista, disse algo como, bem, só porque o conservador de alguém não não significa que eles estejam errados. E eu me lembro de me sentir meio escandalizado em algum nível de apenas dizer, bem, isso é, não é isso que quando dizemos é que eles são apenas pessoas más com ideias ruins.

LEX: Você pode simplesmente lançar um, ah, aquele cara é um ponta direita. Você pode simplesmente jogar isso.

GREG: Não preciso mais pensar em você.

LEX: Sim. E então pode, se você for popular o suficiente, pode ser isso, pode ser meio pegajoso. Sim.

GREG: Tipo, e é estranho porque, porque é eficaz, é por isso que ele continua se acostumando essencialmente com isso, deveria ter atingido alguém porque, porque eu, você sabe, eu tenho um grande liberal pedigree, você sabe, tudo, desde trabalhar na ACLU até fazer leis para refugiados na Europa Oriental, fiz parte de um programa de orientação ambiental para crianças do ensino médio do centro da cidade em DC. Você sabe, eu estive, eu estive, eu, eu, eu posso, você sabe, me defender como sendo de esquerda, mas eu odeio fazer isso porque também há uma parte de mim que está tipo, ok, e daí, tipo, você está realmente dizendo que se você puder me fazer discutir magicamente ou se convencer disso, que estou certo, que você não precisa mais me ouvir? E, novamente, isso é discutir como crianças. E a razão pela qual isto se tornou tão popular é porque mesmo entre, ou talvez, talvez especialmente entre as elites, funciona tão eficazmente como uma arma perfeita que se pode usar sem crítica. Se eu puder provar que você está certo, não preciso, não preciso pensar em você. Não é de admirar que de repente você comece a ver pessoas ligando para a direita da ACLU e ligando para a direita do New York Times, porque tem sido uma forma muito eficaz de deslegitimar as pessoas como pensadoras. Nós temos, você sabe, Stephen Pinker, que está em nosso conselho consultivo, ele se refere à academia como sendo o pólo esquerdo que essencialmente é, é uma posição que, desse ponto de vista, tudo parece para a direita, parece como se estivesse à direita. Mas uma vez que se torne uma tática que aceitamos, e essa é uma das razões pelas quais, você sabe, eu sou, eu sou, sou mais de esquerda, mas acho que sou de esquerda do centro liberal. Ricky é, você sabe, um libertário mais conservador. E inicialmente eu pensei, eu deveria realmente escrever algo com alguém que está mais à direita? E eu digo, absolutamente deveria estar. Na verdade, tenho que viver de acordo com o que acredito sobre essas coisas, porque é ridículo que tenhamos essa ideia primitiva de que você pode demitir alguém assim que afirma, com ou sem razão, que essa pessoa está certa.

LEX: Bem, eu sinto, corrija-me se estiver errado, mas sinto que você foi recentemente chamado de fogo de direita, talvez você por associação por causa desse debate.

GREG: Oh, o LA Times . O LA Times. Vamos falar sobre o LA Times.

LEX: Então sim, há um artigo, há um debate. Mal posso esperar para assistir porque acho que ainda não está disponível para assistir em vídeo. Você tem que comparecer pessoalmente. Mal posso esperar para ver. Uh, mas o fogo apoiou em parte e então o LA Times escreveu, hum, um artigo contundente sobre, uh, que todos no debate estavam basicamente certos, inclinados para a direita. Ok.

GREG: Uh, tanta coisa para desfazer as malas aí. Uh, você sabe, Barry Weiss tem esse, você sabe, ótimo, ótimo projeto, a imprensa livre. Fiquei muito impressionado. É cobrir histórias que muitos meios de comunicação de direita ou de esquerda não estão dispostos a cobrir. Hum, e nós fizemos um, uh, organizamos um debate com ela. Hum, uh, e nós queríamos torná-lo o mais divertido e controverso possível. Uh, então o fogo e a imprensa livre organizaram um debate. A revolução sexual falhou? Então o debate foi muito emocionante, muito divertido. O lado que disse que a revolução sexual não foi um fracasso em que Grimes e Sarah Hader estiveram. Um, hum, foi, você sabe, uma noite agradável, substancial e atenciosa. E recebemos uma revisão, houve uma revisão que foi meio contundente sobre a coisa toda. E incluía uma linha dizendo que, uh, fogo, que afirma acreditar na liberdade de expressão, mas só defende pontos de vista até certo ponto. Não acredito que isso apareceu na revista.Porque não está apenas nos ligando. Porque é claro, você sabe, a implicação, é claro, de que somos de direita, hum, o que na verdade não somos, a equipe se inclina decididamente mais para a esquerda ePara a direita. Hum, mas também defendemos pessoas de todo o espectro, o tempo todo. Como se isso fosse algo que mesmo a mínima pesquisa no Google teria resolvido. Então, como se tivéssemos sido criticados em Los Angeles sobre isso porque é tipo, sim, se você dissesse. Na minha opinião, eles são de direita, teríamos argumentado, você sabe, hum, dizendo, bem, aqui, aqui, aqui estão os seguintes 50.000 exemplos de, de, de nós não sermos, mas quando você realmente faz concordamos com a afirmação factual de que apenas defendemos opiniões, em primeiro lugar, não há como concordarmos com isso. Não há como concordarmos com as opiniões porque, na verdade, temos uma equipe politicamente diversificada que nem sequer concorda sobre quais opiniões são boas e quais opiniões temos. Mas sim, eu tive que fazer isso, certa vez, quando alguém fez algo assim e estava sendo um pouco irreverente sobre como se a liberdade de expressão estivesse bem. Eu fiz um longo tópico de 70 tweets, você sabe, apenas pensando, Ei, você realmente acha que está tudo bem? Decidi não fazer isso, hum, neste em particular. Mas o bom disso é que demonstrou duas partes do livro, ah, o cancelamento da mente americana. Se não mais, um deles está demitindo alguém porque é conservador. Uh, e porque essa foi a implicação, não precisamos ouvir o fogo porque eles são conservadores. Mas o outro é alguma coisa, um termo que inventei especificamente para a forma como as pessoas discutem no Twitter, que é projeção de hipocrisia. Olá, sou uma pessoa que só se preocupa com um lado da cerca política. E acho que todo mundo é hipócrita. Hum, e a propósito, não fiz nenhuma pesquisa real sobre isso, mas presumo que todo mundo é hipócrita. E você vê isso acontecer o tempo todo. O, o, e isso acontece de disparar muito onde alguém vai ficar tipo, cadê o fogo nesse caso? E nós pensamos que fomos literalmente citados no link que você acabou de enviar, mas na verdade não lemos. Ou é como, onde está o fogo nisso? É tipo, aqui está nosso processo sobre isso de seis meses atrás. Hum, então é uma coisa favorita. E também o programa diário de John Stewart, como o, o, o, o, hum, uh, e o ismo e o tipo de ideia de que essas pessoas devem ser hipócritas é algo que é a maior comédia, mas na verdade é uma tática retórica que irá levá-lo à verdade, apenas presumir que seu oponente ou apenas acusá-lo de sempre ser um hipócrita não é uma boa tática para a verdade. Mas, a propósito, isso tende sempre a vir de pessoas que não são realmente consistentes com a liberdade de expressão.

LEX: Então isso dá a projeção, mas basicamente não faz a pesquisa sobre se a pessoa é ou não não sou um hipócrita e presumindo que os outros sejam uma grande fração dos outros que o leem, uh, também não fará a pesquisa. E, portanto, este tipo de afirmação torna-se uma espécie de veracidade sem base na realidade real. Isso quebra a barreira entre o que é e o que não é verdade, porque se, se a multidão disser que algo é verdade, é preciso muito esforço para corrigi-lo.

GREG: E há três maneiras que eu quero isso, tipo, você sabe, eu quero responder a isso, que é apenas dar exemplo após exemplo, de tempos em que defendemos pessoas de ambos os lados de todas as maiorias, basicamente todas as questões importantes, seja Israel, Palestina, seja terrorismo , seja casamento gay, temos feito aborto. Defendemos ambos os lados desse argumento. A outra parte, e eu chamo estes de órfãos da guerra cultural. Eu realmente quero exortar a mídia a começar a se preocupar com os casos de liberdade de expressão que na verdade não têm valência política e que na verdade são apenas sobre o bom e velho exercício de poder contra o garotinho ou a garotinha ou o pequeno grupo no campus ou fora do campus, por falar nisso. Porque esses casos acontecem. Muitos dos nossos litígios são apenas pessoas pequenas, como pessoas comuns, que são informadas de que não podem protestar, que não podem segurar cartazes. E então a última parte do argumento que eu quero que as pessoas realmente entendam é tipo, sim. E, a propósito, os direitistas também se metem em problemas. Hum, e há ataques da esquerda e você também deve levá-los a sério. Hum, você deveria se importar quando os republicanos se metem em problemas. Você deve se preocupar quando a Califórnia tem um DEI, um programa que exige isso nas faculdades comunitárias da Califórnia tem uma política de programa DEI que na verdade exige que até mesmo professores de química trabalhem em ideias diferentes de DEI, da interseccionalidade ao anti-racismo em sua sala de aula, em seu plano de estudos , etc. Esta é uma violação grosseira da liberdade acadêmica. É tão ruim dizer aos professores o que eles não podem dizer. Como lutamos e derrotamos na Flórida. É ainda pior dizer-lhes o que devem dizer. Isso é totalmente totalitário. E estamos processando isso.E o que estou dizendo é que, quando você demite alguém apenas por estar do outro lado da cerca política, você também está afirmando, afirmando que nenhum desses casos importa também. E eu quero pessoasse preocupar com a censura, mesmo quando ela é contra pessoas que eles odeiam.

LEX: Censura é censura. Se pudermos pegar essa tangente brevemente com DEI, diversidade, equidade e inclusão, qual é o bem e qual é o mal de tais programas?

GREG: DEI, conheço pessoas que são DEI, hum, consultores ou alguns, na verdade eu tenho um amigo querido que amo muito, hum, que faz DEI. Pessoas absolutamente decentes. O que eles querem é criar laços de compreensão, amizade, compaixão entre as pessoas, pessoas que são diferentes. Infelizmente, a pesquisa sobre o que grande parte do DEI realmente faz é muitas vezes o oposto disso. E eu acho que é parcialmente um problema com parte da ideologia que vem de uma teoria racial crítica, que é uma coisa real, aliás, que informa muito da DEI, que na verdade a torna algo mais propenso a dividir do que unir. Falamos sobre isto mimando a mente americana como a diferença entre a política de identidade comum da humanidade e a política de identidade comum do inimigo. E eu acho que, uh, eu conheço algumas das pessoas que conheço que fazem DEI, elas realmente querem que seja uma política de identidade comum da humanidade, mas algumas das suposições ideológicas reais que estão incorporadas podem realmente fazer com que as pessoas se sintam mais alienados um do outro. Agora, quando comecei no FIRE, meus primeiros casos envolveram o 11 de setembro. Hum, e foi ruim. Uh, os professores estavam sendo alvos. Os professores estavam perdendo seus empregos por dizerem coisas insensíveis sobre o 11 de setembro e ambos, da direita e da esquerda, na verdade, nesse caso, na verdade, às vezes mais, muito mais da direita. Hum, e foi muito ruim. E cerca de cinco professores perderam o emprego. Isso é ruim. Cinco professores foram demitidos em um período relativamente curto por causa de uma opinião política. Isso é algo que, você sabe, seria escrito nas décadas anteriores. Agora estamos avaliando quantos professores foram alvo de cancelamento entre 2014 e, uh, meados deste ano, julho de, de, de 2023. Estamos em cerca de, bem mais de mil tentativas de conseguir professores, uh, demitidos ou punidos, geralmente conduzidos por estudantes e administradores, muitas vezes conduzidos por professores, infelizmente também. Cerca de dois terços deles resultam na punição do professor de alguma forma. Hum, tudo, desde a remoção do artigo até a suspensão, etc. Cerca de um quinto deles resulta na demissão de professores. Então, agora estamos, são quase 200, são cerca de 190, hum, professores sendo demitidos. Hum, então quero dar algum contexto aqui. Uh, o, o Red Scare é geralmente considerado como tendo ocorrido, uh, de 1947 a 1957. A propósito, terminou em 57, quando finalmente ficou claro, hum, graças à Primeira Emenda que você não poderia realmente demitir pessoas por suas ideologias. Antes disso, muitas universidades pensavam que sim. Eles disseram, esse cara é um comunista muito médico, uh, doutrinário. Uh, você sabe, não pode ser apenas esperar. Eu vou demiti-los. Eles pensaram que realmente poderiam fazer isso. Hum, e tinha apenas 57 anos quando a lei foi estabelecida. Assim como agora, isso está acontecendo em um ambiente onde a liberdade de expressão e a liberdade acadêmica estão claramente protegidas, hum, nas faculdades públicas dos Estados Unidos. E ainda estamos vendo esses tipos de números. Hum, durante, durante o Red Scare, o maior estudo que foi feito sobre o que estava acontecendo é que acho que isso saiu em 55. E a avaliação foi que houve cerca de 62 professores demitidos por, por, por serem comunistas e cerca de 90 professores demitidos por opiniões políticas em geral. Hum, isso geralmente é, é relatado como sendo cerca de 100. Hum, então 60, 90, 100, dependendo de como você olha para isso, acho que o número é realmente maior. Hum, mas isso é apenas por causa de uma retrospectiva. O que quero dizer com retrospectiva é que podemos olhar para trás e realmente descobrir que houve mais professores que foram demitidos, como o tempo revela, estamos em 190 professores demitidos. E ainda tenho que aturar pessoas dizendo que isso nem está acontecendo. E eu penso que nos nove anos e meio de cultura do cancelamento, 190 professores foram demitidos nos 11 anos de, uh, do Red Scare, provavelmente, você sabe, algo em torno de cem, talvez provavelmente mais, o número vai continuar subindo. Hum, mas ao contrário do Red Scare, onde as pessoas podiam dizer claramente que algo estava acontecendo, a coisa mais louca sobre a cultura do cancelamento é que alguns ainda lidam com pessoas que dizem que isso não está acontecendo. E não tem sido sutil no campus. E sabemos que isso é uma contagem muito baixa, a propósito, porque quando nós, quando entrevistamos professores, 17% deles disseram que tinham sido ameaçados com, ah, ameaçados de investigação ou realmente investigados pelo que ensinaram, disseram, ou por seus pesquisar. E um terço deles disse que os administradores lhes disseram para não realizarem pesquisas controversas.Então, extrapolando isso, é um número enorme. E a razão pela qual você não ouvirá falar de muitos desses casos é porque há tantosdiferentes mecanismos indutores de conformidade em tudo isso. Sim. E essa é uma das razões pelas quais a ideia de adicionar algo como um D, como exigir uma declaração DEI para ser contratado ou para entrar em uma escola no ambiente atual, é completamente maluca. Tivemos uma crise genuína de liberdade acadêmica nos últimos anos, você sabe, especialmente desde 2017 nos campi, para começar, temos uma diversidade de pontos de vista muito baixa. E nessas circunstâncias, os administradores para começarem a dizer, vocês sabem qual é o problema? Temos muitos pensamentos heterogêneos. Sim, não somos homogêneos o suficiente. Na verdade, precisamos, você sabe, de outro teste político, o que é uma loucura. E é isso que efetivamente é uma declaração DEI. Porque não há como preencher uma declaração DEI sem que alguém avalie você em sua política. É cristalino. É cristalino. Até fizemos um experimento com esse Nate honeycutt. Ele conseguiu que cerca de 3.000 professores participassem avaliando diferentes tipos de declarações DEI. Hum, e um era basicamente o tipo padrão de interseccionalidade de política de identidade, o outro era sobre diversidade de pontos de vista. Um era sobre diversidade religiosa e o outro era sobre diversidade socioeconômica. E até onde realmente estou, é que temos muito pouca diversidade socioeconómica, particularmente no ensino superior de elite, mas também no período educacional. Portanto, o experimento contou com uma grande participação, realmente interessante. E tentou modelar a forma como muitas dessas políticas de DEI foram realmente implementadas. E uma das maneiras pelas quais isso foi implementado, e acho que em algumas escolas da Califórnia, é que os administradores analisam as declarações do DEI antes. Qualquer outra pessoa olha para eles e depois elimina as pessoas do topo, dependendo de como, como eles se sentem sobre suas, hum, declarações DEI e sobre, hum, diversidade de pontos de vista. Acho que metade das pessoas que o revisaram o eliminariam imediatamente. Hum, e acho que foi basicamente o mesmo para a diversidade religiosa. Foi um pouco melhor, uns 40% para a diversidade socioeconômica, mas isso me mata. Tipo a ideia de, sim, esse é realmente o tipo de diversidade que acho que precisamos muito mais no ensino superior. A propósito, você pode concordar que não é hostil aos outros tipos. Hum, mas a ideia de que precisamos de mais pessoas de baixo, você sabe, três quartos da sociedade americana, como no ensino superior, acho que deveria ser algo que todos poderíamos contornar. Mas o único que realmente teve sucesso foi aquele que brotou exatamente o tipo de, você sabe, uh, ideologia que eles achavam que a retaguarda gostaria, que é tipo, ok, não há como isso não poder ser político teste decisivo. Provámos que se trata de um teste decisivo político e escola após escola está a adicioná-los ao seu processo de candidatura para tornar as escolas ainda mais homogéneas ideologicamente.

LEX: Porque é que isso tem um efeito negativo? É porque impõe uma espécie de pensamento de grupo onde as pessoas têm medo, começam a ficar com medo de pensar e falar livremente, liberalmente sobre qualquer coisa.

GREG: Bem, primeiro, seleciona pessoas que tendem a ser mais para a esquerda, hum, em uma situação onde você já tem, uh, pessoas, uma situação onde as universidades se inclinam decididamente dessa forma, mas também estabelece essencialmente um conjunto de ideias sagradas que se você estiver sendo questionado sobre se, você sabe, o que você fez para promover o anti-racismo, hum, feriu, uh, como você tem consciência da interseccionalidade, é improvável que você realmente entre. E se você dissesse, a propósito, eu realmente acho esses são conceitos duvidosos. Eu acho que eles são magros. Eu acho que eles não são filosoficamente muito defensáveis, mas basicamente como se, se a sua posição fosse, eu realmente rejeito, hum, esses conceitos como sendo simples demais. Hum, você não vai, você não vai entrar. E, e, e eu acho que, hum, a pessoa em quem sempre penso não era um direitista que diria, vá para o inferno. Se você, se você o fez preencher uma dessas coisas, é Feynman. Eu sinto que se você desse uma dessas coisas para Richard Feynman, ele iria rasgá-la em pedaços.

LEX: Sim. E não conseguir o emprego. Sim, há algum elemento nisso que cria esse medo difícil de definir. Então você disse como a demissão, o que eu queria dizer é demitir cem ou 200 pessoas. A questão é até despedir uma pessoa, acabei de ver. Pode criar esse efeito cascata silencioso de medo. Ah, claro. Aquela única demissão de um corpo docente. Ah, absolutamente. Tem um efeito cascata em dezenas de milhares de pessoas, de educadores, de, de, uh, quem é contratado, que tipo de conversas estão sendo mantidas, que tipo de livros didáticos são escolhidos, que tipo de autocensura e diferentes sabores de isso está acontecendo.É difícil medir isso. Sim.

GREG: Quero dizer, quando você pergunta aos professores, você sabe, eles estão intimidados sob a atualambiente? Hum, a resposta é sim. E professores particularmente conservadores, você sabe, você sabe, relatando que eles, você sabe, temem por seus empregos em muitos casos diferentes.

LEX: Você tem muitas estatísticas boas no livro, coisas como autocensura. Quando lhes foi dada a definição de autocensura, pelo menos um quarto dos estudantes afirmou que se autocensuram com bastante frequência ou com muita frequência durante conversas com outros estudantes, com professores e durante discussões em sala de aula, 25%, 27% e 28%, respetivamente. Uh, um quarto dos estudantes também disse que é mais provável que se autocensurem no campus agora, na época em que foram pesquisados, do que quando começaram a faculdade. Então, algumas faculdades estão incutindo essa ideia de, de, de censura, autocensura.

GREG: E voltando à comparação do Red Scare, e esta é uma das coisas interessantes sobre os dados também, é que nesse mesmo estudo que eu estava falando, o estudo mais abrangente do Red Scare, havia uma pesquisa sobre se os professores estavam ou não se autocensurando por medo do meio ambiente. E 9% dos professores disseram que estavam autocensurando suas pesquisas e que o que diziam, 9% é muito ruim. Hum, isso é quase um décimo dos professores dizendo que sim, seu discurso foi frio. Quando fizemos essa pergunta para os professores em nossa última pesquisa com o corpo docente, hum, quando você leva em consideração, se eles estão, perguntamos a eles, eles se autocensuram em suas pesquisas ou se autocensuram em sala de aula, eles são autocensurantes. censura online, etc., eram 90% dos professores. Portanto, a ideia de que estamos realmente em um ambiente que é histórico, hum, em termos de como as pessoas têm medo de expressar opiniões controversas. Acho que é a razão pela qual estudaremos isso daqui a 50 anos, da mesma forma que estudamos o Pânico Vermelho. Hum, não é a ideia de que isso não está acontecendo, apenas será corretamente visto como uma loucura.

LEX: Então talvez possamos apenas, uh, discutir a tendência, a atual tendência da academia para a esquerda , que você descreve em várias perspectivas diferentes. Então, primeiro, há um gráfico de proporção de recenseamento eleitoral que você tem por departamento, o que eu acho interessante. Você pode explicar este gráfico e o que ele mostra?

GREG: Sim, quando comecei a trabalhar em 2001, não levei tão a sério a questão da diversidade de pontos de vista. Achei que era apenas algo de que a direita reclamava. Hum, mas eu realmente comecei a entender o que acontece quando você tem uma comunidade com baixa, hum, com baixa, uh, diversidade de pontos de vista. E, na verdade, muitas das pesquisas que mais me interessaram foram feitas em conjunto com o grande Cass Sunstein, hum, que escreve muito sobre polarização de grupo. Hum, porque como, uh, e a pesquisa sobre isso é muito forte, mas essencialmente quando você tem grupos com, hum, diversidade política, e você pode ver isso realmente em juízes, por exemplo, isso tende a produzir, você sabe, de forma confiável resultados mais moderados. Hum, enquanto os grupos que o são, que têm baixa diversidade política tendem a entrar em espiral, em espiral em sua própria direção. E quando temos uma supermaioria de pessoas com apenas uma perspectiva política, isso é um problema para a produção de ideias. Cria uma situação onde existem ideias sagradas. Hum, e quando você olha para alguns dos departamentos, hum, você sabe, acho que o S, a estimativa do Crimson, é que Harvard tem 3% de conservadores. Mas quando você olha para departamentos diferentes, há departamentos de elite que literalmente não têm, hum, uh, conservadores, uh, neles. E eu acho que isso é um ambiente intelectual saudável. O problema é definitivamente pior. Hum, à medida que você ganha mais elite, definitivamente vemos mais casos de professores esquerdistas sendo cancelados em escolas menos elitistas. Fica pior à medida que você desce das escolas de elite, é aí que grande parte do um terço das tentativas de punir, uh, professores que são bem-sucedidos, você sabe, vêm da direita e em grande parte de fora do campus, uh, de fontes fora do campus. E passamos muito tempo falando sobre isso no livro também. Hum, é algo que eu acho que é subestimado. Uh, mas quando se trata de baixa diversidade de pontos de vista, você sabe, funciona como você esperaria até certo ponto, você sabe, economia é quatro para um ou algo assim. Não é tão ruim. Hum, mas então, quando você começa a entrar em algumas áreas de humanidades, você sabe, como se houvesse departamentos que literalmente não existem.

LEX: Existe um bom motivo para a administração do corpo docente da universidade se mover para a esquerda?

GREG: Sim, eu não amo, e este é um argumento que você ' Às vezes, encontro na esquerda, apenas o argumento de que, bem, as pessoas na esquerda são simplesmente mais inteligentes. Certo. E é tipo, ok, é interessante porque pelo menos a pesquisa de 10anos atrás indicava que se você se aprofundar um pouco mais nisso, muitas pessoas que se consideram de esquerda tendem a ser um pouco mais de esquerda. Libertário, a música que Pinker, você sabe, escreveu bastante sobre a ideia de que somos apenas mais inteligentes. Não é, não é uma opinião. Eu, estou pelo menos um pouco confortável com, hum, eu acho que, que, uh, isso, que os departamentos ganham, hum, impulso quando se tornam um lugar onde você fica tipo, uau, seria realmente desagradável para mim trabalhar neste departamento. Se eu sou o conservador simbólico. E acho que isso ganha vida própria. Existem também departamentos onde muitas das ideologias são explicitamente esquerdistas. Hum, você olha para as escolas de educação, muitas das coisas que realmente sobraram do que é corretamente chamado de teorias raciais críticas estão presentes. E você acaba tendo isso em vários departamentos. Hum, e seria muito estranho ser, em muitos departamentos, um, você sabe, um professor assistente social conservador. Tenho certeza que eles existem. Hum, mas há muita pressão para calar a boca se você estiver.

LEX: Então, o processo à esquerda do cancelamento, quando você começou a falar sobre a fortaleza retórica perfeita, o, o primeiro passo é demitir uma pessoa. Se forem justos, se você puder colocar um rótulo de conservador neles, poderá descartá-los dessa forma. Quais outras demissões eficientes ou eficazes existem?

GREG: Nós nos divertimos um pouco com, uh, uh, com números demográficos, mas eu avalio isso pela altura. Hum, uh, e eu me lembro dele dizendo, eu não, não, não incluo a porcentagem real. Eu digo, não, precisamos incluir as porcentagens reais. Porque as pessoas são muito ruins em estimar como é realmente a demografia dos EUA, tanto à direita quanto à esquerda, de maneiras diferentes. Hum, então colocamos isso nos números e falamos sobre, você sabe, hum, ser demitido por ser branco ou ser demitido por, uh, ser hétero ou ser demitido por ser homem. Hum, e nós, uh, e você já pode dispensar as pessoas por serem conservadoras. E nós, então nós, nós, damos exemplos no livro de, destes serem usados para dispensar pessoas e muitas vezes em assuntos não relacionados ao fato de serem homens ou de serem ou não minoria. E então chegamos, acho que é a camada seis e pensamos, surpresa, adivinhe? Você caiu para 0,4% da população e nada disso importava. Porque se você tem a opinião errada, mesmo que você esteja naquele 0,4% da pessoa mais interseccional que já existiu e tenha a opinião errada, você é um herege e na verdade provavelmente será odiado ainda mais. E a parte mais interessante da pesquisa que fizemos sobre isso foi perguntar a cada proeminente, uh, negro conservador e moderado que conhecíamos pessoalmente, se lhe disseram que você não é realmente negro, para saber a opinião que você tinha de cada um deles foi tipo, ah sim, não. E é meio engraçado porque muitas vezes os canhotos brancos dizem a eles que é tipo, ah, você se considera negro? John McWhorter falou sobre ter um repórter. Hum, quando ele falou sobre, quando ele mostrou que discordava de alguns dos, uh, o que ele descreveu como uma espécie de racismo despertado em seu livro, despertado ideias, o repórter na verdade disse, então você se considera negro? Ele ficou tipo, ele estava tipo, por que você está louco? Claro que eu faço. E Coleman Hughes fez uma das melhores citações sobre isso. Ele disse: Constantemente me dizem que a coisa mais importante, ah, para o quão legítima é minha opinião, é se, ah, sou negro ou não, mas quando tenho uma opinião divergente, fico disse que não sou realmente negro. Tão perfeito. Tipo, não há, não há como falsificar, uh, esse argumento. Hum, essa realmente, essa investigação realmente me impressionou.

LEX: Então, e você explica isso muito bem no livro, que existe esse processo de dizer, você é conservador? Sim. Você pode demitir a pessoa. Você é branco? Demitir a pessoa. Você é homem? Você pode demitir a pessoa. Existem essas categorias que tornam mais fácil descartar as ideias de uma pessoa com base nisso. E como você disse, você acaba nessa pequena porcentagem e ainda pode dispensar.

GREG: E não é apenas dispensar. Eu, nós, falamos sobre isso do ponto de vista prático, da forma como as limitações da realidade e uma delas é o tempo. Hum, e muita cultura do cancelamento, hum, como, como, uh, como normas culturais, já que essa forma de vencer discussões sem vencer discussões significa esgotar o tempo.Porque no momento em que você chega ao fundo do, uh, uh, do, ou na verdade até dá alguns passos na fortaleza do recorde perfeito e, você sabe, para onde foi o tempo? Você sabe, tipo, você provavelmente simplesmente desiste, uh, de tentar, uh, você sabe, de tentar realmente ter uma discussão e nunca chega à discussão em primeiro lugar.

LEX: Todas essas coisas são bastante pegajosas nas redes sociais.

GREG: Redes sociaispraticamente inventou a fortaleza retórica perfeita.

LEX: Para que cada uma dessas etapas tenha uma viralidade. Então poderia, poderia durar e deixar as pessoas realmente entusiasmadas.

GREG: Isso permite que você sinta indignação e superioridade. Sim.

LEX: Por causa disso, na escala da viralidade, você nunca chega à discussão real do assunto. Hum, então, mas você sabe, não é apenas a esquerda, é a direita também, então a fortaleza retórica eficiente, uh, então há algo para se orgulhar na direita.

GREG: É mais eficiente .

LEX: Então você não precisa ouvir os liberais e qualquer um pode ser rotulado de liberal se tiver uma opinião errada. Já vi liberais, esquerdistas e esquerdistas, todos usados como, da mesma maneira. Isso é um absurdo esquerdista. Você não precisa ouvir os especialistas, mesmo os conservadores, se eles têm a opinião errada, você não precisa ouvir os jornalistas, mesmo os conservadores, se eles têm a opinião errada e entre a ala do MAGA, há um quarto proposição, há uma quarta provisão. Você não precisa ouvir ninguém que não seja pró Trump.

GREG: Sim. E chamamos isso de eficiente porque elimina muitas pessoas que você provavelmente deveria ouvir pelo menos algumas vezes, você sabe, como apontamos às vezes como a cultura do cancelamento pode interferir na fé e na experiência. Então ficamos um pouco desconfiados dos especialistas, mas ao mesmo tempo, se você seguir isso e mecanicamente, e eu definitivamente, você sabe, acho que todo mundo nos EUA provavelmente tem algum tio mais velho, hum, uh, quem exerce alguns destes. É uma maneira realmente eficiente de fazer isso, então você está, uh, se isolando do resto do mundo e dispensando, você sabe, pelo menos algumas pessoas que você realmente deveria ouvir.

LEX: A maneira como você expôs isso me fez perceber que ocupamos muito do poder do nosso cérebro. Essas coisas, é literalmente a hora. Poderíamos estar resolvendo coisas. E você fica tipo, você meio que se esgota nesse processo de ficar indignado com base nesses rótulos e você nunca consegue, na verdade, quase não há tempo suficiente para empatia, para olhar para uma pessoa pensando, bem, talvez ela esteja certa . Porque você está tão ocupado categorizando-os.

GREG: Qual é a graça da empatia? E quero dizer, o que há de tão interessante nisso é que muita, hum, energia social parece ser gasta nesses desejos primitivos e desagradáveis, onde essencialmente é como, por favor, me diga quem eu posso odiar. Onde posso ser legitimamente cruel? Onde posso realmente exercer alguma agressão contra alguém? Hum, e às vezes parece que estamos apenas encontrando novas justificativas para isso. E é uma falha humana compreensível, você sabe, que às vezes pode ser usada para defender a justiça. Mas, novamente, isso nunca chegará perto da verdade.

LEX: Uh, um caso interessante que você cobre sobre especialização é com o COVID. Sim. Então, como a cultura do cancelamento entrou em cena no tema COVID?

GREG: Sim, acho que a COVID foi um grande golpe para a fé e a experiência das pessoas e a cultura do cancelamento desempenhou um grande papel nisso. Hum, acho que um dos melhores exemplos disso é Jennifer Say, da Levi's. Hum, ela é uma mulher adorável. Hum, ela era vice-presidente da Levi's. Uh, ela falou sobre potencialmente ser a presidente dos jeans da Levi's. E ela era uma grande defensora das crianças. E quando começaram a fechar as escolas, ela começou a dizer, isto vai ser um desastre. Isso vai prejudicar mais as crianças pobres e desfavorecidas. Hum, temos que descobrir uma maneira de reabrir as escolas. E esse era um ponto de vista herético. E o tipo típico de cultura de cancelamento, uh, onda tomou conta, já que ele tinha todo tipo de petição para ela ser demitida e que ela precisava se desculpar e todo esse tipo de coisa. E, você sabe, foi oferecida a ela, acho que uma indenização de um milhão de dólares, que ela não aceitou porque queria dizer ao mundo o que pensava sobre isso e, e que ela queria continuar dizendo, hum, que ela não mudou de ideia, que isso era um desastre para os jovens. E agora que essa é a sabedoria convencional e a investigação é bastante clara, é bastante claro que isto foi devastador para jovens particularmente desfavorecidos. Como as pessoas entendem isso como algo bom, ela provavelmente estava certa. Mas um dos aspectos realmente tristes da cultura do cancelamento é que as pessoas esquecem por que você foi cancelado e simplesmente sabem que te odeiam. Hum, há esse tipo persistente de, bem, eu não preciso mais levá-los a sério. Mas, a propósito, você percebeu que eles estavam certos em algo muito importante? Agora, uma coisa engraçada sobre a liberdade de expressão: a liberdade de expressão não existiria se você também não tivesse o direito de dizer coisas erradas.Porque se você não puder, você sabe, se envolver em uma ideia para você, se você não puder realmente especular, você nunca chegará a algo que seja certo em primeiro lugar. Mas é especialmente irritantequando as pessoas que estavam certas foram censuradas e você, uh, e nunca recebeu o crédito que merecem.

LEX: Bem, este pode ser um bom lugar para perguntar um pouco mais sobre a liberdade de expressão. E então você disse que está incluído na liberdade de expressão dizer coisas que estão erradas.

GREG: Sim.

LEX: Hum, qual é a sua perspectiva sobre o discurso de ódio?

GREG: O discurso de ódio é a melhor campanha de marketing para a censura. Hum, e veio da academia, hum, do século XX. E quando falei sobre o movimento anti-liberdade de expressão, essa foi uma de suas primeiras invenções. Hum, houve muita conversa sobre a teoria racial crítica, hum, e, e ser contra a teoria racial crítica e o fogo irá processar se você disser que as pessoas não podem defendê-la, ensiná-la ou pesquisá-la, porque você faz absolutamente o direito de persegui-lo academicamente. No entanto, toda vez que alguém mencionasse o CRT, eles também deveriam dizer que o primeiro projeto das pessoas que fundaram o CRT, hum, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, hum, etc., estava para ir, era criar esta nova categoria de discurso desprotegido chamada discurso de ódio e proibi-lo. A pessoa que permitiu esta tendência, claro, foi Herbert Marcuse em 1965, basicamente questionando se a liberdade de expressão deveria ou não ser um valor sagrado para a esquerda. E ele esteve do lado perdedor por muito tempo. Os liberais, você sabe, do jeito que eu cresci, que basicamente eram pró - a liberdade de expressão era sinônimo de ser liberal, mas isso começou a ficar gravado no campus. E do jeito que foi, foi com, com a ideia de discurso de ódio, hum, isso, isso essencialmente, ah, mas você deveria, hum, podemos designar um discurso particularmente ruim como, uh, não protegido. Hum, e, e quem vai fazer cumprir isso? Quem vai decidir o que realmente é o discurso de ódio? Bem, geralmente isso só pode acontecer em um ambiente de diversidade de pontos de vista muito baixa, porque você tem que realmente concordar sobre quais são as coisas mais odiosas e erradas. E há um princípio fundamental. Hum, isso é mencionado em um grande caso sobre a queima de bandeiras na Primeira Emenda, do qual acho que todo o mundo poderia se beneficiar. Você não pode proibir o discurso só porque é ofensivo. É muito subjetivo. Basicamente, é uma das razões pelas quais esses tipos de códigos foram adotados com mais sucesso em lugares como a Europa, onde eles têm a sensação de que existe um alemão modal ou um inglês modal. Hum, e eu acho que isso é ofensivo e, portanto, posso dizer que isso é errado em um país mais multicultural, em um país genuinamente mais diverso, que nunca teve um pensamento honesto de que existe um único tipo de americano. Nunca houve, tivemos, tivemos a ideia do tio Sam, mas isso sempre foi uma espécie de piada. Hum, Boston sempre soube que não era Richmond, sempre soube que não era Georgia, sempre soube que não era, você sabe, Alasca. Como se sempre tivéssemos sido uma miscelânea e entramos em uma sociedade tão diversa que você não pode proibir coisas simplesmente porque são ofensivas. Hum, e essa é uma das razões pelas quais o discurso de ódio não é uma categoria desprotegida de discurso. E eu, e vou mais longe, minha teoria sobre liberdade de expressão é um pouco diferente da maioria dos outros advogados constitucionais. Hum, e eu acho, e acho que isso é parcialmente porque algumas das maneiras, uh, algumas dessas teorias, embora muitas delas sejam realmente boas, são inadequadas, elas não são expansivas o suficiente. E às vezes chamo minha teoria de pura teoria informacional da liberdade de expressão. Hum, ou às vezes quando eu quero ser sofisticado, o laboratório e a teoria do espelho e seu inquilino mais importante é que se o objetivo é o projeto do conhecimento humano, que é conhecer o mundo que ele é, você não pode conhecer o mundo como ele é sem saber o que as pessoas realmente pensam e o que as pessoas realmente pensam é um fato extremamente importante de se saber. Então, toda vez que você está realmente dizendo, você não pode dizer que está realmente se privando do conhecimento do que as pessoas realmente pensam que você está causando, o que Tim ou Karan, que está em nosso conselho consultivo, chama de falsificação de preferência. Hum, você acaba com uma imagem imprecisa do mundo, que, aliás, em muitos casos, hum, porque há ativistas que querem restringir mais o discurso, eles na verdade tendem a pensar que as pessoas são mais preconceituosas do que eles, uh, do que eles poderiam ser. Hum, e na verdade esses tipos de restrições, havia um livro chamado paranóia racial, hum, que foi publicado há cerca de 15 anos e que afirmava que a imposição de alguns desses códigos às vezes pode fazer as pessoas pensarem que a única coisa que mantém você deixou de ser um racista furioso, hum, são esses códigos. Então deve ser muito, muito ruim. Na verdade, pode piorar todas essas coisas.E uma, sobre a qual falamos no livro, uma forma prática muito real de piorar as coisas é quando você censura as pessoas, isso não muda a opinião delas. Isso apenas os incentiva a não compartilhar isso com pessoas que lhes causarão problemas. Então éleva-os a falar com pessoas com quem já concordam e a polarização do grupo decola. Portanto, temos alguns dados interessantes no livro, hum, sobre como tirar as pessoas do Twitter, por exemplo, hum, você sabe, uh, em 2017. Hum, e novamente, acho que em 2020, levar as pessoas a tagarelar levou a, você sabe, maior radicalização entre essas pessoas. É uma força muito previsível. A censura na verdade não muda a opinião das pessoas e as empurra em direções que, na verdade, por meio de uma pesquisa muito sólida, na verdade as tornará mais radicalizadas. Então, sim, acho que a tentativa de proibir o discurso de ódio não nos protege dele, mas dá ao governo uma arma tão vasta para usar contra nós que nos arrependeremos de ter dado a eles .

LEX: Existe uma maneira de analisar casos extremos, de testar um pouco essa ideia? Então, se olharmos para o campus, qual é a sua opinião sobre permitir, digamos, que os supremacistas brancos no campus façam discursos? Ok.

GREG: Acho que você deveria ser capaz de estudar o que as pessoas pensam. E acho que é importante que realmente o façamos. Então eu acho que, você sabe, vamos pegar, por exemplo, QAnon. Sim, QAnon está errado. Hum, mas de onde veio isso? Por que eles pensaram isso? Qual é a motivação? Quem lhes ensinou isso?

LEX: Quem teve essas ideias?

GREG: Isso é importante para entender a história. Isso é importante para entender a política americana moderna. E então, se você agir, se você colocar seu chapéu de estudioso e você deveria estar curioso sobre todo mundo sobre de onde eles vêm. Darrell Davis, que tenho certeza que você conhece, parte de seu objetivo era simplesmente saber de onde as pessoas vinham. E no processo, ele realmente radicalizou vários membros dos clientes quando eles perceberam que esse homem negro que seria amigo deles era na verdade compassivo, era uma pessoa decente. Eles perceberam que todos os seus preconceitos estavam errados. A propósito, isso pode ter um fator de radicalização, mas mesmo quando isso não acontece, ainda é muito importante saber o que as pessoas más da sua sociedade pensam. Honestamente, de certa forma, é para sua própria segurança, provavelmente é mais importante saber o que as pessoas más da sua sociedade realmente pensam.

LEX: Eu, pessoalmente, não sei o que você pensa sobre isso , mas pessoalmente acho que a liberdade de expressão em casos como esse, como o KKK e o campus, pode causar mais danos no curto prazo, mas muito mais benefícios no longo prazo. Porque às vezes você pode argumentar que isso vai doer. Sim. A curto prazo. Mas quero dizer, Harvey disse que isso é como considerar a alternativa. Porque você meio que defendeu isso, isso seria potencialmente uma coisa boa, mesmo no curto prazo. E muitas vezes acontece, eu acho, especialmente em uma sociedade estável como a nossa, com uma classe média forte, todos esses tipos de coisas onde as pessoas têm o conforto, a razão através das coisas. Sim. Hum, mas você sabe, para mim é tipo, mesmo que doa no curto prazo, mesmo que crie mais ódio no curto prazo, a liberdade de expressão tem uma coisa realmente benéfica, que ajuda você a avançar em direção ao verdade, toda a sociedade rumo a uma compreensão mais profunda e precisa da vida na terra, da sociedade, de como as pessoas funcionam, da ética, da metafísica, de tudo. E isso a longo prazo é um enorme benefício. Elimina os nazis a longo prazo, mesmo que aumente o número de nazis a curto prazo. Sim.

GREG: Bem, e enquanto isso, só para verificar a realidade, parte disso é que as pessoas sempre mencionam, e o clã no campus? Eu fico tipo, eles nunca são convidados. Hum, o, o, o, o, eu não vi um caso em que eles foram convidados. Hum, geralmente esse argumento do clã é descartado quando as pessoas estão tentando se desculpar. E foi por isso que gritamos para baixo Ben Shapiro. E é por isso que não podemos ter Bill Maher no campus. É por isso, você sabe, e é tipo, ok. Hum, você sabe, e é um pouco disso, sobre o ismo de novo, sobre ser tipo, bem, aquela coisa ali é terrível e, portanto, esse comediante não deveria vir.

LEX: Uh, então Eu tenho uma pergunta, talvez a título de conselho, você sabe, entrevistando pessoas e vendo isso como um podcast como uma plataforma para decidir com quem falar ou não, não algo que eu tenha que enfrentar de vez em quando. Minha inclinação natural antes de começar o podcast era conversar com qualquer pessoa, inclusive com pessoas nas quais ainda estou interessado, que são, você sabe, os atuais membros da KKK. E para mim, há uma responsabilidade de fazer isso com habilidade. Sim.Hum, e essa responsabilidade tem pesado cada vez mais sobre mim porque você percebe quanta habilidade é realmente necessária, porque você tem que saber, entender muito, porque eu, eu entendi que o diabo está sempre indo ser carismático. Sim. Hum, o diabo não vai se parecer com o diabo. E então você tem que perceber que precisa, você nem sempre podevenha para a mesa com uma profunda compaixão por outro ser humano. Você tem que ter cerca de 90% de compaixão e outros 90% de conhecimento histórico profundo sobre o contexto das batalhas em torno desta questão específica. E isso exige muito esforço, mas não sei se você pensa sobre isso, como lidar com a fala, hum, de uma forma sem censura, trazendo-a à tona, mas de uma forma que crie mais amor no mundo.

GREG: Eu lembro, hum, Steve Bannon foi desconvidado do festival New Yorker e Jim Carrey surtou e todo tipo de gente pirou e ele foi desconvidado, hum, de, de o, e fui convidado para falar sobre isso. E eu estava dizendo, ouça, você não tem pessoas para sua conferência porque concorda com elas. Hum, tipo, temos que sair dessa ideia de que isso é porque eles estavam tentando fazer parecer que isso era um endosso de Steve Bannon. Como se isso fosse um absurdo. Por exemplo, se você realmente olhar para as opiniões de todas as pessoas que estão lá, você não poderá endossar todas as opiniões que todas essas outras pessoas que estarão lá realmente têm. E então, no processo de apresentar esse argumento, cheguei, hum, e, e também, é claro, o clássico, é muito valioso saber o que alguém pensa Steve Bannon. Você deveria estar curioso sobre isso. E lembro-me de alguém argumentando, dizendo: bem, o que você gostaria que alguém entrevistasse um jihadista? E eu fico tipo, porque no momento, como era na época em que o ISIS estava realmente indo em frente, indo em frente. Hum, e eu pensei, você não gostaria de ir a uma palestra onde alguém estava tentando descobrir o que motiva algumas dessas pessoas? Hum, porque isso muda o seu enquadramento, essencialmente é tipo, não, é curiosidade. É a cura para muitas dessas coisas. E precisamos de muito mais curiosidade e muito menos certezas injustificadas.

LEX: E há uma questão de como você conduz essas conversas? E, hum, me sinto profundamente subqualificado. Quem você acha que é especialmente bom nisso? Sinto que os documentaristas costumam fazer um trabalho muito melhor. E o melhor trabalho geralmente é feito por biógrafos. Sim. Então, quanto mais tempo você dedica a uma conversa específica, como uma reflexão realmente profunda e o contexto histórico e o estudo das pessoas, como elas pensam, olhando para todas as perspectivas diferentes, olhando para a psicologia da pessoa, a educação, seus pais, seus avós, todos disso, quanto mais tempo você passa com isso, melhor, melhor é a qualidade da conversa, porque você consegue entender, você consegue realmente ter empatia com a pessoa, com as pessoas que ela representa, hum, e você consegue ver a humanidade comum, tudo isso. Eu acho que os entrevistadores geralmente não fazem esse trabalho.

GREG: Sim. Hum, então a melhor coisa que vi foram entrevistas que fazem parte de um documentário. Sim.

LEX: Mas mesmo agora os documentários são assim, há um grande incentivo para fazer o mais rápido possível. Não há um incentivo para realmente passar tempo com a pessoa.

GREG: Há um novo documentário excelente sobre Floyd Abrams que eu realmente recomendo. Fizemos um documentário sobre Ira Glasser chamado poderoso Ira, hum, que foi minha equipe de vídeo e meu protegido Nico Perino e Chris Mulvey e Aaron Reese montaram tudo. E apenas segue a vida e a época de, hum, Ira Glasser, o ex-chefe da ACLU.

LEX: Se você pudesse demorar um pouco nisso, seria uma história fascinante. Ah, sim.

GREG: Incrível. Hum, Ira, ele não era advogado. Hum, ele começou a trabalhar no NYCLU, sindicato de liberdades civis de Nova York, acho que nos anos sessenta. Ele foi, uh, acho que Robert Kennedy recomendou que ele seguisse nessa direção. Hum, e ele se tornou o presidente da ACLU bem no momento em que eles estavam, hum, sofrendo por, uh, defender os nazistas em Skokie e Nico, uh, e, e, e, e Aaron e Chris montaram isso e eles 'nunca tinha feito um documentário antes. E saiu tão, tão bem. Hum, e conta a história dos nazistas em Skokie. Conta a história do caso em torno dele conta a história da ACLU na época. E que grande líder foi Ira Glasser. E uma das coisas mais incríveis é que quando você vê os nazistas em Skokie, eles parecem os idiotas que você esperaria que fossem. Tem um momento que o rali não vai muito bem e o líder fica confuso. E quase parece que ele vai gritar tipo, você está, você está, você está, você está transformando esse comício nazista em uma zombaria. E então mostrou como permitir que os nazistas falassem em Skokie meio que tirou o fôlego de suas velas.Como se eles tivessem todo o movimento, como se todo mundo fosse, tudo meio que se dissolveu depois disso porque eles pareciam os idiotas racistas que eram. Eles eram, você sabe, até irmãos do blues faziam piadas, você sabe, piadas sobre eles. Hum, e isso, e não se transformou em um desastreque as pessoas pensavam que seria apenas deixá-los falar. E Ira Glasser, tudo bem. Então ele tem essa história maravilhosa sobre como Jackie Robinson se juntou ao Brooklyn Dodgers e como houve um momento em que ele viu alguém, um afro-americano, literalmente em seu time e como isso realmente os deixou entusiasmados com a causa da igualdade racial. E isso se tornou uma grande parte do que era sua vida. E eu simplesmente penso nisso como uma grande metáfora: expandir seu círculo e ver mais pessoas literalmente fazendo parte de sua equipe é a solução para muitos desses problemas. E eu me preocupo que uma das coisas que é absolutamente um fato da vida na América é que nós nos vemos mais como campos inimigos do que como pessoas do mesmo time. E isso foi realmente algo no início, como eu e Will Creely, o diretor jurídico do corpo de bombeiros, escrevemos sobre os desafios futuros da liberdade de expressão de todos que estão no Facebook. E uma coisa que eu esperava era que, à medida que mais pessoas expusessem mais sobre suas vidas, percebêssemos muitas dessas coisas que sabíamos intelectualmente, como crianças que vão ao bar, ficam bêbadas e fazem coisas estúpidas. Hum, isso, uh, quando começamos a ver evidências deles fazendo coisas estúpidas, podemos ficar chocados no início, mas depois ficamos mais sofisticados e pensamos, bem, vamos lá, as pessoas são assim. Isso nunca pareceu realmente acontecer. Hum, isso, isso, isso eu não acho que há muitas coisas que sabemos sobre a natureza humana e sabemos sobre coisas idiotas que as pessoas dizem, uh, e nós, nós transformamos isso em um ambiente onde há apenas alguém esperando para dizer, Oh, lembra daquela coisa idiota que você disse que tínhamos 14 anos? Bem, vou garantir que você não entre na escola dos seus sonhos por causa disso.

LEX: Essa arqueologia ofensiva.

GREG: Esse não é o meu termo no entanto. É um ótimo termo. Roubamos o melhor dos comentários anteriores de alguém para encontrar um discurso que não envelheceu bem. E esse é tático. Assim, aquele não é apenas alguém que não tem empatia. Eles ficam tipo, vou punir você por isso ou, e essa é uma das razões pelas quais fiquei deprimido escrevendo este livro porque você sabe, já existe, já tem gente que não me ama por mimar o americano mente, geralmente com base num mal-entendido sobre o que realmente dissemos e em mimos na mente americana, mas mesmo assim. Uh, mas neste, você sabe, eu estou criticando as pessoas por serem muito cruéis em muitos casos, mas, digamos, uma coisa que foi realmente assustadora em estudar muitos desses casos é que, uma vez que você tem isso alvo nas suas costas, o que eles vão tentar cancelar você pode ser qualquer coisa. Você sabe, eles podem voltar para seus velhos barcos, encontrar algo que você disse em 1995, você sabe, fazer algo, hum, onde essencialmente parece que é uma outra coisa, mas realmente o que eles são, o que é o que está acontecendo é que eles não gostaram da sua opinião. Eles não gostaram do seu ponto de vista sobre alguma coisa. E eles vão encontrar uma maneira de, de agora em diante, sempre que seu nome aparecer, seja como, Ah, lembre-se disso, dessa coisa que eu não gostei neles. E é novamente, é cruel. Isso não leva você a nenhum lugar mais perto da verdade. E, mas é um pouco assustador arriscar o pescoço.

LEX: Ok. Em termos de soluções, vou perguntar algumas coisas. Então, um, uh, paternidade.

GREG: Sim. Criança de cinco e sete anos.

LEX: Tenho certeza de que você já descobriu tudo. Oh Deus, não.

GREG: Do ponto de vista da liberdade de expressão. Sim. Uh, do ponto de vista da cultura da liberdade de expressão, como ser um bom pai. Sim. Acho que a primeira qualidade que você deve cultivar em seus filhos, se quiser ter uma cultura de liberdade de expressão, é a curiosidade e a consciência da vastidão que sempre será desconhecida. E deixar meus filhos entusiasmados com a ideia de que vamos passar a vida inteira aprendendo sobre coisas. E é rápido, emocionante e interminável e nunca faremos uma grande diferença nele, mas a jornada será incrível. Mas só os tolos pensam que sabem tudo. Hum, e às vezes tolos perigosos. Então, dar o senso de humildade intelectual desde o início também é, você sabe, dizer coisas que realmente parecem meio antiquadas, tipo, mas eu digo coisas para meus filhos, tipo, escute, se você gosta de estudar e trabalhar, ambas coisas que Eu gosto muito, faço por diversão. Hum, sua vida vai ser ótima e fácil. Hum, então algumas, algumas, você sabe, algumas dessas virtudes antiquadas são coisas que tento pregar, hum, coisas contra-intuitivas como brincar ao ar livre, hum, ter um tempo que não seja uma experiência intermediária é realmente, uh, é realmente importante .E pequenas coisas como, hum, eu falo no livro sobre quando meus filhos estão assistindo algo que é assustador e não estou falando de filmes de zumbis, você sabe, estou falando de um desenho animado que tem um tipo de assustador momento e dizendo que elesdeseja desligar a TV. E eu, e eu conversei com eles e falo, escuta, estou com saudades do seu lado e vamos terminar esse show e quero que você me diga o que acha disso depois. E sentei-me ao lado dos meus filhos. Hum, e no final, toda vez que eu, você sabe, quando perguntei a eles, foi tão assustador quanto você pensou que seria? E houve tipo, não papai, tudo bem. E eu penso, essa é uma das grandes lições da vida. O medo que você não passa se torna muito maior na sua cabeça do que simplesmente enfrentá-lo. Essa é uma das razões pelas quais estou lutando contra essa cultura. Eu adoro, você sabe, que todos os nossos filhos possam crescer em um ambiente onde as pessoas te dão graça e, você sabe, aceitam o fato de que às vezes as pessoas vão dizer coisas que te irritam, leve a sério a possibilidade e estar errado e, e, uh, ser curioso.

LEX: Bem, eu espero que o que você mencionou, que é porque muitas das coisas dos jovens estão na internet que eles vamos dar um tempo uns aos outros porque então todos serão dignos de cancelar.

GREG: A Geração Z odeia mais a cultura do cancelamento. E essa é outra razão pela qual as pessoas ainda afirmam que isso está acontecendo. É tipo, não, você realmente pode perguntar às crianças o que elas acham da cultura do cancelamento e elas odeiam isso.

LEX: Sim. Bem, eu meio que penso neles como o sistema imunológico. É assim que a cultura está acordando para dizer, não, isso não é uma coisa boa.

GREG: Mas estou feliz. Quer dizer, eu, eu, sou uma daquelas crianças que, você sabe, está muito feliz por ter sido uma criança nos anos oitenta e um adolescente nos anos noventa porque ter tudo potencialmente online, uh, não é um , uma educação.

LEX: Eu invejo. Bem, eu, porque você também pode praticar a liberdade de expressão absoluta. Gosto de liderar onde espero um futuro onde muitas das nossas inseguranças, falhas, tudo está por aí. E para ser sincero, acho que isso leva a um mundo melhor. Porque as falhas são lindas. Quero dizer, essas falhas são, uh, os ingredientes básicos da conexão humana.

GREG: Uh, Robert Wright, ele escreveu um livro sobre, uh, sobre o budismo. Hum, e eu falei sobre tentar usar a mídia social de uma perspectiva budista e tipo, como se você estivesse, como se fosse o inconsciente coletivo meditando e vendo aqueles pequenos pedaços de raiva que estão tentando cancelar você ou te pegar calar a boca e deixá-los seguir o mesmo caminho que você deveria observar seus pensamentos se dispersarem.

LEX: Eu adoraria ver isso visualizado seja qual for o drama que está acontecendo continuando, continuando, apenas vendo o mar disso, da consciência coletiva, apenas processando isso e tendo um pouco como um ataque de pânico e tipo, sim, lendo, olhando para o tipo de vozes raivosas e odiosas, tipo de aparecer e dizer, ok, aí está você.

GREG: E ainda estou focado nisso, porque isso é, isso, isso é uma das coisas, ok. Sim, na verdade, provavelmente já é tarde para apresentar minha grande teoria sobre essas coisas. Hum, mas, uh, nunca é tarde demais. Então, o que eu estava estudando, na faculdade de direito, quando acabei as aulas da Primeira Emenda, decidi estudar censura durante a dinastia dos tutores, porque é daí que tiramos nossas ideias de restrição prévia, uh, isso, isso vem do licenciamento da imprensa, hum, que foi algo que Henrique VIII foi o primeiro a fazer onde basicamente, hum, a ideia era que se você não pode imprimir nada na Inglaterra, a menos que seja com estes, uh, uh, impressoras aprovadas por sua majestade, hum, isso impedirá que trabalhos heréticos e anti-Henry o oitavo material sejam publicados. Eu sou linda, linda, linda, linda, linda, hum, uma ideia eficiente, pelo menos. Hum, e eu sempre, então ele começou a ficar bravo com a imprensa por volta de 1521 e depois aprovou algo que exigia que as impressões estivessem junto com o parlamento em, em, uh, 1538. Uh, e eu sempre penso nisso como algo assim onde estamos agora, hum, porque temos isso, tínhamos, naquela época tínhamos a tecnologia disruptiva original, você sabe, a escrita provavelmente era, mas a próxima, que era a imprensa, que foi absolutamente calamitosa. E quero dizer, e eu, e digo calamitoso de propósito porque, no curto prazo, a caça às bruxas aumentou loucamente porque a imprensa permitiu que você conseguisse aquele manual sobre como encontrar bruxas que as guerras religiosas enlouqueceram. Hum, isso levou a todo tipo de angústia, desinformação, maldade. E Henrique VIII estava tentando colocar o gênio de volta na garrafa. Você sabe, ele estava tipo, eu posso, eu posso, eu posso, eu quero usar isso para o bem. Tipo, uh, eu sinto que poderia, poderia ser usado, mas ele estava em um período inevitável de anarquia epistêmica.Não há nada que você possa fazer para que o período após a imprensa vir, uh, se torne um período não perturbador e não louco, a não ser como absolutototalitarismo e destruir todas as impressoras, o que simplesmente não era possível na Europa. Então eu sinto que é como estamos agora. Essa disrupção resultou da adição, penso eu, de vários milhões de pessoas ao diálogo europeu e, eventualmente, ao diálogo global, mas acabou por se tornar a melhor ferramenta para a desconfirmação, hum, para se livrar da falsidade, para detectar más ideias. E são os benefícios, os benefícios a longo prazo da imprensa são calculavelmente grandes. Hum, e é isso que me dá algum otimismo sobre onde estamos agora com as mídias sociais, porque estamos naquele período inevitavelmente anárquico. E eu me preocupo com isso, que haja, hum, uh, que haja tentativas nos Estados de aprovar coisas para tentar colocar o gênio de volta na garrafa. Por exemplo, se proibirmos um tick tock ou dissermos que, hum, ninguém com menos de 18 anos pode estar na, na internet, a menos que tenha permissão dos pais, estaremos caminhando para algo que nenhum tipo de abordagem de cima para baixo será capaz de consertar isso. Temos que nos adaptar culturalmente ao fato, hum, uh, de uma forma que nos torne mais sábios do que na verdade, hum, e permitir que seja potencialmente aquele mecanismo maravilhoso para a desconfirmação de que ainda não estamos nem perto, a propósito, mas pense nisso. Milhões adicionais de olhos voltados para os problemas, hum, graças à imprensa ajudaram a criar a revolução científica, o iluminismo, a ignorância da descoberta. Hum, agora adicionamos bilhões de olhos e vozes para resolver problemas. E estamos apenas usando-os para vídeos de gatos e cancelamentos.

LEX: Mas esses são apenas os primeiros dias da imprensa. Tudo começa com os gatos e o cancelamento. Existe algo sobre X no Twitter, que talvez seja a fonte mais energética de gatos e cancelamentos.

GREG: Parece o inconsciente coletivo da espécie. Quero dizer, como se fosse uma daquelas coisas em que a tendência de querer ver padrões na história às vezes pode limitar a experiência maluca do que a história realmente é. Porque sim, nós, nós, temos essas boas ideias reconfortantes de que será como da última vez. Nós não sabemos. Ainda não aconteceu. E eu acho que o Twitter é incomum porque penso nele como se fosse uma criança, porque as pessoas falam sobre, você sabe, escrita e comunicação de massa e, uh, como algo que expande o tamanho do nosso cérebro coletivo. Mas agora estamos olhando para o nosso cérebro coletivo em tempo real. E está cheio, assim como nossos próprios cérebros, com todos os tipos de pequenas coisas malucas que aparecem e, e, e, e aparecem como partículas virtuais em todo lugar de, de pessoas, hum, você sabe, reagindo em tempo real para as coisas. Nunca houve nada nem vagamente parecido. E pode ser, na pior das hipóteses, horrível de ver. Na melhor das hipóteses, às vezes ver as pessoas ficando eufóricas com algo que está acontecendo e contando piadas imediatas absolutamente brilhantes, você sabe, ao mesmo tempo, pode ser, nem pode ser uma experiência alegre. Hum, eu sinto que, uh, moro em um bairro agora no X, onde lido principalmente com pessoas que considero realmente atenciosas, mesmo que eu discorde delas. Hum, e, e não é uma experiência tão ruim. Ocasionalmente, encontro aquele tipo de bairro que chamo de X, onde tudo cancela toda a maldade. E é sempre uma visita meio desagradável a esses lugares. Não estou dizendo que tudo precisa ser, uh, como a minha experiência, mas acho que a razão pela qual as pessoas continuam voltando a isso é que revela aspectos brutos da humanidade que às vezes preferimos fingir que não. não existe.

LEX: Sim. Sim. Mas também é totalmente novo. Como você disse, é apenas uma viralidade, a velocidade, as notícias viajam, as opiniões viajam, a batalha pelas ideias viaja.

GREG: A batalha pela informação também.

LEX: Sim . Sobre o que é verdade e não mentiras viajado, a velha coisa de Mark Twain é bastante rápida. Sim. E então isso muda sua compreensão de como interpretar as informações.

GREG: Isso também estressa você infinitamente. Lembrei-me de sair disso às vezes. As estatísticas são muito ruins para a saúde mental, com, com, com os jovens. E estou definitivamente no grupo de pessoas que pensam que a mídia social faz parte disso. Eu entendo o debate, mas estou bastante convencido de que uma das coisas que não tem sido boa para a saúde mental das pessoas é que isso está constantemente exposto.

LEX: Sim, com certeza. Acho que é possível criar redes sociais que rendem muito dinheiro, que deixam as pessoas felizes para mim, como se fosse possível alinhar os incentivos.Então, em termos de, sim, fazer adolescentes, fazer, uh, todas as fases da vida, dar-lhe satisfação e felicidade a longo prazo com a sua existência física fora das redes sociais e nas redes sociais, ajudando-o a crescer como ser humano, uh , ajudando a desafiá-lo na quantidade certa e na quantidade certa de vídeos de gatos, o que quer que proporcione essa experiência humana completa e rica. Acho que é apenas um problema de aprendizado de máquina. É como,não é fácil criar um feed. Portanto, o feed mais fácil que você pode fazer é maximizar o engajamento. Sim. Mas isso é como um algoritmo realmente idiota. Sim. É como se o algoritmo aprendesse o suficiente sobre você para entender o que o fará verdadeiramente feliz como ser humano para crescer a longo prazo. Esse é apenas um problema muito difícil de resolver.

GREG: Você já assistiu Fleabag? É absolutamente brilhante, um show britânico. Hum, e isso configura você. Uma das razões pelas quais as pessoas gostam tanto é que você está assistindo como um atrevido Sex and the City britânico, exceto que o personagem principal é o mais proeminente. Hum, é tipo, ok. E você meio que revira os olhos um pouco e é meio engraçado e meio fofo e meio picante. E então você percebe que a pessoa está realmente sofrendo e passando por momentos difíceis e isso fica cada vez mais profundo conforme o show avança. E ela fará esses discursos incríveis sobre me diga o que fazer. Como eu sei que há especialistas por aí. Eu sei que existe conhecimento por aí. Eu sei que existe uma maneira ideal de viver minha vida. Então, por que alguém não pode simplesmente me dizer o que fazer? E, e é isso maravilhosamente parecido, hum, preciso, eu acho, uh, aspecto do desejo humano que e se algo pudesse realmente me dizer o caminho ideal a seguir? Porque eu acho que há um desejo de abrir mão de um pouco de sua própria liberdade e discrição para ser instruído a fazer a coisa certa. Mas esse caminho me assusta até a morte.

LEX: Sim, vemos a maneira como você expressa isso. Isso é, isso também me assusta. Portanto, há várias coisas: você pode se distrair constantemente no estilo TikTok com coisas que o mantêm engajado. Portanto, remova isso e lhe dê um monte de opções constantemente e aprenda com o longo prazo o que resulta em sua felicidade real a longo prazo. Então, quais quantidades de ideias desafiadoras são boas para você? Uh, isso, você sabe, para alguém como eu, mas há um número assim para você, Greg, assim como para mim, esse número é bem alto. Eu adoro debate. Eu amo, eu, eu amo a sensação de perceber, puta merda, eu estava errado.

GREG: Sim. Mas tipo, você sabe, e eu adoraria que o algoritmo soubesse disso sobre mim e me ajudasse, mas sempre me dando opções. Se eu quiser entrar em vídeos de gatos e assim por diante. Bem, o aspecto educacional disso.

LEX: Sim, educação. Gosto da ideia de ir na velocidade que você precisa e correr o mais rápido que puder. Sim. Você sabe, quero dizer, tem aquela coisa toda de fluxo. Eu simplesmente sinto que a recomendação do YouTube, para o bem ou para o mal, se usada corretamente, parece que faz um bom trabalho. Sempre que me recuso a clicar em coisas que são baseadas apenas em dopamina e clico apenas em coisas educacionais, a recomendação é realmente muito boa. Então eu sinto que é um problema solucionável, pelo menos no espaço da educação de se desafiar, mas também de expandir seu domínio de conhecimento e todo esse tipo de coisa.

GREG: E estou definitivamente mais interessado , estamos num período inescapavelmente anárquico e necessitamos de grandes ajustes culturais. E não há como essa transição não ser difícil.

LEX: Há alguma pequena ou grande coisa específica que você gostaria de ver o X fazer, o Twitter fazer? Tenho muitas ideias sobre isso.

GREG: Com a imprensa e milhões de olhos extras voltados para qualquer problema, qualquer problema pode destruir qualquer instituição, qualquer pessoa ou qualquer ideia. E isso é bom em alguns aspectos, porque muitas instituições medievais precisaram ser demolidas. E algumas pessoas também o fizeram, e muitas ideias precisaram ser demolidas. A mesma coisa é verdade agora. Bilhões extras de olhos voltados para cada problema podem destruir qualquer pessoa, ideia ou instituição. E algumas, novamente, algumas dessas coisas precisavam ser demolidas, mas ainda não é possível construir. Ainda não estamos no estágio que podemos construir, mas isso nos mostrou o quão escasso era nosso conhecimento. É uma das razões pelas quais também estamos cientes da crise de replicação. É uma das razões pelas quais também estamos conscientes de quão de má qualidade é a nossa investigação, do quanto a nossa classe de especialistas é arrogante em muitos casos, mas as pessoas não querem viver num mundo onde não tenham pessoas que eles respeitam e podem olhar. E eu acho que o que possivelmente está acontecendo agora, mas continuará acontecendo, é que as pessoas vão se estabelecer como sendo de alta integridade, que sempre serão honestas. Acho que você está se estabelecendo como alguém de alta integridade, onde pode confiar nessa pessoa. Um incêndio quer ser, você sabe, a instituição para a qual as pessoas podem recorrer é tipo, se for liberdade de expressão, nós a defenderemos, ponto final. E acho que as pessoas precisam de novidades, precisam de autoridades em que possam realmente confiar.E eu acho que se você realmente tivesse um stream que talvez as pessoas pudessem assistir em ação, mas não inundado com, você sabe, coisas estúpidas de cancelamento de cultura ou meios de gato idiota, onde na verdade é uma discussão séria delimitada por regras, sem uma fortaleza retórica perfeita , não eficientefortaleza retórica, nenhuma das formas idiotas que debatemos. Acho que você poderia realmente começar a criar algo que poderia realmente ser uma grande melhoria na velocidade com que criamos ideias novas e melhores e estabelecemos e separamos a verdade da falsidade.

LEX: Sim. Se for bem feito, pode inspirar um grande número de pessoas a se tornarem cada vez mais íntegros e pode criar a integridade como um valor pelo qual lutar. Quero dizer, você sabe, houve projetos em toda a Internet que fizeram um trabalho incrível nisso, mas também foram muito falhos. Como se a Wikipédia fosse um exemplo de um grande avanço nesse sentido.

GREG: É bastante impressionante. Qual é a sua opinião geral? Quer dizer, estou muito impressionado.

LEX: Então, há algumas ideias realmente poderosas para as pessoas que editam a Wikipédia. Uma delas é que cada editor declara por si mesmo, você sabe, eu gosto de política e realmente sou um cara com tendência para a esquerda. Então eu realmente não deveria editar artigos políticos porque tenho preconceito. Então, eles declaram seus preconceitos e muitas vezes fazem um bom trabalho ao declará-los, mas ainda assim gostarão, encontrarão uma maneira de se justificar. Como se algo fosse irritá-los e eles quisessem corrigir isso porque adoram transformar a mentira em verdade. Mas a perspectiva do que é verdadeiro ou não é afetada por seu preconceito. A verdade é difícil de saber. E é verdade que existe um preconceito de esquerda nos editores da Wikipédia. Então, para isso, o que acontece é nos artigos, que eu aprecio principalmente que não tenham um aspecto político, sabe, artigos científicos ou, hum, artigos técnicos, eles vão ser muito fortes, até mesmo históricos , apenas descrevendo os fatos da história que não têm um elemento subjetivo, ah, forte. Além disso, usando meu próprio cérebro, posso filtrar se for, uh, você sabe, se for algo sobre 6 de janeiro ou algo assim, eu sei que vou ficar tipo, não sou o que está acontecendo aqui . Vou ler, mas na maioria das vezes vou procurar outras fontes. Vou examinar várias perspectivas diferentes sobre isso. Vai ser muito tenso. Provavelmente haverá algum tipo de preconceito. Talvez alguma redação seja tal, que é uma palavra. É aqui que a Wikipedia faz isso. A maneira como eles expressam as coisas será tendenciosa, a escolha das palavras, mas os próprios editores da Wikipedia são muito auto-reflexivos. Eles literalmente têm artigos que descrevem esses mesmos efeitos de como você pode usar palavras para injetar preconceito em todas as maneiras como você fala sobre isso.

GREG: Isso é mais saudável do que a maioria dos ambientes.

LEX: É incrivelmente saudável, mas acho que você poderia fazer melhor. Para mim, uma das grandes falhas da Wikipedia, que as notas da comunidade no X têm melhor desempenho, é a acessibilidade de se tornar um editor. Hum, é difícil se tornar um editor e não é tão visível o processo de edição. Então eu adoraria, como você disse, um stream, para que todos pudessem observar esse debate entre pessoas com integridade quando discutem coisas como 6 de janeiro, um tema muito polêmico para ver como vai o processo do debate em vez de ser escondido nas sombras, que atualmente está na Wikipedia. Você pode acessar isso. É simplesmente difícil de acessar, mas também vi como eles usarão certos artigos, como sobre certas pessoas, como artigos sobre pessoas em quem aprendi a confiar cada vez menos, porque eles literalmente os usarão para fazer algo pessoal. ataques. E isso é algo sobre o qual você escreve. Eles usarão, uh, descrições de diferentes controvérsias para pintar o retrato de uma pessoa que, pelo menos para mim, não parece uma representação precisa da pessoa. E é como escrever um artigo sobre Einstein mencionando algo sobre, uh, a teoria da relatividade e depois dizer que ele era um mulherengo e abusador e uma espécie de controvérsia, você sabe, sim, ele também é Feynman, você sabe, não, você sabe , foi, você sabe, eles não são exatamente o humano perfeito em termos de mulheres, mas como há outros aspectos desse humano e para capturar esse humano adequadamente, há uma certa maneira de fazer isso. Acho que a Wikipedia muitas vezes se inclinará. Eles realmente tentam ser auto-reflexivos e tentar impedir isso, mas se inclinarão para o drama se ele corresponder ao preconceito. Mas, novamente, muito melhor que o mundo, acredito que seja muito melhor. Uh, porque a Wikipédia existe, mas agora que estamos na fase da adolescência, estamos crescendo e tentando criar tecnologias diferentes. A ideia de um fluxo é muito, muito interessante à medida que você atrai mais e mais pessoas para esse discurso de que onde está o valor, vamos tentar descobrir a verdade.

GREG: Sim. Sim. E basicamente, você sabe, você recebe pequenos cartões para, Não, errado, não, errado.

LEX: E as diferentes, as diferentes, as diferentes técnicas retóricas que estão sendo usadas para evitar realmente discutir.

GREG: Sim. E eu acho que na verdade você pode tornar isso um pouco divertido se tiver um número limitado deles. Hum, você sabe, é tipo,você ganha três, que tal alguns cartões.

LEX: Então, gamificando a coisa toda.

GREG: Uh, absolutamente.

LEX: Sim. Uh, deixe-me perguntar sobre, uh, então você mencionou ter passado por alguns momentos difíceis em sua vida. Hum, qual tem sido sua experiência com, uh, com, com depressão? Qual tem sido sua experiência em superar isso?

GREG: Sim. Quero dizer, a coisa toda, toda a jornada, hum, th th th th th th th th th th th th com mimar a mente americana começou comigo, hum, no, no centro psiquiátrico de Belmont, na Filadélfia, em 2007 , liguei para o 911 em um momento de clareza porque fui à, uh, loja de ferragens para, para, hum, ter certeza de que, quando eu me matasse, isso traria. Eu queria ter certeza de que eu, você sabe, estava com a cabeça enrolada e tudo mais. Então, se todos os medicamentos que eu estava planejando tomar não funcionassem, eu não seria capaz de escapar. Foi um ano muito difícil e sempre tive problemas de depressão, hum, mas eles estavam piorando. E, francamente, uma das razões pelas quais essa coisa de cancelar cultura é tão importante para mim é que aquilo que não enfatizei tanto ao mimar a mente americana, que, a propósito, aquela descrição que dou de tentar me matar foi a primeira vez que escrevi isso. Ninguém na minha família sabia, hum, como, uh, era assim. Minha esposa nunca tinha visto isso. E basicamente a única maneira que consegui escrever isso foi fazendo, você sabe, como você pode se enganar. Se, hum, e eu pensasse, vou me convencer de que isso é apenas entre mim e meu computador e ninguém vai ver. E provavelmente não é a coisa mais pública que já escrevi. Hum, mas o que eu não enfatizei nisso foi o quanto a guerra cultural contribuiu para o quão deprimido eu fiquei, porque eu era originalmente o diretor jurídico do fogo. Depois tornei-me presidente dos bombeiros em 2005, mudei-me para Filadélfia e é onde fico deprimido. Hum, e, uh, apenas, eu não tenho família lá. Há algo sobre a cidade. Eles não parecem gostar muito de mim. Hum, mas o principal era estar no mundo da cultura o tempo todo. Hum, havia uma garota com quem eu estava namorando. Hum, eu lembro, você sabe, ela não parecia realmente aprovar o que eu fiz. E muitas pessoas realmente não pareciam. E enquanto isso, eu estava defendendo pessoas de esquerda o tempo todo e elas diziam: Ah, que bom que você está defendendo alguém de esquerda, mas eles ainda assim nunca me perdoariam por defender alguém de direita. E eu me lembro de dizer em que ponto eu sou, ouça, eu sou um verdadeiro crente nessas coisas. Estou disposto a defender os nazistas. Certamente estou disposto a defender os republicanos. E ela realmente disse: acho que os republicanos podem ser piores. Hum, e isso não aconteceu, esse relacionamento não foi muito bem. E então quase tive brigas algumas vezes com pessoas da direita. Hum, porque descobriram que eu defendia pessoas que faziam piadas sobre o 11 de setembro. Como se isso tivesse acontecido mais de uma vez. E que, você sabe, quando eu tiver vinte e poucos anos, não estarei brigando de novo. Hum, mas sim, sempre foi assim. Você, você, você vê como as pessoas podem ser hipócritas. Você pode ver como os amigos podem se voltar contra você se não gostarem da sua política. Então, eu tive uma prévia disso, de qual cultura estamos caminhando ao sermos o presidente do fogo. E foi exaustivo. Hum, e essa foi uma das principais coisas que me levaram a ficar, você sabe, deprimido suicidamente, uh, no centro de Belmont. Se você me dissesse que isso seria o começo de uma vida nova e melhor para mim, eu teria rido se pudesse, mas eu iria, você sabe, eu não gosto, você pode dizer que estou bem se eu ainda estou rindo. E eu não estava rindo, hum, naquele momento. Então, hum, procurei um médico e comecei a fazer terapia cognitivo-comportamental. Comecei a ter todas essas vozes na minha cabeça que estavam catastrofizando e, hum, você sabe, isso me deu uma generalização exagerada e, hum, uh, leitura da sorte, você sabe, uh, leitura mental de todas essas coisas que eles ensinam você não deve fazer. E isso, uh, e o que eles fazem na TCC é essencialmente que você tem algo que te deixa chateado e então você apenas escreve qual foi o pensamento. Hum, e você sabe, algo menor poderia acontecer em sua resposta foi, você sabe, tipo, hum, bem, o encontro não pareceu ter corrido muito bem. Hum, e isso é porque estou quebrado e morreremos sozinhos. E você fica tipo, ok, ok, ok. O que, o que, quais são os seguintes, você sabe, uh, isso é catastrofização, isso é leitura de mentes, isso é adivinhação, isso é tudo isso. Hum, e você tem que fazer isso várias vezes ao dia para sempre. Na verdade, preciso atualizar isso no momento.Hum, e lentamente, com o passar do tempo, vozes em minha cabeça diziam uma conversa interna horrível, você sabe, horrível, simplesmente não parecia mais tão convincente, o que foi realmente um efeito sutil. Como se fosse tipo, ah, espere, eu não acredito que estou quebrado. Você sabe, isso não pareceverdadeiro. Isso não soa como a verdade de Deus como costumava ser. E nove meses depois de planejar me matar, provavelmente estava mais feliz do que em uma década. Hum, e essa foi uma das coisas que, você sabe, o CBT foi o que me levou a perceber isso em meu próprio trabalho, que parecia que os administradores estavam vendendo distorções cognitivas, mas os alunos ainda não estavam comprando. E então, quando comecei a perceber que eles pareciam já acreditar em muitas dessas coisas, seria muito perigoso. E isso levou a mimar a mente americana e tudo mais. Mas o que foi difícil em escrever Hansling sobre a mente americana, eu já teria mencionado isso algumas vezes, fiquei muito deprimido no ano passado, hum, porque eu estava estudando, sabe, tem um amigo lá que Falei sobre quem se matou após ser cancelado. Falei com ele uma semana antes de ele se matar e na verdade não tinha, hum, não tinha falado com ele porque ele parecia muito confiante. Achei que ficaria tudo bem porque ele fez um tweet insensível em junho de 2020 e, você sabe, foi forçado a sair de uma forma que não parecia tão ruim quanto muitos outros professores. Na verdade, ele pelo menos recebeu um pacote de indenização, então eles sabiam que ele iria processar e vencer, hum, porque já havia ganhado antes. E então eu esperei para ver como ele estava porque estávamos tão sobrecarregados com o pedido de ajuda. E ele estava dizendo que as pessoas ainda vinham à sua casa. E então ele se matou na semana seguinte. E eu definitivamente, e porque todo mundo sabe que sou tão público sobre minhas lutas com essas coisas, todo mundo que luta contra essas coisas vem até mim quando está passando por momentos difíceis. E este é um negócio psicologicamente muito difícil de se estar. E mesmo admitindo isso agora, como eu penso, como todos os abutres por aí, eles vão se divertir com isso. Da mesma forma quando, quando, quando meu amigo Mike Adams se matou, havia pessoas comemorando no Twitter, hum, que um homem estava morto, uh, porque não gostaram de seus tweets. E, mas de alguma forma isso os tornou compassivos por alguma outra pessoa abstrata. Então eu estava ficando um pouco deprimido e ansioso. E o que realmente me ajudou mais do que qualquer outra coisa, hum, foi confessar à minha equipe que eu, você sabe, eu, eu, os livros consomem muita energia. Então eu sabia que eles não queriam ouvir isso. Isso não só tomava muito tempo do chefe, mas também o deixava deprimido e ansioso. Mas quando eu finalmente contei para a liderança da minha equipe, hum, você sabe, pessoas que, embora eu tente manter muita distância, eu amo muito, muito, hum, isso fez uma grande diferença, você sabe , hum, porque eu poderia ser aberto sobre isso. E a outra coisa foi: você ouviu esse diálogo da conferência? Oh sim. É como uma coisa apenas para convidados. É Orrin Hoffman, hum, quem dirige. Hum, ele tenta intencionalmente fazer com que as pessoas de todo o espectro político se reúnam, uh, e tenham conversas não oficiais sobre grandes questões. E foi bom estar em uma sala onde os conservadores liberais, nenhuma das opções acima, estávamos todos tipo, ah, graças a Deus, alguém adotou a cultura do cancelamento. E onde parecia, eu senti que talvez este não fosse o desastre para mim e minha família que eu era, do qual estava começando a ter medo. Seria que aceitar as coisas poderia realmente ter um final feliz.

LEX: Bem, uma coisa que me destaca é que a dor do cancelamento pode ser muito intensa. E isso não significa necessariamente perder o emprego, mas mesmo assim, você pode chamar isso de bullying, pode chamar qualquer nome, mas apenas algumas pessoas na internet. E esse número pode ser pequeno para dizer coisas ruins para você.

GREG: Sim. Isso pode ser uma força muito poderosa para a psique humana, o que é, mas foi muito surpreendente. E o outro lado disso também, hum, realmente me deixa triste o quão cruéis as pessoas podem ser. É tal, pensar que a sua, a sua causa é uma justiça social em muitos casos pode levar as pessoas a pensarem que posso ser tão cruel quanto quiser na busca por isso. Quando isso acontece, muitas vezes é apenas uma forma de desabafar alguma agressão sobre uma pessoa que você considera apenas uma abstração.

LEX: Então, acho que é importante que as pessoas percebam que estão seja o que for, qualquer coisa, qualquer energia negativa, qualquer negatividade que você queira espalhar, como se houvesse pessoas reais que podem se machucar. Como se você realmente pudesse fazer com que as pessoas se tornassem a pior versão de si mesmas ou possivelmente tirassem a própria vida. E não é tão real.

GREG: Sim. Bem, essa é uma das coisas que fazemos no livro, hum, para realmente nos dirigirmos às pessoas que ainda tentam afirmar que isso não é real, apenas citamos, citamos o Papa, citamos Obama, citamos James Carville, citamos Taylor Swift sobre a cultura do cancelamento.Tipo, hum, e a citação suíça de Taylor é, é essencialmente sobre como por trás de tudo isso, há, quando fica particularmente desagradável, há isso muito claro, você sabe, matarvocê mesmo está meio que ligado a isso. Hum, e é cruel. E o problema é que em um ambiente tão aberto, sempre haverá alguém que quer ser tão transgressor e dizer a coisa mais dolorosa, você sabe, terrível. Mas então você tem que se lembrar da deturpação, voltando às velhas expressões, paus e pedras vão quebrar meus ossos, mas nomes nunca, nunca vão me machucar. Foi reimaginado nos debates universitários da maneira mais estúpida. As pessoas vão literalmente dizer coisas como, mas agora sabemos que as palavras podem machucar. E é como se agora sabemos que as palavras podem machucar. Gente, vocês não precisavam inventar uma coisinha especial para ensinar às crianças para que as palavras dela doessem menos. Se eles nunca machucassem em primeiro lugar, nem faria sentido. O ditado é um ditado que você repete para si mesmo para se fortalecer. Quando os agressores percebem que você é um pouco estranho, talvez um pouco pessoal, hum, e isso ajuda. Realmente ajuda pensar, ouça, ok, idiotas vão dizer coisas idiotas. Hum, e não posso permitir que eles tenham esse tipo de poder sobre mim.

LEX: Sim. Sim. Ainda é uma experiência de aprendizado porque dói, dói.

GREG: Mas para as pessoas boas por aí que, na verdade, você sabe, às vezes pensam, pensam que estão desabafando, você sabe, pense nisso. Lembre-se de que há pessoas do outro lado.

LEX: Sim. Para mim, isso fere meu tipo de fé na humanidade. Hum, eu sei que não deveria, mas às vezes acontece quando vejo as pessoas sendo legais umas com as outras, é meio que, uh, uma nuvem flutua sobre minha perspectiva do mundo. E isso não, eu gostaria que não tivesse que estar lá.

GREG: Sim. Esse sempre foi meu tipo de petulância, mas, uh, responda a isso. Se, se a humanidade é basicamente boa ou basicamente má, sendo o maior debate na, na, na filosofia e sendo tipo, bem, o problema com, uh, o primeiro é que não há nada básico sobre a humanidade.

LEX: Sim. O que lhe dá esperança sobre tudo isso, sobre esse estado sombrio em que estamos, como você descreve, como podemos sair? O que lhe dá esperança de que sairemos?

GREG: Acho que as pessoas estão cansadas disso. Hum, acho que as pessoas estão cansadas de não serem autênticas. Hum, e isso é realmente, você sabe, o que é censura. Basicamente, está lhe dizendo: não seja você mesmo. Na verdade, não diga o que você pensa. Hum, não mostre sua personalidade. Não discorde. Não seja estranho. Não se engane. Hum, e isso não é sustentável. Acho que as pessoas já estão fartas disso. Uh, mas uma coisa que eu definitivamente quero dizer ao seu público é que não cabe apenas a nós, nossos espectadores, tentar consertar isso. Hum, e eu acho isso, e isso pode parecer um problema não relacionado. Acho que se existissem maneiras altamente respeitadas, digamos extremamente difíceis, de provar que você é extremamente inteligente e trabalhador, que custassem pouco ou nada, que na verdade poderiam permitir que Harvard e Yale do mundo corressem pelo seu dinheiro. Acho que essa pode ser a coisa mais positiva que poderíamos fazer para lidar com muitos desses problemas e por que acho que o fato de termos nos tornado uma América estranha com uma grande tradição anti-elitista se tornou estranhamente elitista nisso, no sentido de que não apenas novamente, nossa liderança vem dessas poucas escolas sofisticadas, mas na verdade temos uma grande admiração por eles. Nós meio que os admiramos, mas acho que teríamos uma sociedade muito mais saudável se as pessoas pudessem provar, você sabe, sua excelência de maneiras que vêm de correntes completamente diferentes e, e que, que, que são altamente respeitado. Às vezes eu falo sobre, deveria haver um teste em que qualquer um que passasse, ganhasse como um bacharelado em humanidades, que é como um super bacharelado, como algo, como alguém, não um GED. Não é disso que estou falando. Estou falando de algo que, você sabe, uma em apenas algumas, como uma centena de pessoas pode passar por alguma outra maneira de, na verdade, hum, uh, de não passar por essas instituições enormes e caras e inchadas, onde as pessoas podem levantar as mãos e dizer: sou inteligente e trabalhador. Acho que essa poderia ser uma maneira incrivelmente saudável. Acho que precisamos de fluxos adicionais para que pessoas criativas resolvam problemas, seja no X ou em outro lugar. Hum, acho que há muitas coisas que a tecnologia poderia fazer para realmente ajudar nisso. Acho que algumas das coisas em que Sal Khan está trabalhando, a Khan Academy, poderiam realmente ajudar. Hum, então eu acho que há muitas maneiras, mas elas existem principalmente em torno de criar novas maneiras de fazer as coisas, não apenas esperando que as coisas antigas que têm cerca de US$ 40 bilhões no banco sejam reformadas. E aqui está, você sabe, tenho implicado muito com Harvard, mas vou importuná-los um pouco mais.Hum, e, e, uh, eu falo muito sobre aula de novo, e você sabe, há um ótimo livro chamado Hera Venenosa, hum, de Evan Mandry, que eu recomendo a todos. E é ultrajante. Parece comigoe um discurso retórico em Stanford, hum, que foi, uh, e eu, e acho que o status, você sabe, o ensino superior de elite tem mais crianças do 1% mais rico do que dos 50 ou 60% mais pobres, dependendo da escola . Hum, e quando você olha o quanto eles realmente gostam de replicar privilégios de classe, é realmente angustiante. Então todo mundo deveria ler Hera Venenosa.

LEX: E acima de tudo, uh, se você é estranho, continue sendo estranho. E você é um dos mais interessantes, um dos mais estranhos e mais lindos que as pessoas já conheceram. Greg, obrigado pelo trabalho realmente importante que você faz.

GREG: Isso foi, isso é agradecimento pela aula, toda a área que você trouxe aqui hoje, cara.

LEX: Hum, esta é uma conversa incrível. Obrigado pelo trabalho que você faz. Obrigado. Obrigado. E para mim, que me preocupo profundamente com a educação, o ensino superior, obrigado por responsabilizar os MITs e os de Harvard, por, hum, fazer o que é certo pelas pessoas que andam pelos seus corredores. Então, muito obrigado por falar comigo. Obrigado por ouvir esta conversa com Greg Lukianoff para apoiar este podcast. Confira nossos patrocinadores na descrição. E agora deixem-me deixar-vos algumas palavras de Noam Chomsky. Se você acredita na liberdade de expressão, você acredita na liberdade de expressão para opiniões, você não gosta. Gables era a favor da liberdade de expressão para as opiniões de que gostava. O mesmo aconteceu com Stálin. Se você é a favor da liberdade de expressão, isso significa que você é a favor da liberdade de expressão precisamente para pontos de vista que você despreza. Obrigado por ouvir e esperamos vê-lo na próxima vez.

Portuguese transcription subtitles:

0
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,240
Se o objetivo é o projeto do conhecimento humano,

1
00:00:02,700 --> 00:00:04,320
que é conhecer o mundo que é,

2
00:00:04,740 --> 00:00:10,140
você não pode conhecer o mundo como ele é sem saber o que as pessoas realmente pensam.

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:14,440
E o que as pessoas realmente pensam é um fato extremamente importante de se saber.

4
00:00:15,040 --> 00:00:16,780
Então, toda vez que você está realmente dizendo,

5
00:00:17,460 --> 00:00:26,400
você não pode dizer que está realmente se privando do conhecimento do que as pessoas realmente pensam que você está causando, o que Tim ou Crown, que está em nosso conselho consultivo, chama de falsificação de preferências.

6
00:00:27,140 --> 00:00:29,400
Você acaba com uma imagem imprecisa do mundo,

7
00:00:29,460 --> 00:00:30,240
que, aliás,

8
00:00:30,720 --> 00:00:31,640
em muitos casos,

9
00:00:32,220 --> 00:00:35,040
porque há ativistas que querem restringir mais o discurso,

10
00:00:35,340 --> 00:00:38,380
na verdade, eles tendem a pensar que as pessoas são mais preconceituosas do que poderiam ser.

11
00:00:38,520 --> 00:00:43,840
E, na verdade, uma maneira muito prática de piorar as coisas é quando você censura as pessoas,

12
00:00:44,200 --> 00:00:46,340
isso não muda a opinião deles.

13
00:00:46,340 --> 00:00:50,440
Isso apenas os incentiva a não compartilhar isso com pessoas que lhes causarão problemas.

14
00:00:50,880 --> 00:00:55,920
Portanto, isso os leva a conversar com pessoas com quem já concordam e a polarização de grupo decola.

15
00:00:58,660 --> 00:01:01,100
A seguir está uma conversa com Greg Lukianoff,

16
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:02,520
defensor da liberdade de expressão,

17
00:01:03,020 --> 00:01:03,940
advogado da primeira emenda,

18
00:01:04,440 --> 00:01:05,980
presidente e CEO da FIRE,

19
00:01:06,320 --> 00:01:08,460
a base para os direitos e a expressão individuais.

20
00:01:09,020 --> 00:01:11,360
E ele é o autor de Unleashing Liberty,

21
00:01:11,880 --> 00:01:15,520
co-autor com Jonathan Haidt de Coddling of the American

22
00:01:15,680 --> 00:01:21,200
Mente e co-autor com Ricky Schlott de um novo livro que será lançado em outubro.

23
00:01:21,540 --> 00:01:26,060
Eles definitivamente deveriam fazer uma pré-encomenda agora chamada Cancelling of the American Mind,

24
00:01:26,600 --> 00:01:29,100
que é um relato definitivo da história,

25
00:01:29,420 --> 00:01:31,260
presente e futuro da cultura do cancelamento,

26
00:01:31,680 --> 00:01:34,700
um termo usado e usado em demasia no discurso público,

27
00:01:35,260 --> 00:01:40,220
mas raramente estudado e compreendido com a profundidade e o rigor que Greg e Ricky fazem

28
00:01:40,680 --> 00:01:43,820
neste livro e em parte nesta conversa.

29
00:01:45,080 --> 00:01:46,480
A liberdade de expressão é importante,

30
00:01:46,980 --> 00:01:48,580
especialmente em campi universitários,

31
00:01:49,700 --> 00:01:52,980
o próprio lugar que deveria servir como campo de batalha de ideias,

32
00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:55,460
incluindo alguns estranhos e controversos

33
00:01:56,100 --> 00:01:58,420
que deve encorajar a assunção de riscos ousados,

34
00:01:58,820 --> 00:02:00,460
não conformidade.

35
00:02:01,500 --> 00:02:03,140
Este é o podcast de Lex Friedman.

36
00:02:03,540 --> 00:02:03,940
Para apoiá-lo,

37
00:02:04,340 --> 00:02:06,280
confira nossos patrocinadores na descrição.

38
00:02:06,720 --> 00:02:07,160
E agora,

39
00:02:07,480 --> 00:02:07,900
Caros amigos,

40
00:02:08,460 --> 00:02:09,960
aqui está Greg Lukianoff.

41
00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:12,760
Vamos começar com a grande questão.

42
00:02:13,000 --> 00:02:14,360
O que é a cultura do cancelamento?

43
00:02:14,880 --> 00:02:17,240
Agora, você disse que não gosta do termo como está,

44
00:02:17,380 --> 00:02:22,500
cito, arrastado pela lama e abusado interminavelmente por uma série de figuras controversas.

45
00:02:23,040 --> 00:02:24,280
No entanto, temos o termo.

46
00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:25,380
O que é?

47
00:02:25,480 --> 00:02:30,480
A cultura do cancelamento é o aumento das campanhas, especialmente das campanhas bem-sucedidas,

48
00:02:30,920 --> 00:02:34,120
começando por volta de 2014 para fazer com que as pessoas fossem demitidas,

49
00:02:34,780 --> 00:02:35,220
expulso,

50
00:02:35,580 --> 00:02:36,780
deplataforma, etc.,

51
00:02:37,420 --> 00:02:39,280
para um discurso que

52
00:02:39,280 --> 00:02:41,100
normalmente serão protegidos pela primeira emenda.

53
00:02:41,640 --> 00:02:43,620
E eu digo que estaria protegido porque estamos

54
00:02:43,740 --> 00:02:48,160
falando sobre circunstâncias em que não é necessariamente onde a Primeira Emenda se aplica.

55
00:02:48,460 --> 00:02:55,180
Mas o que quero dizer é como um análogo para dizer coisas pelas quais você não poderia perder seu emprego como funcionário público,

56
00:02:55,560 --> 00:03:00,720
e também o clima de medo que resultou desse fenômeno,

57
00:03:00,820 --> 00:03:03,080
o fato de que você pode perder o emprego por ter uma opinião errada.

58
00:03:03,500 --> 00:03:04,900
E não foi sutil isso

59
00:03:04,900 --> 00:03:06,360
houve um aumento nisso,

60
00:03:06,760 --> 00:03:08,640
particularmente no campus por volta de 2014.

61
00:03:09,840 --> 00:03:11,140
John Ronson escreveu um livro

62
00:03:11,160 --> 00:03:12,700
chamado Então você foi publicamente envergonhado.

63
00:03:12,800 --> 00:03:13,980
Foi lançado em 2015,

64
00:03:14,180 --> 00:03:15,740
já documentando esse fenômeno.

65
00:03:16,420 --> 00:03:19,020
Escrevi um livro chamado Freedom From Speech em 2014.

66
00:03:19,640 --> 00:03:22,360
Mas foi realmente em 2017 que você começou a ver

67
00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:23,660
isso seja direcionado aos professores.

68
00:03:24,600 --> 00:03:28,380
E quando se trata do número de professores que vimos ser

69
00:03:28,460 --> 00:03:29,820
alvo e perderem seus empregos,

70
00:03:30,420 --> 00:03:34,160
Faço isso há 22 anos e nunca vi nada igual.

71
00:03:34,560 --> 00:03:36,940
Então, há tantas coisas que quero perguntar a você aqui.

72
00:03:37,300 --> 00:03:38,980
Na verdade, basta olhar para a organização

73
00:03:39,000 --> 00:03:39,380
FOGO.

74
00:03:39,420 --> 00:03:41,220
Você pode explicar o que é a organização?

75
00:03:41,260 --> 00:03:42,960
Porque está interligado a este todo

76
00:03:43,760 --> 00:03:49,580
luta e a ascensão da cultura do câncer e a luta pela liberdade de expressão desde 2014 e antes.

77
00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:54,100
Então a FIRE foi fundada em 1999 por Harvey Silverglate.

78
00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:56,480
Ele é um famoso advogado de liberdades civis.

79
00:03:56,720 --> 00:03:58,360
Ele está um pouco no show.

80
00:03:58,620 --> 00:04:03,040
Ele é a pessoa que realmente me descobriu na minha vida muito feliz em São Francisco,

81
00:04:03,040 --> 00:04:05,720
mas sabia que estava procurando um emprego na Primeira Emenda.

82
00:04:05,900 --> 00:04:09,200
Eu fui para a faculdade de direito especificamente para fazer a Primeira Emenda.

83
00:04:10,520 --> 00:04:11,780
E ele me encontrou,

84
00:04:11,960 --> 00:04:12,700
o que foi muito legal.

85
00:04:13,100 --> 00:04:16,600
Sua protegida, Kathleen Sullivan, foi reitora da Faculdade de Direito de Stanford.

86
00:04:16,720 --> 00:04:19,820
E este continua sendo o melhor elogio que já recebi na minha vida,

87
00:04:19,920 --> 00:04:22,820
é que ela me recomendou a Harvey.

88
00:04:23,800 --> 00:04:26,200
E já que essa é a razão pela qual fui para a faculdade de direito,

89
00:04:26,200 --> 00:04:28,240
Fiquei entusiasmado por fazer parte desta nova organização.

90
00:04:29,040 --> 00:04:32,060
O outro cofundador do FIRE é Alan Charles Kors.

91
00:04:32,760 --> 00:04:34,400
Ele é simplesmente um gênio absoluto.

92
00:04:34,680 --> 00:04:40,520
Ele é um dos maiores especialistas do mundo no Iluminismo e particularmente em Voltaire.

93
00:04:41,280 --> 00:04:43,760
E se algum de seus ouvintes gostar dos ótimos cursos,

94
00:04:45,000 --> 00:04:47,620
ele tem uma palestra sobre Blaise Pascal.

95
00:04:48,080 --> 00:04:50,840
E Blaise, claro, é famoso pela Aposta de Pascal.

96
00:04:51,660 --> 00:04:54,900
E eu deixei isso tão emocionado e impressionado

97
00:04:54,900 --> 00:04:57,880
e com uma compreensão profunda de quão importante essa pessoa

98
00:04:58,400 --> 00:04:58,740
era.

99
00:04:59,720 --> 00:05:00,320
É interessante.

100
00:05:00,600 --> 00:05:04,330
Você mencionou para mim off-line relacionado a isso que existe um,

101
00:05:05,060 --> 00:05:09,160
pelo menos funciona em paralelo ou há uma conexão entre o amor pela ciência e

102
00:05:09,160 --> 00:05:10,460
o amor pela liberdade de expressão.

103
00:05:10,540 --> 00:05:11,040
Sim.

104
00:05:11,420 --> 00:05:14,160
Você pode explicar onde está essa conexão?

105
00:05:14,480 --> 00:05:14,980
Claro.

106
00:05:15,260 --> 00:05:17,820
Eu acho que para aqueles de nós que são realmente,

107
00:05:18,180 --> 00:05:20,480
você sabe, que devotaram nossas vidas à liberdade de

108
00:05:20,480 --> 00:05:22,840
discurso, uma coisa que gostamos,

109
00:05:22,840 --> 00:05:23,880
quer saibamos disso ou não,

110
00:05:24,660 --> 00:05:25,440
é epistemologia,

111
00:05:25,960 --> 00:05:28,660
você sabe, o estudo e a filosofia do conhecimento.

112
00:05:29,540 --> 00:05:31,280
Você sabe, a liberdade de expressão tem muitos

113
00:05:32,620 --> 00:05:34,400
dimensões morais e filosóficas,

114
00:05:34,520 --> 00:05:36,400
mas de um ponto de vista pragmático,

115
00:05:36,940 --> 00:05:38,600
é necessário porque

116
00:05:38,600 --> 00:05:40,760
somos criaturas de conhecimento incrivelmente limitado.

117
00:05:41,040 --> 00:05:43,140
Somos incrivelmente autoenganadores.

118
00:05:43,640 --> 00:05:45,480
Eu sempre adorei o fato de Yuval Harari

119
00:05:46,060 --> 00:05:49,180
refere-se ao Iluminismo como a descoberta da ignorância

120
00:05:49,580 --> 00:05:51,400
porque foi exatamente isso que aconteceu.

121
00:05:51,560 --> 00:05:53,000
De repente, estava tipo,

122
00:05:53,540 --> 00:05:54,420
uau, espere um segundo.

123
00:05:55,140 --> 00:05:58,040
Toda essa sabedoria popular incrivelmente interessante que obtivemos,

124
00:05:58,080 --> 00:06:01,700
que, aliás, pode ser surpreendentemente confiável aqui e ali.

125
00:06:02,440 --> 00:06:07,040
Quando você começa a testar muito, isso é um absurdo e não se sustenta.

126
00:06:07,600 --> 00:06:09,820
Até as nossas ideias sobre a forma como as coisas acontecem,

127
00:06:09,820 --> 00:06:14,400
você sabe, como Galileu estabeleceu, como até mesmo nossas intuições, elas estão simplesmente erradas.

128
00:06:15,680 --> 00:06:19,340
E assim, grande parte da história inicial da liberdade de expressão,

129
00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:23,420
estava acontecendo ao mesmo tempo que uma espécie de revolução científica.

130
00:06:24,060 --> 00:06:28,140
Portanto, muitos dos primeiros debates sobre a liberdade de expressão estavam interligados.

131
00:06:28,660 --> 00:06:30,160
Então certamente Galileu,

132
00:06:30,480 --> 00:06:31,080
você sabe,

133
00:06:31,900 --> 00:06:36,420
Eu sempre aponto que o Kepler provavelmente tinha a ideia ainda mais radical de que eles nem eram esferas perfeitas.

134
00:06:37,120 --> 00:06:38,500
Mas ao mesmo tempo,

135
00:06:39,000 --> 00:06:40,720
em grande parte devido à invenção da imprensa,

136
00:06:41,080 --> 00:06:42,840
você também teve todos esses desenvolvimentos políticos.

137
00:06:43,160 --> 00:06:45,120
E você sabe,

138
00:06:45,460 --> 00:06:46,800
Eu sempre falo sobre Jan Hus,

139
00:06:47,000 --> 00:06:52,420
você sabe, do famoso herói tcheco que foi

140
00:06:52,780 --> 00:06:55,420
queimado na fogueira e acho que em 1419.

141
00:06:56,420 --> 00:07:01,020
Mas ele era basicamente Lutero antes da imprensa.

142
00:07:01,720 --> 00:07:03,460
Antes que Lutero pudesse divulgar sua palavra,

143
00:07:03,600 --> 00:07:05,000
você sabe, ele não teve chance.

144
00:07:05,120 --> 00:07:06,080
E isso foi exatamente

145
00:07:06,080 --> 00:07:06,880
o que foi Jan Hus.

146
00:07:07,060 --> 00:07:07,960
Mas um século depois,

147
00:07:08,320 --> 00:07:09,260
graças à imprensa,

148
00:07:10,000 --> 00:07:10,540
todos poderiam saber o que

149
00:07:10,660 --> 00:07:11,920
Lutero pensou e garoto,

150
00:07:12,340 --> 00:07:12,700
Eles fizeram.

151
00:07:13,160 --> 00:07:13,860
Mas isso levou a,

152
00:07:13,920 --> 00:07:16,260
claro, isso é completamente louco,

153
00:07:16,940 --> 00:07:19,780
período hiper-perturbado da história europeia.

154
00:07:20,500 --> 00:07:23,080
Bem, você mencionou pular um pouco,

155
00:07:23,260 --> 00:07:23,860
a Primeira Emenda.

156
00:07:23,940 --> 00:07:27,680
Em primeiro lugar, o que é a Primeira Emenda e qual é a ligação para você entre

157
00:07:28,700 --> 00:07:31,220
a Primeira Emenda, a liberdade de expressão e a cultura do cancelamento?

158
00:07:31,320 --> 00:07:31,660
Claro.

159
00:07:32,480 --> 00:07:33,640
Então eu sou uma Primeira Emenda

160
00:07:33,720 --> 00:07:35,180
advogado, como mencionei,

161
00:07:35,620 --> 00:07:36,680
e foi isso que eu,

162
00:07:36,680 --> 00:07:38,180
essa é a minha paixão, foi isso que estudei.

163
00:07:38,280 --> 00:07:40,640
E acho que a lei americana da Primeira Emenda é incrivelmente interessante.

164
00:07:41,320 --> 00:07:42,480
Em uma frase,

165
00:07:43,080 --> 00:07:44,580
a Primeira Emenda está tentando

166
00:07:44,580 --> 00:07:50,440
livrar-se basicamente de todas as razões pelas quais a humanidade tem se matado durante toda a sua existência.

167
00:07:51,060 --> 00:07:53,300
Que não iríamos mais brigar por opinião,

168
00:07:53,480 --> 00:07:54,640
não iríamos mais brigar

169
00:07:54,800 --> 00:07:58,200
religião, que você tem o direito de recorrer ao seu governo para reparação de queixas,

170
00:07:58,620 --> 00:08:00,420
que você tem a liberdade de se associar.

171
00:08:00,760 --> 00:08:03,340
Que todas essas coisas em uma frase eram como, não,

172
00:08:03,800 --> 00:08:11,040
o governo não interferirá mais no seu direito de ter esses direitos humanos fundamentais.

173
00:08:12,280 --> 00:08:16,800
E então uma coisa que torna o FIRE um pouco diferente de outras organizações é,

174
00:08:17,040 --> 00:08:19,480
no entanto, não somos apenas uma organização da Primeira Emenda,

175
00:08:20,100 --> 00:08:21,940
somos uma organização de liberdade de expressão.

176
00:08:22,900 --> 00:08:24,300
E assim, e,

177
00:08:24,700 --> 00:08:25,660
mas ao mesmo tempo,

178
00:08:25,860 --> 00:08:29,420
muito do que eu acho que é liberdade de expressão,

179
00:08:29,900 --> 00:08:31,120
pode ser bem explicado

180
00:08:31,640 --> 00:08:33,800
com referência a muitas leis da Primeira Emenda,

181
00:08:34,160 --> 00:08:36,300
parcialmente porque na história americana,

182
00:08:36,440 --> 00:08:37,260
alguns dos nossos mais inteligentes

183
00:08:37,340 --> 00:08:42,660
as pessoas têm pensado sobre quais são os parâmetros da liberdade de expressão em relação a

184
00:08:42,700 --> 00:08:43,280
a Primeira Emenda.

185
00:08:43,420 --> 00:08:44,400
E muitos desses princípios,

186
00:08:44,480 --> 00:08:48,000
eles transferem muito bem, assim como ideias pragmáticas.

187
00:08:48,420 --> 00:08:52,720
Assim como o maior pecado em termos de censura é chamado de discriminação de ponto de vista.

188
00:08:53,060 --> 00:08:54,560
Que essencialmente você permite liberdade de expressão,

189
00:08:54,840 --> 00:08:55,940
exceto por essa opinião.

190
00:08:56,780 --> 00:08:59,060
Agora é, e é considerado gentil

191
00:08:59,080 --> 00:09:00,040
de mais defensável.

192
00:09:00,140 --> 00:09:01,940
E acho que faz sentido que se você,

193
00:09:01,940 --> 00:09:02,980
se você criar um fórum e gostar,

194
00:09:03,160 --> 00:09:07,020
vamos falar apenas sobre economia para excluir pessoas que querem falar sobre um assunto diferente,

195
00:09:07,620 --> 00:09:11,160
mas é considerado um negócio maior.

196
00:09:11,460 --> 00:09:12,860
Se você criou um fórum para economia,

197
00:09:13,240 --> 00:09:17,920
mas não vamos permitir que as pessoas falem sobre esse tipo de economia ou tenham essa opinião sobre economia,

198
00:09:18,260 --> 00:09:20,020
mais, mais particularmente.

199
00:09:20,700 --> 00:09:27,400
Portanto, muitos dos princípios da lei da Primeira Emenda na verdade fazem muito sentido filosófico como bons princípios para quando,

200
00:09:27,520 --> 00:09:29,900
como o que é discurso protegido e desprotegido,

201
00:09:30,000 --> 00:09:31,160
o que deve causar problemas para você,

202
00:09:31,760 --> 00:09:33,440
como você realmente analisa isso,

203
00:09:33,480 --> 00:09:37,400
é por isso que tentamos, em nossa definição de cultura do cancelamento, trabalhar em

204
00:09:37,540 --> 00:09:38,700
algumas das normas da Primeira Emenda,

205
00:09:38,800 --> 00:09:39,620
apenas na definição.

206
00:09:39,900 --> 00:09:41,820
Portanto, não precisamos nos atolar neles também.

207
00:09:42,400 --> 00:09:43,400
Você está dizendo tantas coisas interessantes,

208
00:09:43,400 --> 00:09:45,540
mas se você puder vincular o ponto de vista da discriminação,

209
00:09:46,400 --> 00:09:49,360
existe alguma área cinzenta de discussão aí?

210
00:09:49,400 --> 00:09:52,460
Tipo, o que é e não é economia para o exemplo que você deu?

211
00:09:52,560 --> 00:09:53,100
Sim.

212
00:09:53,760 --> 00:09:54,600
É, está aí,

213
00:09:55,400 --> 00:09:56,580
Quero dizer, é uma ciência?

214
00:09:56,690 --> 00:09:59,400
Ou é uma arte traçar limites do que não é,

215
00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:00,160
não é permitido?

216
00:10:00,360 --> 00:10:00,520
Sim.

217
00:10:00,700 --> 00:10:02,380
Você sabe, se você está dizendo que algo é,

218
00:10:02,380 --> 00:10:03,240
ou não é economia,

219
00:10:03,300 --> 00:10:06,200
bem, você pode dizer que tudo é economia e por isso quero falar sobre poesia.

220
00:10:06,460 --> 00:10:07,300
Haveria alguma linha

221
00:10:07,300 --> 00:10:08,400
exercício de desenho aí,

222
00:10:08,660 --> 00:10:14,520
mas digamos que imediatamente você decida abri-lo até mesmo para a poesia.

223
00:10:16,060 --> 00:10:17,420
É uma grande diferença entre dizer:

224
00:10:17,460 --> 00:10:18,620
ok, agora estamos abertos à poesia,

225
00:10:18,860 --> 00:10:20,040
mas você não pode dizer,

226
00:10:20,440 --> 00:10:21,920
você sabe, Dante era mau.

227
00:10:22,780 --> 00:10:25,840
Como se isso fosse uma opinião proibida agora oficialmente,

228
00:10:25,840 --> 00:10:29,720
neste fórum aberto que iria imediatamente, em um nível intuitivo, atacar

229
00:10:29,740 --> 00:10:33,980
pessoas como um problema maior do que apenas dizer que poesia não é economia.

230
00:10:35,060 --> 00:10:35,320
Sim. Quero dizer,

231
00:10:35,880 --> 00:10:38,240
aquele nível intuitivo com o qual você fala,

232
00:10:39,780 --> 00:10:40,280
Espero

233
00:10:41,580 --> 00:10:42,800
que todos nós temos

234
00:10:42,800 --> 00:10:45,300
esse tipo de intuição básica quando a linha é cruzada,

235
00:10:45,380 --> 00:10:46,460
é a mesma coisa para

236
00:10:46,460 --> 00:10:47,780
como pornografia, certo?

237
00:10:47,780 --> 00:10:48,880
Você sabe, quando você vê,

238
00:10:48,880 --> 00:10:52,620
Acho que há o mesmo nível de intuição que

239
00:10:52,620 --> 00:10:54,220
deve ser aplicado de forma generalizada aqui.

240
00:10:54,930 --> 00:10:56,320
E é quando

241
00:10:57,060 --> 00:11:00,280
que a intuição é deformada por quaisquer forças da sociedade,

242
00:11:00,340 --> 00:11:02,540
é aí que começa a parecer censura.

243
00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:03,020
Sim.

244
00:11:03,220 --> 00:11:05,280
Quer dizer, as pessoas acham uma coisa diferente.

245
00:11:05,680 --> 00:11:07,240
Você sabe, se alguém perder o emprego simplesmente

246
00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:08,440
pela sua opinião política,

247
00:11:08,780 --> 00:11:11,400
mesmo que esse empregador tenha todo o direito do mundo de demiti-lo,

248
00:11:11,880 --> 00:11:13,520
Acho que os americanos ainda deveriam pensar,

249
00:11:13,520 --> 00:11:14,300
bom, é verdade.

250
00:11:14,520 --> 00:11:15,220
Eles têm todo o direito em

251
00:11:15,220 --> 00:11:17,900
o mundo e não estou defendendo legalmente que talvez você não devesse

252
00:11:19,100 --> 00:11:20,680
demitir alguém por sua opinião política,

253
00:11:21,120 --> 00:11:21,960
mas pense bem nisso.

254
00:11:22,420 --> 00:11:24,020
Como o que, que sociedade queremos,

255
00:11:24,040 --> 00:11:25,860
em que tipo de sociedade queremos viver?

256
00:11:26,160 --> 00:11:27,660
E tem sido engraçado assistir,

257
00:11:29,160 --> 00:11:30,440
você sabe, e eu, eu aponto isso.

258
00:11:30,600 --> 00:11:32,600
Sim, defenderei as empresas,

259
00:11:33,520 --> 00:11:35,960
os direitos de associação da primeira emenda serão

260
00:11:35,960 --> 00:11:37,880
capaz de ter o direito legal de decidir,

261
00:11:38,140 --> 00:11:39,440
você sabe, quem trabalha para eles.

262
00:11:39,680 --> 00:11:42,280
Mas por uma questão moral ou filosófica,

263
00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:44,600
se você pensar nas implicações de,

264
00:11:44,860 --> 00:11:46,640
se todas as empresas em

265
00:11:46,640 --> 00:11:49,160
A América se torna uma associação expressiva,

266
00:11:49,240 --> 00:11:52,360
além de ser uma organização maximizadora de lucros,

267
00:11:53,120 --> 00:11:57,080
isso seria um desastre para a democracia porque acabaríamos numa situação em que as pessoas

268
00:11:57,080 --> 00:11:58,620
estariam realmente dizendo para si mesmos,

269
00:11:59,100 --> 00:12:01,500
Eu não acho que posso realmente dizer o que realmente

270
00:12:01,500 --> 00:12:03,900
penso e ainda acredito que posso manter meu emprego.

271
00:12:04,340 --> 00:12:05,600
E foi aí que fiquei preocupado.

272
00:12:05,620 --> 00:12:12,290
Eu senti que estávamos indo porque grande parte da resposta inicial às pessoas sendo canceladas foi muito

273
00:12:12,600 --> 00:12:13,000
simplesmente,

274
00:12:13,380 --> 00:12:15,860
você sabe, ah, mas eles têm o direito de se livrar dessa pessoa.

275
00:12:16,060 --> 00:12:20,100
E isso, e isso é o fim, o começo e o fim da discussão.

276
00:12:20,680 --> 00:12:22,420
E eu pensei que isso era uma esquiva.

277
00:12:22,660 --> 00:12:25,760
Achei que não era realmente uma maneira muito séria de fazer isso.

278
00:12:25,780 --> 00:12:29,790
Se você se preocupa tanto com a Primeira Emenda quanto com a liberdade de expressão de pensar sobre isso

279
00:12:29,900 --> 00:12:31,160
para você, apenas para

280
00:12:32,380 --> 00:12:34,920
esclarecer que a primeira alteração é uma espécie de

281
00:12:35,840 --> 00:12:38,980
uma personificação legal do ideal

282
00:12:38,980 --> 00:12:41,280
da liberdade de expressão e depois da liberdade de expressão aplicada ao governo.

283
00:12:41,840 --> 00:12:47,360
E é muito específico aplicado ao governo e à liberdade de expressão é a aplicação de

284
00:12:47,500 --> 00:12:49,560
o princípio de gostar de tudo,

285
00:12:50,040 --> 00:12:51,960
incluindo tipo de alto nível

286
00:12:52,720 --> 00:12:54,220
ideal filosófico

287
00:12:54,720 --> 00:12:59,160
do que é, do valor das pessoas serem capazes de falar o que pensam.

288
00:12:59,380 --> 00:12:59,580
Sim.

289
00:12:59,660 --> 00:13:03,640
É uma ideia mais antiga, mais ousada e mais expansiva.

290
00:13:04,020 --> 00:13:05,680
E você pode ter uma situação.

291
00:13:05,820 --> 00:13:08,540
E falo sobre países que têm boas leis de liberdade de expressão,

292
00:13:08,720 --> 00:13:10,580
mas não necessariamente uma grande cultura de liberdade de expressão.

293
00:13:11,100 --> 00:13:15,160
E falo sobre como, quando às vezes fazemos esta distinção entre liberdade de expressão

294
00:13:15,180 --> 00:13:16,420
lei e cultura da liberdade de expressão,

295
00:13:17,140 --> 00:13:19,920
estamos pensando de uma forma muito nebulosa.

296
00:13:21,160 --> 00:13:21,640
E o que quero dizer

297
00:13:21,640 --> 00:13:24,140
por isso é que a lei é geralmente,

298
00:13:24,180 --> 00:13:25,500
particularmente em um país de direito consuetudinário,

299
00:13:26,000 --> 00:13:27,200
é o reflexo

300
00:13:27,780 --> 00:13:28,520
de normas.

301
00:13:29,480 --> 00:13:31,200
Esses juízes também são pessoas.

302
00:13:31,360 --> 00:13:32,140
E em muitos casos,

303
00:13:32,240 --> 00:13:33,000
o direito comum é suposto

304
00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:37,880
realmente pegar nossas ideias intuitivas de justiça e colocá-las na lei.

305
00:13:38,720 --> 00:13:39,660
Então, se você realmente

306
00:13:39,660 --> 00:13:43,260
temos uma cultura que não aprecia a liberdade de expressão do ponto de vista filosófico,

307
00:13:43,580 --> 00:13:46,640
não será capaz de proteger a liberdade de expressão a longo prazo,

308
00:13:46,720 --> 00:13:47,640
mesmo na lei.

309
00:13:47,880 --> 00:13:50,940
Porque, eventualmente, essa é uma das razões pelas quais me preocupo tanto com alguns desses terríveis

310
00:13:50,940 --> 00:13:52,600
casos provenientes de faculdades de direito.

311
00:13:52,940 --> 00:13:56,640
Porque temo que, embora tenha certeza de que é americano primeiro

312
00:13:56,640 --> 00:13:59,040
a lei de emenda protege fortemente a primeira emenda

313
00:13:59,700 --> 00:14:00,040
por agora,

314
00:14:00,500 --> 00:14:01,880
não vai continuar assim.

315
00:14:01,960 --> 00:14:06,480
Se você tem gerações de estudantes de direito se formando que realmente pensam

316
00:14:06,580 --> 00:14:09,860
não há nada, não há objetivo maior do que gritar, você é um oponente.

317
00:14:10,600 --> 00:14:10,800
Sim.

318
00:14:10,920 --> 00:14:12,800
Então é por isso que tanto do seu foco

319
00:14:14,080 --> 00:14:22,620
ou grande parte do seu foco está no ensino superior ou no período educacional porque a educação é a base da cultura.

320
00:14:23,120 --> 00:14:23,240
Sim.

321
00:14:23,500 --> 00:14:24,360
Você tem essa história,

322
00:14:24,460 --> 00:14:26,000
você sabe, 64,

323
00:14:26,320 --> 00:14:30,320
você tem o movimento pela liberdade de expressão em Berkeley e em 65,

324
00:14:30,600 --> 00:14:32,720
você tem tolerância repressiva por Herbert Marcuse,

325
00:14:33,000 --> 00:14:34,240
que foi uma declaração de,

326
00:14:34,780 --> 00:14:37,660
a propósito, hum, nós da esquerda, não deveríamos,

327
00:14:38,180 --> 00:14:39,460
deveríamos ter liberdade de expressão,

328
00:14:39,520 --> 00:14:41,240
mas deveríamos ter liberdade de expressão para nós.

329
00:14:41,740 --> 00:14:44,040
Quer dizer, eu fui, voltei e reli,

330
00:14:44,400 --> 00:14:45,680
hum, uh, tolerância repressiva

331
00:14:46,200 --> 00:14:47,540
e quão claro é.

332
00:14:47,660 --> 00:14:50,240
Eu esqueci que tinha esquecido que realmente é tipo,

333
00:14:50,340 --> 00:14:52,600
hum, e esses chamados conservadores e direitistas,

334
00:14:52,880 --> 00:14:55,580
precisamos reprimi-los porque são pensadores regressivos.

335
00:14:55,980 --> 00:14:59,680
Realmente não resulta em nada mais sofisticado do que a ideia muito antiga,

336
00:15:00,080 --> 00:15:01,940
hum, que nosso povo é bom.

337
00:15:02,320 --> 00:15:03,420
Eles obtêm liberdade de expressão.

338
00:15:03,820 --> 00:15:04,760
Nós deveríamos, eles deveriam mantê-lo.

339
00:15:05,800 --> 00:15:07,180
O outro lado é ruim.

340
00:15:07,820 --> 00:15:08,840
Hum, nós, não deveríamos ter,

341
00:15:08,980 --> 00:15:10,900
uh, e temos que reciclar a sociedade.

342
00:15:11,040 --> 00:15:13,220
E claro, assim, acaba sendo outro,

343
00:15:13,560 --> 00:15:15,000
ele também era fã de Mao.

344
00:15:15,160 --> 00:15:16,320
Portanto, não é surpreendente que ele,

345
00:15:16,580 --> 00:15:20,160
que é claro que o sistema teria que contar com algum tipo de regime totalitário, uh,

346
00:15:20,860 --> 00:15:21,500
sistema. Hum,

347
00:15:22,640 --> 00:15:25,780
mas isso foi ridículo, hum,

348
00:15:26,160 --> 00:15:33,300
uh, posição, você sabe, digamos, 30, 40 anos atrás, a ideia de que essencialmente, você sabe, liberdade de expressão para mim, não para o,

349
00:15:33,960 --> 00:15:39,400
uh, como, como o grande, você sabe, campeão da liberdade de expressão que Hentoff costumava dizer era algo que você deveria

350
00:15:39,400 --> 00:15:40,260
para ficar envergonhado.

351
00:15:40,980 --> 00:15:43,460
Mas eu vi isso quando estava lá,

352
00:15:43,460 --> 00:15:44,700
na faculdade de direito em 97,

353
00:15:44,880 --> 00:15:46,180
Eu vi isso quando estava estagiando na

354
00:15:46,200 --> 00:15:47,500
a ACLU em 99,

355
00:15:48,580 --> 00:15:52,420
hum, que havia um acidente de trem em câmera lenta que essencialmente

356
00:15:52,420 --> 00:15:56,200
havia, hum, essas ideias ruins do campus que foram

357
00:15:56,980 --> 00:15:58,780
ganhando cada vez mais força

358
00:15:58,780 --> 00:16:03,780
de basicamente nenhuma liberdade de expressão para o meu oponente estavam se tornando cada vez mais,

359
00:16:03,860 --> 00:16:09,640
cada vez mais aceito como, e em parte porque, a academia estava se tornando cada vez menos diversificada em termos de pontos de vista.

360
00:16:09,740 --> 00:16:15,180
Acho que, como meu coautor Jonathan Haidt aponta, quando você tem um ponto de vista baixo

361
00:16:15,280 --> 00:16:18,260
diversidade, as pessoas começam a pensar de uma forma muito tribal.

362
00:16:18,780 --> 00:16:21,280
E se você não tiver dissidentes respeitados,

363
00:16:21,340 --> 00:16:22,080
você não tem as pessoas

364
00:16:22,080 --> 00:16:23,260
que você pode apontar para o que eu penso,

365
00:16:23,340 --> 00:16:24,650
Ei, esta é uma pessoa inteligente.

366
00:16:24,780 --> 00:16:25,660
Hum, isso é tipo,

367
00:16:26,100 --> 00:16:26,740
isso é inteligente,

368
00:16:26,960 --> 00:16:28,120
pessoa razoável e decente que eu,

369
00:16:28,180 --> 00:16:31,800
das quais discordo, então acho que nem todos pensam da mesma forma sobre esse assunto.

370
00:16:32,380 --> 00:16:35,180
Você começa a ficar muito mais tipo, você sabe,

371
00:16:35,600 --> 00:16:36,580
apenas pessoas más,

372
00:16:37,020 --> 00:16:41,220
apenas hereges, apenas blasfemadores, apenas direitistas, você sabe, hum, podem realmente

373
00:16:41,540 --> 00:16:42,180
pense desta forma.

374
00:16:42,580 --> 00:16:44,000
Cada vez que você diz alguma coisa,

375
00:16:44,000 --> 00:16:47,320
Sempre tenho um milhão de pensamentos e milhões de perguntas que

376
00:16:47,320 --> 00:16:47,640
Aparecer.

377
00:16:47,800 --> 00:16:52,300
Mas já que você mencionou, há uma espécie de desvio conforme você escreve no livro e você

378
00:16:52,300 --> 00:16:55,140
mencionei agora que há uma tendência para a esquerda na academia,

379
00:16:55,780 --> 00:16:57,340
hum, o que talvez também possamos

380
00:16:57,440 --> 00:17:01,440
estabeleça aqui uma distinção entre a esquerda e a direita e a cultura do cancelamento conforme você apresenta

381
00:17:01,440 --> 00:17:06,280
no seu livro não está necessariamente associado a nenhum ponto de vista político,

382
00:17:06,640 --> 00:17:09,260
que existem mecanismos em ambos os lados que resultam

383
00:17:09,820 --> 00:17:11,360
em cancelamento e censura,

384
00:17:12,020 --> 00:17:13,260
ah, em violação à liberdade de expressão.

385
00:17:13,800 --> 00:17:18,160
Então, uma coisa que quero deixar bem claro é que o livro aborda a cultura do cancelamento tanto à direita quanto à esquerda.

386
00:17:18,520 --> 00:17:21,080
Eles são diferentes em muitos aspectos e definitivamente,

387
00:17:21,080 --> 00:17:27,040
você sabe, hum, cancelar a cultura da esquerda é mais importante na academia, onde a esquerda domina mais.

388
00:17:27,800 --> 00:17:31,320
Hum, mas falamos muito sobre cancelar a cultura vinda das legislaturas.

389
00:17:31,480 --> 00:17:32,200
Falamos muito sobre

390
00:17:32,220 --> 00:17:35,120
cancelar a cultura no campus também,

391
00:17:35,440 --> 00:17:37,560
porque mesmo que, hum,

392
00:17:38,320 --> 00:17:39,180
a maioria das tentativas que

393
00:17:39,180 --> 00:17:42,460
vêm do campus para cancelar as pessoas ainda são da esquerda,

394
00:17:42,740 --> 00:17:43,620
há muitos

395
00:17:43,620 --> 00:17:45,720
ataques que vêm da direita que vêm,

396
00:17:45,720 --> 00:17:47,770
você sabe, uh, as tentativas de diferentes

397
00:17:47,960 --> 00:17:51,720
organizações e, às vezes, quando há histórias na Fox News,

398
00:17:51,940 --> 00:17:58,120
você sabe, como se eles fossem atrás de professores e cerca de um terço das tentativas de punir professores

399
00:17:58,140 --> 00:18:00,400
são bem-sucedidos, na verdade, vêm da direita.

400
00:18:00,760 --> 00:18:01,880
E, e falamos sobre,

401
00:18:01,880 --> 00:18:03,440
hum, tentativas de proibir livros.

402
00:18:03,440 --> 00:18:05,980
Hum, no, no, no livro sobre o qual falamos,

403
00:18:06,040 --> 00:18:09,020
hum, e, uh, eu falo sobre processar

404
00:18:09,260 --> 00:18:10,520
legislatura da Flórida.

405
00:18:10,760 --> 00:18:12,880
Rhonda Santus tinha algo chamado ato de parar de acordar,

406
00:18:13,500 --> 00:18:17,160
hum, que dissemos a todos que isso é ridiculamente inconstitucional.

407
00:18:17,320 --> 00:18:19,200
Hum, eles tentaram proibir,

408
00:18:19,200 --> 00:18:21,800
você sabe, tópicos específicos no ensino superior e nós pensamos,

409
00:18:21,880 --> 00:18:22,800
não, isso é uma piada.

410
00:18:23,040 --> 00:18:23,280
Tipo, tipo,

411
00:18:23,720 --> 00:18:25,340
isso será, isso será ridicularizado fora do tribunal.

412
00:18:26,580 --> 00:18:29,320
Hum, e eles não nos ouviram e trouxeram,

413
00:18:29,600 --> 00:18:32,640
uh, eles aprovaram e nós processamos e ganhamos.

414
00:18:33,160 --> 00:18:35,800
Agora eles estão tentando novamente com algo que é igualmente

415
00:18:35,800 --> 00:18:38,680
como inconstitucional e iremos processar novamente e iremos,

416
00:18:38,680 --> 00:18:39,540
e venceremos.

417
00:18:39,700 --> 00:18:41,700
Você pode elaborar um ato de parar de acordar?

418
00:18:41,960 --> 00:18:43,340
Então isso provavelmente está tentando limitar

419
00:18:44,040 --> 00:18:45,980
certos tópicos sejam ensinados na escola.

420
00:18:45,980 --> 00:18:46,340
Sim.

421
00:18:46,420 --> 00:18:48,140
Basicamente despertou tópicos.

422
00:18:48,240 --> 00:18:50,500
Hum, você sabe, é mais, saiu do tipo de

423
00:18:50,640 --> 00:18:52,600
tentativa de chegar a uma teoria racial crítica.

424
00:18:52,700 --> 00:18:55,620
Hum, então são tópicos relacionados à raça,

425
00:18:55,660 --> 00:18:56,580
gênero, etc.

426
00:18:56,600 --> 00:18:59,880
Hum, não me lembro exatamente como eles tentaram fazer o gabinete,

427
00:18:59,880 --> 00:19:01,580
hum, uh, para CRT.

428
00:19:02,140 --> 00:19:04,000
Hum, mas quando você realmente,

429
00:19:04,380 --> 00:19:07,560
a lei está realmente bem estabelecida e você não pode dizer mais

430
00:19:07,560 --> 00:19:11,140
educação o que eles estão autorizados a ensinar sem violar,

431
00:19:11,700 --> 00:19:12,680
uh, sem violar o primeiro

432
00:19:12,680 --> 00:19:13,040
alteração.

433
00:19:13,300 --> 00:19:15,240
E quando isto chegou a um juiz,

434
00:19:15,280 --> 00:19:16,500
foi exatamente assim,

435
00:19:16,500 --> 00:19:20,580
uh, ele estava exatamente tão cético quanto pensávamos que ele seria.

436
00:19:20,680 --> 00:19:21,980
Acho que ele chamou isso de distópico.

437
00:19:22,980 --> 00:19:24,680
Hum, e não foi por pouco.

438
00:19:24,760 --> 00:19:30,080
Então, se você é contra esse tipo de ensino, a maneira certa de combatê-lo é fazendo com que o

439
00:19:30,080 --> 00:19:34,460
caso não seja uma boa ideia fazer parte do currículo, em vez de bani-lo do currículo.

440
00:19:34,540 --> 00:19:34,660
Sim.

441
00:19:35,020 --> 00:19:37,480
Acontece que o estado não tem o poder de simplesmente dizer:

442
00:19:37,720 --> 00:19:42,640
para, para proibir, hum, você sabe, o que, o que ensina, o que os professores do ensino superior ensinam.

443
00:19:43,080 --> 00:19:45,840
Agora fica um pouco mais complicado quando você fala de K a 12,

444
00:19:46,400 --> 00:19:46,880
porque

445
00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:52,120
o estado tem um papel na decisão do que o público do ensino fundamental ao 12 ensina porque eles são seus filhos,

446
00:19:52,800 --> 00:19:53,960
eles, é financiado pelo contribuinte.

447
00:19:54,520 --> 00:19:57,260
Hum, e geralmente a legislatura está envolvida.

448
00:19:57,420 --> 00:19:59,900
Hum, há supervisão democrática desse processo.

449
00:20:00,640 --> 00:20:01,700
Então, de K a 12,

450
00:20:01,760 --> 00:20:03,420
há também inclinação para o

451
00:20:03,420 --> 00:20:06,060
sobra em termos da administração que gere o currículo?

452
00:20:06,120 --> 00:20:09,480
Sim, hum, aí, definitivamente há, hum, de K a 12,

453
00:20:09,820 --> 00:20:10,920
o, o, quero dizer,

454
00:20:11,760 --> 00:20:13,000
meus filhos estudam em escola pública.

455
00:20:13,340 --> 00:20:15,160
Hum, eu tenho um filho de cinco e sete anos,

456
00:20:16,200 --> 00:20:19,540
uh, e eles têm professores adoráveis.

457
00:20:19,720 --> 00:20:21,660
Hum, mas nos deparamos com um

458
00:20:21,660 --> 00:20:22,380
muitos problemas com,

459
00:20:22,600 --> 00:20:23,780
com escolas de educação em chamas.

460
00:20:24,340 --> 00:20:26,000
Hum, e muitos dos graduados de

461
00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:30,120
A escola de educação acabou sendo os administradores que reprimiram a liberdade de expressão no ensino superior.

462
00:20:31,040 --> 00:20:35,300
E então estou tentando pensar em maneiras positivas de enfrentar alguns dos,

463
00:20:35,520 --> 00:20:37,440
alguns dos problemas que vejo de K a 12.

464
00:20:37,640 --> 00:20:38,860
Eu pensei que a tentativa de apenas

465
00:20:39,500 --> 00:20:39,950
ditar,

466
00:20:40,560 --> 00:20:43,020
você não ensinará os 10 livros a seguir,

467
00:20:43,300 --> 00:20:46,340
você sabe, ou 20 livros ou 200 livros era a maneira errada de fazer isso.

468
00:20:46,540 --> 00:20:48,960
Agora, quando se trata de decidir quais livros estão no currículo,

469
00:20:49,060 --> 00:20:50,360
novamente, isso é algo que o legislador

470
00:20:50,360 --> 00:20:52,700
na verdade, você sabe, não posso, não posso ter alguma palavra a dizer,

471
00:20:52,700 --> 00:20:54,480
e isso é bastante incontroverso,

472
00:20:54,480 --> 00:20:55,560
hum, nos termos da lei.

473
00:20:56,220 --> 00:20:57,580
Mas quando se trata de como você luta contra isso,

474
00:20:57,780 --> 00:21:00,300
Eu tinha algo que, como estou preso a uma fórmula,

475
00:21:00,740 --> 00:21:02,860
Chamei de empoderamento da mente americana.

476
00:21:02,860 --> 00:21:05,560
Hum, eu dei princípios que eram inconsistentes,

477
00:21:05,960 --> 00:21:10,020
hum, com o tipo de pensamento de grupo e grande ênfase em,

478
00:21:10,040 --> 00:21:13,000
uh, política de identidade, uh, isso,

479
00:21:13,400 --> 00:21:16,580
hum, você sabe, alguns dos críticos estão reclamando com razão do K ao 12.

480
00:21:17,100 --> 00:21:18,600
Uh, e nós, nós,

481
00:21:19,160 --> 00:21:21,900
isso é, na verdade, um cancelamento da mente americana,

482
00:21:21,960 --> 00:21:23,820
mas tenho uma explicação mais detalhada sobre

483
00:21:23,820 --> 00:21:26,000
isso que vou colocar no meu blog,

484
00:21:26,260 --> 00:21:27,280
a ideia eternamente radical.

485
00:21:27,840 --> 00:21:29,080
É possível legalmente,

486
00:21:29,080 --> 00:21:30,760
isso é apenas uma pergunta boba,

487
00:21:31,000 --> 00:21:34,780
talvez criar uma proteção extra para certos tipos de literatura

488
00:21:35,410 --> 00:21:38,440
1984 ou algo assim para permanecer no currículo.

489
00:21:38,700 --> 00:21:40,280
Quer dizer, já está, está tudo protegido, eu acho.

490
00:21:40,560 --> 00:21:40,800
Sim.

491
00:21:40,800 --> 00:21:41,440
Eu acho

492
00:21:42,140 --> 00:21:44,540
para proteger contra administradores de

493
00:21:45,220 --> 00:21:46,280
mexendo demais

494
00:21:46,900 --> 00:21:47,880
com o currículo,

495
00:21:48,220 --> 00:21:49,400
como estabilizar o currículo.

496
00:21:49,700 --> 00:21:51,400
Eu não sei qual é o maquinário

497
00:21:51,940 --> 00:21:53,900
do ensino fundamental ao 12º ano da escola pública.

498
00:21:54,000 --> 00:21:54,840
De K a 12,

499
00:21:54,980 --> 00:21:57,860
você sabe, as legislaturas estaduais, você sabe, hum, elas fazem parte disso.

500
00:21:57,940 --> 00:21:59,540
Eles fazem parte disso e podem dizer tipo,

501
00:21:59,660 --> 00:22:01,060
você deve ensinar os seguintes livros.

502
00:22:01,160 --> 00:22:03,400
Agora, é claro, as pessoas estão sempre um pouco preocupadas com o fato de, hum,

503
00:22:03,760 --> 00:22:05,980
se você, uh, se eles recomendassem,

504
00:22:06,500 --> 00:22:06,840
você sabe,

505
00:22:07,200 --> 00:22:07,540
ensinar,

506
00:22:07,860 --> 00:22:09,740
uh, ensine a declaração de independência,

507
00:22:09,920 --> 00:22:11,120
você sabe, que vai acabar sendo,

508
00:22:11,180 --> 00:22:14,040
bem, eles vão ensinar que a declaração de independência foi apenas para proteger a escravidão,

509
00:22:14,440 --> 00:22:14,700
qual

510
00:22:15,030 --> 00:22:17,700
não estava ensinando um assunto específico,

511
00:22:17,800 --> 00:22:18,980
quais livros você escolhe,

512
00:22:19,200 --> 00:22:20,240
qual perspectiva você adota,

513
00:22:20,340 --> 00:22:21,120
todo esse tipo de coisa.

514
00:22:21,120 --> 00:22:25,280
É como se a religião começasse a se infiltrar em toda a questão de como, você sabe,

515
00:22:25,640 --> 00:22:29,000
a Bíblia tem permissão para ensinar nas empresas e na educação?

516
00:22:29,020 --> 00:22:29,180
Uh,

517
00:22:30,180 --> 00:22:30,660
não, sim.

518
00:22:30,840 --> 00:22:32,660
Quer dizer, eu sou ateu,

519
00:22:33,280 --> 00:22:35,080
uh, com um intenso interesse em religião.

520
00:22:35,240 --> 00:22:38,140
Na verdade, li a Bíblia inteira este ano só porque faço coisas assim.

521
00:22:38,420 --> 00:22:39,480
E eu nunca tinha lido isso

522
00:22:39,480 --> 00:22:40,500
do começo ao fim.

523
00:22:40,680 --> 00:22:42,420
Hum, então eu li o Alcorão porque você sabe,

524
00:22:42,420 --> 00:22:43,480
e vou tentar fazer o

525
00:22:43,480 --> 00:22:44,540
livro de Mórmon, mas você sabe.

526
00:22:44,680 --> 00:22:46,420
Bem, eles começaram, você é tão fascinante.

527
00:22:46,780 --> 00:22:48,360
Hum, você recomenda fazer isso?

528
00:22:48,700 --> 00:22:50,040
Eu acho que você deveria,

529
00:22:50,040 --> 00:22:53,200
hum, só para saber, porque é uma pedra de toque,

530
00:22:53,460 --> 00:22:55,940
hum, na maneira como as pessoas falam sobre as coisas,

531
00:22:56,360 --> 00:22:57,800
pode ser muito tedioso,

532
00:22:58,080 --> 00:23:00,460
mas eu até me fiz ler

533
00:23:00,500 --> 00:23:06,120
todas as instruções muito específicas sobre a altura que as diferentes partes do templo precisam ter

534
00:23:06,120 --> 00:23:10,380
e quanto tempo os trajes precisam ter, que formato eles precisam ter e como,

535
00:23:10,620 --> 00:23:12,880
e isso acontece muito.

536
00:23:13,300 --> 00:23:14,660
Hum, isso, isso, surpreendentemente,

537
00:23:15,080 --> 00:23:16,880
desculpe, parte surpreendentemente grande do Êxodo.

538
00:23:17,100 --> 00:23:19,980
Hum, pensei que fosse mais parecido com Levítico e Deuteronômio.

539
00:23:20,600 --> 00:23:22,340
Hum, mas então você chega a livros como Jó,

540
00:23:22,860 --> 00:23:23,240
você sabe,

541
00:23:23,580 --> 00:23:23,960
uau.

542
00:23:24,360 --> 00:23:28,260
Quero dizer, Jó é uma leitura e de jeito nenhum Jó originalmente teve esse final.

543
00:23:29,140 --> 00:23:30,260
Como Jó é basicamente,

544
00:23:30,760 --> 00:23:34,020
começa como esta aposta perversa entre Deus,

545
00:23:34,020 --> 00:23:36,760
hum, e Satanás sobre se ou não

546
00:23:36,800 --> 00:23:39,080
eles podem realmente fazer um homem bom renunciar a Deus.

547
00:23:39,160 --> 00:23:40,060
E inicialmente eles não podem,

548
00:23:40,060 --> 00:23:41,340
tudo está indo de forma muito previsível.

549
00:23:41,900 --> 00:23:44,460
E então eles finalmente torturaram Jó de verdade

550
00:23:45,160 --> 00:23:46,760
e ele se transforma no melhor,

551
00:23:47,960 --> 00:23:49,040
por que Deus é cruel?

552
00:23:49,120 --> 00:23:50,600
Como poderia Deus existir?

553
00:23:50,640 --> 00:23:52,120
Como poderia um Deus bondoso fazer essas coisas?

554
00:23:52,360 --> 00:23:56,820
E ele vence, vira o melhor advogado do mundo e derrota todo mundo,

555
00:23:57,120 --> 00:23:57,780
todas as pessoas que

556
00:23:57,780 --> 00:23:58,440
venha discutir com ele.

557
00:23:58,620 --> 00:24:00,780
Ele, ele argumenta até tirar as calças deles.

558
00:24:00,900 --> 00:24:02,800
E então, de repente, no final, Deus aparece

559
00:24:03,340 --> 00:24:04,380
e ele disse,

560
00:24:04,880 --> 00:24:08,420
hum, bem, você sabe, uh, estou em todo lugar.

561
00:24:08,980 --> 00:24:09,860
E, ah,

562
00:24:10,560 --> 00:24:11,880
é uma resposta muito confusa.

563
00:24:11,900 --> 00:24:13,040
Ele dá uma resposta tipo,

564
00:24:13,200 --> 00:24:14,360
Eu estou lá quando,

565
00:24:14,360 --> 00:24:16,660
quando, quando as leoas dão à luz e eu estou lá.

566
00:24:16,840 --> 00:24:17,360
E, aliás,

567
00:24:17,400 --> 00:24:21,400
tem um monstro gigante, o Leviatã, que é muito grande e muito assustador.

568
00:24:21,400 --> 00:24:23,260
E eu, e eu tenho que administrar o universo.

569
00:24:23,580 --> 00:24:24,280
E eu fico tipo,

570
00:24:24,300 --> 00:24:26,300
Deus, você está dizendo que você é muito

571
00:24:26,300 --> 00:24:26,680
ocupado?

572
00:24:26,960 --> 00:24:30,560
Esse é essencialmente o seu argumento para Jó?

573
00:24:31,000 --> 00:24:32,480
E você não menciona o todo,

574
00:24:32,820 --> 00:24:34,440
você não menciona todo esse tipo de coisa,

575
00:24:34,880 --> 00:24:37,300
que aposto que é por isso que estava torturando você,

576
00:24:37,300 --> 00:24:38,160
isso não aparece.

577
00:24:38,540 --> 00:24:39,940
E então no final ele decide,

578
00:24:40,180 --> 00:24:42,520
Deus decide, como Jó, ah, não, você está totalmente certo.

579
00:24:42,520 --> 00:24:43,460
Eu estava totalmente errado.

580
00:24:43,480 --> 00:24:44,140
Ah, desculpe.

581
00:24:44,340 --> 00:24:49,360
Hum, e, e Deus diz, vou punir aquelas pessoas que tentaram discutir com você e não venceram.

582
00:24:49,720 --> 00:24:51,440
Então, hum, então ele se livra do,

583
00:24:51,440 --> 00:24:52,920
Não sei exatamente o que ele faz com eles.

584
00:24:52,920 --> 00:24:53,480
Eu não me lembro.

585
00:24:54,000 --> 00:24:56,860
Hum, e então ele devolveu a Jó todo o seu dinheiro e tudo mais,

586
00:24:57,020 --> 00:24:58,460
e isso os torna super prósperos.

587
00:24:58,620 --> 00:25:02,440
E eu pensei, de jeito nenhum esse foi o final original daquele livro.

588
00:25:02,500 --> 00:25:03,860
Tipo, porque isso gostaria,

589
00:25:03,940 --> 00:25:06,420
este era claramente um romance amado que eles gostavam,

590
00:25:06,480 --> 00:25:07,540
mas não pode ter esse final.

591
00:25:07,740 --> 00:25:07,940
OK.

592
00:25:08,180 --> 00:25:10,040
Então, então, então, então, sim, é um longo caminho para dizer,

593
00:25:10,300 --> 00:25:11,560
Na verdade, acho que vale a pena.

594
00:25:11,660 --> 00:25:12,620
Uh, parte disso foi,

595
00:25:12,620 --> 00:25:15,160
você sempre fica meio surpreso quando acaba no papel,

596
00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:16,160
tipo, hum,

597
00:25:17,160 --> 00:25:19,260
há partes dele que vão aparecer furtivamente em você,

598
00:25:19,380 --> 00:25:21,060
tipo uma viagem de Isaías, hum,

599
00:25:21,380 --> 00:25:22,100
Eclesiastes,

600
00:25:22,580 --> 00:25:23,000
Modo Depeche.

601
00:25:24,280 --> 00:25:25,520
E você fez, você disse que também,

602
00:25:25,520 --> 00:25:26,640
uh, o Alcorão.

603
00:25:26,740 --> 00:25:26,860
Sim.

604
00:25:26,860 --> 00:25:27,520
O que foi fascinante.

605
00:25:28,040 --> 00:25:29,460
Então o que há,

606
00:25:29,460 --> 00:25:30,340
seria interessante perguntar,

607
00:25:30,380 --> 00:25:32,160
existe uma tensão entre

608
00:25:32,900 --> 00:25:34,280
o estudo da religião

609
00:25:34,380 --> 00:25:41,400
textos ou seguir a religião e apenas acreditar em Deus e seguir os vários

610
00:25:41,420 --> 00:25:43,560
aspectos da religião com liberdade de expressão?

611
00:25:44,260 --> 00:25:45,740
Hum, na primeira emenda,

612
00:25:46,000 --> 00:25:46,860
ah, nós, nós temos

613
00:25:47,220 --> 00:25:50,700
algo que chamamos de cláusula religiosa e nunca gostei de chamá-lo assim

614
00:25:50,820 --> 00:25:53,400
porque são duas coisas brilhantes uma ao lado da outra.

615
00:25:54,200 --> 00:25:55,880
O estado não pode estabelecer

616
00:25:55,880 --> 00:26:00,100
uma religião oficial, mas não pode interferir com o seu direito de praticar a sua religião.

617
00:26:00,700 --> 00:26:01,440
Isso é lindo.

618
00:26:01,840 --> 00:26:03,360
Duas coisas ao mesmo tempo.

619
00:26:03,360 --> 00:26:04,000
E eu acho que eles são,

620
00:26:04,000 --> 00:26:05,580
e acho que ambos estão exatamente certos.

621
00:26:06,060 --> 00:26:09,640
E acho que às vezes a direita fica muito entusiasmada com a cláusula de livre exercício

622
00:26:09,660 --> 00:26:11,780
e a esquerda fica muito entusiasmada com o establishment.

623
00:26:12,200 --> 00:26:13,440
E gostei do fato de termos,

624
00:26:13,480 --> 00:26:14,820
temos os dois juntos.

625
00:26:15,240 --> 00:26:16,940
Agora, como isso se relaciona com a liberdade de expressão?

626
00:26:17,640 --> 00:26:18,960
E eu estava certo no currículo,

627
00:26:19,000 --> 00:26:20,040
como estávamos conversando.

628
00:26:21,220 --> 00:26:25,720
Hum, na verdade acho que seria ótimo se as escolas públicas pudessem ensinar

629
00:26:26,300 --> 00:26:28,120
a Bíblia, semelhante no sentido de semelhante,

630
00:26:28,200 --> 00:26:29,520
leia-o como um documento histórico.

631
00:26:30,060 --> 00:26:31,160
Mas quando eu estava no

632
00:26:31,160 --> 00:26:33,460
ACLU, sempre que via pessoas tentando isso,

633
00:26:33,680 --> 00:26:36,760
sempre se transformou em eles realmente defendendo,

634
00:26:36,900 --> 00:26:42,620
você sabe, um católico ou protestante ou algum tipo de ortodoxo que lê sobre religião.

635
00:26:43,260 --> 00:26:43,560
Hum, então

636
00:26:44,000 --> 00:26:47,500
se você realmente transformar isso em algo que defende uma visão específica sobre religião,

637
00:26:47,640 --> 00:26:50,360
então passa para o lado da cláusula de estabelecimento.

638
00:26:50,900 --> 00:26:53,120
Portanto, os americanos ainda não descobriram uma maneira de realmente ensiná-lo.

639
00:26:53,440 --> 00:26:54,920
Então provavelmente é melhor que você,

640
00:26:54,920 --> 00:26:57,580
você sabe, aprende, aprende fora de uma aula de escola pública.

641
00:26:57,580 --> 00:27:02,020
Você acha que é possível ensinar religião, hum,

642
00:27:02,700 --> 00:27:02,960
de como,

643
00:27:03,780 --> 00:27:06,120
uh, religiões mundiais, é claro,

644
00:27:06,780 --> 00:27:09,340
sem desrespeitar as religiões?

645
00:27:09,920 --> 00:27:12,220
Acho que a resposta é que depende da perspectiva de quem.

646
00:27:13,320 --> 00:27:17,320
Hum, bem, como dizem os praticantes, você é como um seguidor ortodoxo de um determinado

647
00:27:17,320 --> 00:27:17,760
religião.

648
00:27:17,760 --> 00:27:20,060
É possível

649
00:27:20,640 --> 00:27:24,360
para não te irritar ensinando como todos os principais

650
00:27:24,360 --> 00:27:25,120
religiões do mundo?

651
00:27:25,180 --> 00:27:26,100
Para algumas pessoas,

652
00:27:27,040 --> 00:27:30,080
o resultado final é que você deve ensiná-lo como verdadeiro.

653
00:27:30,340 --> 00:27:33,800
Ah, hum, e com isso nessas condições,

654
00:27:33,800 --> 00:27:34,940
então a resposta é não,

655
00:27:34,940 --> 00:27:35,360
você não pode ensiná-lo

656
00:27:35,380 --> 00:27:38,200
sem, sem ofender alguém pelo menos.

657
00:27:38,380 --> 00:27:40,680
Você não pode dizer que essas pessoas acreditam que é verdade?

658
00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:41,920
Você pode reformá-lo?

659
00:27:41,920 --> 00:27:43,420
Então você tem que pisar em ovos,

660
00:27:43,500 --> 00:27:43,740
essencialmente.

661
00:27:43,960 --> 00:27:48,060
Você pode se esforçar muito e ainda deixará algumas pessoas com raiva,

662
00:27:48,340 --> 00:27:52,580
mas pessoas sérias dirão: ah, não, você realmente tentou ser justo com as crenças aqui.

663
00:27:52,780 --> 00:27:54,800
Hum, e eu, e tento ser respeitoso,

664
00:27:54,800 --> 00:27:56,360
hum, tanto quanto eu puder,

665
00:27:56,700 --> 00:27:57,660
hum,

666
00:27:58,080 --> 00:27:58,440
muito disso,

667
00:27:58,520 --> 00:28:01,040
Ainda me sinto muito mais atraído tanto pelo Budismo quanto pelo Estoicismo.

668
00:28:01,300 --> 00:28:01,420
Bem,

669
00:28:03,360 --> 00:28:05,860
para onde eu vou?

670
00:28:07,040 --> 00:28:09,100
Bem, uma coisa interessante

671
00:28:09,640 --> 00:28:11,420
voltar aos campi universitários é,

672
00:28:11,420 --> 00:28:17,000
hum, o incêndio mantém as classificações de liberdade de expressão da faculdade em rankings.thefire.org.

673
00:28:17,200 --> 00:28:18,060
Estou muito orgulhoso deles.

674
00:28:18,180 --> 00:28:20,840
Eu recomendo fortemente porque esqueça que mesmo apenas a classificação,

675
00:28:20,840 --> 00:28:21,600
você aprende um

676
00:28:21,600 --> 00:28:25,780
muito sobre as universidades a partir desta perspectiva totalmente diferente da que as pessoas têm

677
00:28:25,780 --> 00:28:29,180
costumavam fazer quando vão escolher a universidade que desejam estudar.

678
00:28:29,220 --> 00:28:32,080
Isso apenas dá outra perspectiva sobre a coisa toda.

679
00:28:32,260 --> 00:28:35,340
E dá citações de pessoas que são estudantes lá e assim por diante,

680
00:28:35,540 --> 00:28:36,600
gosto sobre suas experiências.

681
00:28:37,320 --> 00:28:38,300
E, e dá diferente,

682
00:28:38,580 --> 00:28:44,620
talvez você pudesse falar sobre as várias medidas aqui antes de falarmos sobre quem está entre os cinco primeiros e quem está entre os cinco últimos.

683
00:28:45,220 --> 00:28:49,880
Quais, quais são os diferentes parâmetros que contribuem para a avaliação?

684
00:28:50,600 --> 00:28:54,200
Então, desde o primeiro dia, as pessoas me pedem para fazer um ranking de escolas,

685
00:28:54,480 --> 00:28:55,360
de acordo com a liberdade de expressão.

686
00:28:55,720 --> 00:28:56,920
E mesmo que tivéssemos,

687
00:28:57,300 --> 00:29:01,880
tínhamos o melhor banco de dados existente de códigos de fala do campus, uh,

688
00:29:02,920 --> 00:29:06,600
políticas que as universidades têm que violam a primeira emenda ou as normas da primeira emenda.

689
00:29:07,200 --> 00:29:08,920
Também temos o melhor banco de dados de,

690
00:29:08,920 --> 00:29:11,040
de, uh, chamamos de banco de dados de desconvite.

691
00:29:11,330 --> 00:29:13,240
Hum, mas na verdade é o,

692
00:29:13,240 --> 00:29:15,400
hum, é melhor chamá-lo de banco de dados deplataforma,

693
00:29:15,480 --> 00:29:16,900
que é como vamos chamá-lo.

694
00:29:17,260 --> 00:29:23,740
Hum, e todos esses são casos em que alguém foi convidado como palestrante para o campus e depois foi desconvidado.

695
00:29:23,860 --> 00:29:26,740
Desconvidado ou deplataforma também inclui comida.

696
00:29:27,340 --> 00:29:28,120
Hum, então eles apareceram

697
00:29:28,680 --> 00:29:30,000
e eles realmente não conseguiam falar.

698
00:29:30,180 --> 00:29:30,760
Sim, exatamente.

699
00:29:31,480 --> 00:29:32,940
Hum, e, e, uh,

700
00:29:33,640 --> 00:29:34,740
e tendo isso,

701
00:29:35,240 --> 00:29:41,040
o que realmente precisávamos para ter alguma ciência social séria para realmente apresentar um argumento sério sobre qual era a classificação,

702
00:29:41,640 --> 00:29:43,500
hum, era ser capaz de fazer um,

703
00:29:43,720 --> 00:29:48,140
ter uma noção melhor de quantos professores foram realmente punidos durante esse período.

704
00:29:48,220 --> 00:29:53,480
Hum, e então o, o, o maior elemento que faltava era ser capaz de,

705
00:29:53,480 --> 00:29:58,420
hum, pergunte diretamente aos alunos como era o ambiente naquele campus para a liberdade de expressão.

706
00:29:58,920 --> 00:30:00,760
Você se sente confortável em discordar um do outro?

707
00:30:00,800 --> 00:30:02,400
Você se sente confortável em discordar do seu,

708
00:30:02,400 --> 00:30:03,400
uh, com seus professores?

709
00:30:03,880 --> 00:30:07,200
Você acha que a violência é aceitável em resposta a um orador?

710
00:30:07,380 --> 00:30:08,220
Você acha que gritar,

711
00:30:08,480 --> 00:30:10,060
uh, você acha que gritar está certo?

712
00:30:10,140 --> 00:30:13,640
Você acha que bloquear o acesso das pessoas a um alto-falante é correto?

713
00:30:14,300 --> 00:30:16,900
Hum, e assim que conseguimos reunir todos esses elementos,

714
00:30:17,480 --> 00:30:20,200
nós, uh, primeiro fizemos um teste,

715
00:30:20,200 --> 00:30:21,380
Acho que em 2019,

716
00:30:21,600 --> 00:30:22,340
Cerca de 50.

717
00:30:22,640 --> 00:30:24,280
E já fazemos isso há quatro anos,

718
00:30:24,360 --> 00:30:31,820
sempre tentando tornar a metodologia cada vez mais precisa para melhor refletir o ambiente real em determinadas escolas.

719
00:30:32,360 --> 00:30:36,160
Hum, e este ano, a escola número um foi a Universidade Tecnológica de Michigan,

720
00:30:36,280 --> 00:30:38,380
o que foi uma boa surpresa.

721
00:30:38,560 --> 00:30:41,180
Uh, a escola número dois era na verdade a Universidade de Auburn.

722
00:30:41,440 --> 00:30:45,720
Hum, o que foi bom ver, uh, entre os 10 primeiros,

723
00:30:45,900 --> 00:30:47,440
a escola de prestígio mais conhecida

724
00:30:47,440 --> 00:30:50,000
é na verdade UVA, hum, que foi muito bem este ano.

725
00:30:50,700 --> 00:30:52,400
A Universidade de Chicago não ficou feliz

726
00:30:52,400 --> 00:30:53,760
que eles não eram o número um,

727
00:30:53,920 --> 00:30:57,800
mas a universidade de Chicago tem 13 anos e eles foram o número um

728
00:30:57,800 --> 00:31:00,280
ou entre os três primeiros nos anos anteriores.

729
00:31:00,620 --> 00:31:01,320
Então você pode explicar,

730
00:31:01,420 --> 00:31:02,320
é quase surpreendente.

731
00:31:02,340 --> 00:31:03,220
É por causa de,

732
00:31:03,240 --> 00:31:04,520
uh, como o realmente forte

733
00:31:04,530 --> 00:31:06,740
departamentos de economia e coisas assim ou o quê, por quê?

734
00:31:07,360 --> 00:31:09,220
Eles tiveram um caso envolvendo um estudante.

735
00:31:09,480 --> 00:31:12,700
Eles não reconheceriam um capítulo de viragem nos EUA e

736
00:31:12,700 --> 00:31:15,420
eles fizeram um argumento muito clássico, hum,

737
00:31:15,920 --> 00:31:18,060
que nós, e clássico do jeito ruim que ouvimos

738
00:31:18,200 --> 00:31:19,420
campi em todo o país.

739
00:31:19,740 --> 00:31:21,200
Oh, temos um campus republicano,

740
00:31:21,700 --> 00:31:23,920
então não precisamos deste grupo conservador adicional.

741
00:31:24,280 --> 00:31:25,900
E nós pensamos, não, me desculpe.

742
00:31:25,960 --> 00:31:27,560
Como vimos dezenas e

743
00:31:27,560 --> 00:31:30,440
dezenas, não centenas de tentativas para conseguir este em particular,

744
00:31:30,440 --> 00:31:35,780
hum, estudante conservador, um grupo de estudantes, você reconhece ou não reconhece?

745
00:31:36,440 --> 00:31:38,560
E então dissemos a eles,

746
00:31:38,700 --> 00:31:41,640
ouça, isso é tipo, uh, nós dissemos a eles no incêndio que,

747
00:31:41,780 --> 00:31:43,860
uh, você sabe, consideramos isso sério e

748
00:31:43,860 --> 00:31:45,220
eles não reconheceriam o grupo.

749
00:31:45,380 --> 00:31:48,800
Então isso, isso é um, isso, isso é um ponto abaixo em nosso

750
00:31:48,800 --> 00:31:50,660
classificação e foi o suficiente para derrubá-los,

751
00:31:51,100 --> 00:31:52,660
eles provavelmente teriam sido o número dois em

752
00:31:52,660 --> 00:31:53,160
as classificações.

753
00:31:53,320 --> 00:31:55,560
Uh, mas agora eles são 13 de dois 48.

754
00:31:56,040 --> 00:31:57,160
Eles ainda são uma das melhores escolas

755
00:31:57,160 --> 00:31:57,720
no país.

756
00:31:57,900 --> 00:31:59,480
Não tenho nenhum problema em dizer isso

757
00:32:00,080 --> 00:32:03,140
a escola que não foi tão bem, uh, hum,

758
00:32:03,800 --> 00:32:11,660
em 10,69 negativos, 10,69 negativos e arredondamos para zero foi Harvard e

759
00:32:11,660 --> 00:32:15,320
Harvard não ficou, hum, muito feliz com esse resultado.

760
00:32:15,460 --> 00:32:17,580
A única escola a receber a classificação péssima.

761
00:32:18,400 --> 00:32:19,900
Sim. E há algumas pessoas,

762
00:32:20,000 --> 00:32:21,380
ah, Harvard, ah, Harvard.

763
00:32:21,600 --> 00:32:23,500
E há algumas pessoas que realmente estiveram,

764
00:32:23,700 --> 00:32:26,780
Eu acho que, cometendo um erro ao ficar muito em Harvard,

765
00:32:27,020 --> 00:32:28,880
hum, soando como,

766
00:32:28,880 --> 00:32:30,620
Pedi a estatísticos que analisassem isso e eles,

767
00:32:30,620 --> 00:32:32,340
e eles, eles, eles acham que sua metodologia é uma piada.

768
00:32:32,430 --> 00:32:34,160
E, uh, e como apontar,

769
00:32:34,420 --> 00:32:35,580
e este caso não era tão importante.

770
00:32:35,580 --> 00:32:39,780
E aquele estudioso não era aquele estudioso, como aquele dos argumentos contra um dos estudiosos que

771
00:32:39,780 --> 00:32:41,180
contamos contra eles por,

772
00:32:41,580 --> 00:32:45,400
uh, punir foi que aquele não era muito famoso ou

773
00:32:45,400 --> 00:32:46,220
estudioso influente.

774
00:32:46,360 --> 00:32:47,300
E eu fico tipo,

775
00:32:47,580 --> 00:32:51,200
então seu argumento parece esnobismo.

776
00:32:51,200 --> 00:32:53,220
Basicamente, gosto de você,

777
00:32:53,220 --> 00:32:55,620
você não está entendendo nossa metodologia por um motivo.

778
00:32:56,080 --> 00:32:59,920
E então você está dizendo que na verdade aquele estudioso não era importante o suficiente para

779
00:32:59,920 --> 00:33:00,020
contar.

780
00:33:00,280 --> 00:33:01,200
E a propósito, Harvard,

781
00:33:01,900 --> 00:33:03,140
a propósito, Harvard,

782
00:33:04,060 --> 00:33:04,600
hum,

783
00:33:05,020 --> 00:33:06,260
se nós, o campus de Harvard,

784
00:33:06,620 --> 00:33:06,720
sim.

785
00:33:07,360 --> 00:33:08,120
Se nós,

786
00:33:08,840 --> 00:33:11,280
mesmo que tomássemos todos os seus argumentos como verdadeiros,

787
00:33:11,500 --> 00:33:14,260
mesmo que decidíssemos nos livrar desses dois professores,

788
00:33:14,460 --> 00:33:17,120
hum, você ainda estaria em números negativos.

789
00:33:17,300 --> 00:33:18,720
Você ainda estaria em último lugar.

790
00:33:18,860 --> 00:33:20,780
Você ainda estaria atrás de Georgetown e Penn.

791
00:33:20,940 --> 00:33:23,260
E nenhuma dessas escolas é boa para a liberdade de expressão.

792
00:33:23,280 --> 00:33:23,980
Eu deveria dizer o,

793
00:33:23,980 --> 00:33:26,280
o, os cinco últimos são a universidade da Pensilvânia,

794
00:33:26,800 --> 00:33:27,300
Nicosette Penn,

795
00:33:27,740 --> 00:33:29,900
uh, a universidade da Carolina do Sul,

796
00:33:30,180 --> 00:33:32,000
Universidade de Georgetown e Universidade Fordham.

797
00:33:32,640 --> 00:33:33,620
Tudo muito bem merecido.

798
00:33:33,840 --> 00:33:36,260
Eles têm tantos casos graves em todas essas escolas.

799
00:33:36,400 --> 00:33:39,640
Qual é a melhor maneira de se encontrar entre os cinco últimos?

800
00:33:39,640 --> 00:33:40,680
Se você é uma universidade,

801
00:33:40,900 --> 00:33:42,720
qual é o caminho mais rápido para esse negativo,

802
00:33:42,860 --> 00:33:46,480
até aquele zero, muita plataforma, hum, isso,

803
00:33:47,060 --> 00:33:48,520
uh, quando olhamos para os cinco últimos,

804
00:33:48,720 --> 00:33:54,400
uh, 81% das tentativas de desplataformar os alto-falantes foram bem-sucedidas entre os cinco últimos.

805
00:33:54,580 --> 00:33:55,800
Hum, havia algumas escolas,

806
00:33:55,940 --> 00:33:58,240
Acho que Penn incluiu onde cada tentativa,

807
00:33:58,860 --> 00:33:59,820
cada vez que um aluno,

808
00:33:59,900 --> 00:34:03,260
como objetou, um grupo de estudantes se opôs à vinda daquele orador,

809
00:34:03,340 --> 00:34:04,540
eles cancelaram isso, esse discurso.

810
00:34:05,120 --> 00:34:07,440
E eu acho que Georgetown teve uma taxa de sucesso de cem por cento.

811
00:34:07,520 --> 00:34:10,080
Acho que Penn teve uma taxa de sucesso de cem por cento.

812
00:34:10,180 --> 00:34:12,400
Acho que Harvard defendeu alguns,

813
00:34:12,560 --> 00:34:15,460
mas principalmente, uh, as pessoas também ficaram deplataformadas lá.

814
00:34:15,540 --> 00:34:17,980
Então, como você evita a deplataforma?

815
00:34:18,580 --> 00:34:19,960
Bem, quem, quem faria isso?

816
00:34:19,980 --> 00:34:21,280
São outros alunos?

817
00:34:21,640 --> 00:34:22,360
É faculdade?

818
00:34:22,520 --> 00:34:23,580
É a administração?

819
00:34:23,780 --> 00:34:25,260
Qual é a dinâmica de, de,

820
00:34:25,600 --> 00:34:26,340
uh, empurrando para trás

821
00:34:27,080 --> 00:34:29,380
basicamente, porque imagino

822
00:34:30,140 --> 00:34:32,600
parte disso é cultura,

823
00:34:33,200 --> 00:34:35,960
mas imagino que toda universidade tenha um monte de estudantes que irão

824
00:34:35,960 --> 00:34:37,540
protestar basicamente contra todos os oradores.

825
00:34:37,740 --> 00:34:39,760
E é uma questão de como você responde a esse protesto.

826
00:34:40,340 --> 00:34:44,620
Bem, aqui está o segredinho sujo sobre a grande mudança em 2014.

827
00:34:44,740 --> 00:34:47,520
Hum, e, e fogo e eu e altura,

828
00:34:47,580 --> 00:34:50,400
hum, foi muito claro que a grande mudança que

829
00:34:50,400 --> 00:34:53,700
vi no campus foi que durante a maior parte da minha carreira, os alunos foram ótimos,

830
00:34:54,060 --> 00:34:55,360
hum, sobre liberdade de expressão.

831
00:34:55,580 --> 00:34:57,440
Eles eram o melhor eleitorado para a liberdade de expressão,

832
00:34:58,100 --> 00:35:01,600
absolutamente inequívoca até cerca de 2013, 2014.

833
00:35:02,400 --> 00:35:04,820
E foi só em 2014 que tivemos isso,

834
00:35:04,820 --> 00:35:06,800
você sabe, é meio triste para nós a experiência

835
00:35:06,820 --> 00:35:11,860
onde de repente os estudantes eram os que defendiam a deplataforma e novos códigos de fala

836
00:35:11,880 --> 00:35:15,880
de maneira semelhante ao que vinham fazendo, digamos, em meados dos anos oitenta, por exemplo.

837
00:35:16,300 --> 00:35:17,320
Mas aqui está o segredinho sujo.

838
00:35:18,040 --> 00:35:20,240
Não são, são apenas os alunos,

839
00:35:20,760 --> 00:35:22,200
são estudantes e administradores,

840
00:35:23,140 --> 00:35:24,740
às vezes, apenas um punhado deles,

841
00:35:24,900 --> 00:35:26,120
trabalhando juntos para fazer,

842
00:35:26,680 --> 00:35:27,760
uh, para criar alguns desses problemas.

843
00:35:28,120 --> 00:35:30,100
E foi exatamente isso que aconteceu em Stanford.

844
00:35:30,420 --> 00:35:31,400
Quando Kyle Duncan,

845
00:35:31,860 --> 00:35:34,660
uh, um juiz do quinto circuito tentou falar na minha alma mater

846
00:35:35,220 --> 00:35:36,100
e um quinto do

847
00:35:36,120 --> 00:35:37,680
a turma apareceu para gritar com ele.

848
00:35:38,320 --> 00:35:40,480
Hum, foi uma verdadeira demonstração do,

849
00:35:40,540 --> 00:35:45,980
do que estava acontecendo naqueles 10 minutos após o grito de um juiz do quinto circuito.

850
00:35:46,000 --> 00:35:48,120
E continuo enfatizando isso porque sou advogado constitucional,

851
00:35:48,280 --> 00:35:49,980
os juízes do quinto circuito são grandes negócios.

852
00:35:50,640 --> 00:35:52,320
Eles estão um nível abaixo da Suprema Corte.

853
00:35:53,140 --> 00:35:55,820
Hum, você sabe, cerca de um quinto da escola aparece para gritar

854
00:35:56,540 --> 00:35:57,420
depois de 10 minutos de

855
00:35:57,420 --> 00:35:59,020
gritando para eles e administrador,

856
00:35:59,140 --> 00:36:01,560
um administrador DEI se levanta com um preparado

857
00:36:01,580 --> 00:36:03,200
discurso que ela, que ela escreveu.

858
00:36:03,380 --> 00:36:06,460
É um discurso de sete minutos onde ela fala sobre,

859
00:36:06,900 --> 00:36:07,460
ah, liberdade de expressão.

860
00:36:07,760 --> 00:36:09,400
Talvez o suco não valha a pena ser espremido.

861
00:36:09,900 --> 00:36:14,220
E estávamos nesta faculdade de direito onde as pessoas podiam aprender a desafiar estas normas.

862
00:36:15,080 --> 00:36:16,840
Então está claro que houve coordenação,

863
00:36:16,840 --> 00:36:18,580
você sabe, entre alguns desses

864
00:36:18,580 --> 00:36:20,620
administradores e de conversar com os alunos lá,

865
00:36:20,620 --> 00:36:21,660
eles estavam em reuniões,

866
00:36:22,320 --> 00:36:23,440
reuniões extensas por um longo tempo.

867
00:36:23,780 --> 00:36:25,100
Eles aparecem, gritam.

868
00:36:25,660 --> 00:36:28,940
Em seguida, eles levam mais sete minutos para,

869
00:36:28,940 --> 00:36:31,040
para, dar uma palestra ao palestrante gratuitamente

870
00:36:31,060 --> 00:36:33,940
discurso, não ser, não o suco da liberdade de expressão,

871
00:36:33,960 --> 00:36:35,040
não valendo a pena o aperto.

872
00:36:35,980 --> 00:36:37,580
Hum, e então para o resto,

873
00:36:37,580 --> 00:36:39,160
são apenas reclamações constantes.

874
00:36:39,420 --> 00:36:41,580
Hum, depois que ela, depois que ela for embora,

875
00:36:41,960 --> 00:36:44,560
isso é claro, e isso, e algo muito semelhante,

876
00:36:44,560 --> 00:36:46,660
você sabe, aconteceu várias vezes em Yale, onde

877
00:36:46,660 --> 00:36:49,820
ficou muito claro que os administradores estavam ajudando,

878
00:36:49,820 --> 00:36:51,120
com muitas dessas interrupções.

879
00:36:51,420 --> 00:36:55,020
Então eu acho que toda vez que há uma gritaria em uma universidade,

880
00:36:55,740 --> 00:36:57,180
a investigação deverá ser

881
00:36:57,740 --> 00:36:58,540
em primeiro lugar,

882
00:36:59,160 --> 00:37:00,060
os administradores fizeram

883
00:37:01,220 --> 00:37:02,860
ajudar a criar esse problema?

884
00:37:03,060 --> 00:37:03,900
Eles fizeram alguma coisa

885
00:37:03,900 --> 00:37:04,940
parar com isso?

886
00:37:05,200 --> 00:37:08,520
Porque acho que muito do que realmente está acontecendo aqui é a hiperburocratização

887
00:37:08,560 --> 00:37:13,940
de universidades com muito mais pessoas ideológicas que pensam que seu trabalho principal é basicamente

888
00:37:13,940 --> 00:37:15,600
como discurso de policiamento, mais ou menos,

889
00:37:16,440 --> 00:37:17,500
eles estão incentivando os alunos,

890
00:37:17,840 --> 00:37:20,360
desculpe, eles estão incentivando os alunos que têm opiniões de que gostam,

891
00:37:20,780 --> 00:37:22,580
hum, para gritar.

892
00:37:22,760 --> 00:37:24,340
Hum, e é por isso que eles

893
00:37:24,420 --> 00:37:25,780
realmente preciso investigar isso.

894
00:37:26,640 --> 00:37:31,900
E é, em Stanford, o administrador que, que fez os comentários preparados,

895
00:37:31,900 --> 00:37:33,880
hum, sobre o suco, não vale a pena espremer.

896
00:37:33,900 --> 00:37:35,660
Ela não foi convidada a voltar para Stanford,

897
00:37:36,160 --> 00:37:39,940
mas ela é um dos únicos exemplos em que consigo pensar quando essas coisas acontecem muito

898
00:37:40,300 --> 00:37:42,880
onde um administrador facilitou claramente algo que

899
00:37:43,540 --> 00:37:44,660
foi um grito baixo ou

900
00:37:44,660 --> 00:37:48,480
deplataforma ou resultou na demissão de um professor ou resultou na demissão de um aluno

901
00:37:48,480 --> 00:37:51,640
sendo expulso onde o administrador

902
00:37:52,380 --> 00:37:54,360
saiu impune ou provavelmente em algum

903
00:37:54,380 --> 00:37:55,440
casos até conseguiram uma promoção.

904
00:37:56,080 --> 00:37:58,100
E então um pequeno número de administradores,

905
00:37:58,760 --> 00:38:01,130
talvez até um único administrador pudesse

906
00:38:01,480 --> 00:38:05,860
participar do incentivo e da organização e, assim, capacitar todo o

907
00:38:05,860 --> 00:38:06,220
processo.

908
00:38:06,340 --> 00:38:08,320
E isso é algo que vi durante toda a minha carreira.

909
00:38:08,400 --> 00:38:11,400
E a única coisa que é meio difícil é pegar esse tipo de coisa em flagrante,

910
00:38:11,640 --> 00:38:12,140
por assim dizer.

911
00:38:12,160 --> 00:38:14,940
E essa é uma das razões pelas quais é útil que as pessoas saibam sobre isso, você sabe,

912
00:38:15,700 --> 00:38:17,020
ah, porque

913
00:38:17,680 --> 00:38:19,220
foi esse caso incrível.

914
00:38:19,320 --> 00:38:20,520
Isso foi na Universidade de Washington.

915
00:38:20,820 --> 00:38:24,340
Hum, e na verdade apresentamos isso em um documentário feito em 2015,

916
00:38:24,920 --> 00:38:26,620
20, que veio em 2015, 2016

917
00:38:27,340 --> 00:38:28,460
chamado, podemos fazer uma piada?

918
00:38:28,660 --> 00:38:29,080
Hum,

919
00:38:29,380 --> 00:38:31,140
e foi aí que começamos a notar algo

920
00:38:31,140 --> 00:38:32,340
estava mudando no campus.

921
00:38:32,560 --> 00:38:34,840
Também ouvimos que os comediantes diziam que não podiam usar

922
00:38:34,840 --> 00:38:35,860
seu bom humor não mais.

923
00:38:36,420 --> 00:38:39,180
Isso foi na época em que Jerry Seinfeld e Chris Rock

924
00:38:39,520 --> 00:38:40,380
disseram que não podiam,

925
00:38:40,720 --> 00:38:42,540
uh, eles não queriam brincar nos campi porque eles,

926
00:38:42,540 --> 00:38:44,320
eles não podiam, eles, eles, eles não podiam ser engraçados.

927
00:38:45,120 --> 00:38:48,620
Uh, mas apresentamos o caso de um comediante que queria

928
00:38:48,720 --> 00:38:51,060
fazer um musical chamado a paixão do musical,

929
00:38:51,160 --> 00:38:52,280
gozando com a paixão de Cristo

930
00:38:52,440 --> 00:38:55,380
com o objetivo declarado de ofender a todos,

931
00:38:55,820 --> 00:38:56,700
cada grupo igualmente.

932
00:38:56,840 --> 00:38:58,800
Foi muito, muito uma missão de South Park.

933
00:38:58,960 --> 00:38:59,240
Hum,

934
00:39:00,360 --> 00:39:04,960
e é um caso incomum porque na verdade temos documentação

935
00:39:04,980 --> 00:39:10,980
de administradores comprando ingressos para estudantes irritados e realizando um evento onde eles,

936
00:39:11,420 --> 00:39:12,860
para onde eles os treinam,

937
00:39:13,080 --> 00:39:15,140
pular no meio disso e gritar,

938
00:39:15,200 --> 00:39:15,940
Estou ofendido.

939
00:39:15,980 --> 00:39:17,600
Como eles, eles, eles compraram ingressos para eles.

940
00:39:17,960 --> 00:39:18,880
Eles os enviaram para isso,

941
00:39:18,880 --> 00:39:20,360
essa coisa com o objetivo

942
00:39:20,360 --> 00:39:22,000
de gritar.

943
00:39:22,340 --> 00:39:26,600
Agora, sem surpresa, quando você envia um grupo furioso de estudantes para fechar

944
00:39:26,600 --> 00:39:29,400
uma peça, não vai acabar apenas

945
00:39:30,000 --> 00:39:30,740
Estou ofendido.

946
00:39:31,160 --> 00:39:32,460
Hum, e esquentou.

947
00:39:32,760 --> 00:39:34,140
Houve ameaças de morte sendo lançadas,

948
00:39:34,140 --> 00:39:38,440
uh, o, hum, e depois a polícia Pullman Washington

949
00:39:38,590 --> 00:39:42,380
disse a Chris, uh, Chris Lee, o cara que fez a peça que ele,

950
00:39:42,420 --> 00:39:43,440
eles não iriam realmente proteger

951
00:39:43,520 --> 00:39:43,720
eles.

952
00:39:43,860 --> 00:39:46,960
Agora, não é todo dia que você terá esse tipo de evidência concreta de que,

953
00:39:47,080 --> 00:39:49,600
isso, isso, uh, de realmente ver os administradores,

954
00:39:49,640 --> 00:39:52,760
uh, seria tão, uh, tão descarado que eles gravassem

955
00:39:52,760 --> 00:39:54,640
o fato de terem comprado ingressos e enviado.

956
00:39:55,080 --> 00:39:56,200
Mas eu acho que muitas dessas coisas

957
00:39:56,300 --> 00:39:58,320
é, está acontecendo.

958
00:39:58,320 --> 00:39:59,460
E eu acho que é o,

959
00:39:59,460 --> 00:40:01,800
o, é uma boa desculpa para reduzir um

960
00:40:01,800 --> 00:40:03,440
dos grandes problemas do ensino superior hoje,

961
00:40:03,520 --> 00:40:04,800
o que é hiperburocratização.

962
00:40:05,760 --> 00:40:09,440
Na sua experiência, existe uma distinção entre administradores e professores em termos de,

963
00:40:10,060 --> 00:40:13,160
uh, perpetradores disso, desse tipo de coisa?

964
00:40:13,180 --> 00:40:15,160
Então se, se nos livrarmos de tudo,

965
00:40:15,320 --> 00:40:19,380
como Harvey falou sobre se livrar de uma grande porcentagem da administração,

966
00:40:19,460 --> 00:40:24,280
isso ajuda a resolver o problema ou o corpo docente também é pequeno

967
00:40:25,220 --> 00:40:26,960
por cento do corpo docente também faz parte

968
00:40:26,960 --> 00:40:29,580
do incentivo na organização deste tipo de cancelamento.

969
00:40:30,060 --> 00:40:30,520
Sim.

970
00:40:30,560 --> 00:40:33,500
E isso é algo que tem sido profundamente decepcionante.

971
00:40:33,720 --> 00:40:38,980
Hum, é isso quando você olha para o enorme aumento nas tentativas de demissão de professores que vimos ao longo

972
00:40:39,000 --> 00:40:39,880
os últimos 10 anos

973
00:40:41,060 --> 00:40:42,840
e, na verdade, nos últimos 22 anos,

974
00:40:43,080 --> 00:40:45,080
desde que nossos registros vão.

975
00:40:46,460 --> 00:40:49,880
Hum, primeiro eles são liderados esmagadoramente por administradores,

976
00:40:49,880 --> 00:40:52,220
tentativas de punir os professores.

977
00:40:52,260 --> 00:40:53,700
Hum, e

978
00:40:54,120 --> 00:40:57,540
isso foi mais, você sabe, eu diria que essa foi a minha carreira até 2013,

979
00:40:57,540 --> 00:40:59,720
estava lutando contra os excessos administrativos.

980
00:41:00,000 --> 00:41:03,540
Hum, então você começa a ter o problema em 2014 de alunos tentando

981
00:41:03,560 --> 00:41:04,580
para fazer com que as pessoas sejam canceladas.

982
00:41:04,960 --> 00:41:07,720
Hum, e isso realmente acelerou em 2017 e no número.

983
00:41:08,080 --> 00:41:09,460
Então, um, de um jeito,

984
00:41:09,460 --> 00:41:11,400
uma coisa que torna mais fácil documentar é,

985
00:41:11,620 --> 00:41:14,060
são as petições para que professores sejam demitidos ou punidos.

986
00:41:14,540 --> 00:41:17,620
Hum, e quão desproporcionalmente eles realmente vêm de estudantes.

987
00:41:18,280 --> 00:41:24,300
Mas outro grande aumento foi o de colegas professores exigindo que seus colegas professores obtivessem

988
00:41:24,300 --> 00:41:24,520
punido.

989
00:41:24,720 --> 00:41:25,280
E isso para mim,

990
00:41:25,660 --> 00:41:27,280
é meio vergonhoso.

991
00:41:27,700 --> 00:41:30,420
Você, você, você não deveria se orgulhar de assinar o

992
00:41:30,600 --> 00:41:32,160
petição para conseguir seu colega professor.

993
00:41:32,780 --> 00:41:34,400
E o que é, o que é ainda mais, uh,

994
00:41:35,000 --> 00:41:36,680
mais, mais vergonhoso é isso

995
00:41:36,680 --> 00:41:40,180
nós entendemos, isso, isso é, isso quase se tornou um clichê dentro do fogo.

996
00:41:40,580 --> 00:41:41,780
Quando alguém está enfrentando um dos

997
00:41:41,780 --> 00:41:43,360
essas campanhas de cancelamento como professor,

998
00:41:43,860 --> 00:41:47,260
Eu recebia cartas de alguns dos meus amigos dizendo:

999
00:41:47,440 --> 00:41:48,420
Sinto muito,

1000
00:41:48,420 --> 00:41:49,620
isso aconteceu com você.

1001
00:41:50,340 --> 00:41:52,260
E estas foram as mesmas pessoas que assinaram publicamente

1002
00:41:52,280 --> 00:41:54,000
a petição para demiti-los.

1003
00:41:56,020 --> 00:41:56,200
Sim.

1004
00:41:56,200 --> 00:41:56,540
Sim.

1005
00:41:57,760 --> 00:41:58,120
Sim.

1006
00:41:58,160 --> 00:42:01,800
Integridade Integridade é uma coisa importante neste mundo.

1007
00:42:02,500 --> 00:42:04,280
E eu acho que parte disso,

1008
00:42:06,140 --> 00:42:11,840
Estou tão surpreso que as pessoas não defendam mais isso porque há muita fome por isso.

1009
00:42:11,980 --> 00:42:15,400
E se você tiver coragem, como professor ou administrador, de realmente se posicionar,

1010
00:42:15,740 --> 00:42:16,240
ficar de pé,

1011
00:42:17,440 --> 00:42:17,620
uh,

1012
00:42:18,150 --> 00:42:19,980
com eloquência,

1013
00:42:21,060 --> 00:42:21,720
com rigor,

1014
00:42:22,440 --> 00:42:23,780
com integridade, eu sinto que

1015
00:42:24,440 --> 00:42:25,640
é impossível

1016
00:42:26,300 --> 00:42:27,480
para qualquer um fazer qualquer coisa

1017
00:42:27,920 --> 00:42:29,260
porque há muita fome.

1018
00:42:29,540 --> 00:42:30,580
É tão refrescante.

1019
00:42:30,720 --> 00:42:30,980
Sim.

1020
00:42:31,180 --> 00:42:32,960
Acho que todo mundo concorda

1021
00:42:33,540 --> 00:42:36,320
que a liberdade de expressão é uma coisa boa.

1022
00:42:36,520 --> 00:42:37,360
Ah, eu não, eu não.

1023
00:42:37,540 --> 00:42:38,160
Bem, ok.

1024
00:42:38,260 --> 00:42:38,600
Desculpe, desculpe.

1025
00:42:38,660 --> 00:42:39,220
Eu não concordo.

1026
00:42:39,660 --> 00:42:41,180
A, a maioria das pessoas,

1027
00:42:41,380 --> 00:42:43,260
até nas universidades que há fome,

1028
00:42:43,260 --> 00:42:43,620
mas é quase como, uh,

1029
00:42:44,160 --> 00:42:49,580
esse tipo de nervosismo em torno disso porque há um pequeno número de vozes altas.

1030
00:42:49,640 --> 00:42:50,860
Eles estão gritando.

1031
00:42:51,900 --> 00:42:54,780
Então, quero dizer, novamente, é aí que entra a grande liderança.

1032
00:42:54,980 --> 00:42:57,960
E então, você sabe, os presidentes das universidades provavelmente deveriam ser,

1033
00:42:58,620 --> 00:43:00,820
uh, fazendo declarações claras de tipo,

1034
00:43:01,100 --> 00:43:05,220
este não é, este é um lugar onde valorizamos a liberdade de expressão.

1035
00:43:05,740 --> 00:43:09,040
Quando, e isso foi durante toda a minha carreira, hum, um presidente,

1036
00:43:09,360 --> 00:43:11,940
um reitor de universidade que bate o pé cedo e diz, não,

1037
00:43:12,380 --> 00:43:13,120
você sabe,

1038
00:43:14,200 --> 00:43:16,780
não estamos entretendo demitir esse professor.

1039
00:43:16,940 --> 00:43:18,120
Não estamos expulsando o aluno.

1040
00:43:18,520 --> 00:43:21,300
Muitas vezes, o problema termina muito rapidamente.

1041
00:43:21,760 --> 00:43:24,740
Embora às vezes, e é aqui que se pode realmente perceber o envolvimento administrativo,

1042
00:43:25,720 --> 00:43:28,460
hum, os alunos farão coisas como assumir o gabinete do presidente.

1043
00:43:29,000 --> 00:43:31,720
E então essa aquisição será atendida pela universidade.

1044
00:43:32,220 --> 00:43:34,180
As pessoas vão apontar isso às vezes como algo como,

1045
00:43:34,220 --> 00:43:37,420
ah, é claramente como, hum, meu amigo Sam Abrams,

1046
00:43:37,520 --> 00:43:38,260
quando eles tentaram conseguir,

1047
00:43:38,320 --> 00:43:39,540
uh, tentei fazer com que ele fosse demitido,

1048
00:43:39,540 --> 00:43:41,280
na, na, uh, faculdade Sarah Lawrence.

1049
00:43:42,080 --> 00:43:45,080
Hum, e, uh, essa foi uma das vezes que,

1050
00:43:45,080 --> 00:43:46,700
que foi usado como uma espécie de,

1051
00:43:46,740 --> 00:43:49,360
ah, isso foi hostil à universidade porque eles,

1052
00:43:49,780 --> 00:43:51,380
os estudantes assumiram o gabinete do presidente.

1053
00:43:51,420 --> 00:43:53,280
E eu digo, não, eles os deixaram assumir o controle

1054
00:43:53,280 --> 00:43:53,900
gabinete do presidente.

1055
00:43:53,980 --> 00:43:56,780
E não sei se esse foi um dos casos em que,

1056
00:43:56,780 --> 00:43:57,980
a aquisição foi atendida,

1057
00:43:57,980 --> 00:44:00,000
mas se alguma vez houve algum tipo de sinal, isso é uma espécie de

1058
00:44:00,000 --> 00:44:03,200
tipo, sim, isso não é, na verdade é muito amigável.

1059
00:44:03,280 --> 00:44:06,860
Bem, de certa forma, como protestar e ter opiniões muito fortes, até mesmo como

1060
00:44:07,540 --> 00:44:09,900
opiniões ridículas, malucas e selvagens são uma coisa boa.

1061
00:44:10,000 --> 00:44:11,720
É só que não deveria levar a uma situação real

1062
00:44:12,460 --> 00:44:14,200
disparo ou desplataforma de pessoas.

1063
00:44:14,240 --> 00:44:15,280
Como se fosse bom protestar.

1064
00:44:15,440 --> 00:44:17,400
Simplesmente não é bom,

1065
00:44:17,400 --> 00:44:19,920
uh, para a universidade apoiar isso e agir com base nisso.

1066
00:44:20,120 --> 00:44:20,680
E este é um dos,

1067
00:44:20,680 --> 00:44:21,560
um daqueles como,

1068
00:44:21,560 --> 00:44:23,860
hum, tensões na, na, na primeira emenda que

1069
00:44:23,860 --> 00:44:25,730
na verdade, acho que tem um lançamento bem fácil.

1070
00:44:25,760 --> 00:44:27,400
Essencialmente você tem um aplicativo,

1071
00:44:27,440 --> 00:44:30,040
você tem absolutamente o direito de,

1072
00:44:30,380 --> 00:44:32,200
uh, dedique sua vida a

1073
00:44:32,200 --> 00:44:35,060
acabar com a liberdade de expressão e ridicularizar como conceito.

1074
00:44:35,160 --> 00:44:37,440
E, e há pessoas que,

1075
00:44:37,440 --> 00:44:42,480
quem realmente o é, pode parecer muito desprezível até mesmo em relação à filosofia da liberdade de expressão.

1076
00:44:42,940 --> 00:44:44,740
Hum, e defenderemos seu direito de fazer isso.

1077
00:44:45,100 --> 00:44:47,660
Também discordaremos de você.

1078
00:44:47,660 --> 00:44:49,460
E se você tentar fazer com que um professor seja demitido,

1079
00:44:49,460 --> 00:44:50,940
estaremos do outro lado disso.

1080
00:44:51,120 --> 00:44:52,720
Agora, acho que você tinha Randy Kennedy,

1081
00:44:52,840 --> 00:44:54,420
quem eu realmente, eu o amo.

1082
00:44:54,540 --> 00:44:55,660
Eu acho que ele é um cara legal,

1083
00:44:56,140 --> 00:45:01,400
mas ele nos criticou por nosso banco de dados deplataforma dizendo:

1084
00:45:01,500 --> 00:45:04,100
isso quer dizer que os estudantes não podem protestar contra os oradores.

1085
00:45:04,160 --> 00:45:04,880
Eu sou como,

1086
00:45:05,500 --> 00:45:06,240
ok, isso é bobagem.

1087
00:45:06,940 --> 00:45:11,660
Hum, uh, nós demitimos porque uma organização defendeu o direito de protestar o tempo todo.

1088
00:45:11,800 --> 00:45:14,440
Estamos constantemente defendendo os direitos dos manifestantes,

1089
00:45:15,060 --> 00:45:18,880
não acreditando que os manifestantes tenham o direito de dizer isso gostaria,

1090
00:45:18,940 --> 00:45:20,000
basicamente seria isso.

1091
00:45:20,620 --> 00:45:21,620
Punir os oradores.

1092
00:45:21,820 --> 00:45:23,340
Não estamos pedindo punição,

1093
00:45:23,340 --> 00:45:26,060
hum, uh, os manifestantes, mas o que estamos dizendo

1094
00:45:26,060 --> 00:45:29,620
é que você não pode deixar os manifestantes vencerem se eles estão exigindo que alguém seja demitido

1095
00:45:30,040 --> 00:45:30,740
pela sua liberdade de expressão.

1096
00:45:30,760 --> 00:45:35,940
Portanto, a linha que existe entre os manifestantes que protestam e

1097
00:45:36,560 --> 00:45:40,100
a universidade agindo com base no protesto.

1098
00:45:40,220 --> 00:45:40,560
Sim, exatamente.

1099
00:45:40,840 --> 00:45:43,440
E, claro, grite que isso é apenas censura da multidão.

1100
00:45:44,080 --> 00:45:46,060
Hum, e isso é algo onde a universidade,

1101
00:45:46,280 --> 00:45:47,980
do jeito, do jeito que você realmente,

1102
00:45:48,060 --> 00:45:52,900
você lidar com essa tensão na lei da Primeira Emenda é essencialmente como o único dever positivo que o governo tem.

1103
00:45:53,190 --> 00:45:57,560
O primeiro, o dever negativo, aquilo que não é permitido fazer é censurar você.

1104
00:45:58,400 --> 00:46:00,120
Hum, mas o dever positivo é que se,

1105
00:46:00,160 --> 00:46:02,320
que se eu quiser dizer coisas horríveis,

1106
00:46:02,620 --> 00:46:03,160
ou, nesse caso,

1107
00:46:03,300 --> 00:46:05,520
grandes coisas que não são populares em um parque público,

1108
00:46:06,060 --> 00:46:08,760
hum, você não pode deixar a multidão simplesmente gritar comigo.

1109
00:46:09,060 --> 00:46:11,780
Hum, você não pode permitir o que é chamado de veto do questionador.

1110
00:46:14,280 --> 00:46:15,180
Isso é tão interessante.

1111
00:46:15,200 --> 00:46:17,420
Porque sinto que isso também acontece nas redes sociais.

1112
00:46:17,440 --> 00:46:17,980
Causa,

1113
00:46:18,920 --> 00:46:22,140
uh, você sabe, há toda essa discussão sobre censura e liberdade de expressão,

1114
00:46:22,500 --> 00:46:25,780
mas para mim, a questão da cenoura

1115
00:46:26,360 --> 00:46:27,060
é quase mais

1116
00:46:28,000 --> 00:46:28,540
interessante.

1117
00:46:28,560 --> 00:46:32,580
Uma vez estabelecida a liberdade de expressão, como você incentiva a alta qualidade

1118
00:46:32,580 --> 00:46:33,640
debate e desacordo?

1119
00:46:33,880 --> 00:46:35,140
Estou pensando muito sobre isso.

1120
00:46:35,880 --> 00:46:39,320
E essa é uma das coisas sobre as quais falamos ao cancelar a mente americana: argumentar em direção à verdade

1121
00:46:40,060 --> 00:46:43,060
e essa cultura do cancelamento é cruel.

1122
00:46:43,460 --> 00:46:43,780
É impiedoso.

1123
00:46:44,300 --> 00:46:45,900
É anti-intelectual,

1124
00:46:46,240 --> 00:46:48,340
mas também nunca o levará a lugar algum em sua verdade.

1125
00:46:48,640 --> 00:46:51,460
E você vai perder muito tempo destruindo seus oponentes,

1126
00:46:52,640 --> 00:46:56,640
hum, em, em algo que na verdade nunca pode levar você à verdade através do processo, é claro, de,

1127
00:46:57,040 --> 00:46:58,420
você nunca chega diretamente à verdade.

1128
00:46:58,540 --> 00:46:59,440
Você apenas elimina a falsidade.

1129
00:47:00,600 --> 00:47:00,780
Sim.

1130
00:47:01,100 --> 00:47:04,500
Mas todo mundo tendo um megafone na internet no anonimato,

1131
00:47:05,440 --> 00:47:06,480
parece que

1132
00:47:07,240 --> 00:47:08,460
é melhor que a censura,

1133
00:47:10,540 --> 00:47:13,540
mas parece que há incentivos além disso.

1134
00:47:13,800 --> 00:47:14,300
Além disso,

1135
00:47:15,000 --> 00:47:17,000
você pode construir para, hum,

1136
00:47:17,680 --> 00:47:19,620
sim, para incentivar um discurso melhor.

1137
00:47:19,620 --> 00:47:19,800
Sim.

1138
00:47:20,200 --> 00:47:25,340
É como incentivar alguém que se esforça muito para tornar até o mais ridículo

1139
00:47:25,860 --> 00:47:34,960
argumentos, mas basicamente aqueles que não incluem nenhuma das coisas que você destaca em termos de todos os truques retóricos para encerrar conversas,

1140
00:47:35,200 --> 00:47:38,320
apenas apresente argumentos realmente bons para qualquer coisa.

1141
00:47:38,560 --> 00:47:41,140
Não importa se é um comunismo para o fascismo,

1142
00:47:41,260 --> 00:47:42,540
o que quer que você queira dizer,

1143
00:47:43,120 --> 00:47:45,720
mas faça isso com escala, com contexto histórico,

1144
00:47:47,140 --> 00:47:49,300
com, uh, uh, com o homem de aço do outro lado,

1145
00:47:49,360 --> 00:47:50,240
todos esses tipos de elementos.

1146
00:47:50,620 --> 00:47:52,620
Tentamos destacar três pontos principais no livro.

1147
00:47:52,960 --> 00:47:55,820
Um, hum, é simplesmente cancelar a cultura é

1148
00:47:55,820 --> 00:47:56,080
real.

1149
00:47:56,220 --> 00:47:57,820
É uma era histórica,

1150
00:47:57,820 --> 00:47:59,540
hum, e está em uma escala histórica.

1151
00:48:00,180 --> 00:48:00,980
O segundo é

1152
00:48:01,240 --> 00:48:04,480
você deveria pensar na cultura do cancelamento como parte de um, hum,

1153
00:48:05,060 --> 00:48:09,100
retórica, como uma retórica preguiçosa maior,

1154
00:48:09,100 --> 00:48:13,520
uh, abordagem para o que, o que, o que chamamos de argumentos vencedores sem argumentos vencedores.

1155
00:48:14,220 --> 00:48:18,660
E queremos dizer isso em dois sentidos, sem ter argumentos vencedores ou sem realmente ter um argumento.

1156
00:48:19,400 --> 00:48:21,060
E falamos sobre todas as coisas diferentes,

1157
00:48:21,140 --> 00:48:25,760
o que chamamos de fortalezas retóricas que tanto a esquerda quanto a direita têm e que o impedem de,

1158
00:48:26,100 --> 00:48:28,560
que permitem que você simplesmente dispense a pessoa,

1159
00:48:29,300 --> 00:48:33,720
hum, ou esquivar-se do argumento sem realmente chegar à substância do argumento.

1160
00:48:33,880 --> 00:48:34,580
A terceira parte é apenas,

1161
00:48:34,800 --> 00:48:36,040
você sabe, como podemos consertar isso?

1162
00:48:36,240 --> 00:48:38,680
Mas a questão da fortaleza retórica é na verdade algo que já estive,

1163
00:48:38,920 --> 00:48:43,840
Sou muito apaixonado porque interfere na nossa capacidade de chegar à verdade e

1164
00:48:43,840 --> 00:48:45,620
perde tempo e, francamente,

1165
00:48:45,800 --> 00:48:48,640
também já que a cultura do cancelamento faz parte disso

1166
00:48:48,650 --> 00:48:50,180
tática retórica, também pode arruinar vidas.

1167
00:48:51,320 --> 00:48:54,460
Na verdade, seria muito divertido falar sobre esse aspecto específico do livro.

1168
00:48:54,500 --> 00:48:56,780
E eu recomendo fortemente que se você estiver ouvindo isso,

1169
00:48:56,980 --> 00:48:59,020
pré-encomende o livro agora.

1170
00:49:00,040 --> 00:49:00,220
Uh,

1171
00:49:00,600 --> 00:49:01,440
quando sai?

1172
00:49:01,700 --> 00:49:02,340
17 de outubro.

1173
00:49:02,340 --> 00:49:02,540
OK.

1174
00:49:02,680 --> 00:49:03,840
O cancelamento da mente americana.

1175
00:49:04,240 --> 00:49:04,380
OK.

1176
00:49:04,440 --> 00:49:05,140
Então,

1177
00:49:05,540 --> 00:49:05,640
uh,

1178
00:49:06,360 --> 00:49:07,820
no livro, você também tem

1179
00:49:08,340 --> 00:49:12,720
uma lista de táticas retóricas baratas que tanto a esquerda quanto a direita usam.

1180
00:49:13,100 --> 00:49:13,960
E então você tem

1181
00:49:14,620 --> 00:49:19,060
uma lista de táticas que a esquerda usa e a direita usa.

1182
00:49:19,440 --> 00:49:25,620
Então aí está a retórica, a fortaleza retórica perfeita que a esquerda usa e a fortaleza retórica eficiente

1183
00:49:25,880 --> 00:49:26,560
que a direita usa.

1184
00:49:27,340 --> 00:49:29,560
A primeira é sobre o ismo.

1185
00:49:29,740 --> 00:49:32,230
Talvez possamos passar por alguns deles que capturam

1186
00:49:32,240 --> 00:49:35,000
seu coração neste momento específico enquanto falamos sobre isso.

1187
00:49:35,320 --> 00:49:36,200
E se, se você puder

1188
00:49:37,260 --> 00:49:43,840
descreva exemplos disso ou se, uh, há aspectos que você vê aí, especialmente eficazes.

1189
00:49:44,180 --> 00:49:48,960
Então, uh, o que dizer do ismo é defender-se contra as críticas do seu lado, trazendo à tona as opiniões do outro lado?

1190
00:49:49,710 --> 00:49:51,400
suposta irregularidade.

1191
00:49:51,600 --> 00:49:53,960
Quero fazer pequenos cartões com estes, uh,

1192
00:49:54,280 --> 00:49:56,200
de todas essas táticas e começar

1193
00:49:56,200 --> 00:50:00,300
usá-los no X o tempo todo porque eles são comumente implantados.

1194
00:50:00,380 --> 00:50:01,760
E quanto ao ism eu coloquei

1195
00:50:01,760 --> 00:50:02,800
primeiro por uma razão,

1196
00:50:03,020 --> 00:50:07,160
você sabe, seria uma ideia interessante integrar isso na barra X do Twitter

1197
00:50:07,860 --> 00:50:10,100
onde as pessoas, você sabe, em vez de clicar no coração,

1198
00:50:10,140 --> 00:50:12,340
eles podem clicar em qual dos,

1199
00:50:12,540 --> 00:50:15,360
uh, uh, qual das táticas retóricas é essa.

1200
00:50:15,700 --> 00:50:16,140
E então,

1201
00:50:16,560 --> 00:50:18,060
porque você sabe, na verdade existem notas da comunidade.

1202
00:50:18,200 --> 00:50:19,200
Não sei se você já viu

1203
00:50:19,940 --> 00:50:23,860
no X que vocês podem contribuir com notas e é bastante

1204
00:50:24,060 --> 00:50:24,560
fascinante.

1205
00:50:24,840 --> 00:50:25,920
Funciona muito, muito bem,

1206
00:50:26,240 --> 00:50:28,240
mas para dar um pouco mais de estrutura.

1207
00:50:28,320 --> 00:50:28,760
Sim.

1208
00:50:28,780 --> 00:50:30,220
Na verdade, esse é um método realmente interessante.

1209
00:50:30,500 --> 00:50:30,700
Sim.

1210
00:50:30,780 --> 00:50:32,600
Na verdade, quando estava pensando em maneiras

1211
00:50:33,100 --> 00:50:35,320
X poderia ser usado para argumentar em favor da verdade,

1212
00:50:35,860 --> 00:50:37,480
Eu não gostaria que isso acontecesse,

1213
00:50:37,480 --> 00:50:39,340
você sabe, todo mundo estaria obrigado a isso.

1214
00:50:39,620 --> 00:50:43,740
Mas acho que imagino ser quase como um fluxo dentro do X

1215
00:50:44,020 --> 00:50:45,700
isso foi focado na verdade,

1216
00:50:45,700 --> 00:50:48,760
que concorda com algumas regras adicionais sobre como eles argumentariam.

1217
00:50:48,820 --> 00:50:49,400
Sim cara.

1218
00:50:49,400 --> 00:50:50,240
Eu adoraria isso.

1219
00:50:50,840 --> 00:50:54,640
Onde há em termos de fluxos que se cruzam e podem ser

1220
00:50:54,640 --> 00:50:59,320
separei o falar merda daquele em que as pessoas simplesmente gostam de falar merda.

1221
00:50:59,700 --> 00:51:00,220
OK. Vá em frente, cara.

1222
00:51:00,260 --> 00:51:01,320
E então há como a verdade

1223
00:51:01,840 --> 00:51:05,640
e então, quero dizer, eles ficam tipo, então há humor,

1224
00:51:06,660 --> 00:51:08,240
então há boas vibrações.

1225
00:51:08,760 --> 00:51:09,220
Tipo, você sabe,

1226
00:51:09,560 --> 00:51:11,660
Eu não sou como alguém que absolutamente precisa do bem

1227
00:51:11,680 --> 00:51:12,820
vibrações o tempo todo,

1228
00:51:12,860 --> 00:51:14,380
mas às vezes é bom ter,

1229
00:51:14,440 --> 00:51:17,580
é bom apenas fazer login e não precisar ver

1230
00:51:17,960 --> 00:51:23,160
como o drama, as brigas, as brigas, os cancelamentos, as mães, tudo isso.

1231
00:51:23,220 --> 00:51:24,240
É bom apenas ver,

1232
00:51:24,820 --> 00:51:28,680
uh, é por isso que vou ao Reddit ou tipo,

1233
00:51:28,680 --> 00:51:30,420
uh, quais são os animais fofos,

1234
00:51:30,640 --> 00:51:32,000
se há cachorrinhos e gatinhos fofos.

1235
00:51:32,240 --> 00:51:34,960
E é tipo, eu só quero ver Ryan Reynolds cantando com Will Farrell.

1236
00:51:35,080 --> 00:51:35,260
Quero dizer,

1237
00:51:35,880 --> 00:51:38,020
às vezes isso é tudo que você precisa em meu coração.

1238
00:51:38,060 --> 00:51:38,260
Sim.

1239
00:51:38,800 --> 00:51:39,620
Nem sempre,

1240
00:51:39,640 --> 00:51:42,420
só um pouquinho e de volta à batalha

1241
00:51:42,940 --> 00:51:43,280
pela verdade.

1242
00:51:44,040 --> 00:51:44,300
OK.

1243
00:51:44,360 --> 00:51:45,220
Então e o ismo?

1244
00:51:45,300 --> 00:51:46,040
E como Mia?

1245
00:51:46,140 --> 00:51:46,920
Isso está em todo lugar.

1246
00:51:47,080 --> 00:51:48,460
Hum, quando, quando você olha para isso,

1247
00:51:48,460 --> 00:51:49,540
uh, quando você olha para o Twitter,

1248
00:51:49,580 --> 00:51:51,660
quando você olha para as mídias sociais em geral, hum,

1249
00:51:52,020 --> 00:51:56,480
e a primeira, como o que chamamos de pista de obstáculos, é basicamente testada pelo tempo,

1250
00:51:56,560 --> 00:51:58,400
antiquado, você sabe,

1251
00:51:59,220 --> 00:52:00,800
esquivas argumentativas que todo mundo usa.

1252
00:52:01,380 --> 00:52:02,360
E quanto a asm é apenas

1253
00:52:02,360 --> 00:52:05,440
trazendo algo à tona, você sabe, como se alguém discutisse,

1254
00:52:05,580 --> 00:52:06,640
como se Biden fosse corrupto.

1255
00:52:06,900 --> 00:52:08,060
E, e então alguém diz,

1256
00:52:08,140 --> 00:52:09,460
bem, Trump foi pior, você sabe, tipo,

1257
00:52:10,080 --> 00:52:12,760
e isso não é ilegítimo,

1258
00:52:13,080 --> 00:52:15,400
você sabe, argumento para retrucar, mas é verdade,

1259
00:52:15,820 --> 00:52:16,820
isso, parece acontecer.

1260
00:52:16,980 --> 00:52:17,780
Toda vez que alguém faz uma

1261
00:52:17,780 --> 00:52:22,120
afirmação, alguém apenas aponta alguma outra coisa que estava acontecendo e isso pode ficar cada vez mais atenuado,

1262
00:52:22,440 --> 00:52:24,060
do que você está realmente tentando argumentar.

1263
00:52:24,680 --> 00:52:25,920
E quando você, e então você vê

1264
00:52:25,920 --> 00:52:28,980
isso o tempo todo nas redes sociais e é tipo,

1265
00:52:29,080 --> 00:52:31,080
você sabe, eu era um grande fã de Jon Stewart

1266
00:52:31,080 --> 00:52:36,140
programa diário, mas muito do que era o humor e qual era a tática para discutir era isso

1267
00:52:36,280 --> 00:52:36,820
coisa aqui.

1268
00:52:37,060 --> 00:52:39,320
É como, Oh, estou argumentando sobre um problema importante.

1269
00:52:39,860 --> 00:52:43,800
Ah, na verdade, você sabe, há outro problema aqui que me preocupa mais.

1270
00:52:44,460 --> 00:52:47,780
E isso, isso, você sabe, e, você sabe, vamos, vamos escolher o certo aqui.

1271
00:52:48,340 --> 00:52:49,340
Então, 6 de janeiro,

1272
00:52:49,860 --> 00:52:53,260
você sabe, vendo todo mundo discutindo sobre, hum, chop,

1273
00:52:53,600 --> 00:52:57,060
você sabe, como a parte ocupada de Seattle ou

1274
00:52:57,060 --> 00:52:59,220
a parte ocupada de Portland e set,

1275
00:52:59,260 --> 00:53:00,580
e basicamente tentando gostar,

1276
00:53:00,660 --> 00:53:01,900
Oh, você está trazendo à tona o, o,

1277
00:53:02,240 --> 00:53:03,580
o motim de 6 de janeiro.

1278
00:53:04,060 --> 00:53:04,620
Hum, e por falar nisso,

1279
00:53:04,660 --> 00:53:05,640
Eu moro no Capitólio.

1280
00:53:05,760 --> 00:53:09,260
Então, acredite, eu estava muito ciente de como isso era assustador e ruim.

1281
00:53:09,620 --> 00:53:10,200
Hum,

1282
00:53:10,700 --> 00:53:15,320
você sabe, como eu disse, meu pai cresceu na Iugoslávia e foi uma noite em que todos jantamos no porão.

1283
00:53:15,380 --> 00:53:17,300
Porque eu fico tipo, Oh, quando a merda acontece,

1284
00:53:17,540 --> 00:53:18,060
comer no porão.

1285
00:53:18,760 --> 00:53:20,600
Foi, foi, foi genuinamente assustador.

1286
00:53:20,600 --> 00:53:26,360
E as pessoas tentariam desviar o fato de 6 de janeiro ser sério, argumentando que,

1287
00:53:26,480 --> 00:53:30,160
Oh, bem, há coisas horríveis e malucas acontecendo em todo o país.

1288
00:53:30,280 --> 00:53:35,060
Uh, você sabe, tumultos, uh, uh, hum, que vieram de alguns dos protestos por justiça social.

1289
00:53:35,660 --> 00:53:39,700
E, claro, a resposta é que você pode se preocupar com essas duas coisas e,

1290
00:53:39,700 --> 00:53:41,240
e encontrar os dois problemas.

1291
00:53:41,460 --> 00:53:44,040
Mas você sabe, se estou discutindo sobre chop,

1292
00:53:44,300 --> 00:53:47,500
você sabe, alguém mencionando 6 de janeiro não é muito relevante para isso.

1293
00:53:47,780 --> 00:53:49,200
Ou se estou discutindo sobre 6 de janeiro,

1294
00:53:49,340 --> 00:53:51,980
alguém trazendo à tona os tumultos em 2020,

1295
00:53:52,540 --> 00:53:53,040
isso não é útil?

1296
00:53:53,320 --> 00:53:56,580
Fizemos uma longa jornada sombria desde o ismo e,

1297
00:53:56,580 --> 00:53:57,620
uh, relacionado a isso é

1298
00:53:57,640 --> 00:53:59,680
tripulação de palha e tripulação de aço.

1299
00:53:59,840 --> 00:54:04,860
Deturpando assim a, a, a, a perspectiva da, da, perspectiva oposta.

1300
00:54:05,440 --> 00:54:06,880
E isso também é algo,

1301
00:54:07,440 --> 00:54:13,180
uh, eu acho que é muito comum e é difícil fazer o inverso disso,

1302
00:54:13,300 --> 00:54:14,360
que é tripulação de aço

1303
00:54:14,400 --> 00:54:16,380
requer empatia ou requer eloqüência.

1304
00:54:16,420 --> 00:54:17,480
Requer compreensão,

1305
00:54:18,500 --> 00:54:20,660
realmente fazendo a pesquisa e entendendo o,

1306
00:54:20,960 --> 00:54:22,580
a, a perspectiva alternativa.

1307
00:54:23,480 --> 00:54:27,060
Meu, uh, funcionário maravilhoso, Angel e Eduardo tem algo que ele chama de Star Manning

1308
00:54:27,640 --> 00:54:29,720
e eu me pego fazendo muito isso.

1309
00:54:29,840 --> 00:54:30,700
É bom ter,

1310
00:54:30,700 --> 00:54:34,860
você sabe, dois pais imigrantes, hum, porque me lembro de estar em São Francisco,

1311
00:54:34,860 --> 00:54:44,240
uh, você sabe, uh, no tipo estranho de ACLU cortando homem em chamas e tendo um

1312
00:54:44,240 --> 00:54:48,060
amigo lá que era um artista que falava sobre odiar o Kansas.

1313
00:54:48,310 --> 00:54:52,380
E essa foi a sua metáfora para a América Central, foi isso que ele quis dizer com isso.

1314
00:54:53,020 --> 00:54:56,180
E, mas ele estava meio orgulhoso do fato de odiar o Kansas.

1315
00:54:56,880 --> 00:54:58,630
E eu digo, você tem que entender.

1316
00:54:58,900 --> 00:55:02,240
Ainda vejo todos vocês um pouco como estrangeiros e

1317
00:55:03,040 --> 00:55:06,600
pense em mudar o nome do Kansas para Croácia,

1318
00:55:06,840 --> 00:55:09,260
você sabe, mude o nome de Kansas para,

1319
00:55:09,280 --> 00:55:09,920
para, para alguns.

1320
00:55:10,200 --> 00:55:11,600
Isso é o que parece para mim.

1321
00:55:11,860 --> 00:55:13,460
E a ideia de tripulação estelar,

1322
00:55:13,640 --> 00:55:14,980
que eu, que eu gosto é,

1323
00:55:15,140 --> 00:55:15,740
é a ideia de ser como,

1324
00:55:16,000 --> 00:55:19,900
então você está dizendo que realmente odeia sua minoria religiosa dominante,

1325
00:55:20,300 --> 00:55:25,140
tipo, e é aí que você começa a se distanciar um pouco disso, que típico

1326
00:55:25,700 --> 00:55:27,780
A América é excepcional de várias maneiras,

1327
00:55:28,060 --> 00:55:30,840
mas algumas de nossas dinâmicas são incrivelmente

1328
00:55:30,840 --> 00:55:31,280
típica.

1329
00:55:31,420 --> 00:55:32,300
É uma das razões pelas quais,

1330
00:55:32,460 --> 00:55:34,340
como quando as pessoas começam a ler a alma de Thomas,

1331
00:55:34,400 --> 00:55:37,460
por exemplo, eles começam a ficar fisgados porque uma das coisas que ele faz é

1332
00:55:37,460 --> 00:55:41,500
faz análises comparativas dos problemas dos países e aponta que alguns destes

1333
00:55:41,500 --> 00:55:44,300
existem coisas que consideramos exclusivas dos Estados Unidos,

1334
00:55:45,500 --> 00:55:48,140
você sabe, 75% do resto dos países do mundo.

1335
00:55:48,560 --> 00:55:51,460
O livro de Francis Fukuyama que estou lendo agora,

1336
00:55:51,500 --> 00:55:54,900
origens da ordem política realmente faz esse maravilhoso trabalho de apontar

1337
00:55:54,900 --> 00:55:56,820
descobrir como não somos especiais de várias maneiras.

1338
00:55:57,200 --> 00:55:59,260
Na verdade, isso é algo que está muito em minha mente.

1339
00:56:00,420 --> 00:56:04,880
E, uh, Fukuyama, claro, uh, é um ótimo livro.

1340
00:56:05,240 --> 00:56:05,580
Não é,

1341
00:56:06,460 --> 00:56:08,200
é um pouco afetado em sua escrita

1342
00:56:08,940 --> 00:56:11,100
porque o termo dele para uma das coisas que o preocupa

1343
00:56:11,120 --> 00:56:14,560
sobre o que destrói as sociedades é a repatriação,

1344
00:56:15,240 --> 00:56:21,780
que é a reversão para sociedades nas quais

1345
00:56:21,780 --> 00:56:23,280
você favorece sua família e amigos.

1346
00:56:23,840 --> 00:56:28,240
E eu realmente penso muito no que estou vendo, de certa forma,

1347
00:56:28,280 --> 00:56:29,900
hum, uh, nos Estados Unidos,

1348
00:56:30,020 --> 00:56:31,740
isso me deixa preocupado que possamos estar passando por um pouco

1349
00:56:31,740 --> 00:56:33,260
um pouco de um processo de repatriação.

1350
00:56:33,840 --> 00:56:35,560
E acho que essa é uma das razões pelas quais as pessoas são tão

1351
00:56:35,640 --> 00:56:36,000
nervoso.

1352
00:56:36,200 --> 00:56:36,920
Eu acho que ter um,

1353
00:56:37,240 --> 00:56:39,080
Acho que a perspectiva de que nós,

1354
00:56:39,080 --> 00:56:43,700
você sabe, nós muito, quase parecemos ter uma eleição que seria,

1355
00:56:43,700 --> 00:56:46,180
você sabe, Jeb Bush versus Hillary Clinton.

1356
00:56:46,420 --> 00:56:48,680
É tipo, somos um país dinástico agora?

1357
00:56:48,680 --> 00:56:50,220
É isso que está acontecendo?

1358
00:56:50,780 --> 00:56:54,320
Mas também é uma das razões pelas quais as pessoas estão tão irritadas com as admissões de legados

1359
00:56:54,780 --> 00:56:56,160
sobre quanto, você sabe,

1360
00:56:56,540 --> 00:57:00,140
certas famílias parecem ser capazes de manter seu povo no

1361
00:57:00,140 --> 00:57:02,540
classes altas dos Estados Unidos perpetuamente.

1362
00:57:02,700 --> 00:57:05,220
E acredite em mim, como se eu fosse pobre quando era

1363
00:57:05,360 --> 00:57:06,400
uma criança e eu fomos,

1364
00:57:06,400 --> 00:57:07,360
e eu tenho que ir,

1365
00:57:07,500 --> 00:57:08,800
Tenho que ir a uma das fantasias.

1366
00:57:08,880 --> 00:57:09,620
Eu tenho que ir para Stanford.

1367
00:57:11,170 --> 00:57:15,240
E pude ver como as pessoas,

1368
00:57:16,440 --> 00:57:19,640
eles tratam você de maneira diferente, de uma forma que é quase um insulto.

1369
00:57:20,060 --> 00:57:23,660
Basicamente, de repente, para um certo tipo de pessoa,

1370
00:57:23,660 --> 00:57:25,140
Eu era uma pessoa legítima.

1371
00:57:25,540 --> 00:57:28,720
E vejo o quanto a América depende de Harvard,

1372
00:57:29,200 --> 00:57:31,080
em Yale para produzir seu,

1373
00:57:31,780 --> 00:57:32,500
vou usar um muito

1374
00:57:32,520 --> 00:57:34,200
marca um termo sonoro, classe dominante.

1375
00:57:35,100 --> 00:57:37,880
E essa é uma das razões pelas quais você precisa ser particularmente

1376
00:57:37,880 --> 00:57:40,420
preocupado com o que acontece nessas faculdades de elite.

1377
00:57:40,820 --> 00:57:42,260
E essas faculdades de elite com o

1378
00:57:42,260 --> 00:57:48,460
com exceção da Universidade de Chicago e da UVA, eles se saem muito mal em relação à liberdade de expressão.

1379
00:57:48,880 --> 00:57:50,960
E isso tem todos os tipos de problemas.

1380
00:57:52,420 --> 00:57:55,260
Não é um bom presságio para o futuro da proteção

1381
00:57:55,260 --> 00:57:56,980
liberdade de expressão para o resto da sociedade.

1382
00:57:58,040 --> 00:57:59,920
Então você também pode ter empatia por aí

1383
00:58:00,480 --> 00:58:02,520
com as pessoas que votaram em Donald Trump?

1384
00:58:04,480 --> 00:58:10,160
Porque precisamente isso como uma resistência a este tipo de

1385
00:58:11,060 --> 00:58:13,000
impulso da classe dominante,

1386
00:58:14,600 --> 00:58:16,220
essa realeza que passa

1387
00:58:16,220 --> 00:58:19,760
na regra de geração em geração.

1388
00:58:20,160 --> 00:58:25,660
Eu tento muito ter empatia até certo ponto com todos e tento realmente ver onde eles estão

1389
00:58:25,740 --> 00:58:29,440
vindo e a raiva à direita.

1390
00:58:29,800 --> 00:58:30,440
Entendo.

1391
00:58:30,780 --> 00:58:33,490
Quero dizer, tipo, eu sinto que o, o

1392
00:58:33,860 --> 00:58:34,400
livro,

1393
00:58:35,200 --> 00:58:37,560
então, lidar com a mente americana foi um livro que eu,

1394
00:58:37,560 --> 00:58:39,280
isso poderia ser uma espécie de prazer para todos

1395
00:58:39,580 --> 00:58:45,910
até certo ponto, em parte porque realmente quisemos dizer o que dissemos no subtítulo: estes são

1396
00:58:46,140 --> 00:58:49,660
boas intenções e más ideias que estão prejudicando as pessoas.

1397
00:58:49,940 --> 00:58:51,820
E se você entender e ler o

1398
00:58:51,840 --> 00:58:56,280
livro, você pode dizer, é tipo, ok, isso não é ninguém sendo malicioso.

1399
00:58:56,700 --> 00:58:58,640
Você sabe, são pessoas tentando proteger seus filhos.

1400
00:58:58,660 --> 00:59:03,220
Eles estão apenas fazendo isso de uma maneira que pode realmente levar a maior ansiedade, depressão,

1401
00:59:04,340 --> 00:59:07,180
e estranhamente eventualmente representam uma ameaça à liberdade de expressão.

1402
00:59:08,020 --> 00:59:09,040
Mas neste,

1403
00:59:09,400 --> 00:59:10,360
não podemos ficar bem,

1404
00:59:10,920 --> 00:59:13,960
eu e meu, ah, nem mencionei meu brilhante co-autor, Ricky Schlott,

1405
00:59:14,280 --> 00:59:15,180
um jovem de 23 anos

1406
00:59:16,640 --> 00:59:17,120
gênio.

1407
00:59:17,460 --> 00:59:18,580
Ela é, ela é, ela é incrível.

1408
00:59:18,620 --> 00:59:19,420
Comecei a trabalhar com ela quando ela

1409
00:59:19,440 --> 00:59:21,900
tinha 20 anos, quem é meu coautor deste livro.

1410
00:59:21,900 --> 00:59:23,500
Então, quando estou dizendo nós,

1411
00:59:23,520 --> 00:59:24,520
Estou falando sobre mim e Ricky.

1412
00:59:24,640 --> 00:59:25,860
Ele é um libertário.

1413
00:59:25,960 --> 00:59:26,580
Jornalista libertário.

1414
00:59:27,140 --> 00:59:28,060
E um jornalista.

1415
00:59:28,440 --> 00:59:28,640
Sim.

1416
00:59:28,720 --> 00:59:29,520
Uma mente brilhante.

1417
00:59:30,200 --> 00:59:30,380
Sim.

1418
00:59:30,400 --> 00:59:34,780
E, na verdade, não podemos escrever isso de uma forma muito gentil, porque os canceladores não são gentis.

1419
00:59:35,420 --> 00:59:38,100
Há uma crueldade e uma impiedade nisso.

1420
00:59:38,300 --> 00:59:39,920
Quer dizer, comecei a ficar muito deprimido

1421
00:59:40,260 --> 00:59:44,580
no ano passado, quando eu estava escrevendo e nem queria contar à minha equipe por que estava ficando tão ansioso e deprimido.

1422
00:59:45,080 --> 00:59:47,520
Em parte é porque estou falando de pessoas que irão,

1423
00:59:48,560 --> 00:59:50,580
você sabe, em alguns dos casos de que estamos falando,

1424
00:59:51,300 --> 00:59:53,140
vá para sua casa, mire em seus filhos.

1425
00:59:54,860 --> 00:59:56,180
Então, então isso é um longo

1426
00:59:56,180 --> 00:59:57,360
maneira de dizer o,

1427
00:59:58,880 --> 01:00:03,200
Eu meio que consigo entender o que deixa os malucos certos nisso.

1428
01:00:03,400 --> 01:00:06,500
Eu sinto que eles estão constantemente se sentindo como se estivessem sendo iluminados a gás.

1429
01:00:08,320 --> 01:00:12,260
A educação de elite é realmente um insulto à classe trabalhadora.

1430
01:00:12,720 --> 01:00:16,620
Assim, parte da ideologia que é dominante no momento trata,

1431
01:00:17,210 --> 01:00:19,460
quase 70% do público americano,

1432
01:00:19,740 --> 01:00:23,400
como eles são, pensamos que desenvolvemos isso um pouco na fortaleza retórica perfeita, como se eles fossem

1433
01:00:23,980 --> 01:00:30,060
para alguns, de alguma forma ilegítimo e não digno de respeito ou compaixão.

1434
01:00:30,620 --> 01:00:30,720
Sim.

1435
01:00:30,820 --> 01:00:33,940
O, o elitismo geral que irradia,

1436
01:00:35,600 --> 01:00:39,900
elitismo autoalimentado que irradia das pessoas que frequentam essas instituições.

1437
01:00:40,320 --> 01:00:41,780
E o que é engraçado é que,

1438
01:00:41,780 --> 01:00:45,580
o, o elitismo foi reembalado como uma espécie de,

1439
01:00:48,740 --> 01:00:50,680
isso se disfarça como uma espécie de compaixão infinita,

1440
01:00:50,920 --> 01:00:53,940
mas essencialmente é baseado em uma espécie de muito,

1441
01:00:54,980 --> 01:00:55,380
ser franco,

1442
01:00:56,180 --> 01:00:58,620
ideologia excessivamente simples e excessivamente simples,

1443
01:00:58,840 --> 01:01:01,940
uma explicação simples do mundo e quebrando pessoas

1444
01:01:01,940 --> 01:01:06,480
em grupos e julgar as pessoas pelo quão oprimidas elas são,

1445
01:01:06,680 --> 01:01:08,660
na intersecção de suas diversas identidades.

1446
01:01:10,400 --> 01:01:12,200
E chegou a isso,

1447
01:01:12,280 --> 01:01:13,420
Eu acho que inicialmente com,

1448
01:01:13,420 --> 01:01:16,240
com, com um apelo de um núcleo compassivo,

1449
01:01:17,040 --> 01:01:19,660
mas é usado de uma forma que é,

1450
01:01:19,660 --> 01:01:22,160
pode ser muito cruel, muito desdenhoso,

1451
01:01:23,400 --> 01:01:27,960
sem compaixão e permite que você não leve a sério a maior parte

1452
01:01:27,960 --> 01:01:28,700
seus semelhantes.

1453
01:01:29,280 --> 01:01:30,560
É muito estranho como isso aconteceu.

1454
01:01:30,680 --> 01:01:34,680
Talvez você possa explorar por que uma coisa que tem

1455
01:01:35,880 --> 01:01:36,980
parece bom no início.

1456
01:01:37,120 --> 01:01:38,080
Sim.

1457
01:01:38,480 --> 01:01:39,080
Pode ser,

1458
01:01:39,900 --> 01:01:40,220
pode criar,

1459
01:01:41,420 --> 01:01:46,660
pode se tornar uma arma cruel para cancelar e ferir pessoas e ignorá-las.

1460
01:01:47,020 --> 01:01:49,860
Quero dizer, isso é o que você descreveu com a fortaleza retórica perfeita.

1461
01:01:50,000 --> 01:01:50,300
Sim.

1462
01:01:50,320 --> 01:01:51,260
Que é um conjunto de perguntas.

1463
01:01:51,280 --> 01:01:55,000
Talvez você possa explicar qual é a fortaleza retórica perfeita.

1464
01:01:55,220 --> 01:01:55,460
Sim.

1465
01:01:55,540 --> 01:01:59,960
Portanto, a fortaleza retórica perfeita é a forma como foi desenvolvida

1466
01:02:00,640 --> 01:02:02,600
à esquerda para não

1467
01:02:02,720 --> 01:02:04,400
chegar ao argumento real de alguém.

1468
01:02:05,100 --> 01:02:06,480
Eu quero fazer um gráfico,

1469
01:02:06,520 --> 01:02:08,000
como um fluxograma disso,

1470
01:02:08,100 --> 01:02:08,880
aqui está o argumento e

1471
01:02:08,880 --> 01:02:13,740
aqui está esta fortaleza perfeita que irá desviá-lo sempre de entrar na discussão.

1472
01:02:14,400 --> 01:02:16,560
E comecei a notar isso certamente quando eu,

1473
01:02:16,620 --> 01:02:17,680
quando eu estava na faculdade de direito,

1474
01:02:17,980 --> 01:02:22,860
que havia muitas maneiras diferentes de dispensar as pessoas e aperfeiçoar a fortaleza retórica, primeiro passo.

1475
01:02:23,800 --> 01:02:26,980
E posso atestar isso porque também fui culpado disso,

1476
01:02:27,440 --> 01:02:28,780
que você pode demitir pessoas

1477
01:02:29,300 --> 01:02:31,540
se você pode argumentar que eles são conservadores.

1478
01:02:31,700 --> 01:02:34,120
Eles não precisam ser conservadores para serem claros.

1479
01:02:34,620 --> 01:02:36,280
Você apenas tem que dizer que eles são.

1480
01:02:36,760 --> 01:02:38,620
Então eu nunca li Thomas Sowell

1481
01:02:39,160 --> 01:02:40,220
porque ele era um lateral-direito.

1482
01:02:40,960 --> 01:02:42,380
Eu não li Camille Poglia

1483
01:02:43,160 --> 01:02:45,540
porque eu estava, eu, alguém me convenceu de que ela estava certa

1484
01:02:45,540 --> 01:02:45,700
ala.

1485
01:02:45,820 --> 01:02:47,860
Houve muitos autores que, e

1486
01:02:48,500 --> 01:02:49,740
quando eu estava na faculdade de direito,

1487
01:02:50,340 --> 01:02:52,640
isso, entre muitas pessoas muito brilhantes,

1488
01:02:53,160 --> 01:02:57,420
realmente já era um hábito intelectual que se você pudesse designar

1489
01:02:57,430 --> 01:03:00,820
algo conservador, então você não precisava mais pensar muito sobre isso ou

1490
01:03:00,900 --> 01:03:01,920
leve isso particularmente a sério.

1491
01:03:02,440 --> 01:03:05,020
Esta é uma maneira infantil de argumentar,

1492
01:03:05,560 --> 01:03:07,160
mas, mesmo assim, eu me envolvi nisso.

1493
01:03:07,160 --> 01:03:07,900
Era uma tática comum.

1494
01:03:08,380 --> 01:03:09,360
Eu até mencionei no livro,

1495
01:03:09,480 --> 01:03:10,260
houve um tempo em que

1496
01:03:10,260 --> 01:03:14,460
a, um amigo ativista gay que era,

1497
01:03:14,500 --> 01:03:15,720
Acho que decididamente à minha esquerda,

1498
01:03:15,900 --> 01:03:20,760
mas mesmo assim aquela experiência pragmática de ser realmente um ativista disse algo como,

1499
01:03:20,880 --> 01:03:22,740
bem, só porque alguém é conservador não significa que esteja errado.

1500
01:03:23,420 --> 01:03:24,160
E eu lembro de me sentir gentil

1501
01:03:24,160 --> 01:03:27,180
de escandalizado em algum nível por apenas ser tipo,

1502
01:03:27,260 --> 01:03:31,180
bem, isso é, não é isso que quando dizemos é que eles são apenas pessoas más com ideias ruins.

1503
01:03:31,400 --> 01:03:33,160
Você pode simplesmente jogar um,

1504
01:03:33,260 --> 01:03:34,140
ah, esse cara é um ponta-direita.

1505
01:03:34,460 --> 01:03:35,340
Você pode simplesmente jogar isso.

1506
01:03:35,430 --> 01:03:36,920
Não preciso mais pensar em você.

1507
01:03:37,180 --> 01:03:37,420
Sim.

1508
01:03:37,420 --> 01:03:38,280
E então pode,

1509
01:03:38,780 --> 01:03:39,600
se você for popular o suficiente,

1510
01:03:39,620 --> 01:03:40,220
podem ser aqueles,

1511
01:03:40,440 --> 01:03:41,440
pode ser meio pegajoso.

1512
01:03:41,740 --> 01:03:42,040
Sim.

1513
01:03:42,110 --> 01:03:42,860
Como,

1514
01:03:43,780 --> 01:03:46,060
e é estranho porque, por ser eficaz,

1515
01:03:46,440 --> 01:03:47,720
é por isso que continua ficando

1516
01:03:47,720 --> 01:03:49,400
costumava essencialmente isso,

1517
01:03:49,620 --> 01:03:51,420
deveria ter atingido alguém porque,

1518
01:03:51,420 --> 01:03:53,380
porque eu, você sabe, eu tenho um ótimo

1519
01:03:54,460 --> 01:03:57,400
pedigree liberal, você sabe, tudo, desde trabalhar na ACLU até

1520
01:03:57,420 --> 01:03:59,220
fazer legislação sobre refugiados na Europa Oriental para,

1521
01:03:59,380 --> 01:04:01,710
Participei de uma mentoria ambiental

1522
01:04:01,900 --> 01:04:04,260
programa para crianças do ensino médio do centro da cidade em DC.

1523
01:04:04,800 --> 01:04:06,060
Você sabe, eu estive, eu estive,

1524
01:04:06,740 --> 01:04:10,240
Eu, eu, eu posso, você sabe, me defender como sendo de esquerda,

1525
01:04:10,620 --> 01:04:13,200
mas eu odeio fazer isso porque

1526
01:04:13,200 --> 01:04:15,120
também há uma parte de mim que pensa, ok,

1527
01:04:15,740 --> 01:04:16,280
e daí,

1528
01:04:17,200 --> 01:04:17,420
como,

1529
01:04:17,760 --> 01:04:18,960
você está realmente dizendo isso

1530
01:04:18,960 --> 01:04:23,300
se você puder magicamente me fazer discutir ou se convencer disso,

1531
01:04:23,340 --> 01:04:24,200
que estou à direita,

1532
01:04:24,640 --> 01:04:25,940
que você não precisa mais me ouvir?

1533
01:04:26,320 --> 01:04:27,840
E, novamente, isso é discutir como crianças.

1534
01:04:28,500 --> 01:04:32,040
E a razão pela qual isto se tornou tão popular é porque mesmo entre,

1535
01:04:32,340 --> 01:04:37,120
ou talvez, talvez especialmente entre as elites, que funcione tão eficazmente como uma arma perfeita

1536
01:04:37,200 --> 01:04:38,560
que você pode usar sem crítica.

1537
01:04:38,580 --> 01:04:39,820
Se eu puder provar que você está certo,

1538
01:04:39,920 --> 01:04:40,420
Eu não preciso,

1539
01:04:40,420 --> 01:04:41,560
Eu não preciso pensar em você.

1540
01:04:42,140 --> 01:04:45,020
Não é à toa que de repente você começa a ver pessoas ligando

1541
01:04:45,020 --> 01:04:50,220
a direita da ACLU e chamando a ala direita do New York Times porque tem sido um grande

1542
01:04:50,220 --> 01:04:53,940
forma eficaz de deslegitimar as pessoas como pensadores.

1543
01:04:54,580 --> 01:04:58,100
Nós temos, você sabe, Stephen Pinker, que está em nosso conselho consultivo,

1544
01:04:58,500 --> 01:05:02,840
ele se refere à academia como sendo o pólo esquerdo que essencialmente é,

1545
01:05:02,840 --> 01:05:03,980
é uma posição que de,

1546
01:05:04,320 --> 01:05:05,180
desse ponto de vista,

1547
01:05:05,240 --> 01:05:06,880
tudo parece à sua direita,

1548
01:05:06,920 --> 01:05:08,220
parece que está à direita.

1549
01:05:09,240 --> 01:05:12,360
Mas uma vez que se torne uma tática que aceitamos,

1550
01:05:12,920 --> 01:05:12,980
isto,

1551
01:05:13,340 --> 01:05:15,240
e essa é uma das razões pelas quais, você sabe, eu sou,

1552
01:05:15,880 --> 01:05:17,020
Estou, estou mais à esquerda,

1553
01:05:17,160 --> 01:05:18,980
mas acho que sou liberal de centro-esquerda.

1554
01:05:20,460 --> 01:05:23,160
Ricky é, você sabe, um libertário mais conservador.

1555
01:05:23,620 --> 01:05:24,580
E inicialmente eu estava tipo,

1556
01:05:24,580 --> 01:05:27,220
eu deveria realmente escrever algo com alguém que está mais à direita?

1557
01:05:27,280 --> 01:05:29,560
E eu digo, absolutamente deveria estar.

1558
01:05:29,640 --> 01:05:31,900
Eu tenho que realmente viver de acordo com o que acredito nisso

1559
01:05:31,900 --> 01:05:35,920
coisas porque é ridículo termos essa ideia primitiva de que você pode demitir alguém

1560
01:05:36,060 --> 01:05:37,460
assim que você reivindicar,

1561
01:05:38,140 --> 01:05:39,640
certo ou errado, que eles estão à direita.

1562
01:05:40,120 --> 01:05:40,340
Bem,

1563
01:05:41,220 --> 01:05:42,280
Eu sinto, corrija-me se eu estiver errado,

1564
01:05:42,360 --> 01:05:45,000
mas sinto que recentemente você foi chamado de direita

1565
01:05:45,740 --> 01:05:46,580
fogo,

1566
01:05:47,000 --> 01:05:50,120
talvez você por associação por causa desse debate.

1567
01:05:50,980 --> 01:05:51,920
Ah, o LA Times.

1568
01:05:51,940 --> 01:05:52,660
O LA Times.

1569
01:05:53,040 --> 01:05:54,100
Vamos falar sobre o LA Times.

1570
01:05:54,640 --> 01:05:56,440
Então sim, há um artigo, há um debate.

1571
01:05:57,080 --> 01:06:01,560
Mal posso esperar para assistir porque acho que ainda não está disponível para assistir em vídeo.

1572
01:06:01,620 --> 01:06:02,500
Você tem que comparecer pessoalmente.

1573
01:06:02,820 --> 01:06:04,140
Mal posso esperar para ver.

1574
01:06:04,400 --> 01:06:07,100
Uh, mas o fogo apoiou em parte e então o LA Times escreveu, hum,

1575
01:06:08,180 --> 01:06:12,020
um artigo contundente sobre, uh, que todos no debate estavam

1576
01:06:12,620 --> 01:06:13,760
basicamente certo

1577
01:06:14,380 --> 01:06:15,080
inclinando-se para a direita.

1578
01:06:15,420 --> 01:06:15,540
OK.

1579
01:06:15,840 --> 01:06:17,120
Uh, tanta coisa para desfazer as malas lá.

1580
01:06:17,660 --> 01:06:19,520
Uh, você sabe, Barry Weiss tem isso,

1581
01:06:19,520 --> 01:06:21,100
você sabe, ótimo, ótimo projeto, a imprensa livre.

1582
01:06:21,220 --> 01:06:22,140
Fiquei muito impressionado.

1583
01:06:22,400 --> 01:06:23,820
Está cobrindo histórias que,

1584
01:06:23,820 --> 01:06:26,940
que grande parte da mídia de direita ou de esquerda não está disposta a cobrir.

1585
01:06:28,200 --> 01:06:29,620
Hum, e nós fizemos um,

1586
01:06:29,840 --> 01:06:31,460
uh, organizamos um debate com ela.

1587
01:06:31,900 --> 01:06:36,600
Hum, uh, e nós queríamos torná-lo o mais divertido e controverso possível.

1588
01:06:37,260 --> 01:06:39,800
Uh, então o fogo e a imprensa livre organizaram um debate.

1589
01:06:40,240 --> 01:06:41,720
A revolução sexual falhou?

1590
01:06:42,300 --> 01:06:44,340
Então o debate foi realmente emocionante,

1591
01:06:44,340 --> 01:06:44,960
Realmente engraçado.

1592
01:06:45,120 --> 01:06:48,440
O lado que disse que a revolução sexual não foi um fracasso,

1593
01:06:48,440 --> 01:06:50,080
isso, que Grimes e Sarah Hader estavam.

1594
01:06:50,530 --> 01:06:51,080
Um,

1595
01:06:51,860 --> 01:06:52,420
hum, foi,

1596
01:06:52,740 --> 01:06:53,720
você sabe, um bom,

1597
01:06:54,500 --> 01:06:55,260
noite carnuda e pensativa.

1598
01:06:55,960 --> 01:07:00,320
E recebemos uma revisão, houve uma revisão que foi meio contundente sobre a coisa toda.

1599
01:07:00,500 --> 01:07:02,420
E incluía uma linha dizendo que,

1600
01:07:02,940 --> 01:07:05,080
uh, fogo, que afirma acreditar na liberdade de expressão,

1601
01:07:05,120 --> 01:07:06,880
mas apenas defende pontos de vista até certo ponto.

1602
01:07:08,080 --> 01:07:10,100
Não acredito que isso apareceu na revista.

1603
01:07:10,120 --> 01:07:11,100
Porque não está apenas nos ligando.

1604
01:07:11,100 --> 01:07:12,580
Porque é claro, você sabe, a implicação é claro,

1605
01:07:12,580 --> 01:07:13,420
que somos de direita,

1606
01:07:13,500 --> 01:07:18,260
hum, o que na verdade não somos, a equipe se inclina decididamente mais para a esquerda e para a direita.

1607
01:07:18,920 --> 01:07:19,320
Hum,

1608
01:07:19,940 --> 01:07:20,240
mas

1609
01:07:20,820 --> 01:07:23,060
também defendemos pessoas de todo o espectro,

1610
01:07:23,180 --> 01:07:23,880
o tempo todo.

1611
01:07:24,100 --> 01:07:25,040
Como se isso fosse algo que,

1612
01:07:25,040 --> 01:07:27,620
que mesmo a menor pesquisa no Google teria resolvido.

1613
01:07:27,840 --> 01:07:30,560
Então, como se tivéssemos sido criticados em Los Angeles sobre isso porque é tipo,

1614
01:07:30,840 --> 01:07:31,700
sim, se você disse.

1615
01:07:32,280 --> 01:07:35,180
Na minha opinião, eles são de direita, teríamos argumentado,

1616
01:07:35,520 --> 01:07:40,400
você sabe, hum, dizendo, bem, aqui, aqui, aqui estão os seguintes 50.000 exemplos de,

1617
01:07:40,400 --> 01:07:41,880
de, de nós não sermos,

1618
01:07:42,160 --> 01:07:45,660
mas quando você realmente afirma que defendemos apenas opiniões,

1619
01:07:45,680 --> 01:07:47,320
concordamos, em primeiro lugar, não há como concordarmos com isso.

1620
01:07:47,340 --> 01:07:51,240
Não há como concordarmos com as opiniões porque, na verdade, temos um grupo politicamente diverso

1621
01:07:51,320 --> 01:07:56,260
funcionários que nem sequer concordam sobre quais opiniões são boas e quais opiniões temos.

1622
01:07:56,780 --> 01:07:57,280
Mas sim,

1623
01:07:57,680 --> 01:07:58,000
Eu precisei,

1624
01:07:58,400 --> 01:08:01,680
Eu, certa vez, quando alguém fez algo assim e estava simplesmente

1625
01:08:01,680 --> 01:08:04,620
ser um pouco irreverente sobre a liberdade de expressão estar bem.

1626
01:08:04,780 --> 01:08:07,360
Eu fiz um longo tópico de 70 tweets,

1627
01:08:07,360 --> 01:08:09,760
você sabe, apenas dizendo, Ei, você realmente acha que está tudo bem?

1628
01:08:10,280 --> 01:08:11,820
Eu decidi não fazer isso,

1629
01:08:11,820 --> 01:08:13,400
hum, neste em particular.

1630
01:08:13,660 --> 01:08:13,940
Mas

1631
01:08:14,520 --> 01:08:18,420
o bom disso é que demonstrou duas partes do livro,

1632
01:08:18,880 --> 01:08:19,720
uh, cancelamento do Americano

1633
01:08:19,720 --> 01:08:20,000
mente.

1634
01:08:20,160 --> 01:08:20,720
Se não mais,

1635
01:08:21,200 --> 01:08:23,320
um deles está demitindo alguém porque é conservador.

1636
01:08:23,540 --> 01:08:27,160
Uh, e porque essa foi a implicação, não precisamos ouvir o fogo porque eles são conservadores.

1637
01:08:27,380 --> 01:08:33,280
Mas o outro é alguma coisa, um termo que inventei especificamente para a forma como as pessoas discutem no Twitter,

1638
01:08:33,720 --> 01:08:35,080
que é projeção de hipocrisia.

1639
01:08:35,340 --> 01:08:39,480
Olá, sou uma pessoa que só se preocupa com um lado da cerca política.

1640
01:08:39,500 --> 01:08:42,520
E acho que todo mundo é hipócrita.

1641
01:08:43,320 --> 01:08:43,760
Hum, e por falar nisso,

1642
01:08:43,840 --> 01:08:45,440
Eu não fiz nenhuma pesquisa real sobre isso,

1643
01:08:45,800 --> 01:08:48,400
mas presumo que todos os outros sejam hipócritas.

1644
01:08:48,580 --> 01:08:50,080
E você vê isso acontecer o tempo todo.

1645
01:08:50,320 --> 01:08:52,920
O, o, e isso acontece disparar muito onde alguém vai ficar tipo,

1646
01:08:52,920 --> 01:08:54,260
onde está o fogo neste caso?

1647
01:08:54,320 --> 01:08:54,640
E nós pensamos,

1648
01:08:54,960 --> 01:08:58,440
estamos literalmente citados no link que você acabou de enviar,

1649
01:08:58,640 --> 01:09:00,180
mas na verdade não li.

1650
01:09:00,980 --> 01:09:02,540
Ou é como, onde está o fogo nisso?

1651
01:09:02,580 --> 01:09:06,540
É tipo, aqui está nosso processo sobre isso de seis meses atrás.

1652
01:09:07,200 --> 01:09:09,540
Hum, então é uma coisa favorita.

1653
01:09:09,740 --> 01:09:11,700
E também o programa diário de John Stewart,

1654
01:09:12,200 --> 01:09:18,600
tipo, o, o, o, hum, uh, e o ismo e o tipo de ideia de que essas pessoas devem ser hipócritas é algo que

1655
01:09:19,120 --> 01:09:23,020
maior comédia, mas no que diz respeito a uma tática retórica que o levará à verdade,

1656
01:09:23,400 --> 01:09:28,200
apenas assumindo que seu oponente ou apenas acusando seu oponente de sempre ser um

1657
01:09:28,200 --> 01:09:30,980
hipócrita não é uma boa tática para a verdade.

1658
01:09:31,080 --> 01:09:31,720
Mas a propósito,

1659
01:09:31,800 --> 01:09:36,080
tende sempre a vir de pessoas que não são consistentes com a liberdade de expressão.

1660
01:09:37,020 --> 01:09:38,640
Então isso entrega a projeção,

1661
01:09:39,140 --> 01:09:41,820
mas basicamente não fazendo a pesquisa sobre se o

1662
01:09:41,820 --> 01:09:47,520
pessoa é ou não hipócrita e presumindo que os outros são uma grande fração dos outros que estão lendo isso,

1663
01:09:48,300 --> 01:09:49,980
uh, também não farei a pesquisa.

1664
01:09:50,140 --> 01:09:51,640
E, portanto, esse tipo de

1665
01:09:52,420 --> 01:09:55,220
declaração se torna uma espécie de veracidade sem

1666
01:09:55,220 --> 01:09:56,520
baseando-se na realidade real.

1667
01:09:56,800 --> 01:10:00,740
Isso quebra a barreira entre o que é e o que não é verdade porque se,

1668
01:10:00,740 --> 01:10:01,660
se a multidão disser

1669
01:10:01,660 --> 01:10:04,320
algo é verdade, é preciso muito esforço para corrigi-lo.

1670
01:10:04,480 --> 01:10:06,340
E há três maneiras que eu quero,

1671
01:10:06,360 --> 01:10:08,860
tipo, você sabe, eu quero responder a isso,

1672
01:10:08,940 --> 01:10:11,180
que é apenas dar exemplo após exemplo de,

1673
01:10:11,320 --> 01:10:14,900
de momentos em que defendemos pessoas de ambos os lados de cada majorado,

1674
01:10:15,000 --> 01:10:16,340
basicamente todas as questões importantes,

1675
01:10:16,440 --> 01:10:19,900
seja Israel, Palestina, seja terrorismo, seja casamento gay,

1676
01:10:20,420 --> 01:10:21,720
fomos aborto.

1677
01:10:22,000 --> 01:10:24,360
Defendemos ambos os lados desse argumento.

1678
01:10:24,980 --> 01:10:28,240
A outra parte, e eu chamo estes de órfãos da guerra cultural.

1679
01:10:29,020 --> 01:10:34,320
Eu realmente quero exortar a mídia a começar a se preocupar com os casos de liberdade de expressão que são

1680
01:10:34,340 --> 01:10:38,740
que na verdade não têm uma valência política que na verdade são apenas os bons e velhos tempos

1681
01:10:38,780 --> 01:10:45,580
exercício de poder contra o garotinho, a garotinha ou o grupinho dentro ou fora do campus

1682
01:10:45,580 --> 01:10:46,420
campus para esse assunto.

1683
01:10:46,660 --> 01:10:47,460
Porque esses casos acontecem.

1684
01:10:47,840 --> 01:10:49,820
Muitos dos nossos litígios são apenas pessoas pequenas

1685
01:10:50,580 --> 01:10:52,820
como pessoas comuns sendo informadas de que não podem protestar,

1686
01:10:52,840 --> 01:10:53,960
que eles não podem segurar cartazes.

1687
01:10:54,440 --> 01:10:57,760
E então a última parte do argumento que eu quero que as pessoas realmente entendam é tipo, sim.

1688
01:10:58,100 --> 01:10:59,400
E, aliás,

1689
01:10:59,740 --> 01:11:01,080
uh, os direitistas também têm problemas.

1690
01:11:01,300 --> 01:11:03,480
Hum, e há ataques da esquerda

1691
01:11:03,560 --> 01:11:05,520
e você também deve levar isso a sério.

1692
01:11:05,900 --> 01:11:08,080
Hum, você deveria se importar quando os republicanos entrarem

1693
01:11:08,080 --> 01:11:08,220
dificuldade.

1694
01:11:08,500 --> 01:11:12,100
Você deveria se preocupar quando a Califórnia tem um DEI,

1695
01:11:12,100 --> 01:11:15,680
um programa que exige isso nas faculdades comunitárias da Califórnia

1696
01:11:16,260 --> 01:11:20,260
tem uma política de programa DEI que na verdade exige até mesmo

1697
01:11:20,260 --> 01:11:25,820
professores de química para trabalhar em uma ideia diferente do DEI, da interseccionalidade à

1698
01:11:25,820 --> 01:11:27,900
anti-racismo em suas salas de aula,

1699
01:11:28,040 --> 01:11:29,160
em seu programa de estudos, etc.

1700
01:11:29,640 --> 01:11:30,240
Isto é um

1701
01:11:30,920 --> 01:11:32,580
grave violação da liberdade acadêmica.

1702
01:11:33,160 --> 01:11:36,980
É tão ruim dizer aos professores o que eles não podem dizer.

1703
01:11:37,060 --> 01:11:38,920
Como lutamos e derrotamos na Flórida.

1704
01:11:39,340 --> 01:11:41,520
É ainda pior dizer-lhes o que devem dizer.

1705
01:11:41,560 --> 01:11:42,880
Isso é totalmente totalitário.

1706
01:11:43,360 --> 01:11:44,220
E estamos processando isso.

1707
01:11:44,400 --> 01:11:46,540
E o que eu sou, o que estou dizendo é

1708
01:11:47,060 --> 01:11:48,620
que isso,

1709
01:11:49,400 --> 01:11:50,860
quando você está demitindo alguém por apenas

1710
01:11:50,860 --> 01:11:51,500
estando do outro,

1711
01:11:51,500 --> 01:11:52,780
outro lado da cerca política,

1712
01:11:53,540 --> 01:11:55,040
você também é meio

1713
01:11:55,040 --> 01:11:58,420
alegando, afirmando que nenhum desses casos também importa.

1714
01:11:58,500 --> 01:12:04,390
E quero que as pessoas se preocupem com a censura, mesmo que seja contra pessoas que odeiam.

1715
01:12:05,800 --> 01:12:07,080
Censura é censura.

1716
01:12:08,710 --> 01:12:13,360
Se pudermos pegar essa tangente brevemente com DEI,

1717
01:12:13,820 --> 01:12:15,040
diversidade, equidade e inclusão,

1718
01:12:16,540 --> 01:12:20,340
o que há de bom e qual é o mal de tais programas?

1719
01:12:20,840 --> 01:12:23,340
DEI, eu conheço pessoas que são DEI, hum,

1720
01:12:23,700 --> 01:12:24,740
consultores ou alguns,

1721
01:12:25,400 --> 01:12:28,000
na verdade, tenho um amigo querido que amo muito,

1722
01:12:28,000 --> 01:12:29,240
hum, quem faz DEI.

1723
01:12:30,180 --> 01:12:31,640
Pessoas absolutamente decentes.

1724
01:12:32,280 --> 01:12:37,000
O que eles querem fazer é criar laços de compreensão,

1725
01:12:37,520 --> 01:12:39,480
amizade, compaixão entre as pessoas,

1726
01:12:39,580 --> 01:12:40,140
pessoas que são diferentes.

1727
01:12:40,950 --> 01:12:41,500
Infelizmente,

1728
01:12:41,920 --> 01:12:44,620
a pesquisa sobre o que muito DEI realmente faz

1729
01:12:45,200 --> 01:12:46,480
muitas vezes é o oposto disso.

1730
01:12:46,900 --> 01:12:53,240
E acho que isso é parcialmente um problema com parte da ideologia que vem de uma teoria racial crítica,

1731
01:12:53,800 --> 01:12:54,560
o que é uma coisa real,

1732
01:12:54,700 --> 01:12:57,280
aliás, isso, isso informa muito do DEI,

1733
01:12:57,300 --> 01:12:59,960
isso na verdade torna algo mais propenso a dividir do que a unir.

1734
01:13:00,320 --> 01:13:03,440
Falamos sobre isso em mimos no americano

1735
01:13:03,440 --> 01:13:08,920
mente como a diferença entre a política de identidade comum da humanidade e a política de identidade comum do inimigo.

1736
01:13:09,560 --> 01:13:10,380
E eu acho que,

1737
01:13:10,760 --> 01:13:13,040
uh, eu conheço algumas pessoas que conheço que,

1738
01:13:13,040 --> 01:13:17,520
que fazem DEI, eles realmente querem que seja uma política de identidade comum da humanidade,

1739
01:13:17,700 --> 01:13:18,960
mas alguns dos reais

1740
01:13:19,000 --> 01:13:25,300
suposições ideológicas incorporadas podem, na verdade, fazer com que as pessoas se sintam mais alienadas umas das outras.

1741
01:13:26,060 --> 01:13:27,680
Agora, quando comecei no FIRE,

1742
01:13:28,020 --> 01:13:30,280
meus primeiros casos envolveram o 11 de setembro.

1743
01:13:31,040 --> 01:13:32,660
Hum, e foi ruim.

1744
01:13:33,300 --> 01:13:34,620
Uh, os professores estavam sendo alvos.

1745
01:13:34,800 --> 01:13:37,180
Os professores estavam perdendo seus empregos por dizerem

1746
01:13:37,200 --> 01:13:40,420
coisas insensíveis sobre o 11 de setembro e ambos,

1747
01:13:40,420 --> 01:13:41,340
da direita e da esquerda,

1748
01:13:41,420 --> 01:13:42,440
na verdade, nesse caso,

1749
01:13:42,560 --> 01:13:44,580
na verdade, às vezes mais, muito mais da direita.

1750
01:13:45,160 --> 01:13:46,200
Hum, e

1751
01:13:46,840 --> 01:13:47,640
foi muito ruim.

1752
01:13:48,240 --> 01:13:50,160
E cerca de cinco professores perderam o emprego.

1753
01:13:50,640 --> 01:13:51,480
Isso é ruim.

1754
01:13:51,740 --> 01:13:54,000
Cinco professores durante um período relativamente curto de

1755
01:13:54,000 --> 01:13:55,720
vez sendo demitido por uma opinião política.

1756
01:13:56,200 --> 01:13:58,420
Isso é algo que, você sabe, seria escrito

1757
01:13:58,480 --> 01:13:59,780
em quaisquer décadas anteriores.

1758
01:14:00,800 --> 01:14:04,300
Agora estamos avaliando quantos professores foram alvo

1759
01:14:04,520 --> 01:14:07,660
para cancelamento entre 2014 e, uh,

1760
01:14:08,220 --> 01:14:09,060
meio deste ano,

1761
01:14:09,360 --> 01:14:11,600
Julho de, de, de 2023.

1762
01:14:12,320 --> 01:14:15,660
Estamos em cerca de mil tentativas de conseguir professores,

1763
01:14:16,140 --> 01:14:20,520
uh, demitido ou punido, geralmente conduzido por estudantes e administradores,

1764
01:14:21,080 --> 01:14:23,100
muitas vezes conduzido por professores, infelizmente também.

1765
01:14:23,960 --> 01:14:26,220
Cerca de dois terços desses

1766
01:14:26,220 --> 01:14:28,880
resultar na punição do professor de alguma forma.

1767
01:14:29,120 --> 01:14:34,180
Hum, tudo, desde a remoção do artigo até a suspensão, etc.

1768
01:14:35,080 --> 01:14:38,380
Cerca de um quinto deles resulta em professores sendo

1769
01:14:38,740 --> 01:14:39,280
despedido.

1770
01:14:39,520 --> 01:14:40,240
Então, agora estamos,

1771
01:14:40,300 --> 01:14:42,240
é, é quase 200, é cerca de 190,

1772
01:14:42,540 --> 01:14:43,740
hum, professores sendo demitidos.

1773
01:14:44,260 --> 01:14:46,540
Hum, então quero dar algum contexto aqui.

1774
01:14:47,300 --> 01:14:50,000
Uh, o Red Scare é geralmente considerado como tendo sido,

1775
01:14:50,260 --> 01:14:52,240
ah, de 1947 a 1957.

1776
01:14:52,460 --> 01:14:55,940
A propósito, terminou em 57, quando finalmente ficou claro,

1777
01:14:55,940 --> 01:15:00,480
hum, graças à Primeira Emenda, você não poderia realmente demitir pessoas por causa de suas ideologias.

1778
01:15:00,620 --> 01:15:01,140
Antes disso,

1779
01:15:02,120 --> 01:15:03,360
muitas universidades pensaram que sim.

1780
01:15:03,600 --> 01:15:05,040
Eles disseram, esse cara é muito médico,

1781
01:15:05,300 --> 01:15:06,140
uh, comunista doutrinário.

1782
01:15:06,280 --> 01:15:07,920
Uh, você sabe, não pode ser apenas esperar.

1783
01:15:08,160 --> 01:15:09,280
Eu vou demiti-los.

1784
01:15:09,680 --> 01:15:11,420
Eles pensaram que realmente poderiam fazer isso.

1785
01:15:12,180 --> 01:15:14,620
Hum, e tinha apenas 57 anos quando a lei foi estabelecida.

1786
01:15:14,660 --> 01:15:18,040
Tal como agora, isto está a acontecer num ambiente onde a liberdade de expressão,

1787
01:15:18,360 --> 01:15:20,380
a liberdade acadêmica está claramente protegida,

1788
01:15:20,700 --> 01:15:23,360
hum, em faculdades públicas nos Estados Unidos.

1789
01:15:23,360 --> 01:15:24,880
E ainda estamos vendo esses tipos de números.

1790
01:15:25,740 --> 01:15:26,460
Hum, durante,

1791
01:15:26,880 --> 01:15:28,080
durante o susto vermelho,

1792
01:15:28,400 --> 01:15:29,360
o maior estudo que

1793
01:15:29,360 --> 01:15:32,840
O que estava acontecendo foi feito, acho que isso saiu em 55.

1794
01:15:33,420 --> 01:15:35,620
E a avaliação foi

1795
01:15:35,640 --> 01:15:39,700
que houve cerca de 62 professores demitidos,

1796
01:15:39,700 --> 01:15:42,300
por, por ser comunista e cerca de 90

1797
01:15:42,860 --> 01:15:45,840
algo que os professores dispararam por opiniões políticas em geral.

1798
01:15:46,720 --> 01:15:50,560
Hum, isso geralmente é, é relatado como sendo cerca de 100.

1799
01:15:51,860 --> 01:15:53,500
Hum, então 60, 90,

1800
01:15:53,820 --> 01:15:55,160
100, dependendo de como você olha para isso,

1801
01:15:55,160 --> 01:15:56,880
Acho que o número é realmente maior.

1802
01:15:57,280 --> 01:15:59,680
Hum, mas isso é apenas por causa de uma retrospectiva.

1803
01:15:59,800 --> 01:16:01,200
Como o que quero dizer com retrospectiva

1804
01:16:01,200 --> 01:16:06,500
é que podemos olhar para trás e descobrir que houve mais professores que foram demitidos, como o tempo revela,

1805
01:16:07,560 --> 01:16:10,300
estamos em 190 professores demitidos.

1806
01:16:10,300 --> 01:16:11,900
E ainda tenho que aturar as pessoas dizendo

1807
01:16:11,900 --> 01:16:12,980
isso nem está acontecendo.

1808
01:16:13,000 --> 01:16:15,220
E eu estou nos nove anos e meio de cultura do cancelamento,

1809
01:16:15,680 --> 01:16:19,300
190 professores demitidos nos 11 anos de,

1810
01:16:19,300 --> 01:16:20,920
uh, do susto vermelho,

1811
01:16:21,820 --> 01:16:24,440
provavelmente, você sabe, algo em torno de cem, talvez provavelmente mais

1812
01:16:25,000 --> 01:16:27,060
tem, o número vai continuar subindo.

1813
01:16:27,400 --> 01:16:30,980
Hum, mas ao contrário do Red Scare, onde as pessoas podiam dizer claramente que algo estava acontecendo,

1814
01:16:31,360 --> 01:16:33,980
a coisa mais maluca sobre a cultura do cancelamento é que alguns ainda estão lidando com

1815
01:16:33,980 --> 01:16:35,720
pessoas que estão dizendo que isso não está acontecendo.

1816
01:16:36,020 --> 01:16:38,300
E não tem sido sutil no campus.

1817
01:16:38,620 --> 01:16:39,820
E sabemos que isso é uma contagem muito baixa,

1818
01:16:39,880 --> 01:16:42,120
aliás, porque quando nós, quando entrevistamos professores,

1819
01:16:43,160 --> 01:16:44,540
17% deles

1820
01:16:45,240 --> 01:16:47,600
disseram que foram ameaçados com, uh,

1821
01:16:48,160 --> 01:16:52,480
ameaçados de investigação ou realmente investigados pelo que ensinaram, disseram,

1822
01:16:52,920 --> 01:16:53,720
ou suas pesquisas.

1823
01:16:54,380 --> 01:17:00,620
E um terço deles disse que os administradores lhes disseram para não realizarem pesquisas controversas.

1824
01:17:01,300 --> 01:17:02,980
Então, como extrapolar isso,

1825
01:17:02,980 --> 01:17:03,940
que esse é um número enorme.

1826
01:17:03,960 --> 01:17:10,920
E a razão pela qual você não ouvirá falar de muitos desses casos é porque existem muitos mecanismos diferentes de indução de conformidade em tudo isso.

1827
01:17:11,140 --> 01:17:11,500
Sim.

1828
01:17:11,760 --> 01:17:15,060
E essa é uma das razões pelas quais a ideia de adicionar algo como um D,

1829
01:17:15,220 --> 01:17:22,040
como exigir uma declaração DEI para ser contratado ou entrar em uma escola no ambiente atual é completamente maluco.

1830
01:17:22,740 --> 01:17:25,680
Tivemos uma verdadeira crise de liberdade académica nos últimos

1831
01:17:25,820 --> 01:17:28,740
você sabe, especialmente desde 2017 nos campi,

1832
01:17:29,340 --> 01:17:31,740
para começar, temos uma diversidade de pontos de vista muito baixa.

1833
01:17:32,380 --> 01:17:34,180
E nestas circunstâncias,

1834
01:17:34,420 --> 01:17:35,660
administradores comecem a dizer:

1835
01:17:35,920 --> 01:17:36,640
Você sabe qual é o problema?

1836
01:17:36,860 --> 01:17:40,080
Temos muitos pensamentos heterogêneos.

1837
01:17:40,280 --> 01:17:41,660
Sim, não somos homogêneos o suficiente.

1838
01:17:41,840 --> 01:17:46,040
Na verdade, precisamos, você sabe, de outro teste político, o que é uma loucura.

1839
01:17:46,720 --> 01:17:49,000
E é isso que efetivamente é uma declaração DEI.

1840
01:17:49,140 --> 01:17:54,660
Porque não há como preencher uma declaração DEI sem que alguém avalie você em sua política.

1841
01:17:55,040 --> 01:17:55,640
É cristalino.

1842
01:17:55,660 --> 01:17:56,380
É cristalino.

1843
01:17:56,880 --> 01:17:59,800
Até fizemos um experimento com esse Nate honeycutt.

1844
01:18:00,720 --> 01:18:04,240
Ele conseguiu cerca de 3.000 professores para participar

1845
01:18:04,840 --> 01:18:07,920
avaliando diferentes tipos de declarações DEI.

1846
01:18:08,720 --> 01:18:09,020
Hum,

1847
01:18:09,420 --> 01:18:14,260
e um era basicamente o tipo padrão de interseccionalidade de política de identidade,

1848
01:18:14,640 --> 01:18:17,200
um era sobre diversidade de pontos de vista.

1849
01:18:17,500 --> 01:18:21,560
Um era sobre diversidade religiosa e o outro era sobre diversidade socioeconômica.

1850
01:18:21,660 --> 01:18:23,320
E no que diz respeito a onde meu coração realmente está,

1851
01:18:23,640 --> 01:18:26,060
é que temos muito pouca diversidade socioeconómica,

1852
01:18:26,300 --> 01:18:27,140
particularmente no ensino superior de elite,

1853
01:18:27,160 --> 01:18:29,000
mas também no período de educação.

1854
01:18:30,040 --> 01:18:34,120
Então o experimento teve grande participação,

1855
01:18:34,340 --> 01:18:35,400
realmente interessante configurado.

1856
01:18:35,520 --> 01:18:39,180
E tentou modelar a forma como muitas dessas políticas de DEI foram realmente implementadas.

1857
01:18:39,900 --> 01:18:41,860
E uma das maneiras pelas quais isso foi implementado,

1858
01:18:41,960 --> 01:18:43,000
e acho que em alguns dos

1859
01:18:43,000 --> 01:18:48,480
As escolas da Califórnia são os administradores que passam pelas declarações do DEI antes.

1860
01:18:49,460 --> 01:18:53,220
Qualquer outra pessoa olha para eles e depois elimina as pessoas do topo, dependendo de como,

1861
01:18:54,040 --> 01:18:56,920
como eles se sentem sobre suas, hum, declarações DEI

1862
01:18:57,500 --> 01:19:01,100
e aquele sobre, hum, diversidade de pontos de vista.

1863
01:19:01,560 --> 01:19:04,120
Acho que metade das pessoas que o avaliaram fariam,

1864
01:19:04,380 --> 01:19:05,180
eliminaria isso imediatamente.

1865
01:19:06,060 --> 01:19:08,380
Hum, e acho que foi basicamente o mesmo para a diversidade religiosa.

1866
01:19:09,460 --> 01:19:10,680
Foi um pouco melhor,

1867
01:19:10,860 --> 01:19:14,620
como 40% para a diversidade socioeconômica,

1868
01:19:14,820 --> 01:19:15,880
mas isso me mata.

1869
01:19:15,960 --> 01:19:16,920
Gosto da ideia desse tipo,

1870
01:19:16,960 --> 01:19:20,560
sim, esse é realmente o tipo de diversidade em que acho que precisamos muito mais,

1871
01:19:20,560 --> 01:19:21,280
no ensino superior.

1872
01:19:21,380 --> 01:19:24,200
Você pode concordar que não é hostil aos outros tipos,

1873
01:19:24,240 --> 01:19:24,940
por falar nisso.

1874
01:19:24,940 --> 01:19:27,880
Hum, mas a ideia de que precisamos de mais pessoas de baixo,

1875
01:19:27,980 --> 01:19:30,820
você sabe, três quartos da sociedade americana,

1876
01:19:30,960 --> 01:19:32,640
como no ensino superior,

1877
01:19:32,680 --> 01:19:33,560
Acho que deveria ser algo que todos poderíamos contornar.

1878
01:19:33,580 --> 01:19:37,000
Mas o único que realmente teve sucesso foi aquele que,

1879
01:19:37,000 --> 01:19:38,460
que brotou de volta exatamente

1880
01:19:38,460 --> 01:19:42,680
o tipo de ideologia que eles achavam que a retaguarda gostaria,

1881
01:19:43,080 --> 01:19:43,760
o que é tipo, ok,

1882
01:19:44,720 --> 01:19:46,560
não há como isso não ser um teste político.

1883
01:19:47,240 --> 01:19:52,100
Provámos que é um teste decisivo político e ainda escola após escola está a acrescentar

1884
01:19:52,100 --> 01:19:57,100
isto no seu processo de aplicação para tornar as escolas ainda mais homogêneas ideologicamente.

1885
01:19:57,840 --> 01:19:58,560
Por que isso tem um efeito negativo?

1886
01:19:58,580 --> 01:20:00,180
É porque

1887
01:20:01,180 --> 01:20:06,300
impõe uma espécie de pensamento de grupo onde as pessoas têm medo,

1888
01:20:08,000 --> 01:20:11,800
comece a ficar com medo de pensar e falar

1889
01:20:12,980 --> 01:20:13,540
livremente,

1890
01:20:14,280 --> 01:20:15,760
liberalmente sobre qualquer coisa.

1891
01:20:16,240 --> 01:20:20,200
Bem, primeiro, ele seleciona pessoas que tendem a estar mais à esquerda,

1892
01:20:20,540 --> 01:20:22,160
hum, em uma situação em que você já tem,

1893
01:20:22,460 --> 01:20:26,160
uh, pessoal, uma situação em que as universidades se inclinam decididamente que

1894
01:20:26,180 --> 01:20:30,020
forma, mas também estabelece essencialmente um conjunto de ideias sagradas

1895
01:20:30,920 --> 01:20:33,740
que se você estiver sendo questionado sobre se,

1896
01:20:34,100 --> 01:20:35,980
você sabe, o que você fez para avançar

1897
01:20:36,540 --> 01:20:37,900
anti-racismo,

1898
01:20:38,280 --> 01:20:39,380
hum, ferido, uh,

1899
01:20:39,680 --> 01:20:41,860
como você tem consciência da interseccionalidade,

1900
01:20:42,480 --> 01:20:44,240
é improvável que você realmente entre.

1901
01:20:44,320 --> 01:20:44,740
E se você dissesse,

1902
01:20:44,820 --> 01:20:47,700
aliás, na verdade acho que esses conceitos são duvidosos.

1903
01:20:47,980 --> 01:20:48,720
Eu acho que eles são magros.

1904
01:20:48,980 --> 01:20:50,920
Eu acho que eles não são filosoficamente muito defensáveis,

1905
01:20:51,160 --> 01:20:52,080
mas basicamente como se,

1906
01:20:52,120 --> 01:20:53,080
se sua posição fosse,

1907
01:20:53,700 --> 01:20:54,960
Na verdade, eu rejeito,

1908
01:20:55,220 --> 01:20:58,280
hum, esses conceitos são muito simples.

1909
01:20:59,220 --> 01:21:00,680
Hum, você não vai, você não vai entrar.

1910
01:21:01,060 --> 01:21:02,180
E, e, e eu acho que,

1911
01:21:02,180 --> 01:21:03,320
hum, a pessoa que eu

1912
01:21:03,320 --> 01:21:06,460
sempre pense que não era um ponta-direita que diria,

1913
01:21:07,160 --> 01:21:07,780
vá para o inferno.

1914
01:21:07,960 --> 01:21:10,660
Se você, se você o fez preencher uma dessas coisas, é Feynman.

1915
01:21:11,420 --> 01:21:12,060
Eu sinto que se você,

1916
01:21:12,140 --> 01:21:14,720
se você desse uma dessas coisas para Richard Feynman, ele diria,

1917
01:21:15,240 --> 01:21:17,060
ele iria rasgá-lo em pedaços.

1918
01:21:18,360 --> 01:21:18,680
Sim.

1919
01:21:18,780 --> 01:21:19,400
E não conseguir o emprego.

1920
01:21:20,880 --> 01:21:24,940
Sim, há algum elemento nisso que cria isso

1921
01:21:26,440 --> 01:21:28,220
difícil definir o medo.

1922
01:21:28,300 --> 01:21:29,560
Então você disse como o disparo,

1923
01:21:30,100 --> 01:21:33,440
o que eu queria dizer é demitir cem ou 200 pessoas.

1924
01:21:33,940 --> 01:21:36,180
A questão é até despedir uma pessoa,

1925
01:21:36,280 --> 01:21:37,260
Acabei de ver.

1926
01:21:37,280 --> 01:21:40,940
Pode criar esse efeito cascata silencioso de medo.

1927
01:21:40,980 --> 01:21:41,500
Ah, claro.

1928
01:21:41,960 --> 01:21:44,220
Aquela única demissão de um corpo docente.

1929
01:21:44,220 --> 01:21:44,840
Ah, absolutamente.

1930
01:21:45,120 --> 01:21:49,160
Tem um efeito cascata em dezenas de milhares de pessoas,

1931
01:21:49,620 --> 01:21:50,300
de educadores,

1932
01:21:51,020 --> 01:21:52,500
de, de, uh, quem foi contratado,

1933
01:21:52,880 --> 01:21:55,020
que tipo de conversas estão sendo mantidas, tiveram,

1934
01:21:55,380 --> 01:21:56,920
que tipo de livros didáticos são escolhidos,

1935
01:21:57,440 --> 01:22:00,340
que tipo de autocensura e diferentes sabores disso está acontecendo.

1936
01:22:00,900 --> 01:22:01,840
É difícil medir isso.

1937
01:22:02,420 --> 01:22:02,540
Sim.

1938
01:22:02,540 --> 01:22:04,920
Quero dizer, quando você pergunta aos professores sobre,

1939
01:22:05,280 --> 01:22:07,960
você sabe, eles estão intimidados no ambiente atual?

1940
01:22:08,460 --> 01:22:11,080
Hum, a resposta é sim.

1941
01:22:11,080 --> 01:22:12,640
E professores particularmente conservadores,

1942
01:22:12,640 --> 01:22:14,180
você sabe, já, você sabe,

1943
01:22:14,940 --> 01:22:15,700
relatando que eles são,

1944
01:22:16,460 --> 01:22:18,220
você sabe, temem por seus empregos em muitos casos diferentes.

1945
01:22:18,740 --> 01:22:20,500
Você tem muitas estatísticas boas no livro,

1946
01:22:20,640 --> 01:22:21,720
coisas como autocensura.

1947
01:22:22,460 --> 01:22:24,980
Quando fornecido com a definição de autocensura,

1948
01:22:25,040 --> 01:22:27,260
pelo menos um quarto dos estudantes disse que se autocensuram

1949
01:22:27,260 --> 01:22:30,160
com bastante frequência ou com muita frequência durante conversas com outros alunos,

1950
01:22:30,540 --> 01:22:32,780
com professores e durante discussões em sala de aula,

1951
01:22:33,680 --> 01:22:36,880
25%, 27% e 28% respectivamente.

1952
01:22:37,620 --> 01:22:39,680
Uh, um quarto dos estudantes também disse que estão

1953
01:22:39,700 --> 01:22:42,160
mais propensos a se autocensurar no campus agora,

1954
01:22:43,080 --> 01:22:46,240
uh, na época em que foram pesquisados, eles

1955
01:22:46,240 --> 01:22:47,720
eram quando começaram a faculdade.

1956
01:22:48,300 --> 01:22:51,720
Então, algumas faculdades estão incutindo essa ideia de,

1957
01:22:52,020 --> 01:22:54,280
de, de censura, autocensura.

1958
01:22:54,320 --> 01:22:55,740
E voltando à comparação do Red Scare,

1959
01:22:55,960 --> 01:22:57,460
e esta é uma das coisas interessantes sobre

1960
01:22:57,460 --> 01:22:58,240
os dados também,

1961
01:22:58,900 --> 01:22:59,220
é aquele

1962
01:22:59,740 --> 01:23:01,340
aquele mesmo estudo que eu estava falando,

1963
01:23:01,340 --> 01:23:03,360
o estudo mais abrangente do, do Red Scare,

1964
01:23:03,500 --> 01:23:06,140
houve pesquisas sobre se os professores eram ou não

1965
01:23:06,160 --> 01:23:08,600
autocensura devido ao medo do meio ambiente.

1966
01:23:09,480 --> 01:23:12,620
E 9% dos professores disseram que estavam se autocensurando

1967
01:23:12,760 --> 01:23:14,360
suas pesquisas e o que eles estavam dizendo,

1968
01:23:15,380 --> 01:23:16,580
9% é muito ruim.

1969
01:23:17,820 --> 01:23:20,780
Hum, isso é quase um décimo dos professores dizendo que eles eram, na verdade,

1970
01:23:20,840 --> 01:23:22,140
seu discurso foi gelado.

1971
01:23:23,080 --> 01:23:23,780
Quando fizemos isso

1972
01:23:23,780 --> 01:23:27,340
pergunta para professores em nossa última pesquisa com professores,

1973
01:23:28,000 --> 01:23:29,900
hum, quando você leva em consideração, se eles forem,

1974
01:23:30,320 --> 01:23:33,200
perguntamos a eles se eles se autocensuram em suas pesquisas ou se autocensuram em sala de aula,

1975
01:23:33,380 --> 01:23:34,720
eles estão se autocensurando online,

1976
01:23:34,880 --> 01:23:37,680
et cetera, eram 90% dos professores.

1977
01:23:38,280 --> 01:23:41,920
Então a ideia de que estamos num ambiente que é histórico,

1978
01:23:42,220 --> 01:23:45,060
hum, em termos de quão assustadas as pessoas estão realmente

1979
01:23:45,780 --> 01:23:46,980
expressar opiniões controversas.

1980
01:23:47,240 --> 01:23:48,000
Eu acho que é,

1981
01:23:48,580 --> 01:23:50,760
é a razão pela qual vamos realmente estudar isso

1982
01:23:51,400 --> 01:23:54,700
daqui a 50 anos, da mesma forma que estudamos o Red Scare.

1983
01:23:54,780 --> 01:23:57,860
Hum, não é a ideia de que isso não está acontecendo, é,

1984
01:23:57,860 --> 01:24:00,100
será corretamente visto como insano.

1985
01:24:00,560 --> 01:24:01,760
Então talvez possamos apenas,

1986
01:24:01,760 --> 01:24:06,060
uh, discuta a tendência, a atual tendência da academia para a esquerda,

1987
01:24:06,480 --> 01:24:08,780
que você descreve em várias perspectivas diferentes.

1988
01:24:09,080 --> 01:24:10,940
Então, primeiro, há um registro eleitoral

1989
01:24:11,050 --> 01:24:13,880
gráfico de proporção que você tem por departamento,

1990
01:24:13,920 --> 01:24:14,900
o que eu acho interessante.

1991
01:24:15,740 --> 01:24:16,500
Você pode explicar isso

1992
01:24:16,500 --> 01:24:18,460
gráfico e você pode explicar o que ele mostra?

1993
01:24:19,020 --> 01:24:20,980
Sim, quando comecei o fogo em 2001,

1994
01:24:20,980 --> 01:24:24,740
Não levei tão a sério a questão da diversidade de pontos de vista.

1995
01:24:24,760 --> 01:24:26,860
Achei que era apenas algo de que a direita reclamava.

1996
01:24:27,980 --> 01:24:29,180
Hum, mas eu realmente comecei a ficar

1997
01:24:29,800 --> 01:24:33,360
o que acontece quando você tem uma comunidade com baixa, hum,

1998
01:24:34,620 --> 01:24:36,180
com baixa, uh, diversidade de pontos de vista.

1999
01:24:36,680 --> 01:24:39,720
E, na verdade, muitas das pesquisas que mais me interessaram foram,

2000
01:24:39,720 --> 01:24:43,320
uh, feito em conjunto com o grande Cass Sunstein,

2001
01:24:43,540 --> 01:24:46,300
hum, que escreve muito sobre polarização de grupo.

2002
01:24:46,300 --> 01:24:49,580
Hum, porque como, uh, e a pesquisa sobre isso é muito forte,

2003
01:24:49,900 --> 01:24:52,700
mas essencialmente quando você tem grupos com, hum,

2004
01:24:53,580 --> 01:24:56,220
diversidade política, e você pode ver isso em juízes, por exemplo,

2005
01:24:56,740 --> 01:25:00,480
tende a produzir, você sabe, resultados confiáveis mais moderados.

2006
01:25:00,940 --> 01:25:02,400
Hum, enquanto grupos que são,

2007
01:25:02,400 --> 01:25:05,180
que têm baixa diversidade política tendem a entrar em espiral,

2008
01:25:05,340 --> 01:25:07,020
espiralar em sua própria direção.

2009
01:25:07,600 --> 01:25:11,840
E quando você tem uma supermaioria de pessoas de apenas uma perspectiva política,

2010
01:25:12,160 --> 01:25:13,820
isso é um problema para a produção de ideias.

2011
01:25:14,040 --> 01:25:16,140
Cria uma situação onde existem ideias sagradas.

2012
01:25:16,900 --> 01:25:18,840
Hum, e quando você olha para alguns dos departamentos,

2013
01:25:18,840 --> 01:25:21,660
hum, você sabe, eu acho que o S o

2014
01:25:21,660 --> 01:25:23,500
estimativa do Crimson é que Harvard é,

2015
01:25:23,500 --> 01:25:24,880
tem 3% de conservadores.

2016
01:25:25,460 --> 01:25:25,960
Mas quando você olha

2017
01:25:26,160 --> 01:25:29,920
em diferentes departamentos, existem departamentos de elite que literalmente não têm, hum,

2018
01:25:30,380 --> 01:25:31,700
uh, conservadores, uh, neles.

2019
01:25:31,720 --> 01:25:32,220
E eu acho que é isso,

2020
01:25:32,580 --> 01:25:35,340
isso é em um ambiente intelectual saudável.

2021
01:25:35,720 --> 01:25:37,360
O problema é definitivamente pior.

2022
01:25:37,980 --> 01:25:39,100
Hum, à medida que você ganha mais elite,

2023
01:25:39,280 --> 01:25:41,160
uh, definitivamente vemos mais casos de,

2024
01:25:41,760 --> 01:25:44,480
uh, professores esquerdistas sendo cancelados em escolas menos elitistas.

2025
01:25:44,680 --> 01:25:45,920
Fica pior quando você,

2026
01:25:45,920 --> 01:25:47,320
enquanto você desce do,

2027
01:25:47,320 --> 01:25:51,500
as, as escolas de elite, é onde grande parte do um terço das tentativas de conseguir, uh,

2028
01:25:51,860 --> 01:25:53,480
professores punidos que obtiverem sucesso,

2029
01:25:53,820 --> 01:25:55,520
você sabe, vem da direita e em grande parte

2030
01:25:55,580 --> 01:25:56,640
de fora do campus, uh,

2031
01:25:57,460 --> 01:25:58,460
fontes fora do campus.

2032
01:25:58,480 --> 01:26:01,400
E passamos muito tempo falando sobre isso no livro também.

2033
01:26:01,990 --> 01:26:03,990
Hum, é algo que eu acho que é subestimado.

2034
01:26:04,980 --> 01:26:06,320
Uh, mas quando se trata de baixo,

2035
01:26:06,320 --> 01:26:10,580
baixa diversidade de pontos de vista, você sabe, funciona como você esperaria até certo ponto,

2036
01:26:10,960 --> 01:26:12,920
você sabe, economia é o que quatro

2037
01:26:12,920 --> 01:26:14,180
para um ou algo assim.

2038
01:26:14,480 --> 01:26:15,260
Não é tão ruim.

2039
01:26:15,540 --> 01:26:17,920
Hum, mas quando você começa a entrar em algumas áreas de humanidades,

2040
01:26:18,220 --> 01:26:21,040
você sabe, como se houvesse departamentos que literalmente não existem.

2041
01:26:22,200 --> 01:26:23,760
Existe um bom porquê

2042
01:26:24,700 --> 01:26:29,300
por que a administração do corpo docente da universidade se moveu para a esquerda?

2043
01:26:29,760 --> 01:26:30,140
Sim,

2044
01:26:30,960 --> 01:26:34,820
Eu não amo, e esta é uma discussão que às vezes você encontrará na esquerda,

2045
01:26:35,140 --> 01:26:36,580
uh, apenas o argumento de que,

2046
01:26:36,840 --> 01:26:38,340
bem, as pessoas de esquerda são simplesmente mais inteligentes.

2047
01:26:38,580 --> 01:26:39,040
Certo.

2048
01:26:39,300 --> 01:26:43,000
E é tipo, ok, é interessante porque pelo menos a pesquisa a partir de

2049
01:26:43,980 --> 01:26:47,560
10 anos atrás indicava que se você se aprofundar um pouco mais nisso,

2050
01:26:47,700 --> 01:26:50,640
muitas pessoas que se consideram de esquerda tendem a ser um pouco mais.

2051
01:26:51,610 --> 01:26:52,160
Libertário,

2052
01:26:53,040 --> 01:26:55,040
a música que Pinker, você sabe,

2053
01:26:55,480 --> 01:26:58,520
escreveu bastante sobre a ideia de que somos apenas mais inteligentes.

2054
01:26:59,440 --> 01:27:01,720
Não é, não é uma opinião.

2055
01:27:02,080 --> 01:27:04,260
Eu estou pelo menos um pouco confortável com,

2056
01:27:04,540 --> 01:27:05,600
hum, eu acho que,

2057
01:27:05,600 --> 01:27:07,740
isso, uh, isso, que os departamentos assumem,

2058
01:27:08,040 --> 01:27:10,300
hum, impulso quando eles se tornam um lugar

2059
01:27:10,370 --> 01:27:14,120
onde você está tipo, uau, seria muito desagradável para mim trabalhar neste departamento.

2060
01:27:14,220 --> 01:27:15,660
Se eu sou o conservador simbólico.

2061
01:27:15,680 --> 01:27:17,460
E acho que isso ganha vida própria.

2062
01:27:17,860 --> 01:27:18,820
Existem também departamentos

2063
01:27:19,240 --> 01:27:22,920
onde muitas das ideologias meio que explicitamente

2064
01:27:23,680 --> 01:27:24,520
esquerdista.

2065
01:27:25,140 --> 01:27:26,420
Hum, você olha para escolas de educação,

2066
01:27:26,680 --> 01:27:27,340
muito do,

2067
01:27:27,400 --> 01:27:31,560
muitas das coisas que sobraram do que é corretamente chamado de crítico

2068
01:27:31,560 --> 01:27:33,500
teorias raciais estão presentes.

2069
01:27:33,580 --> 01:27:36,060
E você acaba tendo isso em vários departamentos.

2070
01:27:36,380 --> 01:27:37,120
Hum,

2071
01:27:37,580 --> 01:27:40,240
e seria muito estranho ser um,

2072
01:27:40,780 --> 01:27:43,460
em muitos departamentos, uma assistente social conservadora

2073
01:27:43,560 --> 01:27:44,000
professor.

2074
01:27:44,180 --> 01:27:45,060
Tenho certeza que eles existem.

2075
01:27:45,300 --> 01:27:45,440
Hum,

2076
01:27:46,020 --> 01:27:46,160
mas

2077
01:27:47,120 --> 01:27:50,600
isso, há muita pressão para calar a boca, se você estiver.

2078
01:27:51,360 --> 01:27:53,880
Portanto, o processo à esquerda do cancelamento,

2079
01:27:53,880 --> 01:27:57,000
quando você começou a falar com a fortaleza retórica perfeita,

2080
01:27:57,580 --> 01:27:59,220
o, o primeiro passo é

2081
01:28:00,300 --> 01:28:01,360
demitir uma pessoa.

2082
01:28:01,440 --> 01:28:02,480
Se eles são justos, se você puder

2083
01:28:03,060 --> 01:28:05,140
coloque um rótulo de conservador neles,

2084
01:28:05,540 --> 01:28:06,780
você pode dispensá-los dessa forma.

2085
01:28:06,880 --> 01:28:13,060
Quais, que outras demissões eficientes ou efetivas existem?

2086
01:28:13,260 --> 01:28:15,300
Nós nos divertimos um pouco com,

2087
01:28:15,300 --> 01:28:18,460
uh, uh, com números demográficos, mas avalio isso por altura.

2088
01:28:18,760 --> 01:28:20,980
Hum, uh, e eu me lembro dele dizendo tipo,

2089
01:28:20,980 --> 01:28:22,320
Eu não, não, não incluo o real

2090
01:28:22,360 --> 01:28:22,660
percentagem.

2091
01:28:22,740 --> 01:28:24,620
Eu digo, não, precisamos incluir as porcentagens reais.

2092
01:28:24,720 --> 01:28:26,480
Porque as pessoas são muito ruins

2093
01:28:26,620 --> 01:28:32,200
em estimar como é realmente a demografia dos EUA, tanto à direita quanto à esquerda, de maneiras diferentes.

2094
01:28:32,840 --> 01:28:35,340
Hum, então colocamos isso nos números e conversamos sobre,

2095
01:28:35,340 --> 01:28:38,900
você sabe, hum, ser demitido por ser branco ou ser demitido por,

2096
01:28:38,900 --> 01:28:41,780
uh, ser hétero ou ser demitido por ser homem.

2097
01:28:42,380 --> 01:28:45,260
Hum, e nós, uh, e você já pode dispensar as pessoas por serem conservadoras.

2098
01:28:45,580 --> 01:28:48,480
E nós, então nós, nós, damos exemplos no livro de,

2099
01:28:48,480 --> 01:28:52,640
destes sendo usados para demitir pessoas e muitas vezes em tópicos não relacionados

2100
01:28:52,760 --> 01:28:55,120
ao fato de serem homens ou de serem ou não uma minoria.

2101
01:28:55,500 --> 01:28:56,260
E então chegamos,

2102
01:28:56,360 --> 01:28:58,240
Eu acho que é como a camada seis e nós pensamos,

2103
01:28:58,540 --> 01:28:59,280
surpresa, adivinhe?

2104
01:28:59,680 --> 01:29:01,900
Você caiu para 0,4% da população e

2105
01:29:01,900 --> 01:29:02,660
nada disso importava.

2106
01:29:02,740 --> 01:29:04,100
Porque se você tiver a opinião errada,

2107
01:29:04,300 --> 01:29:06,660
mesmo se você estiver naqueles 0,4% do

2108
01:29:06,680 --> 01:29:09,380
pessoa mais interseccional que já existiu e você tem a opinião errada,

2109
01:29:09,700 --> 01:29:12,680
você é um herege e provavelmente será odiado ainda mais.

2110
01:29:13,360 --> 01:29:15,440
E a parte mais interessante do

2111
01:29:15,440 --> 01:29:19,960
A pesquisa que fizemos para isso foi apenas perguntar a todos os proeminentes,

2112
01:29:20,260 --> 01:29:22,560
uh, negro conservador e moderado

2113
01:29:22,640 --> 01:29:24,100
que conhecíamos pessoalmente,

2114
01:29:24,700 --> 01:29:26,340
já lhe disseram que você não é realmente

2115
01:29:26,900 --> 01:29:28,580
preto por uma opinião que você teve

2116
01:29:29,160 --> 01:29:31,000
cada um deles era tipo,

2117
01:29:31,000 --> 01:29:31,900
ah sim, não.

2118
01:29:31,960 --> 01:29:32,740
E é meio engraçado porque

2119
01:29:32,980 --> 01:29:34,920
é como muitas vezes os canhotos brancos

2120
01:29:35,460 --> 01:29:36,400
dizendo a eles que é como,

2121
01:29:36,400 --> 01:29:37,540
ah, você se considera negro?

2122
01:29:37,840 --> 01:29:39,820
John McWhorter falou sobre ter um repórter.

2123
01:29:39,820 --> 01:29:41,440
Hum, quando ele falou sobre,

2124
01:29:41,500 --> 01:29:42,340
quando ele mostrou que

2125
01:29:42,340 --> 01:29:43,300
discordou de alguns,

2126
01:29:43,740 --> 01:29:48,020
uh, o que ele descreveu como uma espécie de despertar o racismo em seu livro, despertar ideias,

2127
01:29:48,540 --> 01:29:49,420
o repórter realmente está tipo,

2128
01:29:49,500 --> 01:29:50,680
então você se considera negro?

2129
01:29:50,980 --> 01:29:51,380
Ele é tipo,

2130
01:29:51,780 --> 01:29:53,160
ele estava tipo, o que você está louco?

2131
01:29:53,180 --> 01:29:53,880
Claro que eu faço.

2132
01:29:54,160 --> 01:29:56,720
E Coleman Hughes fez uma das melhores citações sobre isso.

2133
01:29:56,840 --> 01:29:57,080
Ele disse,

2134
01:29:57,960 --> 01:30:00,780
Constantemente me dizem que o mais importante,

2135
01:30:00,780 --> 01:30:03,300
uh, para o quão legítima é minha opinião,

2136
01:30:03,740 --> 01:30:04,100
é se,

2137
01:30:04,580 --> 01:30:05,460
uh, se eu sou negro ou não,

2138
01:30:05,980 --> 01:30:07,800
mas quando tenho uma opinião divergente,

2139
01:30:07,960 --> 01:30:09,500
Disseram-me que não sou realmente negro.

2140
01:30:10,260 --> 01:30:11,260
Tão perfeito.

2141
01:30:11,820 --> 01:30:14,320
Como se houvesse, não houvesse como falsificar, uh,

2142
01:30:14,640 --> 01:30:15,220
esse argumento.

2143
01:30:15,680 --> 01:30:19,800
Hum, essa realmente, essa investigação realmente me impressionou.

2144
01:30:19,900 --> 01:30:23,100
Então, e você explica isso muito bem no livro, que existe esse processo de dizer:

2145
01:30:23,480 --> 01:30:24,320
você é conservador?

2146
01:30:24,400 --> 01:30:24,800
Sim.

2147
01:30:24,820 --> 01:30:26,940
Você pode demitir a pessoa.

2148
01:30:27,580 --> 01:30:28,660
Você é branco?

2149
01:30:28,920 --> 01:30:29,680
Demitir a pessoa.

2150
01:30:29,820 --> 01:30:30,460
Você é homem?

2151
01:30:30,540 --> 01:30:31,560
Você pode demitir a pessoa.

2152
01:30:31,660 --> 01:30:34,780
Existem essas categorias que facilitam para você

2153
01:30:35,360 --> 01:30:36,080
demitir

2154
01:30:36,620 --> 01:30:37,880
as ideias de uma pessoa com base nisso.

2155
01:30:37,980 --> 01:30:38,500
E como você disse,

2156
01:30:38,500 --> 01:30:40,800
você acaba naquela pequena porcentagem e ainda pode dispensar.

2157
01:30:41,040 --> 01:30:41,960
E não é só demitir.

2158
01:30:42,200 --> 01:30:43,560
Eu, nós, falamos sobre isso de um,

2159
01:30:43,860 --> 01:30:45,520
do ponto de vista prático, a maneira

2160
01:30:46,040 --> 01:30:49,120
as limitações da realidade e uma delas é o tempo.

2161
01:30:49,440 --> 01:30:51,420
Hum, e muita cultura de cancelamento,

2162
01:30:51,560 --> 01:30:54,200
hum, como, como, uh, como normas culturais,

2163
01:30:54,620 --> 01:30:55,720
como esta forma de vencer

2164
01:30:55,720 --> 01:30:58,320
argumentos sem vencer argumentos significa esgotar o tempo.

2165
01:30:58,880 --> 01:30:59,440
Porque na hora

2166
01:30:59,440 --> 01:31:01,380
você chega ao fundo do,

2167
01:31:01,380 --> 01:31:02,700
ah, ah, do,

2168
01:31:03,020 --> 01:31:04,280
ou até mesmo para dar alguns passos

2169
01:31:04,280 --> 01:31:06,180
na fortaleza de registro perfeita e,

2170
01:31:06,340 --> 01:31:07,440
você sabe, para onde foi o tempo?

2171
01:31:07,560 --> 01:31:08,100
Você sabe, tipo

2172
01:31:08,690 --> 01:31:11,460
você é, você é, você provavelmente simplesmente desiste,

2173
01:31:11,840 --> 01:31:15,840
uh, tentando, uh, você sabe, tentando realmente ter uma discussão e você nunca chega à discussão em primeiro lugar.

2174
01:31:16,040 --> 01:31:19,280
Todas essas coisas são bastante pegajosas nas redes sociais.

2175
01:31:19,400 --> 01:31:22,000
As redes sociais praticamente inventaram a fortaleza retórica perfeita.

2176
01:31:22,480 --> 01:31:25,520
Para que cada uma dessas etapas tenha uma viralidade.

2177
01:31:25,940 --> 01:31:28,840
Então poderia, poderia durar e deixar as pessoas realmente entusiasmadas.

2178
01:31:29,160 --> 01:31:31,270
Isso permite que você sinta indignação e superioridade.

2179
01:31:31,580 --> 01:31:31,880
Sim.

2180
01:31:31,980 --> 01:31:35,900
Por isso, que na escala da viralidade permite que você nunca chegue ao

2181
01:31:35,920 --> 01:31:37,360
discussão real do ponto.

2182
01:31:37,780 --> 01:31:40,000
Hum, então, mas você sabe, não é apenas a esquerda,

2183
01:31:40,060 --> 01:31:43,100
é o certo também, então a fortaleza retórica eficiente,

2184
01:31:43,880 --> 01:31:44,220
uh,

2185
01:31:44,620 --> 01:31:46,860
então há algo para se orgulhar na direita.

2186
01:31:46,980 --> 01:31:47,740
É mais eficiente.

2187
01:31:49,760 --> 01:31:53,580
Então você não precisa ouvir os liberais e qualquer um poderia ser rotulado de liberal se

2188
01:31:53,580 --> 01:31:54,820
eles têm uma opinião errada.

2189
01:31:55,740 --> 01:31:59,020
Já vi liberais, esquerdistas e esquerdistas, todos usados como,

2190
01:31:59,060 --> 01:32:00,280
do mesmo jeito.

2191
01:32:00,660 --> 01:32:02,240
Isso é um absurdo esquerdista.

2192
01:32:02,660 --> 01:32:04,400
Você não precisa ouvir especialistas,

2193
01:32:05,540 --> 01:32:08,220
mesmo os especialistas conservadores, se tiverem a opinião errada,

2194
01:32:08,820 --> 01:32:10,360
você não precisa ouvir jornalistas,

2195
01:32:10,480 --> 01:32:15,380
mesmo jornalistas conservadores, se tiverem opinião errada e entre a ala MAGA,

2196
01:32:15,900 --> 01:32:17,080
há uma quarta proposição,

2197
01:32:17,740 --> 01:32:18,820
há uma quarta disposição.

2198
01:32:19,240 --> 01:32:22,260
Você não precisa ouvir ninguém que não seja pró Trump.

2199
01:32:22,820 --> 01:32:25,500
Sim. E chamamos isso de eficiente porque elimina

2200
01:32:26,280 --> 01:32:27,400
muitas pessoas você provavelmente

2201
01:32:27,400 --> 01:32:28,720
deveria ouvir pelo menos algumas vezes,

2202
01:32:28,720 --> 01:32:31,300
você sabe, como apontamos às vezes como cancelar

2203
01:32:31,300 --> 01:32:33,320
a cultura pode interferir na fé e na experiência.

2204
01:32:33,800 --> 01:32:36,960
Então ficamos um pouco desconfiados dos especialistas,

2205
01:32:37,440 --> 01:32:38,280
mas ao mesmo tempo,

2206
01:32:38,280 --> 01:32:40,320
se você seguir isso e mecanicamente,

2207
01:32:40,320 --> 01:32:45,800
e eu definitivamente, você sabe, acho que todo mundo nos EUA provavelmente tem algum tio mais velho,

2208
01:32:45,920 --> 01:32:48,340
hum, uh, quem exerce alguns desses.

2209
01:32:49,140 --> 01:32:51,980
É uma maneira realmente eficiente de,

2210
01:32:52,320 --> 01:32:55,080
então você deve se isolar do resto do mundo e descartar,

2211
01:32:55,080 --> 01:32:57,980
você sabe, pelo menos algumas pessoas que você realmente deveria ouvir.

2212
01:32:58,360 --> 01:32:59,340
Do jeito que você expôs,

2213
01:32:59,460 --> 01:33:00,660
isso me fez perceber que nós apenas

2214
01:33:01,500 --> 01:33:03,220
ocupar muito do nosso poder cerebral.

2215
01:33:03,820 --> 01:33:04,940
Essas coisas,

2216
01:33:05,280 --> 01:33:06,260
está literalmente na hora.

2217
01:33:06,340 --> 01:33:07,460
Poderíamos estar resolvendo coisas.

2218
01:33:07,640 --> 01:33:08,360
E você fica tipo,

2219
01:33:08,500 --> 01:33:12,860
você meio que se esgota nesse processo de ficar indignado com base

2220
01:33:12,860 --> 01:33:14,600
nesses rótulos e você nunca consegue, na verdade,

2221
01:33:15,580 --> 01:33:17,420
quase não há tempo suficiente para empatia,

2222
01:33:17,820 --> 01:33:19,200
pois é como olhar para uma pessoa pensando,

2223
01:33:19,400 --> 01:33:20,220
bem, talvez eles estejam certos.

2224
01:33:20,400 --> 01:33:23,460
Porque você está tão ocupado categorizando-os.

2225
01:33:24,280 --> 01:33:25,220
Qual é a graça da empatia?

2226
01:33:25,660 --> 01:33:27,640
E quero dizer, o que há de tão interessante nisso é que

2227
01:33:28,440 --> 01:33:32,260
muita, hum, energia social parece ser gasta nesses

2228
01:33:33,100 --> 01:33:36,600
desejos primitivos desagradáveis onde essencialmente é como,

2229
01:33:36,680 --> 01:33:38,140
por favor me diga quem eu posso odiar.

2230
01:33:39,100 --> 01:33:41,500
Onde posso ser legitimamente cruel?

2231
01:33:41,680 --> 01:33:42,600
Onde posso realmente

2232
01:33:42,600 --> 01:33:44,780
exercer alguma agressão contra alguém?

2233
01:33:45,400 --> 01:33:49,780
Hum, e às vezes parece que estamos apenas encontrando novas justificativas para isso.

2234
01:33:50,300 --> 01:33:51,260
E é compreensível,

2235
01:33:51,260 --> 01:33:55,060
você sabe, falha humana, uh, isso às vezes pode ser

2236
01:33:55,080 --> 01:33:56,720
usado para defender a justiça.

2237
01:33:57,000 --> 01:33:59,440
Mas, novamente, isso nunca o levará nem perto da verdade.

2238
01:34:00,500 --> 01:34:04,840
Uh, um caso interessante que você aborda sobre especialização é o do COVID.

2239
01:34:05,000 --> 01:34:05,360
Sim.

2240
01:34:05,700 --> 01:34:09,260
Então, como a cultura do cancelamento entrou em jogo no tema COVID?

2241
01:34:10,020 --> 01:34:17,640
Sim, acho que o COVID foi um grande golpe para a fé e a experiência das pessoas e a cultura do cancelamento desempenhou um grande papel nisso.

2242
01:34:18,420 --> 01:34:21,700
Hum, acho que um dos melhores exemplos disso é Jennifer Say, da Levi's.

2243
01:34:21,960 --> 01:34:24,580
Hum, ela é uma mulher adorável.

2244
01:34:24,840 --> 01:34:27,740
Hum, ela era vice-presidente da Levi's.

2245
01:34:27,740 --> 01:34:29,460
Uh, ela falou sobre potencialmente

2246
01:34:29,480 --> 01:34:31,160
para ser o presidente da Levi's jeans.

2247
01:34:32,200 --> 01:34:35,440
E ela era uma grande defensora das crianças.

2248
01:34:36,060 --> 01:34:36,980
E quando eles começaram

2249
01:34:36,980 --> 01:34:38,020
fechando as escolas,

2250
01:34:38,680 --> 01:34:39,640
ela começou a dizer:

2251
01:34:40,000 --> 01:34:41,620
isso vai ser um desastre.

2252
01:34:41,760 --> 01:34:42,780
Isto vai doer,

2253
01:34:43,490 --> 01:34:45,980
uh, as crianças pobres e desfavorecidas são as que mais.

2254
01:34:46,700 --> 01:34:50,520
Hum, temos que descobrir uma maneira de reabrir as escolas.

2255
01:34:50,880 --> 01:34:53,120
E esse era um ponto de vista herético.

2256
01:34:53,680 --> 01:34:55,380
E o tipo típico de cultura do cancelamento,

2257
01:34:55,930 --> 01:35:00,360
uh, wave assumiu, pois ele tinha todos os tipos de petições para que ela fosse demitida e que ela

2258
01:35:00,360 --> 01:35:02,060
precisava me desculpar e todo esse tipo de coisa.

2259
01:35:02,700 --> 01:35:03,660
E,

2260
01:35:04,040 --> 01:35:07,000
você sabe, ela foi oferecida, acho que como uma indenização de um milhão de dólares,

2261
01:35:07,040 --> 01:35:09,520
que ela não aceitou porque queria contar ao mundo

2262
01:35:09,520 --> 01:35:10,960
o que ela pensou sobre isso e,

2263
01:35:10,960 --> 01:35:13,100
e que ela queria continuar dizendo,

2264
01:35:13,100 --> 01:35:15,860
hum, que ela não mudou de ideia,

2265
01:35:15,980 --> 01:35:17,840
que isto foi um desastre para os jovens.

2266
01:35:18,200 --> 01:35:20,180
E agora isso é meio que

2267
01:35:20,200 --> 01:35:22,780
sabedoria convencional e a pesquisa é bonita,

2268
01:35:22,820 --> 01:35:25,600
é bastante claro que isso foi devastador

2269
01:35:26,300 --> 01:35:28,660
para jovens particularmente desfavorecidos.

2270
01:35:28,720 --> 01:35:30,200
Como as pessoas entendem isso como

2271
01:35:30,200 --> 01:35:32,000
estando bem, ela provavelmente estava certa.

2272
01:35:32,400 --> 01:35:33,080
Mas um dos,

2273
01:35:33,080 --> 01:35:34,420
um dos aspectos realmente tristes

2274
01:35:34,420 --> 01:35:40,260
da cultura do cancelamento é que as pessoas esquecem por que você foi cancelado e simplesmente sabem que te odeiam.

2275
01:35:40,660 --> 01:35:42,620
Hum, há esse tipo persistente de,

2276
01:35:42,740 --> 01:35:43,400
bem, eu não preciso aceitar

2277
01:35:43,400 --> 01:35:44,220
mais seriamente.

2278
01:35:44,480 --> 01:35:44,940
Mas a propósito,

2279
01:35:44,960 --> 01:35:46,220
você notou que eles estavam certos

2280
01:35:46,380 --> 01:35:47,940
em algo muito importante?

2281
01:35:48,860 --> 01:35:50,340
Agora, uma coisa engraçada sobre a liberdade de expressão,

2282
01:35:51,260 --> 01:35:55,780
a liberdade de expressão não existiria se você também não tivesse o direito de dizer coisas erradas.

2283
01:35:56,160 --> 01:35:56,720
Porque se você não puder,

2284
01:35:57,220 --> 01:35:59,120
você sabe, envolva-se em uma ideia para você,

2285
01:35:59,120 --> 01:36:00,820
se você não pode realmente especular,

2286
01:36:01,080 --> 01:36:03,540
você nunca chegará realmente a algo certo em primeiro lugar.

2287
01:36:04,000 --> 01:36:05,440
Mas é especialmente irritante

2288
01:36:05,740 --> 01:36:07,120
quando as pessoas que estavam certas

2289
01:36:07,660 --> 01:36:08,440
foram censurados

2290
01:36:09,060 --> 01:36:11,720
e você, uh, e nunca recebe o crédito que merece.

2291
01:36:13,320 --> 01:36:16,920
Bem, este pode ser um bom lugar para perguntar um pouco mais sobre a liberdade de expressão.

2292
01:36:18,100 --> 01:36:22,680
E então você disse que está incluído na liberdade de expressão dizer coisas que estão erradas.

2293
01:36:22,940 --> 01:36:23,440
Sim.

2294
01:36:23,860 --> 01:36:26,760
Hum, qual é a sua perspectiva sobre o discurso de ódio?

2295
01:36:27,840 --> 01:36:33,320
O discurso de ódio é a melhor campanha de marketing para a censura.

2296
01:36:33,440 --> 01:36:36,000
Hum, e veio da academia,

2297
01:36:36,250 --> 01:36:38,260
hum, do, do século XX.

2298
01:36:38,460 --> 01:36:41,320
E quando falei sobre o movimento anti-liberdade de expressão,

2299
01:36:41,800 --> 01:36:43,700
uh, essa foi uma de suas primeiras invenções.

2300
01:36:43,900 --> 01:36:46,300
Hum, houve muita conversa sobre a teoria racial crítica,

2301
01:36:46,400 --> 01:36:48,680
hum, e, e sendo contra a teoria racial crítica

2302
01:36:49,240 --> 01:36:55,040
e o fogo irá processar se você disser que as pessoas não podem defendê-lo, ensiná-lo ou pesquisá-lo,

2303
01:36:55,640 --> 01:36:59,920
porque você tem absolutamente o direito de persegui-lo academicamente.

2304
01:37:00,680 --> 01:37:01,140
No entanto,

2305
01:37:01,480 --> 01:37:08,660
toda vez que alguém mencionasse o CRT, deveria dizer também o primeiro projeto das pessoas que fundaram o CRT,

2306
01:37:09,020 --> 01:37:11,500
hum, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, hum, et cetera,

2307
01:37:12,060 --> 01:37:15,360
estava para ir, era criar esta nova categoria de desprotegidos

2308
01:37:15,460 --> 01:37:18,020
discurso chamado discurso de ódio e proibi-lo.

2309
01:37:18,780 --> 01:37:20,420
A pessoa que permitiu essa deriva,

2310
01:37:20,420 --> 01:37:22,760
claro, foi Herbert Marcuse em 1965,

2311
01:37:22,760 --> 01:37:25,700
você sabe, basicamente questionando se a liberdade de expressão deveria ou não ser

2312
01:37:25,700 --> 01:37:26,820
um valor sagrado à esquerda.

2313
01:37:27,260 --> 01:37:29,640
E ele esteve do lado perdedor por muito tempo.

2314
01:37:29,780 --> 01:37:30,540
Os liberais,

2315
01:37:30,840 --> 01:37:31,940
você sabe, do jeito que eu cresci,

2316
01:37:32,120 --> 01:37:35,500
que era basicamente ser pró-liberdade de expressão era sinônimo de ser

2317
01:37:35,960 --> 01:37:36,460
um liberal,

2318
01:37:36,920 --> 01:37:40,120
mas isso começou a ficar gravado no campus.

2319
01:37:40,660 --> 01:37:42,240
E do jeito que foi, foi com,

2320
01:37:42,580 --> 01:37:43,980
com a ideia de discurso de ódio,

2321
01:37:44,260 --> 01:37:48,780
hum, isso, isso essencialmente, ah, mas você deveria, hum, podemos designar particularmente

2322
01:37:48,840 --> 01:37:52,060
discurso ruim como, uh, não protegido.

2323
01:37:52,320 --> 01:37:53,320
Hum, e, e

2324
01:37:53,920 --> 01:37:54,880
quem vai aplicá-lo?

2325
01:37:54,880 --> 01:37:55,720
Quem vai decidir o que

2326
01:37:55,840 --> 01:37:56,920
discurso de ódio realmente é?

2327
01:37:57,500 --> 01:38:01,020
Bem, geralmente isso só pode acontecer em um ambiente

2328
01:38:01,020 --> 01:38:04,760
de diversidade de pontos de vista muito baixa porque você tem que realmente concordar,

2329
01:38:04,960 --> 01:38:07,320
sobre quais são as coisas mais odiosas e erradas.

2330
01:38:08,000 --> 01:38:10,580
E há um princípio fundamental.

2331
01:38:11,060 --> 01:38:16,600
Hum, é mencionado isso em um grande caso sobre queima de bandeiras na Primeira Emenda que eu acho que todos os

2332
01:38:16,600 --> 01:38:17,680
mundo poderia se beneficiar.

2333
01:38:18,140 --> 01:38:20,960
Você não pode proibir o discurso só porque é ofensivo.

2334
01:38:21,340 --> 01:38:22,640
É muito subjetivo.

2335
01:38:22,940 --> 01:38:24,920
Basicamente, é uma das razões pelas quais estes,

2336
01:38:24,920 --> 01:38:27,400
uh, tipo de código tem sido mais feliz

2337
01:38:27,400 --> 01:38:29,040
adotado em lugares como a Europa,

2338
01:38:29,060 --> 01:38:31,320
onde eles têm a sensação de que existe um alemão modal

2339
01:38:31,320 --> 01:38:32,520
ou um inglês modal.

2340
01:38:32,940 --> 01:38:36,360
Hum, e eu acho que isso é ofensivo e, portanto, posso dizer que isso é,

2341
01:38:36,680 --> 01:38:38,620
isso está errado em um sentido mais

2342
01:38:39,300 --> 01:38:42,480
multicultural, em um país genuinamente mais diversificado

2343
01:38:42,480 --> 01:38:47,180
que nunca pensou honestamente que existe um único tipo de americano.

2344
01:38:47,520 --> 01:38:49,120
Nunca houve algo assim,

2345
01:38:49,500 --> 01:38:50,860
tivemos, tivemos a ideia do tio Sam,

2346
01:38:50,880 --> 01:38:52,100
mas isso sempre foi meio que uma piada.

2347
01:38:53,000 --> 01:38:57,580
Hum, Boston sempre soube que não era Richmond, sempre soube que não era Georgia, sempre soube que não era, você sabe, Alasca.

2348
01:38:57,900 --> 01:39:03,180
Como se sempre tivéssemos sido uma miscelânea e entramos em uma sociedade tão diversa

2349
01:39:03,560 --> 01:39:04,260
que

2350
01:39:04,940 --> 01:39:07,180
você não pode proibir coisas simplesmente porque são ofensivas.

2351
01:39:07,180 --> 01:39:09,320
Hum, e esse é um dos

2352
01:39:09,320 --> 01:39:12,560
razões pelas quais o discurso de ódio não é uma categoria de discurso desprotegida.

2353
01:39:12,940 --> 01:39:14,020
E eu, e eu vou mais longe,

2354
01:39:14,380 --> 01:39:18,400
minha teoria sobre liberdade de expressão é ligeiramente diferente da maioria dos outros advogados constitucionais.

2355
01:39:19,560 --> 01:39:22,000
Hum, e eu acho, e acho que isso é parcialmente porque algumas das maneiras,

2356
01:39:22,120 --> 01:39:23,040
uh, algumas dessas teorias,

2357
01:39:23,160 --> 01:39:26,040
embora muitos deles sejam realmente bons, são inadequados,

2358
01:39:26,500 --> 01:39:27,780
eles não são expansivos o suficiente.

2359
01:39:28,300 --> 01:39:29,720
E às vezes chamo minha teoria de

2360
01:39:29,740 --> 01:39:31,940
a teoria informacional pura da liberdade de expressão.

2361
01:39:32,400 --> 01:39:34,600
Hum, ou às vezes quando eu quero ser chique,

2362
01:39:34,640 --> 01:39:38,340
o laboratório e a teoria do espelho e é mais

2363
01:39:38,340 --> 01:39:43,060
O inquilino importante é que se o objetivo é o projeto do conhecimento humano,

2364
01:39:43,200 --> 01:39:43,660
que é saber

2365
01:39:43,680 --> 01:39:44,580
o mundo que é,

2366
01:39:44,900 --> 01:39:50,420
é que você não pode conhecer o mundo como ele é sem saber o que as pessoas realmente pensam

2367
01:39:51,000 --> 01:39:54,920
e o que as pessoas realmente pensam é um fato extremamente importante de se saber.

2368
01:39:55,780 --> 01:39:57,380
Então, toda vez que você está realmente dizendo,

2369
01:39:58,040 --> 01:40:00,900
você não pode dizer que está realmente se privando do conhecimento

2370
01:40:00,900 --> 01:40:07,020
do que as pessoas realmente acham que você está causando o que Tim ou Karan, que está em nosso conselho consultivo, chama de falsificação de preferência.

2371
01:40:07,380 --> 01:40:09,940
Hum, você acaba com uma imagem imprecisa do mundo,

2372
01:40:10,160 --> 01:40:10,840
que, aliás,

2373
01:40:11,320 --> 01:40:12,300
em muitos casos,

2374
01:40:12,700 --> 01:40:15,260
hum, porque há ativistas que querem restringir mais

2375
01:40:15,260 --> 01:40:18,620
discurso, eles na verdade tendem a pensar que as pessoas são mais preconceituosas do que elas,

2376
01:40:18,620 --> 01:40:19,960
uh, do que eles poderiam ser.

2377
01:40:19,960 --> 01:40:21,860
Hum, e na verdade esses tipos de restrições,

2378
01:40:21,900 --> 01:40:23,120
havia um livro chamado racial

2379
01:40:23,420 --> 01:40:29,420
paranóia, hum, que surgiu há cerca de 15 anos e que afirmava que a imposição

2380
01:40:29,420 --> 01:40:33,060
de alguns desses códigos às vezes pode fazer as pessoas pensarem que a única coisa que prende você

2381
01:40:33,060 --> 01:40:35,060
voltar de ser um racista furioso,

2382
01:40:35,620 --> 01:40:36,840
hum, são esses códigos.

2383
01:40:37,020 --> 01:40:38,060
Então deve ser realmente,

2384
01:40:38,060 --> 01:40:38,560
muito ruim.

2385
01:40:38,600 --> 01:40:40,020
Na verdade, pode piorar todas essas coisas.

2386
01:40:40,380 --> 01:40:41,880
E um, sobre o qual falamos no livro,

2387
01:40:42,080 --> 01:40:44,800
uma maneira prática muito real de piorar as coisas

2388
01:40:45,400 --> 01:40:46,700
é quando você censura as pessoas,

2389
01:40:47,140 --> 01:40:49,200
isso não muda a opinião deles.

2390
01:40:49,440 --> 01:40:53,400
Isso apenas os incentiva a não compartilhar isso com pessoas que lhes causarão problemas.

2391
01:40:53,740 --> 01:40:58,800
Portanto, isso os leva a conversar com pessoas com quem já concordam e a polarização de grupo decola.

2392
01:40:59,360 --> 01:41:03,040
Portanto, temos alguns dados interessantes no livro, hum, sobre como

2393
01:41:03,620 --> 01:41:06,200
expulsar as pessoas do Twitter, por exemplo, hum,

2394
01:41:06,540 --> 01:41:08,200
você sabe, em 2017.

2395
01:41:08,200 --> 01:41:13,000
Hum, e novamente, acho que em 2020 levar as pessoas a conversar levou a, você sabe,

2396
01:41:13,300 --> 01:41:15,420
maior radicalização entre essas pessoas.

2397
01:41:15,520 --> 01:41:17,860
É uma força muito previsível.

2398
01:41:18,080 --> 01:41:20,180
A censura na verdade não muda a opinião das pessoas e

2399
01:41:20,180 --> 01:41:23,240
isso os empurra em direções que, na verdade, são muito,

2400
01:41:23,240 --> 01:41:25,320
você sabe, uma pesquisa sólida realmente

2401
01:41:25,320 --> 01:41:26,320
torná-los mais radicalizados.

2402
01:41:26,720 --> 01:41:28,180
Então, sim, acho que,

2403
01:41:28,460 --> 01:41:30,780
Penso que a tentativa de proibir o discurso de ódio,

2404
01:41:31,080 --> 01:41:32,780
isso realmente não nos protege disso,

2405
01:41:33,040 --> 01:41:34,040
mas dá ao governo

2406
01:41:34,680 --> 01:41:40,540
uma arma tão vasta para usar contra nós que nos arrependeremos de tê-la dado.

2407
01:41:41,500 --> 01:41:42,220
Existe uma maneira de

2408
01:41:42,800 --> 01:41:45,040
mais ou menos, para olhar para casos extremos,

2409
01:41:45,660 --> 01:41:47,120
testar um pouco essa ideia?

2410
01:41:47,360 --> 01:41:48,520
Então, se olharmos para o campus,

2411
01:41:49,420 --> 01:41:54,520
qual é a sua opinião sobre permitir, digamos, supremacistas brancos no campus

2412
01:41:54,520 --> 01:41:55,760
fazer, fazer discursos?

2413
01:41:55,920 --> 01:41:56,100
OK.

2414
01:41:56,980 --> 01:42:02,140
Acho que você deveria ser capaz de estudar o que as pessoas pensam.

2415
01:42:02,240 --> 01:42:04,620
E acho que é importante que realmente o façamos.

2416
01:42:05,340 --> 01:42:06,060
Então eu acho que,

2417
01:42:06,060 --> 01:42:08,080
você sabe, vamos pegar, por exemplo, QAnon.

2418
01:42:09,060 --> 01:42:09,880
Sim, QAnon está errado.

2419
01:42:10,220 --> 01:42:13,060
Hum, mas de onde veio isso?

2420
01:42:13,380 --> 01:42:14,520
Por que eles pensaram isso?

2421
01:42:14,640 --> 01:42:15,720
Qual é a motivação?

2422
01:42:15,820 --> 01:42:16,800
Quem lhes ensinou isso?

2423
01:42:16,800 --> 01:42:18,140
Quem teve essas ideias?

2424
01:42:18,260 --> 01:42:20,220
Isso é importante para entender a história.

2425
01:42:20,360 --> 01:42:23,520
Isso é importante para entender a política americana moderna.

2426
01:42:24,220 --> 01:42:26,420
E então, se você agir,

2427
01:42:26,420 --> 01:42:26,840
se você colocar o seu

2428
01:42:26,860 --> 01:42:33,780
chapéu de estudioso e sobre o qual você deve estar curioso para saber de onde eles vêm.

2429
01:42:34,440 --> 01:42:35,080
Darrell Davis,

2430
01:42:35,380 --> 01:42:38,960
com quem tenho certeza que você conhece, parte do objetivo dele era simplesmente

2431
01:42:38,960 --> 01:42:40,540
para saber de onde as pessoas vinham.

2432
01:42:40,600 --> 01:42:41,340
E no processo,

2433
01:42:41,860 --> 01:42:43,080
ele realmente se radicalizou

2434
01:42:43,280 --> 01:42:46,660
vários membros clientes quando perceberam que esse homem negro

2435
01:42:47,260 --> 01:42:49,480
quem seria amigo deles na verdade era compassivo,

2436
01:42:49,600 --> 01:42:50,500
era uma pessoa decente.

2437
01:42:50,660 --> 01:42:51,520
Eles perceberam todos os seus

2438
01:42:51,520 --> 01:42:52,460
preconceitos estavam errados.

2439
01:42:52,540 --> 01:42:55,120
A propósito, pode ter um fator de radicalização,

2440
01:42:55,440 --> 01:42:56,440
mas mesmo quando isso não acontece,

2441
01:42:56,840 --> 01:43:00,720
ainda é muito importante saber o que as pessoas más da sua sociedade pensam.

2442
01:43:01,800 --> 01:43:03,640
Honestamente, de certa forma é para,

2443
01:43:03,740 --> 01:43:04,540
para sua própria segurança,

2444
01:43:04,560 --> 01:43:05,820
provavelmente é mais importante

2445
01:43:05,820 --> 01:43:07,860
saber o que as pessoas más da sua sociedade realmente pensam.

2446
01:43:08,120 --> 01:43:10,760
Eu pessoalmente não sei o que você pensa sobre isso,

2447
01:43:10,760 --> 01:43:12,120
mas pessoalmente penso que a liberdade

2448
01:43:12,120 --> 01:43:13,320
da fala em casos como esse,

2449
01:43:13,400 --> 01:43:14,420
como KKK e campus

2450
01:43:15,060 --> 01:43:17,800
pode causar mais danos no curto prazo,

2451
01:43:18,660 --> 01:43:21,240
mas muito mais benefícios a longo prazo.

2452
01:43:22,040 --> 01:43:24,000
Porque às vezes você pode argumentar,

2453
01:43:24,180 --> 01:43:25,200
Isto vai doer.

2454
01:43:25,480 --> 01:43:25,820
Sim.

2455
01:43:25,820 --> 01:43:26,620
A curto prazo.

2456
01:43:27,560 --> 01:43:30,540
Mas quero dizer, Harvey disse que isso é como considerar a alternativa.

2457
01:43:31,110 --> 01:43:34,180
Porque você meio que defendeu tipo,

2458
01:43:34,180 --> 01:43:35,520
isso seria potencialmente um bom

2459
01:43:35,520 --> 01:43:36,900
coisa, mesmo no curto prazo.

2460
01:43:37,160 --> 01:43:38,160
E muitas vezes é, eu acho,

2461
01:43:38,660 --> 01:43:40,620
especialmente numa sociedade estável como a nossa,

2462
01:43:41,400 --> 01:43:44,640
uh, com uma classe média forte, todos esses tipos de coisas onde as pessoas têm como

2463
01:43:44,640 --> 01:43:46,060
conforto, a razão através das coisas.

2464
01:43:46,260 --> 01:43:46,540
Sim.

2465
01:43:46,660 --> 01:43:46,980
Hum,

2466
01:43:47,500 --> 01:43:49,700
mas você sabe, para mim é como,

2467
01:43:50,060 --> 01:43:51,320
mesmo que doa no curto prazo,

2468
01:43:51,700 --> 01:43:54,000
mesmo que isso crie mais ódio no curto prazo,

2469
01:43:54,560 --> 01:43:56,060
a liberdade de expressão tem isso

2470
01:43:56,800 --> 01:43:58,360
coisa realmente benéfica,

2471
01:43:58,720 --> 01:44:00,480
que é que ajuda você a avançar em direção à verdade,

2472
01:44:00,480 --> 01:44:03,280
toda a sociedade rumo a uma abordagem mais profunda,

2473
01:44:03,280 --> 01:44:05,400
compreensão mais precisa de

2474
01:44:05,940 --> 01:44:09,740
vida na terra, da sociedade, de como as pessoas funcionam,

2475
01:44:10,460 --> 01:44:10,940
de ética,

2476
01:44:11,300 --> 01:44:12,540
da metafísica, de tudo.

2477
01:44:12,700 --> 01:44:15,980
E isso a longo prazo é um enorme benefício.

2478
01:44:16,340 --> 01:44:18,560
Isso acaba com os nazistas a longo prazo,

2479
01:44:18,680 --> 01:44:20,500
mesmo que isso aumente o número

2480
01:44:20,500 --> 01:44:21,720
dos nazistas no curto prazo.

2481
01:44:21,720 --> 01:44:21,820
Sim.

2482
01:44:22,180 --> 01:44:26,000
Bem, enquanto isso, apenas para verificar a realidade, parte disso é que as pessoas sempre mencionam,

2483
01:44:26,120 --> 01:44:27,140
e o clã no campus?

2484
01:44:27,240 --> 01:44:27,840
Eu sou como,

2485
01:44:28,300 --> 01:44:29,200
eles nunca são convidados.

2486
01:44:30,200 --> 01:44:33,580
Hum, o, o, o, o, eu não vi um caso em que eles foram convidados.

2487
01:44:34,040 --> 01:44:34,640
Hum,

2488
01:44:35,020 --> 01:44:40,120
geralmente este, o argumento do clã é descartado quando as pessoas estão tentando se desculpar.

2489
01:44:40,380 --> 01:44:42,220
E foi por isso que gritamos para baixo Ben Shapiro.

2490
01:44:42,800 --> 01:44:45,620
E é por isso que não podemos ter Bill Maher no campus.

2491
01:44:45,820 --> 01:44:48,200
É por isso, você sabe, e é tipo, ok.

2492
01:44:48,240 --> 01:44:51,940
Hum, você sabe, e é um pouco disso, e sobre o ismo de novo,

2493
01:44:52,020 --> 01:44:55,700
sobre ser tipo, bem, aquela coisa ali é terrível e, portanto, esse comediante não deveria vir.

2494
01:44:56,780 --> 01:44:59,640
Uh, então eu tenho uma pergunta, talvez a título de conselho,

2495
01:45:00,540 --> 01:45:00,900
você sabe,

2496
01:45:01,280 --> 01:45:02,940
entrevistando pessoas e vendo

2497
01:45:02,950 --> 01:45:05,440
isso é como um podcast como plataforma

2498
01:45:07,320 --> 01:45:10,080
ao decidir com quem falar ou não,

2499
01:45:10,240 --> 01:45:12,760
não é algo que eu tenha que enfrentar de vez em quando.

2500
01:45:13,560 --> 01:45:17,220
Minha inclinação natural antes de começar o podcast era conversar com qualquer pessoa

2501
01:45:18,000 --> 01:45:22,120
e incluindo pessoas nas quais ainda estou interessado e que são,

2502
01:45:22,480 --> 01:45:22,800
você sabe,

2503
01:45:23,460 --> 01:45:24,300
os atuais membros do

2504
01:45:24,300 --> 01:45:24,720
KKK.

2505
01:45:24,720 --> 01:45:26,240
E para mim,

2506
01:45:26,940 --> 01:45:29,620
há uma responsabilidade de fazer isso com habilidade.

2507
01:45:29,660 --> 01:45:30,500
Sim.

2508
01:45:31,260 --> 01:45:35,340
Hum, e essa responsabilidade tem pesado cada vez mais sobre mim porque

2509
01:45:35,340 --> 01:45:39,560
você percebe quanta habilidade é realmente necessária porque você precisa saber,

2510
01:45:39,840 --> 01:45:40,980
entender tanto,

2511
01:45:41,360 --> 01:45:43,600
porque eu entendi que o diabo

2512
01:45:44,140 --> 01:45:45,700
sempre será carismático.

2513
01:45:46,140 --> 01:45:46,400
Sim.

2514
01:45:46,900 --> 01:45:48,800
Hum, o diabo não vai se parecer com o diabo.

2515
01:45:48,800 --> 01:45:51,080
E então você tem que perceber que precisa,

2516
01:45:51,540 --> 01:45:52,820
você nem sempre pode

2517
01:45:54,080 --> 01:45:57,280
venha para a mesa com uma profunda compaixão por outro ser humano.

2518
01:45:57,420 --> 01:45:58,000
Você tem que ter,

2519
01:45:58,100 --> 01:46:00,140
você sabe, tipo 90% de compaixão e,

2520
01:46:01,080 --> 01:46:03,800
e outros 90% de conhecimento histórico profundo

2521
01:46:03,800 --> 01:46:06,840
sobre o contexto das batalhas em torno desta questão específica.

2522
01:46:06,940 --> 01:46:08,360
E isso leva apenas um enorme

2523
01:46:08,360 --> 01:46:10,460
quantidade de esforço, mas não sei se há

2524
01:46:11,080 --> 01:46:12,320
pensamentos que você tem sobre isso,

2525
01:46:12,520 --> 01:46:15,620
como lidar com a fala,

2526
01:46:16,860 --> 01:46:17,180
hum,

2527
01:46:17,820 --> 01:46:18,520
de uma forma

2528
01:46:19,640 --> 01:46:22,100
sem censura, trazendo isso à tona,

2529
01:46:22,400 --> 01:46:23,400
mas de uma forma que cria

2530
01:46:23,400 --> 01:46:24,460
mais amor no mundo.

2531
01:46:25,040 --> 01:46:26,000
Eu lembro, hum,

2532
01:46:26,780 --> 01:46:27,600
Steve Bannon

2533
01:46:28,160 --> 01:46:32,260
foi desconvidado do festival New Yorker e Jim Carrey

2534
01:46:32,260 --> 01:46:34,960
enlouqueceu e todo tipo de gente enlouqueceu e ele foi desconvidado,

2535
01:46:35,280 --> 01:46:39,660
hum, de, de, e fui convidado para falar sobre isso sobre nós.

2536
01:46:40,480 --> 01:46:42,000
E eu estava dizendo tipo, ouça,

2537
01:46:44,740 --> 01:46:49,080
você não tem pessoas para sua conferência porque concorda com elas.

2538
01:46:49,080 --> 01:46:53,980
Hum, tipo, temos que sair dessa ideia de que é porque eles estavam tentando fazer isso

2539
01:46:53,980 --> 01:46:55,540
parece que é um endosso de Steve Bannon.

2540
01:46:55,600 --> 01:46:56,480
Como se isso fosse um absurdo.

2541
01:46:56,580 --> 01:46:59,020
Por exemplo, se você realmente olhar para as opiniões de todas as pessoas que estão lá,

2542
01:46:59,800 --> 01:47:01,040
você não pode endossar

2543
01:47:01,040 --> 01:47:03,860
todas as opiniões que todas essas outras pessoas que estarão lá realmente têm.

2544
01:47:04,460 --> 01:47:06,420
E então, no processo de apresentar esse argumento,

2545
01:47:06,640 --> 01:47:08,580
Eu tenho, hum, e, e também, é claro,

2546
01:47:09,180 --> 01:47:12,660
o clássico, é muito valioso saber o que alguém pensa Steve Bannon.

2547
01:47:12,660 --> 01:47:13,300
Você deveria estar curioso

2548
01:47:13,320 --> 01:47:13,980
sobre isso.

2549
01:47:14,260 --> 01:47:16,080
E eu me lembro de alguém discutindo e dizendo:

2550
01:47:16,540 --> 01:47:17,940
bem, o que você gostaria que alguém

2551
01:47:17,940 --> 01:47:18,740
entrevistar um jihadista?

2552
01:47:18,940 --> 01:47:21,020
E eu fico tipo, porque no momento,

2553
01:47:21,200 --> 01:47:22,300
como era na época em que,

2554
01:47:22,300 --> 01:47:23,460
quando o ISIS estava realmente em

2555
01:47:23,980 --> 01:47:24,260
indo,

2556
01:47:24,700 --> 01:47:25,860
indo em frente.

2557
01:47:25,880 --> 01:47:27,620
Hum, e eu pensei,

2558
01:47:28,020 --> 01:47:29,480
você não gostaria de ir

2559
01:47:29,480 --> 01:47:32,980
para uma palestra em que alguém estava tentando descobrir o que motiva algumas dessas pessoas?

2560
01:47:33,240 --> 01:47:36,160
Hum, porque isso muda o seu enquadramento, basicamente é como,

2561
01:47:36,220 --> 01:47:37,280
não, é curiosidade.

2562
01:47:37,520 --> 01:47:40,200
É a cura para muitas dessas coisas.

2563
01:47:40,200 --> 01:47:44,060
E precisamos de muito mais curiosidade e muito menos certezas injustificadas.

2564
01:47:44,760 --> 01:47:45,920
E há uma questão de tipo,

2565
01:47:46,120 --> 01:47:48,000
como você conduz essas conversas?

2566
01:47:48,740 --> 01:47:48,840
E,

2567
01:47:49,540 --> 01:47:51,460
hum, me sinto profundamente subqualificado.

2568
01:47:51,700 --> 01:47:53,100
Quem você acha que é especialmente bom nisso?

2569
01:47:54,100 --> 01:47:57,440
Sinto que os documentaristas costumam fazer um trabalho muito melhor.

2570
01:47:57,860 --> 01:47:59,820
E o melhor trabalho geralmente é feito por biógrafos.

2571
01:48:00,320 --> 01:48:00,720
Sim.

2572
01:48:00,720 --> 01:48:04,140
Portanto, quanto mais tempo você dedica a uma conversa específica,

2573
01:48:04,860 --> 01:48:06,660
como um pensamento realmente profundo e

2574
01:48:06,660 --> 01:48:09,920
contexto histórico e estudar as pessoas, como elas pensam,

2575
01:48:10,280 --> 01:48:10,900
olhando para tudo diferente

2576
01:48:10,920 --> 01:48:13,300
perspectivas, olhando para a psicologia da pessoa,

2577
01:48:13,780 --> 01:48:16,540
educação, seus pais, seus avós, tudo isso,

2578
01:48:17,100 --> 01:48:18,620
quanto mais tempo você passa com isso,

2579
01:48:19,760 --> 01:48:20,700
ah, melhor,

2580
01:48:21,500 --> 01:48:24,000
melhor será a qualidade da conversa porque

2581
01:48:24,580 --> 01:48:25,520
você consegue entender o,

2582
01:48:26,700 --> 01:48:29,360
você consegue realmente simpatizar com a pessoa,

2583
01:48:29,740 --> 01:48:30,900
com as pessoas que ele ou ela

2584
01:48:31,380 --> 01:48:34,340
representa, hum, e você consegue ver a humanidade comum,

2585
01:48:34,520 --> 01:48:35,160
tudo isso.

2586
01:48:35,420 --> 01:48:38,900
Eu acho que os entrevistadores geralmente não fazem esse trabalho.

2587
01:48:39,140 --> 01:48:39,420
Sim.

2588
01:48:39,640 --> 01:48:43,840
Hum, então a melhor coisa que vi foram entrevistas que fazem parte de um documentário.

2589
01:48:43,920 --> 01:48:44,360
Sim.

2590
01:48:44,640 --> 01:48:46,200
Mas mesmo agora os documentários são como,

2591
01:48:46,220 --> 01:48:48,680
há um grande incentivo para fazer isso o mais rápido possível.

2592
01:48:48,820 --> 01:48:51,860
Não há incentivo para realmente passar tempo com a pessoa.

2593
01:48:52,000 --> 01:48:55,820
Há um novo documentário excelente sobre Floyd Abrams que eu realmente recomendo.

2594
01:48:56,340 --> 01:48:59,160
Fizemos um documentário sobre Ira Glasser chamado poderoso Ira,

2595
01:48:59,300 --> 01:49:01,900
hum, qual foi o meu vídeo

2596
01:49:01,900 --> 01:49:06,540
equipe e meu protegido Nico Perino e Chris Mulvey e Aaron Reese montaram tudo.

2597
01:49:07,140 --> 01:49:10,160
E apenas segue a vida e os tempos de, hum,

2598
01:49:10,600 --> 01:49:13,120
de Ira Glasser, ex-chefe da ACLU.

2599
01:49:13,540 --> 01:49:14,980
Se você pudesse ficar pensando nisso,

2600
01:49:15,040 --> 01:49:16,360
essa é uma história fascinante.

2601
01:49:16,360 --> 01:49:16,860
Oh sim.

2602
01:49:18,280 --> 01:49:18,440
Incrível.

2603
01:49:18,660 --> 01:49:20,240
Hum, Ira, ele não era advogado.

2604
01:49:20,440 --> 01:49:23,300
Hum, ele começou a trabalhar na NYCLU,

2605
01:49:23,480 --> 01:49:24,600
União das Liberdades Civis de Nova York

2606
01:49:25,220 --> 01:49:26,460
lá atrás, acho que nos anos sessenta.

2607
01:49:26,600 --> 01:49:26,780
Ele era,

2608
01:49:27,160 --> 01:49:30,540
uh, acho que Robert Kennedy recomendou que ele fosse nessa direção.

2609
01:49:30,600 --> 01:49:31,200
Hum,

2610
01:49:32,520 --> 01:49:37,100
e ele se tornou o presidente da ACLU bem na época em que eles estavam, hum,

2611
01:49:37,480 --> 01:49:41,760
sofrendo por defender os nazistas em Skokie e Nico,

2612
01:49:41,760 --> 01:49:46,980
uh, e, e, e, e Aaron e Chris montaram isso e nunca tinham feito um documentário antes.

2613
01:49:47,320 --> 01:49:49,420
E saiu tão, tão bem.

2614
01:49:50,040 --> 01:49:53,100
Hum, e conta a história dos nazistas em Skokie.

2615
01:49:53,720 --> 01:49:57,760
Conta a história do caso em torno, conta a história da ACLU na época.

2616
01:49:57,760 --> 01:49:59,540
E que grande líder foi Ira Glasser.

2617
01:49:59,840 --> 01:50:02,280
E uma das coisas que é tão boa é:

2618
01:50:02,300 --> 01:50:03,420
quando você conseguir ver

2619
01:50:04,020 --> 01:50:04,980
os nazistas em Skokie,

2620
01:50:05,600 --> 01:50:08,920
eles parecem os idiotas que você esperaria que fizessem.

2621
01:50:09,020 --> 01:50:10,340
Há um momento em que o,

2622
01:50:10,340 --> 01:50:14,410
quando o rali não está indo muito bem e o líder fica confuso.

2623
01:50:14,980 --> 01:50:17,340
E quase parece que ele vai gostar de gritar tipo,

2624
01:50:17,420 --> 01:50:20,280
você está, você está, você está, você está transformando esse comício nazista em uma zombaria.

2625
01:50:20,300 --> 01:50:20,420
E

2626
01:50:21,000 --> 01:50:26,760
então mostrou como permitir que os nazistas falassem em Skokie meio que tirou o fôlego de suas velas.

2627
01:50:27,180 --> 01:50:29,180
Como se eles tivessem todo o movimento,

2628
01:50:30,040 --> 01:50:31,320
como se todo mundo fosse meio que,

2629
01:50:31,320 --> 01:50:34,100
tudo meio que se dissolveu depois disso porque eles pareciam

2630
01:50:34,780 --> 01:50:36,120
idiotas racistas que eram.

2631
01:50:36,280 --> 01:50:38,580
Eles eram, você sabe, até irmãos do blues faziam piadas,

2632
01:50:38,580 --> 01:50:39,580
você sabe, piadas sobre eles.

2633
01:50:40,160 --> 01:50:45,360
Hum, e isso, e não se transformou no desastre que as pessoas pensavam que seria apenas deixando-as falar.

2634
01:50:45,920 --> 01:50:46,800
E Ira Glasser, tudo bem.

2635
01:50:46,820 --> 01:50:47,560
Então ele tem

2636
01:50:48,380 --> 01:50:54,800
esta história maravilhosa sobre como Jackie Robinson se juntou ao Brooklyn Dodgers e como

2637
01:50:55,320 --> 01:50:57,980
houve um momento em que estava vendo alguém,

2638
01:50:58,360 --> 01:51:03,800
um afro-americano literalmente em sua equipe e como isso realmente os deixou entusiasmados

2639
01:51:03,800 --> 01:51:05,460
a causa da igualdade racial.

2640
01:51:05,660 --> 01:51:07,820
E isso se tornou uma grande parte do que era sua vida.

2641
01:51:08,700 --> 01:51:11,920
E eu penso nisso como uma grande metáfora

2642
01:51:12,440 --> 01:51:14,540
expandindo seu círculo e

2643
01:51:14,600 --> 01:51:19,920
ver mais pessoas literalmente fazendo parte de sua equipe é a solução para muitos desses problemas.

2644
01:51:20,560 --> 01:51:24,260
E eu me preocupo que uma das coisas que é absolutamente um fato da vida

2645
01:51:24,260 --> 01:51:25,440
na América é tipo,

2646
01:51:26,000 --> 01:51:30,160
nós nos vemos mais como campos inimigos do que como pessoas do mesmo time.

2647
01:51:30,940 --> 01:51:32,720
E isso foi realmente algo nos primeiros dias,

2648
01:51:33,060 --> 01:51:34,200
como eu e Will Creely,

2649
01:51:34,260 --> 01:51:39,700
o diretor jurídico do Fire escreveu sobre os próximos desafios à liberdade de expressão de todos que estão no Facebook.

2650
01:51:41,200 --> 01:51:46,300
E uma coisa que eu esperava era que, à medida que mais pessoas expõem

2651
01:51:46,300 --> 01:51:47,340
mais de suas vidas,

2652
01:51:47,700 --> 01:51:49,720
perceberíamos muitas dessas coisas que sabíamos intelectualmente,

2653
01:51:50,100 --> 01:51:52,780
como se crianças fossem ao bar, ficassem bêbadas e fizessem coisas estúpidas.

2654
01:51:53,380 --> 01:51:53,920
Hum,

2655
01:51:54,380 --> 01:51:55,460
isso, ah,

2656
01:51:55,780 --> 01:51:56,620
que quando começamos

2657
01:51:56,690 --> 01:52:01,500
vendo a evidência deles fazendo coisas estúpidas que podemos ficar chocados a princípio,

2658
01:52:01,520 --> 01:52:03,540
mas eventualmente fica mais sofisticado e fica tipo,

2659
01:52:03,540 --> 01:52:04,720
bem, vamos lá, as pessoas são assim.

2660
01:52:05,400 --> 01:52:06,960
Isso nunca pareceu realmente acontecer.

2661
01:52:07,300 --> 01:52:09,880
Hum, isso, isso, isso eu não acho que penso

2662
01:52:09,920 --> 01:52:13,920
que há muitas coisas que sabemos sobre a natureza humana e sabemos sobre coisas idiotas

2663
01:52:13,920 --> 01:52:20,340
as pessoas dizem, uh, e nós, nós transformamos isso em um ambiente onde há apenas alguém

2664
01:52:20,340 --> 01:52:22,220
lá fora, esperando para ser tipo,

2665
01:52:23,120 --> 01:52:24,300
Oh, lembre-se daquela coisa idiota que você disse que éramos

2666
01:52:24,300 --> 01:52:24,700
14?

2667
01:52:24,980 --> 01:52:26,620
Bem, vou garantir que você não entre no,

2668
01:52:26,720 --> 01:52:27,700
para a escola dos seus sonhos porque

2669
01:52:27,720 --> 01:52:28,200
por essa.

2670
01:52:28,380 --> 01:52:29,680
Esta arqueologia ofensiva.

2671
01:52:30,300 --> 01:52:31,140
Esse não é o meu termo.

2672
01:52:31,340 --> 01:52:32,040
É um ótimo termo.

2673
01:52:32,080 --> 01:52:38,160
Roubamos o melhor dos comentários anteriores de alguém para encontrar um discurso que não envelheceu bem.

2674
01:52:38,940 --> 01:52:39,760
E esse é tático.

2675
01:52:39,940 --> 01:52:41,380
Assim, aquele não é apenas alguém que não está

2676
01:52:41,380 --> 01:52:41,880
empático.

2677
01:52:41,960 --> 01:52:44,560
Eles ficam tipo, vou punir você por isso ou,

2678
01:52:44,740 --> 01:52:45,240
e essa é uma das razões

2679
01:52:45,240 --> 01:52:47,200
por que fiquei deprimido escrevendo este livro

2680
01:52:47,720 --> 01:52:52,680
porque você sabe, já tem gente que não me ama por mimar a mente americana,

2681
01:52:52,820 --> 01:52:54,300
geralmente baseado em um mal-entendido

2682
01:52:54,440 --> 01:52:56,880
do que realmente dissemos e mimamos na mente americana, mas mesmo assim.

2683
01:52:57,940 --> 01:53:04,280
Uh, mas neste aqui, você sabe, como se eu estivesse criticando as pessoas por serem muito cruéis em muitos casos,

2684
01:53:05,120 --> 01:53:09,240
mas coloquei, mas uma coisa que foi realmente assustadora em estudar muito

2685
01:53:09,240 --> 01:53:11,560
nesses casos é que, uma vez que você tenha esse alvo nas costas,

2686
01:53:11,680 --> 01:53:14,220
o que eles vão tentar cancelar você pode ser qualquer coisa.

2687
01:53:14,860 --> 01:53:17,100
Você sabe, eles podem voltar ao seu antigo,

2688
01:53:17,220 --> 01:53:20,840
seus barcos antigos, encontre algo que você disse em 1995,

2689
01:53:21,040 --> 01:53:22,500
você sabe, faça alguma coisa,

2690
01:53:23,020 --> 01:53:26,980
hum, onde essencialmente parece que é uma outra coisa,

2691
01:53:27,160 --> 01:53:28,500
mas realmente o que eles são,

2692
01:53:28,500 --> 01:53:30,740
o que está acontecendo é que eles não gostaram da sua opinião.

2693
01:53:30,820 --> 01:53:32,400
Eles não gostaram do seu ponto de vista sobre alguma coisa.

2694
01:53:32,620 --> 01:53:33,480
E eles vão encontrar um,

2695
01:53:33,560 --> 01:53:34,860
encontre uma maneira que a partir de agora,

2696
01:53:34,920 --> 01:53:35,900
sempre que seu nome aparecer,

2697
01:53:36,220 --> 01:53:38,620
é como, Ah, lembre-se disso, dessa coisa que eu não gostei neles.

2698
01:53:39,100 --> 01:53:41,280
E é novamente, é cruel.

2699
01:53:41,300 --> 01:53:42,980
Isso não leva você a nenhum lugar mais perto da verdade.

2700
01:53:43,340 --> 01:53:45,540
E, mas é um pouco assustador arriscar o pescoço.

2701
01:53:46,700 --> 01:53:47,080
OK.

2702
01:53:47,160 --> 01:53:48,120
Em termos de soluções,

2703
01:53:48,460 --> 01:53:49,700
Vou te perguntar algumas coisas.

2704
01:53:50,020 --> 01:53:50,320
Então, um,

2705
01:53:51,440 --> 01:53:52,600
ah, paternidade.

2706
01:53:52,860 --> 01:53:53,060
Sim.

2707
01:53:54,080 --> 01:53:54,820
Cinco e sete anos.

2708
01:53:56,380 --> 01:53:58,240
Então tenho certeza que você já descobriu tudo.

2709
01:53:58,240 --> 01:53:59,160
Oh Deus não.

2710
01:53:59,340 --> 01:54:00,780
Do ponto de vista da liberdade de expressão.

2711
01:54:01,180 --> 01:54:01,600
Sim.

2712
01:54:01,780 --> 01:54:03,860
Uh, do ponto de vista da cultura da liberdade de expressão,

2713
01:54:03,960 --> 01:54:04,760
como ser um bom pai.

2714
01:54:05,380 --> 01:54:05,600
Sim.

2715
01:54:06,340 --> 01:54:10,780
Acho que a primeira qualidade que você deveria cultivar em seus filhos é

2716
01:54:10,780 --> 01:54:12,820
se você quer ter uma cultura de liberdade de expressão

2717
01:54:14,140 --> 01:54:15,200
é curiosidade

2718
01:54:16,100 --> 01:54:20,580
e uma consciência da vastidão que sempre será desconhecida.

2719
01:54:21,560 --> 01:54:24,500
E deixar meus filhos entusiasmados com a ideia é tipo,

2720
01:54:24,640 --> 01:54:25,540
vamos gastar todo o nosso

2721
01:54:25,540 --> 01:54:26,600
vive aprendendo sobre coisas.

2722
01:54:27,640 --> 01:54:32,680
E é rápido e emocionante e interminável e nunca conseguiremos

2723
01:54:32,680 --> 01:54:33,600
um grande arranhão nele,

2724
01:54:33,660 --> 01:54:35,240
mas a jornada será incrível.

2725
01:54:36,120 --> 01:54:38,760
Mas só os tolos pensam que sabem tudo.

2726
01:54:39,560 --> 01:54:41,660
Hum, e às vezes tolos perigosos.

2727
01:54:42,840 --> 01:54:44,560
Então, dando o senso de humildade intelectual

2728
01:54:45,060 --> 01:54:45,680
desde cedo

2729
01:54:46,220 --> 01:54:47,960
sendo também, você sabe,

2730
01:54:48,360 --> 01:54:50,380
dizer coisas que realmente parecem antiquadas,

2731
01:54:50,760 --> 01:54:52,140
tipo, mas eu digo coisas para meus filhos,

2732
01:54:52,540 --> 01:54:53,020
tipo, ouça,

2733
01:54:53,780 --> 01:54:54,280
se você

2734
01:54:55,540 --> 01:54:57,720
gosta de estudar e trabalhar,

2735
01:54:58,040 --> 01:54:59,480
ambas as coisas que eu gosto muito,

2736
01:54:59,520 --> 01:55:00,320
Eu faço por diversão.

2737
01:55:01,400 --> 01:55:04,220
Hum, sua vida vai ser ótima e fácil.

2738
01:55:05,000 --> 01:55:07,900
Hum, então algumas, algumas, você sabe, algumas dessas virtudes antiquadas são coisas

2739
01:55:07,900 --> 01:55:08,600
Eu tento pregar,

2740
01:55:08,900 --> 01:55:12,680
hum, coisas contra-intuitivas, como brincar ao ar livre,

2741
01:55:12,680 --> 01:55:16,720
hum, ter um tempo que não seja uma experiência intermediária é realmente,

2742
01:55:16,760 --> 01:55:18,120
ah, é muito importante.

2743
01:55:19,020 --> 01:55:19,440
E

2744
01:55:20,120 --> 01:55:25,800
pequenas coisas como, hum, eu falo no livro sobre quando meus filhos estão assistindo algo que é assustador

2745
01:55:25,920 --> 01:55:28,320
e não estou falando de filmes de zumbis,

2746
01:55:28,320 --> 01:55:30,240
você sabe, estou falando como um desenho animado

2747
01:55:30,240 --> 01:55:31,520
isso tem um momento meio assustador

2748
01:55:32,300 --> 01:55:34,220
e dizendo que querem desligar a TV.

2749
01:55:34,660 --> 01:55:36,960
E eu, e eu conversei com eles e digo, ouça,

2750
01:55:37,920 --> 01:55:40,180
Estou com saudades de você e vamos terminar esse show

2751
01:55:41,080 --> 01:55:44,520
e quero que você me diga o que pensa disso depois.

2752
01:55:45,220 --> 01:55:47,560
E sentei-me ao lado dos meus filhos.

2753
01:55:48,300 --> 01:55:49,920
Hum, e no final,

2754
01:55:49,980 --> 01:55:51,380
toda vez que eu,

2755
01:55:51,460 --> 01:55:52,460
você sabe, quando eu perguntei a eles,

2756
01:55:52,580 --> 01:55:53,940
foi tão assustador quanto você pensou que seria?

2757
01:55:54,660 --> 01:55:55,140
E havia tipo,

2758
01:55:55,240 --> 01:55:56,260
não, papai, tudo bem.

2759
01:55:56,300 --> 01:55:58,460
E eu penso, essa é uma das grandes lições da vida.

2760
01:55:59,060 --> 01:56:00,060
O medo de que você não

2761
01:56:00,800 --> 01:56:05,000
passar torna-se muito maior na sua cabeça do que simplesmente enfrentá-lo.

2762
01:56:05,620 --> 01:56:07,340
Essa é uma das razões pelas quais estou lutando contra essa cultura.

2763
01:56:07,500 --> 01:56:08,220
Eu amo,

2764
01:56:08,540 --> 01:56:14,420
você sabe, para que todos os nossos filhos possam crescer em um ambiente onde as pessoas nos dão graça e, você sabe,

2765
01:56:15,160 --> 01:56:17,860
aceite o fato de que às vezes as pessoas vão dizer coisas que te irritam,

2766
01:56:18,100 --> 01:56:20,740
levar a sério a possibilidade e estar errado e,

2767
01:56:20,740 --> 01:56:21,700
e, uh, seja curioso.

2768
01:56:22,260 --> 01:56:24,560
Bem, espero que o que você mencionou,

2769
01:56:24,560 --> 01:56:26,560
o que acontece porque muitos jovens

2770
01:56:26,560 --> 01:56:28,400
as coisas das pessoas estão na internet

2771
01:56:29,040 --> 01:56:31,600
que eles vão dar um tempo um ao outro porque então

2772
01:56:31,600 --> 01:56:32,920
todo mundo é digno de cancelar.

2773
01:56:33,600 --> 01:56:35,700
A Geração Z é a que mais odeia a cultura do cancelamento.

2774
01:56:35,840 --> 01:56:37,860
E essa é outra razão pela qual é como se as pessoas

2775
01:56:37,960 --> 01:56:39,240
ainda afirmando que isso está acontecendo.

2776
01:56:39,460 --> 01:56:39,720
É tipo,

2777
01:56:39,800 --> 01:56:41,520
não, você realmente pode perguntar às crianças

2778
01:56:41,980 --> 01:56:44,320
o que eles pensam sobre a cultura do cancelamento e eles odeiam isso.

2779
01:56:44,600 --> 01:56:47,080
Sim. Bem, eu meio que penso neles como o sistema imunológico.

2780
01:56:47,480 --> 01:56:47,600
Isso é como,

2781
01:56:48,360 --> 01:56:50,080
essa é a cultura acordando para gostar,

2782
01:56:50,140 --> 01:56:51,000
não, isso não é uma coisa boa.

2783
01:56:51,260 --> 01:56:52,520
Estou feliz, no entanto.

2784
01:56:52,620 --> 01:56:55,360
Quer dizer, eu, eu, sou uma daquelas crianças que,

2785
01:56:55,360 --> 01:56:56,820
você sabe, estou muito feliz por isso

2786
01:56:56,820 --> 01:57:01,620
Eu era uma criança nos anos oitenta e um adolescente nos anos noventa porque ter tudo

2787
01:57:01,760 --> 01:57:04,560
potencialmente on-line, uh, não é um,

2788
01:57:04,940 --> 01:57:05,520
uma educação.

2789
01:57:05,820 --> 01:57:05,980
Eu invejo.

2790
01:57:06,880 --> 01:57:11,080
Bem, eu, porque você também pode praticar a liberdade de expressão absoluta.

2791
01:57:11,920 --> 01:57:12,660
Eu gosto

2792
01:57:13,380 --> 01:57:20,000
levando a isso onde espero um futuro onde muitas das nossas inseguranças,

2793
01:57:20,540 --> 01:57:20,860
imperfeições,

2794
01:57:21,580 --> 01:57:22,940
está tudo lá fora.

2795
01:57:23,380 --> 01:57:25,700
E para ser honesto com isso,

2796
01:57:25,800 --> 01:57:28,600
uh, acho que isso leva a um mundo melhor.

2797
01:57:28,840 --> 01:57:29,960
Porque as falhas são lindas.

2798
01:57:30,340 --> 01:57:32,120
Quero dizer, essas são as falhas,

2799
01:57:32,120 --> 01:57:34,300
uh, os ingredientes básicos da conexão humana.

2800
01:57:34,780 --> 01:57:35,400
Ah, Robert Wright,

2801
01:57:35,820 --> 01:57:37,000
ele escreveu um livro sobre,

2802
01:57:37,120 --> 01:57:38,280
uh, sobre o budismo.

2803
01:57:38,340 --> 01:57:40,100
Hum, e eu falei sobre tentar

2804
01:57:40,100 --> 01:57:41,940
usar a mídia social de um,

2805
01:57:42,080 --> 01:57:43,840
de uma perspectiva budista e tipo,

2806
01:57:44,000 --> 01:57:48,220
como se você fosse, como se fosse o inconsciente coletivo meditando e

2807
01:57:48,800 --> 01:57:50,060
vendo aqueles pequenos como

2808
01:57:50,580 --> 01:57:56,820
partes raivosas que estão tentando cancelar você ou fazer você calar a boca e simplesmente deixá-las ir embora.

2809
01:57:56,820 --> 01:57:58,940
da mesma forma que você deve observar seus pensamentos desaparecerem.

2810
01:57:59,240 --> 01:58:02,700
Eu adoraria ver isso visualizado seja qual for o

2811
01:58:02,940 --> 01:58:04,520
seja qual for o drama que está acontecendo,

2812
01:58:04,800 --> 01:58:07,180
acontecendo, apenas vendo o mar disso,

2813
01:58:07,180 --> 01:58:08,600
da consciência coletiva,

2814
01:58:08,660 --> 01:58:11,220
apenas processando isso e tendo

2815
01:58:11,220 --> 01:58:14,200
um pouco como um ataque de pânico e tipo,

2816
01:58:14,200 --> 01:58:16,860
sim, lendo, olhando para o tipo de ódio,

2817
01:58:16,860 --> 01:58:18,360
vozes irritadas meio que aparecem e dizem,

2818
01:58:18,480 --> 01:58:19,360
ok, aí está você.

2819
01:58:19,740 --> 01:58:21,220
E ainda estou focado,

2820
01:58:21,220 --> 01:58:22,960
naquela coisa porque isso é,

2821
01:58:23,600 --> 01:58:25,240
isso, essa é uma das coisas é,

2822
01:58:26,280 --> 01:58:26,300
OK.

2823
01:58:26,480 --> 01:58:28,440
Sim, na verdade, provavelmente já é tarde no jogo,

2824
01:58:28,440 --> 01:58:30,740
para dar minha grande teoria sobre essas coisas.

2825
01:58:31,760 --> 01:58:32,600
Hum, mas,

2826
01:58:32,920 --> 01:58:34,580
ah, nunca é tarde demais.

2827
01:58:35,220 --> 01:58:35,360
Então,

2828
01:58:35,720 --> 01:58:37,060
então o que eu estava estudando,

2829
01:58:37,060 --> 01:58:39,740
hum, na faculdade de direito, quando acabei as aulas da Primeira Emenda,

2830
01:58:39,740 --> 01:58:42,620
hum, decidi estudar censura durante o tutor

2831
01:58:42,620 --> 01:58:46,080
dinastia, uh, porque é daí que tiramos nossas ideias de restrição prévia,

2832
01:58:46,080 --> 01:58:49,220
uh, isso vem do licenciamento da imprensa,

2833
01:58:49,360 --> 01:58:51,040
hum, o que foi algo que Henrique VIII

2834
01:58:51,040 --> 01:58:52,520
foi o primeiro a fazer onde basicamente,

2835
01:58:53,060 --> 01:58:56,140
hum, a ideia era que se você não pudesse imprimir nada

2836
01:58:56,160 --> 01:58:58,360
na Inglaterra, a menos que seja com estes, uh,

2837
01:58:59,200 --> 01:59:01,080
uh, impressoras aprovadas por sua majestade,

2838
01:59:01,580 --> 01:59:06,840
hum, isso impedirá que o trabalho herético e o oitavo material anti-Henry sejam divulgados.

2839
01:59:07,060 --> 01:59:08,380
Eu sou linda, linda, linda, linda,

2840
01:59:08,880 --> 01:59:10,000
lindo, hum,

2841
01:59:10,420 --> 01:59:11,700
ideia eficiente, senão outra coisa.

2842
01:59:12,400 --> 01:59:19,100
Hum, e eu sempre, então ele começou a ficar bravo com a impressora por volta de 1521 e depois passou alguma coisa

2843
01:59:19,120 --> 01:59:23,880
que exigia que as impressões estivessem junto com o parlamento em, em, uh, 1538.

2844
01:59:24,620 --> 01:59:27,760
Uh, e eu sempre penso nisso como onde estamos agora,

2845
01:59:28,260 --> 01:59:29,560
hum, porque temos isso,

2846
01:59:29,920 --> 01:59:33,040
tínhamos, naquela época, tínhamos a tecnologia disruptiva original,

2847
01:59:33,160 --> 01:59:34,120
você sabe, escrever provavelmente era,

2848
01:59:34,420 --> 01:59:36,980
mas o próximo, que foi a imprensa,

2849
01:59:37,020 --> 01:59:38,340
o que foi absolutamente calamitoso.

2850
01:59:38,560 --> 01:59:42,920
E quero dizer, e eu, e digo calamitoso de propósito porque, no curto prazo,

2851
01:59:43,380 --> 01:59:44,580
a caça às bruxas aumentou

2852
01:59:44,580 --> 01:59:49,060
como um louco porque a imprensa permitiu que você conseguisse aquele manual sobre como encontrar bruxas

2853
01:59:49,460 --> 01:59:52,540
que as guerras religiosas enlouqueceram.

2854
01:59:52,780 --> 01:59:56,360
Hum, isso levou a todo tipo de angústia, desinformação,

2855
01:59:57,300 --> 01:59:57,700
maldade.

2856
01:59:58,460 --> 02:00:00,760
E Henrique VIII estava tentando colocar o gênio de volta na garrafa.

2857
02:00:00,880 --> 02:00:01,980
Você sabe, ele estava tipo,

2858
02:00:01,980 --> 02:00:04,680
Eu posso, eu posso, eu posso, quero usar isso para sempre.

2859
02:00:04,860 --> 02:00:06,380
Tipo, uh, como eu sinto que poderia,

2860
02:00:06,500 --> 02:00:07,140
poderia ser usado,

2861
02:00:07,780 --> 02:00:12,580
mas ele estava num período inevitável de anarquia epistêmica.

2862
02:00:13,320 --> 02:00:17,360
Não há nada que você possa fazer para que o período após a impressão chegue,

2863
02:00:17,560 --> 02:00:19,960
uh, acabou por ser um não perturbador,

2864
02:00:20,180 --> 02:00:23,900
período não louco, exceto como o totalitarismo absoluto

2865
02:00:23,900 --> 02:00:25,500
e destruir todas as impressoras,

2866
02:00:25,880 --> 02:00:28,200
o que simplesmente não era possível na Europa.

2867
02:00:28,920 --> 02:00:30,060
Então eu sinto que

2868
02:00:30,060 --> 02:00:31,220
é como onde estamos agora.

2869
02:00:32,140 --> 02:00:33,700
Essa interrupção veio da adição,

2870
02:00:33,900 --> 02:00:38,280
Eu penso, você sabe, que vários milhões de pessoas participarão do debate europeu e que, eventualmente, o mercado global

2871
02:00:38,280 --> 02:00:43,740
conversa, mas acabou se tornando a melhor ferramenta para desconfirmação,

2872
02:00:43,900 --> 02:00:47,320
hum, por se livrar da falsidade, por detectar ideias ruins.

2873
02:00:48,420 --> 02:00:49,800
E são os benefícios,

2874
02:00:49,900 --> 02:00:51,140
os benefícios a longo prazo

2875
02:00:52,000 --> 02:00:54,940
da imprensa são calculavelmente grandes.

2876
02:00:55,780 --> 02:00:58,100
Hum, e é isso que me dá algum otimismo

2877
02:00:58,100 --> 02:00:59,940
para onde estamos agora com a mídia social,

2878
02:01:00,000 --> 02:01:02,580
porque estamos naquele período inevitavelmente anárquico.

2879
02:01:02,580 --> 02:01:04,440
E eu me preocupo com isso, com isso,

2880
02:01:05,180 --> 02:01:07,720
hum, uh, que há tentativas nos Estados de aprovar coisas

2881
02:01:07,720 --> 02:01:09,240
para tentar colocar o gênio de volta na garrafa.

2882
02:01:09,300 --> 02:01:13,160
Como se proibissemos um tick tock ou disséssemos isso,

2883
02:01:13,520 --> 02:01:15,880
hum, ninguém com menos de 18 anos pode participar,

2884
02:01:15,980 --> 02:01:17,940
na internet, a menos que tenham permissão dos pais,

2885
02:01:18,660 --> 02:01:20,620
estamos indo para algo que

2886
02:01:22,140 --> 02:01:25,840
nenhum tipo de abordagem de cima para baixo será capaz de consertar isso.

2887
02:01:26,000 --> 02:01:30,000
Temos que nos adaptar culturalmente ao fato, hum,

2888
02:01:30,420 --> 02:01:33,580
uh, de maneiras que nos tornam mais sábios do que na verdade,

2889
02:01:33,580 --> 02:01:41,160
hum, e permitir que seja potencialmente aquele mecanismo maravilhoso para a desconfirmação de que ainda não estamos nem perto, aliás,

2890
02:01:41,560 --> 02:01:42,680
mas pense

2891
02:01:43,300 --> 02:01:43,480
isto.

2892
02:01:43,480 --> 02:01:46,040
Milhões adicionais de olhos voltados para os problemas,

2893
02:01:46,380 --> 02:01:48,060
hum, graças à imprensa ajudou

2894
02:01:48,060 --> 02:01:50,560
criar a revolução científica, o iluminismo,

2895
02:01:50,960 --> 02:01:52,000
a ignorância da descoberta.

2896
02:01:53,380 --> 02:01:55,800
Hum, agora adicionamos bilhões

2897
02:01:56,360 --> 02:01:58,620
de olhos e vozes para resolver problemas.

2898
02:01:58,780 --> 02:02:01,320
E estamos apenas usando-os para vídeos de gatos e cancelamentos.

2899
02:02:02,760 --> 02:02:05,660
Mas esses são apenas os primeiros dias da imprensa.

2900
02:02:05,840 --> 02:02:08,460
Tudo começa com os gatos e o cancelamento.

2901
02:02:08,480 --> 02:02:11,900
Existe algo sobre X no Twitter,

2902
02:02:12,640 --> 02:02:15,520
que é talvez o mais energético

2903
02:02:16,140 --> 02:02:17,720
fonte de gatos e cancelamento.

2904
02:02:17,900 --> 02:02:19,680
Parece o inconsciente coletivo da espécie.

2905
02:02:19,840 --> 02:02:28,980
Quero dizer, como se fosse uma daquelas coisas em que a tendência de querer ver padrões na história às vezes pode limitar

2906
02:02:30,220 --> 02:02:34,580
a verdadeira experiência maluca do que a história realmente é.

2907
02:02:34,700 --> 02:02:38,620
Porque sim, nós, nós, temos essas boas ideias reconfortantes de que será como da última vez.

2908
02:02:38,880 --> 02:02:39,700
Nós não sabemos.

2909
02:02:39,960 --> 02:02:41,860
Ainda não aconteceu.

2910
02:02:42,420 --> 02:02:43,300
E eu penso

2911
02:02:43,920 --> 02:02:49,340
quão incomum o Twitter é porque penso nele como se fosse uma criança,

2912
02:02:49,460 --> 02:02:50,120
porque as pessoas falam sobre,

2913
02:02:50,800 --> 02:02:54,820
você sabe, escrita e comunicação de massa e,

2914
02:02:54,900 --> 02:02:58,740
uh, como se estivesse expandindo o tamanho do nosso cérebro coletivo.

2915
02:02:59,400 --> 02:03:02,220
Mas agora estamos olhando para o nosso cérebro coletivo em tempo real.

2916
02:03:03,000 --> 02:03:07,860
E está cheio, assim como nossos próprios cérebros, com todos os tipos de pequenas coisas malucas que aparecem e,

2917
02:03:07,860 --> 02:03:11,720
e, e, e aparecem como partículas virtuais em todo lugar de, de pessoas,

2918
02:03:12,020 --> 02:03:13,380
hum, você sabe,

2919
02:03:13,740 --> 02:03:15,440
reagindo em tempo real às coisas.

2920
02:03:15,680 --> 02:03:18,580
Nunca houve nada nem vagamente parecido.

2921
02:03:18,580 --> 02:03:20,320
E pode ser o pior,

2922
02:03:20,920 --> 02:03:21,180
horrível de ver.

2923
02:03:21,800 --> 02:03:22,900
No seu melhor,

2924
02:03:23,240 --> 02:03:29,640
às vezes ver as pessoas ficarem eufóricas com algo que está acontecendo e contando piadas imediatas absolutamente brilhantes,

2925
02:03:29,660 --> 02:03:30,780
você sabe, ao mesmo tempo,

2926
02:03:31,120 --> 02:03:31,960
pode ser,

2927
02:03:32,620 --> 02:03:34,820
nem pode ser uma experiência alegre.

2928
02:03:35,400 --> 02:03:36,080
Hum, eu, eu sinto que,

2929
02:03:36,760 --> 02:03:44,880
uh, e eu moro em um bairro agora em X, onde lido principalmente com pessoas que considero realmente atenciosas,

2930
02:03:44,940 --> 02:03:45,180
mesmo que eu discorde deles.

2931
02:03:45,420 --> 02:03:45,820
Hum,

2932
02:03:47,020 --> 02:03:49,220
e, e não é uma experiência tão ruim.

2933
02:03:49,600 --> 02:03:55,880
Ocasionalmente, encontro aquele tipo de bairro que chamo de X, onde tudo cancela toda a maldade.

2934
02:03:55,880 --> 02:03:57,940
E é sempre uma visita meio desagradável a esses lugares.

2935
02:03:58,580 --> 02:04:00,540
Não estou dizendo que tudo precisa ser assim,

2936
02:04:00,540 --> 02:04:02,460
uh, tipo, como minha experiência,

2937
02:04:02,820 --> 02:04:03,980
mas eu acho que

2938
02:04:04,820 --> 02:04:12,120
a razão pela qual as pessoas continuam voltando a ele é que ele revela aspectos brutos da humanidade que às vezes preferimos fingir que não existem.

2939
02:04:12,560 --> 02:04:12,820
Sim.

2940
02:04:13,500 --> 02:04:13,880
Sim.

2941
02:04:13,880 --> 02:04:15,240
Mas também é totalmente novo.

2942
02:04:15,460 --> 02:04:15,880
Como você disse,

2943
02:04:16,260 --> 02:04:17,300
é apenas uma viralidade,

2944
02:04:17,360 --> 02:04:22,380
a velocidade, as notícias viajam, as opiniões viajam, a batalha pelas ideias viaja.

2945
02:04:22,740 --> 02:04:23,860
A batalha pela informação também.

2946
02:04:24,160 --> 02:04:24,380
Sim.

2947
02:04:24,440 --> 02:04:26,720
Do que é verdade e não mentira percorrido,

2948
02:04:27,160 --> 02:04:29,180
a velha coisa de Mark Twain bem rápido no

2949
02:04:29,180 --> 02:04:29,440
coisa.

2950
02:04:29,440 --> 02:04:29,940
Sim.

2951
02:04:29,940 --> 02:04:33,800
E então isso muda sua compreensão de como interpretar

2952
02:04:34,420 --> 02:04:35,140
Informação.

2953
02:04:35,260 --> 02:04:36,720
Também o estressa infinitamente.

2954
02:04:37,280 --> 02:04:38,760
Lembrei-me de sair disso às vezes.

2955
02:04:39,060 --> 02:04:41,520
As estatísticas são muito ruins para a saúde mental, uh,

2956
02:04:41,960 --> 02:04:42,620
com, com, com jovens.

2957
02:04:42,780 --> 02:04:46,540
E estou definitivamente no grupo de pessoas que pensam que a mídia social faz parte disso.

2958
02:04:46,700 --> 02:04:48,260
Eu entendo o debate,

2959
02:04:48,300 --> 02:04:51,100
mas estou bastante convencido de que uma das coisas é,

2960
02:04:51,160 --> 02:04:56,340
não tem sido bom para a saúde mental das pessoas, é apenas estar constantemente exposto.

2961
02:04:56,920 --> 02:04:57,360
Sim, absolutamente.

2962
02:04:57,540 --> 02:05:02,220
Acho que é possível criar mídias sociais que gerem um enorme

2963
02:05:02,220 --> 02:05:04,220
quantidade de dinheiro, deixa as pessoas felizes comigo,

2964
02:05:04,280 --> 02:05:07,490
como se fosse possível alinhar os incentivos.

2965
02:05:08,260 --> 02:05:08,900
Então, em termos de,

2966
02:05:09,540 --> 02:05:10,580
sim, fazendo adolescentes,

2967
02:05:10,920 --> 02:05:11,260
fazendo,

2968
02:05:11,760 --> 02:05:12,920
uh, todas as fases da vida, dando

2969
02:05:13,560 --> 02:05:19,320
você satisfação e felicidade de longo prazo com sua existência física fora das redes sociais e nas redes sociais,

2970
02:05:19,860 --> 02:05:21,420
ajudando você a crescer como ser humano,

2971
02:05:22,220 --> 02:05:25,640
uh, ajudando a desafiar você na quantidade certa e na quantidade certa de vídeos de gatos,

2972
02:05:25,880 --> 02:05:29,180
tudo o que proporciona esta rica experiência humana.

2973
02:05:29,940 --> 02:05:30,760
Eu acho que é só

2974
02:05:31,340 --> 02:05:32,640
um problema de aprendizado de máquina.

2975
02:05:32,680 --> 02:05:35,700
É como se não fosse fácil criar um feed.

2976
02:05:36,380 --> 02:05:38,960
Portanto, o feed mais fácil que você pode fazer é maximizar o engajamento.

2977
02:05:39,340 --> 02:05:39,740
Sim.

2978
02:05:39,740 --> 02:05:41,020
Mas isso é como um algoritmo realmente idiota.

2979
02:05:41,730 --> 02:05:42,280
Sim.

2980
02:05:42,600 --> 02:05:43,800
É como para o,

2981
02:05:43,840 --> 02:05:48,240
para que o algoritmo aprenda o suficiente sobre você para entender

2982
02:05:48,960 --> 02:05:52,360
o que o deixará verdadeiramente feliz como ser humano para crescer a longo prazo.

2983
02:05:52,860 --> 02:05:55,100
Esse é apenas um problema muito difícil de resolver.

2984
02:05:55,720 --> 02:05:56,720
Você já assistiu Fleabag?

2985
02:05:57,340 --> 02:05:59,560
É absolutamente brilhante, um show britânico.

2986
02:05:59,560 --> 02:06:01,940
Hum, e isso configura você.

2987
02:06:02,040 --> 02:06:05,920
Uma das razões pelas quais as pessoas gostam tanto é que isso faz com que você esteja assistindo como um,

2988
02:06:06,020 --> 02:06:07,940
um atrevido britânico Sex and the City,

2989
02:06:08,160 --> 02:06:10,060
exceto que o personagem principal é o mais proeminente.

2990
02:06:11,080 --> 02:06:11,620
Hum,

2991
02:06:12,580 --> 02:06:13,400
é tipo, ok.

2992
02:06:13,620 --> 02:06:16,480
E você meio que revira os olhos um pouco e é engraçado e fofo

2993
02:06:16,620 --> 02:06:18,480
e meio picante.

2994
02:06:19,340 --> 02:06:24,140
E então você percebe que a pessoa está realmente sofrendo e passando por momentos difíceis

2995
02:06:24,800 --> 02:06:25,780
e fica

2996
02:06:26,620 --> 02:06:28,560
cada vez mais fundo à medida que o show continua.

2997
02:06:28,960 --> 02:06:31,640
E ela fará esses discursos incríveis sobre,

2998
02:06:32,080 --> 02:06:32,800
me diga o que fazer.

2999
02:06:33,220 --> 02:06:35,400
Como eu sei que há especialistas por aí.

3000
02:06:35,500 --> 02:06:36,920
Eu sei que existe conhecimento por aí.

3001
02:06:36,960 --> 02:06:38,320
Eu sei que há uma maneira ideal

3002
02:06:38,880 --> 02:06:39,700
para viver minha vida.

3003
02:06:39,720 --> 02:06:42,320
Então, por que alguém não pode simplesmente me dizer o que fazer?

3004
02:06:42,460 --> 02:06:44,480
E, e é maravilhosamente assim,

3005
02:06:45,840 --> 02:06:46,540
hum,

3006
02:06:47,700 --> 02:06:52,120
preciso, eu acho, uh, aspecto do desejo humano de que e se algo pudesse

3007
02:06:52,120 --> 02:06:54,620
realmente me diga o caminho ideal a seguir?

3008
02:06:55,120 --> 02:06:57,400
Porque eu acho que há um desejo de dar

3009
02:06:57,400 --> 02:07:04,100
use um pouco de sua própria liberdade e discrição para que lhe digam para fazer a coisa certa.

3010
02:07:04,540 --> 02:07:05,300
Mas esse caminho

3011
02:07:05,840 --> 02:07:07,180
me assusta até a morte.

3012
02:07:07,260 --> 02:07:09,000
Sim, vemos a maneira como você expressa isso.

3013
02:07:09,220 --> 02:07:10,480
Isso é, isso também me assusta.

3014
02:07:11,100 --> 02:07:12,520
Então há várias coisas que uma,

3015
02:07:12,660 --> 02:07:14,540
você pode estar constantemente distraído em um

3016
02:07:14,540 --> 02:07:17,480
O TikTok usa coisas que mantêm você engajado.

3017
02:07:17,480 --> 02:07:18,880
Então, removendo isso

3018
02:07:19,480 --> 02:07:22,580
e dando a você um monte de opções constantemente

3019
02:07:23,100 --> 02:07:29,080
e aprender a longo prazo o que resulta em sua felicidade real a longo prazo.

3020
02:07:30,020 --> 02:07:33,920
Então, quais quantidades de ideias desafiadoras são boas para você?

3021
02:07:34,120 --> 02:07:34,260
Uh,

3022
02:07:35,480 --> 02:07:37,160
isso, você sabe, para, para alguém como eu,

3023
02:07:39,220 --> 02:07:42,120
mas existe um número assim para você, Greg, como

3024
02:07:42,720 --> 02:07:45,100
para mim, esse número é bem alto.

3025
02:07:45,260 --> 02:07:45,560
Eu amo

3026
02:07:46,240 --> 02:07:46,680
debate.

3027
02:07:46,860 --> 02:07:47,120
Eu amo,

3028
02:07:47,660 --> 02:07:50,120
Eu, eu adoro a sensação de perceber,

3029
02:07:50,420 --> 02:07:51,720
puta merda, eu estava errado.

3030
02:07:51,940 --> 02:07:52,040
Sim.

3031
02:07:52,680 --> 02:07:57,680
Mas tipo, você sabe, e eu adoraria que o algoritmo soubesse isso sobre mim e me ajudasse,

3032
02:07:57,740 --> 02:07:59,040
mas sempre me dando opções.

3033
02:07:59,080 --> 02:08:01,760
Se eu quiser entrar em vídeos de gatos e assim por diante.

3034
02:08:01,760 --> 02:08:03,040
Bem, o aspecto educacional disso.

3035
02:08:03,240 --> 02:08:03,520
Sim,

3036
02:08:03,840 --> 02:08:04,060
Educação.

3037
02:08:04,940 --> 02:08:08,180
Gosto da ideia de ir na velocidade que você precisa e correr como

3038
02:08:08,180 --> 02:08:08,800
o mais rápido que puder.

3039
02:08:09,080 --> 02:08:09,180
Sim.

3040
02:08:09,660 --> 02:08:11,780
Você sabe, quero dizer, tem aquela coisa toda de fluxo.

3041
02:08:12,100 --> 02:08:15,240
Eu simplesmente sinto que a recomendação do YouTube para,

3042
02:08:15,580 --> 02:08:17,500
para melhor ou para pior, se usado corretamente,

3043
02:08:18,220 --> 02:08:19,540
parece que faz um bom trabalho.

3044
02:08:20,160 --> 02:08:22,300
Sempre que me recuso a clicar nas coisas

3045
02:08:22,900 --> 02:08:26,460
isso é apenas baseado em dopamina e clicar apenas em coisas educacionais,

3046
02:08:26,980 --> 02:08:29,000
a recomendação é realmente muito boa.

3047
02:08:29,360 --> 02:08:31,560
Então eu sinto que é solucionável

3048
02:08:32,360 --> 02:08:35,460
problema, pelo menos no espaço da educação, de desafiar a si mesmo,

3049
02:08:36,020 --> 02:08:38,820
mas também expandindo seu domínio de conhecimento e todo esse tipo de coisa.

3050
02:08:38,920 --> 02:08:40,460
E eu estou definitivamente mais no,

3051
02:08:40,460 --> 02:08:45,620
estamos num período inevitavelmente anárquico e necessitamos de grandes ajustes culturais.

3052
02:08:45,780 --> 02:08:48,380
E não há como essa transição não ser difícil.

3053
02:08:49,020 --> 02:08:54,160
Há alguma coisa pequena ou grande específica que você gostaria de ver o X fazer, o Twitter fazer?

3054
02:08:54,720 --> 02:08:56,420
Eu tenho muitos pensamentos sobre isso.

3055
02:08:57,060 --> 02:09:00,180
Com a imprensa e milhões extras de olhos voltados para qualquer problema

3056
02:09:00,420 --> 02:09:01,900
pode destruir qualquer instituição,

3057
02:09:02,140 --> 02:09:03,560
qualquer, qualquer pessoa ou qualquer ideia.

3058
02:09:03,720 --> 02:09:05,020
E isso é bom em alguns aspectos,

3059
02:09:05,040 --> 02:09:07,480
porque muitas instituições medievais precisaram ser demolidas.

3060
02:09:07,540 --> 02:09:08,400
E algumas pessoas também fizeram isso,

3061
02:09:08,540 --> 02:09:10,760
e muitas ideias precisaram ser demolidas.

3062
02:09:11,140 --> 02:09:11,820
A mesma coisa é verdade agora.

3063
02:09:11,900 --> 02:09:16,560
Bilhões extras de olhos voltados para cada problema podem destruir qualquer pessoa, ideia ou instituição.

3064
02:09:17,100 --> 02:09:20,680
E algumas, novamente, algumas dessas coisas precisavam ser demolidas,

3065
02:09:21,160 --> 02:09:22,400
mas ainda não pode ser construído.

3066
02:09:22,600 --> 02:09:23,080
Não estamos no

3067
02:09:23,160 --> 02:09:24,160
estágio que ainda pode ser construído,

3068
02:09:24,340 --> 02:09:26,760
mas nos mostrou quão limitado era nosso conhecimento.

3069
02:09:27,000 --> 02:09:29,480
É uma das razões pelas quais também estamos cientes da crise de replicação.

3070
02:09:29,560 --> 02:09:30,540
É uma das razões pelas quais estamos

3071
02:09:30,600 --> 02:09:33,240
também ciente de quão de má qualidade é nossa pesquisa,

3072
02:09:33,460 --> 02:09:35,940
o quanto nossa classe de especialistas é arrogante

3073
02:09:36,200 --> 02:09:41,920
em muitos casos, mas as pessoas não querem viver num mundo onde não tenham pessoas que

3074
02:09:41,920 --> 02:09:43,600
eles respeitam e podem olhar.

3075
02:09:43,900 --> 02:09:45,480
E eu acho que o que está acontecendo

3076
02:09:46,200 --> 02:09:53,020
possivelmente agora, mas continuará a acontecer se as pessoas se estabelecerem como sendo de alta integridade,

3077
02:09:53,180 --> 02:09:54,240
que eles sempre serão honestos.

3078
02:09:54,260 --> 02:09:57,340
Acho que você está se estabelecendo como alguém de alta integridade,

3079
02:09:57,960 --> 02:09:59,940
onde eles podem confiar nessa pessoa.

3080
02:10:00,060 --> 02:10:01,300
Um fogo quer ser,

3081
02:10:01,740 --> 02:10:03,460
você sabe, a instituição que as pessoas podem frequentar é tipo,

3082
02:10:03,620 --> 02:10:04,420
se for liberdade de expressão,

3083
02:10:04,500 --> 02:10:05,840
vamos defendê-lo, ponto final.

3084
02:10:06,520 --> 02:10:08,740
E eu acho que as pessoas precisam de coisas novas,

3085
02:10:09,720 --> 02:10:12,360
necessitam de autoridades em quem possam realmente confiar.

3086
02:10:12,540 --> 02:10:16,620
E eu acho que se você realmente tivesse uma transmissão que talvez as pessoas pudessem assistir em ação,

3087
02:10:16,660 --> 02:10:18,860
mas não inundar com, você sabe,

3088
02:10:19,440 --> 02:10:21,800
estúpido cancelar coisas culturais ou gato burro significa,

3089
02:10:22,100 --> 02:10:23,240
onde é realmente um sério

3090
02:10:23,240 --> 02:10:24,960
discussão delimitada por regras,

3091
02:10:25,500 --> 02:10:26,740
nenhuma fortaleza retórica perfeita,

3092
02:10:26,900 --> 02:10:30,200
nenhuma fortaleza retórica eficiente, nenhuma das formas idiotas que debatemos.

3093
02:10:30,760 --> 02:10:33,460
Eu acho que você poderia começar a realmente criar algo

3094
02:10:33,460 --> 02:10:38,600
isso poderia realmente ser uma grande melhoria na velocidade com que criamos novos,

3095
02:10:38,700 --> 02:10:41,200
melhores ideias e estabelecer e separar a verdade da falsidade.

3096
02:10:41,960 --> 02:10:42,240
Sim.

3097
02:10:42,460 --> 02:10:43,900
Se for bem feito,

3098
02:10:43,920 --> 02:10:46,880
pode inspirar um grande número de pessoas a se tornarem cada vez mais elevados

3099
02:10:46,900 --> 02:10:51,160
integridade e pode criar integridade como um valor pelo qual lutar.

3100
02:10:51,600 --> 02:10:56,640
Quero dizer, você sabe, houve projetos em toda a Internet que fizeram um

3101
02:10:56,640 --> 02:10:57,540
trabalho incrível disso,

3102
02:10:57,600 --> 02:10:59,220
mas também foram muito falhos.

3103
02:10:59,580 --> 02:11:01,920
Como a Wikipedia é um exemplo de um grande

3104
02:11:01,920 --> 02:11:03,800
avançar ao fazer isso.

3105
02:11:03,840 --> 02:11:04,800
É muito impressionante.

3106
02:11:04,940 --> 02:11:05,880
Qual é a sua opinião geral?

3107
02:11:06,160 --> 02:11:07,600
Quero dizer, estou principalmente impressionado.

3108
02:11:07,780 --> 02:11:09,220
Então, há alguns realmente

3109
02:11:10,080 --> 02:11:11,060
ideias poderosas

3110
02:11:11,600 --> 02:11:13,280
para as pessoas que editam a Wikipédia.

3111
02:11:13,760 --> 02:11:15,300
Um deles é cada

3112
02:11:15,580 --> 02:11:18,740
o editor meio que declara por si mesmo,

3113
02:11:19,040 --> 02:11:19,480
você sabe,

3114
02:11:19,820 --> 02:11:24,340
Eu gosto de política e realmente sou um cara com tendência para a esquerda.

3115
02:11:24,780 --> 02:11:26,460
Então eu realmente não deveria estar editando

3116
02:11:27,140 --> 02:11:29,300
artigos políticos porque tenho preconceito.

3117
02:11:29,420 --> 02:11:31,220
Então eles declaram seus preconceitos

3118
02:11:31,220 --> 02:11:34,020
e muitas vezes fazem um bom trabalho ao declarar os preconceitos,

3119
02:11:34,100 --> 02:11:36,010
mas eles ainda vão gostar,

3120
02:11:36,960 --> 02:11:39,160
eles encontrarão uma maneira de se justificar.

3121
02:11:39,320 --> 02:11:41,440
Como se algo fosse irritá-los e eles quisessem

3122
02:11:41,540 --> 02:11:46,160
corrija-o porque eles adoram corrigir a mentira e transformá-la em verdade.

3123
02:11:46,780 --> 02:11:50,040
Mas a perspectiva do que é verdadeiro ou não é afetada por seu preconceito.

3124
02:11:50,160 --> 02:11:51,280
A verdade é difícil de saber.

3125
02:11:52,100 --> 02:11:56,720
E é verdade que existe um preconceito de esquerda nos editores da Wikipédia.

3126
02:11:57,360 --> 02:11:57,780
Então, para isso,

3127
02:11:58,860 --> 02:12:00,680
o que acontece está nos artigos,

3128
02:12:00,780 --> 02:12:04,360
que eu aprecio principalmente que não tenha uma política

3129
02:12:04,920 --> 02:12:05,860
aspecto para eles,

3130
02:12:06,280 --> 02:12:07,440
você sabe,

3131
02:12:08,100 --> 02:12:11,220
hum, artigos científicos ou artigos técnicos,

3132
02:12:11,840 --> 02:12:13,120
eles serão muito fortes,

3133
02:12:13,300 --> 02:12:17,400
até mesmo história, apenas descrevendo os fatos da história que não possuem um elemento subjetivo,

3134
02:12:18,000 --> 02:12:18,580
ah, forte.

3135
02:12:19,100 --> 02:12:19,280
Também

3136
02:12:19,900 --> 02:12:21,180
apenas usando meu próprio cérebro,

3137
02:12:21,620 --> 02:12:22,980
Eu posso filtrar

3138
02:12:23,580 --> 02:12:24,220
se é,

3139
02:12:24,600 --> 02:12:26,780
uh, você sabe, se for algo sobre 6 de janeiro ou algo assim,

3140
02:12:27,120 --> 02:12:28,000
eu sei que vou

3141
02:12:28,000 --> 02:12:30,200
tipo, eu não sou o que está acontecendo aqui.

3142
02:12:30,280 --> 02:12:32,060
Eu vou meio que ler,

3143
02:12:32,720 --> 02:12:34,320
mas na maioria das vezes vou procurar outras fontes.

3144
02:12:34,320 --> 02:12:36,640
Vou examinar várias perspectivas diferentes sobre isso.

3145
02:12:36,740 --> 02:12:37,820
Vai ser muito tenso.

3146
02:12:38,220 --> 02:12:39,940
Provavelmente haverá algum tipo de preconceito.

3147
02:12:40,000 --> 02:12:43,260
Talvez alguma redação seja tal,

3148
02:12:43,560 --> 02:12:44,180
que é uma palavra.

3149
02:12:44,660 --> 02:12:46,980
É aqui que a Wikipedia faz isso.

3150
02:12:47,540 --> 02:12:50,300
A maneira como eles expressam as coisas será tendenciosa,

3151
02:12:50,700 --> 02:12:51,640
a escolha das palavras,

3152
02:12:52,920 --> 02:12:56,400
mas os próprios editores da Wikipedia são muito auto-reflexivos.

3153
02:12:56,480 --> 02:13:01,020
Eles literalmente têm artigos que descrevem esses mesmos efeitos de como você pode usar

3154
02:13:01,020 --> 02:13:05,800
palavras para injetar preconceito em todas as maneiras como você fala sobre isso.

3155
02:13:05,800 --> 02:13:07,140
Isso é mais saudável do que a maioria dos ambientes.

3156
02:13:07,500 --> 02:13:08,880
É incrivelmente saudável,

3157
02:13:09,200 --> 02:13:10,580
mas acho que você poderia fazer melhor.

3158
02:13:11,000 --> 02:13:12,880
Uma das grandes falhas da Wikipedia para mim,

3159
02:13:13,280 --> 02:13:19,060
O que as notas da comunidade no X têm melhor desempenho é a acessibilidade de se tornar um editor.

3160
02:13:19,560 --> 02:13:24,240
Hum, é difícil se tornar um editor e não é tão visível,

3161
02:13:24,240 --> 02:13:25,380
o processo de edição.

3162
02:13:26,120 --> 02:13:26,820
Então eu adoraria,

3163
02:13:27,140 --> 02:13:36,140
como você disse, um stream, para que todos possam observar esse debate entre as pessoas com integridade de quando discutem coisas como 6 de janeiro,

3164
02:13:36,160 --> 02:13:43,500
um tema muito polêmico para ver como vai o processo do debate em vez de ficar escondido nas sombras,

3165
02:13:43,520 --> 02:13:44,800
que está atualmente na Wikipedia.

3166
02:13:45,060 --> 02:13:45,780
Você pode acessar isso.

3167
02:13:45,820 --> 02:13:47,740
É difícil de acessar, mas,

3168
02:13:48,080 --> 02:13:51,520
e também vi como eles usarão determinados artigos,

3169
02:13:52,680 --> 02:13:53,680
como em certas pessoas,

3170
02:13:54,080 --> 02:14:01,140
como artigos sobre pessoas em quem aprendi a confiar cada vez menos, porque elas literalmente os usarão para fazer ataques pessoais.

3171
02:14:01,160 --> 02:14:02,420
E isso é algo sobre o qual você escreve.

3172
02:14:03,060 --> 02:14:03,660
Eles vão usar,

3173
02:14:04,340 --> 02:14:08,540
uh, descrições de diferentes controvérsias para retratar uma pessoa que é,

3174
02:14:09,840 --> 02:14:12,440
isso não me parece pelo menos uma representação precisa

3175
02:14:12,640 --> 02:14:13,840
da pessoa.

3176
02:14:14,100 --> 02:14:18,240
E é como escrever um artigo sobre Einstein mencionando algo sobre,

3177
02:14:18,760 --> 02:14:22,880
uh, teoria da relatividade e depois dizer que ele era um mulherengo e abusador e um,

3178
02:14:22,880 --> 02:14:27,720
como controvérsia, você sabe, sim, ele também é Feynman,

3179
02:14:27,720 --> 02:14:32,780
você sabe, não, você sabe, foi, você sabe, eles não são exatamente o ser humano perfeito em termos de mulheres,

3180
02:14:33,160 --> 02:14:39,060
mas como há outros aspectos deste humano e para capturá-lo adequadamente,

3181
02:14:39,400 --> 02:14:40,860
há uma certa maneira de fazer isso.

3182
02:14:41,000 --> 02:14:42,820
Acho que a Wikipedia muitas vezes se inclinará.

3183
02:14:43,520 --> 02:14:45,880
Eles realmente tentam ser auto-reflexivos e

3184
02:14:46,880 --> 02:14:47,800
tente parar com isso,

3185
02:14:47,880 --> 02:14:52,040
mas eles se inclinarão para o drama se ele corresponder ao preconceito.

3186
02:14:52,500 --> 02:14:52,940
Mas novamente,

3187
02:14:53,960 --> 02:14:57,040
muito melhor que o mundo, acredito que seja muito melhor.

3188
02:14:58,340 --> 02:14:58,480
Uh,

3189
02:14:58,900 --> 02:14:59,800
porque a Wikipédia existe,

3190
02:15:01,020 --> 02:15:03,660
mas agora que estamos na fase da adolescência,

3191
02:15:03,780 --> 02:15:05,690
estamos crescendo e tentando criar tecnologias diferentes.

3192
02:15:05,980 --> 02:15:08,000
A ideia de um fluxo é realmente,

3193
02:15:08,000 --> 02:15:12,720
realmente interessante à medida que você atrai mais e mais pessoas para esse discurso

3194
02:15:12,940 --> 02:15:14,680
que onde está o valor,

3195
02:15:14,780 --> 02:15:16,120
vamos tentar descobrir a verdade.

3196
02:15:17,080 --> 02:15:17,160
Sim.

3197
02:15:17,420 --> 02:15:17,640
Sim.

3198
02:15:17,640 --> 02:15:19,860
E basicamente, você sabe, você recebe os pequenos cartões para,

3199
02:15:19,980 --> 02:15:21,320
Não, errado, não, errado.

3200
02:15:21,620 --> 02:15:22,400
E o diferente,

3201
02:15:22,720 --> 02:15:25,100
o diferente, as diferentes técnicas retóricas que estão sendo usadas

3202
02:15:25,160 --> 02:15:26,460
para evitar realmente discutir.

3203
02:15:26,500 --> 02:15:26,800
Sim.

3204
02:15:26,880 --> 02:15:29,460
E eu acho que na verdade você pode tornar isso um pouco divertido se você tiver um número limitado

3205
02:15:29,460 --> 02:15:30,220
deles.

3206
02:15:30,220 --> 02:15:32,300
Hum, você sabe, é tipo,

3207
02:15:32,580 --> 02:15:33,940
você ganha três, que tal algumas cartas.

3208
02:15:34,420 --> 02:15:35,420
Então, gamificando tudo.

3209
02:15:35,660 --> 02:15:36,560
Ah, absolutamente.

3210
02:15:36,760 --> 02:15:37,180
Sim.

3211
02:15:37,220 --> 02:15:38,240
Uh, deixe-me perguntar sobre,

3212
02:15:39,460 --> 02:15:42,480
uh, então você mencionou que passou por alguns momentos difíceis em sua vida.

3213
02:15:42,520 --> 02:15:43,560
Hum,

3214
02:15:44,760 --> 02:15:45,740
o que, qual foi o seu

3215
02:15:45,740 --> 02:15:47,980
experiência com, uh, com, com depressão?

3216
02:15:48,460 --> 02:15:50,220
Qual tem sido sua experiência ao sair

3217
02:15:50,220 --> 02:15:51,020
disso, superando isso?

3218
02:15:52,230 --> 02:15:52,380
Sim.

3219
02:15:52,520 --> 02:15:54,840
Quero dizer, a coisa toda, toda a jornada, hum,

3220
02:15:55,240 --> 02:15:56,700
th th th th th th th th th th th

3221
02:15:56,700 --> 02:15:59,600
com mimar a mente americana começou comigo, hum,

3222
02:16:00,240 --> 02:16:02,340
no, no psiquiátrico de Belmont

3223
02:16:02,340 --> 02:16:05,760
instalação na Filadélfia em 2007, eu

3224
02:16:06,380 --> 02:16:09,760
liguei para o 911 em um momento de clareza porque eu

3225
02:16:09,760 --> 02:16:12,620
fui à, uh, loja de ferragens para, para, hum,

3226
02:16:13,740 --> 02:16:14,980
certifique-se de que quando eu me matar,

3227
02:16:14,980 --> 02:16:16,000
que eu, ficou preso.

3228
02:16:16,220 --> 02:16:17,160
Eu queria ter certeza de que eu,

3229
02:16:17,160 --> 02:16:19,160
você sabe, tinha minha cabeça enrolada e tudo mais.

3230
02:16:19,460 --> 02:16:22,000
Então, como se todos os medicamentos que eu planejava tomar não funcionassem,

3231
02:16:22,040 --> 02:16:22,580
que eu não seria capaz

3232
02:16:22,600 --> 02:16:24,360
para abrir caminho para sair.

3233
02:16:25,300 --> 02:16:29,580
Foi um ano muito difícil e sempre tive problemas de depressão,

3234
02:16:29,780 --> 02:16:31,580
hum, mas eles estavam piorando.

3235
02:16:32,280 --> 02:16:34,440
E, francamente, uma das razões pelas quais esta cultura do cancelamento

3236
02:16:34,440 --> 02:16:37,440
coisa é tão, hum, importante para mim é que

3237
02:16:38,820 --> 02:16:40,840
a coisa que eu não enfatizei tanto em mimar

3238
02:16:40,840 --> 02:16:42,080
a mente americana, que, aliás,

3239
02:16:42,760 --> 02:16:44,240
aquela descrição que eu dou de tentar matar

3240
02:16:44,260 --> 02:16:46,740
eu mesmo foi a primeira vez que escrevi isso.

3241
02:16:47,280 --> 02:16:49,240
Ninguém na minha família sabia, hum,

3242
02:16:49,600 --> 02:16:49,780
de como,

3243
02:16:50,220 --> 02:16:51,580
uh, de ser assim.

3244
02:16:51,660 --> 02:16:52,980
Minha esposa nunca tinha visto isso.

3245
02:16:52,980 --> 02:16:55,140
E basicamente a única maneira que consegui escrever isso foi,

3246
02:16:55,280 --> 02:16:57,640
fazendo, você sabe, como você pode se enganar.

3247
02:16:58,240 --> 02:16:59,840
Se, hum, e eu estivesse tipo,

3248
02:17:00,140 --> 02:17:03,880
Vou me convencer de que isso é só entre mim e meu computador e ninguém vai ver.

3249
02:17:03,880 --> 02:17:05,760
E provavelmente não é a coisa mais pública que já escrevi.

3250
02:17:06,960 --> 02:17:12,840
Hum, mas o que eu não enfatizei foi o quanto a guerra cultural influenciou o quão deprimido eu fiquei,

3251
02:17:13,040 --> 02:17:14,180
porque eu era originalmente

3252
02:17:14,200 --> 02:17:15,140
o diretor jurídico do fogo.

3253
02:17:15,360 --> 02:17:17,220
Então me tornei presidente dos bombeiros em 2005,

3254
02:17:17,960 --> 02:17:19,680
mudei para a Filadélfia é onde fico deprimido.

3255
02:17:19,680 --> 02:17:23,360
Hum, e, uh, apenas, eu não tenho família lá.

3256
02:17:23,580 --> 02:17:24,720
Há algo sobre a cidade.

3257
02:17:24,820 --> 02:17:26,060
Eles não parecem gostar muito de mim.

3258
02:17:26,480 --> 02:17:27,120
Hum,

3259
02:17:27,540 --> 02:17:28,480
mas o principal

3260
02:17:28,480 --> 02:17:29,880
estava no mundo da cultura o tempo todo.

3261
02:17:29,920 --> 02:17:32,400
Hum, havia uma garota com quem eu estava namorando.

3262
02:17:32,740 --> 02:17:33,190
Hum,

3263
02:17:33,540 --> 02:17:36,260
Eu lembro, você sabe, ela não pareceu realmente aprovar o que eu fiz.

3264
02:17:36,280 --> 02:17:36,940
E muitas pessoas

3265
02:17:36,940 --> 02:17:37,940
realmente não parecia.

3266
02:17:38,220 --> 02:17:41,220
E enquanto isso, como se eu estivesse defendendo as pessoas da esquerda o tempo todo

3267
02:17:41,400 --> 02:17:43,080
tempo e eles diriam,

3268
02:17:43,080 --> 02:17:44,300
Ah, que bom que você está defendendo alguém no

3269
02:17:44,300 --> 02:17:46,960
esquerda, mas eles nunca me perdoariam por defender alguém da direita.

3270
02:17:47,260 --> 02:17:49,560
E lembro-me de dizer em que ponto eu sou,

3271
02:17:49,680 --> 02:17:52,220
ouça, eu sou um verdadeiro crente nessas coisas.

3272
02:17:52,280 --> 02:17:53,500
Estou disposto a defender os nazistas.

3273
02:17:54,020 --> 02:17:55,430
Certamente estou disposto a defender os republicanos.

3274
02:17:56,420 --> 02:17:57,880
E ela realmente disse:

3275
02:17:57,880 --> 02:17:59,380
Acho que os republicanos podem ser piores.

3276
02:18:00,040 --> 02:18:00,740
Hum,

3277
02:18:01,080 --> 02:18:03,640
e isso não aconteceu, esse relacionamento não foi muito bem.

3278
02:18:04,000 --> 02:18:06,640
E então quase tive brigas algumas vezes com,

3279
02:18:06,640 --> 02:18:07,420
com pessoas no

3280
02:18:07,440 --> 02:18:07,760
certo.

3281
02:18:08,040 --> 02:18:11,500
Hum, porque descobriram que eu defendia pessoas que faziam piadas sobre o 11 de Setembro.

3282
02:18:11,680 --> 02:18:13,240
Como se isso tivesse acontecido mais de uma vez.

3283
02:18:13,580 --> 02:18:15,500
E isso, você sabe, quando eu tiver vinte e poucos anos,

3284
02:18:15,580 --> 02:18:16,840
Não vou brigar de novo.

3285
02:18:17,820 --> 02:18:20,060
Hum, mas sim, sempre foi assim.

3286
02:18:20,120 --> 02:18:22,040
Você, você, você vê como as pessoas hipócritas

3287
02:18:22,040 --> 02:18:22,640
pode ser.

3288
02:18:22,740 --> 02:18:26,780
Você pode ver como os amigos podem se voltar contra você se não gostarem da sua política.

3289
02:18:27,120 --> 02:18:29,220
Então eu tive uma prévia disso,

3290
02:18:29,300 --> 02:18:33,460
de, de, de qual cultura estamos caminhando por sermos o

3291
02:18:33,480 --> 02:18:34,300
presidente do fogo.

3292
02:18:34,360 --> 02:18:35,340
E foi exaustivo.

3293
02:18:36,460 --> 02:18:39,500
Hum, e essa foi uma das coisas principais

3294
02:18:39,500 --> 02:18:40,560
que me levou a ser,

3295
02:18:40,560 --> 02:18:41,720
você sabe, suicidamente deprimido,

3296
02:18:42,480 --> 02:18:44,180
uh, no centro de Belmont.

3297
02:18:44,240 --> 02:18:48,420
Se você me dissesse que isso seria o começo de uma vida nova e melhor para mim,

3298
02:18:48,740 --> 02:18:50,260
Eu teria rido se pudesse,

3299
02:18:50,600 --> 02:18:51,940
mas eu gostaria, você sabe, eu não gosto,

3300
02:18:52,360 --> 02:18:53,540
você pode dizer que estou bem se ainda estiver rindo.

3301
02:18:54,220 --> 02:18:54,800
E eu não estava rindo,

3302
02:18:55,280 --> 02:18:56,280
hum, nesse ponto.

3303
02:18:57,000 --> 02:19:01,880
Então, hum, procurei um médico e comecei a fazer terapia cognitivo-comportamental.

3304
02:19:02,280 --> 02:19:07,480
Comecei a ter todas essas vozes na minha cabeça que estavam catastrofizando e,

3305
02:19:08,160 --> 02:19:10,100
hum, você sabe, isso me deu uma surpresa,

3306
02:19:10,140 --> 02:19:16,900
sobre generalização e, hum, uh, adivinhação, você sabe, uh, leitura mental de todas essas coisas que eles ensinam você a não fazer.

3307
02:19:17,580 --> 02:19:18,200
E isso,

3308
02:19:18,580 --> 02:19:25,720
uh, e o que eles fazem na TCC é essencialmente que você tem algo que te deixa chateado e então você simplesmente

3309
02:19:25,720 --> 02:19:27,020
escreva qual foi o pensamento.

3310
02:19:27,160 --> 02:19:29,920
Hum, e você sabe, algo menor pode acontecer no seu

3311
02:19:29,940 --> 02:19:31,880
a resposta foi, você sabe, tipo, hum,

3312
02:19:32,440 --> 02:19:32,600
bem,

3313
02:19:33,300 --> 02:19:34,780
o encontro não parecia ter corrido muito bem.

3314
02:19:34,920 --> 02:19:37,540
Hum, e isso é porque estou quebrado e morreremos sozinhos.

3315
02:19:37,640 --> 02:19:39,200
E você fica tipo, ok, ok, ok.

3316
02:19:39,280 --> 02:19:40,860
O que, o que, quais são os seguintes,

3317
02:19:40,860 --> 02:19:45,240
você sabe, isso é catastrofização, isso é leitura de mentes, isso é adivinhação, isso é tudo isso.

3318
02:19:45,820 --> 02:19:48,520
Hum, e você tem que fazer isso várias vezes ao dia

3319
02:19:49,400 --> 02:19:49,740
para sempre.

3320
02:19:49,820 --> 02:19:51,580
Na verdade, preciso atualizar isso no momento.

3321
02:19:51,580 --> 02:19:52,300
Hum,

3322
02:19:52,780 --> 02:19:54,840
e lentamente acabou

3323
02:19:54,860 --> 02:19:58,880
vozes do tempo na minha cabeça que diziam coisas horríveis, você sabe,

3324
02:19:59,200 --> 02:19:59,960
conversa interna horrível,

3325
02:20:00,640 --> 02:20:02,380
simplesmente não parecia mais tão convincente,

3326
02:20:02,860 --> 02:20:05,240
que foi realmente um efeito sutil.

3327
02:20:05,300 --> 02:20:06,200
Como se fosse tipo,

3328
02:20:06,260 --> 02:20:09,000
ah, espere, eu não acredito que estou quebrado.

3329
02:20:09,440 --> 02:20:11,100
Você sabe, isso não parece verdade.

3330
02:20:11,340 --> 02:20:14,380
Isso não soa como a verdade de Deus como costumava ser.

3331
02:20:15,380 --> 02:20:18,020
E nove meses depois que eu estava

3332
02:20:19,000 --> 02:20:19,940
planejando me matar,

3333
02:20:19,960 --> 02:20:22,060
Eu provavelmente estava mais feliz do que estive em uma década.

3334
02:20:22,940 --> 02:20:26,140
Hum, e essa foi uma das coisas que,

3335
02:20:26,380 --> 02:20:30,660
você sabe, que o TCC foi o que me levou a perceber isso no meu próprio trabalho,

3336
02:20:30,680 --> 02:20:32,120
que parecia que os administradores estavam

3337
02:20:32,760 --> 02:20:34,840
meio que vendendo distorções cognitivas,

3338
02:20:34,940 --> 02:20:36,080
mas os alunos ainda não estavam comprando.

3339
02:20:36,140 --> 02:20:40,040
E então, quando comecei a perceber que eles pareciam já acreditar em muitas dessas coisas,

3340
02:20:40,040 --> 02:20:41,080
que seria muito perigoso.

3341
02:20:41,080 --> 02:20:43,620
E isso levou a mimar a mente americana e tudo mais.

3342
02:20:44,640 --> 02:20:48,500
Mas o que foi difícil em escrever Hansling sobre a mente americana,

3343
02:20:48,540 --> 02:20:50,440
Eu já teria mencionado isso algumas vezes,

3344
02:20:50,720 --> 02:20:52,520
Fiquei muito deprimido no ano passado,

3345
02:20:52,900 --> 02:20:54,060
hum, porque eu estava estudando,

3346
02:20:54,400 --> 02:20:56,180
você sabe, tem um amigo aí

3347
02:20:56,180 --> 02:20:58,740
que falei sobre quem se matou após ser cancelado.

3348
02:20:58,900 --> 02:21:00,020
Falei com ele uma semana antes

3349
02:21:00,020 --> 02:21:01,900
ele se matou e eu não tinha, hum,

3350
02:21:03,120 --> 02:21:04,960
Na verdade, eu não tinha conversado com ele porque

3351
02:21:04,960 --> 02:21:06,000
ele parecia tão confiante.

3352
02:21:06,000 --> 02:21:08,140
Eu pensei que estaria tudo bem porque ele, ele

3353
02:21:08,800 --> 02:21:11,780
teve um tweet insensível em junho de 2020 e,

3354
02:21:11,940 --> 02:21:13,640
você sabe, fui forçado a sair

3355
02:21:14,220 --> 02:21:15,320
de uma forma que na verdade não

3356
02:21:15,320 --> 02:21:16,940
soar tão ruim quanto muitos outros professores.

3357
02:21:16,940 --> 02:21:18,280
Na verdade, ele pelo menos recebeu um pacote de indenização,

3358
02:21:18,440 --> 02:21:20,100
então eles sabiam que ele iria processar e ganhar, hum,

3359
02:21:20,620 --> 02:21:21,400
porque ele tinha antes.

3360
02:21:22,360 --> 02:21:26,200
E então eu esperei para ver como ele estava porque estávamos tão sobrecarregados com o pedido de

3361
02:21:26,200 --> 02:21:26,380
ajuda.

3362
02:21:26,380 --> 02:21:29,180
E ele estava dizendo que as pessoas ainda vinham à sua casa.

3363
02:21:29,360 --> 02:21:31,260
E então ele se matou na semana seguinte.

3364
02:21:31,420 --> 02:21:36,360
E eu definitivamente, e porque todo mundo sabe que sou tão público sobre minhas lutas com essas coisas,

3365
02:21:37,280 --> 02:21:37,620
todo mundo

3366
02:21:38,240 --> 02:21:41,040
quem luta contra essas coisas vem até mim quando está passando por momentos difíceis.

3367
02:21:41,100 --> 02:21:45,780
E este é um negócio psicologicamente muito difícil de se estar.

3368
02:21:45,920 --> 02:21:47,400
E mesmo admitindo isso agora,

3369
02:21:48,840 --> 02:21:50,240
como eu penso em como todos os,

3370
02:21:50,240 --> 02:21:51,180
todos os abutres lá fora,

3371
02:21:51,200 --> 02:21:52,080
eles vão se divertir com isso.

3372
02:21:52,120 --> 02:21:53,140
Da mesma forma quando,

3373
02:21:53,140 --> 02:21:54,400
quando, quando meu amigo Mike Adams se matou,

3374
02:21:54,580 --> 02:21:56,480
havia pessoas que comemoravam no Twitter,

3375
02:21:56,560 --> 02:21:58,620
hum, isso, que um homem estava morto,

3376
02:21:59,400 --> 02:22:01,420
uh, porque eles não gostaram dos tweets dele.

3377
02:22:02,240 --> 02:22:06,640
E, mas de alguma forma isso os tornou compassivos por alguma outra pessoa abstrata.

3378
02:22:07,420 --> 02:22:09,080
Então eu estava ficando um pouco deprimido e ansioso.

3379
02:22:09,160 --> 02:22:13,560
E o que realmente me ajudou mais do que qualquer outra coisa, hum,

3380
02:22:14,420 --> 02:22:16,200
estava confessando para minha equipe

3381
02:22:17,070 --> 02:22:18,220
que eu,

3382
02:22:18,560 --> 02:22:19,080
você me conhece,

3383
02:22:19,580 --> 02:22:20,660
Eu, os livros consomem muita energia.

3384
02:22:20,820 --> 02:22:22,520
Então eu sabia que eles não queriam ouvir isso.

3385
02:22:22,620 --> 02:22:24,920
Isso não só estava tomando muito tempo do chefe,

3386
02:22:25,400 --> 02:22:26,660
isso o estava deixando deprimido e ansioso.

3387
02:22:26,820 --> 02:22:29,860
Mas quando finalmente contei à liderança da minha equipe,

3388
02:22:29,940 --> 02:22:32,860
hum, você sabe, pessoas que, embora eu tente manter

3389
02:22:32,860 --> 02:22:33,820
muita distância de,

3390
02:22:34,220 --> 02:22:36,340
Eu amo muito, muito, hum, isso fez

3391
02:22:36,860 --> 02:22:37,440
tanta diferença,

3392
02:22:37,920 --> 02:22:40,000
você sabe, hum, porque eu poderia ser aberto sobre isso.

3393
02:22:40,180 --> 02:22:41,880
E a outra coisa foi,

3394
02:22:41,960 --> 02:22:43,260
você já ouviu esse diálogo da conferência?

3395
02:22:43,720 --> 02:22:44,160
Oh sim.

3396
02:22:44,420 --> 02:22:45,760
É como uma coisa apenas para convidados.

3397
02:22:46,060 --> 02:22:47,500
É Orrin Hoffman, hum,

3398
02:22:48,100 --> 02:22:48,440
executa.

3399
02:22:48,880 --> 02:22:50,440
Hum, ele intencionalmente tenta obter

3400
02:22:50,460 --> 02:22:51,880
pessoas de todo o espectro político,

3401
02:22:51,880 --> 02:22:53,140
hum, para nos unirmos,

3402
02:22:53,700 --> 02:22:56,200
uh, e ter conversas não oficiais sobre grandes questões.

3403
02:22:57,160 --> 02:23:01,360
E foi bom estar numa sala onde os conservadores liberais,

3404
02:23:01,800 --> 02:23:02,600
nenhuma das acima,

3405
02:23:02,740 --> 02:23:05,180
todos nós pensamos, ah, graças a Deus, alguém adotou a cultura do cancelamento.

3406
02:23:05,260 --> 02:23:06,640
E onde parecia, eu

3407
02:23:07,440 --> 02:23:08,580
senti como se talvez

3408
02:23:09,200 --> 02:23:13,000
isso não será o desastre para mim e minha família que eu fui,

3409
02:23:13,000 --> 02:23:14,700
que eu estava começando a ter medo.

3410
02:23:14,840 --> 02:23:17,700
Seria que assumir as coisas poderia realmente ter um final feliz.

3411
02:23:18,160 --> 02:23:20,600
Bem, uma coisa que me destaca disso

3412
02:23:23,540 --> 02:23:29,200
é que a dor do cancelamento pode ser muito intensa.

3413
02:23:29,620 --> 02:23:33,480
E isso não significa necessariamente perder o emprego, mas apenas,

3414
02:23:34,000 --> 02:23:36,040
você pode chamar isso de bullying, você pode chamar qualquer nome,

3415
02:23:36,480 --> 02:23:39,120
mas apenas algumas pessoas na Internet.

3416
02:23:40,060 --> 02:23:43,360
E esse número pode ser um pequeno tipo de ditado

3417
02:23:44,540 --> 02:23:45,820
coisas ruins para você.

3418
02:23:45,820 --> 02:23:46,000
Sim.

3419
02:23:46,500 --> 02:23:49,540
Isso pode ser uma força muito poderosa para a psique humana,

3420
02:23:49,540 --> 02:23:51,160
o que é, mas foi muito surpreendente.

3421
02:23:51,600 --> 02:23:53,620
E então o outro lado disso também,

3422
02:23:54,300 --> 02:23:56,960
hum, isso realmente me faz

3423
02:23:56,960 --> 02:23:58,900
triste como as pessoas podem ser cruéis.

3424
02:23:59,360 --> 02:24:00,400
É tal,

3425
02:24:00,900 --> 02:24:05,680
pensar que a sua causa é uma justiça social em muitos casos pode levar

3426
02:24:05,680 --> 02:24:09,520
as pessoas pensem que posso ser tão cruel quanto quiser na busca por isso.

3427
02:24:09,840 --> 02:24:10,560
Quando isso, muitas vezes

3428
02:24:10,740 --> 02:24:18,280
é apenas uma forma de desabafar alguma agressão sobre uma pessoa que você considera apenas uma abstração.

3429
02:24:18,980 --> 02:24:23,120
Então eu acho que é importante que as pessoas percebam que elas são o que quer que seja,

3430
02:24:23,820 --> 02:24:24,860
como qualquer coisa,

3431
02:24:27,060 --> 02:24:31,100
qualquer energia negativa, qualquer negatividade que você queira espalhar,

3432
02:24:31,920 --> 02:24:33,140
como se houvesse pessoas reais

3433
02:24:33,140 --> 02:24:34,060
isso pode se machucar.

3434
02:24:34,340 --> 02:24:37,060
Como se você pudesse realmente conquistar as pessoas,

3435
02:24:37,740 --> 02:24:40,180
hum, para ser a pior versão de

3436
02:24:40,300 --> 02:24:42,100
ou possivelmente tirar a própria vida.

3437
02:24:42,220 --> 02:24:43,600
E não é

3438
02:24:44,540 --> 02:24:45,060
tão real.

3439
02:24:45,880 --> 02:24:47,740
Sim. Bem, essa é uma das coisas que fazemos no livro,

3440
02:24:47,740 --> 02:24:54,560
hum, para realmente nos dirigirmos às pessoas que ainda tentam afirmar que isso não é real, basta citar,

3441
02:24:55,500 --> 02:24:56,220
citamos o Papa,

3442
02:24:56,540 --> 02:24:57,280
citamos Obama,

3443
02:24:57,640 --> 02:24:58,680
citamos James Carville,

3444
02:24:58,920 --> 02:25:01,000
citamos Taylor Swift sobre a cultura do cancelamento.

3445
02:25:01,780 --> 02:25:03,840
Tipo, hum, e a citação suíça de Taylor é,

3446
02:25:04,020 --> 02:25:05,820
é essencialmente sobre como por trás de tudo

3447
02:25:05,820 --> 02:25:07,800
isso, há o, quando fica particularmente desagradável,

3448
02:25:07,800 --> 02:25:09,880
isso é muito claro, você sabe,

3449
02:25:10,440 --> 02:25:12,860
mate-se como uma espécie de tendência subjacente a isso.

3450
02:25:13,280 --> 02:25:14,580
Hum, e é,

3451
02:25:14,960 --> 02:25:15,560
é cruel.

3452
02:25:16,280 --> 02:25:20,360
E o problema é que num ambiente tão aberto,

3453
02:25:20,700 --> 02:25:22,220
sempre haverá

3454
02:25:22,240 --> 02:25:26,560
alguém que quer ser tão transgressor e dizer o que mais magoa, você sabe,

3455
02:25:26,980 --> 02:25:27,460
coisa terrível.

3456
02:25:27,900 --> 02:25:30,660
Mas então você tem que se lembrar da deturpação,

3457
02:25:30,780 --> 02:25:31,820
voltando aos velhos idiomas,

3458
02:25:32,500 --> 02:25:33,980
paus e pedras quebrarão meus ossos,

3459
02:25:34,120 --> 02:25:35,920
mas os nomes nunca, nunca me magoarão.

3460
02:25:36,260 --> 02:25:37,860
Foi

3461
02:25:38,560 --> 02:25:42,940
re-imaginado nos debates no campus da maneira mais estúpida.

3462
02:25:43,240 --> 02:25:44,960
As pessoas vão literalmente dizer coisas como,

3463
02:25:45,240 --> 02:25:46,600
mas agora sabemos que as palavras podem machucar.

3464
02:25:46,880 --> 02:25:49,080
E é como se agora sabemos que as palavras podem machucar.

3465
02:25:49,430 --> 02:25:50,180
Pessoal,

3466
02:25:50,640 --> 02:25:55,420
você não precisava inventar uma coisinha especial para ensinar as crianças a fazer

3467
02:25:55,420 --> 02:25:56,460
suas palavras doem menos.

3468
02:25:56,600 --> 02:25:57,920
Se eles nunca machucaram em primeiro lugar,

3469
02:25:57,940 --> 02:25:58,960
nem faria sentido.

3470
02:25:59,380 --> 02:26:03,980
O ditado é um ditado que você repete para si mesmo para se fortalecer.

3471
02:26:04,220 --> 02:26:07,180
Quando os valentões perceberem que você é um pouco estranho,

3472
02:26:07,440 --> 02:26:08,880
talvez um pouco pessoal,

3473
02:26:09,400 --> 02:26:10,340
hum, o,

3474
02:26:10,800 --> 02:26:11,820
ah, e isso ajuda.

3475
02:26:12,160 --> 02:26:14,140
Realmente ajuda ser tipo,

3476
02:26:14,160 --> 02:26:16,460
escute, ok, idiotas vão dizer coisas idiotas.

3477
02:26:17,000 --> 02:26:20,260
Hum, e não posso permitir que eles tenham esse tipo de poder sobre mim.

3478
02:26:20,560 --> 02:26:20,840
Sim.

3479
02:26:21,580 --> 02:26:22,020
Sim.

3480
02:26:22,060 --> 02:26:24,400
Ainda é uma experiência de aprendizado porque,

3481
02:26:24,720 --> 02:26:25,880
faz, dói.

3482
02:26:26,280 --> 02:26:28,420
Mas para as pessoas boas que na verdade,

3483
02:26:28,420 --> 02:26:30,560
você sabe, às vezes penso, acho que eles estão desabafando,

3484
02:26:30,680 --> 02:26:31,680
você sabe, pense sobre isso.

3485
02:26:31,700 --> 02:26:33,560
Lembre-se de que existem pessoas do outro lado.

3486
02:26:35,100 --> 02:26:35,240
Sim.

3487
02:26:35,240 --> 02:26:37,620
Para mim, isso fere meu tipo de fé na humanidade.

3488
02:26:38,070 --> 02:26:39,160
Hum, eu sei que não deveria,

3489
02:26:39,160 --> 02:26:39,980
mas às vezes acontece

3490
02:26:40,620 --> 02:26:41,800
quando eu apenas vejo as pessoas sendo

3491
02:26:41,860 --> 02:26:43,120
legais um com o outro, é meio que,

3492
02:26:44,700 --> 02:26:45,200
isso é,

3493
02:26:45,800 --> 02:26:46,620
ah, ele flutua

3494
02:26:47,620 --> 02:26:49,940
uma nuvem sobre minha perspectiva do mundo.

3495
02:26:50,360 --> 02:26:52,820
E isso não, eu gostaria de não ter que estar lá.

3496
02:26:53,280 --> 02:26:53,340
Sim.

3497
02:26:53,340 --> 02:26:55,000
Esse sempre foi o meu tipo de irreverência,

3498
02:26:55,120 --> 02:26:56,960
mas, uh, responda a isso.

3499
02:26:57,180 --> 02:27:02,660
Se, se a humanidade é basicamente boa ou basicamente má, sendo o maior debate em,

3500
02:27:02,660 --> 02:27:04,200
em, em filosofia e sendo como,

3501
02:27:04,500 --> 02:27:06,440
bem, o problema com, uh, o primeiro é que há

3502
02:27:06,440 --> 02:27:08,080
nada básico sobre a humanidade.

3503
02:27:09,460 --> 02:27:09,800
Sim.

3504
02:27:09,940 --> 02:27:12,600
O que lhe dá esperança sobre tudo isso,

3505
02:27:12,720 --> 02:27:16,080
sobre esse estado sombrio em que estamos

3506
02:27:16,080 --> 02:27:18,440
entrar, como você descreve, como podemos sair?

3507
02:27:18,460 --> 02:27:20,480
O que lhe dá esperança de que sairemos?

3508
02:27:21,300 --> 02:27:23,460
Acho que as pessoas estão cansadas disso.

3509
02:27:24,020 --> 02:27:26,280
Hum, acho que as pessoas estão cansadas de

3510
02:27:27,080 --> 02:27:28,620
não ser capaz de ser autêntico.

3511
02:27:28,790 --> 02:27:31,600
Hum, e isso é realmente, você sabe, o que é censura.

3512
02:27:31,780 --> 02:27:32,620
Basicamente está dizendo a você,

3513
02:27:32,760 --> 02:27:33,140
não seja você mesmo.

3514
02:27:33,420 --> 02:27:35,380
Na verdade, não diga o que você pensa.

3515
02:27:35,900 --> 02:27:37,360
Hum, não mostre sua personalidade.

3516
02:27:37,520 --> 02:27:38,280
Não discorde.

3517
02:27:38,500 --> 02:27:39,120
Não seja estranho.

3518
02:27:39,140 --> 02:27:39,840
Não se engane.

3519
02:27:40,800 --> 02:27:42,020
Hum, e isso não é sustentável.

3520
02:27:42,460 --> 02:27:43,120
eu penso isso

3521
02:27:44,400 --> 02:27:45,940
as pessoas meio que estão fartas disso.

3522
02:27:46,050 --> 02:27:50,460
Uh, mas uma coisa que eu definitivamente quero dizer ao seu público é

3523
02:27:51,140 --> 02:27:53,680
não pode ser simplesmente

3524
02:27:53,680 --> 02:27:58,080
cabe a nós, nossos espectadores, tentar consertar isso.

3525
02:27:58,760 --> 02:28:00,360
Hum, e eu acho que,

3526
02:28:00,760 --> 02:28:03,280
e isso pode parecer um problema não relacionado.

3527
02:28:03,880 --> 02:28:05,240
Eu acho que se houvesse

3528
02:28:06,220 --> 02:28:07,440
Altamente respeitável,

3529
02:28:07,760 --> 02:28:11,180
digamos maneiras extremamente difíceis de provar isso

3530
02:28:11,180 --> 02:28:14,260
você é extremamente inteligente e trabalhador que custa pouco ou nada,

3531
02:28:15,360 --> 02:28:16,540
isso realmente pode dar

3532
02:28:17,660 --> 02:28:20,680
os de Harvard e os de Yale do mundo a correrem pelo seu dinheiro.

3533
02:28:20,780 --> 02:28:23,840
Acho que essa pode ser a coisa mais positiva que poderíamos fazer para,

3534
02:28:23,840 --> 02:28:24,580
para, para lidar com muitos

3535
02:28:24,580 --> 02:28:28,700
estes problemas e por que penso que o facto de nos termos tornado

3536
02:28:29,320 --> 02:28:31,440
uma América estranha com um grande

3537
02:28:31,660 --> 02:28:35,060
a tradição antielitista tornou-se estranhamente elitista nisso,

3538
02:28:35,340 --> 02:28:36,640
em, hum, no respeito que

3539
02:28:36,640 --> 02:28:38,300
nós não apenas novamente,

3540
02:28:38,320 --> 02:28:41,920
nossa liderança vem dessas poucas escolas sofisticadas,

3541
02:28:42,480 --> 02:28:44,380
na verdade, temos uma grande admiração por eles.

3542
02:28:44,520 --> 02:28:45,700
Nós meio que os admiramos,

3543
02:28:46,020 --> 02:28:47,340
mas acho que teríamos muito

3544
02:28:47,340 --> 02:28:49,740
mais saudável de uma sociedade se as pessoas pudessem provar,

3545
02:28:50,380 --> 02:28:52,480
você sabe, sua excelência em maneiras que são

3546
02:28:52,480 --> 02:28:54,600
vindo de fluxos completamente diferentes e,

3547
02:28:54,840 --> 02:28:56,040
e isso, isso, isso são altamente respeitados.

3548
02:28:56,140 --> 02:28:56,960
Às vezes eu falo sobre,

3549
02:28:57,340 --> 02:29:00,540
deveria haver um teste em que qualquer um que passasse ficasse como um,

3550
02:29:00,900 --> 02:29:01,120
você sabe,

3551
02:29:01,580 --> 02:29:05,260
um bacharelado em humanidades que é como um super bacharelado,

3552
02:29:06,020 --> 02:29:06,480
como algo,

3553
02:29:06,860 --> 02:29:08,000
como alguém, não um GED.

3554
02:29:08,100 --> 02:29:09,040
Não é disso que estou falando.

3555
02:29:09,180 --> 02:29:10,500
Estou falando de algo como,

3556
02:29:11,580 --> 02:29:13,380
você sabe, um entre apenas alguns,

3557
02:29:13,500 --> 02:29:16,860
como se cem pessoas pudessem passar por algum outro caminho, na verdade, hum,

3558
02:29:17,220 --> 02:29:21,160
uh, de não passar por essas instituições enormes e caras que as pessoas

3559
02:29:21,160 --> 02:29:22,240
podem levantar as mãos e dizer:

3560
02:29:22,240 --> 02:29:23,140
Sou inteligente e trabalhador.

3561
02:29:23,700 --> 02:29:26,340
Acho que essa poderia ser uma maneira incrivelmente saudável.

3562
02:29:26,600 --> 02:29:29,740
Acho que precisamos de fluxos adicionais para que pessoas criativas resolvam problemas,

3563
02:29:29,820 --> 02:29:31,400
seja no X ou em outro lugar.

3564
02:29:32,080 --> 02:29:35,720
Hum, acho que há muitas coisas que a tecnologia poderia fazer para realmente ajudar

3565
02:29:35,720 --> 02:29:35,940
esse.

3566
02:29:36,160 --> 02:29:38,580
Acho que algumas das coisas em que Sal Khan está trabalhando,

3567
02:29:38,920 --> 02:29:40,020
uh, a Khan Academy pode realmente ajudar.

3568
02:29:40,720 --> 02:29:42,380
Hum, então acho que há muitas maneiras,

3569
02:29:42,480 --> 02:29:45,980
mas eles existem principalmente para criar novas maneiras de fazer as coisas,

3570
02:29:46,120 --> 02:29:49,220
não apenas esperando as coisas antigas que dizem

3571
02:29:50,140 --> 02:29:51,860
US$ 40 bilhões no banco

3572
02:29:52,440 --> 02:29:53,900
que eles vão se reformar.

3573
02:29:54,180 --> 02:29:56,600
E aqui está o meu, você sabe, tenho implicado muito com Harvard,

3574
02:29:56,660 --> 02:29:57,700
mas vou mexer um pouco mais com eles.

3575
02:29:58,580 --> 02:29:58,660
Hum,

3576
02:29:59,180 --> 02:30:02,380
o, e, e, uh, eu falo muito sobre aula de novo,

3577
02:30:02,640 --> 02:30:05,380
e você sabe, há um ótimo livro chamado Poison Ivy,

3578
02:30:05,380 --> 02:30:07,880
hum, de Evan Mandry, que recomendo a todos.

3579
02:30:07,880 --> 02:30:08,740
E é ultrajante.

3580
02:30:08,780 --> 02:30:10,280
Parece que eu e um discurso retórico em Stanford,

3581
02:30:10,760 --> 02:30:14,620
hum, que foi, uh, e eu, e acho que o status, você sabe,

3582
02:30:15,080 --> 02:30:17,020
o ensino superior de elite tem mais crianças de

3583
02:30:17,020 --> 02:30:21,780
o 1% superior do que os 50 ou 60% inferiores, dependendo da escola.

3584
02:30:22,580 --> 02:30:27,000
Hum, e quando você olha o quanto eles realmente gostam de replicar privilégios de classe,

3585
02:30:27,160 --> 02:30:28,640
é, é realmente angustiante.

3586
02:30:28,840 --> 02:30:30,300
Então todo mundo deveria ler Hera Venenosa.

3587
02:30:31,300 --> 02:30:32,280
E acima de tudo,

3588
02:30:32,480 --> 02:30:35,580
uh, se você é estranho, continue sendo estranho.

3589
02:30:37,620 --> 02:30:39,760
E você é um dos mais interessantes,

3590
02:30:39,800 --> 02:30:41,560
um dos mais estranhos no mais bonito

3591
02:30:41,560 --> 02:30:42,940
maneira como as pessoas já se conheceram.

3592
02:30:43,000 --> 02:30:45,580
Greg, obrigado pelo trabalho realmente importante que você faz.

3593
02:30:46,300 --> 02:30:48,820
Isto foi, isto é

3594
02:30:51,960 --> 02:30:55,220
agradeço a aula, toda a área que você trouxe aqui hoje,

3595
02:30:55,220 --> 02:30:55,600
homem.

3596
02:30:55,600 --> 02:30:57,280
Hum, esta é uma conversa incrível.

3597
02:30:57,540 --> 02:30:58,540
Obrigado pelo trabalho que você faz.

3598
02:30:59,140 --> 02:30:59,840
Obrigado.

3599
02:30:59,860 --> 02:31:00,200
Obrigado.

3600
02:31:00,760 --> 02:31:04,260
E para mim, que me preocupo profundamente com a educação, o ensino superior,

3601
02:31:04,620 --> 02:31:08,520
obrigado por responsabilizar os MITs e Harvard,

3602
02:31:09,080 --> 02:31:09,980
ah, para, hum,

3603
02:31:10,620 --> 02:31:12,020
fazendo o certo pelas pessoas que

3604
02:31:12,620 --> 02:31:13,420
andar pelos seus corredores.

3605
02:31:13,600 --> 02:31:15,480
Então, muito obrigado por falar comigo.

3606
02:31:16,040 --> 02:31:20,260
Obrigado por ouvir esta conversa com Greg Lukianoff para apoiar este podcast.

3607
02:31:20,680 --> 02:31:22,520
Confira nossos patrocinadores na descrição.

3608
02:31:22,660 --> 02:31:25,760
E agora deixem-me deixar-vos algumas palavras de Noam Chomsky.

3609
02:31:27,000 --> 02:31:28,520
Se você acredita na liberdade de expressão,

3610
02:31:29,220 --> 02:31:31,440
você acredita na liberdade de expressão para opiniões, você não

3611
02:31:32,400 --> 02:31:34,060
como. Gables era a favor

3612
02:31:34,060 --> 02:31:36,020
de liberdade de expressão para opiniões que ele gostava.

3613
02:31:36,640 --> 02:31:37,360
O mesmo aconteceu com Stálin.

3614
02:31:38,060 --> 02:31:39,700
Se você é a favor da liberdade de expressão,

3615
02:31:40,180 --> 02:31:44,330
isso significa que você é a favor da liberdade de expressão precisamente para pontos de vista que você despreza.

3616
02:31:45,800 --> 02:31:48,620
Obrigado por ouvir e espero vê-lo na próxima vez.

Spanish transcription text:

GREG: Si el objetivo es el proyecto del conocimiento humano, que es conocer el mundo que es, no se puede conocer el mundo tal como es sin saber lo que la gente realmente piensa. Y lo que la gente realmente piensa es un hecho increíblemente importante que hay que saber. Entonces, cada vez que lo dices, no puedes decir que en realidad te estás privando del conocimiento de lo que la gente realmente cree que estás causando lo que Tim o la Corona, que está en nuestra junta de asesores, llama falsificación de preferencias. Se termina con una imagen inexacta del mundo que, por cierto, en muchos casos, debido a que hay activistas que quieren restringir más la expresión, en realidad tienden a pensar que las personas tienen más prejuicios de los que podrían tener. Y, de hecho, una forma muy práctica y real de empeorar las cosas es que cuando censuras a las personas, eso no cambia su opinión. Simplemente los alienta a no compartirlo con personas que los meterán en problemas. Esto los lleva a hablar con personas con las que ya están de acuerdo y la polarización del grupo despega.

LEX: La siguiente es una conversación con Greg Lukianoff, defensor de la libertad de expresión, abogado de la primera enmienda, presidente y director ejecutivo de FIRE, la base de los derechos y la expresión individuales. Y es autor de Unleashing Liberty, coautor con Jonathan Haidt de Coddling of the American Mind y coautor con Ricky Schlott de un nuevo libro que se publicará en octubre. Definitivamente deberían reservar ahora el título Canceling of the American Mind, que es un relato definitivo de la historia, el presente y el futuro de la cultura de la cancelación, un término usado y sobreutilizado en el discurso público, pero rara vez estudiado y comprendido con la profundidad y el rigor. que Greg y Ricky hacen en este libro y en parte en esta conversación. La libertad de expresión es importante, especialmente en los campus universitarios, el mismo lugar que debería servir como campo de batalla de ideas, incluidas las extrañas y controvertidas que deberían alentar la toma de riesgos audaces, no la conformidad. Este es el podcast de Lex Friedman. Para respaldarlo, consulte nuestros patrocinadores en la descripción. Y ahora, queridos amigos, aquí está Greg Lukianoff. Empecemos por la gran pregunta. ¿Qué es la cultura de la cancelación? Ahora, usted ha dicho que no le gusta el término tal como ha sido, cito, arrastrado por el barro y abusado sin cesar por una gran cantidad de figuras controvertidas. Sin embargo, tenemos el término. ¿Qué es?

GREG: La cultura de la cancelación es el repunte de campañas, especialmente campañas exitosas, que comenzaron alrededor de 2014 para despedir, expulsar, destituir, etc., a personas por discursos que normalmente estarían protegidos por la primera enmienda. . Y digo estaría protegido porque estamos hablando de circunstancias en las que no es necesariamente donde se aplica la primera enmienda. Pero lo que quiero decir es como algo análogo a decir cosas por las que no podrías perder tu trabajo como empleado público, y también el clima de miedo que resulta de ese fenómeno, el hecho de que puedes perder tu trabajo por tener una opinión equivocada. . Y no fue sutil que hubo un aumento en esto, particularmente en el campus alrededor de 2014. John Ronson escribió un libro llamado Así que te han avergonzado públicamente. Salió en 2015 y ya documenta este fenómeno. Escribí un libro llamado Freedom From Speech en 2014. Pero realmente fue en 2017 cuando empezaste a ver que esto estaba dirigido a los profesores. Y en lo que respecta a la cantidad de profesores que hemos visto ser perseguidos y perder sus empleos, he estado haciendo esto durante 22 años y no he visto nada igual.

LEX: Así que hay tantos Muchas cosas quiero preguntarte aquí. En realidad, basta con mirar la organización de FIRE. ¿Puedes explicar qué es la organización? Porque está interconectado con toda esta lucha y el surgimiento de la cultura del cáncer y la lucha por la libertad de expresión desde 2014 y antes.

GREG: Entonces, FIRE fue fundada en 1999 por Harvey Silverglate. Es un famoso abogado de libertades civiles. Está un poco en el programa. Él es la persona que realmente me descubrió en mi vida feliz en San Francisco, pero sabía que estaba buscando un trabajo de primera enmienda. Había ido a la facultad de derecho específicamente para estudiar la primera enmienda. Y me encontró, lo cual fue genial. Su protegida, Kathleen Sullivan, era la decana de la Facultad de Derecho de Stanford. Y este sigue siendo el mejor cumplido que he recibido en mi vida: que ella me recomendara a Harvey. Y como esa es la razón por la que fui a la facultad de derecho, estaba emocionado de ser parte de esta nueva organización. El otro cofundador de FIRE es Alan Charles Kors. Es simplemente un genio absoluto. Es uno de los principales expertos del mundo en la Ilustración y, en particular, en Voltaire. Y si a alguno de sus oyentes le gustan los excelentes cursos, tiene una conferencia sobre Blaise Pascal. Y Blaise, por supuesto, es famoso por la Apuesta de Pascal. Y lo dejé muy conmovido e impresionado y con una profunda comprensión de lo importante que era esta persona.

LEX: Eso es interesante. Me mencionaste sin conexión conectado a esto que hay, al menos se ejecuta en paralelo o hay una conexión entre losel amor a la ciencia y el amor a la libertad de expresión. Sí. ¿Podrías explicarnos dónde está esa conexión?

GREG: Claro. Creo que para aquellos de nosotros que realmente hemos dedicado nuestras vidas a la libertad de expresión, una cosa que nos interesa, lo sepamos o no, es la epistemología, ya sabes, el estudio y la filosofía de conocimiento. Ya sabes, la libertad de expresión tiene muchas dimensiones morales y filosóficas, pero desde un punto de vista pragmático, es necesaria porque somos criaturas con un conocimiento increíblemente limitado. Nos engañamos increíblemente a nosotros mismos. Siempre me ha encantado el hecho de que Yuval Harari se refiera a la Ilustración como el descubrimiento de la ignorancia porque eso es exactamente lo que fue. De repente fue como, guau, espera un segundo. Tenemos toda esta sabiduría popular increíblemente interesante, que por cierto puede ser sorprendentemente confiable aquí y allá. Cuando empiezas a probar, muchas cosas son una tontería y no se sostienen. Incluso nuestras ideas sobre cómo caen las cosas, como estableció Galileo, e incluso nuestras intuiciones, simplemente están equivocadas. Y así, gran parte de la historia temprana de la libertad de expresión ocurrió al mismo tiempo que una especie de revolución científica. Así que muchos de los primeros debates sobre la libertad de expresión estaban relacionados. Así que ciertamente Galileo, ya sabes, siempre señalo que Kepler probablemente tenía la idea aún más radical de que ni siquiera eran esferas perfectas. Pero al mismo tiempo, en gran parte debido a la invención de la imprenta, también se produjeron todos estos acontecimientos políticos. Y, ya sabes, siempre hablo de Jan Hus, ya sabes, del famoso héroe checo que fue quemado en la hoguera y creo que en 1419. Pero él era básicamente Lutero antes de la imprenta. Antes de que Luther pudiera hacer correr su palabra, ya sabes, no tenía ninguna posibilidad. Y eso era exactamente lo que era Jan Hus. Pero un siglo después, gracias a la imprenta, todos podían saber lo que pensaba Lutero y, vaya, lo sabían. Pero condujo, por supuesto, a este período completamente loco e hiperperturbado en la historia europea.

LEX: Bueno, mencionaste saltar un poco la Primera Enmienda. En primer lugar, ¿qué es la Primera Enmienda y cuál es para usted la conexión entre la Primera Enmienda, la libertad de expresión y la cultura de la cancelación? Claro.

GREG: Soy un abogado de la Primera Enmienda, como mencioné, y eso es lo que soy, esa es mi pasión, eso es lo que estudié. Y creo que la ley de la Primera Enmienda estadounidense es increíblemente interesante. En una frase, la Primera Enmienda intenta deshacerse de básicamente todas las razones por las que la humanidad se ha estado matando entre sí durante toda su existencia. Que no íbamos a luchar más por la opinión, que no íbamos a luchar más contra la religión, que tienes derecho a acudir a tu gobierno para que se reparen tus agravios, que tienes la libertad de asociarte. Que todas estas cosas en una frase fueran como, no, el gobierno ya no interferirá con tu derecho a tener estos derechos humanos fundamentales. Y una cosa que hace que FIRE sea un poco diferente de otras organizaciones es, sin embargo, que no somos sólo una organización de la Primera Enmienda, somos una organización de libertad de expresión. Y así, pero al mismo tiempo, mucho de lo que creo que es la libertad de expresión se puede explicar bien con referencia a muchas leyes de la Primera Enmienda, en parte porque en la historia de Estados Unidos, algunas de nuestras personas más inteligentes han estado pensando en cuáles son los parámetros de la libertad de expresión en relación con la Primera Enmienda. Y muchos de esos principios se transfieren muy bien como ideas pragmáticas. Entonces, el mayor pecado en términos de censura se llama discriminación de puntos de vista. Que esencialmente permites la libertad de expresión, excepto esa opinión. Ahora lo es, y se ha descubierto que es más defendible. Y creo que tiene sentido que si usted crea un foro y le gusta, solo vamos a hablar de economía para excluir a las personas que quieren hablar sobre un tema diferente, pero se considera, con razón, un tema más importante. Si hemos creado un foro para la economía, pero no vamos a permitir que la gente hable sobre ese tipo de economía o tenga esa opinión sobre la economía, en particular. Así que muchos de los principios de la ley de la Primera Enmienda en realidad tienen mucho sentido filosófico como buenos principios para cuándo, como qué es un discurso protegido y no protegido, qué debería causarle problemas, cómo analizarlo realmente, y es por eso que realmente intentamos en nuestra definición de cultura de cancelación para que funcione en algunas de las normas de la Primera Enmienda, solo en la definición. Así que no tenemos que atascarnos en ellos también.

LEX: Estás diciendo muchas cosas interesantes, pero si puedes vincularlas con la discriminación de puntos de vista, ¿hay algún área gris de discusión allí? ¿Qué es y qué no es economía según el ejemplo que diste? Sí.¿Existe, quiero decir, es una ciencia? ¿O es un arte trazar líneas de lo que no está, no está permitido?

GREG: Sí. Ya sabes, si estás diciendo que algo es o no es economía, bueno, puedes decirTodo es economía y por eso quiero hablar de poesía. Habría algún ejercicio de dibujo lineal allí, pero digamos que de inmediato decides abrirlo incluso a la poesía. Es una gran diferencia entre decir, está bien, ahora estamos abiertos a la poesía, pero no puedes decir, ya sabes, Dante era malo. Como si fuera una opinión prohibida ahora oficialmente en este foro que de otro modo sería abierto y que inmediatamente, en un nivel intuitivo, le parecería a la gente un problema mayor que simplemente decir que la poesía no es economía.

LEX: Sí. Quiero decir, ese nivel intuitivo con el que hablas, espero que todos tengamos ese tipo de intuición básica cuando se cruza la línea, es lo mismo con la pornografía, ¿verdad? Sabes, cuando lo ves, creo que hay el mismo nivel de intuición que debería aplicarse en todos los ámbitos. Y es cuando esa intuición se deforma por cualquier fuerza de la sociedad, es cuando comienza a sentirse como censura.

GREG: Sí. Quiero decir, la gente lo encuentra diferente. Ya sabes, si alguien pierde su trabajo simplemente por su opinión política, incluso si ese empleador tiene todo el derecho del mundo a despedirte, creo que los estadounidenses deberían decir, bueno, es verdad. Tienen todo el derecho del mundo y no estoy argumentando legalmente que tal vez no deberías despedir a alguien por su opinión política, pero piénsalo bien. ¿Qué, qué sociedad queremos, en qué tipo de sociedad queremos vivir? Y ha sido divertido verlo, ya sabes, y yo señalo esto. Sí, defenderé a las empresas, los derechos de asociación de la primera enmienda para poder tener el derecho legal de decidir, ya sabes, quién trabaja para ellas. Pero desde una cuestión moral o filosófica, si piensas en las implicaciones de que cada empresa en Estados Unidos se convierta en una asociación expresiva, además de ser una organización que maximiza las ganancias, eso sería un desastre para la democracia porque terminarías en una situación donde la gente se estaría diciendo a sí misma: "No creo que pueda decir lo que realmente pienso y seguir creyendo que puedo conservar mi trabajo". Y ahí es donde me preocupaba. Sentí que nos dirigíamos porque gran parte de la respuesta inicial a las personas que fueron canceladas fue muy simple, ya sabes, Oh, pero tienen derecho a deshacerse de esta persona. Y eso, y ese es el final, el principio y el final de la discusión. Y pensé que era una evasión. Pensé que en realidad no era una forma muy seria de hacerlo.

LEX: Si le importan tanto la primera enmienda como la libertad de expresión para pensarlo detenidamente, solo para aclarar, la primera enmienda es una especie de una encarnación legal del ideal de libertad de expresión y luego libertad de expresión aplicada al gobierno. Y es muy específico aplicado al gobierno y la libertad de expresión es la aplicación del principio de gustar a todo, incluido el ideal filosófico de alto nivel de lo que es, del valor de que las personas puedan decir lo que piensan.

GREG: Sí. Es una idea más antigua, más audaz y más amplia. Y puedes tener una situación. Y hablo de países que tienen buenas leyes sobre libertad de expresión, pero no necesariamente una gran cultura de libertad de expresión. Y hablo de cómo cuando a veces hacemos esta distinción entre la ley de libertad de expresión y la cultura de la libertad de expresión, pensamos de una manera muy confusa. Y lo que quiero decir con esto es que la ley en general, particularmente en un país de derecho consuetudinario, es el reflejo de las normas. Esos jueces también son personas. Y en muchos casos, se supone que el derecho consuetudinario toma nuestras ideas intuitivas de justicia y las incorpora a la ley. Entonces, si realmente tienes una cultura que no aprecia la libertad de expresión desde un punto de vista filosófico, no podrá proteger la libertad de expresión a largo plazo, ni siquiera en la ley. Porque, eventualmente, esa es una de las razones por las que me preocupan tanto algunos de estos terribles casos que surgen de las facultades de derecho. Porque me temo que, aunque la ley estadounidense de la primera enmienda protege muy fuertemente la primera enmienda por ahora, no va a seguir así. Si tienes generaciones de estudiantes de derecho que se gradúan y que realmente piensan que no hay nada, no hay mayor objetivo que gritar, eres un oponente.

LEX: Sí. Por eso es que gran parte de su enfoque o gran parte de su enfoque está en la educación superior o en el período educativo, porque la educación es la base de la cultura.

GREG: Sí. Tienes esta historia, ya sabes, 64, tienes el movimiento de libertad de expresión en Berkeley y en un 65, tienes la tolerancia represiva por parte de Herbert Marcuse, que fue una declaración de, por cierto, nosotros en la izquierda, Nosotros, no deberíamos, deberíamos tener libertad de expresión, pero deberíamos tener libertad de expresión para nosotros. Quiero decir, fui, volví y releí, um, uh, tolerancia represiva y lo claro que es.Olvidé que había olvidado que realmente es como, um, y estos llamados conservadores y derechistas, tenemos que reprimirlos porque son pensadores regresivos. Realmente no salealgo más sofisticado que la vieja idea de que nuestra gente es buena. Obtienen libertad de expresión. Deberíamos, deberían conservarlo. El otro lado malo. Um, nosotros, no deberíamos haberlo hecho, y tenemos que volver a capacitar a la sociedad. Y claro, como éste, acaba siendo otro, también era fan de Mao. Así que no es sorprendente que, por supuesto, el sistema tuviera que depender de algún tipo de sistema totalitario. Um, pero esa era una posición ridícula, um, uh, ya sabes, uh, digamos hace 30, 40 años, la idea de que esencialmente, ya sabes, la libertad de expresión para mí, no para los, uh, como los grandes. , ya sabes, el defensor de la libertad de expresión que Hentoff solía decir era algo de lo que se suponía que debías avergonzarte. Pero vi esto cuando estaba en la facultad de derecho en el 97, vi esto cuando estaba haciendo prácticas en la ACLU en el 99, que se avecinaba un choque de trenes en cámara lenta y que esencialmente había, um, estos malos Las ideas del campus que habían ido adquiriendo cada vez más fuerza (básicamente no había libertad de expresión para mi oponente) en realidad se estaban volviendo cada vez más aceptadas, y en parte porque la academia se estaba volviendo cada vez menos diversa en cuanto a puntos de vista. Creo que, como señala mi coautor Jonathan Haidt, cuando hay poca diversidad de puntos de vista, la gente empieza a pensar de una manera muy tribal. Y si no tienes a los disidentes respetados, no tienes a la gente a la que puedas señalar y decir: "Oye, esta es una persona inteligente". Um, esto es como, esta es una persona inteligente, razonable y decente con la que no estoy de acuerdo, así que supongo que no todos piensan igual sobre este tema. Empiezas a pensar que sólo, ya sabes, sólo la gente mala, sólo los herejes, sólo los blasfemos, sólo los derechistas, ya sabes, um, pueden realmente pensar de esta manera.

LEX: Cada vez que decir algo, siempre tengo un millón de pensamientos y millones de preguntas que surgen. Pero como mencionaste que hay una especie de deriva mientras escribes en el libro y mencionaste que ahora hay una deriva hacia la izquierda en el mundo académico, um, que tal vez también hagamos una distinción aquí entre la izquierda y la derecha y la cancelación. La cultura tal como la presentas en tu libro no está necesariamente asociada con ningún punto de vista político, que hay mecanismos en ambos lados que resultan en cancelación y censura, eh, en violación de la libertad de expresión.

GREG: Una cosa Quiero dejar muy claro que el libro aborda la cultura de cancelación tanto de derecha como de izquierda. Son diferentes, uh, en muchos sentidos y definitivamente, ya sabes, cancelar la cultura de la izquierda es más importante en el mundo académico donde la izquierda domina más. Um, pero hablamos mucho sobre la cultura de cancelación proveniente de las legislaturas. También hablamos mucho sobre la cultura de la cancelación en el campus, porque aunque, bueno, la mayoría de los intentos que vienen desde el campus para cancelar a la gente siguen siendo de la izquierda, hay muchos ataques que vienen de la derecha que vienen. de, ya sabes, los intentos de diferentes organizaciones y, a veces, cuando hay historias en Fox News, ya sabes, como que perseguirán a los profesores y alrededor de un tercio de los intentos de castigar a los profesores que en realidad tienen éxito. vienes de la derecha. Y hablamos de intentos de prohibir libros. Um, en, en el, en el libro del que hablamos, um, y, uh, hablo de demandar a la legislatura de Florida. Rhonda Santus tenía algo llamado ley de detener el despertar, um, que les dijimos a todos que es ridículamente inconstitucional. Intentaron prohibir, ya sabes, ciertos temas en educación superior y nosotros pensamos, no, esto es una broma. Como, esto será, esto será reído fuera de los tribunales. Um, y no nos escucharon y lo trajeron, uh, lo aprobaron y demandamos y ganamos. Ahora están intentando de nuevo con algo que es igualmente inconstitucional y volveremos a demandar y lo haremos, y ganaremos.

LEX: ¿Puede darnos más detalles sobre una ley de parada del despertar? Así que presumiblemente esto es un intento de limitar la enseñanza de ciertos temas en la escuela.

GREG: Sí. Básicamente despertaron temas. Um, ya sabes, es más, surgió del tipo de intento de llegar a una teoría racial crítica. Um, entonces son temas relacionados con raza, género, etcétera. Um, no recuerdo exactamente cómo intentaron conectar el gabinete a, um, uh, a CRT. Um, pero cuando en realidad, la ley está muy bien establecida que no se puede decirle a la educación superior lo que se les permite enseñar sin violar, sin violar la primera enmienda. Y cuando esto llegó ante un juez, fue exactamente tan escéptico como pensábamos que estaría. Creo que llamó a esto distópico. Um, y no estuvo cerca.

LEX: Entonces, si estás en contra de ese tipo de enseñanza, la forma correcta de luchar es argumentando que no es una buena idea como parte del plan de estudios en lugar de prohibirlo del plan de estudios.

GREG: Sí.Simplemente, el estado no tiene el poder de simplemente decir, prohibir, um, ya sabes, qué, qué enseñan, qué enseñan los profesores de educación superior. AhoraSe vuelve un poco más complicado cuando se habla de jardín de infantes a 12, porque el estado tiene un papel en decidir qué se enseña al público de jardín de infantes a 12, porque son sus hijos, ellos, están financiados por los contribuyentes. Um, y en general la legislatura está involucrada. Um, existe una supervisión democrática de ese proceso.

LEX: Entonces, desde jardín de infantes hasta 12.º, ¿también hay una inclinación hacia la izquierda en términos de la administración que gestiona el plan de estudios?

GREG: Sí , um, allí, allí, definitivamente hay, um, desde jardín de infantes hasta 12, el, el, quiero decir, mis hijos van a la escuela pública. Tengo un hijo de cinco y otro de siete años y tienen profesores encantadores. Um, pero nos hemos topado con muchos problemas con las escuelas de educación en llamas. Um, y muchos de los graduados de las escuelas de educación terminaron siendo los administradores que reprimieron la libertad de expresión en la educación superior. Y entonces he estado tratando de pensar en formas positivas de abordar algunos de los problemas que veo desde jardín de infantes hasta 12. Pensé que el intento de simplemente dictar, no enseñarás los siguientes 10 libros, ya sabes, o 20 libros o 200 libros era la forma incorrecta de hacerlo. Ahora, cuando se trata de decidir qué libros están en el plan de estudios, nuevamente, eso es algo en lo que la legislatura en realidad, ya sabes, no puede, no puede tener voz y voto, y eso es bastante poco controvertido, eh, en términos de la ley. Pero cuando se trata de cómo combatirlo, tenía algo que, como estoy atascado en una fórmula, lo llamé empoderamiento de la mente estadounidense. Um, di principios que eran inconsistentes, um, con el tipo de pensamiento grupal y el fuerte énfasis en, uh, políticas de identidad, uh, de lo que, um, ya sabes, algunos de los críticos se quejan con razón desde jardín de infantes hasta 12. Uh. , y nosotros, eso es en realidad cancelar la mente estadounidense, pero tengo una explicación más detallada que voy a publicar en mi blog, la idea eternamente radical.

LEX : ¿Es posible legalmente, es sólo una pregunta tonta, tal vez crear una protección adicional para ciertos tipos de literatura 1984 o algo que permanezca en el plan de estudios? Quiero decir, ya está todo protegido, supongo. Sí. Supongo que para proteger a los administradores de manipular demasiado el plan de estudios, como por ejemplo estabilizarlo. No sé cuál es la maquinaria de la escuela pública desde jardín de infantes hasta 12.° grado.

GREG: En jardín de infantes hasta 12.° grado, ya sabes, las legislaturas estatales, ya sabes, son parte de eso. Ellos son parte de eso y pueden decir que deberían enseñar los siguientes libros. Ahora, por supuesto, la gente siempre está un poco preocupada de que, si tú, si recomendaran, ya sabes, enseñaran, enseñaran la declaración de independencia, ya sabes, terminaría siendo, bueno, iban a enseñar que la declaración de independencia fue solo para proteger la esclavitud, lo que no era enseñar un tema en particular, qué libros de texto eliges, qué perspectiva adoptas, todo ese tipo de cosas.

LEX: Hay como si la religión comenzara a infiltrarse en toda la cuestión de, ¿cómo, ya sabes, se le permite a la Biblia enseñar en forma corporativa y en educación? Uh, no lo hagas, sí.

GREG: Quiero decir, soy ateo, eh, con un intenso interés en la religión. De hecho, leí toda la Biblia este año sólo porque hago cosas así. Y en realidad nunca lo había leído de principio a fin. Um, luego leí el Corán porque ya sabes, y voy a intentar leer el Libro de Mormón, pero ya sabes.

LEX: Bueno, empezaron a hacerlo, eres tan fascinante. Um, ¿recomiendas hacer eso?

GREG: Creo que deberías, um, sólo para saberlo, porque es una piedra de toque, um, en la forma en que la gente habla de las cosas, puede volverse bastante tedioso. , pero incluso me obligué a leer todas las instrucciones muy específicas sobre qué tan altas deben ser las diferentes partes del templo y qué tan largas deben ser las vestimentas y qué forma deben tener y qué les gusta, y esas van en un lote. Um, eso, eso, sorprendentemente, lo siento, una parte sorprendentemente grande de Éxodo. Um, pensé que eso era más como en Levítico y Deuteronomio. Um, pero luego llegas a libros como Job, ya sabes, guau. Quiero decir, Job es una lectura así y de ninguna manera Job originalmente tuvo ese final. Básicamente, como lo es Job, comienza como esta apuesta perversa entre Dios, um, y Satanás sobre si realmente pueden o no hacer que un buen hombre renuncie a Dios. Y al principio no pueden, todo va de forma muy predecible. Y finalmente torturaron de verdad a Job y él se convirtió en el mejor, ¿por qué es cruel Dios? ¿Cómo es posible que Dios exista? ¿Cómo podría un Dios bondadoso hacer estas cosas? Y vence, se convierte en el mejor abogado del mundo y derrota a todos, a todas las personas que vienen a discutir con él. Él, él discute hasta quitarles los pantalones. Y de repente, al final, Dios aparece y dice, bueno, ya sabes, estoy en todas partes. Y es una respuesta muy confusa.Él da una respuesta como: "Estoy allí cuando, cuando, cuando las leonas dan a luz y estoy allí". Y por cierto, está este monstruo gigante Leviatán que es muygrande y da mucho miedo. Y yo, y tengo que gestionar el universo. Y yo dije: Dios, ¿estás diciendo que estás muy ocupado? ¿Es ese, es esencialmente su argumento para Job? Y no mencionas la totalidad, no mencionas la totalidad, como que tengo una apuesta, por eso te estaba torturando, eso no surge. Y luego, al final, él decide, Dios decide, como lo dice Job, oh, no, tienes toda la razón. Estaba totalmente equivocado. Eh, lo siento. Um, y Dios dice: Voy a castigar a esas personas que intentaron discutir contigo y no lo hicieron, no ganaron. Entonces, um, entonces se deshace de ellos, no sé exactamente qué les hace. No lo recuerdo. Um, y luego le devuelve a Job todo su dinero y todo, y eso los hace súper prósperos. Y yo digo, de ninguna manera ese fue el final original de ese libro. Porque a esto le gustaría, esta era claramente una novela querida, pero no puede tener ese final. Bueno. Entonces, así, así, sí, es una manera larga de decir que realmente creo que vale la pena. Uh, algo de eso fue, siempre te sorprendes cuando terminas en la parte, como, um, hay partes que te sorprenderán, algo así como el viaje de Isaías, um, Eclesiastés, Depeche. mode.

LEX: Y lo hiciste, dijiste que también, eh, el Corán. Sí. Lo cual fue fascinante. Entonces, ¿qué hay? Sería interesante preguntar: ¿existe una tensión entre el estudio de textos religiosos o seguir una religión y simplemente creer en Dios y seguir los diversos aspectos de la religión con libertad de expresión?

GREG: Um, en la primera enmienda, tenemos algo que llamamos cláusula de religión y nunca me ha gustado llamarla así porque son dos cosas brillantes una al lado de la otra. El Estado no puede establecer una religión oficial, pero no puede interferir con su derecho a practicar su religión. Eso es hermoso. Dos cosas al mismo tiempo. Y creo que lo son, y creo que ambos tienen toda la razón. Y creo que a veces la derecha se entusiasma mucho con la cláusula de libre ejercicio y la izquierda se entusiasma mucho con el establishment. Y me gustó el hecho de que los tenemos a ambos juntos. Ahora bien, ¿cómo se relaciona esto con la libertad de expresión? Y tenía razón en el plan de estudios, del que estábamos hablando. De hecho, creo que sería fantástico si las escuelas públicas pudieran enseñar la Biblia, en el sentido de leerla como un documento histórico. Pero cuando estaba en la ACLU, cada vez que veía a gente intentando esto, siempre eran defensores de, ya sabes, un católico o protestante o algún tipo de lectura ortodoxa sobre religión. Um, entonces si realmente lo conviertes en algo que defienda una visión particular de la religión, entonces pasa al lado de la cláusula de establecimiento. Así que los estadounidenses no han encontrado una manera de enseñarlo. Así que probablemente sea mejor que, ya sabes, aprendas, aprendas fuera de una clase de escuela pública.

LEX: ¿Crees que es posible enseñar religión, um, desde, uh, religiones mundiales, por supuesto? sin faltarle el respeto a las religiones?

GREG: Creo que la respuesta es que depende de la perspectiva de quién.

LEX: Um, bueno, como dicen los practicantes, eres como un seguidor ortodoxo de un religión determinada. ¿Es posible no enojarte enseñando como lo hacen todas las religiones principales del mundo?

GREG: Para algunas personas, lo fundamental es enseñarlo como si fuera verdad. Ah, um, y con eso bajo esas condiciones, entonces la respuesta es no, no puedes enseñarlo sin, al menos sin ofender a alguien.

LEX: ¿No puedes decir que esta gente cree que es verdad? ¿Puedes reformarlo? Así que, básicamente, tienes que caminar sobre cáscaras de huevo.

GREG: Puedes esforzarte mucho y aún así enfadarás a algunas personas, pero las personas serias dirán, oh no, en realidad trataste de ser justo con los demás. creencias aquí. Um, y yo, y trato de ser respetuoso, um, tanto como puedo sobre, um, mucho de esto, todavía me siento mucho más atraído tanto por el budismo como por el estoicismo. Bueno, ¿a dónde voy?

LEX: Bueno, una cosa interesante para volver a los campus universitarios es, um, el fuego mantiene las clasificaciones de libertad de expresión universitaria en rankings .thefire .org. Estoy muy orgulloso de ellos. Lo recomiendo mucho porque olvídate de que incluso solo con el ranking, puedes aprender mucho sobre las universidades desde esta perspectiva completamente diferente a la que la gente está acostumbrada cuando eligen la universidad a la que quieren ir. Simplemente da otra perspectiva de todo el asunto. Y proporciona citas de personas que son estudiantes allí y demás, sobre sus experiencias. Y, y es diferente, tal vez podrías hablar de las diversas medidas aquí antes de hablar sobre quién está entre los cinco primeros y quién está entre los cinco últimos.¿Cuáles, cuáles, cuáles son los diferentes parámetros que contribuyen a la evaluación?

GREG: Entonces la gente me ha estado pidiendo desde el primer día que haga una clasificación de las escuelas, según la libertad de expresión. Y aunque lo teníamos, teníamos la mejor base de datos que existe sobreCódigos de expresión del campus, políticas que tienen las universidades que violan la primera enmienda o las normas de la primera enmienda. También tenemos la mejor base de datos de lo que llamamos base de datos de desinvitación. Um, pero en realidad es, um, es mejor llamarla base de datos de eliminación de plataforma, que es como la llamaremos.

LEX: Um, y todos estos son casos en los que alguien fue invitado como orador a campus y luego fueron desinvitados.

GREG: Desinvitado o desalojado de la plataforma también incluye comer.

LEX: Um, entonces aparecieron y realmente no podían hablar.

GREG: Sí, exactamente. Um, y, y, uh, y teniendo eso, lo que realmente necesitábamos para tener algo de ciencia social seria para realmente hacer un argumento serio sobre cuál era la clasificación, um, era poder tener una mejor idea. de cuántos profesores fueron realmente castigados durante este tiempo. Um, y luego el elemento que más faltaba era poder preguntar a los estudiantes directamente cómo era el ambiente en ese campus para la libertad de expresión. ¿Se sienten cómodos estando en desacuerdo unos con otros? ¿Te sientes cómodo estando en desacuerdo con tus... con tus profesores? ¿Crees que la violencia es aceptable en respuesta a un orador? ¿Crees que gritar, eh, crees que gritar está bien? ¿Crees que está bien bloquear el acceso de las personas a un altavoz? Um, y una vez que pudimos reunir todos esos elementos, primero hicimos una prueba, creo que en 2019, alrededor de 50. Y lo hemos estado haciendo durante cuatro años, siempre tratando de hacer que la metodología cada vez más precisos para reflejar mejor el entorno real de determinadas escuelas. Y este año, la escuela número uno fue la Universidad Tecnológica de Michigan, lo cual fue una agradable sorpresa. Uh, la escuela número dos era en realidad la Universidad de Auburn. Um, lo cual fue, uh, agradable ver, uh, en el top 10, la escuela prestigiosa más conocida es en realidad UVA, um, a la que le fue muy bien este año. La Universidad de Chicago no estaba contenta de no ser el número uno, pero la Universidad de Chicago ocupa el puesto 13 y habían sido el número uno o entre los tres primeros durante años antes de eso.

LEX: Entonces, ¿puedes explicarme? casi sorprendente. ¿Es por, eh, departamentos de economía realmente fuertes y cosas como esta o qué, por qué?

GREG: Tenían un caso que involucraba a un estudiante. No reconocerían un capítulo del punto de inflexión de EE. UU. e hicieron un argumento muy clásico, um, que nosotros, y clásico en la mala forma que escuchamos en los campus de todo el país. Oh, tenemos un campus republicano, por lo que no necesitamos este grupo conservador adicional. Y nosotros decimos, no, lo siento. Hemos visto docenas y docenas, no cientos, de intentos de conseguir que este estudiante conservador en particular, un grupo de estudiantes, ¿reconozca o no reconozca? Y entonces les dijimos, escuchen, esto como, uh, les dijimos en el fuego que, uh, ya sabes, consideramos esto serio y no reconocerían al grupo. Así que eso es un punto menos en nuestro ranking y fue suficiente para eliminarlos, probablemente habrían sido el número dos en el ranking. Uh, pero ahora son 13 de dos 48. Siguen siendo una de las mejores escuelas del país. No tengo ningún problema en decir que la escuela a la que no le fue tan bien, uh, um, con un negativo 10 .69 negativo 10 .69 y redondeamos a cero fue Harvard y Harvard no ha estado, um, muy contenta con ese resultado. .

LEX: La única escuela que recibió la clasificación abismal.

GREG: Sí. Y hay un par de personas, oh, Harvard, oh, Harvard. Y hay un par de personas que realmente, creo, han estado cometiendo un error al volverse muy Harvard, um, sonando como, He hecho que los estadísticos vean esto y ellos, ellos, ellos, ellos piensan Tu metodología es una broma. Y, como señalar, este caso no era tan importante. Y ese erudito no era ese erudito, como el de los argumentos contra uno de los eruditos que contamos en su contra porque, eh, el castigo fue que no era un erudito muy famoso o influyente. Y yo pienso que tu argumento parece ser esnobismo. Básicamente, al igual que usted, no comprende nuestra metodología, por un lado. Y luego estás diciendo que en realidad ese erudito no era lo suficientemente importante como para ser contado. Y por cierto, Harvard, por cierto, Harvard, um, si nosotros, el campus de Harvard, sí. Si nosotros, incluso si tomáramos todos sus argumentos como verdaderos, incluso si decidiéramos deshacernos de esos dos profesores, todavía estaría en números negativos. Seguirías siendo el último en morir. Todavía estarías detrás de Georgetown y Penn. Y ninguna de esas escuelas es buena para la libertad de expresión.

LEX: Debería decir que los cinco últimos son la Universidad de Pensilvania, Nicosette Penn, eh, la Universidad de Carolina del Sur, la Universidad de Georgetown y la Universidad de Fordham.

GREG: Todo muy bien ganado. Tienen tantos casos graves en todas esas escuelas.

LEX: ¿Cuál es la mejor manera de encontrarse en el fondo?¿cinco?

GREG: Si eres una universidad, ¿cuál es la forma más rápida de llegar a ese negativo, a ese cero, muchas plataformas, um, eso, uh, cuando miramos los cinco últimos? El 81% de los intentos de sacar a los oradores de la plataforma tuvieron éxito entre los cinco últimos. Um, hubo un par de escuelas, creo que Penn incluyó, donde cada intento, cada vez que un estudiante, por ejemplo, se oponía, un grupo de estudiantes se oponía a que viniera ese orador, cancelaban este, este discurso. Y creo que Georgetown tuvo una tasa de éxito del cien por cien. Creo que Penn tuvo una tasa de éxito del cien por cien. Creo que Harvard defendió a un par de personas, pero en su mayoría, la gente también fue destituida allí.

LEX: Entonces, ¿cómo se puede rechazar la desplataforma? Bueno, ¿quién, quién lo haría? ¿Son otros estudiantes? ¿Es facultad? ¿Es la administración? ¿Cuál es la dinámica de, uh, rechazar básicamente? Porque me imagino que parte de eso es cultura, pero me imagino que cada universidad tiene un grupo de estudiantes que protestarán básicamente contra cada orador. Y es una cuestión de cómo respondes a esa protesta.

GREG: Bueno, aquí está el pequeño y sucio secreto sobre el gran cambio en 2014. Um, y, y el fuego, yo y la altura, um, He sido muy claro en que el gran cambio que vimos en el campus fue que durante la mayor parte de mi carrera, los estudiantes fueron excelentes en cuanto a la libertad de expresión. Eran el mejor electorado para la libertad de expresión, de manera absolutamente inequívoca hasta aproximadamente 2013, 2014. Y no fue hasta 2014 cuando tuvimos esta experiencia muy, ya sabes, algo triste para nosotros en la que de repente los estudiantes fueron los que abogaron por la eliminación de plataformas y un nuevo discurso. códigos de una manera similar a la que habían estado haciendo, digamos, a mediados de los años ochenta, eh, por ejemplo. Pero aquí está el pequeño y sucio secreto. No son ellos, son solo los estudiantes, son los estudiantes y los administradores, aunque a veces solo un puñado de ellos, trabajando juntos para crear algunos de estos problemas. Y esto fue exactamente lo que pasó en Stanford. Cuando Kyle Duncan, un juez del quinto circuito intentó hablar en mi alma mater y un quinto de la clase apareció para gritarle. Um, fue una demostración real de lo que estaba sucediendo esos 10 minutos después del grito de un juez del quinto circuito. Y sigo enfatizando que, como soy abogado constitucionalista, los jueces del quinto circuito son grandes negocios. Están un nivel por debajo de la Corte Suprema. Um, ya sabes, aproximadamente una quinta parte de la escuela aparece para gritarles después de 10 minutos de gritarles y el administrador, un administrador de DEI se levanta con un discurso preparado que ella, que ella ha escrito. Es un discurso de siete minutos de duración en el que habla de la libertad de expresión. Quizás no valga la pena exprimir el jugo. Y estábamos en esta facultad de derecho donde la gente podía aprender a desafiar estas normas. Entonces, está claro que hubo coordinación, ya sabes, entre algunos de estos administradores y, al hablar con los estudiantes allí, estuvieron en reuniones, reuniones extensas durante mucho tiempo. Aparecen, gritan. Luego se toman siete minutos adicionales para sermonear al orador sobre la libertad de expresión, que no es, que no es el jugo de la libertad de expresión, que no vale la pena exprimirla. Um, y luego, por el resto, son simplemente abucheos constantes. Um, después de que ella, después de que ella se vaya, esto está claro, y esto, y algo muy similar, ya sabes, sucedió varias veces en Yale, donde estaba muy claro que los administradores estaban ayudando con muchas de estas interrupciones. Entonces, creo que cada vez que hay un grito en una universidad, la investigación debería ser lo primero y lo más importante: ¿ayudaron los administradores a crear este problema? ¿Hicieron algo para detenerlo? Porque creo que mucho de lo que realmente está sucediendo aquí es la hiperburocratización de las universidades con mucha más gente ideológica que piensa que su trabajo principal es básicamente como controlar el discurso, más o menos, están alentando a los estudiantes, lo siento, están alentar a los estudiantes que tienen opiniones que les gustan, um, a gritar. Um, y es por eso que realmente necesitan investigar esto. Y es, eh, en Stanford, el administrador quien dio los comentarios preparados, um, acerca de que no valía la pena exprimir el jugo. No la han invitado a regresar a Stanford, pero es uno de los únicos ejemplos que se me ocurren cuando estas cosas suceden con frecuencia, en las que un administrador claramente facilitó algo que fue un insulto o una destitución o resultó en el despido de un profesor o resultó en una estudiante expulsado cuando el administrador salió impune o probablemente en algunos casos incluso obtuvo un ascenso.

LEX: Y entonces, un pequeño número de administradores, tal vez incluso un solo administrador, podría participar en el estímulo y la organización y así potenciar todo el proceso.

GREG: Y eso es algo que he visto a lo largo de toda mi carrera.Y lo único es que es un poco difícil captar esto en el acto, por así decirlo. Y esa es una de las razones por las que es útil que la gente sepa sobre esto.Lo sé, eh, porque fue un caso asombroso. Esto fue en la Universidad de Washington. Um, y de hecho presentamos esto en un documental realizado en 2015, 20, que apareció en 2015, 2016 llamado, ¿podemos aceptar una broma? Um, y fue entonces cuando empezamos a notar que algo estaba cambiando en el campus. También escuchamos que los comediantes decían que ya no podían usar su buen humor. Esto fue justo en el momento en que Jerry Seinfeld y Chris Rock dijeron que no podían, uh, no querían tocar en los campus porque no podían, no podían ser divertidos. Uh, pero presentamos el caso de un comediante que quería hacer un musical llamado la pasión del musical, burlándose de la pasión de Cristo con el objetivo declarado de ofender a todos, a todos los grupos por igual. Fue en gran medida una misión de South Park. Um, y es un caso inusual porque en realidad tenemos documentación de administradores que compran boletos para estudiantes enojados y realizan un evento en el que ellos, donde los entrenan, saltan en medio del evento y gritan: "Estoy ofendido". Como ellos, ellos, les compraron boletos. Los enviaron a esto, a esta cosa con el objetivo de silenciarlo a gritos. Ahora, como era de esperar, cuando envías a un grupo de estudiantes enojados a cerrar una obra, no terminará en "Estoy ofendido". Um, y se calentó. Hubo amenazas de muerte, uh, um, y luego la policía de Pullman Washington le dijo a Chris, uh, Chris Lee, el tipo que hizo la obra, que en realidad no los protegerían. Ahora bien, no todos los días vas a tener ese tipo de evidencia contundente de que, de ver a los administradores, sería tan, tan descarado que registraran el hecho de que compraron Les dio los boletos y los envió. Pero creo que muchas de esas cosas están sucediendo. Y creo que es una buena excusa para reducir uno de los grandes problemas de la educación superior actual, que es la hiperburocratización.

LEX: Según su experiencia, ¿existe una distinción entre administradores? y facultad en términos de, eh, perpetradores de esto, de este tipo de cosas? Entonces, si nos deshacemos de todo, como habló Harvey, de deshacernos de un gran porcentaje de la administración, ¿eso ayuda a solucionar el problema o el profesorado también es un pequeño porcentaje del profesorado que también forma parte del estímulo en el organización de este tipo de cancelaciones.

GREG: Sí. Y eso es algo que ha sido profundamente decepcionante. Um, es eso cuando miras el gran aumento en los intentos de despedir a los profesores que hemos visto en los últimos 10 años y, de hecho, en los últimos 22 años, hasta donde llegan nuestros registros. Primero, están dirigidos abrumadoramente por administradores, intentos de castigar a los profesores. Um, y eso fue lo más, ya sabes, yo diría que mi carrera hasta 2013 fue luchar contra los excesos administrativos. Um, entonces empiezas a tener el problema en 2014 de los estudiantes que intentan cancelar a la gente. Um, y eso realmente se aceleró en 2017 y el número. Entonces, una forma de hacerlo, una cosa que hace que sea más fácil de documentar son las peticiones para despedir o castigar a los profesores. Um, y cuán desproporcionadamente provienen de estudiantes. Pero otro gran repunte ha sido el de los compañeros profesores que exigen que sus compañeros profesores sean castigados. Y eso para mí es algo vergonzoso. Tú, tú, no deberías estar orgulloso de firmar la petición para conseguir a tu compañero profesor. Y lo que es aún más, uh, más vergonzoso es que tenemos, esto, esto es, esto casi se ha convertido en un cliché dentro del fuego. Cuando alguien se enfrenta a una de estas campañas de cancelación como profesor, recibo cartas de algunos de mis amigos diciendo: "Lo siento mucho, esto te ha pasado". Y estas fueron las mismas personas que firmaron públicamente la petición para que los despidieran.

LEX: Sí. Sí. Sí. La integridad la integridad es algo importante en este mundo. Y creo que en parte me sorprende mucho que la gente no defienda más esto porque hay tanta hambre por ello. Y si tienes las agallas como docente o administrador para realmente defenderte, defenderte, con elocuencia, con rigor, con integridad, siento que es imposible que alguien pueda hacer algo porque hay tanta hambre. Es tan refrescante. Sí. Creo que todo el mundo está de acuerdo en que la libertad de expresión es algo bueno. Oh, no lo hago, no lo hago.

GREG: Bueno, está bien. Lo siento lo siento. No estoy de acuerdo. La mayoría de la gente, incluso en las universidades, siente hambre, pero es casi como, eh, este tipo de nerviosismo a su alrededor porque hay un pequeño número de voces fuertes. Ellos son los que gritan. Entonces, quiero decir, nuevamente, ahí es donde entra en juego el gran liderazgo. Y entonces, ya sabes, los rectores de las universidades probablemente deberían hacer declaraciones claras de que este no es un lugar donde valoramos la libertad de expresión. .Cuando, y esto fue a lo largo de toda mi carrera, un presidente, un presidente de una universidad que se pone firme temprano y dice, no, túYa sabes, no nos planteamos despedir a este profesor. No estamos expulsando al estudiante. El problema suele terminar muy rápido. Aunque a veces, y aquí es donde realmente se nota la participación administrativa, los estudiantes hacen cosas como hacerse cargo de la oficina del presidente. Y luego esa adquisición correrá a cargo de la universidad. La gente señalará esto a veces como algo así como, oh, es claramente como, um, mi amigo Sam Abrams, cuando intentaron que, uh, intentaron que lo despidieran en, en, en, uh, la universidad Sarah Lawrence. Um, y, uh, esa fue una de las veces que se usó como algo así como, oh, que era hostil a la universidad porque ellos, los estudiantes, asumieron la oficina del presidente. Y yo digo, no, les dejaron hacerse cargo de la oficina del presidente. Y no sé si ese fue uno de los casos en los que se realizó la adquisición, pero si alguna vez hubo una señal que dijera, sí, esto no lo es, en realidad es bastante amigable. .

LEX: Bueno, en cierto sentido, protestar y tener opiniones muy fuertes, incluso opiniones ridículas, locas y descabelladas, es algo bueno. Es solo que no debería llevar a despidos o despidos de personas. Como si fuera bueno protestar. Simplemente no es bueno que la universidad apoye eso y tome medidas basadas en ello.

GREG: Y esta es una de esas tensiones en la primera enmienda. En realidad, creo que tiene un lanzamiento bastante fácil. Básicamente, tienes una aplicación, tienes absolutamente el derecho de dedicar tu vida a acabar con la libertad de expresión y el ridículo como concepto. Y hay personas que, que realmente lo son, pueden parecer muy despreciables incluso respecto de la filosofía de la libertad de expresión. Um, y defenderemos tu derecho a hacer eso. Tampoco estaremos de acuerdo contigo. Y si intentas que despidan a un profesor, estaremos del otro lado. Ahora, creo que tenías a Randy Kennedy, a quien realmente lo amo. Creo que es un gran tipo, pero nos criticó por nuestra base de datos destructiva, diciendo que los estudiantes no pueden protestar contra los oradores. Yo digo, está bien, eso es una tontería. Um, uh, disparamos como organización y hemos defendido el derecho a protestar todo el tiempo. Estamos constantemente defendiendo los derechos de los manifestantes por los derechos, sin creer que los manifestantes tengan derecho a decir lo que quisieran, básicamente así sería. Castigar a los hablantes. No estamos pidiendo que se castigue a los manifestantes, pero lo que estamos diciendo es que no se puede dejar que los manifestantes ganen si exigen que alguien sea despedido por su libertad de expresión.

LEX : Entonces, la línea que existe es entre los manifestantes que protestan y la universidad que toma medidas basadas en la protesta.

GREG: Sí, exactamente. Y, por supuesto, gritan que eso es sólo censura de la mafia. Um, y eso es algo en lo que la universidad, la forma, la forma en que realmente manejas esa tensión en la ley de la primera enmienda es esencialmente como el único deber positivo que tiene el gobierno. El primero, el deber negativo, lo que no está permitido es censurarte. Um, pero su deber positivo es que si, si quiero decir cosas horribles, o en realidad, cosas grandiosas que no son populares en un parque público, no puedes dejar que la multitud simplemente me grite. Um, no puedes permitir lo que se llama un veto de persona que interrumpe.

LEX: Eso es muy interesante. Porque siento que eso también entra en juego en las redes sociales. Porque, ya sabes, existe toda esta discusión sobre la censura y la libertad de expresión, pero para mí, la cuestión de la zanahoria es casi más interesante. Una vez establecida la libertad de expresión, ¿cómo se incentiva el debate y el desacuerdo de alta calidad? Estoy pensando mucho en eso.

GREG: Y esa es una de las cosas de las que hablamos en la cancelación de la mente estadounidense: argumentar a favor de la verdad y que cancelar la cultura es cruel. Es despiadado. Es antiintelectual, pero tampoco te llevará a ninguna parte en tu verdad. Y vas a perder mucho tiempo destruyendo a tus oponentes, um, en algo que en realidad nunca podrá llevarte a la verdad a través del proceso, por supuesto, en el que nunca llegarás directamente a la verdad. Simplemente eliminas la falsedad.

LEX: Sí. Pero todo el mundo que tiene un megáfono en Internet con anonimato, parece que es mejor que la censura, pero parece que además hay incentivos. Además de eso, puedes construir, um, sí, para incentivar un mejor discurso. Sí. Es como incentivar a alguien que hace un gran esfuerzo para presentar incluso los argumentos más ridículos, pero básicamente aquellos que no incluyen ninguna de las cosas que destacas en términos de todos los trucos retóricos para cerrar conversaciones, simplemente hazlos realmente buenos. argumentos para lo que sea.No importa si es comunismo para fascismo, lo que sea que quieras decir, pero hazlo a escala, con contexto histórico, con, uh, uh, con el hombre de acero del otro lado, todo ese tipo de elementos.

GREG: Intentamos hacer trespuntos principales del libro. Una, um, es simplemente cancelar que la cultura sea real. Es una era histórica, um, y está en una escala histórica. La segunda es que deberías pensar en cancelar la cultura como parte de una, um, retórica, como una retórica perezosa más amplia, uh, enfoque de qué, qué, a lo que nos referimos como argumentos ganadores sin argumentos ganadores. Y lo decimos en dos sentidos sin tener argumentos ganadores o sin tener realmente un argumento. Y hablamos de todas las diferentes, lo que llamamos fortalezas retóricas que tienen tanto la izquierda como la derecha que te impiden, que te permiten simplemente descartar a la persona, eh, o esquivar el argumento sin llegar nunca a la esencia del argumento. argumento. La tercera parte es, ya sabes, ¿cómo lo solucionamos? Pero la cuestión de la fortaleza retórica es en realidad algo que me apasiona mucho porque interfiere con nuestra capacidad de llegar a la verdad y es una pérdida de tiempo y, francamente, también, dado que cancelar la cultura es parte de esa táctica retórica, también puede arruinar vidas.

LEX: En realidad, sería muy divertido hablar sobre este aspecto particular del libro. Y te recomiendo ampliamente que si estás escuchando esto, hagas tu reserva del libro ahora.

GREG: Eh, ¿cuándo saldrá? 17 de octubre. Bueno. La cancelación de la mente americana. Bueno. Entonces, en el libro también hay una lista de tácticas retóricas baratas que utilizan tanto la izquierda como la derecha. Y luego tienes una lista de tácticas que usa la izquierda y la derecha. Entonces está la retórica, la fortaleza retórica perfecta que usa la izquierda y la fortaleza retórica eficiente que usa la derecha.

LEX: La primera es ¿qué pasa con el ismo? Tal vez podamos repasar algunos de ellos que capturen su corazón en este momento particular mientras hablamos de ello. Y si puede describir ejemplos de esto o si hay aspectos que ve allí, especialmente efectivos y efectivos. Entonces, ¿qué pasa con el ismo? Es defenderse de las críticas de tu lado sacando a relucir las supuestas malas acciones del otro lado.

GREG: Quiero hacer pequeñas tarjetas de estas, de todas estas tácticas y comenzar a usarlas. ellos en X todo el tiempo porque se implementan con mucha frecuencia.

LEX: ¿Y qué pasa con el ismo? Lo puse primero por una razón, ya sabes, sería una idea interesante integrar eso en la barra diagonal X de Twitter. donde la gente, ya sabes, en lugar de hacer clic en el corazón, pueden hacer clic en cuál de las tácticas retóricas es esta. Y luego, porque ya sabes, en realidad están las notas de la comunidad. No sé si han visto en X que ustedes pueden contribuir con notas y es bastante fascinante. Funciona muy, muy bien, pero para darle un poco más de estructura. Sí. En realidad, ese es un método realmente interesante.

GREG: Sí. De hecho, cuando estaba pensando en las formas en que X podría usarse para argumentar hacia la verdad, no me gustaría tenerlo de modo que, ya sabes, todos estuvieran obligados a eso. Pero creo que me imagino casi como una corriente dentro de X que se centra en la verdad y que acepta algunas reglas adicionales sobre cómo discutirían. Sí, hombre.

LEX: Me encantaría. Donde hay, en términos de corrientes que se cruzan y se pueden separar, las que hablan mierda, donde la gente simplemente disfruta hablando mierda. Bueno. Adelante, hombre. Y luego está la verdad y luego, eh, quiero decir, hay humor, luego hay buenas vibraciones. Ya sabes, no soy alguien que necesita absolutamente buenas vibraciones todo el tiempo, pero a veces es bueno tenerlas, es bueno simplemente iniciar sesión y no tener que ver el drama, las peleas, las discusiones, las, las cancelaciones, las mamás, todo esto. Es bueno ver, por eso voy a Reddit, cuáles son los animales lindos, si hay lindos cachorros y gatitos.

GREG: Y es como, solo quiero Veo a Ryan Reynolds cantando con Will Farrell.

LEX: Quiero decir, a veces eso es todo lo que necesitas en mi corazón. Sí. No todo el tiempo, sólo un poquito y volvamos a la batalla por la verdad. Bueno. Entonces, ¿qué pasa con el ismo?

GREG: ¿Qué tal como Mia? Eso está en todas partes. Um, cuando lo miras, uh, cuando miras Twitter, cuando miras las redes sociales en general, um, y el primero, como lo que llamamos la carrera de obstáculos, es básicamente probado en el tiempo, anticuado, ya sabes. , esquivas argumentativas que todo el mundo utiliza. ¿Y qué pasa con asm? Es simplemente mencionar algo, ya sabes, como si alguien presentara un argumento, como si Biden fuera corrupto. Y luego alguien dice, bueno, Trump fue peor, ya sabes, y ese no es un argumento ilegítimo, ya sabes, para defenderse, pero parece que sucede.Cada vez que alguien hace una afirmación, alguien simplemente señala alguna otra cosa que estaba sucediendo y puede atenuarse cada vez más a partir de lo que realmente estás tratando de argumentar. Y cuando ves esto todo el tiempo en las redes sociales y es como, ya sabes, yo era un gran admirador del programa diario de Jon Stewart, pero muchísimo.de cuál era el humor y cuál era la táctica para discutir era esto de aquí. Es como, Oh, estoy argumentando sobre este importante problema. Oh, en realidad, ya sabes, hay otro problema aquí que me preocupa más. Y eso, ya sabes, y en, ya sabes, elijamos lo de la derecha aquí. Entonces, el 6 de enero, ya sabes, viendo a todos discutir sobre, um, chop, ya sabes, como, um, uh, la parte ocupada de Seattle o la parte ocupada de Portland y todo, y básicamente tratando de decir, Oh, Estás mencionando los disturbios del 6 de enero. Um, y por cierto, vivo en Capitol Hill. Créanme, era muy consciente de lo aterrador y malo que era. Um, ya sabes, como dije, mi papá creció en Yugoslavia y esa fue una noche en la que todos cenamos en el sótano. Porque yo digo, Oh, cuando la mierda baje, come en el sótano. Fue, fue, fue realmente aterrador. Y la gente trataría de desviar la seriedad del 6 de enero argumentando que, bueno, están sucediendo cosas locas y horribles en todo el país. Uh, ya sabes, disturbios, uh, uh, um, que surgieron de algunas de las protestas por la justicia social. Y, por supuesto, la respuesta es que usted puede preocuparse por ambas cosas y encontrar ambas cosas como problemas. Pero ya sabes, si estoy discutiendo sobre Chop, ya sabes, que alguien mencione el 6 de enero no es muy relevante. O si estoy hablando del 6 de enero, de que alguien mencione los disturbios en 2020, ¿no es útil?

LEX: Hicimos un viaje largo y oscuro desde lo que pasa con el ismo y, uh, relacionado con eso. dotación de paja y dotación de acero. Entonces tergiversando la, la, la, la perspectiva de la, la, la perspectiva opuesta. Y esto es algo que también, uh, supongo que es muy frecuente y es difícil hacer lo contrario, que es que el acero requiere empatía o requiere elocuencia. Requiere comprensión, realmente hacer la investigación y comprender la perspectiva alternativa.

GREG: Mi... maravilloso empleado, Ángel y Eduardo, tienen algo que él llama personal estrella y yo me encuentro haciendo esto lote. Es bueno tener, ya sabes, dos padres inmigrantes, um, porque recuerdo estar en San Francisco, uh, ya sabes, uh, en el tipo extraño de cohorte del ACLU Slash Burning Man y tener un amigo allí que era un artista que hablaría de odiar a Kansas. Y esa era su metáfora de la América media, eso es lo que quiso decir con ella. Y estaba algo orgulloso del hecho de que odiaba Kansas. Y yo digo, tienes que entender. Todavía los veo a todos ustedes un poco como extranjeros y pienso en cambiar el nombre de Kansas a Croacia, ya saben, cambiar el nombre de Kansas a, a, a algo. Eso es lo que me parece. Y la idea de ser una estrella, que me gusta, es la idea de ser así, entonces estás diciendo que realmente odias a tu minoría religiosa dominante, y ahí es cuando empiezas a distanciarte un poco de ella. Aunque Estados Unidos sea típico, es excepcional en varios sentidos, pero algunas de nuestras dinámicas son increíblemente típicas. Es una de las razones por las que, cuando la gente empieza a leer a Thomas Soul, por ejemplo, empiezan a engancharse porque una de las cosas que hace es realizar análisis comparativos de los problemas de los países y señala que algunas de estas cosas que creemos que son simplemente exclusivos de Estados Unidos existen en, ya sabes, el 75% del resto de los países del mundo. El libro de Francis Fukuyama, eh, que estoy leyendo ahora, Orígenes del orden político, en realidad hace este maravilloso trabajo al señalar que no somos especiales en una variedad de maneras. En realidad, esto es algo que tengo muy presente. Y Fukuyama, por supuesto, es un gran libro. No lo es, está un poco forzado en su escritura porque su término para una de las cosas que le preocupan y que destruye las sociedades es la repatriación, que es la reversión a sociedades en las que favoreces a tu familia y amigos. Y de hecho, pienso que mucho de lo que estoy viendo en los Estados Unidos me preocupa que podamos estar pasando por un pequeño proceso de repatriación. Y creo que esa es una de las razones por las que la gente está tan enojada. Creo que tenemos la perspectiva de que nosotros, ya sabes, casi parecemos tener una elección que iba a ser, ya sabes, Jeb Bush contra Hillary Clinton. Es como, ¿somos ahora un país dinástico? ¿Es eso lo que está pasando? Pero también es una de las razones por las que la gente se enoja tanto por las admisiones heredadas, por el hecho de que ciertas familias parecen ser capaces de mantener a su gente en las clases altas de los Estados Unidos perpetuamente. Y créanme, yo era pobre cuando era niño y fui y tuve que ir a una de las fantasías. Tengo que ir a Stanford.Y pude ver cómo la gente te trata de manera diferente, de una manera que es casi insultante. Básicamente me gustaDe repente, para cierto tipo de persona, yo era una persona legítima. Y veo cuánto depende Estados Unidos de Harvard y de Yale para producir su clase dominante. Voy a utilizar un término que suena muy bien. Y esa es una de las razones por las que hay que preocuparse especialmente por lo que sucede en estas universidades de élite. Y estas universidades de élite, con la excepción de la Universidad de Chicago y la UVA, obtienen muy malos resultados en materia de libertad de expresión. Y eso tiene todo tipo de problemas. No augura nada bueno para el futuro de la protección de la libertad de expresión para el resto de la sociedad.

LEX: Entonces, ¿puedes también empatizar con las personas que votaron por Donald Trump? Porque precisamente eso es una resistencia a este tipo de impulso de la clase dominante, esta realeza que pasa el gobierno de generación en generación.

GREG: Me esfuerzo mucho por empatizar con todos, hasta cierto punto, y trato de para ver realmente de dónde vienen y la ira de la derecha. Lo entiendo. Quiero decir, siento que el libro, así que explorar la mente estadounidense, era un libro que podría complacer al público hasta cierto punto, en parte porque realmente queríamos decir lo que dijimos en el subtítulo de que estos son buenas intenciones y malas ideas que están lastimando a la gente. Y si lo entiendes y lees el libro, puedes decir, está bien, no se trata de nadie siendo malicioso. Ya sabes, se trata de personas que intentan proteger a sus hijos. Simplemente lo están haciendo de una manera que en realidad puede provocar mayor ansiedad, depresión y, extrañamente, eventualmente representar una amenaza a la libertad de expresión. Pero en este, no podemos ser del todo, yo y mi, oh, ni siquiera he mencionado a mi brillante coautor, Ricky Schlott, un genio de 23 años. Ella es, ella, ella es increíble. Empecé a trabajar con ella cuando tenía 20 años y es mi coautora de este libro. Entonces, cuando digo nosotros, me refiero a Ricky y a mí. Es un libertario. Periodista libertario.

LEX: Y periodista. Sí. Una mente brillante.

GREG: Sí. Y, en realidad, no podemos escribir esto de una manera demasiado amable porque quienes cancelan no son amables. Hay crueldad y despiadada en ello. Quiero decir, comencé a deprimirme mucho el año pasado cuando lo estaba escribiendo y ni siquiera quería decirle a mi personal por qué me estaba poniendo tan ansioso y deprimido. Es en parte porque estoy hablando de personas que, ya sabes, en algunos de los casos de los que estamos hablando, irán a tu casa y se centrarán en tus hijos. Entonces, esa es una manera larga de decir que puedo entender qué es lo que nos vuelve locos hasta cierto punto en esto. Siento que constantemente sienten que los están iluminando con gas. La educación de élite es realmente un insulto para la clase trabajadora. Me gusta, parte de la ideología que es dominante en este momento trata a casi el 70% del público estadounidense, como lo son, pensamos que desarrollamos esto un poco en la fortaleza retórica perfecta, como lo son para algunos, de alguna manera ilegítimo y no digno de respeto o compasión.

LEX: Sí. El elitismo general que irradia, el elitismo autoalimentado que irradia la gente que va a estas instituciones.

GREG: Y lo curioso es que el elitismo ha sido reenvasado como una especie de se disfraza como una especie de compasión infinita, pero esencialmente se basa en una especie de ideología muy, para ser franco, demasiado simple y demasiado simple, una explicación simple del mundo que divide a las personas en grupos y las juzga por lo oprimidas que están en sus, en la intersección de sus diversas identidades. Y llegó a eso, creo que inicialmente con un llamado desde un núcleo compasivo, pero se usa de una manera que puede ser muy cruel, muy desdeñoso, sin compasión y te permite no tomarlo en serio. la mayoría de tus semejantes.

LEX: Es realmente extraño cómo sucedió eso. Tal vez puedas explorar por qué algo que suena bien al principio. Sí. Puede ser, puede crear, puede convertirse en un arma tan cruel para cancelar y herir a las personas e ignorarlas. Quiero decir, esto es lo que describiste con la fortaleza retórica perfecta. Sí. Que es un conjunto de preguntas. Tal vez puedas explicar cuál es la fortaleza retórica perfecta.

GREG: Sí. Así que la fortaleza retórica perfecta es la forma en que se ha desarrollado en la izquierda para no llegar nunca al argumento real de alguien. Quiero hacer un diagrama, como un diagrama de flujo de esto, aquí está el argumento y aquí está esta fortaleza perfecta que los desviará cada vez de llegar al argumento. Y comencé a notar esto ciertamente cuando estaba en la facultad de derecho, que había muchas formas diferentes de descartar a las personas y perfeccionar la fortaleza retórica en el primer paso. Y puedo dar fe de esto porque también fui culpable de eso: puedes despedir a la gente si puedes argumentar que son conservadores.No es necesario que sean conservadores para ser claros. Sólo hay que decir que lo son. Así que nunca leí a Thomas Sowell porque era de derechas. No leí a Camille PogliaPorque yo, yo, alguien me había convencido de que ella era de derecha. Había muchos autores que, y cuando yo estaba en la facultad de derecho, entre muchas personas muy brillantes, ya era un hábito intelectual que si se podía designar algo conservador, entonces no había que pensar en ello. mucho más o lo toman particularmente en serio. Esta es una forma infantil de discutir, pero aun así la usé. Era una táctica común. Incluso mencioné en el libro que hubo un momento en que un amigo activista gay que estaba, creo, decididamente a mi izquierda, pero que aun así tenía esa experiencia pragmática de ser realmente un activista, dijo algo como, bueno, sólo porque el conservador de alguien no No significa que estén equivocados. Y recuerdo sentirme un poco escandalizado en cierto nivel al decir, bueno, eso es más o menos, ¿no es eso todo cuando decimos que son personas un poco malas con malas ideas?

LEX: Puedes simplemente lanzar un, oh, ese tipo es un extremo derecho. Puedes tirar eso.

GREG: Ya no tengo que pensar en ti.

LEX: Sí. Y luego, si eres lo suficientemente popular, pueden ser esos, puede ser un poco pegajoso. Sí.

GREG: Me gusta, y es extraño porque, porque es efectivo, es por eso que sigue acostumbrándose esencialmente, debería haber golpeado a alguien porque, porque yo, ya sabes, tengo un gran liberal. pedigrí, ya sabes, todo, desde trabajar en la ACLU hasta hacer derecho de refugiados en Europa del Este y fui parte de un programa de tutoría ambiental para niños de secundaria del centro de la ciudad en DC. Ya sabes, he sido, he sido, yo, yo, puedo, ya sabes, defenderme como de izquierda, pero odio hacer eso porque también hay una parte de mí que dice, está bien, ¿y qué? ¿De verdad estás diciendo que si mágicamente puedes hacerme discutir o convencerte de que estoy en la derecha, no tendrás que escucharme más? Y repito, eso es discutir como niños. Y la razón por la que esto se ha vuelto tan popular es porque incluso entre, o quizás especialmente entre las élites, funciona tan eficazmente como un arma perfecta que se puede usar sin crítica. Si puedo demostrar que estás en lo correcto, no tengo que hacerlo, no tengo que pensar en ti. No es de extrañar que de repente empieces a ver gente llamando a la ACLU derechista y al New York Times derechista porque ha sido una forma muy efectiva de deslegitimar a las personas como pensadores. Tenemos, ya sabes, Stephen Pinker, que está en nuestra junta de asesores, se refiere a la academia como el polo izquierdo que esencialmente es, es una posición que, desde ese punto de vista, todo mira hacia su derecha, parece como si estuviera a la derecha. Pero una vez que se convierte en una táctica que la aceptamos, y esa es una de las razones por las que, ya sabes, soy más de izquierda, pero creo que soy de centro liberal. Ricky es, ya sabes, un libertario más conservador. E inicialmente pensé: ¿realmente debería escribir algo con alguien que sea más de derechas? Y yo digo, absolutamente debería serlo. De hecho, tengo que estar a la altura de lo que creo en estas cosas porque es ridículo que tengamos esta idea primitiva de que puedes despedir a alguien tan pronto como afirmas, con razón o sin ella, que está en la derecha.

LEX: Bueno, creo que corrígeme si me equivoco, pero siento que recientemente te llamaron fuego de derecha, tal vez por asociación debido a ese debate.

GREG: Oh, el LA Times . Los Ángeles Times. Hablemos del LA Times.

LEX: Entonces sí, hay un artículo, hay un debate. No puedo esperar para verlo porque no creo que esté disponible todavía para verlo en video. Tienes que asistir personalmente. No puedo esperar a verlo. Uh, pero el fuego fue en parte apoyo y luego LA Times escribió, um, un artículo mordaz sobre, uh, que todos en el debate básicamente tenían razón y se inclinaban hacia la derecha. Vale.

GREG: Uh, hay mucho que desempacar allí. Uh, ya sabes, Barry Weiss tiene este, ya sabes, un gran, gran proyecto, la prensa libre. Me ha impresionado mucho. Se trata de cubrir historias que muchos medios de comunicación, de derecha o de izquierda, no están dispuestos a cubrir. Um, e hicimos un... organizamos un debate con ella. Um, uh, y nosotros queríamos hacerlo lo más divertido y controvertido posible. Entonces Fire y la prensa libre organizaron un debate. ¿Falló la revolución sexual? Entonces el debate fue realmente emocionante, realmente divertido. El lado que decía que la revolución sexual no fue un fracaso en el que estaban Grimes y Sarah Hader. Una... fue, ya sabes, una noche agradable, sustanciosa y reflexiva. Y obtuvimos una revisión, hubo una revisión que fue un poco mordaz sobre todo el asunto. E incluía una línea que decía "fuego", que dice creer en la libertad de expresión, pero sólo defiende puntos de vista hasta cierto punto. No puedo creer que eso siquiera haya aparecido en la revista.Porque no se trata sólo de llamarnos. Porque, por supuesto, ya sabes, la implicación, por supuesto, de que somos de derecha, um, lo que en realidad no somos, el personal se inclina decididamente más hacia la izquierda yA la derecha. Um, pero también defendemos a personas de todo el espectro, todo el tiempo. Como si eso fuera algo que incluso la búsqueda más mínima en Google habría resuelto. Entonces, como si nos hubieran dado algo de presión en Los Ángeles Times sobre esto porque es como, sí, si lo dijeras. En mi opinión, son de derechas, les habríamos respondido, ya sabes, diciendo, bueno, aquí, aquí, aquí están los siguientes 50.000 ejemplos de, de, de nosotros no lo somos, pero cuando realmente haces la afirmación fáctica de que sólo defendemos opiniones con la que estamos de acuerdo, en primer lugar, no hay manera de que estemos de acuerdo con ella. No hay manera de que estemos de acuerdo con las opiniones porque en realidad tenemos un personal políticamente diverso que ni siquiera está de acuerdo sobre qué opiniones son buenas y qué opiniones tenemos. Pero sí, tuve que hacerlo, en un momento en que alguien hizo algo como esto y estaba siendo un poco frívolo acerca de que la libertad de expresión estaba bien. Hice un hilo de 70 tweets de largo, ya sabes, simplemente dije: Oye, ¿realmente crees que esto está bien? Decidí no hacer eso, um, en este en particular. Pero lo bueno de esto es que demostró dos partes del libro, la cancelación de la mente estadounidense. Si no más, uno de ellos está despidiendo a alguien porque es conservador. Uh, y como esa era la implicación, no tienes que escuchar el fuego porque son conservadores. Pero el otro es algo, un término que inventé específicamente para la forma en que la gente discute en Twitter, que es proyección de hipocresía. Hola, soy una persona a la que sólo le importa un lado de la valla política. Y creo que todos los demás son hipócritas. Um, y por cierto, no he hecho ninguna investigación real sobre esto, pero asumo que todos los demás son hipócritas. Y ves que esto sucede todo el tiempo. El, el, y esto sucede a menudo y alguien dirá, ¿dónde está el fuego en este caso? Y pensamos que estamos literalmente citados en el enlace que acaba de enviar, pero que en realidad no leyó. O es como, ¿dónde está el fuego en esto? Es como, aquí está nuestra demanda al respecto de hace seis meses. Um, entonces es algo favorito. Y también el programa diario de John Stewart, como el, el, el, el, um, uh, ¿qué pasa con el ismo y el tipo de idea similar de que estas personas deben ser hipócritas es algo que es una gran comedia, pero en la medida en que en realidad es una táctica retórica que te llevará a la verdad, simplemente asumir que tu oponente o simplemente acusar a tu oponente de ser siempre un hipócrita no es una buena táctica para la verdad. Pero, por cierto, siempre tiende a provenir de personas que en realidad no son consistentes con la libertad de expresión.

LEX: Así que eso deja la proyección, pero básicamente no investiga si la persona lo es o no. No soy un hipócrita y asumir que otros son una gran fracción de los que lo leen, tampoco hará la investigación. Y, por lo tanto, este tipo de afirmación se convierte en una especie de veracidad sin fundamento en la realidad real. Rompe esa barrera entre lo que es verdad y lo que no es verdad porque si la mafia dice que algo es verdad, lo es, se necesita demasiado esfuerzo para corregirlo.

GREG: Y hay tres formas que quiero Es como, ya sabes, quiero responder a esto, que es simplemente dar ejemplo tras ejemplo de tiempos en los que defendimos a personas de ambos lados de cada tema mayoritario, básicamente de cada tema importante, ya sea Israel, Palestina, ya sea terrorismo. , ya sea matrimonio homosexual, hemos tenido abortos. Hemos defendido ambos lados de ese argumento. La otra parte, y yo la llamo los huérfanos de la guerra cultural. Realmente quiero instar a los medios a que empiecen a preocuparse por los casos de libertad de expresión que en realidad no tienen una valencia política y que en realidad se refieren simplemente al ejercicio de poder a la antigua usanza contra el pequeño individuo o niña o pequeño grupo en el campus o fuera del campus para el caso. Porque estos casos suceden. Muchos de nuestros litigios son simplemente sobre personas insignificantes, como personas comunes y corrientes, a las que se les dice que no pueden protestar, que no pueden sostener carteles. Y luego, la última parte del argumento que quiero que la gente realmente entienda es, sí. Y por cierto, los derechistas también se meten en problemas. Um, y hay ataques de la izquierda y deberías tomarlos en serio también. A usted debería importarle cuando los republicanos se meten en problemas. Debería importarle cuando California tiene un DEI, un programa que requiere esto en los colegios comunitarios de California tiene una política de programa DEI que en realidad requiere que incluso los profesores de química trabajen en diferentes ideas de DEI, desde la interseccionalidad hasta el antirracismo, en sus aulas y en sus programas de estudios. , etcétera. Esta es una grave violación de la libertad académica. Es tan malo como decirles a los profesores lo que no pueden decir. Como luchamos y derrotamos en Florida. Es incluso peor decirles lo que deben decir. Eso es francamente totalitario. Y estamos demandando contra esto.Y lo que estoy diciendo es que, cuando despides a alguien simplemente por estar del otro lado de la valla política, también estás afirmando, afirmando que ninguno de estos casos importa también. Y quiero gentepreocuparse por la censura incluso cuando es contra personas que odian.

LEX: La censura es censura. Si podemos tomar esa tangente brevemente con DEI, diversidad, equidad e inclusión, ¿cuál es el bien y el daño de tales programas?

GREG: DEI, conozco personas que son, um, consultores de DEI. o algo así, de hecho tengo un querido amigo al que quiero mucho, um, que hace DEI. Gente absolutamente decente. Lo que quieren es crear lazos de comprensión, de amistad, de compasión entre la gente, la gente que es diferente. Desafortunadamente, la investigación sobre lo que realmente hace gran parte de DEI es a menudo lo contrario de eso. Y creo que es en parte un problema con parte de la ideología que proviene de una teoría racial crítica, que es algo real, por cierto, que informa gran parte de DEI, que en realidad la convierte en algo más probable que divida que unir. Hablamos de esto, mimando en la mente estadounidense, como la diferencia entre la política de identidad común de la humanidad y la política de identidad del enemigo común. Y creo que, uh, conozco a algunas de las personas que conozco que hacen DEI, realmente quieren que sea una política de identidad común para la humanidad, pero algunas de las suposiciones ideológicas reales que están incorporadas pueden en realidad hacer que la gente se sienta más distanciados unos de otros. Ahora, cuando comencé en FIRE, mis primeros casos involucraron el 11 de septiembre. Um, y fue malo. Uh, los profesores estaban siendo atacados. Los profesores estaban perdiendo sus trabajos por decir cosas insensibles sobre el 11 de septiembre y tanto de derecha como de izquierda, en realidad en ese caso, a veces más, mucho más de derecha. Um, y fue realmente malo. Y unos cinco profesores perdieron sus puestos de trabajo. Eso es malo. Cinco profesores fueron despedidos en un período de tiempo relativamente corto por una opinión política. Eso es algo que, ya sabes, se escribiría en décadas anteriores. Ahora estamos evaluando cuántos profesores han sido objeto de cancelación entre 2014 y mediados de este año, julio de 2023. Estamos en aproximadamente más de mil intentos de conseguir profesores. despedidos o castigados, generalmente impulsados por estudiantes y administradores, a menudo impulsados por profesores, lamentablemente también. Alrededor de dos tercios de ellos resultan en que el profesor sea castigado de alguna manera. Um, todo, desde, ya sabes, que se elimine su artículo hasta la suspensión, etcétera. Alrededor de una quinta parte de ellos resultan en el despido de profesores. Entonces, en este momento estamos, son casi 200, alrededor de 190, um, profesores siendo despedidos. Um, entonces quiero dar algo de contexto aquí. Generalmente se considera que el Terror Rojo fue de 1947 a 1957. Por cierto, terminó en el 57 cuando finalmente quedó claro, gracias a la primera enmienda, que en realidad no se podía despedir a la gente por sus ideologías. Antes de eso, muchas universidades pensaban que podían hacerlo. Decían: este tipo es un comunista muy doctrinario. Ya sabes, no se puede simplemente esperar. Voy a despedirlos. Pensaron que realmente podían hacer eso. Um, y sólo era el año 57 cuando se estableció la ley. Entonces, como ahora, esto está sucediendo en un entorno donde la libertad de expresión y la libertad académica están claramente protegidas, um, en las universidades públicas de los Estados Unidos. Y todavía estamos viendo este tipo de números. Um, durante el Terror Rojo, el estudio más grande que se hizo sobre lo que estaba pasando es que creo que esto salió como 55. Y la evaluación fue que hubo alrededor de 62 profesores despedidos por ser comunistas y aproximadamente 90 profesores despedidos por opiniones políticas en general. Um, normalmente es así, se informa que es alrededor de 100. Um, entonces 60, 90, 100, dependiendo de cómo lo mires, creo que el número es en realidad mayor. Um, pero eso es sólo en retrospectiva. Lo que quiero decir con retrospectiva es que podemos mirar hacia atrás y encontrar que hubo más profesores que fueron despedidos, como lo revela el tiempo, somos 190 profesores despedidos. Y todavía tengo que aguantar que la gente diga que esto ni siquiera está sucediendo. Y estoy como en los nueve años y medio de la cultura de la cancelación, 190 profesores despedidos en los 11 años del Terror Rojo, probablemente, ya sabes, alrededor de cien, tal vez probablemente más, el número va a seguir subiendo. Um, pero a diferencia del Terror Rojo, donde la gente podía decir claramente que algo estaba sucediendo, lo más loco de la cultura de la cancelación es que algunos todavía tratan con personas que dicen que esto no está sucediendo en absoluto. Y no ha sido sutil en el campus. Y, por cierto, sabemos que es un recuento tremendamente insuficiente, porque cuando encuestamos a los profesores, el 17 % de ellos dijeron que habían sido amenazados con, eh, amenazados con una investigación o realmente investigados por lo que enseñaban, decían o sus investigación. Y un tercio de ellos dijo que los administradores les dijeron que no realizaran investigaciones controvertidas.Entonces, si extrapolamos eso, es un número enorme. Y la razón por la que no oirás hablar de muchos de estos casos es porque hay muchosdiferentes mecanismos inductores de conformidad en todo el asunto. Sí. Y esa es una de las razones por las que la idea de agregar algo como una D, como exigir una declaración DEI para ser contratado o ingresar a una escuela en el entorno actual, es completamente descabellada. Hemos tenido una verdadera crisis de libertad académica en los últimos años, especialmente desde 2017 en los campus, para empezar, tenemos muy poca diversidad de puntos de vista. Y en estas circunstancias, los administradores empiezan a decir: ¿saben cuál es el problema? Tenemos demasiado pensamiento heterogéneo. Lo hemos hecho, no somos lo suficientemente homogéneos. En realidad necesitamos, ya sabes, necesitamos otra prueba de fuego política, lo cual es una locura. Y eso es lo que efectivamente es una declaración DEI. Porque no hay manera de completar una declaración DEI sin que alguien lo evalúe sobre su política. Está muy claro. Está muy claro. Incluso hicimos un experimento con este Nate Honeycutt. Consiguió que participaran casi 3000 profesores evaluando diferentes tipos de declaraciones DEI. Um, y uno era básicamente como el tipo estándar de interseccionalidad de política de identidad, el otro trataba sobre la diversidad de puntos de vista. Uno trataba sobre la diversidad religiosa y el otro sobre la diversidad socioeconómica. Y en lo que realmente me preocupa es que tenemos muy poca diversidad socioeconómica, particularmente en la educación superior de élite, pero también en el período educativo. Así que el experimento contó con una gran participación y una configuración realmente interesante. Y trató de modelar la forma en que muchas de estas políticas DEI se implementaron realmente. Y una de las formas en que se han implementado, y creo que en algunas de las escuelas de California, es que los administradores revisan las declaraciones de la DEI antes. Cualquier otra persona los mira y luego elimina a las personas de la cima, dependiendo de cómo se sienten acerca de sus declaraciones de DEI y la de la diversidad de puntos de vista. Creo que la mitad de las personas que lo revisaron lo eliminarían de inmediato. Um, y creo que fue básicamente lo mismo para la diversidad religiosa. Fue un poco mejor, como un 40 % para la diversidad socioeconómica, pero eso me mata. Como la idea de que, sí, en realidad es el tipo de diversidad que creo que necesitamos mucho más en la educación superior. Por cierto, puedes estar de acuerdo en que no es hostil a los otros tipos. Um, pero la idea de que necesitamos más gente de abajo, ya sabes, tres cuartas partes de la sociedad estadounidense, como en una educación superior, creo que debería ser algo que todos podamos entender. Pero el único que realmente tuvo éxito fue el que surgió exactamente del tipo de, ya sabes, ideología que pensaron que les gustaría a los traseros, que es como, está bien, no hay manera de que esto no pueda ser una política. Prueba de fuego. Hemos demostrado que es una prueba de fuego política y todavía escuela tras escuela las agrega a su proceso de solicitud para hacer que las escuelas sean aún más homogéneas ideológicamente.

LEX: ¿Por qué eso tiene un efecto negativo? ¿Es porque impone una especie de pensamiento grupal donde la gente tiene miedo, comienza a tener miedo de pensar y hablar libremente, liberalmente sobre lo que sea?

GREG: Bueno, primero, selecciona a personas que tienden a ser más hacia la izquierda, um, en una situación en la que ya tienes gente, una situación en la que las universidades se inclinan decididamente en esa dirección, pero también establece esencialmente un conjunto de ideas sagradas que, si te preguntan si, sabes, lo que has hecho para promover el antirracismo, um, herido, uh, cómo has sido consciente de la interseccionalidad, es poco probable que realmente entres. Y si dijeras, por cierto, en realidad creo Estos son conceptos dudosos. Creo que son delgados. Creo que filosóficamente no son muy defendibles, pero básicamente si, si tu posición fuera, en realidad rechazo, um, estos conceptos por ser demasiado simples. Um, no lo harás, no vas a entrar. Y, y, y creo que, um, la persona en la que siempre pienso que no era un derechista que diría, vete al infierno. Si tú, si le hiciste llenar una de estas cosas, es Feynman. Siento que si le dieras una de estas cosas a Richard Feynman, él diría que la haría pedazos.

LEX: Sí. Y no conseguir el trabajo. Sí, hay algún elemento que crea este miedo difícil de precisar. Entonces dijiste como el despido, lo que yo quería decir es despedir a cien o 200 personas. La cuestión es incluso despedir a una persona, lo acabo de ver. Puede crear este silencioso efecto dominó del miedo. Oh por supuesto. Ese único despido de una facultad. Oh, absolutamente. Tiene un efecto dominó en decenas de miles de personas, de educadores, de quién es contratado, qué tipo de conversaciones se tienen, qué tipo de libros de texto se eligen, qué tipo de autocensura y diferentes tipos de eso está pasando.Es difícil medir eso. Sí.

GREG: Quiero decir, cuando les preguntas a los profesores, ya sabes, ¿se sienten intimidados por la situación actual?¿ambiente? Um, la respuesta es sí. Y profesores particularmente conservadores, ya sabes, ya sabes, informando que temen por sus trabajos en muchos casos diferentes.

LEX: Tienes muchas buenas estadísticas en el libro, cosas como la autocensura. Cuando se les proporcionó la definición de autocensura, al menos una cuarta parte de los estudiantes dijeron que se autocensuraban con bastante frecuencia o muy a menudo durante conversaciones con otros estudiantes, con profesores y durante discusiones en el aula, 25%, 27% y 28% respectivamente. Uh, una cuarta parte de los estudiantes también dijo que es más probable que se autocensuren en el campus ahora, uh, en el momento en que fueron encuestados que cuando comenzaron la universidad. Entonces, las universidades inculcan esta idea de censura, autocensura.

GREG: Y volviendo a la comparación del Terror Rojo, y esta es también una de las cosas interesantes de los datos, Es que en ese mismo estudio del que estaba hablando, el estudio más completo sobre el Terror Rojo, hubo encuestas sobre si los profesores se autocensuraban o no debido al miedo al medio ambiente. Y el 9% de los profesores dijo que se estaban autocensurando sus investigaciones y que lo que decían, el 9%, es realmente malo. Um, eso es casi una décima parte de los profesores que dicen que en realidad su discurso fue frío. Cuando hicimos esta pregunta a los profesores en nuestra última encuesta de profesores, um, cuando se toman en conjunto, si les preguntamos, ¿se autocensuran en su investigación o se autocensuran en clase? censura en línea, etcétera, era el 90% de los profesores. Entonces, la idea de que en realidad estamos en un entorno histórico, en términos de cuán asustada está la gente de expresar puntos de vista controvertidos. Creo que es la razón por la que vamos a estudiar esto dentro de 50 años, de la misma manera que estudiamos el Terror Rojo. Um, no es la idea de que esto no esté sucediendo, simplemente se verá correctamente como una locura.

LEX: Así que tal vez podamos simplemente, eh, discutir la inclinación actual de la academia hacia la izquierda. , que usted describe en varias perspectivas diferentes. Primero, hay un cuadro de índice de registro de votantes por departamento, lo cual creo que es interesante. ¿Puedes explicar este gráfico y qué muestra?

GREG: Sí, cuando comencé a disparar en 2001, no tomé tan en serio el tema de la diversidad de puntos de vista. Pensé que era algo de lo que se quejaban los derechistas. Um, pero realmente comencé a entender lo que sucede cuando tienes una comunidad con baja, um, con baja, uh, diversidad de puntos de vista. Y, de hecho, gran parte de la investigación que más me interesó se realizó en conjunto con el gran Cass Sunstein, quien escribe mucho sobre la polarización grupal. Um, porque, uh, y la investigación sobre esto es muy sólida, pero esencialmente cuando tienes grupos con, um, diversidad política, y puedes ver esto en los jueces, por ejemplo, tiende a producir, ya sabes, de manera confiable. resultados más moderados. Um, mientras que los grupos que lo son, que tienen baja diversidad política, tienden a entrar en espiral, en espiral, en su propia dirección. Y cuando tienes una gran mayoría de personas desde una sola perspectiva política, eso es un problema para la producción de ideas. Crea una situación en la que hay ideas sagradas. Um, y cuando miras algunos de los departamentos, um, ya sabes, creo que la S, la estimación de Crimson es que Harvard tiene un 3% de conservadores. Pero cuando miras los diferentes departamentos, hay departamentos de élite que literalmente no tienen, um, uh, conservadores, uh, en ellos. Y creo que eso es en un entorno intelectual saludable. El problema es definitivamente peor. Um, a medida que te vuelves más elitista, definitivamente vemos más casos de profesores zurdos cancelados en escuelas menos elitistas. Se pone peor a medida que bajas de las escuelas de élite, ahí es donde gran parte del tercio de los intentos de castigar a los profesores que tienen éxito, ya sabes, provienen de la derecha. y en gran medida de fuentes externas al campus. Y también dedicamos mucho tiempo a hablar de eso en el libro. Um, es algo que creo que está subestimado. Uh, pero cuando se trata de la baja, baja diversidad de puntos de vista, es, ya sabes, funciona como se esperaría hasta cierto punto, ya sabes, la economía es cuatro a uno o algo así. No es tan malo. Um, pero luego, cuando empiezas a entrar en algunas de las humanidades, ya sabes, hay departamentos que literalmente no existen.

LEX: ¿Existe un buen por qué la administración de la facultad universitaria de la universidad se movió hacia la izquierda?

GREG: Sí, no me encanta, y este es un argumento que usted A veces nos topamos con el argumento de la izquierda de que, bueno, la gente de izquierda es simplemente más inteligente. Bien. Y es como, está bien, es interesante porque al menos la investigación del 10Hace años indicaba que si profundizas un poco más en eso, muchas de las personas que se consideran de izquierda tienden a ser un poco más. Libertarian, la canción que Pinker, ya sabes, escribió bastante sobre la idea de que somos más inteligentes. No lo es, no es una opinión. Yo, al menos me siento un poco cómodo con, um, creo que, uh, eso, que los departamentos toman, um, impulso cuando se convierten en un lugar donde dices, wow, sería Realmente desagradable para mí trabajar en este departamento. Si soy el conservador simbólico. Y creo que eso cobra vida propia. También hay departamentos donde muchas ideologías son explícitamente izquierdistas. Um, si miras las escuelas de educación, muchas de las cosas que en realidad sobran de lo que correctamente se llama teorías raciales críticas están presentes. Y terminas teniendo eso en varios departamentos. Um, y sería muy extraño ser, en muchos departamentos, un profesor de trabajador social conservador. Estoy seguro de que existen. Um, pero hay mucha presión para que te calles si lo haces.

LEX: Entonces, el proceso a la izquierda de cancelación, como empezaste a hablar con la fortaleza retórica perfecta, la, la primera. El paso es despedir a una persona. Si son justos, si puedes ponerles una etiqueta de conservadores, puedes descartarlos de esa manera. ¿Qué, qué otro despido eficiente o efectivo hay?

GREG: Nos divertimos un poco con, uh, uh, con números demográficos, pero analizo esto por altura. Um, uh, y recuerdo que él dijo: "No, no, no incluyo el porcentaje real". Yo digo, no, necesitamos incluir los porcentajes reales. Porque la gente es realmente mala para estimar cómo se ve realmente la demografía de los EE. UU., tanto de derecha como de izquierda de diferentes maneras. Um, entonces lo ponemos en números y hablamos de, ya sabes, ser despedido por ser blanco o ser despedido por, uh, ser heterosexual o ser despedido por ser hombre. Um, y nosotros, uh, y ya puedes descartar a la gente por ser conservadora. Y nosotros, entonces, nosotros, damos ejemplos en el libro de cómo estos se utilizan para despedir a las personas y, a menudo, sobre temas no relacionados con el hecho de que son hombres o si son minoría o no. Y luego llegamos a, creo que es como la capa seis y pensamos, sorpresa, ¿adivinen qué? Estás en el 0,4% de la población y nada de eso importaba. Porque si tienes una opinión equivocada, incluso si estás en ese 0,4 % de las personas más interseccionales que jamás hayan existido y tienes una opinión equivocada, eres un hereje y, de hecho, probablemente te odiarán aún más. Y la parte más interesante de la investigación que hicimos para esto fue preguntarles a todos los conservadores y moderados negros prominentes que conocíamos personalmente, ¿les han dicho que no son realmente negros para conocer la opinión que tenían de cada uno de ellos? Fue como, oh sí, no. Y es un poco gracioso porque a menudo los zurdos blancos les dicen: oh, ¿te consideras negro? John McWhorter habló de tener un reportero. Um, cuando habló, cuando demostró que disentía de algo de lo que describió como una especie de racismo que despertó en su libro, ideas que despertaron, el reportero en realidad dijo: Entonces, ¿te consideras negro? Él dijo, ¿qué estás loco? Por supuesto que sí. Y Coleman Hughes tenía una de las mejores citas al respecto. Dijo: Constantemente me dicen que lo más importante para cuán legítima es mi opinión es si soy negro o no, pero luego, cuando tengo una opinión disidente, me dan Me dijeron que no soy realmente negro. Tan perfecto. Como si no hubiera, no hubiera manera de refutar este argumento. Um, esa realmente, esa investigación realmente me impactó.

LEX: Entonces, y usted expone esto muy bien en el libro que existe este proceso de decir: ¿eres conservador? Sí. Puedes despedir a la persona. ¿Eres blanco? Despedir a la persona. ¿Es usted varón? Puedes despedir a la persona. Existen estas categorías que le facilitan descartar las ideas de una persona basándose en eso. Y como dijiste, terminas en ese pequeño porcentaje y aún puedes descartar.

GREG: Y no se trata solo de descartar. Yo, nosotros, hablamos de esto desde un punto de vista práctico, la forma en que las limitaciones de la realidad y una de ellas es el tiempo. Um, y mucha cancelación de la cultura, um, como, uh, como normas culturales, ya que esta forma de ganar argumentos sin ganar argumentos implica quedarse sin tiempo.Porque cuando llegas al fondo de, uh, uh, de, o incluso das un par de pasos hacia la fortaleza récord perfecta y, ya sabes, ¿adónde se ha ido el tiempo? Ya sabes, como si, probablemente simplemente te rindas, uh, tratando de, uh, ya sabes, tratando de tener la discusión y nunca llegas a la discusión en primer lugar.

LEX: Todas estas cosas son bastante pegajosas en las redes sociales.

GREG: Redes socialesPrácticamente inventé la fortaleza retórica perfecta.

LEX: Para que cada una de esas etapas tenga una viralidad. Entonces podría, podría persistir y entonces podría entusiasmar mucho a la gente.

GREG: Te permite sentir indignación y superioridad. Sí.

LEX: Por eso, eso en la escala de viralidad te permite nunca llegar a la discusión real del punto. Um, entonces, pero ya sabes, no es solo la izquierda, también es la derecha, entonces la fortaleza retórica eficiente, eh, entonces hay algo de qué enorgullecerse en la derecha.

GREG: Es más eficiente .

LEX: Así que no es necesario escuchar a los liberales y cualquiera podría ser etiquetado como liberal si tiene una opinión equivocada. He visto liberales, izquierdistas e izquierdistas utilizados como, de la misma manera. Eso es una tontería de izquierda. No hay que escuchar a los expertos, ni siquiera a los expertos conservadores, si tienen una opinión equivocada, no hay que escuchar a los periodistas, ni siquiera a los periodistas conservadores, si tienen una opinión equivocada, y entre el ala MAGA, hay una cuarta proposición, hay una disposición cuarta. No necesitas escuchar a nadie que no sea pro Trump.

GREG: Sí. Y lo llamamos eficiente porque elimina a muchas personas a las que probablemente deberías escuchar al menos a veces, ya sabes, como señalamos a veces, cómo cancelar la cultura puede interferir con la fe y la experiencia. Entonces llegamos a sospechar un poco de los expertos, pero al mismo tiempo, si sigues eso y lo sigues mecánicamente, y definitivamente, ya sabes, creo que todo el mundo en los EE. UU. probablemente tenga algún tío mayor, um, uh, quien ejerce algunos de estos. Es una manera realmente eficiente de, por lo tanto, aislarte del resto del mundo y descartar, ya sabes, al menos algunas personas a las que realmente deberías escuchar.

LEX: La forma en que lo planteaste me hizo darme cuenta de que consumimos gran parte de nuestra capacidad cerebral. Estas cosas, es literalmente el momento. Podríamos estar resolviendo cosas. Y te sientes como si te agotaras a través de este proceso de indignación basado en estas etiquetas y nunca llegas a hacerlo, en realidad casi no hay suficiente tiempo para la empatía, como mirar a una persona pensando, bueno, tal vez tenga razón. . Porque estás muy ocupado categorizándolos.

GREG: ¿Qué tiene de divertido la empatía? Y quiero decir, lo interesante de esto es que tanta energía social parece gastarse en estos desagradables deseos primarios donde esencialmente gran parte es como, por favor, dime a quién puedo odiar. ¿Dónde puedo ser legítimamente cruel? ¿Dónde puedo realmente ejercer alguna agresión contra alguien? Um, y a veces parece estar simplemente encontrando nuevas justificaciones para eso. Y es un defecto humano comprensible, ya sabes, que a veces puede utilizarse para defender la justicia. Pero repito, nunca te acercará a la verdad.

LEX: Uh, un caso interesante que cubres sobre experiencia es el de COVID. Sí. Entonces, ¿cómo entró en juego la cultura de la cancelación en el tema de la COVID?

GREG: Sí, creo que la COVID fue un gran golpe para la fe y la experiencia de las personas, y la cultura de la cancelación jugó un papel importante en eso. Um, creo que uno de los mejores ejemplos de esto es Jennifer Say en Levi's. Ella es una mujer encantadora. Ella era vicepresidenta de Levi's. Uh, ella habló de ser potencialmente la presidenta de los jeans Levi's. Y ella era una gran defensora de los niños. Y cuando empezaron a cerrar las escuelas, ella empezó a decir: esto va a ser un desastre. Esto va a perjudicar más a los niños pobres y desfavorecidos. Um, tenemos que encontrar una manera de volver a abrir las escuelas. Y ese era un punto de vista tan herético. Y el tipo típico de cultura de cancelación, eh, ola se hizo cargo, ya que él tenía todo tipo de peticiones para que la despidieran y que ella necesitaba disculparse y todo ese tipo de cosas. Y, ya sabes, le ofrecieron, creo que una indemnización de un millón de dólares, que ella no aceptó porque quería decirle al mundo lo que pensaba sobre esto y quería seguir diciendo, um, que ella no había cambiado de opinión, que esto era un desastre para los jóvenes. Y ahora que esa es la opinión generalizada y la investigación es bastante clara, está bastante claro que esto fue devastador para los jóvenes particularmente desfavorecidos. Como si la gente entendiera que esto estaba bien, probablemente ella tenía razón. Pero uno de los aspectos realmente tristes de la cultura de la cancelación es que la gente olvida por qué te cancelaron y simplemente saben que te odian. Um, hay una especie de persistente como, bueno, ya no tengo que tomarlos en serio. Pero, por cierto, ¿notaste que tenían razón en algo muy importante? Ahora, una cosa curiosa acerca de la libertad de expresión es que la libertad de expresión no existiría si no tuvieras también el derecho de decir cosas que están mal.Porque si no puedes, ya sabes, desarrollar una idea para ti, si no puedes realmente especular, nunca llegarás a algo que sea correcto en primer lugar. Pero es especialmente irritantecuando las personas que tenían razón fueron censuradas y tú, eh, nunca obtienes el crédito que merecen.

LEX: Bueno, este podría ser un buen lugar para preguntar un poco más sobre la libertad de expresión. Y entonces dijiste que incluido en la libertad de expresión está decir cosas que están mal.

GREG: Sí.

LEX: Um, ¿cuál es tu perspectiva sobre el discurso de odio?

GREG: El discurso de odio es la mejor campaña de marketing para la censura. Um, y vino de la academia, um, del siglo XX. Y cuando hablé del movimiento contra la libertad de expresión, ese fue uno de sus primeros inventos. Um, se habló mucho sobre la teoría crítica de la raza, um, y estar en contra de la teoría crítica de la raza y el fuego demandará si dices que la gente no puede defenderla, enseñarla o investigarla, porque no Tengo absolutamente el derecho de seguirlo académicamente. Sin embargo, cada vez que alguien menciona CRT, también debería decir que el primer proyecto de las personas que fundaron CRT, um, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, um, etcétera, iba a desaparecer, fue crear esta nueva categoría de discurso desprotegido llamado discurso de odio y prohibirlo. La persona que permitió esta tendencia, por supuesto, fue Herbert Marcuse en 1965, básicamente cuestionando si la libertad de expresión debería ser o no un valor sagrado en la izquierda. Y estuvo en el bando perdedor durante mucho tiempo. Los liberales, ya sabes, la forma en que crecí, que básicamente era estar a favor de la libertad de expresión, era sinónimo de ser liberal, pero eso comenzó a quedar grabado en el campus. Y la forma en que fue, fue con la idea del discurso de odio, um, eso, eso esencialmente, oh, pero deberías, um, podemos designar el discurso particularmente malo como, uh, no protegido. Um, ¿y quién va a hacer cumplir esto? ¿Quién va a decidir qué es realmente el discurso de odio? Bueno, por lo general, de manera abrumadora, solo puede suceder en un entorno con una diversidad de puntos de vista muy baja porque realmente tienes que estar de acuerdo sobre cuáles son las cosas más odiosas y equivocadas. Y hay un principio fundamental. Se hace referencia a esto en un gran caso sobre la quema de banderas en la primera enmienda del que creo que todo el mundo podría beneficiarse. No se puede prohibir la expresión sólo porque sea ofensiva. Es demasiado subjetivo. Básicamente, es una de las razones por las que este tipo de códigos se han adoptado más felizmente en lugares como Europa, donde tienen la sensación de que hay un alemán modal o un inglés modal. Um, y creo que esto es ofensivo y por lo tanto puedo decir que esto está mal en un país más multicultural, en un país genuinamente más diverso que nunca ha tenido una idea honesta de que existe un solo tipo de estadounidense. Nunca tuvimos la idea del tío Sam, pero eso siempre fue una especie de broma. Um, Boston siempre supo que no era Richmond siempre supo que no era Georgia siempre supo que no era, ya sabes, Alaska. Siempre hemos sido una mezcolanza y nos encontramos en una sociedad tan diversa que no se pueden prohibir cosas simplemente porque son ofensivas. Um, y esa es una de las razones por las que el discurso de odio no es una categoría de discurso desprotegida. Y yo, y voy más allá, mi teoría sobre la libertad de expresión es ligeramente diferente a la de la mayoría de los demás abogados constitucionales. Um, y creo que eso se debe en parte a que algunas de las formas en que algunas de estas teorías, aunque muchas de ellas son realmente buenas, son inadecuadas, no son lo suficientemente amplias. Y a veces llamo a mi teoría teoría puramente informativa de la libertad de expresión. Um, o a veces cuando quiero ser elegante, la teoría del laboratorio y el espejo y su inquilino más importante es que si el objetivo es el proyecto del conocimiento humano, que es conocer el mundo que es, no se puede. Conocer el mundo tal como es sin saber lo que la gente realmente piensa y lo que la gente realmente piensa es un hecho increíblemente importante de saber. Entonces, cada vez que lo dices, no puedes decir que en realidad te estás privando del conocimiento de lo que la gente realmente cree que estás causando lo que Tim o Karan, que está en nuestra junta de asesores, llaman falsificación de preferencias. Um, terminas con una imagen inexacta del mundo, que por cierto, en muchos casos, um, debido a que hay activistas que quieren restringir más el discurso, en realidad tienden a pensar que las personas tienen más prejuicios que ellos, uh, de lo que podrían ser. Um, y en realidad este tipo de restricciones, hubo un libro llamado paranoia racial, um, que salió hace unos 15 años que señalaba que la imposición de algunos de estos códigos a veces puede hacer que la gente piense que lo único que mantiene Dejas de ser un racista furioso, um, son estos códigos. Así que debe ser muy, muy malo. De hecho, puede empeorar todas estas cosas.Y una, de la que hablamos en el libro, una forma muy práctica y real de empeorar las cosas es que cuando censuras a las personas, no cambia su opinión. Simplemente los alienta a no compartirlo con personas que los meterán en problemas. Por lo quelos lleva a hablar con personas con las que ya están de acuerdo y la polarización del grupo despega. Así que tenemos algunos datos interesantes en el libro, um, sobre cómo sacar a la gente de Twitter, por ejemplo, ya sabes, en 2017. Um, y de nuevo, creo que en 2020, hacer que la gente hablara llevó a, ya sabes, una mayor radicalización entre esas personas. Es una fuerza muy predecible. La censura en realidad no cambia la forma de pensar de las personas y las empuja en direcciones que, en realidad, mediante una investigación muy sólida, en realidad las radicalizará más. Entonces, sí, creo que el intento de prohibir el discurso de odio realmente no nos protege de él, pero le da al gobierno un arma tan vasta para usar contra nosotros que nos arrepentiremos de haberla dado. .

LEX: ¿Hay alguna manera de observar casos extremos y probar esta idea un poco? Entonces, si miramos el campus, ¿cuál es su opinión sobre permitir, digamos, que los supremacistas blancos en el campus hagan discursos? Vale.

GREG: Creo que deberías poder estudiar lo que piensa la gente. Y creo que es importante que realmente lo hagamos. Entonces creo que, ya sabes, tomemos, por ejemplo, QAnon. Sí, QAnon está equivocado. Um, pero ¿de dónde vino? ¿Por qué pensaron eso? ¿Cuál es la motivación? ¿Quién se lo enseñó?

LEX: ¿A quién se le ocurrieron estas ideas?

GREG: Esto es importante para entender la historia. Eso es poco importante para entender la política estadounidense moderna. Y entonces, si actúas, si te pones tu sombrero de erudito y deberías sentir curiosidad por saber de dónde vienen. Darrell Davis, con quien estoy seguro estás familiarizado, parte de su objetivo era simplemente saber de dónde venía la gente. Y en el proceso, desradicalizó a varios miembros de sus clientes cuando se dieron cuenta de que este hombre negro que se haría amigo de ellos en realidad era compasivo y una persona decente. Se dieron cuenta de que todos sus prejuicios estaban equivocados. Por cierto, puede tener un factor desradicalizador, pero incluso cuando no lo tiene, sigue siendo muy importante saber qué piensan las personas malas de tu sociedad. Honestamente, de alguna manera es por tu propia seguridad, probablemente sea más importante saber qué piensan realmente las personas malas en tu sociedad.

LEX: Yo personalmente, no sé qué piensas sobre eso. , pero personalmente creo que la libertad de expresión en casos como ese, como el KKK y el campus, puede causar más daño en el corto plazo, pero mucho más beneficio en el largo plazo. Porque a veces puedes argumentar que esto va a doler. Sí. A corto plazo. Pero quiero decir, Harvey dijo que esto es como considerar la alternativa. Debido a que simplemente defendiste esto, esto potencialmente sería algo bueno incluso en el corto plazo. Y creo que a menudo es así, especialmente en una sociedad estable como la nuestra, con una clase media fuerte, todo este tipo de cosas en las que a la gente le gustan las comodidades, la razón a través de las cosas. Sí. Um, pero ya sabes, para mí es como si, incluso si duele en el corto plazo, incluso si crea más odio en el corto plazo, la libertad de expresión tiene algo realmente beneficioso, que es que te ayuda a avanzar hacia el verdad, a toda la sociedad hacia una comprensión más profunda y precisa de la vida en la tierra, de la sociedad, del funcionamiento de las personas, de la ética, de la metafísica, de todo. Y eso a largo plazo es un beneficio enorme. Se deshace de los nazis a largo plazo, incluso si aumenta el número de nazis a corto plazo. Sí.

GREG: Bueno, y mientras tanto, solo por, y la parte de verificación de la realidad de esto es que la gente siempre menciona, ¿qué pasa con el clan en el campus? Yo digo que nunca están invitados. Um, el, el, el, no he visto un caso en el que hayan sido invitados. Um, normalmente este, el argumento del clan, se descarta cuando la gente intenta excusarse. Y es por eso que rechazamos a Ben Shapiro. Y es por eso que no puedes tener a Bill Maher en el campus. Por eso, ya sabes, y es como, está bien. Um, ya sabes, y es un poco de eso, de nuevo, de ser como, bueno, esa cosa de allí es terrible y por lo tanto este comediante no debería venir.

LEX: Uh, entonces Tengo una pregunta, tal vez a modo de consejo, ya sabes, entrevistar a la gente y ver esto como un podcast como una plataforma para decidir con quién hablar y con quién no, no es algo con lo que tenga que enfrentarme cara a cara en ocasiones. Mi inclinación natural antes de comenzar el podcast era hablar con cualquiera, incluidas personas, que todavía me interesan, ya sabes, los miembros actuales del KKK. Y para mí, existe la responsabilidad de hacerlo con habilidad. Sí.Um, y esa responsabilidad ha estado pesando cada vez más sobre mí porque te das cuenta de cuánta habilidad realmente se necesita porque tienes que saber, entender mucho, porque he llegado a comprender que el diablo siempre está yendo. ser carismático. Sí. Um, el diablo no se parecerá al diablo. Y entonces tienes que darte cuenta de que tienes que hacerlo, no siempre puedes.venir a la mesa con una profunda compasión por otro ser humano. Tienes que tener, ya sabes, un 90 % de compasión y otro 90 % de conocimiento histórico profundo sobre el contexto de las batallas en torno a este tema en particular. Y eso requiere una gran cantidad de esfuerzo, pero no sé si hay alguna idea que tengas sobre esto, cómo manejar el habla, um, de una manera sin censura, sacándola a la superficie, pero de una manera que cree más. amor en el mundo.

GREG: Recuerdo, um, a Steve Bannon le retiraron la invitación del festival New Yorker y Jim Carrey se asustó y todo tipo de personas se asustaron y a él le retiraron la invitación, um, de, de y me invitaron a hablar con una sonrisa sobre esto. Y yo decía, escuche, no tiene gente en su conferencia porque está de acuerdo con ellos. Um, ese es el, el, tenemos que salir de esta idea de que eso se debe a que estaban tratando de hacer que pareciera que era un respaldo a Steve Bannon. Como si eso fuera una tontería. Si realmente miras las opiniones de todas las personas que están allí, no es posible respaldar todas las opiniones que todas estas otras personas que estarán allí realmente tienen. Y luego, en el proceso de presentar ese argumento, obtuve, um, y también, por supuesto, el muy clásico: es muy valioso saber lo que alguien piensa, Steve Bannon. Deberías sentir curiosidad por eso. Y recuerdo que alguien respondió diciendo, bueno, ¿qué te gustaría que alguien entrevistara a un yihadista? Y pienso, porque en este momento, como era en el momento en que ISIS realmente estaba yendo a por ello. Um, y yo pensé, ¿no te gustaría ir a una charla en la que alguien estuviera tratando de descubrir qué es lo que motiva a algunas de estas personas? Um, porque eso cambia tu encuadre y esencialmente es como, no, es curiosidad. Es la cura para muchas de estas cosas. Y necesitamos mucha más curiosidad y mucha menos certeza injustificada.

LEX: Y hay una pregunta, ¿cómo se llevan a cabo esas conversaciones? Y me siento profundamente poco cualificado. ¿Quién crees que es especialmente bueno en eso? Siento que los realizadores de documentales suelen hacer un trabajo mucho mejor. Y el mejor trabajo lo suelen hacer los biógrafos. Sí. Entonces, cuanto más tiempo le dediques a una conversación en particular, como un pensamiento realmente profundo y un contexto histórico y estudiar a las personas, cómo piensan, observar todas las diferentes perspectivas, observar la psicología de la persona, su educación, sus padres, sus abuelos, todos De esto, cuanto más tiempo pases con eso, mejor, mejor será la calidad de la conversación porque puedes entender, realmente empatizar con la persona, con las personas que él o ella representa, um, y puedes ver la humanidad común, todo esto. Los entrevistadores que tengo a menudo no hacen ese trabajo.

GREG: Sí. Um, lo mejor que he visto son entrevistas que son parte de un documental. Sí.

LEX: Pero incluso ahora los documentales parecen tener un gran incentivo para hacerlos lo más rápido posible. No hay ningún incentivo para realmente pasar tiempo con la persona.

GREG: Hay un nuevo documental fantástico sobre Floyd Abrams que realmente recomiendo. Hicimos un documental sobre Ira Glasser llamado mighty Ira, um, que fue mi equipo de video y mi protegido Nico Perino, Chris Mulvey y Aaron Reese lo armaron. Y simplemente sigue la vida y la época de, um, Ira Glasser, el ex jefe de la ACLU.

LEX: Si pudieras detenerte en eso, sería una historia fascinante. Oh, sí.

GREG: Increíble. Um, Ira, él no era abogado. Empezó a trabajar en la NYCLU, la unión de libertades civiles de Nueva York, creo que en los años sesenta. Él era, eh, creo que Robert Kennedy le recomendó que fuera en esa dirección. Um, y se convirtió en presidente de la ACLU justo en el momento en que estaban, um, sufriendo por, uh, defender a los nazis en Skokie y Nico, uh, y, y, y Aaron y Chris armaron esto y Nunca antes había hecho un documental. Y salió tan, tan bien. Um, y cuenta la historia de los nazis en Skokie. Cuenta la historia del caso que lo rodea, cuenta la historia de la ACLU en ese momento. Y qué gran líder fue Ira Glasser. Y una de las cosas más geniales es que cuando ves a los nazis en Skokie, se comportan como los idiotas que esperarías que fueran. Hay un momento en el que el rally no va muy bien y el líder se pone nervioso. Y casi parece que le va a gustar gritar, estás, estás, estás, estás haciendo de esta manifestación nazi una burla. Y así demostró cómo permitir que los nazis hablaran en Skokie les quitó el viento a sus velas.Como si tuvieran todo el movimiento, como todo el mundo, todo se disolvió después de eso porque parecían tontos racistas que eran. Eran, ya sabes, incluso los hermanos del blues hacían bromas, ya sabes, bromas sobre ellos. Um, y eso, y no se convirtió en el desastre.que la gente pensaba que iba a ser solo por dejarles hablar. E Ira Glasser, está bien. Entonces, tiene esta maravillosa historia sobre cómo Jackie Robinson se unió a los Dodgers de Brooklyn y cómo hubo un momento en el que vio a alguien, un afroamericano literalmente en su equipo, y cómo eso realmente los entusiasmó con la causa de la igualdad racial. Y eso se convirtió en una gran parte de lo que fue su vida. Y simplemente pienso que una gran metáfora es expandir su círculo y ver a más personas literalmente en su equipo es la solución a muchos de estos problemas. Y me preocupa que una de las cosas que es absolutamente una realidad de la vida en Estados Unidos es que nos vemos más como campos enemigos que como personas del mismo equipo. Y eso fue en realidad algo en los primeros días, cuando Will Creely y yo, el director legal de bomberos, escribimos sobre los próximos desafíos a la libertad de expresión para todos los que están en Facebook. Y una cosa que esperaba era que a medida que más personas expusieran más de sus vidas, nos daríamos cuenta de muchas de estas cosas que sabíamos intelectualmente, como que los niños van al bar, se emborrachan y hacen cosas estúpidas. Um, eso, uh, que cuando empezamos a ver evidencia de que estaban haciendo cosas estúpidas, al principio nos sorprendimos, pero luego eventualmente nos volvemos más sofisticados y pensamos, bueno, vamos, la gente es así. En realidad, eso nunca pareció suceder. Um, eso, eso, que no creo que creo que hay muchas cosas que sabemos sobre la naturaleza humana y sabemos sobre las cosas tontas que dice la gente, uh, y lo hemos convertido en un entorno donde simplemente hay alguien ahí afuera esperando a decir: Oh, ¿recuerdas esa tontería que dijiste que teníamos 14 años? Bueno, me aseguraré de que no entres a la escuela de tus sueños por eso.

LEX: Este delito es arqueología.

GREG: Ese no es mi término. aunque. Es un gran término. Robamos a los mejores investigando los comentarios anteriores de alguien para encontrar un discurso que no ha envejecido bien. Y eso es táctico. De esa manera, ese no es simplemente alguien que no es empático. Dicen, te voy a castigar por esto o, y esa es una de las razones por las que me deprimí al escribir este libro porque ya sabes, ya hay gente que no me ama por mimar al estadounidense. mente, generalmente basado en una mala comprensión de lo que realmente dijimos y mimos en la mente estadounidense, pero no obstante. Uh, pero en este caso, ya sabes, estoy criticando a las personas por ser muy crueles en muchos casos, pero, en fin, una cosa que fue realmente aterradora al estudiar muchos de estos casos es que una vez que tienes eso objetivo en tu espalda, lo que van a intentar cancelarte podría ser cualquier cosa. Ya sabes, podrían volver a tus viejos, tus viejos barcos, encontrar algo que dijiste en 1995, ya sabes, hacer algo, um, donde esencialmente parece que es algo completamente diferente, pero en realidad lo que son, lo que es. Lo que pasa es que no les gustó tu opinión. No les gustó tu punto de vista sobre algo. Y van a encontrar una manera de que, de ahora en adelante, cada vez que aparezca tu nombre, sea como, Oh, recuerda esto, esa cosa que no me gustó de ellos. Y de nuevo, es cruel. No te acercará más a la verdad. Y, pero da un poco de miedo arriesgarse.

LEX: Está bien. En cuanto a soluciones, te voy a preguntar algunas cosas. Entonces, uno, eh, ser padre.

GREG: Sí. Cinco y siete años.

LEX: Entonces estoy seguro de que ya lo has descubierto todo. Oh Dios, no.

GREG: Desde la perspectiva de la libertad de expresión. Sí. Desde la perspectiva de la cultura de la libertad de expresión, cómo ser un buen padre. Sí. Creo que la primera cualidad que deberías cultivar en tus hijos, si quieres tener una cultura de libertad de expresión, es la curiosidad y la conciencia de la inmensidad que siempre será desconocida. Y hacer que mis hijos se entusiasmen con la idea es que vamos a pasar toda nuestra vida aprendiendo sobre cosas. Y es rápido, emocionante e interminable y nunca haremos gran mella en ello, pero el viaje será increíble. Pero sólo los tontos creen que lo saben todo. Um, y a veces tontos peligrosos además. Entonces, al dar la sensación de humildad intelectual desde el principio, también, ya sabes, decir cosas que realmente suenan un poco pasadas de moda, pero les digo cosas a mis hijos, como, escuchen, si les gusta estudiar y trabajar, ambas cosas que Disfruto mucho, lo hago por diversión. Um, tu vida se sentirá genial y fácil. Um, entonces algunas de, algunas, ya sabes, algunas de esas virtudes pasadas de moda son cosas que trato de predicar, um, cosas contraintuitivas como tiempo para jugar al aire libre, um, tener tiempo que no sean experiencias intermedias es realmente, uh, es realmente importante. .Y pequeñas cosas como, um, de las que hablo en el libro, cuando mis hijos ven algo que da miedo y no me refiero a películas de zombies, ya sabes, me refiero a dibujos animados que dan algo de miedo. momento y diciendo que ellosQuiero apagar el televisor. Y yo, y hablé con ellos y les dije, escuchen, lo extraño a su lado y vamos a terminar este programa y quiero que me digan qué piensan de esto después. Y me senté al lado de mis hijos. Um, y al final, cada vez que, ya sabes, cuando les preguntaba, ¿fue tan aterrador como pensabas que iba a ser? Y había como, no papá, eso estaba bien. Y pienso que esa es una de las grandes lecciones de la vida. El miedo que no atraviesas se vuelve mucho más grande en tu cabeza que simplemente enfrentarlo. Ésa es una de las razones por las que estoy luchando contra esta cultura. Me encanta, ya sabes, que todos nuestros hijos puedan crecer en un ambiente donde la gente te da gracia y, ya sabes, acepta el hecho de que a veces la gente va a decir cosas que te cabrean, toma en serio la posibilidad. y estar equivocado y, eh, tener curiosidad.

LEX: Bueno, tengo la esperanza de que lo que mencionaste, que se debe a que muchas de las cosas de los jóvenes están en Internet, Nos daremos un respiro unos a otros porque entonces todos serán dignos de cancelar.

GREG: La Generación Z es la que más odia la cultura de la cancelación. Y esa es otra razón por la que la gente todavía afirma que esto está sucediendo. Es algo así como, no, en realidad puedes preguntarles a los niños qué piensan sobre la cultura de la cancelación y la odian.

LEX: Sí. Bueno, creo que son como el sistema inmunológico. Eso es como, esa es la cultura que se despierta y piensa que no, esto no es algo bueno.

GREG: Aunque me alegro. Quiero decir, soy uno de esos niños que, ya sabes, está muy contento de haber sido un niño pequeño en los años ochenta y un adolescente en los noventa porque tener todo potencialmente en línea, uh, no es una , una educación.

LEX: Lo envidio. Bueno, yo, porque también puedes hacer la absoluta libertad de expresión. Me gusta dirigirme hacia allí donde espero un futuro donde muchas de nuestras inseguridades, defectos, todo está ahí afuera. Y para ser sincero, creo que eso conduce a un mundo mejor. Porque los defectos son hermosos. Quiero decir, esos son los defectos, los ingredientes básicos de la conexión humana.

GREG: Eh, Robert Wright, escribió un libro sobre, eh, sobre, sobre el budismo. Um, y hablé sobre tratar de usar las redes sociales desde una perspectiva budista y como si fuera el inconsciente colectivo meditando y viendo esos pequeños fragmentos enojados que están tratando de cancelarte o atraparte. callarte y simplemente dejarlos ir de la misma manera que se supone que debes ver cómo tus pensamientos se desvanecen.

LEX: Me encantaría verlo visualizado sea cual sea el drama que esté sucediendo. Sigo, sigo, simplemente viendo el mar de eso, de la conciencia colectiva, simplemente procesando esto y teniendo un poco como un ataque de pánico y simplemente, sí, leyéndolo, mirando esas pequeñas voces llenas de odio y enojo. de aparecer y decir, está bien, ahí lo tienes.

GREG: Y todavía estoy concentrado en esa cosa porque esa es, esa, esa es una de las cosas que es, está bien. Sí, en realidad esto probablemente sea una etapa avanzada del juego para dar mi gran teoría sobre este tema. Um, pero, uh, nunca es demasiado tarde. Entonces, lo que estaba estudiando, um, en la facultad de derecho, cuando se me acabaron las clases de la primera enmienda, um, decidí estudiar censura durante la dinastía de los tutores, uh, porque de ahí sacamos nuestras ideas de restricción previa, uh, eso, eso viene de la concesión de licencias a la imprenta, um, que fue algo que Enrique VIII fue el primero en hacer donde básicamente, um, la idea era que si no se puede imprimir nada en Inglaterra, a menos que sea con estos, uh, uh, imprentas aprobadas por su majestad, um, evitará que salgan trabajos heréticos y anti Henry el octavo. Soy bonita, bonita, bonita, bonita, bonita, um, idea eficiente al menos. Um, y yo siempre, así que comenzó a enojarse con la imprenta alrededor de 1521 y luego aprobó algo que requería que las impresiones estuvieran junto con el parlamento en, uh, 1538. Uh, y siempre pienso en eso como algo así. donde estamos ahora, um, porque tenemos esto, teníamos, en aquel entonces teníamos la tecnología disruptiva original, ya sabes, la escritura fue probablemente, pero la siguiente, que fue la imprenta, que fue absolutamente calamitosa. Y quiero decir, y digo calamitoso a propósito porque en el corto plazo, la caza de brujas subió como loca porque la imprenta te permitió conseguir ese manual de cómo encontrar brujas que las guerras religiosas se volvieron locas. Um, generó todo tipo de angustia, desinformación y maldad. Y Enrique octavo estaba intentando devolver al genio a la botella. Ya sabes, él dijo: Puedo, puedo, puedo, quiero usar esto para siempre. Como, uh, siento que podría, podría usarse, pero él estaba en un período inevitable de anarquía epistémica.No hay nada que puedas hacer para que el período posterior a la llegada de la imprenta resulte ser un período no perturbador ni loco, aparte de algo absoluto.totalitarismo y destruir todas las imprentas, lo que simplemente no era posible en Europa. Así que siento que así es como nos encontramos ahora. Esa interrupción se produjo al agregar, creo, varios millones de personas a la conversación europea y, eventualmente, a la conversación global, pero eventualmente se convirtió en la mejor herramienta para la desconfirmación, para deshacerse de la falsedad, para detectar malas ideas. Y son los beneficios, los beneficios a largo plazo de la imprenta son calculablemente grandes. Um, y eso es lo que me da cierto optimismo sobre dónde estamos ahora con las redes sociales, porque estamos en ese período inevitablemente anárquico. Y me preocupa que haya, um, uh, que haya intentos en los estados de aprobar cosas para tratar de volver a poner al genio en la botella. Por ejemplo, si prohibimos un tic tac o decimos que, um, nadie menor de 18 años puede estar en Internet, a menos que tenga el permiso de sus padres, vamos a algo que no habrá ningún tipo de de arriba hacia abajo. capaz de arreglarlo. Tenemos que adaptarnos culturalmente a ello, um, uh, de maneras que nos hagan más sabios que en realidad, um, y permitir que sea potencialmente ese maravilloso motor para la desconfirmación de que todavía no estamos cerca, por cierto, pero Piénsalo. Millones de ojos adicionales sobre los problemas, gracias a la imprenta ayudaron a crear la revolución científica, la ilustración, el descubrimiento de la ignorancia. Um, ahora hemos agregado miles de millones de ojos y voces para resolver problemas. Y simplemente los estamos usando para videos de gatos y cancelaciones.

LEX: Pero esos son solo los primeros días de la imprenta. Todo comienza con los gatos y la cancelación. ¿Hay algo en X sobre Twitter, que es quizás la fuente más energética de gatos y cancelaciones?

GREG: Parece el inconsciente colectivo de la especie. Quiero decir, como si fuera una de esas cosas en las que la tendencia a querer ver patrones en la historia a veces puede limitar la experiencia loca de lo que realmente es la historia. Porque sí, nosotros, nosotros, tenemos estas lindas y reconfortantes ideas de que será como la última vez. No lo sabemos. No ha sucedido todavía. Y pienso en lo inusual que es Twitter porque lo considero como los niños, porque la gente habla sobre, ya sabes, escritura y comunicaciones masivas y, uh, como algo que expande el tamaño de nuestro cerebro colectivo. Pero ahora estamos mirando nuestro cerebro colectivo en tiempo real. Y está lleno, al igual que nuestros propios cerebros, con todo tipo de pequeñas cosas locas que aparecen y, y, y, y aparecen como partículas virtuales por todos lados, de personas, um, ya sabes, reaccionando en tiempo real. a las cosas. Nunca ha habido nada vagamente parecido. Y puede ser, en el peor de los casos, horrible de ver. En el mejor de los casos, a veces ver a la gente simplemente ponerse eufórico por algo que está sucediendo y contar chistes inmediatos absolutamente brillantes, ya sabes, al mismo tiempo, puede ser, ni siquiera puede ser una experiencia alegre. Um, yo siento que ahora vivo en un vecindario en X donde trato principalmente con personas que creo que son realmente reflexivas, incluso si no estoy de acuerdo con ellas. Um, y, y no es una mala experiencia. De vez en cuando me encuentro con ese otro tipo de barrios en X donde todo cancela toda la maldad. Y siempre es una visita desagradable a esos lugares. No estoy diciendo que todo tenga que ser como mi experiencia, pero sí creo que la razón por la que la gente sigue volviendo a ello es que revela aspectos crudos de la humanidad que a veces preferimos fingir. No existe.

LEX: Sí. Sí. Pero también es totalmente nuevo. Como dijiste, es solo una viralidad, la velocidad, las noticias viajan, las opiniones viajan, la batalla por las ideas viaja.

GREG: La batalla por la información también.

LEX: Sí . De lo que es verdad y no mentira viajó, el viejo Mark Twain bastante rápido en la cosa. Sí. Y luego cambia tu comprensión de cómo interpretar la información.

GREG: También te estresa muchísimo. A veces me acordaba de dejarlo. Las estadísticas son bastante malas en cuanto a la salud mental, eh, entre los jóvenes. Y definitivamente estoy en el campo de las personas que piensan que las redes sociales son parte de eso. Entiendo el debate, pero estoy bastante convencido de que una de las cosas que no ha sido buena para la salud mental de las personas es la exposición constante.

LEX: Sí, absolutamente. Creo que es posible crear redes sociales que generen una gran cantidad de dinero, que hagan feliz a la gente y que sea posible alinear los incentivos.Entonces, en términos de, sí, hacer adolescentes, hacer que cada etapa de la vida te brinde satisfacción y felicidad a largo plazo con tu existencia física fuera de las redes sociales y en las redes sociales, ayudarte a crecer como ser humano. , ayudándote a desafiarte con la cantidad justa y la cantidad justa de videos de gatos, lo que sea que brinde esta rica experiencia humana. Creo que es solo un problema de aprendizaje automático. Es como,No es fácil crear un feed. Entonces, el feed más fácil que puedes hacer es maximizar la participación. Sí. Pero eso es como un algoritmo realmente tonto. Sí. Es como si el algoritmo aprendiera lo suficiente sobre ti para comprender qué te hará verdaderamente feliz como ser humano para crecer a largo plazo. Ése es simplemente un problema muy difícil de resolver.

GREG: ¿Alguna vez viste Fleabag? Es absolutamente brillante, un espectáculo británico. Um, y te prepara. Una de las razones por las que a la gente le encanta tanto es que te hace sentir como si estuvieras viendo un obsceno Sex and the City británico, excepto que el personaje principal es el más destacado. Um, es como, está bien. Y pones los ojos en blanco un poco y es algo divertido, algo lindo y algo picante. Y luego te das cuenta de que la persona en realidad está sufriendo y pasando por un momento difícil y se vuelve cada vez más profundo a medida que avanza el programa. Y ella hará estos increíbles discursos sobre, dime qué hacer. Como acabo de decir, sé que hay expertos por ahí. Sé que hay conocimiento ahí fuera. Sé que hay una manera óptima de vivir mi vida. Entonces, ¿por qué alguien no puede simplemente decirme qué hacer? Y, y es este aspecto maravillosamente, um, preciso, creo, uh, del deseo humano de que ¿qué pasaría si algo realmente pudiera decirme el camino óptimo a seguir? Porque creo que existe el deseo de renunciar a cierta cantidad de su propia libertad y discreción para que le digan que haga lo óptimo y correcto. Pero ese camino me da mucho miedo.

LEX: Sí, vemos la forma en que lo expresas. Eso sí, a mí también me da miedo. Entonces, hay varias cosas: una, puedes distraerte constantemente en TikTok con cosas que te mantienen comprometido. Entonces, eliminar eso y brindarte un montón de opciones constantemente y aprender a largo plazo qué resulta en tu felicidad real a largo plazo. Entonces, ¿qué cantidad de ideas desafiantes son buenas para ti? Uh, eso, ya sabes, para alguien como yo, pero hay un número como ese para ti, Greg, para mí, ese número es bastante alto. Me encanta el debate. Me encanta, me encanta la sensación de darme cuenta, mierda, me he equivocado.

GREG: Sí. Pero, ya sabes, me encantaría que el algoritmo supiera eso sobre mí y me ayudara, pero siempre dándome opciones. Si quiero descender a videos de gatos y demás. Bueno, el aspecto educativo.

LEX: Sí, educación. Me gusta la idea de ir a la velocidad que necesitas y correr lo más rápido que puedas. Sí. Ya sabes, quiero decir, está eso, ya sabes, todo el asunto del flujo. Simplemente siento que la recomendación de YouTube, para bien o para mal, si se usa correctamente, parece que hace un trabajo bastante bueno. Cada vez que me niego a hacer clic en cosas que solo están basadas en dopamina y hago clic solo en cosas educativas, la recomendación es realmente buena. Así que siento que es un problema que tiene solución, al menos en el ámbito educativo de desafiarte a ti mismo, pero también de expandir tu ámbito de conocimiento y todo ese tipo de cosas.

GREG: Y definitivamente estoy más en el , estamos en un período ineludiblemente anárquico y necesitamos grandes ajustes culturales. Y no hay manera de que esta no sea una transición difícil.

LEX: ¿Hay alguna pequeña o gran cosa específica que te gustaría que X hiciera, Twitter? Tengo muchas ideas sobre eso.

GREG: Con la imprenta y millones de ojos adicionales puestos en cualquier problema se puede derribar cualquier institución, cualquier persona o idea. Y eso es bueno en cierto modo, porque era necesario derribar muchas instituciones medievales. Y algunas personas también lo hicieron, y fue necesario derribar muchas ideas. Lo mismo es cierto ahora. Miles de millones de ojos adicionales puestos en cada problema pueden derribar a cualquier persona, idea o institución. Y algunas, nuevamente, algunas de esas cosas necesitaban ser derribadas, pero aún no se puede construir. Aún no estamos en la etapa en la que podamos construir, pero esto nos ha demostrado cuán escasos eran nuestros conocimientos. Es una de las razones por las que también somos conscientes de la crisis de replicación. Es una de las razones por las que también somos conscientes de lo deficiente que es nuestra investigación, de lo arrogante que es en muchos casos nuestra clase de expertos, pero la gente no quiere vivir en un mundo en el que no haya gente que respetan y pueden mirar. Y creo que lo que está sucediendo posiblemente ahora, pero seguirá sucediendo, es que las personas se establecerán como personas de gran integridad, que siempre serán honestas. Creo que te estás estableciendo como alguien de gran integridad, en quien pueden confiar en esa persona. Un incendio quiere ser, ya sabes, la institución a la que la gente pueda acudir y, si se trata de libertad de expresión, la defenderemos, punto. Y creo que la gente necesita autoridades nuevas en las que realmente puedan confiar.Y creo que si realmente tuvieras una transmisión que tal vez la gente pueda ver en acción, pero no inundarla con, ya sabes, cosas estúpidas de cancelar la cultura o tontos medios de gato, donde en realidad sea una discusión seria limitada en torno a reglas, sin una fortaleza retórica perfecta. , no eficientefortaleza retórica, ninguna de las tonterías que debatimos. Creo que se podría empezar a crear algo que realmente podría ser una mejora importante en la velocidad con la que se nos ocurren nuevas y mejores ideas y establecemos y separamos la verdad de la falsedad.

LEX: Sí. Si se hace bien, puede inspirar a un gran número de personas a alcanzar una integridad cada vez mayor y puede crear la integridad como un valor por el que luchar. Quiero decir, ya sabes, ha habido proyectos en Internet que han hecho un trabajo increíble al respecto, pero también han tenido muchos defectos. Wikipedia es un ejemplo de un gran paso adelante al hacer eso.

GREG: Es bastante impresionante. ¿Cuál es su opinión general? Quiero decir, estoy muy impresionado.

LEX: Así que hay algunas ideas realmente poderosas para las personas que editan Wikipedia. Uno de los cuales es que cada editor declara por sí mismo, ya sabes, estoy metido en política y realmente soy un tipo de tendencia izquierdista. Así que realmente no debería editar artículos políticos porque tengo prejuicios. Entonces declaran sus prejuicios y a menudo hacen un buen trabajo al declararlos, pero aún así les gustará, encontrarán una manera de justificarse. Como si algo los enojara y quisieran corregirlo porque les encanta corregir la falsedad para convertirla en verdad. Pero la perspectiva de lo que es verdad y lo que no se ve afectada por su sesgo. La verdad es difícil de saber. Y es cierto que existe un sesgo izquierdista en los editores de Wikipedia. Entonces, para eso, lo que sucede es con los artículos, que aprecio principalmente que no tienen un aspecto político, ya sabes, artículos científicos o artículos técnicos, van a ser muy fuertes, incluso históricos. , simplemente describiendo los hechos de la historia que no tienen un elemento subjetivo, eh, fuerte. Además, usando mi propio cerebro, puedo filtrar si es, ya sabes, si es algo sobre el 6 de enero o algo así, sé que voy a decir, no soy lo que sea que esté pasando aquí. . Más o menos lo leeré, pero sobre todo buscaré otras fuentes. Voy a analizar un montón de perspectivas diferentes al respecto. Va a ser muy tenso. Probablemente habrá algún tipo de sesgo. Tal vez alguna redacción sea tal, que es una palabra. Aquí es donde Wikipedia hace esto. La forma en que redactan las cosas será parcial, la elección de las palabras, pero los propios editores de Wikipedia son muy autorreflexivos. Literalmente tienen artículos que describen estos efectos de cómo puedes usar palabras para inyectar prejuicios en todas las formas en que hablas de ello.

GREG: Eso es más saludable que la mayoría de los entornos.

LEX: Es increíblemente saludable, pero creo que podrías hacerlo mejor. Para mí, uno de los grandes defectos de Wikipedia, que las notas de la comunidad sobre X funcionan mejor, es la accesibilidad para convertirse en editor. Um, es difícil convertirse en editor y el proceso de edición no es tan visible. Así que me encantaría, como dijiste, una transmisión, para que todos puedan observar este debate entre personas con integridad de cuando discuten cosas como el 6 de enero, temas muy controvertidos para ver cómo va el proceso del debate en lugar de ser escondido en las sombras, que actualmente se encuentra en Wikipedia. Puedes acceder a eso. Es simplemente de difícil acceso, pero también he visto cómo usan ciertos artículos, como sobre ciertas personas, como artículos sobre personas en las que he aprendido a confiar cada vez menos porque literalmente los usarán para hacer asuntos personales. ataques. Y esto es algo sobre lo que escribes. Usarán descripciones de diferentes controversias para pintar una imagen de una persona que, al menos a mí, no me parece una representación precisa de la persona. Y es como escribir un artículo sobre Einstein mencionando algo sobre la teoría de la relatividad y luego decir que era un mujeriego y abusador y una especie de controversia, ya sabes, sí, él también es Feynman, ya sabes, no, ya sabes. , fue que, ya sabes, no son exactamente el ser humano perfecto en términos de mujeres, pero hay otros aspectos de este ser humano y para capturarlo adecuadamente, hay una cierta manera de hacerlo. Creo que Wikipedia a menudo se inclinará. Realmente intentan ser autorreflexivos y tratar de detener esto, pero se inclinarán hacia el drama si coincide con el sesgo. Pero repito, mucho mejor que el mundo que creo que es mucho mejor. Uh, porque Wikipedia existe, pero ahora que estamos en estas etapas de la adolescencia, estamos creciendo y tratando de crear diferentes tecnologías. La idea de una transmisión es realmente interesante a medida que involucras a más y más personas en este discurso de que dónde está el valor, intentemos entender la verdad.

GREG: Sí. Sí. Y eso, básicamente, ya sabes, obtienes las tarjetas pequeñas para "No, mal, no, mal".

LEX: Y las diferentes, las diferentes, las diferentes técnicas retóricas que se están utilizando para evitar realmente discutir.

GREG: Sí. Y creo que, de hecho, puedes hacerlo un poco divertido si tienes un número limitado de ellos. Um, ya sabes, es algo así como,obtienes tres, ¿qué tal algunas cartas?

LEX: Así que ludificamos todo.

GREG: Eh, absolutamente.

LEX: Sí. Uh, déjame preguntarte sobre... entonces mencionaste haber pasado por algunos momentos difíciles en tu vida. ¿Cuál ha sido tu experiencia con la depresión? ¿Cuál ha sido tu experiencia al salir de esto, superarlo?

GREG: Sí. Quiero decir, todo el asunto, todo el viaje, um, th th th th th th th th th con mimar la mente estadounidense comenzó conmigo, um, en el centro psiquiátrico de Belmont en Filadelfia allá por 2007. Llamé al 911 en un momento de claridad porque había ido a la ferretería para asegurarme de que cuando me suicidara, se quedara. Quería asegurarme de tener mi cabeza vendada y todo. Entonces, si todos los medicamentos que planeaba tomar no funcionaban, no podría salir. Había sido un año muy difícil y siempre tuve problemas con la depresión, um, pero estaban empeorando. Y, francamente, una de las razones por las que esto de cancelar la cultura es tan importante para mí es que lo que no enfaticé tanto al mimar la mente estadounidense, que por cierto, esa descripción que doy de intentar Suicidarme fue la primera vez que lo escribí. Nadie en mi familia era consciente de cómo podía ser así. Mi esposa nunca lo había visto. Y básicamente la única forma en que pude escribir eso fue haciendo, ya sabes, cómo puedes engañarte a ti mismo. Si, um, y dijera, me convenceré de que esto es solo entre mi computadora y yo y que nadie lo verá. Y probablemente no sea lo más público que he escrito. Um, pero lo que no enfaticé en eso fue en qué medida la guerra cultural influyó en mi depresión, porque originalmente era el director legal de incendios. Luego me convertí en presidente de bomberos en 2005, me mudé a Filadelfia y es donde me deprimo. Um, y, en fin, no tengo familia allí. Hay algo en el pueblo. No parece que les agrado mucho. Um, pero lo principal era estar en el mundo de la cultura todo el tiempo. Um, había una chica con la que estaba saliendo. Um, recuerdo, ya sabes, ella no parecía aprobar realmente lo que hice. Y mucha gente realmente no lo parecía. Y mientras tanto, yo estaba defendiendo a la gente de izquierda todo el tiempo y ellos decían: Oh, qué bueno que estés defendiendo a alguien de izquierda, pero aun así nunca me perdonarían por defender a alguien de derecha. Y recuerdo haber dicho en qué punto soy, escucha, soy como, soy, soy un verdadero creyente en estas cosas. Estoy dispuesto a defender a los nazis. Ciertamente estoy dispuesto a defender a los republicanos. Y de hecho dijo: Creo que los republicanos podrían estar peor. Um, y eso no fue así, esa relación no fue muy bien. Y luego estuve a punto de pelearme a puñetazos un par de veces con gente de derecha. Um, porque descubrieron que defendí a la gente que hace chistes sobre el 11 de septiembre. Como si esto hubiera sucedido más de una vez. Y que, ya sabes, cuando tenga veintitantos años, ya no volveré a pelear a puñetazos. Um, pero sí, siempre fue así. Tú, tú, ya ves lo hipócrita que puede ser la gente. Puedes ver cómo tus amigos pueden volverse contra ti si no les gusta tu política. Así que tuve una vista previa de esto, de hacia qué cultura nos dirigimos al ser el presidente del fuego. Y fue agotador. Um, y esa fue una de las principales cosas que me llevó a estar, ya sabes, deprimido de forma suicida, uh, en el centro Belmont. Si me hubieras dicho que ese sería el comienzo de una vida nueva y mejor para mí, me habría reído si hubiera podido, pero lo habría hecho, ya sabes, no me gusta, puedes decir que estoy bien si lo hago. Todavía me río. Y no me estaba riendo, um, en ese momento. Entonces, busqué un médico y comencé a hacer terapia cognitivo-conductual. Empecé a tener todas estas voces en mi cabeza que eran catastróficas y, ya sabes, me dio una generalización excesiva y, um, uh, adivinación, ya sabes, leer la mente todas estas cosas que enseñan. no debes hacerlo. Y lo que ellos, lo que haces en la TCC es esencialmente que tienes algo que te molesta y luego simplemente escribes cuál fue el pensamiento. Um, y sabes, algo menor podría pasar en tu respuesta fue, ya sabes, como, um, bueno, la cita no pareció ir muy bien. Um, y eso es porque estoy destrozado y moriremos solos. Y tú dices, está bien, está bien, está bien. ¿Qué, qué, cuáles son los siguientes? Ya sabes, eso es catastrófico, eso es leer la mente, eso es adivinar el futuro, eso es todo esto. Um, y tienes que hacer esto varias veces al día para siempre. De hecho, necesito repasarlo en este momento.Um, y poco a poco, con el tiempo, voces en mi cabeza que habían estado diciendo horrible, ya sabes, horrible conversación interna, simplemente ya no sonaba tan convincente, lo cual fue realmente un efecto sutil. Como si fuera algo así como, oh espera, no creo que esté roto. Ya sabes, eso no suenaverdadero. Eso ya no suena como una verdad de Dios como antes. Y nueve meses después de que planeara suicidarme, probablemente estaba más feliz de lo que había sido en una década. Um, y esa fue una de las cosas que, ya sabes, la TCC es lo que me llevó a notar esto en mi propio trabajo, que sentía como si los administradores estuvieran vendiendo distorsiones cognitivas, pero los estudiantes aún no estaban comprando. Y luego, cuando comencé a notar que parecían haber llegado, en realidad ya creían en muchas de estas cosas, que serían muy peligrosas. Y eso llevó a mimar la mente estadounidense y todo eso. Pero lo difícil de escribir Hansling de la mente americana, lo habría mencionado ya un par de veces, me deprimí mucho el año pasado, um, porque estaba estudiando, ya sabes, hay un amigo ahí que Hablé de quién se suicidó después de ser cancelado. Hablé con él una semana antes de que se suicidara y en realidad no había hablado con él porque parecía muy confiado. Pensé que estaría totalmente bien porque él tenía un tweet insensible en junio de 2020 y, ya sabes, lo obligaron a salir de una manera que en realidad no sonó tan mal como muchos otros profesores. De hecho, al menos recibió un paquete de indemnización, así que sabían que demandaría y ganaría, porque ya lo había hecho antes. Y entonces esperé para ver cómo estaba porque estábamos muy abrumados con la solicitud de ayuda. Y él decía que todavía venía gente a su casa. Y luego se pegó un tiro la semana siguiente. Y definitivamente, y debido a que todos saben que soy tan público sobre mis luchas con estas cosas, todos los que luchan contra estas cosas acuden a mí cuando están pasando por un momento difícil. Y este es un negocio psicológicamente agotador muy difícil. E incluso admitiendo esto en este momento, creo que todos los buitres que hay por ahí se divertirán con ello. De la misma manera cuando, cuando mi amigo Mike Adams se suicidó, había gente celebrando en Twitter, um, eso, que un hombre estaba muerto, uh, porque no les gustaban sus tweets. Y, de alguna manera, eso los hizo sentir compasión por alguna otra persona abstracta. Entonces me estaba poniendo un poco deprimido y ansioso. Y lo que realmente me ayudó más que cualquier otra cosa, fue confesarle a mi personal que yo, ya sabes, los libros requieren mucha energía. Entonces supe que no querían escuchar eso. Esto no sólo le estaba quitando mucho tiempo al jefe, sino que lo estaba deprimiendo y ansiosa. Pero cuando finalmente le dije a los líderes de mi personal, um, ya sabes, gente a la que, aunque trato de mantener mucha distancia, amo muchísimo, um, hizo una gran diferencia, ya sabes. , um, porque podría ser abierto sobre eso. Y la otra cosa fue: ¿has oído este diálogo de la conferencia? Oh sí. Es como una cosa sólo por invitación. Es Orrin Hoffman, lo dirige. Um, intenta intencionalmente que personas de todo el espectro político se reúnan y tengan conversaciones extraoficiales sobre grandes temas. Y fue agradable estar en una sala donde los conservadores liberales, ninguno de los anteriores, todos pensamos, oh, gracias a Dios, alguien ha aceptado cancelar la cultura. Y sentí que tal vez este no sería el desastre para mí y mi familia que era, al que estaba empezando a tener miedo. Sería que asumir las cosas podría tener un final feliz.

LEX: Bueno, una cosa que destaco es que el dolor de la cancelación puede ser realmente intenso. Y eso no significa necesariamente perder tu trabajo, pero incluso puedes llamarlo acoso, puedes llamarlo como quieras, pero solo a un número determinado de personas en Internet. Y ese número puede ser pequeño, como decirte cosas malas.

GREG: Sí. Puede ser una fuerza bastante poderosa para la psique humana, lo cual lo es, pero fue muy sorprendente. Y luego, la otra cara de la moneda es que realmente me entristece lo cruel que puede ser la gente. Es así, pensar que tu, tu causa es una justicia social, en muchos casos puede llevar a la gente a pensar que puedo ser tan cruel como quiera en pos de esto. Cuando es así, muchas veces es solo una forma de desahogar cierta agresión hacia una persona que consideras solo como una abstracción.

LEX: Entonces creo que es importante que las personas se den cuenta de que son Lo que sea, lo que sea, cualquier energía negativa, cualquier negatividad que quieras sacar, como si hubiera personas reales que pueden salir lastimadas. Como si realmente pudieras lograr que la gente, eh, sea la peor versión de sí misma o posiblemente se quite la vida. Y no es tan real.

GREG: Sí. Bueno, esa es una de las cosas que hacemos en el libro, para dirigirnos a las personas que todavía intentan afirmar que esto no es real. Simplemente citamos, citamos al Papa, citamos a Obama, citamos James Carville, citamos a Taylor Swift sobre la cultura de la cancelación.Como, um, y la cita suiza de Taylor es, esencialmente, sobre cómo detrás de todo esto, está, cuando se vuelve particularmente desagradable, hay esto muy claro, ya sabes, matar.usted mismo tiene una especie de trasfondo. Um, y es, es cruel. Y el problema es que en un ambiente tan abierto, siempre habrá alguien que quiera ser tan transgresor y decir lo más hiriente, ya sabes, lo más terrible. Pero luego hay que recordar la tergiversación, volver a los viejos modismos, palos y piedras me romperán los huesos, pero los nombres nunca, nunca me harán daño. Ha sido reimaginado en los debates universitarios de la manera más estúpida. La gente literalmente dirá cosas así, pero ahora sabemos que las palabras pueden doler. Y es como si ahora supiéramos que las palabras pueden herir. Chicos, no era necesario que se les ocurriera algo especial que enseñaran a los niños para que sus palabras dolieran menos. Si nunca hicieran daño en primer lugar, ni siquiera tendría sentido. El dicho es un dicho que te repites a ti mismo para darte fuerzas. Cuando los acosadores se han dado cuenta de que eres un poco raro, tal vez un poco personal, um, uh, y eso ayuda. Realmente ayuda decir, escucha, está bien, los idiotas van a decir cosas idiotas. Um, y no puedo permitir que tengan ese tipo de poder sobre mí.

LEX: Sí. Sí. Sigue siendo una experiencia de aprendizaje porque duele, duele.

GREG: Pero para las buenas personas que en realidad, ya sabes, a veces piensan, piensan que se están desahogando, Ya sabes, piénsalo. Recuerda que hay gente al otro lado.

LEX: Sí. Para mí, perjudica mi tipo de fe en la humanidad. Um, sé que no debería, pero a veces lo hace, cuando veo que las personas son amables entre sí, es como, uh, flota una nube sobre mi perspectiva del mundo. Y eso no, desearía que no tuviera que estar ahí.

GREG: Sí. Ese siempre fue mi tipo de frivolidad, pero, uh, responde a eso. Si, si la humanidad es básicamente buena o básicamente mala, es el mayor debate en filosofía y es como, bueno, el problema con, eh, el primero es que no hay nada básico en la humanidad.

LEX: Sí. ¿Qué te da esperanza sobre todo este asunto, sobre este estado oscuro en el que nos encontramos, como lo describe, cómo podemos salir? ¿Qué te da esperanzas de que salgamos?

GREG: Creo que la gente está harta de esto. Um, creo que la gente está harta de no poder ser auténtica. Um, y eso es realmente, ya sabes, lo que es la censura. Básicamente te está diciendo que no seas tú mismo. En realidad, no digas lo que piensas. Um, no muestres tu personalidad. No discrepes. No seas raro. No te equivoques. Um, y eso no es sostenible. Creo que la gente ya ha tenido suficiente. Uh, pero una cosa que definitivamente quiero decirle a su audiencia es que no puede depender sólo de nosotros, nuestros espectadores, intentar solucionar esto. Um, y creo eso, y puede parecer que es un problema no relacionado. Creo que si hubiera formas muy respetadas, digamos extremadamente difíciles, de demostrar que eres extremadamente inteligente y trabajador que cuesten poco o nada, eso en realidad podría dar a las universidades de Harvard y Yale del mundo competir por su dinero. Creo que eso podría ser lo más positivo que podríamos hacer para lidiar con muchos de estos problemas y por qué creo que el hecho de que nos hayamos convertido en un Estados Unidos extraño con una gran tradición antielitista se ha vuelto extrañamente elitista en esto. En, um, en el sentido de que no solo nuevamente, nuestro liderazgo proviene de estas pocas escuelas elegantes, sino que en realidad tenemos una gran admiración por ellas. En cierto modo los admiramos, pero creo que tendríamos una sociedad mucho más saludable si la gente pudiera demostrar, ya sabes, su excelencia en formas que provienen de corrientes completamente diferentes y, y eso, eso, que son altamente respetado. A veces hablo de que debería haber un examen que cualquiera que lo apruebe obtenga como, ya sabes, una licenciatura en humanidades, que es como una súper licenciatura, como algo, como alguien, no un GED. Eso no es de lo que estoy hablando. Estoy hablando de algo que, ya sabes, una de cada dos, como cien personas, puede pasar de alguna otra manera, de hecho, de no pasar por estas instituciones masivas e infladas y costosas en las que la gente puede levantar la mano. y decir: soy inteligente y trabajador. Creo que podría ser una forma increíblemente saludable. Creo que necesitamos flujos adicionales para que las personas creativas resuelvan problemas, ya sea en X o en otro lugar. Um, creo que hay muchas cosas que la tecnología podría hacer para ayudar realmente con esto. Creo que algunas de las cosas en las que está trabajando Sal Khan, Khan Academy, realmente podrían ayudar. Um, entonces creo que hay muchas maneras, pero existen en gran medida en torno a idear nuevas formas de hacer las cosas, no solo esperar que las cosas viejas que tienen, digamos, $ 40 mil millones en el banco, se reformen por sí mismas. Y aquí está mi, ya sabes, he estado molestando mucho a Harvard, pero voy a molestarlos un poco más.Um, y, y, uh, hablo mucho sobre la clase otra vez, y ya sabes, hay un gran libro llamado Poison Ivy, um, de Evan Mandry, que recomiendo a todos. Y es indignante. Suena como yoy una perorata en Stanford, um, que fue, uh, y yo, y creo que el estado, ya sabes, la educación superior de élite tiene más niños del 1% superior que del 50 o 60% inferior, dependiendo de la escuela. . Um, y cuando miras cuánto les gusta replicar el privilegio de clase, es realmente angustioso. Así que todo el mundo debería leer Poison Ivy.

LEX: Y sobre todo, si eres raro, sigue siendo raro. Y eres una de las personas más interesantes, una de las más extrañas y hermosas que jamás haya conocido. Greg, gracias por el trabajo realmente importante que haces.

GREG: Esto fue, esto agradece la clase, toda el área que trajiste aquí hoy, hombre.

LEX: Um, Esta es una conversación increíble. Gracias por el trabajo que haces. Gracias. Gracias. Y para mí, que me preocupo profundamente por la educación, la educación superior, gracias por responsabilizar al MIT y a Harvard por hacer lo correcto con las personas que caminan por sus pasillos. Así que muchas gracias por hablar conmigo. Gracias por escuchar esta conversación con Greg Lukianoff para apoyar este podcast. Consulte nuestros patrocinadores en la descripción. Y ahora déjenme dejarles con algunas palabras de Noam Chomsky. Si crees en la libertad de expresión, crees en la libertad de expresión para las opiniones, no te gusta. Gables estaba a favor de la libertad de expresión para las opiniones que le gustaban. También lo fue Stalin. Si estás a favor de la libertad de expresión, eso significa que estás a favor de la libertad de expresión precisamente para opiniones que desprecias. Gracias por escuchar y espero verte la próxima vez.

Spanish transcription subtitles:

0
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,240
Si el fin es el proyecto del conocimiento humano,

1
00:00:02,700 --> 00:00:04,320
que es conocer el mundo que es,

2
00:00:04,740 --> 00:00:10,140
No se puede conocer el mundo tal como es sin saber lo que la gente realmente piensa.

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:14,440
Y lo que la gente realmente piensa es un hecho increíblemente importante que hay que saber.

4
00:00:15,040 --> 00:00:16,780
Así que cada vez que dices,

5
00:00:17,460 --> 00:00:26,400
no puedes decir que en realidad te estás privando del conocimiento de lo que la gente realmente cree que estás causando lo que Tim o Crown, que está en nuestra junta de asesores, llama falsificación de preferencias.

6
00:00:27,140 --> 00:00:29,400
Terminas con una imagen inexacta del mundo,

7
00:00:29,460 --> 00:00:30,240
que por cierto,

8
00:00:30,720 --> 00:00:31,640
en muchos casos,

9
00:00:32,220 --> 00:00:35,040
porque hay activistas que quieren restringir más la expresión,

10
00:00:35,340 --> 00:00:38,380
en realidad tienden a pensar que las personas tienen más prejuicios de los que podrían tener.

11
00:00:38,520 --> 00:00:43,840
Y de hecho, una forma muy práctica de empeorar las cosas es cuando censuras a la gente,

12
00:00:44,200 --> 00:00:46,340
no cambia su opinión.

13
00:00:46,340 --> 00:00:50,440
Simplemente los alienta a no compartirlo con personas que los meterán en problemas.

14
00:00:50,880 --> 00:00:55,920
Esto los lleva a hablar con personas con las que ya están de acuerdo y la polarización grupal despega.

15
00:00:58,660 --> 00:01:01,100
La siguiente es una conversación con Greg Lukianoff,

16
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:02,520
defensor de la libertad de expresión,

17
00:01:03,020 --> 00:01:03,940
abogado de la primera enmienda,

18
00:01:04,440 --> 00:01:05,980
presidente y director ejecutivo de FUEGO,

19
00:01:06,320 --> 00:01:08,460
la base de los derechos y la expresión individuales.

20
00:01:09,020 --> 00:01:11,360
Y es el autor de Unleashing Liberty,

21
00:01:11,880 --> 00:01:15,520
coautor con Jonathan Haidt de Coddling of the American

22
00:01:15,680 --> 00:01:21,200
Mind y coautor con Ricky Schlott de un nuevo libro que se publicará en octubre.

23
00:01:21,540 --> 00:01:26,060
Definitivamente deberían hacer un pedido anticipado ahora llamado Canceling of the American Mind.

24
00:01:26,600 --> 00:01:29,100
que es un relato definitivo de la historia,

25
00:01:29,420 --> 00:01:31,260
presente y futuro de la cultura de la cancelación,

26
00:01:31,680 --> 00:01:34,700
un término usado y abusado en el discurso público,

27
00:01:35,260 --> 00:01:40,220
pero rara vez estudiado y comprendido con la profundidad y el rigor que lo hacen Greg y Ricky.

28
00:01:40,680 --> 00:01:43,820
en este libro y en parte en esta conversación.

29
00:01:45,080 --> 00:01:46,480
La libertad de expresión es importante,

30
00:01:46,980 --> 00:01:48,580
especialmente en los campus universitarios,

31
00:01:49,700 --> 00:01:52,980
el mismo lugar que debería servir como campo de batalla de ideas,

32
00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:55,460
incluidos los extraños y controvertidos

33
00:01:56,100 --> 00:01:58,420
que debería alentar la toma de riesgos audaces,

34
00:01:58,820 --> 00:02:00,460
no conformidad.

35
00:02:01,500 --> 00:02:03,140
Este es el podcast de Lex Friedman.

36
00:02:03,540 --> 00:02:03,940
Para apoyarlo,

37
00:02:04,340 --> 00:02:06,280
por favor consulte nuestros patrocinadores en la descripción.

38
00:02:06,720 --> 00:02:07,160
Y ahora,

39
00:02:07,480 --> 00:02:07,900
queridos amigos,

40
00:02:08,460 --> 00:02:09,960
aquí está Greg Lukianoff.

41
00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:12,760
Empecemos por la gran pregunta.

42
00:02:13,000 --> 00:02:14,360
¿Qué es la cultura de la cancelación?

43
00:02:14,880 --> 00:02:17,240
Ahora, has dicho que no te gusta el término tal como ha sido,

44
00:02:17,380 --> 00:02:22,500
cito, arrastrado por el barro y abusado sin cesar por una gran cantidad de figuras controvertidas.

45
00:02:23,040 --> 00:02:24,280
Sin embargo, tenemos el término.

46
00:02:24,560 --> 00:02:25,380
¿Qué es?

47
00:02:25,480 --> 00:02:30,480
La cultura de cancelación es el repunte de las campañas, especialmente las campañas exitosas,

48
00:02:30,920 --> 00:02:34,120
a partir de 2014 para despedir a la gente,

49
00:02:34,780 --> 00:02:35,220
expulsado,

50
00:02:35,580 --> 00:02:36,780
desplataformado, etcétera,

51
00:02:37,420 --> 00:02:39,280
para un discurso que

52
00:02:39,280 --> 00:02:41,100
normalmente estarían protegidos por la primera enmienda.

53
00:02:41,640 --> 00:02:43,620
Y digo que estaríamos protegidos porque estamos

54
00:02:43,740 --> 00:02:48,160
hablando de circunstancias en las que no es necesariamente donde se aplica la primera enmienda.

55
00:02:48,460 --> 00:02:55,180
Pero lo que quiero decir es como una analogía para decir cosas por las que no podrías perder tu trabajo como empleado público,

56
00:02:55,560 --> 00:03:00,720
y también el clima de miedo que ha resultado de ese fenómeno,

57
00:03:00,820 --> 00:03:03,080
el hecho de que puedes perder tu trabajo por tener una opinión equivocada.

58
00:03:03,500 --> 00:03:04,900
Y no fue sutil que

59
00:03:04,900 --> 00:03:06,360
hubo un repunte en esto,

60
00:03:06,760 --> 00:03:08,640
particularmente en el campus alrededor de 2014.

61
00:03:09,840 --> 00:03:11,140
John Ronson escribió un libro

62
00:03:11,160 --> 00:03:12,700
llamado Así que te han avergonzado públicamente.

63
00:03:12,800 --> 00:03:13,980
Salió en 2015,

64
00:03:14,180 --> 00:03:15,740
ya está documentando este fenómeno.

65
00:03:16,420 --> 00:03:19,020
Escribí un libro llamado Freedom From Speech en 2014.

66
00:03:19,640 --> 00:03:22,360
Pero realmente fue en 2017 cuando empezaste a ver

67
00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:23,660
Esto estará dirigido a los profesores.

68
00:03:24,600 --> 00:03:28,380
Y cuando se trata del número de profesores que hemos visto ser

69
00:03:28,460 --> 00:03:29,820
atacados y pierden sus empleos,

70
00:03:30,420 --> 00:03:34,160
Llevo 22 años haciendo esto y no he visto nada igual.

71
00:03:34,560 --> 00:03:36,940
Hay tantas cosas que quiero preguntarles aquí.

72
00:03:37,300 --> 00:03:38,980
En realidad, basta con mirar la organización de

73
00:03:39,000 --> 00:03:39,380
FUEGO.

74
00:03:39,420 --> 00:03:41,220
¿Puedes explicar qué es la organización?

75
00:03:41,260 --> 00:03:42,960
Porque está interconectado con este todo.

76
00:03:43,760 --> 00:03:49,580
La lucha y el auge de la cultura del cáncer y la lucha por la libertad de expresión desde 2014 y antes.

77
00:03:50,680 --> 00:03:54,100
Así que FIRE fue fundada en 1999 por Harvey Silverglate.

78
00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:56,480
Es un famoso abogado de libertades civiles.

79
00:03:56,720 --> 00:03:58,360
Está un poco en el programa.

80
00:03:58,620 --> 00:04:03,040
Él es la persona que realmente me descubrió en mi feliz vida en San Francisco.

81
00:04:03,040 --> 00:04:05,720
pero sabía que estaba buscando un trabajo de primera enmienda.

82
00:04:05,900 --> 00:04:09,200
Había ido a la facultad de derecho específicamente para estudiar la primera enmienda.

83
00:04:10,520 --> 00:04:11,780
Y me encontró,

84
00:04:11,960 --> 00:04:12,700
lo cual fue genial.

85
00:04:13,100 --> 00:04:16,600
Su protegida, Kathleen Sullivan, era la decana de la Facultad de Derecho de Stanford.

86
00:04:16,720 --> 00:04:19,820
Y este sigue siendo el mejor cumplido que he recibido en mi vida.

87
00:04:19,920 --> 00:04:22,820
es que ella me recomendó a Harvey.

88
00:04:23,800 --> 00:04:26,200
Y como esa es la razón por la que fui a la facultad de derecho,

89
00:04:26,200 --> 00:04:28,240
Estaba emocionado de ser parte de esta nueva organización.

90
00:04:29,040 --> 00:04:32,060
El otro cofundador de FIRE es Alan Charles Kors.

91
00:04:32,760 --> 00:04:34,400
Es simplemente un genio absoluto.

92
00:04:34,680 --> 00:04:40,520
Es uno de los principales expertos del mundo en la Ilustración y, en particular, en Voltaire.

93
00:04:41,280 --> 00:04:43,760
Y si a alguno de sus oyentes le gustan los fantásticos cursos,

94
00:04:45,000 --> 00:04:47,620
tiene una conferencia sobre Blaise Pascal.

95
00:04:48,080 --> 00:04:50,840
Y Blaise, por supuesto, es famoso por la Apuesta de Pascal.

96
00:04:51,660 --> 00:04:54,900
Y lo dejé tan conmovido e impresionado.

97
00:04:54,900 --> 00:04:57,880
y con una profunda comprensión de lo importante que es esta persona.

98
00:04:58,400 --> 00:04:58,740
era.

99
00:04:59,720 --> 00:05:00,320
Es interesante.

100
00:05:00,600 --> 00:05:04,330
Me mencionaste sin conexión conectado a esto que hay un,

101
00:05:05,060 --> 00:05:09,160
al menos corre en paralelo o hay una conexión entre el amor por la ciencia y

102
00:05:09,160 --> 00:05:10,460
el amor a la libertad de expresión.

103
00:05:10,540 --> 00:05:11,040
Sí.

104
00:05:11,420 --> 00:05:14,160
¿Podrías explicarnos dónde está esa conexión?

105
00:05:14,480 --> 00:05:14,980
Seguro.

106
00:05:15,260 --> 00:05:17,820
Creo que para aquellos de nosotros que somos realmente,

107
00:05:18,180 --> 00:05:20,480
ya sabes, que hemos dedicado nuestras vidas a la libertad de

108
00:05:20,480 --> 00:05:22,840
discurso, una cosa que nos gusta,

109
00:05:22,840 --> 00:05:23,880
lo sepamos o no,

110
00:05:24,660 --> 00:05:25,440
es epistemología,

111
00:05:25,960 --> 00:05:28,660
ya sabes, el estudio y la filosofía del conocimiento.

112
00:05:29,540 --> 00:05:31,280
Ya sabes, la libertad de expresión tiene muchas

113
00:05:32,620 --> 00:05:34,400
dimensiones morales y filosóficas,

114
00:05:34,520 --> 00:05:36,400
pero desde un punto de vista pragmático,

115
00:05:36,940 --> 00:05:38,600
es necesario porque

116
00:05:38,600 --> 00:05:40,760
Somos criaturas con un conocimiento increíblemente limitado.

117
00:05:41,040 --> 00:05:43,140
Nos engañamos increíblemente a nosotros mismos.

118
00:05:43,640 --> 00:05:45,480
Siempre me ha encantado el hecho de que Yuval Harari

119
00:05:46,060 --> 00:05:49,180
Se refiere a la Ilustración como el descubrimiento de la ignorancia.

120
00:05:49,580 --> 00:05:51,400
porque eso es exactamente lo que era.

121
00:05:51,560 --> 00:05:53,000
De repente fue como,

122
00:05:53,540 --> 00:05:54,420
Vaya, espera un segundo.

123
00:05:55,140 --> 00:05:58,040
Toda esta sabiduría popular increíblemente interesante que tenemos,

124
00:05:58,080 --> 00:06:01,700
que por cierto puede ser sorprendentemente fiable aquí y allá.

125
00:06:02,440 --> 00:06:07,040
Cuando empiezas a probar, muchas cosas son una tontería y no se sostienen.

126
00:06:07,600 --> 00:06:09,820
Incluso nuestras ideas sobre cómo caen las cosas,

127
00:06:09,820 --> 00:06:14,400
Ya sabes, como estableció Galileo, al igual que incluso nuestras intuiciones, simplemente están equivocadas.

128
00:06:15,680 --> 00:06:19,340
Y por eso gran parte de la historia temprana de la libertad de expresión,

129
00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:23,420
estaba ocurriendo al mismo tiempo que una especie de revolución científica.

130
00:06:24,060 --> 00:06:28,140
Así que muchos de los primeros debates sobre la libertad de expresión estaban relacionados.

131
00:06:28,660 --> 00:06:30,160
Así que ciertamente Galileo,

132
00:06:30,480 --> 00:06:31,080
sabes,

133
00:06:31,900 --> 00:06:36,420
Siempre señalo que Kepler probablemente tenía la idea aún más radical de que ni siquiera eran esferas perfectas.

134
00:06:37,120 --> 00:06:38,500
Pero al mismo tiempo,

135
00:06:39,000 --> 00:06:40,720
en gran parte gracias a la invención de la imprenta,

136
00:06:41,080 --> 00:06:42,840
También tuviste todos estos acontecimientos políticos.

137
00:06:43,160 --> 00:06:45,120
Y sabes,

138
00:06:45,460 --> 00:06:46,800
Siempre hablo de Jan Hus,

139
00:06:47,000 --> 00:06:52,420
ya sabes, del famoso héroe checo que fue

140
00:06:52,780 --> 00:06:55,420
quemado en la hoguera y creo que en 1419.

141
00:06:56,420 --> 00:07:01,020
Pero él era básicamente Lutero antes de la imprenta.

142
00:07:01,720 --> 00:07:03,460
Antes de que Lutero pudiera hacer correr su palabra,

143
00:07:03,600 --> 00:07:05,000
Ya sabes, no tuvo ninguna posibilidad.

144
00:07:05,120 --> 00:07:06,080
Y eso fue exactamente

145
00:07:06,080 --> 00:07:06,880
lo que era Jan Hus.

146
00:07:07,060 --> 00:07:07,960
Pero un siglo después,

147
00:07:08,320 --> 00:07:09,260
gracias a la imprenta,

148
00:07:10,000 --> 00:07:10,540
todos podrían saber qué

149
00:07:10,660 --> 00:07:11,920
Pensó Lutero y muchacho,

150
00:07:12,340 --> 00:07:12,700
Hicieron ellos.

151
00:07:13,160 --> 00:07:13,860
Pero esto llevó a,

152
00:07:13,920 --> 00:07:16,260
claro, esto completamente loco,

153
00:07:16,940 --> 00:07:19,780
Período hiperperturbado de la historia europea.

154
00:07:20,500 --> 00:07:23,080
Bueno, mencionaste saltar un poco,

155
00:07:23,260 --> 00:07:23,860
la Primera Enmienda.

156
00:07:23,940 --> 00:07:27,680
En primer lugar, ¿qué es la Primera Enmienda y cuál es la conexión para usted entre

157
00:07:28,700 --> 00:07:31,220
¿La Primera Enmienda, la libertad de expresión y la cultura de la cancelación?

158
00:07:31,320 --> 00:07:31,660
Seguro.

159
00:07:32,480 --> 00:07:33,640
Entonces soy una Primera Enmienda

160
00:07:33,720 --> 00:07:35,180
abogado, como mencioné,

161
00:07:35,620 --> 00:07:36,680
y eso es lo que yo,

162
00:07:36,680 --> 00:07:38,180
Esa es mi pasión, eso es lo que estudié.

163
00:07:38,280 --> 00:07:40,640
Y creo que la ley de la Primera Enmienda estadounidense es increíblemente interesante.

164
00:07:41,320 --> 00:07:42,480
En una frase,

165
00:07:43,080 --> 00:07:44,580
La Primera Enmienda intenta

166
00:07:44,580 --> 00:07:50,440
deshacerse básicamente de todas las razones por las que la humanidad se ha estado matando entre sí durante toda su existencia.

167
00:07:51,060 --> 00:07:53,300
Que ya no íbamos a pelear más por la opinión,

168
00:07:53,480 --> 00:07:54,640
no íbamos a pelear más

169
00:07:54,800 --> 00:07:58,200
religión, que usted tiene derecho a dirigirse a su gobierno para obtener reparación de agravios,

170
00:07:58,620 --> 00:08:00,420
que tienes la libertad de asociarte.

171
00:08:00,760 --> 00:08:03,340
Que todas estas cosas en una frase fueran como, no,

172
00:08:03,800 --> 00:08:11,040
el gobierno ya no interferirá con su derecho a tener estos derechos humanos fundamentales.

173
00:08:12,280 --> 00:08:16,800
Y una cosa que hace que FIRE sea un poco diferente de otras organizaciones es que

174
00:08:17,040 --> 00:08:19,480
sin embargo, no somos sólo una organización de la Primera Enmienda,

175
00:08:20,100 --> 00:08:21,940
Somos una organización de libertad de expresión.

176
00:08:22,900 --> 00:08:24,300
Y así, y,

177
00:08:24,700 --> 00:08:25,660
pero al mismo tiempo,

178
00:08:25,860 --> 00:08:29,420
mucho de lo que creo que es la libertad de expresión,

179
00:08:29,900 --> 00:08:31,120
se puede explicar bien

180
00:08:31,640 --> 00:08:33,800
con referencia a muchas leyes de la Primera Enmienda,

181
00:08:34,160 --> 00:08:36,300
en parte porque en la historia estadounidense,

182
00:08:36,440 --> 00:08:37,260
algunos de nuestros más inteligentes

183
00:08:37,340 --> 00:08:42,660
La gente ha estado pensando en cuáles son los parámetros de la libertad de expresión en relación con

184
00:08:42,700 --> 00:08:43,280
la Primera Enmienda.

185
00:08:43,420 --> 00:08:44,400
Y muchos de esos principios,

186
00:08:44,480 --> 00:08:48,000
se transfieren muy bien como ideas pragmáticas.

187
00:08:48,420 --> 00:08:52,720
Entonces, el mayor pecado en términos de censura se llama discriminación de puntos de vista.

188
00:08:53,060 --> 00:08:54,560
Que esencialmente permites la libertad de expresión,

189
00:08:54,840 --> 00:08:55,940
excepto esa opinión.

190
00:08:56,780 --> 00:08:59,060
Ahora lo es, y resulta ser amable.

191
00:08:59,080 --> 00:09:00,040
de más defendible.

192
00:09:00,140 --> 00:09:01,940
Y creo que tiene sentido que si tú,

193
00:09:01,940 --> 00:09:02,980
si creas un foro y te gusta,

194
00:09:03,160 --> 00:09:07,020
sólo vamos a hablar de economía para excluir a las personas que quieran hablar de un tema diferente,

195
00:09:07,620 --> 00:09:11,160
pero se considera, con razón, algo más importante.

196
00:09:11,460 --> 00:09:12,860
Si ha creado un foro de economía,

197
00:09:13,240 --> 00:09:17,920
pero no vamos a permitir que la gente hable sobre ese tipo de economía o tenga esa opinión sobre la economía,

198
00:09:18,260 --> 00:09:20,020
la mayoría, muy particularmente.

199
00:09:20,700 --> 00:09:27,400
Entonces, muchos de los principios de la ley de la Primera Enmienda en realidad tienen mucho sentido filosófico como buenos principios para cuando,

200
00:09:27,520 --> 00:09:29,900
como lo que es discurso protegido y desprotegido,

201
00:09:30,000 --> 00:09:31,160
¿Qué debería meterte en problemas?

202
00:09:31,760 --> 00:09:33,440
cómo lo analizas realmente,

203
00:09:33,480 --> 00:09:37,400
Es por eso que en nuestra definición de cultura de cancelación intentamos trabajar en

204
00:09:37,540 --> 00:09:38,700
algunas de las normas de la Primera Enmienda,

205
00:09:38,800 --> 00:09:39,620
solo en la definición.

206
00:09:39,900 --> 00:09:41,820
Así que no tenemos que atascarnos en ellos también.

207
00:09:42,400 --> 00:09:43,400
Estás diciendo tantas cosas interesantes.

208
00:09:43,400 --> 00:09:45,540
pero si puedes vincular el punto de vista de la discriminación,

209
00:09:46,400 --> 00:09:49,360
¿Hay alguna zona gris de discusión ahí?

210
00:09:49,400 --> 00:09:52,460
¿Qué es y qué no es economía según el ejemplo que diste?

211
00:09:52,560 --> 00:09:53,100
Sí.

212
00:09:53,760 --> 00:09:54,600
¿Está ahí?

213
00:09:55,400 --> 00:09:56,580
Quiero decir, ¿es una ciencia?

214
00:09:56,690 --> 00:09:59,400
¿O es un arte trazar líneas de lo que no es?

215
00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:00,160
no esta permitido?

216
00:10:00,360 --> 00:10:00,520
Sí.

217
00:10:00,700 --> 00:10:02,380
Ya sabes, si estás diciendo que algo es,

218
00:10:02,380 --> 00:10:03,240
o no es economía,

219
00:10:03,300 --> 00:10:06,200
Bueno, se puede decir que todo es economía y por eso quiero hablar de poesía.

220
00:10:06,460 --> 00:10:07,300
Habría alguna línea

221
00:10:07,300 --> 00:10:08,400
ejercicio de dibujo ahí dentro,

222
00:10:08,660 --> 00:10:14,520
pero digamos inmediatamente que decides abrirlo incluso a la poesía.

223
00:10:16,060 --> 00:10:17,420
Es una gran diferencia entre decir,

224
00:10:17,460 --> 00:10:18,620
Bien, ahora estamos abiertos a la poesía.

225
00:10:18,860 --> 00:10:20,040
pero no puedes decir,

226
00:10:20,440 --> 00:10:21,920
Ya sabes, Dante era malo.

227
00:10:22,780 --> 00:10:25,840
Como si fuera una opinión prohibida ahora oficialmente en,

228
00:10:25,840 --> 00:10:29,720
en este foro que de otro modo sería abierto, eso inmediatamente, en un nivel intuitivo, atacaría

229
00:10:29,740 --> 00:10:33,980
la gente como un problema mayor que simplemente decir que la poesía no es economía.

230
00:10:35,060 --> 00:10:35,320
Sí. Quiero decir,

231
00:10:35,880 --> 00:10:38,240
ese nivel intuitivo con el que hablas,

232
00:10:39,780 --> 00:10:40,280
Espero

233
00:10:41,580 --> 00:10:42,800
que todos tenemos

234
00:10:42,800 --> 00:10:45,300
ese tipo de intuición básica cuando se cruza la línea,

235
00:10:45,380 --> 00:10:46,460
es lo mismo para

236
00:10:46,460 --> 00:10:47,780
Me gusta la pornografía, ¿verdad?

237
00:10:47,780 --> 00:10:48,880
Ya sabes, cuando lo veas,

238
00:10:48,880 --> 00:10:52,620
Creo que hay el mismo nivel de intuición que

239
00:10:52,620 --> 00:10:54,220
debería aplicarse en todos los ámbitos.

240
00:10:54,930 --> 00:10:56,320
Y es cuando

241
00:10:57,060 --> 00:11:00,280
que la intuición se deforma por cualquier fuerza de la sociedad,

242
00:11:00,340 --> 00:11:02,540
Ahí es cuando empieza a parecer censura.

243
00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:03,020
Sí.

244
00:11:03,220 --> 00:11:05,280
Quiero decir, la gente lo encuentra diferente.

245
00:11:05,680 --> 00:11:07,240
Ya sabes, si alguien pierde su trabajo simplemente

246
00:11:07,240 --> 00:11:08,440
por su opinión política,

247
00:11:08,780 --> 00:11:11,400
incluso si ese empleador tiene todo el derecho del mundo a despedirte,

248
00:11:11,880 --> 00:11:13,520
Creo que los estadounidenses todavía deberían decir:

249
00:11:13,520 --> 00:11:14,300
Bueno, es verdad.

250
00:11:14,520 --> 00:11:15,220
Tienen todo el derecho a

251
00:11:15,220 --> 00:11:17,900
el mundo y no estoy presentando un caso legal que tal vez no deberías

252
00:11:19,100 --> 00:11:20,680
despedir a alguien por su opinión política,

253
00:11:21,120 --> 00:11:21,960
pero piénselo bien.

254
00:11:22,420 --> 00:11:24,020
¿Qué sociedad queremos?

255
00:11:24,040 --> 00:11:25,860
¿En qué tipo de sociedad queremos vivir?

256
00:11:26,160 --> 00:11:27,660
Y ha sido divertido verlo,

257
00:11:29,160 --> 00:11:30,440
ya sabes, y yo señalo esto.

258
00:11:30,600 --> 00:11:32,600
Sí, defenderé las empresas,

259
00:11:33,520 --> 00:11:35,960
derechos de asociación de la primera enmienda

260
00:11:35,960 --> 00:11:37,880
capaz de tener el derecho legal de decidir,

261
00:11:38,140 --> 00:11:39,440
ya sabes, quién trabaja para ellos.

262
00:11:39,680 --> 00:11:42,280
Pero desde una cuestión moral o filosófica,

263
00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:44,600
si piensas en las implicaciones de,

264
00:11:44,860 --> 00:11:46,640
si cada negocio en

265
00:11:46,640 --> 00:11:49,160
América se convierte en una asociación expresiva,

266
00:11:49,240 --> 00:11:52,360
Además de ser una organización que maximiza sus beneficios,

267
00:11:53,120 --> 00:11:57,080
eso sería un desastre para la democracia porque terminaría en una situación en la que la gente

268
00:11:57,080 --> 00:11:58,620
en realidad se estarían diciendo a sí mismos,

269
00:11:59,100 --> 00:12:01,500
No creo que pueda decir lo que realmente

270
00:12:01,500 --> 00:12:03,900
Pienso y sigo creyendo que puedo conservar mi trabajo.

271
00:12:04,340 --> 00:12:05,600
Y ahí es donde me preocupaba.

272
00:12:05,620 --> 00:12:12,290
Sentí que nos dirigíamos porque gran parte de la respuesta inicial a las cancelaciones de personas fue muy

273
00:12:12,600 --> 00:12:13,000
simplemente,

274
00:12:13,380 --> 00:12:15,860
ya sabes, Oh, pero tienen derecho a deshacerse de esta persona.

275
00:12:16,060 --> 00:12:20,100
Y eso, y ese es el final, el principio y el final de la discusión.

276
00:12:20,680 --> 00:12:22,420
Y pensé que era una evasión.

277
00:12:22,660 --> 00:12:25,760
Pensé que en realidad esa no era una forma muy seria de hacerlo.

278
00:12:25,780 --> 00:12:29,790
Si le importan tanto la primera enmienda como la libertad de expresión, piense detenidamente

279
00:12:29,900 --> 00:12:31,160
a ti, solo a

280
00:12:32,380 --> 00:12:34,920
aclarar que la primera enmienda es una especie de

281
00:12:35,840 --> 00:12:38,980
una encarnación legal del ideal

282
00:12:38,980 --> 00:12:41,280
de la libertad de expresión y luego la libertad de expresión aplicada al gobierno.

283
00:12:41,840 --> 00:12:47,360
Y es muy específico aplicado al gobierno y la libertad de expresión es la aplicación de

284
00:12:47,500 --> 00:12:49,560
el principio de que te guste todo,

285
00:12:50,040 --> 00:12:51,960
incluyendo algo parecido al alto nivel

286
00:12:52,720 --> 00:12:54,220
ideal filosófico

287
00:12:54,720 --> 00:12:59,160
de lo que es, del valor de que la gente pueda decir lo que piensa.

288
00:12:59,380 --> 00:12:59,580
Sí.

289
00:12:59,660 --> 00:13:03,640
Es una idea más antigua, más audaz y más amplia.

290
00:13:04,020 --> 00:13:05,680
Y puedes tener una situación.

291
00:13:05,820 --> 00:13:08,540
Y hablo de países que tienen buenas leyes de libertad de expresión,

292
00:13:08,720 --> 00:13:10,580
pero no necesariamente una gran cultura de libertad de expresión.

293
00:13:11,100 --> 00:13:15,160
Y hablo de cómo cuando a veces hacemos esta distinción entre libertad de expresión

294
00:13:15,180 --> 00:13:16,420
derecho y cultura de la libertad de expresión,

295
00:13:17,140 --> 00:13:19,920
Estamos pensando de una manera muy confusa.

296
00:13:21,160 --> 00:13:21,640
Y lo que quiero decir

297
00:13:21,640 --> 00:13:24,140
por eso es que la ley es generalmente,

298
00:13:24,180 --> 00:13:25,500
particularmente en un país de derecho común,

299
00:13:26,000 --> 00:13:27,200
es el reflejo

300
00:13:27,780 --> 00:13:28,520
de normas.

301
00:13:29,480 --> 00:13:31,200
Esos jueces también son personas.

302
00:13:31,360 --> 00:13:32,140
Y en muchos casos,

303
00:13:32,240 --> 00:13:33,000
Se supone que el derecho común

304
00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:37,880
tomar nuestras ideas intuitivas de justicia y plasmarlas en la ley.

305
00:13:38,720 --> 00:13:39,660
Así que si realmente

306
00:13:39,660 --> 00:13:43,260
tenemos una cultura que no aprecia la libertad de expresión desde un punto de vista filosófico,

307
00:13:43,580 --> 00:13:46,640
no podrá proteger la libertad de expresión a largo plazo,

308
00:13:46,720 --> 00:13:47,640
incluso en la ley.

309
00:13:47,880 --> 00:13:50,940
Porque eventualmente esa es una de las razones por las que me preocupo tanto por algunos de estos terribles

310
00:13:50,940 --> 00:13:52,600
casos que salen de las facultades de derecho.

311
00:13:52,940 --> 00:13:56,640
Porque me temo que aunque seguro americano primero

312
00:13:56,640 --> 00:13:59,040
La ley de enmienda protege fuertemente la primera enmienda.

313
00:13:59,700 --> 00:14:00,040
por ahora,

314
00:14:00,500 --> 00:14:01,880
no va a quedar así.

315
00:14:01,960 --> 00:14:06,480
Si hay generaciones de estudiantes de derecho que se gradúan y que realmente piensan

316
00:14:06,580 --> 00:14:09,860
No hay nada, no hay objetivo más alto que gritar, eres un oponente.

317
00:14:10,600 --> 00:14:10,800
Sí.

318
00:14:10,920 --> 00:14:12,800
Por eso es que gran parte de tu atención

319
00:14:14,080 --> 00:14:22,620
o una gran parte de su atención se centra en la educación superior o en el período educativo se debe a que la educación es la base de la cultura.

320
00:14:23,120 --> 00:14:23,240
Sí.

321
00:14:23,500 --> 00:14:24,360
Tienes esta historia,

322
00:14:24,460 --> 00:14:26,000
ya sabes, eh, 64,

323
00:14:26,320 --> 00:14:30,320
tienes el movimiento por la libertad de expresión en Berkeley y en un 65,

324
00:14:30,600 --> 00:14:32,720
tienes tolerancia represiva por Herbert Marcuse,

325
00:14:33,000 --> 00:14:34,240
que era una declaración de,

326
00:14:34,780 --> 00:14:37,660
Por cierto, nosotros en la izquierda, nosotros, no deberíamos,

327
00:14:38,180 --> 00:14:39,460
deberíamos tener libertad de expresión,

328
00:14:39,520 --> 00:14:41,240
pero deberíamos tener libertad de expresión para nosotros.

329
00:14:41,740 --> 00:14:44,040
Quiero decir, fui, volví y releí,

330
00:14:44,400 --> 00:14:45,680
um, uh, tolerancia represiva

331
00:14:46,200 --> 00:14:47,540
y lo claro que es.

332
00:14:47,660 --> 00:14:50,240
Olvidé que había olvidado que realmente es como,

333
00:14:50,340 --> 00:14:52,600
um, y estos llamados conservadores y derechistas,

334
00:14:52,880 --> 00:14:55,580
Necesitamos reprimirlos porque son pensadores regresivos.

335
00:14:55,980 --> 00:14:59,680
Realmente no resulta nada más sofisticado que la vieja idea,

336
00:15:00,080 --> 00:15:01,940
um, que nuestra gente es buena.

337
00:15:02,320 --> 00:15:03,420
Obtienen libertad de expresión.

338
00:15:03,820 --> 00:15:04,760
Deberíamos, deberían conservarlo.

339
00:15:05,800 --> 00:15:07,180
El otro lado malo.

340
00:15:07,820 --> 00:15:08,840
Um, nosotros, no deberíamos haberlo hecho,

341
00:15:08,980 --> 00:15:10,900
uh, y tenemos que volver a capacitar a la sociedad.

342
00:15:11,040 --> 00:15:13,220
Y claro, como éste, acaba siendo otro,

343
00:15:13,560 --> 00:15:15,000
también era fanático de Mao.

344
00:15:15,160 --> 00:15:16,320
Así que no es sorprendente que él,

345
00:15:16,580 --> 00:15:20,160
que por supuesto el sistema tendría que depender de algún tipo de totalitario, eh,

346
00:15:20,860 --> 00:15:21,500
sistema. Eh,

347
00:15:22,640 --> 00:15:25,780
pero eso fue ridículo, um,

348
00:15:26,160 --> 00:15:33,300
uh, posición, ya sabes, uh, digamos hace 30, 40 años, la idea de que esencialmente, ya sabes, la libertad de expresión para mí, no para el,

349
00:15:33,960 --> 00:15:39,400
uh, como, como el gran campeón de la libertad de expresión que Hentoff solía decir, era algo que se suponía que debías hacer.

350
00:15:39,400 --> 00:15:40,260
estar avergonzado por.

351
00:15:40,980 --> 00:15:43,460
Pero vi esto cuando estaba dentro,

352
00:15:43,460 --> 00:15:44,700
en, en la facultad de derecho en el 97,

353
00:15:44,880 --> 00:15:46,180
Vi esto cuando estaba haciendo prácticas en

354
00:15:46,200 --> 00:15:47,500
la ACLU en 99,

355
00:15:48,580 --> 00:15:52,420
um, que se avecinaba un choque de trenes en cámara lenta que esencialmente

356
00:15:52,420 --> 00:15:56,200
Había, um, estas malas ideas del campus que habían sido

357
00:15:56,980 --> 00:15:58,780
tomando cada vez más vapor

358
00:15:58,780 --> 00:16:03,780
de prácticamente ninguna libertad de expresión para mi oponente en realidad se estaban volviendo más,

359
00:16:03,860 --> 00:16:09,640
cada vez más aceptado porque, y en parte porque, la academia se estaba volviendo cada vez menos diversa en sus puntos de vista.

360
00:16:09,740 --> 00:16:15,180
Creo que, como señala mi coautor Jonathan Haidt, cuando tienes un punto de vista bajo

361
00:16:15,280 --> 00:16:18,260
diversidad, la gente empieza a pensar de una manera muy tribal.

362
00:16:18,780 --> 00:16:21,280
Y si no tienes a los disidentes respetados,

363
00:16:21,340 --> 00:16:22,080
no tienes la gente

364
00:16:22,080 --> 00:16:23,260
que puedes señalar que soy como,

365
00:16:23,340 --> 00:16:24,650
Oye, esta es una persona inteligente.

366
00:16:24,780 --> 00:16:25,660
Esto es como,

367
00:16:26,100 --> 00:16:26,740
esto es inteligente,

368
00:16:26,960 --> 00:16:28,120
persona razonable y decente que yo,

369
00:16:28,180 --> 00:16:31,800
con lo que no estoy de acuerdo, así que supongo que no todos piensan igual sobre este tema.

370
00:16:32,380 --> 00:16:35,180
Empiezas a sentirte mucho más parecido, ya sabes,

371
00:16:35,600 --> 00:16:36,580
solo gente mala,

372
00:16:37,020 --> 00:16:41,220
Sólo los herejes, sólo los blasfemos, sólo los derechistas, ya sabes, pueden realmente

373
00:16:41,540 --> 00:16:42,180
piensa de esta manera.

374
00:16:42,580 --> 00:16:44,000
Cada vez que dices algo,

375
00:16:44,000 --> 00:16:47,320
Siempre tengo un millón de pensamientos y un millón de preguntas que

376
00:16:47,320 --> 00:16:47,640
surgir.

377
00:16:47,800 --> 00:16:52,300
Pero como mencionaste, hay una especie de deriva a medida que escribes en el libro y

378
00:16:52,300 --> 00:16:55,140
Mencioné ahora que hay una tendencia hacia la izquierda en el mundo académico,

379
00:16:55,780 --> 00:16:57,340
um, que también tal vez

380
00:16:57,440 --> 00:17:01,440
Haga una distinción aquí entre la izquierda y la derecha y la cultura de cancelación tal como presenta

381
00:17:01,440 --> 00:17:06,280
en su libro no está necesariamente asociado con ningún punto de vista político,

382
00:17:06,640 --> 00:17:09,260
que hay mecanismos en ambos lados que resultan

383
00:17:09,820 --> 00:17:11,360
en cancelación y censura,

384
00:17:12,020 --> 00:17:13,260
uh, en violación de la libertad de expresión.

385
00:17:13,800 --> 00:17:18,160
Entonces, una cosa que quiero dejar muy clara es que el libro aborda la cultura de cancelación tanto de derecha como de izquierda.

386
00:17:18,520 --> 00:17:21,080
Son diferentes, uh, en muchos sentidos y definitivamente,

387
00:17:21,080 --> 00:17:27,040
Ya sabes, cancelar la cultura de la izquierda es más importante en el mundo académico donde la izquierda domina más.

388
00:17:27,800 --> 00:17:31,320
Um, pero hablamos mucho sobre la cultura de cancelación proveniente de las legislaturas.

389
00:17:31,480 --> 00:17:32,200
Hablamos mucho de

390
00:17:32,220 --> 00:17:35,120
cancelar la cultura en el campus también,

391
00:17:35,440 --> 00:17:37,560
porque aunque, um,

392
00:17:38,320 --> 00:17:39,180
la mayoría de los intentos que

393
00:17:39,180 --> 00:17:42,460
vienen del campus para cancelar a la gente todavía son de izquierda,

394
00:17:42,740 --> 00:17:43,620
hay una gran cantidad de

395
00:17:43,620 --> 00:17:45,720
ataques que vienen de la derecha que vienen de,

396
00:17:45,720 --> 00:17:47,770
ya sabes, eh, los intentos de diferentes

397
00:17:47,960 --> 00:17:51,720
organizaciones y, a veces, cuando hay historias en Fox News,

398
00:17:51,940 --> 00:17:58,120
ya sabes, como si persiguieran a los profesores y aproximadamente un tercio de los intentos de castigar a los profesores

399
00:17:58,140 --> 00:18:00,400
que tienen éxito en realidad provienen de la derecha.

400
00:18:00,760 --> 00:18:01,880
Y, y hablamos de,

401
00:18:01,880 --> 00:18:03,440
um, intentos de prohibir libros.

402
00:18:03,440 --> 00:18:05,980
Um, en, en el, en el libro del que hablamos,

403
00:18:06,040 --> 00:18:09,020
um, y, uh, hablo de demandar

404
00:18:09,260 --> 00:18:10,520
la legislatura de Florida.

405
00:18:10,760 --> 00:18:12,880
Rhonda Santus tenía algo llamado el acto de detener el despertar,

406
00:18:13,500 --> 00:18:17,160
Um, lo que les dijimos a todos es ridículamente inconstitucional.

407
00:18:17,320 --> 00:18:19,200
Intentaron prohibir,

408
00:18:19,200 --> 00:18:21,800
ya sabes, temas particulares en educación superior y pensamos,

409
00:18:21,880 --> 00:18:22,800
no, esto es una broma.

410
00:18:23,040 --> 00:18:23,280
Como, como,

411
00:18:23,720 --> 00:18:25,340
esto será, esto será reído fuera de los tribunales.

412
00:18:26,580 --> 00:18:29,320
Um, y no nos escucharon y lo trajeron,

413
00:18:29,600 --> 00:18:32,640
uh, lo aprobaron y demandamos y ganamos.

414
00:18:33,160 --> 00:18:35,800
Ahora lo están intentando de nuevo con algo que es igualmente

415
00:18:35,800 --> 00:18:38,680
como inconstitucional y demandaremos nuevamente y lo haremos,

416
00:18:38,680 --> 00:18:39,540
y ganaremos.

417
00:18:39,700 --> 00:18:41,700
¿Puedes darnos más detalles sobre un acto de detener el despertar?

418
00:18:41,960 --> 00:18:43,340
Entonces esto presumiblemente está tratando de limitar

419
00:18:44,040 --> 00:18:45,980
ciertos temas que se enseñan en la escuela.

420
00:18:45,980 --> 00:18:46,340
Sí.

421
00:18:46,420 --> 00:18:48,140
Básicamente despertaron temas.

422
00:18:48,240 --> 00:18:50,500
Um, ya sabes, es más, surgió del tipo de

423
00:18:50,640 --> 00:18:52,600
intento de llegar a una teoría crítica de la raza.

424
00:18:52,700 --> 00:18:55,620
Um, entonces son temas relacionados con la raza,

425
00:18:55,660 --> 00:18:56,580
género, etcétera.

426
00:18:56,600 --> 00:18:59,880
Um, no recuerdo exactamente cómo intentaron hacer el gabinete,

427
00:18:59,880 --> 00:19:01,580
Eh, eh, a CRT.

428
00:19:02,140 --> 00:19:04,000
Um, pero cuando en realidad,

429
00:19:04,380 --> 00:19:07,560
La ley está muy bien establecida y no se puede decir más alto.

430
00:19:07,560 --> 00:19:11,140
educación lo que se les permite enseñar sin violar,

431
00:19:11,700 --> 00:19:12,680
uh, sin violar la primera

432
00:19:12,680 --> 00:19:13,040
enmienda.

433
00:19:13,300 --> 00:19:15,240
Y cuando esto llegó frente a un juez,

434
00:19:15,280 --> 00:19:16,500
era exactamente como,

435
00:19:16,500 --> 00:19:20,580
uh, estaba exactamente tan escéptico al respecto como pensábamos que estaría.

436
00:19:20,680 --> 00:19:21,980
Creo que llamó a esto distópico.

437
00:19:22,980 --> 00:19:24,680
Um, y no estuvo cerca.

438
00:19:24,760 --> 00:19:30,080
Entonces, si estás en contra de ese tipo de enseñanza, la forma correcta de luchar contra ella es haciendo que

439
00:19:30,080 --> 00:19:34,460
caso de que no sea una buena idea como parte del plan de estudios en lugar de prohibirlo del plan de estudios.

440
00:19:34,540 --> 00:19:34,660
Sí.

441
00:19:35,020 --> 00:19:37,480
Simplemente el estado no tiene el poder de simplemente decir:

442
00:19:37,720 --> 00:19:42,640
prohibir, um, ya sabes, qué, qué enseñan, qué enseñan los profesores de educación superior.

443
00:19:43,080 --> 00:19:45,840
Ahora se vuelve un poco más complicado cuando hablas de K a 12,

444
00:19:46,400 --> 00:19:46,880
porque

445
00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:52,120
el estado tiene un papel a la hora de decidir qué se enseña al público desde jardín de infantes hasta el grado 12 porque son sus hijos,

446
00:19:52,800 --> 00:19:53,960
ellos, es financiado por los contribuyentes.

447
00:19:54,520 --> 00:19:57,260
Um, y en general la legislatura está involucrada.

448
00:19:57,420 --> 00:19:59,900
Um, hay supervisión democrática de ese proceso.

449
00:20:00,640 --> 00:20:01,700
Entonces, desde jardín de infantes hasta 12,

450
00:20:01,760 --> 00:20:03,420
¿Existe también una inclinación hacia el

451
00:20:03,420 --> 00:20:06,060
¿Queda en términos de la administración que gestiona el currículo?

452
00:20:06,120 --> 00:20:09,480
Sí, um, allí, allí, definitivamente hay, um, desde jardín de infantes hasta 12,

453
00:20:09,820 --> 00:20:10,920
el, el, quiero decir,

454
00:20:11,760 --> 00:20:13,000
Mis hijos van a la escuela pública.

455
00:20:13,340 --> 00:20:15,160
Um, tengo un niño de cinco y uno de siete años.

456
00:20:16,200 --> 00:20:19,540
uh, y tienen profesores encantadores.

457
00:20:19,720 --> 00:20:21,660
Um, pero nos hemos topado con un

458
00:20:21,660 --> 00:20:22,380
muchos problemas con,

459
00:20:22,600 --> 00:20:23,780
con escuelas de educación en llamas.

460
00:20:24,340 --> 00:20:26,000
Um, y muchos de los graduados de

461
00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:30,120
Las escuelas de educación terminaron siendo los administradores que reprimieron la libertad de expresión en la educación superior.

462
00:20:31,040 --> 00:20:35,300
Y por eso he estado tratando de pensar en formas positivas de abordar algunas de las,

463
00:20:35,520 --> 00:20:37,440
algunos de los problemas que veo en K hasta 12.

464
00:20:37,640 --> 00:20:38,860
Pensé que el intento de simplemente

465
00:20:39,500 --> 00:20:39,950
dictar,

466
00:20:40,560 --> 00:20:43,020
no enseñarás los siguientes 10 libros,

467
00:20:43,300 --> 00:20:46,340
ya sabes, o 20 libros o 200 libros era la forma incorrecta de hacerlo.

468
00:20:46,540 --> 00:20:48,960
Ahora, cuando se trata de decidir qué libros están en el plan de estudios,

469
00:20:49,060 --> 00:20:50,360
Nuevamente, eso es algo que la legislatura

470
00:20:50,360 --> 00:20:52,700
En realidad, ya sabes, no puedo, no puedo tener voz y voto.

471
00:20:52,700 --> 00:20:54,480
y eso es bastante poco controvertido,

472
00:20:54,480 --> 00:20:55,560
um, en términos de la ley.

473
00:20:56,220 --> 00:20:57,580
Pero cuando se trata de cómo combatirlo,

474
00:20:57,780 --> 00:21:00,300
Tenía algo que, dado que estoy atascado con una fórmula,

475
00:21:00,740 --> 00:21:02,860
Lo llamé empoderamiento de la mente estadounidense.

476
00:21:02,860 --> 00:21:05,560
Um, di principios que eran inconsistentes,

477
00:21:05,960 --> 00:21:10,020
um, con el tipo de pensamiento grupal y un gran énfasis en,

478
00:21:10,040 --> 00:21:13,000
uh, política de identidad, uh, eso,

479
00:21:13,400 --> 00:21:16,580
Um, ya sabes, algunos de los críticos se quejan con razón desde jardín de infantes hasta 12.

480
00:21:17,100 --> 00:21:18,600
Uh, y nosotros, nosotros,

481
00:21:19,160 --> 00:21:21,900
eso es en realidad cancelar la mente estadounidense,

482
00:21:21,960 --> 00:21:23,820
pero tengo una explicación más detallada de

483
00:21:23,820 --> 00:21:26,000
es lo que voy a poner en mi blog,

484
00:21:26,260 --> 00:21:27,280
la idea eternamente radical.

485
00:21:27,840 --> 00:21:29,080
¿Es posible legalmente,

486
00:21:29,080 --> 00:21:30,760
esa es solo una pregunta tonta,

487
00:21:31,000 --> 00:21:34,780
tal vez crear una protección adicional para ciertos tipos de literatura

488
00:21:35,410 --> 00:21:38,440
1984 o algo así para permanecer en el plan de estudios.

489
00:21:38,700 --> 00:21:40,280
Quiero decir, ya está todo protegido, supongo.

490
00:21:40,560 --> 00:21:40,800
Sí.

491
00:21:40,800 --> 00:21:41,440
Supongo

492
00:21:42,140 --> 00:21:44,540
para proteger contra administradores de

493
00:21:45,220 --> 00:21:46,280
jugando demasiado

494
00:21:46,900 --> 00:21:47,880
con el plan de estudios,

495
00:21:48,220 --> 00:21:49,400
como estabilizar el currículo.

496
00:21:49,700 --> 00:21:51,400
No sé cuál es la maquinaria de

497
00:21:51,940 --> 00:21:53,900
la escuela pública K a 12.

498
00:21:54,000 --> 00:21:54,840
Desde jardín de infantes hasta 12º,

499
00:21:54,980 --> 00:21:57,860
Ya sabes, las legislaturas estatales, ya sabes, son parte de eso.

500
00:21:57,940 --> 00:21:59,540
Son, son parte de eso y pueden decir como,

501
00:21:59,660 --> 00:22:01,060
deberías enseñar los siguientes libros.

502
00:22:01,160 --> 00:22:03,400
Ahora, por supuesto, la gente siempre está un poco preocupada de que, um,

503
00:22:03,760 --> 00:22:05,980
si tú, eh, si te recomendaran,

504
00:22:06,500 --> 00:22:06,840
sabes,

505
00:22:07,200 --> 00:22:07,540
enseñar,

506
00:22:07,860 --> 00:22:09,740
uh, enseñar la declaración de independencia,

507
00:22:09,920 --> 00:22:11,120
ya sabes, que terminará siendo,

508
00:22:11,180 --> 00:22:14,040
Bueno, van a enseñar que la declaración de independencia fue solo para proteger la esclavitud,

509
00:22:14,440 --> 00:22:14,700
cual

510
00:22:15,030 --> 00:22:17,700
no estaba enseñando un tema en particular,

511
00:22:17,800 --> 00:22:18,980
qué libros de texto eliges,

512
00:22:19,200 --> 00:22:20,240
qué perspectiva tomas,

513
00:22:20,340 --> 00:22:21,120
Todo ese tipo de cosas.

514
00:22:21,120 --> 00:22:25,280
Es como si la religión comenzara a infiltrarse en toda la cuestión de cómo, ya sabes,

515
00:22:25,640 --> 00:22:29,000
¿Se le permite a la Biblia enseñar en forma corporativa que en educación?

516
00:22:29,020 --> 00:22:29,180
Oh,

517
00:22:30,180 --> 00:22:30,660
no lo hagas, sí.

518
00:22:30,840 --> 00:22:32,660
Quiero decir, soy, soy ateo,

519
00:22:33,280 --> 00:22:35,080
uh, con un intenso interés en la religión.

520
00:22:35,240 --> 00:22:38,140
De hecho, leí toda la Biblia este año sólo porque hago cosas así.

521
00:22:38,420 --> 00:22:39,480
Y en realidad nunca lo había leído.

522
00:22:39,480 --> 00:22:40,500
de principio a fin.

523
00:22:40,680 --> 00:22:42,420
Um, luego leí el Corán porque ya sabes,

524
00:22:42,420 --> 00:22:43,480
y voy a intentar hacer lo

525
00:22:43,480 --> 00:22:44,540
Libro de Mormón, pero ya sabes.

526
00:22:44,680 --> 00:22:46,420
Bueno, empezaron a hacerlo, eres tan fascinante.

527
00:22:46,780 --> 00:22:48,360
Mmm, ¿recomiendas hacer eso?

528
00:22:48,700 --> 00:22:50,040
Creo que deberías,

529
00:22:50,040 --> 00:22:53,200
Um, sólo para saberlo, porque es una piedra de toque,

530
00:22:53,460 --> 00:22:55,940
Um, en la forma en que la gente habla de las cosas.

531
00:22:56,360 --> 00:22:57,800
puede resultar bastante tedioso,

532
00:22:58,080 --> 00:23:00,460
pero incluso me obligué a leer

533
00:23:00,500 --> 00:23:06,120
todas las instrucciones muy específicas sobre qué altura deben tener las diferentes partes del templo

534
00:23:06,120 --> 00:23:10,380
y cuánto tiempo deben tener los vestidos y qué forma deben tener y qué les gusta,

535
00:23:10,620 --> 00:23:12,880
y esos continúan mucho.

536
00:23:13,300 --> 00:23:14,660
Um, eso, eso, eso sorprendentemente,

537
00:23:15,080 --> 00:23:16,880
Lo siento, una parte sorprendentemente grande de Éxodo.

538
00:23:17,100 --> 00:23:19,980
Um, pensé que eso era más como en Levítico y Deuteronomio.

539
00:23:20,600 --> 00:23:22,340
Um, pero luego llegas a libros como Job,

540
00:23:22,860 --> 00:23:23,240
sabes,

541
00:23:23,580 --> 00:23:23,960
Guau.

542
00:23:24,360 --> 00:23:28,260
Quiero decir, Job es una lectura así y de ninguna manera Job originalmente tuvo ese final.

543
00:23:29,140 --> 00:23:30,260
Como Job es básicamente,

544
00:23:30,760 --> 00:23:34,020
Comienza como esta apuesta perversa entre Dios,

545
00:23:34,020 --> 00:23:36,760
um, y Satanás sobre si o no

546
00:23:36,800 --> 00:23:39,080
de hecho, pueden hacer que un buen hombre renuncie a Dios.

547
00:23:39,160 --> 00:23:40,060
Y al principio no pueden,

548
00:23:40,060 --> 00:23:41,340
Todo va de manera muy predecible.

549
00:23:41,900 --> 00:23:44,460
Y finalmente torturaron de verdad a Job.

550
00:23:45,160 --> 00:23:46,760
y se convierte en el mejor,

551
00:23:47,960 --> 00:23:49,040
¿Por qué Dios es cruel?

552
00:23:49,120 --> 00:23:50,600
¿Cómo es posible que Dios exista?

553
00:23:50,640 --> 00:23:52,120
¿Cómo podría un Dios bondadoso hacer estas cosas?

554
00:23:52,360 --> 00:23:56,820
Y vence, se convierte en el mejor abogado del mundo y vence a todos.

555
00:23:57,120 --> 00:23:57,780
todas las personas que

556
00:23:57,780 --> 00:23:58,440
ven a discutir con él.

557
00:23:58,620 --> 00:24:00,780
Él, él discute hasta quitarles los pantalones.

558
00:24:00,900 --> 00:24:02,800
Y de repente, al final, Dios aparece.

559
00:24:03,340 --> 00:24:04,380
y él dice,

560
00:24:04,880 --> 00:24:08,420
Bueno, ya sabes, estoy en todas partes.

561
00:24:08,980 --> 00:24:09,860
Y, eh,

562
00:24:10,560 --> 00:24:11,880
es una respuesta muy confusa.

563
00:24:11,900 --> 00:24:13,040
Él da una respuesta como,

564
00:24:13,200 --> 00:24:14,360
Estoy allí cuando,

565
00:24:14,360 --> 00:24:16,660
cuando, cuando las leonas paren y yo estoy allí.

566
00:24:16,840 --> 00:24:17,360
Y por cierto,

567
00:24:17,400 --> 00:24:21,400
Hay un monstruo gigante, Leviatán, que es muy grande y da mucho miedo.

568
00:24:21,400 --> 00:24:23,260
Y yo, y tengo que gestionar el universo.

569
00:24:23,580 --> 00:24:24,280
Y yo soy como,

570
00:24:24,300 --> 00:24:26,300
Dios, ¿estás diciendo que eres muy

571
00:24:26,300 --> 00:24:26,680
¿ocupado?

572
00:24:26,960 --> 00:24:30,560
¿Es ese, es esencialmente su argumento para Job?

573
00:24:31,000 --> 00:24:32,480
Y no mencionas el todo,

574
00:24:32,820 --> 00:24:34,440
no mencionas todo el tipo de me gusta,

575
00:24:34,880 --> 00:24:37,300
que tengo una apuesta por eso te estaba torturando,

576
00:24:37,300 --> 00:24:38,160
eso no surge.

577
00:24:38,540 --> 00:24:39,940
Y luego al final decide,

578
00:24:40,180 --> 00:24:42,520
Dios decide, como lo dice Job, oh, no, tienes toda la razón.

579
00:24:42,520 --> 00:24:43,460
Estaba totalmente equivocado.

580
00:24:43,480 --> 00:24:44,140
Eh, lo siento.

581
00:24:44,340 --> 00:24:49,360
Um, y Dios dice: Voy a castigar a esas personas que intentaron discutir contigo y no lo hicieron, no ganaron.

582
00:24:49,720 --> 00:24:51,440
Entonces, um, entonces él se deshace del,

583
00:24:51,440 --> 00:24:52,920
No sé exactamente qué les hace.

584
00:24:52,920 --> 00:24:53,480
No lo recuerdo.

585
00:24:54,000 --> 00:24:56,860
Um, y luego le devuelve a Job todo su dinero y todo,

586
00:24:57,020 --> 00:24:58,460
y eso los hace súper prósperos.

587
00:24:58,620 --> 00:25:02,440
Y yo digo, de ninguna manera ese fue el final original de ese libro.

588
00:25:02,500 --> 00:25:03,860
Como, porque esto quisiera,

589
00:25:03,940 --> 00:25:06,420
Esta era claramente una novela querida, según ellos,

590
00:25:06,480 --> 00:25:07,540
pero no puede tener ese final.

591
00:25:07,740 --> 00:25:07,940
Bueno.

592
00:25:08,180 --> 00:25:10,040
Entonces, entonces, entonces, sí, entonces es una manera larga de decir:

593
00:25:10,300 --> 00:25:11,560
De hecho creo que vale la pena.

594
00:25:11,660 --> 00:25:12,620
Uh, algo de eso fue,

595
00:25:12,620 --> 00:25:15,160
Siempre te sorprendes cuando terminas en el papel,

596
00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:16,160
como, um,

597
00:25:17,160 --> 00:25:19,260
hay partes que te sorprenderán,

598
00:25:19,380 --> 00:25:21,060
Algo así como el viaje de Isaías, um,

599
00:25:21,380 --> 00:25:22,100
Eclesiastés,

600
00:25:22,580 --> 00:25:23,000
Modo Depeche.

601
00:25:24,280 --> 00:25:25,520
Y lo hiciste, dijiste que tú también,

602
00:25:25,520 --> 00:25:26,640
uh, el Corán.

603
00:25:26,740 --> 00:25:26,860
Sí.

604
00:25:26,860 --> 00:25:27,520
Lo cual fue fascinante.

605
00:25:28,040 --> 00:25:29,460
Entonces, ¿qué hay ahí?

606
00:25:29,460 --> 00:25:30,340
Sería interesante preguntar

607
00:25:30,380 --> 00:25:32,160
¿Existe una tensión entre

608
00:25:32,900 --> 00:25:34,280
el estudio de la religión

609
00:25:34,380 --> 00:25:41,400
textos o seguir una religión y simplemente creer en Dios y seguir los diversos

610
00:25:41,420 --> 00:25:43,560
aspectos de la religión con la libertad de expresión?

611
00:25:44,260 --> 00:25:45,740
Um, en la primera enmienda,

612
00:25:46,000 --> 00:25:46,860
uh, nosotros, tenemos

613
00:25:47,220 --> 00:25:50,700
algo que llamamos cláusula religiosa y nunca me ha gustado llamarlo así

614
00:25:50,820 --> 00:25:53,400
porque son dos cosas brillantes una al lado de la otra.

615
00:25:54,200 --> 00:25:55,880
El Estado no puede establecer

616
00:25:55,880 --> 00:26:00,100
una religión oficial, pero no puede interferir con su derecho a practicar su religión.

617
00:26:00,700 --> 00:26:01,440
Eso es hermoso.

618
00:26:01,840 --> 00:26:03,360
Dos cosas al mismo tiempo.

619
00:26:03,360 --> 00:26:04,000
Y creo que son,

620
00:26:04,000 --> 00:26:05,580
y creo que ambos tienen toda la razón.

621
00:26:06,060 --> 00:26:09,640
Y creo que a veces la derecha se entusiasma mucho con la cláusula de libre ejercicio.

622
00:26:09,660 --> 00:26:11,780
y la izquierda se entusiasma mucho con el establishment.

623
00:26:12,200 --> 00:26:13,440
Y me gustó el hecho de que tenemos,

624
00:26:13,480 --> 00:26:14,820
los tenemos a ambos juntos.

625
00:26:15,240 --> 00:26:16,940
Ahora bien, ¿cómo se relaciona esto con la libertad de expresión?

626
00:26:17,640 --> 00:26:18,960
Y tenía razón en el plan de estudios,

627
00:26:19,000 --> 00:26:20,040
como estábamos hablando.

628
00:26:21,220 --> 00:26:25,720
Um, de hecho creo que sería genial si las escuelas públicas pudieran enseñar

629
00:26:26,300 --> 00:26:28,120
la Biblia, como en el sentido de como,

630
00:26:28,200 --> 00:26:29,520
léelo como un documento histórico.

631
00:26:30,060 --> 00:26:31,160
Pero cuando estaba en el

632
00:26:31,160 --> 00:26:33,460
ACLU, cada vez que vi gente intentando esto,

633
00:26:33,680 --> 00:26:36,760
siempre resultaba que ellos realmente abogaban por,

634
00:26:36,900 --> 00:26:42,620
ya sabes, un católico o protestante o algún ortodoxo incluso le gusta leer sobre religión.

635
00:26:43,260 --> 00:26:43,560
Eh, entonces

636
00:26:44,000 --> 00:26:47,500
si realmente lo conviertes en algo que defienda una visión particular de la religión,

637
00:26:47,640 --> 00:26:50,360
luego pasa al lado de la cláusula de establecimiento.

638
00:26:50,900 --> 00:26:53,120
Así que los estadounidenses no han encontrado una manera de enseñarlo.

639
00:26:53,440 --> 00:26:54,920
Así que probablemente sea mejor que tú,

640
00:26:54,920 --> 00:26:57,580
ya sabes, aprende, aprende fuera de una clase de escuela pública.

641
00:26:57,580 --> 00:27:02,020
¿Crees que es posible enseñar religión?

642
00:27:02,700 --> 00:27:02,960
de como,

643
00:27:03,780 --> 00:27:06,120
uh, las religiones del mundo, por supuesto,

644
00:27:06,780 --> 00:27:09,340
¿Sin faltar el respeto a las religiones?

645
00:27:09,920 --> 00:27:12,220
Creo que la respuesta es que depende de desde qué perspectiva.

646
00:27:13,320 --> 00:27:17,320
Um, bueno, como dicen los practicantes, eres como un seguidor ortodoxo de una determinada religión.

647
00:27:17,320 --> 00:27:17,760
religión.

648
00:27:17,760 --> 00:27:20,060
Es posible

649
00:27:20,640 --> 00:27:24,360
para no cabrearte en la enseñanza como todos los grandes

650
00:27:24,360 --> 00:27:25,120
religiones del mundo?

651
00:27:25,180 --> 00:27:26,100
Para algunas personas,

652
00:27:27,040 --> 00:27:30,080
La conclusión es que hay que enseñarlo como si fuera verdad.

653
00:27:30,340 --> 00:27:33,800
Ah, um, y con eso en esas condiciones,

654
00:27:33,800 --> 00:27:34,940
Entonces la respuesta es no,

655
00:27:34,940 --> 00:27:35,360
no puedes enseñarlo

656
00:27:35,380 --> 00:27:38,200
sin, sin ofender al menos a nadie.

657
00:27:38,380 --> 00:27:40,680
¿No puedes decir que esta gente cree que es verdad?

658
00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:41,920
¿Puedes reformarlo?

659
00:27:41,920 --> 00:27:43,420
Entonces tienes que caminar sobre cáscaras de huevo,

660
00:27:43,500 --> 00:27:43,740
esencialmente.

661
00:27:43,960 --> 00:27:48,060
Puedes esforzarte mucho y aún así enfadarás a algunas personas.

662
00:27:48,340 --> 00:27:52,580
pero la gente seria dirá, oh no, en realidad trataste de ser justo con las creencias aquí.

663
00:27:52,780 --> 00:27:54,800
Um, y yo, y trato de ser respetuoso,

664
00:27:54,800 --> 00:27:56,360
um, tanto como puedo,

665
00:27:56,700 --> 00:27:57,660
em,

666
00:27:58,080 --> 00:27:58,440
mucho de esto,

667
00:27:58,520 --> 00:28:01,040
Todavía me siento mucho más atraído tanto por el budismo como por el estoicismo.

668
00:28:01,300 --> 00:28:01,420
Bien,

669
00:28:03,360 --> 00:28:05,860
¿a dónde voy?

670
00:28:07,040 --> 00:28:09,100
Bueno, una cosa interesante.

671
00:28:09,640 --> 00:28:11,420
volver a los campus universitarios es,

672
00:28:11,420 --> 00:28:17,000
Um, el incendio mantiene las clasificaciones de libertad de expresión universitaria en rankings.thefire.org.

673
00:28:17,200 --> 00:28:18,060
Estoy muy orgulloso de ellos.

674
00:28:18,180 --> 00:28:20,840
Lo recomiendo mucho porque olvídate de que incluso solo el ranking,

675
00:28:20,840 --> 00:28:21,600
puedes aprender un

676
00:28:21,600 --> 00:28:25,780
Mucho sobre las universidades desde esta perspectiva completamente diferente a la de la gente.

677
00:28:25,780 --> 00:28:29,180
solían cuando iban a elegir la universidad a la que querían ir.

678
00:28:29,220 --> 00:28:32,080
Simplemente da otra perspectiva de todo el asunto.

679
00:28:32,260 --> 00:28:35,340
Y da citas de personas que son estudiantes allí y demás,

680
00:28:35,540 --> 00:28:36,600
Me gusta sobre sus experiencias.

681
00:28:37,320 --> 00:28:38,300
Y, y da diferente,

682
00:28:38,580 --> 00:28:44,620
tal vez podría hablar sobre las diversas medidas aquí antes de hablar sobre quién está entre los cinco primeros y quién entre los cinco últimos.

683
00:28:45,220 --> 00:28:49,880
¿Cuáles, cuáles, cuáles son los diferentes parámetros que contribuyen a la evaluación?

684
00:28:50,600 --> 00:28:54,200
La gente me ha estado pidiendo desde el primer día que haga una clasificación de escuelas,

685
00:28:54,480 --> 00:28:55,360
según la libertad de expresión.

686
00:28:55,720 --> 00:28:56,920
Y aunque lo teníamos,

687
00:28:57,300 --> 00:29:01,880
Teníamos la mejor base de datos que existe sobre códigos de voz en el campus.

688
00:29:02,920 --> 00:29:06,600
políticas que tienen las universidades que violan la primera enmienda o las normas de la primera enmienda.

689
00:29:07,200 --> 00:29:08,920
También tenemos la mejor base de datos de,

690
00:29:08,920 --> 00:29:11,040
de lo que llamamos base de datos de desinvitación.

691
00:29:11,330 --> 00:29:13,240
Um, pero en realidad es el,

692
00:29:13,240 --> 00:29:15,400
um, es mejor llamarse base de datos de eliminación de plataforma,

693
00:29:15,480 --> 00:29:16,900
que es como lo vamos a llamar.

694
00:29:17,260 --> 00:29:23,740
Um, y todos estos son casos en los que alguien fue invitado como orador al campus y luego se le retiró la invitación.

695
00:29:23,860 --> 00:29:26,740
Desinvitar o derribar a alguien también incluye comer.

696
00:29:27,340 --> 00:29:28,120
Um, entonces aparecieron

697
00:29:28,680 --> 00:29:30,000
y realmente no podían hablar.

698
00:29:30,180 --> 00:29:30,760
Si, exacto.

699
00:29:31,480 --> 00:29:32,940
Um, y, y, eh,

700
00:29:33,640 --> 00:29:34,740
y teniendo eso,

701
00:29:35,240 --> 00:29:41,040
lo que realmente necesitábamos para tener una ciencia social seria que realmente pudiera presentar un argumento serio sobre cuál era la clasificación,

702
00:29:41,640 --> 00:29:43,500
um, era poder uno,

703
00:29:43,720 --> 00:29:48,140
tener una mejor idea de cuántos profesores fueron realmente castigados durante este tiempo.

704
00:29:48,220 --> 00:29:53,480
Um, y luego el mayor elemento que faltaba era poder,

705
00:29:53,480 --> 00:29:58,420
Bueno, pregúnteles directamente a los estudiantes cómo era el ambiente en ese campus para la libertad de expresión.

706
00:29:58,920 --> 00:30:00,760
¿Se sienten cómodos estando en desacuerdo unos con otros?

707
00:30:00,800 --> 00:30:02,400
¿Se siente cómodo estando en desacuerdo con su,

708
00:30:02,400 --> 00:30:03,400
eh, ¿con tus profesores?

709
00:30:03,880 --> 00:30:07,200
¿Crees que la violencia es aceptable en respuesta a un orador?

710
00:30:07,380 --> 00:30:08,220
¿Crees que gritar,

711
00:30:08,480 --> 00:30:10,060
uh, ¿crees que gritar está bien?

712
00:30:10,140 --> 00:30:13,640
¿Crees que está bien bloquear el acceso de las personas a un altavoz?

713
00:30:14,300 --> 00:30:16,900
Um, y una vez que pudimos reunir todos esos elementos,

714
00:30:17,480 --> 00:30:20,200
primero hicimos una prueba,

715
00:30:20,200 --> 00:30:21,380
Creo que en 2019,

716
00:30:21,600 --> 00:30:22,340
alrededor de 50.

717
00:30:22,640 --> 00:30:24,280
Y lo hemos estado haciendo durante cuatro años,

718
00:30:24,360 --> 00:30:31,820
Siempre intentando que la metodología sea cada vez más precisa para reflejar mejor el entorno real de cada escuela en particular.

719
00:30:32,360 --> 00:30:36,160
Y este año, la escuela número uno fue la Universidad Tecnológica de Michigan,

720
00:30:36,280 --> 00:30:38,380
Lo cual fue una agradable sorpresa.

721
00:30:38,560 --> 00:30:41,180
Uh, la escuela número dos era en realidad la Universidad de Auburn.

722
00:30:41,440 --> 00:30:45,720
Um, lo cual fue, uh, agradable de ver, uh, en el top 10,

723
00:30:45,900 --> 00:30:47,440
la escuela más prestigiosa y conocida

724
00:30:47,440 --> 00:30:50,000
En realidad es UVA, eh, a la que le fue muy bien este año.

725
00:30:50,700 --> 00:30:52,400
La Universidad de Chicago no estaba contenta

726
00:30:52,400 --> 00:30:53,760
que no eran el número uno,

727
00:30:53,920 --> 00:30:57,800
pero la universidad de Chicago tiene 13 años y ellos habían sido el número uno.

728
00:30:57,800 --> 00:31:00,280
o entre los tres primeros durante años anteriores.

729
00:31:00,620 --> 00:31:01,320
Entonces, ¿puedes explicarme?

730
00:31:01,420 --> 00:31:02,320
es casi sorprendente.

731
00:31:02,340 --> 00:31:03,220
¿Es por eso?

732
00:31:03,240 --> 00:31:04,520
uh, como los realmente fuertes

733
00:31:04,530 --> 00:31:06,740
departamentos de economía y cosas así o qué, ¿por qué?

734
00:31:07,360 --> 00:31:09,220
Tenían un caso que involucraba a un estudiante.

735
00:31:09,480 --> 00:31:12,700
No reconocerían un capítulo del punto de inflexión en EE.UU. y

736
00:31:12,700 --> 00:31:15,420
Hicieron un argumento muy clásico, um,

737
00:31:15,920 --> 00:31:18,060
que nosotros, y clásico de la mala manera que oímos

738
00:31:18,200 --> 00:31:19,420
campus de todo el país.

739
00:31:19,740 --> 00:31:21,200
Oh, tenemos un campus republicano,

740
00:31:21,700 --> 00:31:23,920
entonces no necesitamos este grupo conservador adicional.

741
00:31:24,280 --> 00:31:25,900
Y nosotros decimos, no, lo siento.

742
00:31:25,960 --> 00:31:27,560
Como hemos visto docenas y

743
00:31:27,560 --> 00:31:30,440
docenas de, no cientos, intentos de conseguir este en particular,

744
00:31:30,440 --> 00:31:35,780
um, estudiante conservador, un grupo de estudiantes, uh, ¿reconoces o no reconoces?

745
00:31:36,440 --> 00:31:38,560
Y entonces les dijimos como,

746
00:31:38,700 --> 00:31:41,640
Escucha, esto es como, uh, les dijimos en el fuego que,

747
00:31:41,780 --> 00:31:43,860
uh, ya sabes, consideramos esto serio y

748
00:31:43,860 --> 00:31:45,220
No reconocerían al grupo.

749
00:31:45,380 --> 00:31:48,800
Así que ese es un punto hacia abajo en nuestro

750
00:31:48,800 --> 00:31:50,660
ranking y fue suficiente para eliminarlos,

751
00:31:51,100 --> 00:31:52,660
probablemente habrían sido el número dos en

752
00:31:52,660 --> 00:31:53,160
las clasificaciones.

753
00:31:53,320 --> 00:31:55,560
Uh, pero ahora son 13 de dos 48.

754
00:31:56,040 --> 00:31:57,160
Siguen siendo una de las mejores escuelas.

755
00:31:57,160 --> 00:31:57,720
en el país.

756
00:31:57,900 --> 00:31:59,480
no tengo problema en decir eso

757
00:32:00,080 --> 00:32:03,140
la escuela a la que no le fue tan bien, uh, um,

758
00:32:03,800 --> 00:32:11,660
con un valor negativo de 10,69, negativo 10,69 y redondeamos a cero fue Harvard y

759
00:32:11,660 --> 00:32:15,320
Harvard no ha estado muy contenta con ese resultado.

760
00:32:15,460 --> 00:32:17,580
La única escuela que recibió la pésima clasificación.

761
00:32:18,400 --> 00:32:19,900
Sí. Y hay un par de personas

762
00:32:20,000 --> 00:32:21,380
Oh, Harvard, oh, Harvard.

763
00:32:21,600 --> 00:32:23,500
Y hay un par de personas que realmente han estado realmente,

764
00:32:23,700 --> 00:32:26,780
Creo que, cometiendo un error al volverse muy Harvard,

765
00:32:27,020 --> 00:32:28,880
um, sonar por ser como,

766
00:32:28,880 --> 00:32:30,620
Hice que los estadísticos miraran esto y ellos,

767
00:32:30,620 --> 00:32:32,340
y ellos, ellos, ellos piensan que su metodología es una broma.

768
00:32:32,430 --> 00:32:34,160
Y, uh, y como señalar,

769
00:32:34,420 --> 00:32:35,580
Y este caso no era tan importante.

770
00:32:35,580 --> 00:32:39,780
Y ese erudito no era ese erudito, como el de los argumentos contra uno de los eruditos que

771
00:32:39,780 --> 00:32:41,180
contamos en contra de ellos porque,

772
00:32:41,580 --> 00:32:45,400
uh, el castigo fue que ese no era un personaje muy famoso o

773
00:32:45,400 --> 00:32:46,220
erudito influyente.

774
00:32:46,360 --> 00:32:47,300
Y yo soy como,

775
00:32:47,580 --> 00:32:51,200
Entonces tu argumento parece ser esnobismo.

776
00:32:51,200 --> 00:32:53,220
Básicamente, eso te gusta,

777
00:32:53,220 --> 00:32:55,620
Por un lado, no estás entendiendo nuestra metodología.

778
00:32:56,080 --> 00:32:59,920
Y luego estás diciendo que en realidad ese erudito no era lo suficientemente importante como para

779
00:32:59,920 --> 00:33:00,020
contar.

780
00:33:00,280 --> 00:33:01,200
Y por cierto, Harvard,

781
00:33:01,900 --> 00:33:03,140
por cierto, harvard,

782
00:33:04,060 --> 00:33:04,600
em,

783
00:33:05,020 --> 00:33:06,260
si nosotros, el campus de Harvard,

784
00:33:06,620 --> 00:33:06,720
sí.

785
00:33:07,360 --> 00:33:08,120
Si nosotros,

786
00:33:08,840 --> 00:33:11,280
incluso si tomáramos todos sus argumentos como verdaderos,

787
00:33:11,500 --> 00:33:14,260
Incluso si decidiéramos deshacernos de esos dos profesores,

788
00:33:14,460 --> 00:33:17,120
um, todavía estarías en números negativos.

789
00:33:17,300 --> 00:33:18,720
Seguirías siendo el último en morir.

790
00:33:18,860 --> 00:33:20,780
Todavía estarías detrás de Georgetown y Penn.

791
00:33:20,940 --> 00:33:23,260
Y ninguna de esas escuelas es buena para la libertad de expresión.

792
00:33:23,280 --> 00:33:23,980
debería decir el,

793
00:33:23,980 --> 00:33:26,280
Los cinco últimos son la Universidad de Pensilvania.

794
00:33:26,800 --> 00:33:27,300
Nicosette Penn,

795
00:33:27,740 --> 00:33:29,900
uh, la universidad de Carolina del Sur,

796
00:33:30,180 --> 00:33:32,000
Universidad de Georgetown y Universidad de Fordham.

797
00:33:32,640 --> 00:33:33,620
Todo muy bien ganado.

798
00:33:33,840 --> 00:33:36,260
Tienen tantos casos graves en todas esas escuelas.

799
00:33:36,400 --> 00:33:39,640
¿Cuál es la mejor manera de encontrarse entre los cinco últimos?

800
00:33:39,640 --> 00:33:40,680
Si eres una universidad,

801
00:33:40,900 --> 00:33:42,720
¿Cuál es la forma más rápida de llegar a ese punto negativo?

802
00:33:42,860 --> 00:33:46,480
a ese cero, muchas plataformas, um, eso,

803
00:33:47,060 --> 00:33:48,520
uh, cuando miramos los cinco últimos,

804
00:33:48,720 --> 00:33:54,400
Uh, el 81% de los intentos de sacar a los oradores de la plataforma tuvieron éxito entre los cinco últimos.

805
00:33:54,580 --> 00:33:55,800
Um, había un par de escuelas,

806
00:33:55,940 --> 00:33:58,240
Creo que Penn incluyó donde cada intento,

807
00:33:58,860 --> 00:33:59,820
cada vez que un estudiante,

808
00:33:59,900 --> 00:34:03,260
como se objetó, un grupo de estudiantes se opuso a que viniera ese orador,

809
00:34:03,340 --> 00:34:04,540
cancelaron esto, este discurso.

810
00:34:05,120 --> 00:34:07,440
Y creo que Georgetown tuvo una tasa de éxito del cien por cien.

811
00:34:07,520 --> 00:34:10,080
Creo que Penn tuvo una tasa de éxito del cien por cien.

812
00:34:10,180 --> 00:34:12,400
Creo que Harvard defendió a una pareja,

813
00:34:12,560 --> 00:34:15,460
pero sobre todo, la gente también fue expulsada de la plataforma allí.

814
00:34:15,540 --> 00:34:17,980
Entonces, ¿cómo se puede rechazar la desplataforma?

815
00:34:18,580 --> 00:34:19,960
Bueno, ¿quién, quién lo haría?

816
00:34:19,980 --> 00:34:21,280
¿Son otros estudiantes?

817
00:34:21,640 --> 00:34:22,360
¿Es facultad?

818
00:34:22,520 --> 00:34:23,580
¿Es la administración?

819
00:34:23,780 --> 00:34:25,260
¿Cuál es la dinámica de, de,

820
00:34:25,600 --> 00:34:26,340
uh, empujando hacia atrás de

821
00:34:27,080 --> 00:34:29,380
básicamente, porque me imagino

822
00:34:30,140 --> 00:34:32,600
algo de esto es cultura,

823
00:34:33,200 --> 00:34:35,960
pero me imagino que cada universidad tiene un grupo de estudiantes que

824
00:34:35,960 --> 00:34:37,540
Protesta básicamente a todos los oradores.

825
00:34:37,740 --> 00:34:39,760
Y es una cuestión de cómo respondes a esa protesta.

826
00:34:40,340 --> 00:34:44,620
Bueno, aquí está el pequeño y sucio secreto sobre el gran cambio de 2014.

827
00:34:44,740 --> 00:34:47,520
Um, y, y fuego y yo y altura,

828
00:34:47,580 --> 00:34:50,400
um, han sido muy claros en que el gran cambio que estamos

829
00:34:50,400 --> 00:34:53,700
Lo que vi en el campus fue que durante la mayor parte de mi carrera, los estudiantes eran geniales,

830
00:34:54,060 --> 00:34:55,360
um, sobre la libertad de expresión.

831
00:34:55,580 --> 00:34:57,440
Eran el mejor electorado para la libertad de expresión,

832
00:34:58,100 --> 00:35:01,600
absolutamente inequívocamente hasta aproximadamente 2013, 2014.

833
00:35:02,400 --> 00:35:04,820
Y no fue hasta 2014 cuando tuvimos esto muy,

834
00:35:04,820 --> 00:35:06,800
Ya sabes, una experiencia un poco triste para nosotros.

835
00:35:06,820 --> 00:35:11,860
donde de repente los estudiantes fueron los que abogaron por la eliminación de plataformas y nuevos códigos de habla tipo

836
00:35:11,880 --> 00:35:15,880
de una manera similar a como lo habían estado haciendo a mediados de los ochenta, por ejemplo.

837
00:35:16,300 --> 00:35:17,320
Pero aquí está el pequeño y sucio secreto.

838
00:35:18,040 --> 00:35:20,240
No son ellos, son sólo los estudiantes.

839
00:35:20,760 --> 00:35:22,200
son estudiantes y administradores,

840
00:35:23,140 --> 00:35:24,740
aunque a veces sólo un puñado de ellos,

841
00:35:24,900 --> 00:35:26,120
trabajando juntos para hacer,

842
00:35:26,680 --> 00:35:27,760
uh, para crear algunos de estos problemas.

843
00:35:28,120 --> 00:35:30,100
Y esto fue exactamente lo que pasó en Stanford.

844
00:35:30,420 --> 00:35:31,400
Cuando Kyle Duncan,

845
00:35:31,860 --> 00:35:34,660
uh, un juez del quinto circuito intentó hablar en mi alma mater

846
00:35:35,220 --> 00:35:36,100
y una quinta parte del

847
00:35:36,120 --> 00:35:37,680
La clase apareció para gritarle.

848
00:35:38,320 --> 00:35:40,480
Um, fue una demostración real de,

849
00:35:40,540 --> 00:35:45,980
de lo que fue, de lo que estaba sucediendo esos 10 minutos después del grito de un juez del quinto circuito.

850
00:35:46,000 --> 00:35:48,120
Y sigo enfatizando eso porque soy abogado constitucionalista,

851
00:35:48,280 --> 00:35:49,980
Los jueces del quinto circuito son grandes negocios.

852
00:35:50,640 --> 00:35:52,320
Están un nivel por debajo de la Corte Suprema.

853
00:35:53,140 --> 00:35:55,820
Um, ya sabes, alrededor de una quinta parte de la escuela aparece para gritarles.

854
00:35:56,540 --> 00:35:57,420
después de 10 minutos de

855
00:35:57,420 --> 00:35:59,020
gritándoles y al administrador,

856
00:35:59,140 --> 00:36:01,560
un administrador de la DEI se levanta con un preparado

857
00:36:01,580 --> 00:36:03,200
discurso que ella, que ella ha escrito.

858
00:36:03,380 --> 00:36:06,460
Es un discurso de siete minutos de duración en el que habla de,

859
00:36:06,900 --> 00:36:07,460
eh, libertad de expresión.

860
00:36:07,760 --> 00:36:09,400
Quizás no valga la pena exprimir el jugo.

861
00:36:09,900 --> 00:36:14,220
Y estábamos en esta facultad de derecho donde la gente podía aprender a desafiar estas normas.

862
00:36:15,080 --> 00:36:16,840
Entonces está claro que hubo coordinación,

863
00:36:16,840 --> 00:36:18,580
ya sabes, entre algunos de estos

864
00:36:18,580 --> 00:36:20,620
administradores y hablar con los estudiantes allí,

865
00:36:20,620 --> 00:36:21,660
estaban en reuniones,

866
00:36:22,320 --> 00:36:23,440
reuniones extensas durante mucho tiempo.

867
00:36:23,780 --> 00:36:25,100
Aparecen, gritan.

868
00:36:25,660 --> 00:36:28,940
Luego se toman siete minutos adicionales para,

869
00:36:28,940 --> 00:36:31,040
a, para sermonear al orador sobre gratis

870
00:36:31,060 --> 00:36:33,940
palabra, no ser, no el jugo de la libertad de expresión,

871
00:36:33,960 --> 00:36:35,040
no vale la pena apretarlo.

872
00:36:35,980 --> 00:36:37,580
Um, y luego por el resto,

873
00:36:37,580 --> 00:36:39,160
son simplemente abucheos constantes.

874
00:36:39,420 --> 00:36:41,580
Um, después de que ella, después de que ella se vaya,

875
00:36:41,960 --> 00:36:44,560
esto es claro, y esto, y algo muy parecido,

876
00:36:44,560 --> 00:36:46,660
Ya sabes, sucedió varias veces en Yale, donde

877
00:36:46,660 --> 00:36:49,820
estaba muy claro que los administradores estaban ayudando junto con,

878
00:36:49,820 --> 00:36:51,120
con muchas de estas interrupciones.

879
00:36:51,420 --> 00:36:55,020
Así que creo que cada vez que hay un grito en una universidad,

880
00:36:55,740 --> 00:36:57,180
la investigación debe ser

881
00:36:57,740 --> 00:36:58,540
primero y ante todo,

882
00:36:59,160 --> 00:37:00,060
¿Los administradores?

883
00:37:01,220 --> 00:37:02,860
ayudar a crear este problema?

884
00:37:03,060 --> 00:37:03,900
¿Hicieron algo?

885
00:37:03,900 --> 00:37:04,940
para detenerlo?

886
00:37:05,200 --> 00:37:08,520
Porque creo que mucho de lo que realmente está pasando aquí es la hiperburocratización.

887
00:37:08,560 --> 00:37:13,940
de universidades con mucha más gente ideológica que piensa que su trabajo principal es básicamente

888
00:37:13,940 --> 00:37:15,600
como discurso policial, más o menos,

889
00:37:16,440 --> 00:37:17,500
están animando a los estudiantes,

890
00:37:17,840 --> 00:37:20,360
Lo siento, están animando a los estudiantes que tienen opiniones que les gustan.

891
00:37:20,780 --> 00:37:22,580
um, para hacer gritos.

892
00:37:22,760 --> 00:37:24,340
Um, y es por eso que

893
00:37:24,420 --> 00:37:25,780
Realmente necesito investigar esto.

894
00:37:26,640 --> 00:37:31,900
Y es, en Stanford, el administrador que, quien dio los comentarios preparados,

895
00:37:31,900 --> 00:37:33,880
Um, sobre el jugo, no vale la pena exprimirlo.

896
00:37:33,900 --> 00:37:35,660
No la han invitado a regresar a Stanford.

897
00:37:36,160 --> 00:37:39,940
pero ella es uno de los únicos ejemplos que se me ocurren cuando estas cosas suceden con frecuencia.

898
00:37:40,300 --> 00:37:42,880
donde un administrador claramente facilitó algo que

899
00:37:43,540 --> 00:37:44,660
fue un grito hacia abajo o

900
00:37:44,660 --> 00:37:48,480
de plataforma o resultó en el despido de un profesor o resultó en un estudiante

901
00:37:48,480 --> 00:37:51,640
ser expulsado donde el administrador tiene

902
00:37:52,380 --> 00:37:54,360
salió impune o probablemente en algún

903
00:37:54,380 --> 00:37:55,440
En algunos casos incluso se consiguió un ascenso.

904
00:37:56,080 --> 00:37:58,100
Y así, un pequeño número de administradores,

905
00:37:58,760 --> 00:38:01,130
tal vez incluso un solo administrador podría

906
00:38:01,480 --> 00:38:05,860
participar en el estímulo y la organización y así empoderar a todo el

907
00:38:05,860 --> 00:38:06,220
proceso.

908
00:38:06,340 --> 00:38:08,320
Y eso es algo que he visto a lo largo de toda mi carrera.

909
00:38:08,400 --> 00:38:11,400
Y lo único que es un poco difícil de captar así en el acto,

910
00:38:11,640 --> 00:38:12,140
por así decirlo.

911
00:38:12,160 --> 00:38:14,940
Y esa es una de las razones por las que es útil que la gente sepa sobre esto, ya sabes,

912
00:38:15,700 --> 00:38:17,020
eh, porque

913
00:38:17,680 --> 00:38:19,220
Fue este caso sorprendente.

914
00:38:19,320 --> 00:38:20,520
Esto fue en la Universidad de Washington.

915
00:38:20,820 --> 00:38:24,340
Um, y de hecho presentamos esto en un documental realizado en 2015,

916
00:38:24,920 --> 00:38:26,620
20, que vino en 2015, 2016

917
00:38:27,340 --> 00:38:28,460
llamado, ¿podemos aceptar una broma?

918
00:38:28,660 --> 00:38:29,080
Eh,

919
00:38:29,380 --> 00:38:31,140
y fue entonces cuando empezamos a notar algo

920
00:38:31,140 --> 00:38:32,340
estaba cambiando en el campus.

921
00:38:32,560 --> 00:38:34,840
También escuchamos que los comediantes decían que no podían usar

922
00:38:34,840 --> 00:38:35,860
su buen humor.

923
00:38:36,420 --> 00:38:39,180
Esto fue justo en la época en que Jerry Seinfeld y Chris Rock

924
00:38:39,520 --> 00:38:40,380
dijo que no podían,

925
00:38:40,720 --> 00:38:42,540
uh, no querían tocar en los campus porque,

926
00:38:42,540 --> 00:38:44,320
No podían, ellos, ellos, no podían ser graciosos.

927
00:38:45,120 --> 00:38:48,620
Uh, pero presentamos el caso de un comediante que quería

928
00:38:48,720 --> 00:38:51,060
hacer un musical llamado la pasión del musical,

929
00:38:51,160 --> 00:38:52,280
burlándose de la pasión de Cristo

930
00:38:52,440 --> 00:38:55,380
con el objetivo declarado de ofender a todos,

931
00:38:55,820 --> 00:38:56,700
cada grupo por igual.

932
00:38:56,840 --> 00:38:58,800
Fue en gran medida una misión de South Park.

933
00:38:58,960 --> 00:38:59,240
Eh,

934
00:39:00,360 --> 00:39:04,960
y es un caso inusual porque en realidad obtuvimos documentación

935
00:39:04,980 --> 00:39:10,980
de administradores comprando entradas para estudiantes enojados y celebrando un evento en el que ellos,

936
00:39:11,420 --> 00:39:12,860
donde los entrenan,

937
00:39:13,080 --> 00:39:15,140
saltar en medio y gritar,

938
00:39:15,200 --> 00:39:15,940
Estoy ofendido.

939
00:39:15,980 --> 00:39:17,600
Como ellos, ellos, les compraron boletos.

940
00:39:17,960 --> 00:39:18,880
Los enviaron a esto

941
00:39:18,880 --> 00:39:20,360
esta cosa con el objetivo

942
00:39:20,360 --> 00:39:22,000
de gritarlo.

943
00:39:22,340 --> 00:39:26,600
Ahora, como era de esperar, cuando envías a un grupo enojado de estudiantes a cerrar

944
00:39:26,600 --> 00:39:29,400
por una obra, no va a terminar en solo

945
00:39:30,000 --> 00:39:30,740
Estoy ofendido.

946
00:39:31,160 --> 00:39:32,460
Um, y se calentó.

947
00:39:32,760 --> 00:39:34,140
Hubo amenazas de muerte,

948
00:39:34,140 --> 00:39:38,440
uh, el, um, y luego la policía de Pullman Washington

949
00:39:38,590 --> 00:39:42,380
le dijo a Chris, eh, Chris Lee, el tipo que hizo la jugada, que él,

950
00:39:42,420 --> 00:39:43,440
en realidad no protegerían

951
00:39:43,520 --> 00:39:43,720
a ellos.

952
00:39:43,860 --> 00:39:46,960
Ahora bien, no todos los días vas a tener ese tipo de evidencia contundente de que,

953
00:39:47,080 --> 00:39:49,600
eso, eso, uh, de ver a los administradores,

954
00:39:49,640 --> 00:39:52,760
Uh, sería tan, uh, tan descarado que grabaran

955
00:39:52,760 --> 00:39:54,640
el hecho de que les compraron boletos y se los enviaron.

956
00:39:55,080 --> 00:39:56,200
Pero creo que muchas de esas cosas

957
00:39:56,300 --> 00:39:58,320
es que está sucediendo.

958
00:39:58,320 --> 00:39:59,460
Y creo que es el,

959
00:39:59,460 --> 00:40:01,800
el, es una buena excusa para reducir uno

960
00:40:01,800 --> 00:40:03,440
de los grandes problemas de la educación superior actual,

961
00:40:03,520 --> 00:40:04,800
que es la hiperburocratización.

962
00:40:05,760 --> 00:40:09,440
En su experiencia, ¿existe una distinción entre administradores y profesores en términos de,

963
00:40:10,060 --> 00:40:13,160
eh, ¿autores de esto, de este tipo de cosas?

964
00:40:13,180 --> 00:40:15,160
Entonces, si nos deshiciésemos de todo,

965
00:40:15,320 --> 00:40:19,380
como que Harvey habló de deshacerse de un gran porcentaje de la administración,

966
00:40:19,460 --> 00:40:24,280
¿Eso ayuda a solucionar el problema o la facultad también es pequeña?

967
00:40:25,220 --> 00:40:26,960
por ciento del profesorado también forma parte

968
00:40:26,960 --> 00:40:29,580
de la promoción en la organización de este tipo de cancelaciones.

969
00:40:30,060 --> 00:40:30,520
Sí.

970
00:40:30,560 --> 00:40:33,500
Y eso es algo que ha sido profundamente decepcionante.

971
00:40:33,720 --> 00:40:38,980
Um, es que cuando miras el enorme aumento en los intentos de despedir a los profesores que hemos visto durante

972
00:40:39,000 --> 00:40:39,880
los últimos 10 años

973
00:40:41,060 --> 00:40:42,840
y de hecho, durante los últimos 22 años,

974
00:40:43,080 --> 00:40:45,080
hasta donde llegan nuestros registros.

975
00:40:46,460 --> 00:40:49,880
Primero, están abrumadoramente dirigidos por administradores,

976
00:40:49,880 --> 00:40:52,220
intentos de castigar a los profesores.

977
00:40:52,260 --> 00:40:53,700
Mmm, y

978
00:40:54,120 --> 00:40:57,540
Eso fue lo máximo, ya sabes, yo diría que esa fue mi carrera hasta 2013.

979
00:40:57,540 --> 00:40:59,720
estaba luchando contra los excesos administrativos.

980
00:41:00,000 --> 00:41:03,540
Um, entonces empiezas a tener el problema en 2014 de que los estudiantes intenten

981
00:41:03,560 --> 00:41:04,580
para que la gente cancele.

982
00:41:04,960 --> 00:41:07,720
Um, y eso realmente se aceleró en 2017 y el número.

983
00:41:08,080 --> 00:41:09,460
Entonces una, una manera, esa,

984
00:41:09,460 --> 00:41:11,400
Una cosa que hace que sea más fácil de documentar es,

985
00:41:11,620 --> 00:41:14,060
son las peticiones para que los profesores sean despedidos o castigados.

986
00:41:14,540 --> 00:41:17,620
Um, y cuán desproporcionadamente provienen de estudiantes.

987
00:41:18,280 --> 00:41:24,300
Pero otro gran repunte ha sido el de los compañeros profesores que exigen que sus compañeros profesores obtengan

988
00:41:24,300 --> 00:41:24,520
castigado.

989
00:41:24,720 --> 00:41:25,280
Y eso para mí,

990
00:41:25,660 --> 00:41:27,280
es algo vergonzoso.

991
00:41:27,700 --> 00:41:30,420
Tú, tú, no deberías estar orgulloso de firmar el

992
00:41:30,600 --> 00:41:32,160
petición para conseguir a su compañero profesor.

993
00:41:32,780 --> 00:41:34,400
Y es más, eh,

994
00:41:35,000 --> 00:41:36,680
Más, más vergonzoso es eso.

995
00:41:36,680 --> 00:41:40,180
Entendemos que esto, esto es, esto casi se ha convertido en un cliché dentro del fuego.

996
00:41:40,580 --> 00:41:41,780
Cuando alguien se enfrenta a uno de

997
00:41:41,780 --> 00:41:43,360
estas campañas de cancelación como profesor,

998
00:41:43,860 --> 00:41:47,260
Recibía cartas de algunos de mis amigos diciendo:

999
00:41:47,440 --> 00:41:48,420
Lo siento mucho,

1000
00:41:48,420 --> 00:41:49,620
esto te ha pasado.

1001
00:41:50,340 --> 00:41:52,260
Y estas fueron las mismas personas que firmaron públicamente

1002
00:41:52,280 --> 00:41:54,000
la petición para que los despidan.

1003
00:41:56,020 --> 00:41:56,200
Sí.

1004
00:41:56,200 --> 00:41:56,540
Sí.

1005
00:41:57,760 --> 00:41:58,120
Sí.

1006
00:41:58,160 --> 00:42:01,800
La integridad la integridad es algo importante en este mundo.

1007
00:42:02,500 --> 00:42:04,280
Y creo que algo de eso,

1008
00:42:06,140 --> 00:42:11,840
Me sorprende mucho que la gente no defienda más esto porque hay tanta hambre por ello.

1009
00:42:11,980 --> 00:42:15,400
Y si usted tiene las agallas como profesor o administrador para realmente ponerse de pie,

1010
00:42:15,740 --> 00:42:16,240
ponerse de pie,

1011
00:42:17,440 --> 00:42:17,620
oh,

1012
00:42:18,150 --> 00:42:19,980
con elocuencia,

1013
00:42:21,060 --> 00:42:21,720
con rigor,

1014
00:42:22,440 --> 00:42:23,780
con integridad, siento que

1015
00:42:24,440 --> 00:42:25,640
es imposible

1016
00:42:26,300 --> 00:42:27,480
para que cualquiera pueda hacer cualquier cosa

1017
00:42:27,920 --> 00:42:29,260
porque hay tanta hambre.

1018
00:42:29,540 --> 00:42:30,580
Es tan refrescante.

1019
00:42:30,720 --> 00:42:30,980
Sí.

1020
00:42:31,180 --> 00:42:32,960
Creo que todos están de acuerdo

1021
00:42:33,540 --> 00:42:36,320
que la libertad de expresión es algo bueno.

1022
00:42:36,520 --> 00:42:37,360
Oh, no lo hago, no lo hago.

1023
00:42:37,540 --> 00:42:38,160
Bueno esta bien.

1024
00:42:38,260 --> 00:42:38,600
Lo siento lo siento.

1025
00:42:38,660 --> 00:42:39,220
No estoy de acuerdo.

1026
00:42:39,660 --> 00:42:41,180
La, la mayoría de la gente,

1027
00:42:41,380 --> 00:42:43,260
Incluso en las universidades hay hambre.

1028
00:42:43,260 --> 00:42:43,620
pero es casi como, eh,

1029
00:42:44,160 --> 00:42:49,580
Este tipo de nerviosismo a su alrededor porque hay un pequeño número de voces fuertes.

1030
00:42:49,640 --> 00:42:50,860
Ellos son los que gritan.

1031
00:42:51,900 --> 00:42:54,780
Quiero decir, nuevamente, ahí es donde entra en juego el gran liderazgo.

1032
00:42:54,980 --> 00:42:57,960
Y entonces, ya sabes, los presidentes de universidades probablemente deberían serlo,

1033
00:42:58,620 --> 00:43:00,820
uh, haciendo declaraciones claras como,

1034
00:43:01,100 --> 00:43:05,220
este no es, este es un lugar donde valoramos la libertad de expresión.

1035
00:43:05,740 --> 00:43:09,040
Cuando, y esto fue durante toda mi carrera, un presidente,

1036
00:43:09,360 --> 00:43:11,940
un rector de la universidad que se pone firme temprano y dice, no,

1037
00:43:12,380 --> 00:43:13,120
sabes,

1038
00:43:14,200 --> 00:43:16,780
No nos planteamos despedir a este profesor.

1039
00:43:16,940 --> 00:43:18,120
No estamos expulsando al estudiante.

1040
00:43:18,520 --> 00:43:21,300
El problema suele terminar muy rápido.

1041
00:43:21,760 --> 00:43:24,740
Aunque a veces, y aquí es donde realmente se nota la implicación administrativa,

1042
00:43:25,720 --> 00:43:28,460
Um, los estudiantes harán cosas como hacerse cargo de la oficina del presidente.

1043
00:43:29,000 --> 00:43:31,720
Y luego esa adquisición correrá a cargo de la universidad.

1044
00:43:32,220 --> 00:43:34,180
La gente señalará esto a veces como algo así como,

1045
00:43:34,220 --> 00:43:37,420
Oh, es claramente como, um, mi amigo Sam Abrams,

1046
00:43:37,520 --> 00:43:38,260
cuando intentaron conseguir,

1047
00:43:38,320 --> 00:43:39,540
uh, intentó que le dispararan,

1048
00:43:39,540 --> 00:43:41,280
En la universidad Sarah Lawrence.

1049
00:43:42,080 --> 00:43:45,080
Um, y, uh, esa fue una de las veces que,

1050
00:43:45,080 --> 00:43:46,700
que fue usado como algo así,

1051
00:43:46,740 --> 00:43:49,360
oh, eso fue hostil hacia la universidad porque ellos,

1052
00:43:49,780 --> 00:43:51,380
los estudiantes tomaron la oficina del presidente.

1053
00:43:51,420 --> 00:43:53,280
Y yo digo, no, les dejaron hacerse cargo del

1054
00:43:53,280 --> 00:43:53,900
Oficina del Presidente.

1055
00:43:53,980 --> 00:43:56,780
Y no sé si ese fue uno de los casos en los que,

1056
00:43:56,780 --> 00:43:57,980
la adquisición fue atendida,

1057
00:43:57,980 --> 00:44:00,000
pero si alguna vez hubo una especie de señal que sea una especie de

1058
00:44:00,000 --> 00:44:03,200
Como, sí, esto no lo es, en realidad es bastante amigable.

1059
00:44:03,280 --> 00:44:06,860
Bueno, en cierto sentido, como protestar y tener opiniones muy fuertes, incluso como

1060
00:44:07,540 --> 00:44:09,900
opiniones ridículas, locas y descabelladas es algo bueno.

1061
00:44:10,000 --> 00:44:11,720
Es sólo que no debería llevar a una situación real.

1062
00:44:12,460 --> 00:44:14,200
despedir o derribar personas.

1063
00:44:14,240 --> 00:44:15,280
Como si fuera bueno protestar.

1064
00:44:15,440 --> 00:44:17,400
Simplemente no es bueno,

1065
00:44:17,400 --> 00:44:19,920
uh, que la universidad apoye eso y tome medidas en base a ello.

1066
00:44:20,120 --> 00:44:20,680
Y este es uno de,

1067
00:44:20,680 --> 00:44:21,560
uno de esos como,

1068
00:44:21,560 --> 00:44:23,860
Um, tensiones en, en, en la primera enmienda que

1069
00:44:23,860 --> 00:44:25,730
De hecho, creo que tiene un lanzamiento bastante fácil.

1070
00:44:25,760 --> 00:44:27,400
Básicamente tienes una aplicación,

1071
00:44:27,440 --> 00:44:30,040
tienes absolutamente el derecho a,

1072
00:44:30,380 --> 00:44:32,200
uh, dedica tu vida a

1073
00:44:32,200 --> 00:44:35,060
poner fin a la libertad de expresión y ridiculizar como concepto.

1074
00:44:35,160 --> 00:44:37,440
Y hay personas que,

1075
00:44:37,440 --> 00:44:42,480
quienes realmente lo son, pueden parecer muy despreciables incluso respecto de la filosofía de la libertad de expresión.

1076
00:44:42,940 --> 00:44:44,740
Um, y defenderemos tu derecho a hacer eso.

1077
00:44:45,100 --> 00:44:47,660
Tampoco estaremos de acuerdo contigo.

1078
00:44:47,660 --> 00:44:49,460
Y si intentas que despidan a un profesor,

1079
00:44:49,460 --> 00:44:50,940
estaremos del otro lado de eso.

1080
00:44:51,120 --> 00:44:52,720
Ahora, creo que tenías a Randy Kennedy,

1081
00:44:52,840 --> 00:44:54,420
quien realmente, lo amo.

1082
00:44:54,540 --> 00:44:55,660
Creo que es un gran tipo,

1083
00:44:56,140 --> 00:45:01,400
pero nos criticó por nuestra base de datos desplataforma diciendo:

1084
00:45:01,500 --> 00:45:04,100
Esto quiere decir que los estudiantes no pueden protestar contra los oradores.

1085
00:45:04,160 --> 00:45:04,880
Soy como,

1086
00:45:05,500 --> 00:45:06,240
Vale, eso es una tontería.

1087
00:45:06,940 --> 00:45:11,660
Um, uh, disparamos como organización y hemos defendido el derecho a protestar todo el tiempo.

1088
00:45:11,800 --> 00:45:14,440
Estamos constantemente defendiendo los derechos de los manifestantes por los derechos,

1089
00:45:15,060 --> 00:45:18,880
sin creer que los manifestantes tengan derecho a decir esto quisiera,

1090
00:45:18,940 --> 00:45:20,000
básicamente eso sería.

1091
00:45:20,620 --> 00:45:21,620
Castigar a los hablantes.

1092
00:45:21,820 --> 00:45:23,340
No estamos pidiendo castigo,

1093
00:45:23,340 --> 00:45:26,060
um, uh, los manifestantes, pero lo que estamos diciendo

1094
00:45:26,060 --> 00:45:29,620
¿No se puede dejar que ganen los manifestantes si exigen que despidan a alguien?

1095
00:45:30,040 --> 00:45:30,740
por su libertad de expresión.

1096
00:45:30,760 --> 00:45:35,940
Entonces, la línea que existe entre los manifestantes que protestan y

1097
00:45:36,560 --> 00:45:40,100
la universidad tomando medidas en base a la protesta.

1098
00:45:40,220 --> 00:45:40,560
Si, exacto.

1099
00:45:40,840 --> 00:45:43,440
Y, por supuesto, gritan que eso es sólo censura de la mafia.

1100
00:45:44,080 --> 00:45:46,060
Um, y eso es algo en lo que la universidad,

1101
00:45:46,280 --> 00:45:47,980
la forma, la forma en que realmente,

1102
00:45:48,060 --> 00:45:52,900
Lidiar con esa tensión en la ley de la Primera Enmienda es esencialmente como el único deber positivo que tiene el gobierno.

1103
00:45:53,190 --> 00:45:57,560
El primero, el deber negativo, lo que no está permitido es censurarte.

1104
00:45:58,400 --> 00:46:00,120
Um, pero su deber positivo es que si,

1105
00:46:00,160 --> 00:46:02,320
que si quiero decir cosas horribles,

1106
00:46:02,620 --> 00:46:03,160
o para el caso,

1107
00:46:03,300 --> 00:46:05,520
cosas geniales que no son populares en un parque público,

1108
00:46:06,060 --> 00:46:08,760
Um, no puedes dejar que la multitud simplemente me grite.

1109
00:46:09,060 --> 00:46:11,780
Um, no puedes permitir lo que se llama un veto de quien interrumpe.

1110
00:46:14,280 --> 00:46:15,180
Eso es muy interesante.

1111
00:46:15,200 --> 00:46:17,420
Porque siento que eso también entra en juego en las redes sociales.

1112
00:46:17,440 --> 00:46:17,980
Causa,

1113
00:46:18,920 --> 00:46:22,140
uh, ya sabes, está toda esta discusión sobre censura y libertad de expresión,

1114
00:46:22,500 --> 00:46:25,780
pero para mí, la pregunta de la zanahoria

1115
00:46:26,360 --> 00:46:27,060
es casi mas

1116
00:46:28,000 --> 00:46:28,540
interesante.

1117
00:46:28,560 --> 00:46:32,580
Una vez que se establece la libertad de expresión, ¿cómo se incentiva la alta calidad?

1118
00:46:32,580 --> 00:46:33,640
debate y desacuerdo?

1119
00:46:33,880 --> 00:46:35,140
Estoy pensando mucho en eso.

1120
00:46:35,880 --> 00:46:39,320
Y esa es una de las cosas de las que hablamos al cancelar la mente estadounidense: argumentar hacia la verdad.

1121
00:46:40,060 --> 00:46:43,060
y que cancelar la cultura es cruel.

1122
00:46:43,460 --> 00:46:43,780
Es despiadado.

1123
00:46:44,300 --> 00:46:45,900
Es antiintelectual,

1124
00:46:46,240 --> 00:46:48,340
pero tampoco te llevará a ninguna parte en tu verdad.

1125
00:46:48,640 --> 00:46:51,460
Y vas a perder mucho tiempo destruyendo a tus oponentes,

1126
00:46:52,640 --> 00:46:56,640
um, en, en algo que en realidad nunca podrá llevarte a la verdad a través del proceso, por supuesto, de,

1127
00:46:57,040 --> 00:46:58,420
En realidad, nunca se llega directamente a la verdad.

1128
00:46:58,540 --> 00:46:59,440
Simplemente eliminas la falsedad.

1129
00:47:00,600 --> 00:47:00,780
Sí.

1130
00:47:01,100 --> 00:47:04,500
Pero todos los que tienen un megáfono en Internet con anonimato,

1131
00:47:05,440 --> 00:47:06,480
parece que

1132
00:47:07,240 --> 00:47:08,460
es mejor que la censura,

1133
00:47:10,540 --> 00:47:13,540
pero parece que además hay incentivos.

1134
00:47:13,800 --> 00:47:14,300
Además de eso,

1135
00:47:15,000 --> 00:47:17,000
puedes construir para, um,

1136
00:47:17,680 --> 00:47:19,620
sí, para incentivar un mejor discurso.

1137
00:47:19,620 --> 00:47:19,800
Sí.

1138
00:47:20,200 --> 00:47:25,340
Es como incentivar a alguien que se esfuerza mucho en hacer hasta el más ridículo.

1139
00:47:25,860 --> 00:47:34,960
argumentos, pero básicamente aquellos que no incluyen ninguna de las cosas que usted destaca en términos de todos los trucos retóricos para cerrar conversaciones,

1140
00:47:35,200 --> 00:47:38,320
simplemente presenta muy buenos argumentos para lo que sea.

1141
00:47:38,560 --> 00:47:41,140
No importa si es comunismo por fascismo,

1142
00:47:41,260 --> 00:47:42,540
lo que sea que quieras decir,

1143
00:47:43,120 --> 00:47:45,720
pero hazlo a escala, con contexto histórico,

1144
00:47:47,140 --> 00:47:49,300
con, uh, uh, con el hombre de acero al otro lado,

1145
00:47:49,360 --> 00:47:50,240
todo ese tipo de elementos.

1146
00:47:50,620 --> 00:47:52,620
Intentamos resaltar tres puntos principales en el libro.

1147
00:47:52,960 --> 00:47:55,820
Uno, um, es simplemente cancelar la cultura.

1148
00:47:55,820 --> 00:47:56,080
real.

1149
00:47:56,220 --> 00:47:57,820
Es una, es una era histórica,

1150
00:47:57,820 --> 00:47:59,540
Um, y es a una escala histórica.

1151
00:48:00,180 --> 00:48:00,980
El segundo es

1152
00:48:01,240 --> 00:48:04,480
deberías pensar en cancelar la cultura como parte de, um,

1153
00:48:05,060 --> 00:48:09,100
retórica, como una retórica perezosa más amplia,

1154
00:48:09,100 --> 00:48:13,520
uh, acercamiento a qué, qué, a qué nos referimos como argumentos ganadores sin argumentos ganadores.

1155
00:48:14,220 --> 00:48:18,660
Y lo decimos en dos sentidos sin tener argumentos ganadores o sin tener realmente un argumento.

1156
00:48:19,400 --> 00:48:21,060
Y hablamos de todos los diferentes,

1157
00:48:21,140 --> 00:48:25,760
lo que llamamos fortalezas retóricas que tienen tanto la izquierda como la derecha que te impiden,

1158
00:48:26,100 --> 00:48:28,560
que te permiten simplemente descartar a la persona,

1159
00:48:29,300 --> 00:48:33,720
um, o esquivar el argumento sin llegar nunca a la sustancia del mismo.

1160
00:48:33,880 --> 00:48:34,580
La tercera parte es justa,

1161
00:48:34,800 --> 00:48:36,040
ya sabes, ¿cómo lo solucionamos?

1162
00:48:36,240 --> 00:48:38,680
Pero la fortaleza retórica es algo que en realidad he sido,

1163
00:48:38,920 --> 00:48:43,840
Me apasiona mucho porque interfiere con nuestra capacidad de llegar a la verdad y

1164
00:48:43,840 --> 00:48:45,620
pierde el tiempo y francamente,

1165
00:48:45,800 --> 00:48:48,640
También es algo así como cancelar la cultura es parte de eso.

1166
00:48:48,650 --> 00:48:50,180
táctica retórica, también puede arruinar vidas.

1167
00:48:51,320 --> 00:48:54,460
De hecho, sería muy divertido hablar sobre este aspecto particular del libro.

1168
00:48:54,500 --> 00:48:56,780
Y te recomiendo encarecidamente que si estás escuchando esto,

1169
00:48:56,980 --> 00:48:59,020
Reserva el libro ahora.

1170
00:49:00,040 --> 00:49:00,220
Oh,

1171
00:49:00,600 --> 00:49:01,440
¿Cuándo sale?

1172
00:49:01,700 --> 00:49:02,340
17 de octubre.

1173
00:49:02,340 --> 00:49:02,540
Bueno.

1174
00:49:02,680 --> 00:49:03,840
La cancelación de la mente americana.

1175
00:49:04,240 --> 00:49:04,380
Bueno.

1176
00:49:04,440 --> 00:49:05,140
Así que en

1177
00:49:05,540 --> 00:49:05,640
oh,

1178
00:49:06,360 --> 00:49:07,820
En el libro también tienes

1179
00:49:08,340 --> 00:49:12,720
una lista de tácticas retóricas baratas que utilizan tanto la izquierda como la derecha.

1180
00:49:13,100 --> 00:49:13,960
Y luego tienes

1181
00:49:14,620 --> 00:49:19,060
una lista de tácticas que usa la izquierda y la derecha.

1182
00:49:19,440 --> 00:49:25,620
Entonces está la retórica, la fortaleza retórica perfecta que usa la izquierda y la fortaleza retórica eficiente.

1183
00:49:25,880 --> 00:49:26,560
que usa la derecha.

1184
00:49:27,340 --> 00:49:29,560
La primera es ¿qué pasa con el ismo?

1185
00:49:29,740 --> 00:49:32,230
Tal vez podamos repasar algunos de ellos que capturan

1186
00:49:32,240 --> 00:49:35,000
tu corazón en este momento particular mientras hablamos de ello.

1187
00:49:35,320 --> 00:49:36,200
Y si, si puedes

1188
00:49:37,260 --> 00:49:43,840
Describe ejemplos de esto o si hay aspectos que ves allí, especialmente efectivos y efectivos.

1189
00:49:44,180 --> 00:49:48,960
Entonces, ¿qué pasa con el ismo? ¿Es defenderse de las críticas de tu lado sacando a relucir las opiniones del otro lado?

1190
00:49:49,710 --> 00:49:51,400
presunta irregularidad.

1191
00:49:51,600 --> 00:49:53,960
Quiero hacer tarjetitas de estas, eh,

1192
00:49:54,280 --> 00:49:56,200
de todas estas tácticas y comenzar

1193
00:49:56,200 --> 00:50:00,300
usándolos en X todo el tiempo porque se implementan con mucha frecuencia.

1194
00:50:00,380 --> 00:50:01,760
¿Y qué hay del ismo que pongo?

1195
00:50:01,760 --> 00:50:02,800
primero por una razón,

1196
00:50:03,020 --> 00:50:07,160
Ya sabes, sería una idea interesante integrar eso en la barra X de Twitter.

1197
00:50:07,860 --> 00:50:10,100
donde la gente, ya sabes, en lugar de hacer clic en el corazón,

1198
00:50:10,140 --> 00:50:12,340
pueden hacer clic en cuál de ellos,

1199
00:50:12,540 --> 00:50:15,360
uh, uh, cuál de las tácticas retóricas es esta.

1200
00:50:15,700 --> 00:50:16,140
Y luego,

1201
00:50:16,560 --> 00:50:18,060
Porque ya sabes, en realidad hay notas de la comunidad.

1202
00:50:18,200 --> 00:50:19,200
No sé si has visto

1203
00:50:19,940 --> 00:50:23,860
en X que ustedes pueden contribuir con notas y es bastante

1204
00:50:24,060 --> 00:50:24,560
fascinante.

1205
00:50:24,840 --> 00:50:25,920
Funciona muy, muy bien.

1206
00:50:26,240 --> 00:50:28,240
pero para darle un poco más de estructura.

1207
00:50:28,320 --> 00:50:28,760
Sí.

1208
00:50:28,780 --> 00:50:30,220
En realidad, ese es un método realmente interesante.

1209
00:50:30,500 --> 00:50:30,700
Sí.

1210
00:50:30,780 --> 00:50:32,600
De hecho, cuando estaba pensando en formas

1211
00:50:33,100 --> 00:50:35,320
X podría usarse para argumentar hacia la verdad,

1212
00:50:35,860 --> 00:50:37,480
No quisiera tenerlo para que,

1213
00:50:37,480 --> 00:50:39,340
ya sabes, todo el mundo estaría obligado a eso.

1214
00:50:39,620 --> 00:50:43,740
Pero creo que me imagino casi como un arroyo dentro de X.

1215
00:50:44,020 --> 00:50:45,700
eso fue centrado en la verdad, eso,

1216
00:50:45,700 --> 00:50:48,760
que acepta algunas reglas adicionales sobre cómo argumentarían.

1217
00:50:48,820 --> 00:50:49,400
Si hombre.

1218
00:50:49,400 --> 00:50:50,240
Me encantaría que.

1219
00:50:50,840 --> 00:50:54,640
Donde hay en términos de corrientes que se cruzan y pueden ser

1220
00:50:54,640 --> 00:50:59,320
Separó el hablar de mierda, uno donde la gente simplemente disfruta hablando de mierda.

1221
00:50:59,700 --> 00:51:00,220
Bueno. Adelante, hombre.

1222
00:51:00,260 --> 00:51:01,320
Y luego hay una verdad

1223
00:51:01,840 --> 00:51:05,640
y luego, uh, quiero decir, dicen, luego está el humor,

1224
00:51:06,660 --> 00:51:08,240
Entonces hay buenas vibraciones.

1225
00:51:08,760 --> 00:51:09,220
Como tú sabes,

1226
00:51:09,560 --> 00:51:11,660
No soy alguien que necesita absolutamente algo bueno.

1227
00:51:11,680 --> 00:51:12,820
vibraciones todo el tiempo,

1228
00:51:12,860 --> 00:51:14,380
pero a veces es bueno tener,

1229
00:51:14,440 --> 00:51:17,580
es bueno simplemente iniciar sesión y no tener que ver

1230
00:51:17,960 --> 00:51:23,160
como el drama, las peleas, las peleas, las cancelaciones, las mamás, todo esto.

1231
00:51:23,220 --> 00:51:24,240
Es bueno simplemente ver

1232
00:51:24,820 --> 00:51:28,680
uh, es por eso que voy a Reddit o me gusta,

1233
00:51:28,680 --> 00:51:30,420
¿Cuáles son los animales lindos?

1234
00:51:30,640 --> 00:51:32,000
si hay lindos cachorros y gatitos.

1235
00:51:32,240 --> 00:51:34,960
Y es como, sólo quiero ver a Ryan Reynolds cantando con Will Farrell.

1236
00:51:35,080 --> 00:51:35,260
Quiero decir,

1237
00:51:35,880 --> 00:51:38,020
A veces eso es todo lo que necesitas en mi corazón.

1238
00:51:38,060 --> 00:51:38,260
Sí.

1239
00:51:38,800 --> 00:51:39,620
No todo el tiempo,

1240
00:51:39,640 --> 00:51:42,420
solo un poquito y de vuelta a la batalla

1241
00:51:42,940 --> 00:51:43,280
por la verdad.

1242
00:51:44,040 --> 00:51:44,300
Bueno.

1243
00:51:44,360 --> 00:51:45,220
Entonces, ¿qué pasa con el ismo?

1244
00:51:45,300 --> 00:51:46,040
¿Qué tal como Mia?

1245
00:51:46,140 --> 00:51:46,920
Eso está en todas partes.

1246
00:51:47,080 --> 00:51:48,460
Um, cuando, cuando lo miras,

1247
00:51:48,460 --> 00:51:49,540
uh, cuando miras Twitter,

1248
00:51:49,580 --> 00:51:51,660
Cuando miras las redes sociales en general, um,

1249
00:51:52,020 --> 00:51:56,480
y el primero, como lo que llamamos la carrera de obstáculos, es básicamente una prueba de tiempo,

1250
00:51:56,560 --> 00:51:58,400
pasado de moda, ya sabes,

1251
00:51:59,220 --> 00:52:00,800
esquivas argumentativas que todo el mundo utiliza.

1252
00:52:01,380 --> 00:52:02,360
¿Y qué pasa con asm?

1253
00:52:02,360 --> 00:52:05,440
sacar a relucir algo, ya sabes, como si alguien presentara un argumento,

1254
00:52:05,580 --> 00:52:06,640
como si Biden fuera corrupto.

1255
00:52:06,900 --> 00:52:08,060
Y entonces alguien dice:

1256
00:52:08,140 --> 00:52:09,460
Bueno, Trump fue peor, ya sabes, como,

1257
00:52:10,080 --> 00:52:12,760
y eso no es ilegítimo,

1258
00:52:13,080 --> 00:52:15,400
ya sabes, argumento para responder, pero lo hace,

1259
00:52:15,820 --> 00:52:16,820
eso, parece suceder.

1260
00:52:16,980 --> 00:52:17,780
Cada vez que alguien hace un

1261
00:52:17,780 --> 00:52:22,120
afirmación, alguien simplemente señala alguna otra cosa que estaba sucediendo y puede atenuarse cada vez más,

1262
00:52:22,440 --> 00:52:24,060
de lo que realmente estás tratando de argumentar.

1263
00:52:24,680 --> 00:52:25,920
Y cuando tú, y luego ves

1264
00:52:25,920 --> 00:52:28,980
esto todo el tiempo en las redes sociales y es como,

1265
00:52:29,080 --> 00:52:31,080
Ya sabes, yo era un gran admirador de Jon Stewart.

1266
00:52:31,080 --> 00:52:36,140
programa diario, pero gran parte de cuál era el humor y cuál era la táctica para discutir era esto

1267
00:52:36,280 --> 00:52:36,820
cosa por aquí.

1268
00:52:37,060 --> 00:52:39,320
Es como, Oh, estoy argumentando sobre este importante problema.

1269
00:52:39,860 --> 00:52:43,800
Oh, en realidad, ya sabes, hay otro problema aquí que me preocupa más.

1270
00:52:44,460 --> 00:52:47,780
Y eso, ya sabes, y en, ya sabes, elijamos lo de la derecha aquí.

1271
00:52:48,340 --> 00:52:49,340
Así que el 6 de enero

1272
00:52:49,860 --> 00:52:53,260
ya sabes, ver a todos discutiendo sobre, um, chop,

1273
00:52:53,600 --> 00:52:57,060
ya sabes, como, um, uh, la parte ocupada de Seattle o

1274
00:52:57,060 --> 00:52:59,220
la parte ocupada de Portland y el conjunto,

1275
00:52:59,260 --> 00:53:00,580
y básicamente tratando de gustar,

1276
00:53:00,660 --> 00:53:01,900
Oh, estás mencionando el, el,

1277
00:53:02,240 --> 00:53:03,580
los disturbios del 6 de enero.

1278
00:53:04,060 --> 00:53:04,620
Um, y por cierto,

1279
00:53:04,660 --> 00:53:05,640
Vivo en Capitol Hill.

1280
00:53:05,760 --> 00:53:09,260
Créanme, era muy consciente de lo aterrador y malo que era.

1281
00:53:09,620 --> 00:53:10,200
Eh,

1282
00:53:10,700 --> 00:53:15,320
Ya sabes, como dije, mi papá creció en Yugoslavia y esa fue una noche en la que todos cenamos en el sótano.

1283
00:53:15,380 --> 00:53:17,300
Porque pienso, Oh, cuando la mierda baja,

1284
00:53:17,540 --> 00:53:18,060
comer en el sótano.

1285
00:53:18,760 --> 00:53:20,600
Fue, fue, fue realmente aterrador.

1286
00:53:20,600 --> 00:53:26,360
Y la gente trataría de desviar la seriedad del 6 de enero argumentando que,

1287
00:53:26,480 --> 00:53:30,160
Oh, bueno, están sucediendo cosas locas y horribles en todo el país.

1288
00:53:30,280 --> 00:53:35,060
Uh, ya sabes, disturbios, uh, uh, um, que surgieron de algunas de las protestas por la justicia social.

1289
00:53:35,660 --> 00:53:39,700
Y, por supuesto, la respuesta es que puedes preocuparte por ambas cosas y,

1290
00:53:39,700 --> 00:53:41,240
y encontrar ambos problemas.

1291
00:53:41,460 --> 00:53:44,040
Pero ya sabes, si estoy discutiendo sobre chop,

1292
00:53:44,300 --> 00:53:47,500
Ya sabes, que alguien mencione el 6 de enero no es muy relevante.

1293
00:53:47,780 --> 00:53:49,200
O si estoy discutiendo sobre el 6 de enero,

1294
00:53:49,340 --> 00:53:51,980
alguien que menciona los disturbios en 2020,

1295
00:53:52,540 --> 00:53:53,040
¿No es eso útil?

1296
00:53:53,320 --> 00:53:56,580
Hicimos un largo y oscuro viaje desde el ismo y,

1297
00:53:56,580 --> 00:53:57,620
uh, relacionado con eso es

1298
00:53:57,640 --> 00:53:59,680
dotación de paja y dotación de acero.

1299
00:53:59,840 --> 00:54:04,860
Entonces tergiversando la, la, la, la perspectiva de la, la, la perspectiva opuesta.

1300
00:54:05,440 --> 00:54:06,880
Y esto es algo también,

1301
00:54:07,440 --> 00:54:13,180
Uh, supongo que es muy frecuente y es difícil hacer lo contrario.

1302
00:54:13,300 --> 00:54:14,360
que es la dotación de acero

1303
00:54:14,400 --> 00:54:16,380
requiere empatía o requiere elocuencia.

1304
00:54:16,420 --> 00:54:17,480
Requiere comprensión,

1305
00:54:18,500 --> 00:54:20,660
realmente haciendo la investigación y entendiendo el,

1306
00:54:20,960 --> 00:54:22,580
la, la perspectiva alternativa.

1307
00:54:23,480 --> 00:54:27,060
Mi... maravilloso empleado, Ángel y Eduardo, tienen algo que él llama tripulación estelar.

1308
00:54:27,640 --> 00:54:29,720
y me encuentro haciendo esto mucho.

1309
00:54:29,840 --> 00:54:30,700
Es bueno tener

1310
00:54:30,700 --> 00:54:34,860
ya sabes, dos padres inmigrantes, um, porque recuerdo estar en San Francisco,

1311
00:54:34,860 --> 00:54:44,240
uh, ya sabes, uh, en el tipo extraño de cohorte del hombre en llamas de ACLU y tener una

1312
00:54:44,240 --> 00:54:48,060
amigo que era un artista que hablaba de odiar a Kansas.

1313
00:54:48,310 --> 00:54:52,380
Y esa era su metáfora de la América media, eso es lo que quiso decir con ella.

1314
00:54:53,020 --> 00:54:56,180
Y estaba algo orgulloso del hecho de que odiaba Kansas.

1315
00:54:56,880 --> 00:54:58,630
Y yo digo, tienes que entender.

1316
00:54:58,900 --> 00:55:02,240
Todavía los veo a todos un poco como extranjeros y

1317
00:55:03,040 --> 00:55:06,600
piensa en cambiar el nombre de Kansas a Croacia,

1318
00:55:06,840 --> 00:55:09,260
ya sabes, cambiar el nombre de Kansas a,

1319
00:55:09,280 --> 00:55:09,920
a, a algunos.

1320
00:55:10,200 --> 00:55:11,600
Eso es lo que me parece.

1321
00:55:11,860 --> 00:55:13,460
Y la idea de la tripulación estelar,

1322
00:55:13,640 --> 00:55:14,980
lo que me gusta es,

1323
00:55:15,140 --> 00:55:15,740
es la idea de ser como,

1324
00:55:16,000 --> 00:55:19,900
entonces estás diciendo que realmente odias a tu minoría religiosa dominante,

1325
00:55:20,300 --> 00:55:25,140
y ahí es cuando empiezas a despegarte un poco de ello, qué típico

1326
00:55:25,700 --> 00:55:27,780
Estados Unidos es excepcional en varios sentidos,

1327
00:55:28,060 --> 00:55:30,840
pero algunas de nuestras dinámicas son increíblemente

1328
00:55:30,840 --> 00:55:31,280
típico.

1329
00:55:31,420 --> 00:55:32,300
Es una de las razones por las que,

1330
00:55:32,460 --> 00:55:34,340
como cuando la gente empieza a leer Thomas Soul,

1331
00:55:34,400 --> 00:55:37,460
por ejemplo, empiezan a engancharse porque una de las cosas que hace es

1332
00:55:37,460 --> 00:55:41,500
hace un análisis comparativo de los problemas de los países y señala que algunos de estos

1333
00:55:41,500 --> 00:55:44,300
cosas que creemos que son exclusivas de los Estados Unidos existen en,

1334
00:55:45,500 --> 00:55:48,140
ya sabes, el 75% del resto de países del mundo.

1335
00:55:48,560 --> 00:55:51,460
El libro de Francis Fukuyama que estoy leyendo ahora mismo,

1336
00:55:51,500 --> 00:55:54,900
orígenes del orden político en realidad hace este maravilloso trabajo de señalar

1337
00:55:54,900 --> 00:55:56,820
descubrir que no somos especiales en varios sentidos.

1338
00:55:57,200 --> 00:55:59,260
En realidad, esto es algo que tengo muy presente.

1339
00:56:00,420 --> 00:56:04,880
Y Fukuyama, por supuesto, es un gran libro.

1340
00:56:05,240 --> 00:56:05,580
Que no es,

1341
00:56:06,460 --> 00:56:08,200
está un poco forzado en su escritura

1342
00:56:08,940 --> 00:56:11,100
porque su término para una de las cosas que le preocupan

1343
00:56:11,120 --> 00:56:14,560
lo que destruye las sociedades es la repatriación,

1344
00:56:15,240 --> 00:56:21,780
que es la reversión a sociedades en las que

1345
00:56:21,780 --> 00:56:23,280
favoreces a tu familia y amigos.

1346
00:56:23,840 --> 00:56:28,240
Y de hecho pienso mucho en lo que estoy viendo en cierto modo,

1347
00:56:28,280 --> 00:56:29,900
um, uh, en los Estados Unidos,

1348
00:56:30,020 --> 00:56:31,740
Me preocupa que estemos pasando por un poco

1349
00:56:31,740 --> 00:56:33,260
un poco un proceso de repatriación.

1350
00:56:33,840 --> 00:56:35,560
Y creo que esa es una de las razones por las que la gente es tan

1351
00:56:35,640 --> 00:56:36,000
enojado.

1352
00:56:36,200 --> 00:56:36,920
Creo que tener un,

1353
00:56:37,240 --> 00:56:39,080
Creo que la perspectiva de que nosotros,

1354
00:56:39,080 --> 00:56:43,700
ya sabes, parece que casi tendremos una elección que iba a ser,

1355
00:56:43,700 --> 00:56:46,180
ya sabes, Jeb Bush contra Hillary Clinton.

1356
00:56:46,420 --> 00:56:48,680
Es como, ¿somos ahora un país dinástico?

1357
00:56:48,680 --> 00:56:50,220
¿Es eso lo que está pasando?

1358
00:56:50,780 --> 00:56:54,320
Pero también es una de las razones por las que la gente se enoja tanto por las admisiones heredadas,

1359
00:56:54,780 --> 00:56:56,160
aproximadamente cuánto, ya sabes,

1360
00:56:56,540 --> 00:57:00,140
ciertas familias parecen ser capaces de mantener a su gente en el

1361
00:57:00,140 --> 00:57:02,540
clases altas de los Estados Unidos perpetuamente.

1362
00:57:02,700 --> 00:57:05,220
Y créeme, como si fuera pobre cuando era

1363
00:57:05,360 --> 00:57:06,400
un niño y yo fuimos a,

1364
00:57:06,400 --> 00:57:07,360
y tengo que ir a,

1365
00:57:07,500 --> 00:57:08,800
Tengo que ir a una de las fantasías.

1366
00:57:08,880 --> 00:57:09,620
Tengo que ir a Stanford.

1367
00:57:11,170 --> 00:57:15,240
Y pude ver cómo la gente,

1368
00:57:16,440 --> 00:57:19,640
Te tratan de manera diferente, de una manera casi insultante.

1369
00:57:20,060 --> 00:57:23,660
Básicamente, como de repente para cierto tipo de persona,

1370
00:57:23,660 --> 00:57:25,140
Yo era una persona legítima.

1371
00:57:25,540 --> 00:57:28,720
Y miro cuánto depende Estados Unidos de Harvard,

1372
00:57:29,200 --> 00:57:31,080
en Yale para producir su,

1373
00:57:31,780 --> 00:57:32,500
Voy a usar un muy

1374
00:57:32,520 --> 00:57:34,200
marca un término que suena: clase dominante.

1375
00:57:35,100 --> 00:57:37,880
Y esa es una de las razones por las que tienes que ser particularmente

1376
00:57:37,880 --> 00:57:40,420
preocupado por lo que sucede en estas universidades de élite.

1377
00:57:40,820 --> 00:57:42,260
Y estas universidades de élite con la

1378
00:57:42,260 --> 00:57:48,460
A excepción de la Universidad de Chicago y la UVA, los resultados son realmente malos en materia de libertad de expresión.

1379
00:57:48,880 --> 00:57:50,960
Y eso tiene todo tipo de problemas.

1380
00:57:52,420 --> 00:57:55,260
No augura nada bueno para el futuro de la protección.

1381
00:57:55,260 --> 00:57:56,980
de libertad de expresión para el resto de la sociedad.

1382
00:57:58,040 --> 00:57:59,920
Entonces, ¿puedes también sentir empatía allí?

1383
00:58:00,480 --> 00:58:02,520
¿Con la gente que votó por Donald Trump?

1384
00:58:04,480 --> 00:58:10,160
Porque precisamente eso como resistencia a este tipo de

1385
00:58:11,060 --> 00:58:13,000
impulso de la clase dominante,

1386
00:58:14,600 --> 00:58:16,220
esta realeza que pasa

1387
00:58:16,220 --> 00:58:19,760
sobre el gobierno de generación en generación.

1388
00:58:20,160 --> 00:58:25,660
Intento con todas mis fuerzas empatizar con todos hasta cierto punto y trato de ver realmente dónde están.

1389
00:58:25,740 --> 00:58:29,440
viene de y la ira de la derecha.

1390
00:58:29,800 --> 00:58:30,440
Lo entiendo.

1391
00:58:30,780 --> 00:58:33,490
Quiero decir, me siento como el, el

1392
00:58:33,860 --> 00:58:34,400
libro,

1393
00:58:35,200 --> 00:58:37,560
Así que abordar la mente estadounidense fue un libro que yo,

1394
00:58:37,560 --> 00:58:39,280
eso podría complacer a la multitud

1395
00:58:39,580 --> 00:58:45,910
hasta cierto punto, en parte porque realmente queríamos decir lo que dijimos en el subtítulo de que estos son

1396
00:58:46,140 --> 00:58:49,660
buenas intenciones y malas ideas que están lastimando a la gente.

1397
00:58:49,940 --> 00:58:51,820
Y si lo entiendes y lees el

1398
00:58:51,840 --> 00:58:56,280
libro, puedes decir, es como, está bien, no se trata de nadie siendo malicioso.

1399
00:58:56,700 --> 00:58:58,640
Ya sabes, se trata de personas que intentan proteger a sus hijos.

1400
00:58:58,660 --> 00:59:03,220
Simplemente lo están haciendo de una manera que en realidad puede conducir a mayor ansiedad, depresión,

1401
00:59:04,340 --> 00:59:07,180
y, extrañamente, eventualmente representan una amenaza a la libertad de expresión.

1402
00:59:08,020 --> 00:59:09,040
Pero en este,

1403
00:59:09,400 --> 00:59:10,360
no podemos estar del todo,

1404
00:59:10,920 --> 00:59:13,960
yo y mi, oh, ni siquiera he mencionado a mi brillante coautor, Ricky Schlott,

1405
00:59:14,280 --> 00:59:15,180
un joven de 23 años

1406
00:59:16,640 --> 00:59:17,120
genio.

1407
00:59:17,460 --> 00:59:18,580
Ella es, ella, ella es increíble.

1408
00:59:18,620 --> 00:59:19,420
Empecé a trabajar con ella cuando ella

1409
00:59:19,440 --> 00:59:21,900
Tenía 20 años, quién es mi coautor de este libro.

1410
00:59:21,900 --> 00:59:23,500
Entonces cuando digo nosotros,

1411
00:59:23,520 --> 00:59:24,520
Estoy hablando de Ricky y yo.

1412
00:59:24,640 --> 00:59:25,860
Es un libertario.

1413
00:59:25,960 --> 00:59:26,580
Periodista libertario.

1414
00:59:27,140 --> 00:59:28,060
Y periodista.

1415
00:59:28,440 --> 00:59:28,640
Sí.

1416
00:59:28,720 --> 00:59:29,520
Una mente brillante.

1417
00:59:30,200 --> 00:59:30,380
Sí.

1418
00:59:30,400 --> 00:59:34,780
Y, en realidad, no podemos escribir esto de una manera demasiado amable porque quienes cancelan no son amables.

1419
00:59:35,420 --> 00:59:38,100
Hay crueldad y despiadada en ello.

1420
00:59:38,300 --> 00:59:39,920
Quiero decir, comencé a deprimirme mucho.

1421
00:59:40,260 --> 00:59:44,580
el año pasado cuando lo estaba escribiendo y ni siquiera quería decirle a mi personal por qué me estaba poniendo tan ansioso y deprimido.

1422
00:59:45,080 --> 00:59:47,520
Es en parte porque estoy hablando de personas que,

1423
00:59:48,560 --> 00:59:50,580
ya sabes, en algunos de los casos de los que estamos hablando,

1424
00:59:51,300 --> 00:59:53,140
ve a tu casa, apunta a tus hijos.

1425
00:59:54,860 --> 00:59:56,180
Entonces, eso es un largo

1426
00:59:56,180 --> 00:59:57,360
forma de decir el,

1427
00:59:58,880 --> 01:00:03,200
Puedo entender qué tipo de cosas te vuelven loco hasta cierto punto en esto.

1428
01:00:03,400 --> 01:00:06,500
Siento que constantemente sienten que los están iluminando con gas.

1429
01:00:08,320 --> 01:00:12,260
La educación de élite es realmente un insulto para la clase trabajadora.

1430
01:00:12,720 --> 01:00:16,620
Así, parte de la ideología que es dominante en este momento trata,

1431
01:00:17,210 --> 01:00:19,460
casi el 70% del público estadounidense,

1432
01:00:19,740 --> 01:00:23,400
como son, pensamos que desarrollamos esto un poco en la fortaleza retórica perfecta, como si fueran

1433
01:00:23,980 --> 01:00:30,060
para algunos, de algún modo ilegítimo y no digno de respeto o compasión.

1434
01:00:30,620 --> 01:00:30,720
Sí.

1435
01:00:30,820 --> 01:00:33,940
El, el elitismo general que irradia,

1436
01:00:35,600 --> 01:00:39,900
elitismo autoalimentado que irradia la gente que acude a estas instituciones.

1437
01:00:40,320 --> 01:00:41,780
Y lo gracioso es que,

1438
01:00:41,780 --> 01:00:45,580
el elitismo ha sido reenvasado como una especie de,

1439
01:00:48,740 --> 01:00:50,680
se disfraza de una especie de compasión infinita,

1440
01:00:50,920 --> 01:00:53,940
pero esencialmente se basa en una especie de muy,

1441
01:00:54,980 --> 01:00:55,380
para ser franco,

1442
01:00:56,180 --> 01:00:58,620
ideología demasiado simple y demasiado simple,

1443
01:00:58,840 --> 01:01:01,940
una explicación simple del mundo y de la gente quebrantada

1444
01:01:01,940 --> 01:01:06,480
en grupos y juzgando a las personas por lo oprimidas que están en sus,

1445
01:01:06,680 --> 01:01:08,660
en la intersección de sus diversas identidades.

1446
01:01:10,400 --> 01:01:12,200
Y llegó a eso,

1447
01:01:12,280 --> 01:01:13,420
Creo inicialmente con,

1448
01:01:13,420 --> 01:01:16,240
con, con, un llamado desde un núcleo compasivo,

1449
01:01:17,040 --> 01:01:19,660
pero se usa de una manera que es,

1450
01:01:19,660 --> 01:01:22,160
puede ser muy cruel, muy desdeñoso,

1451
01:01:23,400 --> 01:01:27,960
sin compasión, y te permite no tomar en serio la mayoría de las cosas.

1452
01:01:27,960 --> 01:01:28,700
tus semejantes.

1453
01:01:29,280 --> 01:01:30,560
Es realmente extraño cómo sucedió eso.

1454
01:01:30,680 --> 01:01:34,680
Tal vez puedas explorar por qué algo que tiene

1455
01:01:35,880 --> 01:01:36,980
Suena bien al principio.

1456
01:01:37,120 --> 01:01:38,080
Sí.

1457
01:01:38,480 --> 01:01:39,080
Puede ser,

1458
01:01:39,900 --> 01:01:40,220
puede crear,

1459
01:01:41,420 --> 01:01:46,660
puede convertirse en un arma tan cruel para cancelar y herir a las personas e ignorarlas.

1460
01:01:47,020 --> 01:01:49,860
Quiero decir, esto es lo que describiste con la fortaleza retórica perfecta.

1461
01:01:50,000 --> 01:01:50,300
Sí.

1462
01:01:50,320 --> 01:01:51,260
Que es un conjunto de preguntas.

1463
01:01:51,280 --> 01:01:55,000
Quizás puedas explicar cuál es la fortaleza retórica perfecta.

1464
01:01:55,220 --> 01:01:55,460
Sí.

1465
01:01:55,540 --> 01:01:59,960
Entonces, la fortaleza retórica perfecta es la forma en que se ha desarrollado.

1466
01:02:00,640 --> 01:02:02,600
a la izquierda para no

1467
01:02:02,720 --> 01:02:04,400
llegar alguna vez al argumento real de alguien.

1468
01:02:05,100 --> 01:02:06,480
quiero hacer un grafico,

1469
01:02:06,520 --> 01:02:08,000
como un diagrama de flujo de esto sobre como,

1470
01:02:08,100 --> 01:02:08,880
Aquí está el argumento y

1471
01:02:08,880 --> 01:02:13,740
Aquí está esta fortaleza perfecta que siempre te desviará de la discusión.

1472
01:02:14,400 --> 01:02:16,560
Y comencé a notar esto ciertamente cuando yo,

1473
01:02:16,620 --> 01:02:17,680
cuando estaba en la facultad de derecho,

1474
01:02:17,980 --> 01:02:22,860
que había muchas formas diferentes de despedir a la gente y perfeccionar la fortaleza retórica en el primer paso.

1475
01:02:23,800 --> 01:02:26,980
Y puedo dar fe de ello porque yo también fui culpable de esto,

1476
01:02:27,440 --> 01:02:28,780
que puedes despedir a la gente

1477
01:02:29,300 --> 01:02:31,540
si se puede argumentar que son conservadores.

1478
01:02:31,700 --> 01:02:34,120
No es necesario que sean conservadores para ser claros.

1479
01:02:34,620 --> 01:02:36,280
Sólo hay que decir que lo son.

1480
01:02:36,760 --> 01:02:38,620
Entonces nunca leí a Thomas Sowell.

1481
01:02:39,160 --> 01:02:40,220
porque era de derechas.

1482
01:02:40,960 --> 01:02:42,380
No leí a Camille Poglia

1483
01:02:43,160 --> 01:02:45,540
Porque yo, yo, alguien me había convencido de que ella tenía razón.

1484
01:02:45,540 --> 01:02:45,700
exterior.

1485
01:02:45,820 --> 01:02:47,860
Hubo muchos autores que, y

1486
01:02:48,500 --> 01:02:49,740
cuando estaba en la facultad de derecho,

1487
01:02:50,340 --> 01:02:52,640
eso, entre mucha gente muy brillante,

1488
01:02:53,160 --> 01:02:57,420
Realmente ya era un hábito intelectual que si pudieras designar

1489
01:02:57,430 --> 01:03:00,820
algo conservador, entonces ya no tenías que pensar mucho en ello o

1490
01:03:00,900 --> 01:03:01,920
tómelo especialmente en serio.

1491
01:03:02,440 --> 01:03:05,020
Esta es una forma infantil de argumentar,

1492
01:03:05,560 --> 01:03:07,160
pero aun así, me involucré en ello.

1493
01:03:07,160 --> 01:03:07,900
Era una táctica común.

1494
01:03:08,380 --> 01:03:09,360
Incluso lo mencioné en el libro,

1495
01:03:09,480 --> 01:03:10,260
hubo un tiempo en que

1496
01:03:10,260 --> 01:03:14,460
un amigo activista gay que era,

1497
01:03:14,500 --> 01:03:15,720
Pienso decididamente a mi izquierda,

1498
01:03:15,900 --> 01:03:20,760
pero, aun así, esa experiencia pragmática de ser realmente un activista dijo algo como,

1499
01:03:20,880 --> 01:03:22,740
Bueno, sólo porque alguien sea conservador no significa que esté equivocado.

1500
01:03:23,420 --> 01:03:24,160
Y recuerdo sentirme amable

1501
01:03:24,160 --> 01:03:27,180
de escandalizarse en algún nivel de simplemente ser como,

1502
01:03:27,260 --> 01:03:31,180
Bueno, eso es más o menos, ¿no es eso todo lo que decimos cuando decimos que son simplemente malas personas con malas ideas?

1503
01:03:31,400 --> 01:03:33,160
Puedes simplemente lanzar un,

1504
01:03:33,260 --> 01:03:34,140
Oh, ese tipo es un extremo de derecha.

1505
01:03:34,460 --> 01:03:35,340
Puedes simplemente tirar eso.

1506
01:03:35,430 --> 01:03:36,920
No tengo que pensar más en ti.

1507
01:03:37,180 --> 01:03:37,420
Sí.

1508
01:03:37,420 --> 01:03:38,280
Y entonces puede,

1509
01:03:38,780 --> 01:03:39,600
si eres lo suficientemente popular,

1510
01:03:39,620 --> 01:03:40,220
pueden ser esos,

1511
01:03:40,440 --> 01:03:41,440
puede quedar algo pegajoso.

1512
01:03:41,740 --> 01:03:42,040
Sí.

1513
01:03:42,110 --> 01:03:42,860
Como,

1514
01:03:43,780 --> 01:03:46,060
y es raro porque, porque es efectivo,

1515
01:03:46,440 --> 01:03:47,720
por eso sigue llegando

1516
01:03:47,720 --> 01:03:49,400
acostumbrado esencialmente a eso,

1517
01:03:49,620 --> 01:03:51,420
debería haber golpeado a alguien porque,

1518
01:03:51,420 --> 01:03:53,380
porque yo, ya sabes, tengo una gran

1519
01:03:54,460 --> 01:03:57,400
pedigrí liberal, ya sabes, todo, desde trabajar en la ACLU hasta

1520
01:03:57,420 --> 01:03:59,220
hacer derecho de refugiados en Europa del Este para,

1521
01:03:59,380 --> 01:04:01,710
Fui parte de una mentoría ambiental

1522
01:04:01,900 --> 01:04:04,260
programa para niños de secundaria del centro de la ciudad en DC.

1523
01:04:04,800 --> 01:04:06,060
Sabes, he estado, he estado,

1524
01:04:06,740 --> 01:04:10,240
Yo, yo, puedo, ya sabes, defenderme como de izquierda,

1525
01:04:10,620 --> 01:04:13,200
pero odio hacer eso porque

1526
01:04:13,200 --> 01:04:15,120
También hay una parte de mí que dice, está bien,

1527
01:04:15,740 --> 01:04:16,280
así que lo que,

1528
01:04:17,200 --> 01:04:17,420
como,

1529
01:04:17,760 --> 01:04:18,960
¿De verdad estás diciendo eso?

1530
01:04:18,960 --> 01:04:23,300
Si mágicamente puedes hacerme discutir o convencerte de eso,

1531
01:04:23,340 --> 01:04:24,200
que estoy a la derecha,

1532
01:04:24,640 --> 01:04:25,940
¿Que ya no tienes que escucharme?

1533
01:04:26,320 --> 01:04:27,840
Y repito, eso es discutir como niños.

1534
01:04:28,500 --> 01:04:32,040
Y la razón por la que esto se ha vuelto tan popular es porque incluso entre,

1535
01:04:32,340 --> 01:04:37,120
o tal vez, tal vez especialmente entre las élites, que funciona tan eficazmente como un arma perfecta.

1536
01:04:37,200 --> 01:04:38,560
que puedes utilizar acríticamente.

1537
01:04:38,580 --> 01:04:39,820
Si pudiera demostrar que tienes razón,

1538
01:04:39,920 --> 01:04:40,420
no tengo que hacerlo,

1539
01:04:40,420 --> 01:04:41,560
No tengo que pensar en ti.

1540
01:04:42,140 --> 01:04:45,020
No es de extrañar que de repente empieces a ver gente llamando

1541
01:04:45,020 --> 01:04:50,220
derechista de la ACLU y llamar derechista al New York Times porque ha sido un

1542
01:04:50,220 --> 01:04:53,940
forma efectiva de deslegitimar a las personas como pensadores.

1543
01:04:54,580 --> 01:04:58,100
Tenemos, ya sabes, Stephen Pinker, que está en nuestra junta de asesores,

1544
01:04:58,500 --> 01:05:02,840
se refiere a la academia como el polo izquierdo que esencialmente es,

1545
01:05:02,840 --> 01:05:03,980
es una posición que desde,

1546
01:05:04,320 --> 01:05:05,180
desde ese punto de vista,

1547
01:05:05,240 --> 01:05:06,880
todo mira a su derecha,

1548
01:05:06,920 --> 01:05:08,220
parece como si estuviera a la derecha.

1549
01:05:09,240 --> 01:05:12,360
Pero una vez que se convierte en una táctica que aceptamos,

1550
01:05:12,920 --> 01:05:12,980
él,

1551
01:05:13,340 --> 01:05:15,240
y esa es una de las razones por las que, ya sabes, soy,

1552
01:05:15,880 --> 01:05:17,020
Soy, soy más de izquierdas.

1553
01:05:17,160 --> 01:05:18,980
pero creo que soy de izquierda de centro liberal.

1554
01:05:20,460 --> 01:05:23,160
Ricky es, ya sabes, un libertario más conservador.

1555
01:05:23,620 --> 01:05:24,580
Y al principio pensé,

1556
01:05:24,580 --> 01:05:27,220
¿Debería realmente escribir algo con alguien que sea más de derechas?

1557
01:05:27,280 --> 01:05:29,560
Y yo digo, absolutamente debería serlo.

1558
01:05:29,640 --> 01:05:31,900
Realmente tengo que estar a la altura de lo que creo en esto.

1559
01:05:31,900 --> 01:05:35,920
cosas porque es ridículo que tengamos esta idea primitiva de que puedes despedir a alguien

1560
01:05:36,060 --> 01:05:37,460
tan pronto como reclames,

1561
01:05:38,140 --> 01:05:39,640
con razón o sin ella, que están en la derecha.

1562
01:05:40,120 --> 01:05:40,340
Bien,

1563
01:05:41,220 --> 01:05:42,280
Siento, corrígeme si me equivoco,

1564
01:05:42,360 --> 01:05:45,000
pero siento que hace poco te llamaron derechista

1565
01:05:45,740 --> 01:05:46,580
fuego,

1566
01:05:47,000 --> 01:05:50,120
tal vez usted por asociación debido a ese debate.

1567
01:05:50,980 --> 01:05:51,920
Ah, el LA Times.

1568
01:05:51,940 --> 01:05:52,660
Los Ángeles Times.

1569
01:05:53,040 --> 01:05:54,100
Hablemos del LA Times.

1570
01:05:54,640 --> 01:05:56,440
Entonces sí, hay un artículo, hay un debate.

1571
01:05:57,080 --> 01:06:01,560
No puedo esperar para verlo porque no creo que esté disponible todavía para verlo en video.

1572
01:06:01,620 --> 01:06:02,500
Tienes que asistir personalmente.

1573
01:06:02,820 --> 01:06:04,140
No puedo esperar a verlo.

1574
01:06:04,400 --> 01:06:07,100
Uh, pero el fuego fue en parte apoyo y luego LA Times escribió, um,

1575
01:06:08,180 --> 01:06:12,020
un artículo mordaz sobre, eh, que todos en el debate estaban

1576
01:06:12,620 --> 01:06:13,760
básicamente correcto

1577
01:06:14,380 --> 01:06:15,080
inclinado hacia la derecha.

1578
01:06:15,420 --> 01:06:15,540
Bueno.

1579
01:06:15,840 --> 01:06:17,120
Uh, hay mucho que desempacar allí.

1580
01:06:17,660 --> 01:06:19,520
Ya sabes, Barry Weiss tiene esto,

1581
01:06:19,520 --> 01:06:21,100
Ya sabes, gran, gran proyecto, la prensa libre.

1582
01:06:21,220 --> 01:06:22,140
Me ha impresionado mucho.

1583
01:06:22,400 --> 01:06:23,820
Está cubriendo historias que,

1584
01:06:23,820 --> 01:06:26,940
que muchos medios de derecha o de izquierda no están dispuestos a cubrir.

1585
01:06:28,200 --> 01:06:29,620
Um, e hicimos un,

1586
01:06:29,840 --> 01:06:31,460
uh, organizamos un debate con ella.

1587
01:06:31,900 --> 01:06:36,600
Um, uh, y nosotros queríamos hacerlo lo más divertido y controvertido posible.

1588
01:06:37,260 --> 01:06:39,800
Entonces Fire y la prensa libre organizaron un debate.

1589
01:06:40,240 --> 01:06:41,720
¿Falló la revolución sexual?

1590
01:06:42,300 --> 01:06:44,340
Entonces el debate fue realmente emocionante,

1591
01:06:44,340 --> 01:06:44,960
muy divertido.

1592
01:06:45,120 --> 01:06:48,440
El lado que decía que la revolución sexual no fue un fracaso que,

1593
01:06:48,440 --> 01:06:50,080
eso, que estaban Grimes y Sarah Hader.

1594
01:06:50,530 --> 01:06:51,080
Uno,

1595
01:06:51,860 --> 01:06:52,420
mmm, fue,

1596
01:06:52,740 --> 01:06:53,720
ya sabes, un lindo,

1597
01:06:54,500 --> 01:06:55,260
noche carnosa y pensativa.

1598
01:06:55,960 --> 01:07:00,320
Y obtuvimos una revisión, hubo una revisión que fue un poco mordaz sobre todo el asunto.

1599
01:07:00,500 --> 01:07:02,420
E incluía una línea que decía que,

1600
01:07:02,940 --> 01:07:05,080
uh, fuego, que dice creer en la libertad de expresión,

1601
01:07:05,120 --> 01:07:06,880
pero sólo defiende puntos de vista en grados.

1602
01:07:08,080 --> 01:07:10,100
No puedo creer que eso siquiera haya aparecido en la revista.

1603
01:07:10,120 --> 01:07:11,100
Porque no se trata sólo de llamarnos.

1604
01:07:11,100 --> 01:07:12,580
Porque por supuesto, ya sabes, la implicación, por supuesto,

1605
01:07:12,580 --> 01:07:13,420
que somos de derecha,

1606
01:07:13,500 --> 01:07:18,260
um, que en realidad no somos, el personal se inclina decididamente más hacia la izquierda y hacia la derecha.

1607
01:07:18,920 --> 01:07:19,320
Eh,

1608
01:07:19,940 --> 01:07:20,240
pero

1609
01:07:20,820 --> 01:07:23,060
también defendemos a personas de todo el espectro,

1610
01:07:23,180 --> 01:07:23,880
todo el tiempo.

1611
01:07:24,100 --> 01:07:25,040
Como si eso fuera algo que,

1612
01:07:25,040 --> 01:07:27,620
que incluso la más mínima búsqueda en Google habría solucionado.

1613
01:07:27,840 --> 01:07:30,560
Entonces, como si nos hubieran dado un poco de presión sobre Los Angeles Times porque es como,

1614
01:07:30,840 --> 01:07:31,700
Sí, si lo dijiste.

1615
01:07:32,280 --> 01:07:35,180
En mi opinión, son de derechas, habríamos respondido,

1616
01:07:35,520 --> 01:07:40,400
ya sabes, decir, bueno, aquí, aquí, aquí están los siguientes 50.000 ejemplos de,

1617
01:07:40,400 --> 01:07:41,880
de, de que no estemos,

1618
01:07:42,160 --> 01:07:45,660
pero cuando realmente afirmas que solo defendemos opiniones,

1619
01:07:45,680 --> 01:07:47,320
estamos de acuerdo, en primer lugar, no hay manera de que estemos de acuerdo con ello.

1620
01:07:47,340 --> 01:07:51,240
No hay manera de que estemos de acuerdo con las opiniones porque en realidad tenemos una población políticamente diversa.

1621
01:07:51,320 --> 01:07:56,260
personal que ni siquiera se pone de acuerdo sobre qué opiniones son buenas y qué opiniones tenemos.

1622
01:07:56,780 --> 01:07:57,280
Pero sí,

1623
01:07:57,680 --> 01:07:58,000
Tuve que hacerlo

1624
01:07:58,400 --> 01:08:01,680
Yo, en un momento en que alguien hizo algo como esto y simplemente estaban

1625
01:08:01,680 --> 01:08:04,620
ser un poco frívolo acerca de que la libertad de expresión está bien.

1626
01:08:04,780 --> 01:08:07,360
Hice un hilo de 70 tweets de largo,

1627
01:08:07,360 --> 01:08:09,760
ya sabes, simplemente decir: Oye, ¿de verdad crees que esto está bien?

1628
01:08:10,280 --> 01:08:11,820
Decidí no hacer eso

1629
01:08:11,820 --> 01:08:13,400
um, en este en particular.

1630
01:08:13,660 --> 01:08:13,940
Pero

1631
01:08:14,520 --> 01:08:18,420
Lo bueno de esto es que demostró dos partes del libro,

1632
01:08:18,880 --> 01:08:19,720
uh, cancelación del americano

1633
01:08:19,720 --> 01:08:20,000
mente.

1634
01:08:20,160 --> 01:08:20,720
Si no más,

1635
01:08:21,200 --> 01:08:23,320
uno de ellos está despidiendo a alguien porque es conservador.

1636
01:08:23,540 --> 01:08:27,160
Uh, y como esa era la implicación, no tienes que escuchar el fuego porque son conservadores.

1637
01:08:27,380 --> 01:08:33,280
Pero el otro es algo, un término que inventé específicamente para la forma en que la gente discute en Twitter,

1638
01:08:33,720 --> 01:08:35,080
que es una proyección de hipocresía.

1639
01:08:35,340 --> 01:08:39,480
Hola, soy una persona a la que sólo le importa un lado de la valla política.

1640
01:08:39,500 --> 01:08:42,520
Y creo que todos los demás son hipócritas.

1641
01:08:43,320 --> 01:08:43,760
Um, y por cierto,

1642
01:08:43,840 --> 01:08:45,440
No he hecho ninguna investigación real sobre esto,

1643
01:08:45,800 --> 01:08:48,400
pero supongo que todos los demás son hipócritas.

1644
01:08:48,580 --> 01:08:50,080
Y ves que esto sucede todo el tiempo.

1645
01:08:50,320 --> 01:08:52,920
El, el, y esto sucede muchas veces cuando alguien dice,

1646
01:08:52,920 --> 01:08:54,260
¿Dónde está el fuego en este caso?

1647
01:08:54,320 --> 01:08:54,640
Y estamos como,

1648
01:08:54,960 --> 01:08:58,440
estamos literalmente citados en el enlace que acaba de enviar,

1649
01:08:58,640 --> 01:09:00,180
pero en realidad no lo leí.

1650
01:09:00,980 --> 01:09:02,540
O es como, ¿dónde está el fuego en esto?

1651
01:09:02,580 --> 01:09:06,540
Es como, aquí está nuestra demanda al respecto de hace seis meses.

1652
01:09:07,200 --> 01:09:09,540
Um, entonces es algo favorito.

1653
01:09:09,740 --> 01:09:11,700
Y también el programa diario de John Stewart,

1654
01:09:12,200 --> 01:09:18,600
como el, el, el, el, um, uh, ¿qué pasa con el ismo y el tipo de idea similar de que estas personas deben ser hipócritas es algo que

1655
01:09:19,120 --> 01:09:23,020
la mayor comedia, pero en cuanto a una táctica retórica que te llevará a la verdad,

1656
01:09:23,400 --> 01:09:28,200
simplemente asumir que tu oponente o simplemente acusar a tu oponente de ser siempre un

1657
01:09:28,200 --> 01:09:30,980
Hipócrita no es una buena táctica para la verdad.

1658
01:09:31,080 --> 01:09:31,720
Pero por cierto,

1659
01:09:31,800 --> 01:09:36,080
tiende siempre a provenir de personas que en realidad no son consistentes con la libertad de expresión.

1660
01:09:37,020 --> 01:09:38,640
Entonces esas manos la proyección,

1661
01:09:39,140 --> 01:09:41,820
pero básicamente no hacer la investigación sobre si el

1662
01:09:41,820 --> 01:09:47,520
persona es o no un hipócrita y asumir que los demás son una gran fracción de los que lo leen,

1663
01:09:48,300 --> 01:09:49,980
uh, tampoco hará la investigación.

1664
01:09:50,140 --> 01:09:51,640
Y por lo tanto este tipo de

1665
01:09:52,420 --> 01:09:55,220
declaración se convierte en una especie de veracidad sin

1666
01:09:55,220 --> 01:09:56,520
fundamentación en la realidad real.

1667
01:09:56,800 --> 01:10:00,740
Rompe esa barrera entre lo que es cierto y lo que no es cierto porque si,

1668
01:10:00,740 --> 01:10:01,660
si la mafia dice

1669
01:10:01,660 --> 01:10:04,320
algo es cierto, es que se necesita demasiado esfuerzo para corregirlo.

1670
01:10:04,480 --> 01:10:06,340
Y hay tres formas en que lo quiero,

1671
01:10:06,360 --> 01:10:08,860
como, ya sabes, quiero responder a esto,

1672
01:10:08,940 --> 01:10:11,180
que es solo dar ejemplo tras ejemplo de,

1673
01:10:11,320 --> 01:10:14,900
de tiempos en los que defendíamos a personas de ambos lados de cada mayoría,

1674
01:10:15,000 --> 01:10:16,340
básicamente todos los problemas importantes,

1675
01:10:16,440 --> 01:10:19,900
ya sea Israel, Palestina, ya sea terrorismo, ya sea matrimonio homosexual,

1676
01:10:20,420 --> 01:10:21,720
hemos sido aborto.

1677
01:10:22,000 --> 01:10:24,360
Hemos defendido ambos lados de ese argumento.

1678
01:10:24,980 --> 01:10:28,240
La otra parte, y yo la llamo los huérfanos de la guerra cultural.

1679
01:10:29,020 --> 01:10:34,320
Realmente quiero instar a los medios a que empiecen a preocuparse por los casos de libertad de expresión que están

1680
01:10:34,340 --> 01:10:38,740
que en realidad no tienen una valencia política que en realidad son más o menos las buenas y pasadas de moda

1681
01:10:38,780 --> 01:10:45,580
Ejercicio del poder contra el pequeño, la niña o el pequeño grupo dentro o fuera del campus.

1682
01:10:45,580 --> 01:10:46,420
campus para el caso.

1683
01:10:46,660 --> 01:10:47,460
Porque estos casos suceden.

1684
01:10:47,840 --> 01:10:49,820
Muchos de nuestros litigios son simplemente personas insignificantes.

1685
01:10:50,580 --> 01:10:52,820
como a la gente normal a la que le dicen que no puede protestar,

1686
01:10:52,840 --> 01:10:53,960
que no pueden sostener carteles.

1687
01:10:54,440 --> 01:10:57,760
Y luego, la última parte del argumento que quiero que la gente realmente entienda es, sí.

1688
01:10:58,100 --> 01:10:59,400
Y por cierto,

1689
01:10:59,740 --> 01:11:01,080
Uh, los derechistas también se meten en problemas.

1690
01:11:01,300 --> 01:11:03,480
Um, y hay ataques de la izquierda.

1691
01:11:03,560 --> 01:11:05,520
y tú también deberías tomártelos en serio.

1692
01:11:05,900 --> 01:11:08,080
Um, debería importarte cuando los republicanos entren

1693
01:11:08,080 --> 01:11:08,220
problema.

1694
01:11:08,500 --> 01:11:12,100
Debería importarle que California tenga una DEI,

1695
01:11:12,100 --> 01:11:15,680
un programa que requiere esto en los colegios comunitarios de California

1696
01:11:16,260 --> 01:11:20,260
tiene una política de programa DEI que en realidad requiere incluso

1697
01:11:20,260 --> 01:11:25,820
profesores de química para trabajar en diferentes ideas DEI desde la interseccionalidad hasta

1698
01:11:25,820 --> 01:11:27,900
antirracismo en sus aulas,

1699
01:11:28,040 --> 01:11:29,160
en su plan de estudios, etcétera.

1700
01:11:29,640 --> 01:11:30,240
Esto es un

1701
01:11:30,920 --> 01:11:32,580
grave violación de la libertad académica.

1702
01:11:33,160 --> 01:11:36,980
Es tan malo como decirles a los profesores lo que no pueden decir.

1703
01:11:37,060 --> 01:11:38,920
Como luchamos y derrotamos en Florida.

1704
01:11:39,340 --> 01:11:41,520
Es incluso peor decirles lo que deben decir.

1705
01:11:41,560 --> 01:11:42,880
Eso es francamente totalitario.

1706
01:11:43,360 --> 01:11:44,220
Y estamos demandando contra esto.

1707
01:11:44,400 --> 01:11:46,540
Y lo que soy, lo que estoy diciendo es

1708
01:11:47,060 --> 01:11:48,620
eso,

1709
01:11:49,400 --> 01:11:50,860
cuando despides a alguien por solo

1710
01:11:50,860 --> 01:11:51,500
estando del otro,

1711
01:11:51,500 --> 01:11:52,780
al otro lado de la valla política,

1712
01:11:53,540 --> 01:11:55,040
tu también eres una especie de

1713
01:11:55,040 --> 01:11:58,420
afirmando, afirmando que ninguno de estos casos importa tan bien.

1714
01:11:58,500 --> 01:12:04,390
Y quiero que la gente se preocupe por la censura, incluso cuando es contra personas que odian.

1715
01:12:05,800 --> 01:12:07,080
La censura es censura.

1716
01:12:08,710 --> 01:12:13,360
Si podemos tomar esa tangente brevemente con DEI,

1717
01:12:13,820 --> 01:12:15,040
diversidad, equidad e inclusión,

1718
01:12:16,540 --> 01:12:20,340
¿Cuál es el bien y el daño de tales programas?

1719
01:12:20,840 --> 01:12:23,340
DEI, conozco gente que es DEI, um,

1720
01:12:23,700 --> 01:12:24,740
consultores o algunos,

1721
01:12:25,400 --> 01:12:28,000
De hecho tengo un querido amigo al que quiero mucho.

1722
01:12:28,000 --> 01:12:29,240
Bueno, ¿quién hace DEI?

1723
01:12:30,180 --> 01:12:31,640
Gente absolutamente decente.

1724
01:12:32,280 --> 01:12:37,000
Lo que quieren hacer es crear vínculos de comprensión,

1725
01:12:37,520 --> 01:12:39,480
amistad, compasión entre la gente,

1726
01:12:39,580 --> 01:12:40,140
personas que son diferentes.

1727
01:12:40,950 --> 01:12:41,500
Desafortunadamente,

1728
01:12:41,920 --> 01:12:44,620
la investigación sobre lo que realmente hace gran parte de DEI

1729
01:12:45,200 --> 01:12:46,480
muchas veces es lo contrario de eso.

1730
01:12:46,900 --> 01:12:53,240
Y creo que es en parte un problema con parte de la ideología que proviene de una teoría racial crítica,

1731
01:12:53,800 --> 01:12:54,560
que es algo real,

1732
01:12:54,700 --> 01:12:57,280
por cierto, eso, eso informa mucho a DEI,

1733
01:12:57,300 --> 01:12:59,960
eso en realidad lo convierte en algo que tiene más probabilidades de dividir que de unir.

1734
01:13:00,320 --> 01:13:03,440
Hablamos de esto en mimos en los Estados Unidos.

1735
01:13:03,440 --> 01:13:08,920
mente como la diferencia entre la política de identidad común de la humanidad y la política de identidad del enemigo común.

1736
01:13:09,560 --> 01:13:10,380
Y creo que,

1737
01:13:10,760 --> 01:13:13,040
uh, conozco a algunas de las personas que conozco que,

1738
01:13:13,040 --> 01:13:17,520
quienes hacen DEI, realmente quieren que sea una política de identidad común para la humanidad,

1739
01:13:17,700 --> 01:13:18,960
pero algunos de los reales

1740
01:13:19,000 --> 01:13:25,300
Las suposiciones ideológicas incorporadas pueden en realidad hacer que las personas se sientan más alienadas unas de otras.

1741
01:13:26,060 --> 01:13:27,680
Ahora, cuando comencé en FIRE,

1742
01:13:28,020 --> 01:13:30,280
Mis primeros casos involucraron el 11 de septiembre.

1743
01:13:31,040 --> 01:13:32,660
Um, y fue malo.

1744
01:13:33,300 --> 01:13:34,620
Uh, los profesores estaban siendo atacados.

1745
01:13:34,800 --> 01:13:37,180
Los profesores estaban perdiendo sus trabajos por decir

1746
01:13:37,200 --> 01:13:40,420
cosas insensibles sobre el 11 de septiembre y ambos,

1747
01:13:40,420 --> 01:13:41,340
de derecha y de izquierda,

1748
01:13:41,420 --> 01:13:42,440
en realidad en ese caso,

1749
01:13:42,560 --> 01:13:44,580
De hecho, a veces más, mucho más desde la derecha.

1750
01:13:45,160 --> 01:13:46,200
Mmm, y

1751
01:13:46,840 --> 01:13:47,640
fue realmente malo.

1752
01:13:48,240 --> 01:13:50,160
Y unos cinco profesores perdieron sus puestos de trabajo.

1753
01:13:50,640 --> 01:13:51,480
Eso es malo.

1754
01:13:51,740 --> 01:13:54,000
Cinco profesores durante un período relativamente corto de

1755
01:13:54,000 --> 01:13:55,720
tiempo de ser despedido por una opinión política.

1756
01:13:56,200 --> 01:13:58,420
Eso es algo que, ya sabes, se escribiría.

1757
01:13:58,480 --> 01:13:59,780
en cualquier década anterior.

1758
01:14:00,800 --> 01:14:04,300
Ahora estamos evaluando cuántos profesores han sido atacados.

1759
01:14:04,520 --> 01:14:07,660
para cancelación entre 2014 y, uh,

1760
01:14:08,220 --> 01:14:09,060
mediados de este año,

1761
01:14:09,360 --> 01:14:11,600
Julio de, de, de 2023.

1762
01:14:12,320 --> 01:14:15,660
Estamos en más de mil intentos de conseguir profesores,

1763
01:14:16,140 --> 01:14:20,520
uh, despedido o castigado, generalmente impulsado por estudiantes y administradores,

1764
01:14:21,080 --> 01:14:23,100
Desafortunadamente, a menudo también son impulsados por profesores.

1765
01:14:23,960 --> 01:14:26,220
Alrededor de dos tercios de esos

1766
01:14:26,220 --> 01:14:28,880
resultar en que el profesor sea castigado de alguna manera.

1767
01:14:29,120 --> 01:14:34,180
Um, todo, desde, ya sabes, que se elimine su artículo hasta la suspensión, etcétera.

1768
01:14:35,080 --> 01:14:38,380
Alrededor de una quinta parte de ellos resultan en que los profesores sean

1769
01:14:38,740 --> 01:14:39,280
despedido.

1770
01:14:39,520 --> 01:14:40,240
Así que ahora estamos,

1771
01:14:40,300 --> 01:14:42,240
son casi 200, son alrededor de 190,

1772
01:14:42,540 --> 01:14:43,740
Um, profesores despedidos.

1773
01:14:44,260 --> 01:14:46,540
Um, entonces quiero dar algo de contexto aquí.

1774
01:14:47,300 --> 01:14:50,000
Generalmente se considera que el Terror Rojo fue,

1775
01:14:50,260 --> 01:14:52,240
Eh, de 1947 a 1957.

1776
01:14:52,460 --> 01:14:55,940
Por cierto, terminó en el 57 cuando finalmente quedó claro,

1777
01:14:55,940 --> 01:15:00,480
Um, gracias a la primera enmienda de que en realidad no se podía despedir a la gente por sus ideologías.

1778
01:15:00,620 --> 01:15:01,140
Antes de eso,

1779
01:15:02,120 --> 01:15:03,360
muchas universidades pensaron que podían hacerlo.

1780
01:15:03,600 --> 01:15:05,040
Dijeron, este tipo es muy doctor,

1781
01:15:05,300 --> 01:15:06,140
uh, comunista doctrinario.

1782
01:15:06,280 --> 01:15:07,920
Ya sabes, no se puede simplemente esperar.

1783
01:15:08,160 --> 01:15:09,280
Voy a despedirlos.

1784
01:15:09,680 --> 01:15:11,420
Pensaron que realmente podían hacer eso.

1785
01:15:12,180 --> 01:15:14,620
Um, y sólo era el año 57 cuando se estableció la ley.

1786
01:15:14,660 --> 01:15:18,040
Como ahora, esto está sucediendo en un ambiente donde la libertad de expresión,

1787
01:15:18,360 --> 01:15:20,380
la libertad académica está claramente protegida,

1788
01:15:20,700 --> 01:15:23,360
um, en universidades públicas de Estados Unidos.

1789
01:15:23,360 --> 01:15:24,880
Y todavía estamos viendo este tipo de números.

1790
01:15:25,740 --> 01:15:26,460
durante,

1791
01:15:26,880 --> 01:15:28,080
durante el susto rojo,

1792
01:15:28,400 --> 01:15:29,360
el mayor estudio que

1793
01:15:29,360 --> 01:15:32,840
Se hizo lo que estaba pasando. Creo que esto salió como en 55.

1794
01:15:33,420 --> 01:15:35,620
Y la evaluación fue

1795
01:15:35,640 --> 01:15:39,700
que hubo alrededor de 62 profesores despedidos,

1796
01:15:39,700 --> 01:15:42,300
por, por ser comunista y unos 90

1797
01:15:42,860 --> 01:15:45,840
algo que los profesores despidieron por opiniones políticas en general.

1798
01:15:46,720 --> 01:15:50,560
Um, eso suele ser así, se informa que son alrededor de 100.

1799
01:15:51,860 --> 01:15:53,500
Eh, entonces 60, 90,

1800
01:15:53,820 --> 01:15:55,160
100, según se mire,

1801
01:15:55,160 --> 01:15:56,880
Creo que el número es realmente mayor.

1802
01:15:57,280 --> 01:15:59,680
Um, pero eso es sólo en retrospectiva.

1803
01:15:59,800 --> 01:16:01,200
Como lo que quiero decir con retrospectiva

1804
01:16:01,200 --> 01:16:06,500
es que podemos mirar hacia atrás y encontrar que hubo más profesores a los que despidieron, como lo revela el tiempo,

1805
01:16:07,560 --> 01:16:10,300
Estamos en 190 profesores despedidos.

1806
01:16:10,300 --> 01:16:11,900
Y todavía tengo que aguantar que la gente diga

1807
01:16:11,900 --> 01:16:12,980
esto ni siquiera está sucediendo.

1808
01:16:13,000 --> 01:16:15,220
Y estoy como en los nueve años y medio de la cultura de la cancelación,

1809
01:16:15,680 --> 01:16:19,300
190 profesores despedidos en los 11 años de,

1810
01:16:19,300 --> 01:16:20,920
uh, del susto rojo,

1811
01:16:21,820 --> 01:16:24,440
probablemente, ya sabes, alrededor de cien, tal vez probablemente más

1812
01:16:25,000 --> 01:16:27,060
tiene, el número seguirá aumentando.

1813
01:16:27,400 --> 01:16:30,980
Um, pero a diferencia del Terror Rojo donde la gente podía decir claramente que algo estaba sucediendo,

1814
01:16:31,360 --> 01:16:33,980
Lo más loco de la cultura de la cancelación es que algunos todavía están lidiando con ella.

1815
01:16:33,980 --> 01:16:35,720
personas que dicen que esto no está sucediendo en absoluto.

1816
01:16:36,020 --> 01:16:38,300
Y no ha sido sutil en el campus.

1817
01:16:38,620 --> 01:16:39,820
Y sabemos que es un conteo muy por debajo de lo esperado,

1818
01:16:39,880 --> 01:16:42,120
Por cierto, porque cuando encuestamos a los profesores,

1819
01:16:43,160 --> 01:16:44,540
17% de ellos

1820
01:16:45,240 --> 01:16:47,600
dijeron que habían sido amenazados con, uh,

1821
01:16:48,160 --> 01:16:52,480
amenazados con una investigación o realmente investigados por lo que enseñaron, dijo,

1822
01:16:52,920 --> 01:16:53,720
o sus investigaciones.

1823
01:16:54,380 --> 01:17:00,620
Y un tercio de ellos dijo que los administradores les dijeron que no realizaran investigaciones controvertidas.

1824
01:17:01,300 --> 01:17:02,980
Así que extrapolando eso,

1825
01:17:02,980 --> 01:17:03,940
que es un número enorme.

1826
01:17:03,960 --> 01:17:10,920
Y la razón por la que no vas a oír hablar de muchos de estos casos es porque hay muchos mecanismos diferentes que inducen la conformidad en todo el asunto.

1827
01:17:11,140 --> 01:17:11,500
Sí.

1828
01:17:11,760 --> 01:17:15,060
Y esa es una de las razones por las que la idea de agregar algo como una D,

1829
01:17:15,220 --> 01:17:22,040
como exigir una declaración DEI para ser contratado o ingresar a una escuela en el entorno actual es completamente loco.

1830
01:17:22,740 --> 01:17:25,680
Hemos tenido una auténtica crisis de libertad académica en los últimos años,

1831
01:17:25,820 --> 01:17:28,740
ya sabes, particularmente desde 2017 en los campus,

1832
01:17:29,340 --> 01:17:31,740
Para empezar, tenemos una diversidad de puntos de vista muy baja.

1833
01:17:32,380 --> 01:17:34,180
Y en estas circunstancias,

1834
01:17:34,420 --> 01:17:35,660
administradores para empezar a decir,

1835
01:17:35,920 --> 01:17:36,640
¿Sabes cuál es el problema?

1836
01:17:36,860 --> 01:17:40,080
Tenemos demasiado pensamiento heterogéneo.

1837
01:17:40,280 --> 01:17:41,660
Lo hemos hecho, no somos lo suficientemente homogéneos.

1838
01:17:41,840 --> 01:17:46,040
En realidad necesitamos, ya sabes, necesitamos otra prueba de fuego política, lo cual es una locura.

1839
01:17:46,720 --> 01:17:49,000
Y eso es lo que efectivamente es una declaración DEI.

1840
01:17:49,140 --> 01:17:54,660
Porque no hay manera de completar una declaración DEI sin que alguien lo evalúe sobre su política.

1841
01:17:55,040 --> 01:17:55,640
Está muy claro.

1842
01:17:55,660 --> 01:17:56,380
Está muy claro.

1843
01:17:56,880 --> 01:17:59,800
Incluso hicimos un experimento con este Nate Honeycutt.

1844
01:18:00,720 --> 01:18:04,240
Consiguió que participaran algo así como 3000 profesores.

1845
01:18:04,840 --> 01:18:07,920
evaluar diferentes tipos de declaraciones DEI.

1846
01:18:08,720 --> 01:18:09,020
Eh,

1847
01:18:09,420 --> 01:18:14,260
y uno era básicamente como el tipo estándar de interseccionalidad de políticas de identidad,

1848
01:18:14,640 --> 01:18:17,200
uno trataba sobre la diversidad de puntos de vista.

1849
01:18:17,500 --> 01:18:21,560
Uno trataba sobre la diversidad religiosa y el otro sobre la diversidad socioeconómica.

1850
01:18:21,660 --> 01:18:23,320
Y en cuanto a donde realmente está mi corazón,

1851
01:18:23,640 --> 01:18:26,060
es que tenemos muy poca diversidad socioeconómica,

1852
01:18:26,300 --> 01:18:27,140
particularmente en la educación superior de élite,

1853
01:18:27,160 --> 01:18:29,000
pero también en el período educativo.

1854
01:18:30,040 --> 01:18:34,120
Entonces el experimento tuvo una gran participación,

1855
01:18:34,340 --> 01:18:35,400
realmente interesante.

1856
01:18:35,520 --> 01:18:39,180
Y trató de modelar la forma en que muchas de estas políticas DEI se implementaron realmente.

1857
01:18:39,900 --> 01:18:41,860
Y una de las formas en que se han implementado,

1858
01:18:41,960 --> 01:18:43,000
y creo que en algunos de los

1859
01:18:43,000 --> 01:18:48,480
Las escuelas de California son los administradores y revisan las declaraciones de la DEI antes.

1860
01:18:49,460 --> 01:18:53,220
Cualquiera más los mira y luego elimina a las personas de la cima, dependiendo de cómo,

1861
01:18:54,040 --> 01:18:56,920
cómo se sienten acerca de sus, um, declaraciones DEI

1862
01:18:57,500 --> 01:19:01,100
y el de, um, diversidad de puntos de vista.

1863
01:19:01,560 --> 01:19:04,120
Creo que la mitad de las personas que lo revisaron lo harían,

1864
01:19:04,380 --> 01:19:05,180
lo eliminaría de inmediato.

1865
01:19:06,060 --> 01:19:08,380
Um, y creo que fue básicamente lo mismo para la diversidad religiosa.

1866
01:19:09,460 --> 01:19:10,680
Fue un poco mejor

1867
01:19:10,860 --> 01:19:14,620
como el 40% para la diversidad socioeconómica,

1868
01:19:14,820 --> 01:19:15,880
pero eso me mata.

1869
01:19:15,960 --> 01:19:16,920
Me gusta la idea de que algo así como,

1870
01:19:16,960 --> 01:19:20,560
Sí, en realidad ese es el tipo de diversidad que creo que necesitamos mucho más.

1871
01:19:20,560 --> 01:19:21,280
en la educación superior.

1872
01:19:21,380 --> 01:19:24,200
Puedes estar de acuerdo con que no es hostil a los otros tipos,

1873
01:19:24,240 --> 01:19:24,940
por cierto.

1874
01:19:24,940 --> 01:19:27,880
Um, pero la idea de que necesitamos más gente de abajo,

1875
01:19:27,980 --> 01:19:30,820
ya sabes, tres cuartas partes de la sociedad estadounidense,

1876
01:19:30,960 --> 01:19:32,640
como en una educación superior,

1877
01:19:32,680 --> 01:19:33,560
Creo que debería ser algo que todos podamos solucionar.

1878
01:19:33,580 --> 01:19:37,000
Pero el único que realmente tuvo éxito fue el que,

1879
01:19:37,000 --> 01:19:38,460
que volvió a brotar exactamente

1880
01:19:38,460 --> 01:19:42,680
el tipo de ideología que pensaban que les gustaría a los traseros,

1881
01:19:43,080 --> 01:19:43,760
que es como, está bien,

1882
01:19:44,720 --> 01:19:46,560
No hay manera de que esto no pueda ser una prueba de fuego política.

1883
01:19:47,240 --> 01:19:52,100
Hemos demostrado que es una prueba de fuego política y todavía escuela tras escuela sigue sumando

1884
01:19:52,100 --> 01:19:57,100
esto a su proceso de solicitud para hacer que las escuelas sean aún más homogéneas ideológicamente.

1885
01:19:57,840 --> 01:19:58,560
¿Por qué eso tiene un efecto negativo?

1886
01:19:58,580 --> 01:20:00,180
¿Es porque

1887
01:20:01,180 --> 01:20:06,300
impone una especie de pensamiento grupal donde la gente tiene miedo,

1888
01:20:08,000 --> 01:20:11,800
Empezar a tener miedo de pensar y hablar.

1889
01:20:12,980 --> 01:20:13,540
libremente,

1890
01:20:14,280 --> 01:20:15,760
liberalmente sobre lo que sea.

1891
01:20:16,240 --> 01:20:20,200
Bueno, uno, selecciona a las personas que tienden a estar más a la izquierda,

1892
01:20:20,540 --> 01:20:22,160
um, en una situación en la que ya tienes,

1893
01:20:22,460 --> 01:20:26,160
uh, gente, una situación en la que las universidades se inclinan decididamente por eso

1894
01:20:26,180 --> 01:20:30,020
manera, pero también establece esencialmente un conjunto de ideas sagradas

1895
01:20:30,920 --> 01:20:33,740
que si te preguntan si,

1896
01:20:34,100 --> 01:20:35,980
ya sabes, lo que has hecho para avanzar

1897
01:20:36,540 --> 01:20:37,900
anti racismo,

1898
01:20:38,280 --> 01:20:39,380
um, herido, uh,

1899
01:20:39,680 --> 01:20:41,860
cómo has sido consciente de la interseccionalidad,

1900
01:20:42,480 --> 01:20:44,240
es poco probable que realmente entres.

1901
01:20:44,320 --> 01:20:44,740
Y si dijeras,

1902
01:20:44,820 --> 01:20:47,700
Por cierto, creo que estos son conceptos dudosos.

1903
01:20:47,980 --> 01:20:48,720
Creo que son delgados.

1904
01:20:48,980 --> 01:20:50,920
Creo que filosóficamente no son muy defendibles,

1905
01:20:51,160 --> 01:20:52,080
pero básicamente como si,

1906
01:20:52,120 --> 01:20:53,080
si tu posición fuera,

1907
01:20:53,700 --> 01:20:54,960
En realidad lo rechazo,

1908
01:20:55,220 --> 01:20:58,280
Um, estos conceptos son demasiado simples.

1909
01:20:59,220 --> 01:21:00,680
Um, no lo harás, no vas a entrar.

1910
01:21:01,060 --> 01:21:02,180
Y, y, y creo que,

1911
01:21:02,180 --> 01:21:03,320
um, la persona que yo

1912
01:21:03,320 --> 01:21:06,460
Siempre pienso que no sería un extremo de derecha el que diría,

1913
01:21:07,160 --> 01:21:07,780
vete al infierno.

1914
01:21:07,960 --> 01:21:10,660
Si tú, si le hiciste llenar una de estas cosas, es Feynman.

1915
01:21:11,420 --> 01:21:12,060
Siento que si tu,

1916
01:21:12,140 --> 01:21:14,720
Si le dieras una de estas cosas a Richard Feynman, él diría:

1917
01:21:15,240 --> 01:21:17,060
lo haría pedazos.

1918
01:21:18,360 --> 01:21:18,680
Sí.

1919
01:21:18,780 --> 01:21:19,400
Y no conseguir el trabajo.

1920
01:21:20,880 --> 01:21:24,940
Sí, hay algún elemento que crea esto.

1921
01:21:26,440 --> 01:21:28,220
Es difícil precisar el miedo.

1922
01:21:28,300 --> 01:21:29,560
Entonces dijiste como el despido,

1923
01:21:30,100 --> 01:21:33,440
Lo que quería decir es despedir a cien personas o 200 personas.

1924
01:21:33,940 --> 01:21:36,180
Se trata incluso de despedir a una persona,

1925
01:21:36,280 --> 01:21:37,260
Lo acabo de ver.

1926
01:21:37,280 --> 01:21:40,940
Puede crear este silencioso efecto dominó del miedo.

1927
01:21:40,980 --> 01:21:41,500
Oh por supuesto.

1928
01:21:41,960 --> 01:21:44,220
Ese único despido de una facultad.

1929
01:21:44,220 --> 01:21:44,840
Oh, absolutamente.

1930
01:21:45,120 --> 01:21:49,160
Tiene un efecto dominó en decenas de miles de personas,

1931
01:21:49,620 --> 01:21:50,300
de educadores,

1932
01:21:51,020 --> 01:21:52,500
de, de, eh, quién está contratado,

1933
01:21:52,880 --> 01:21:55,020
qué tipo de conversaciones se están teniendo, teniendo,

1934
01:21:55,380 --> 01:21:56,920
qué tipo de libros de texto se eligen,

1935
01:21:57,440 --> 01:22:00,340
qué tipo de autocensura y diferentes variantes está ocurriendo.

1936
01:22:00,900 --> 01:22:01,840
Es difícil medir eso.

1937
01:22:02,420 --> 01:22:02,540
Sí.

1938
01:22:02,540 --> 01:22:04,920
Quiero decir, cuando les preguntas a los profesores sobre,

1939
01:22:05,280 --> 01:22:07,960
Ya sabes, ¿se sienten intimidados por el entorno actual?

1940
01:22:08,460 --> 01:22:11,080
Um, la respuesta es sí.

1941
01:22:11,080 --> 01:22:12,640
Y profesores particularmente conservadores,

1942
01:22:12,640 --> 01:22:14,180
ya sabes, ya sabes,

1943
01:22:14,940 --> 01:22:15,700
informando que son,

1944
01:22:16,460 --> 01:22:18,220
ya sabes, temerosos por sus trabajos en muchos casos diferentes.

1945
01:22:18,740 --> 01:22:20,500
Tienes muchas buenas estadísticas en el libro,

1946
01:22:20,640 --> 01:22:21,720
cosas como la autocensura.

1947
01:22:22,460 --> 01:22:24,980
Cuando se le proporcionó la definición de autocensura,

1948
01:22:25,040 --> 01:22:27,260
al menos una cuarta parte de los estudiantes dijeron que se autocensuran

1949
01:22:27,260 --> 01:22:30,160
bastante a menudo o muy a menudo durante conversaciones con otros estudiantes,

1950
01:22:30,540 --> 01:22:32,780
con profesores y durante discusiones en el aula,

1951
01:22:33,680 --> 01:22:36,880
25%, 27% y 28% respectivamente.

1952
01:22:37,620 --> 01:22:39,680
Uh, una cuarta parte de los estudiantes también dijeron que están

1953
01:22:39,700 --> 01:22:42,160
Es más probable que ahora se autocensuren en el campus.

1954
01:22:43,080 --> 01:22:46,240
uh, en el momento en que fueron encuestados, entonces

1955
01:22:46,240 --> 01:22:47,720
eran cuando comenzaron la universidad.

1956
01:22:48,300 --> 01:22:51,720
Entonces, las universidades inculcan esta idea de,

1957
01:22:52,020 --> 01:22:54,280
de, de censura, de autocensura.

1958
01:22:54,320 --> 01:22:55,740
Y volvamos a la comparación de Red Scare,

1959
01:22:55,960 --> 01:22:57,460
y esta es una de las cosas interesantes sobre

1960
01:22:57,460 --> 01:22:58,240
los datos también,

1961
01:22:58,900 --> 01:22:59,220
es eso

1962
01:22:59,740 --> 01:23:01,340
ese mismo estudio del que estaba hablando,

1963
01:23:01,340 --> 01:23:03,360
el estudio más completo sobre el susto rojo,

1964
01:23:03,500 --> 01:23:06,140
hubo encuestas sobre si los profesores eran o no

1965
01:23:06,160 --> 01:23:08,600
Autocensura por miedo al medio ambiente.

1966
01:23:09,480 --> 01:23:12,620
Y el 9% de los profesores dijo que se autocensuraban

1967
01:23:12,760 --> 01:23:14,360
su investigación y que lo que decían,

1968
01:23:15,380 --> 01:23:16,580
El 9% es realmente malo.

1969
01:23:17,820 --> 01:23:20,780
Um, eso es casi una décima parte de los profesores que dicen que en realidad eran,

1970
01:23:20,840 --> 01:23:22,140
su discurso fue helado.

1971
01:23:23,080 --> 01:23:23,780
cuando hicimos esto

1972
01:23:23,780 --> 01:23:27,340
pregunta para profesores en nuestra última encuesta de profesores,

1973
01:23:28,000 --> 01:23:29,900
um, cuando se factorizan juntos, si son,

1974
01:23:30,320 --> 01:23:33,200
Les preguntamos si se autocensuran en sus investigaciones o en clase.

1975
01:23:33,380 --> 01:23:34,720
se están autocensurando en línea,

1976
01:23:34,880 --> 01:23:37,680
etcétera, fue el 90% de los profesores.

1977
01:23:38,280 --> 01:23:41,920
Entonces, la idea de que estamos en un entorno histórico,

1978
01:23:42,220 --> 01:23:45,060
um, en términos de cuán asustada está la gente en realidad

1979
01:23:45,780 --> 01:23:46,980
expresar opiniones controvertidas.

1980
01:23:47,240 --> 01:23:48,000
Creo que es,

1981
01:23:48,580 --> 01:23:50,760
es la razón por la que realmente vamos a estudiar esto

1982
01:23:51,400 --> 01:23:54,700
dentro de 50 años, la misma, la misma forma en que estudiaremos el Terror Rojo.

1983
01:23:54,780 --> 01:23:57,860
Um, no es la idea de que esto no esté sucediendo es,

1984
01:23:57,860 --> 01:24:00,100
simplemente será visto correctamente como una locura.

1985
01:24:00,560 --> 01:24:01,760
Entonces tal vez podamos simplemente,

1986
01:24:01,760 --> 01:24:06,060
uh, discutir la inclinación actual de la academia hacia la izquierda,

1987
01:24:06,480 --> 01:24:08,780
que usted describe en varias perspectivas diferentes.

1988
01:24:09,080 --> 01:24:10,940
Entonces, hay un registro de votantes.

1989
01:24:11,050 --> 01:24:13,880
tabla de ratios que tienes por departamento,

1990
01:24:13,920 --> 01:24:14,900
lo cual creo que es interesante.

1991
01:24:15,740 --> 01:24:16,500
Puede explicar esto

1992
01:24:16,500 --> 01:24:18,460
gráfico y ¿puedes explicar lo que muestra?

1993
01:24:19,020 --> 01:24:20,980
Sí, cuando comencé a disparar en 2001,

1994
01:24:20,980 --> 01:24:24,740
No tomé tan en serio el tema de la diversidad de puntos de vista.

1995
01:24:24,760 --> 01:24:26,860
Pensé que era algo de lo que se quejaban los derechistas.

1996
01:24:27,980 --> 01:24:29,180
Um, pero realmente comencé a tener

1997
01:24:29,800 --> 01:24:33,360
¿Qué sucede cuando tienes una comunidad con niveles bajos?

1998
01:24:34,620 --> 01:24:36,180
con baja diversidad de puntos de vista.

1999
01:24:36,680 --> 01:24:39,720
Y, de hecho, gran parte de la investigación que más me interesó fue,

2000
01:24:39,720 --> 01:24:43,320
uh, hecho en conjunto con el gran Cass Sunstein,

2001
01:24:43,540 --> 01:24:46,300
um, que escribe mucho sobre la polarización grupal.

2002
01:24:46,300 --> 01:24:49,580
Um, porque como, uh, y la investigación sobre esto es muy sólida,

2003
01:24:49,900 --> 01:24:52,700
pero esencialmente cuando tienes grupos con, um,

2004
01:24:53,580 --> 01:24:56,220
diversidad política, y esto se puede ver en los jueces, por ejemplo,

2005
01:24:56,740 --> 01:25:00,480
tiende a producir, ya sabes, resultados confiablemente más moderados.

2006
01:25:00,940 --> 01:25:02,400
Um, mientras que los grupos que son,

2007
01:25:02,400 --> 01:25:05,180
que tienen poca diversidad política tienden a caer en una especie de espiral,

2008
01:25:05,340 --> 01:25:07,020
giran en espiral en su propia dirección.

2009
01:25:07,600 --> 01:25:11,840
Y cuando tienes una gran mayoría de personas desde una sola perspectiva política,

2010
01:25:12,160 --> 01:25:13,820
eso es un problema para la producción de ideas.

2011
01:25:14,040 --> 01:25:16,140
Crea una situación en la que hay ideas sagradas.

2012
01:25:16,900 --> 01:25:18,840
Um, y cuando miras algunos de los departamentos,

2013
01:25:18,840 --> 01:25:21,660
um, ya sabes, creo que la S es la

2014
01:25:21,660 --> 01:25:23,500
La estimación del Crimson es que Harvard es,

2015
01:25:23,500 --> 01:25:24,880
Tiene un 3% de conservadores.

2016
01:25:25,460 --> 01:25:25,960
Pero cuando miras

2017
01:25:26,160 --> 01:25:29,920
En diferentes departamentos, hay departamentos de élite que literalmente no tienen, um,

2018
01:25:30,380 --> 01:25:31,700
uh, conservadores, uh, en ellos.

2019
01:25:31,720 --> 01:25:32,220
Y creo que eso es,

2020
01:25:32,580 --> 01:25:35,340
eso es en un ambiente intelectual saludable.

2021
01:25:35,720 --> 01:25:37,360
El problema es definitivamente peor.

2022
01:25:37,980 --> 01:25:39,100
Um, a medida que te vuelves más elitista,

2023
01:25:39,280 --> 01:25:41,160
uh, definitivamente vemos más casos de,

2024
01:25:41,760 --> 01:25:44,480
uh, profesores zurdos cancelados en escuelas menos elitistas.

2025
01:25:44,680 --> 01:25:45,920
Se pone peor cuando tú,

2026
01:25:45,920 --> 01:25:47,320
mientras bajas del,

2027
01:25:47,320 --> 01:25:51,500
Las escuelas de élite, ahí es donde gran parte del tercio de los intentos de obtener, uh,

2028
01:25:51,860 --> 01:25:53,480
profesores castigados que tienen éxito,

2029
01:25:53,820 --> 01:25:55,520
ya sabes, vienes de la derecha y en gran medida

2030
01:25:55,580 --> 01:25:56,640
desde fuera del campus, eh,

2031
01:25:57,460 --> 01:25:58,460
fuentes fuera del campus.

2032
01:25:58,480 --> 01:26:01,400
Y también dedicamos mucho tiempo a hablar de eso en el libro.

2033
01:26:01,990 --> 01:26:03,990
Um, es algo que creo que está subestimado.

2034
01:26:04,980 --> 01:26:06,320
Uh, pero cuando se trata de lo más bajo,

2035
01:26:06,320 --> 01:26:10,580
baja diversidad de puntos de vista, es, ya sabes, funciona más o menos como esperarías hasta cierto punto,

2036
01:26:10,960 --> 01:26:12,920
ya sabes, la economía es lo que cuatro

2037
01:26:12,920 --> 01:26:14,180
a uno o algo así.

2038
01:26:14,480 --> 01:26:15,260
No es tan malo.

2039
01:26:15,540 --> 01:26:17,920
Um, pero luego, cuando empiezas a adentrarte en algunas humanidades,

2040
01:26:18,220 --> 01:26:21,040
ya sabes, como si hubiera departamentos que literalmente no son ninguno.

2041
01:26:22,200 --> 01:26:23,760
¿Hay un buen por qué?

2042
01:26:24,700 --> 01:26:29,300
¿Por qué la administración de la facultad universitaria de la universidad se movió hacia la izquierda?

2043
01:26:29,760 --> 01:26:30,140
Sí,

2044
01:26:30,960 --> 01:26:34,820
No me encanta, y este es un argumento con el que a veces te toparás en la izquierda,

2045
01:26:35,140 --> 01:26:36,580
uh, solo el argumento de que,

2046
01:26:36,840 --> 01:26:38,340
Bueno, la gente de izquierda es simplemente más inteligente.

2047
01:26:38,580 --> 01:26:39,040
Bien.

2048
01:26:39,300 --> 01:26:43,000
Y es como, está bien, es interesante porque al menos la investigación hasta el momento

2049
01:26:43,980 --> 01:26:47,560
Hace 10 años indicaba que si profundizas un poco más en eso,

2050
01:26:47,700 --> 01:26:50,640
Mucha gente que se considera de izquierda tiende a ser un poco más.

2051
01:26:51,610 --> 01:26:52,160
libertario,

2052
01:26:53,040 --> 01:26:55,040
la canción que Pinker, eh, ya sabes,

2053
01:26:55,480 --> 01:26:58,520
Escribí bastante sobre la idea de que simplemente somos más inteligentes.

2054
01:26:59,440 --> 01:27:01,720
No lo es, no es una opinión.

2055
01:27:02,080 --> 01:27:04,260
Yo, al menos me siento un poco cómodo con,

2056
01:27:04,540 --> 01:27:05,600
Um, creo que,

2057
01:27:05,600 --> 01:27:07,740
eso, uh, eso, que los departamentos asumen,

2058
01:27:08,040 --> 01:27:10,300
um, impulso cuando se convierten en un lugar

2059
01:27:10,370 --> 01:27:14,120
donde dices, vaya, sería muy desagradable para mí trabajar en este departamento.

2060
01:27:14,220 --> 01:27:15,660
Si soy el conservador simbólico.

2061
01:27:15,680 --> 01:27:17,460
Y creo que eso cobra vida propia.

2062
01:27:17,860 --> 01:27:18,820
También hay departamentos

2063
01:27:19,240 --> 01:27:22,920
donde muchas de las ideologías son explícitamente

2064
01:27:23,680 --> 01:27:24,520
izquierdista.

2065
01:27:25,140 --> 01:27:26,420
Um, si miras las escuelas de educación,

2066
01:27:26,680 --> 01:27:27,340
muchos de ellos,

2067
01:27:27,400 --> 01:27:31,560
muchas de las cosas que en realidad sobran de lo que correctamente se llama crítica

2068
01:27:31,560 --> 01:27:33,500
Las teorías raciales están presentes.

2069
01:27:33,580 --> 01:27:36,060
Y terminas teniendo eso en varios departamentos.

2070
01:27:36,380 --> 01:27:37,120
Eh,

2071
01:27:37,580 --> 01:27:40,240
y sería muy extraño ser un,

2072
01:27:40,780 --> 01:27:43,460
en muchos departamentos, ya sabes, un trabajador social conservador

2073
01:27:43,560 --> 01:27:44,000
profesor.

2074
01:27:44,180 --> 01:27:45,060
Estoy seguro de que existen.

2075
01:27:45,300 --> 01:27:45,440
Eh,

2076
01:27:46,020 --> 01:27:46,160
pero

2077
01:27:47,120 --> 01:27:50,600
Si lo haces, hay mucha presión para que te calles.

2078
01:27:51,360 --> 01:27:53,880
Entonces el proceso a la izquierda de la cancelación,

2079
01:27:53,880 --> 01:27:57,000
como empezaste a hablar con la fortaleza retórica perfecta,

2080
01:27:57,580 --> 01:27:59,220
el primer paso es

2081
01:28:00,300 --> 01:28:01,360
despedir a una persona.

2082
01:28:01,440 --> 01:28:02,480
Si son justos, si puedes.

2083
01:28:03,060 --> 01:28:05,140
ponerles una etiqueta de conservadores,

2084
01:28:05,540 --> 01:28:06,780
puedes descartarlos de esa manera.

2085
01:28:06,880 --> 01:28:13,060
¿Qué, qué otros despidos eficientes o qué otros efectivos hay?

2086
01:28:13,260 --> 01:28:15,300
Nos divertimos un poco con

2087
01:28:15,300 --> 01:28:18,460
uh, uh, con números demográficos, pero lo analizo por altura.

2088
01:28:18,760 --> 01:28:20,980
Um, uh, y recuerdo que él dijo algo así como,

2089
01:28:20,980 --> 01:28:22,320
No, no, no incluyo el real

2090
01:28:22,360 --> 01:28:22,660
porcentaje.

2091
01:28:22,740 --> 01:28:24,620
Yo digo, no, necesitamos incluir los porcentajes reales.

2092
01:28:24,720 --> 01:28:26,480
Porque la gente es realmente mala.

2093
01:28:26,620 --> 01:28:32,200
a estimar cómo se ve realmente la demografía de Estados Unidos tanto para la derecha como para la izquierda de diferentes maneras.

2094
01:28:32,840 --> 01:28:35,340
Um, entonces lo ponemos en números y hablamos de,

2095
01:28:35,340 --> 01:28:38,900
ya sabes, ser despedido por ser blanco o ser despedido por,

2096
01:28:38,900 --> 01:28:41,780
uh, ser heterosexual o ser despedido por ser hombre.

2097
01:28:42,380 --> 01:28:45,260
Um, y nosotros, uh, y ya puedes descartar a la gente por ser conservadora.

2098
01:28:45,580 --> 01:28:48,480
Y nosotros, entonces, nosotros, damos ejemplos en el libro de,

2099
01:28:48,480 --> 01:28:52,640
de estos se utilizan para despedir a personas y muchas veces sobre temas no relacionados

2100
01:28:52,760 --> 01:28:55,120
al hecho de que son hombres o si son minoría o no.

2101
01:28:55,500 --> 01:28:56,260
Y luego llegamos a,

2102
01:28:56,360 --> 01:28:58,240
Creo que es como la capa seis y pensamos,

2103
01:28:58,540 --> 01:28:59,280
sorpresa, ¿adivinen qué?

2104
01:28:59,680 --> 01:29:01,900
Estás por debajo del 0,4% de la población y

2105
01:29:01,900 --> 01:29:02,660
nada de eso importó.

2106
01:29:02,740 --> 01:29:04,100
Porque si tienes una opinión equivocada,

2107
01:29:04,300 --> 01:29:06,660
incluso si estás en ese 0,4% de la

2108
01:29:06,680 --> 01:29:09,380
la persona más interseccional que jamás haya existido y tienes una opinión equivocada,

2109
01:29:09,700 --> 01:29:12,680
Eres un hereje y probablemente serás odiado aún más.

2110
01:29:13,360 --> 01:29:15,440
Y la parte más interesante del

2111
01:29:15,440 --> 01:29:19,960
La investigación que hicimos para esto fue simplemente preguntar a todos los destacados,

2112
01:29:20,260 --> 01:29:22,560
uh, negro conservador y moderado

2113
01:29:22,640 --> 01:29:24,100
que conocimos personalmente,

2114
01:29:24,700 --> 01:29:26,340
¿Te han dicho que en realidad no eres

2115
01:29:26,900 --> 01:29:28,580
negro por una opinión que tuviste

2116
01:29:29,160 --> 01:29:31,000
cada uno de ellos era como,

2117
01:29:31,000 --> 01:29:31,900
oh sí, no.

2118
01:29:31,960 --> 01:29:32,740
Y es un poco gracioso porque

2119
01:29:32,980 --> 01:29:34,920
es como a menudo los zurdos blancos

2120
01:29:35,460 --> 01:29:36,400
decirles que eso es como,

2121
01:29:36,400 --> 01:29:37,540
oh ¿te consideras negro?

2122
01:29:37,840 --> 01:29:39,820
John McWhorter habló de tener un reportero.

2123
01:29:39,820 --> 01:29:41,440
Um, cuando habló de,

2124
01:29:41,500 --> 01:29:42,340
cuando demostró que él

2125
01:29:42,340 --> 01:29:43,300
disentido de algunos de,

2126
01:29:43,740 --> 01:29:48,020
uh, lo que describió como algo así como despertar el racismo en su libro, despertar ideas,

2127
01:29:48,540 --> 01:29:49,420
el reportero en realidad dice,

2128
01:29:49,500 --> 01:29:50,680
¿Entonces te consideras negro?

2129
01:29:50,980 --> 01:29:51,380
Él es como,

2130
01:29:51,780 --> 01:29:53,160
él estaba como, ¿qué estás loco?

2131
01:29:53,180 --> 01:29:53,880
Por supuesto que sí.

2132
01:29:54,160 --> 01:29:56,720
Y Coleman Hughes tenía una de las mejores citas al respecto.

2133
01:29:56,840 --> 01:29:57,080
Él dijo,

2134
01:29:57,960 --> 01:30:00,780
Constantemente me dicen que lo más importante,

2135
01:30:00,780 --> 01:30:03,300
uh, a lo legítimo que es mi opinión,

2136
01:30:03,740 --> 01:30:04,100
es si,

2137
01:30:04,580 --> 01:30:05,460
uh, sea o no negro,

2138
01:30:05,980 --> 01:30:07,800
pero luego, cuando tengo una opinión disidente,

2139
01:30:07,960 --> 01:30:09,500
Me dicen que no soy realmente negro.

2140
01:30:10,260 --> 01:30:11,260
Tan perfecto.

2141
01:30:11,820 --> 01:30:14,320
Como si no hubiera manera de falsificar, uh,

2142
01:30:14,640 --> 01:30:15,220
este argumento.

2143
01:30:15,680 --> 01:30:19,800
Um, esa realmente, esa investigación realmente, realmente me impactó.

2144
01:30:19,900 --> 01:30:23,100
Entonces, y usted expone muy bien en el libro que existe este proceso de decir:

2145
01:30:23,480 --> 01:30:24,320
¿eres conservador?

2146
01:30:24,400 --> 01:30:24,800
Sí.

2147
01:30:24,820 --> 01:30:26,940
Puedes despedir a la persona.

2148
01:30:27,580 --> 01:30:28,660
¿Eres blanco?

2149
01:30:28,920 --> 01:30:29,680
Despedir a la persona.

2150
01:30:29,820 --> 01:30:30,460
¿Es usted varón?

2151
01:30:30,540 --> 01:30:31,560
Puedes despedir a la persona.

2152
01:30:31,660 --> 01:30:34,780
Existen estas categorías que te lo ponen más fácil.

2153
01:30:35,360 --> 01:30:36,080
despedir

2154
01:30:36,620 --> 01:30:37,880
las ideas de una persona basadas en eso.

2155
01:30:37,980 --> 01:30:38,500
Y como dijiste,

2156
01:30:38,500 --> 01:30:40,800
terminas en ese pequeño porcentaje y aún puedes despedirte.

2157
01:30:41,040 --> 01:30:41,960
Y no se trata sólo de despedir.

2158
01:30:42,200 --> 01:30:43,560
Yo, nosotros, hablamos de esto desde un,

2159
01:30:43,860 --> 01:30:45,520
desde un punto de vista práctico, la forma

2160
01:30:46,040 --> 01:30:49,120
las limitaciones de la realidad y una de ellas es el tiempo.

2161
01:30:49,440 --> 01:30:51,420
Um, y mucha cultura de cancelación,

2162
01:30:51,560 --> 01:30:54,200
um, como, como, uh, como normas culturales,

2163
01:30:54,620 --> 01:30:55,720
como esta forma de ganar

2164
01:30:55,720 --> 01:30:58,320
Discutir sin ganar es quedarse sin tiempo.

2165
01:30:58,880 --> 01:30:59,440
Porque para el momento

2166
01:30:59,440 --> 01:31:01,380
llegas al fondo del,

2167
01:31:01,380 --> 01:31:02,700
uh, uh, de la,

2168
01:31:03,020 --> 01:31:04,280
o incluso dar un par de pasos

2169
01:31:04,280 --> 01:31:06,180
en la fortaleza récord perfecta y,

2170
01:31:06,340 --> 01:31:07,440
ya sabes, ¿dónde se ha ido el tiempo?

2171
01:31:07,560 --> 01:31:08,100
Ya sabes, como

2172
01:31:08,690 --> 01:31:11,460
Eres, eres, probablemente simplemente te rindas,

2173
01:31:11,840 --> 01:31:15,840
uh, tratando de, uh, ya sabes, tratando de tener la discusión y nunca llegas a la discusión en primer lugar.

2174
01:31:16,040 --> 01:31:19,280
Todas estas cosas son bastante pegajosas en las redes sociales.

2175
01:31:19,400 --> 01:31:22,000
Las redes sociales prácticamente inventaron la fortaleza retórica perfecta.

2176
01:31:22,480 --> 01:31:25,520
Para que cada una de esas etapas tenga una viralidad.

2177
01:31:25,940 --> 01:31:28,840
Entonces podría, podría mantenerse y luego podría entusiasmar mucho a la gente.

2178
01:31:29,160 --> 01:31:31,270
Te permite sentir indignación y superioridad.

2179
01:31:31,580 --> 01:31:31,880
Sí.

2180
01:31:31,980 --> 01:31:35,900
Por eso, eso a la escala de la viralidad te permite nunca llegar al

2181
01:31:35,920 --> 01:31:37,360
discusión real del punto.

2182
01:31:37,780 --> 01:31:40,000
Um, entonces, pero ya sabes, no es sólo la izquierda,

2183
01:31:40,060 --> 01:31:43,100
es el derecho, también, por lo que la eficiente fortaleza retórica,

2184
01:31:43,880 --> 01:31:44,220
oh,

2185
01:31:44,620 --> 01:31:46,860
entonces hay algo de qué enorgullecerse en la derecha.

2186
01:31:46,980 --> 01:31:47,740
Es más eficiente.

2187
01:31:49,760 --> 01:31:53,580
Así que no es necesario escuchar a los liberales y cualquiera podría ser etiquetado como liberal si

2188
01:31:53,580 --> 01:31:54,820
tienen una opinión equivocada.

2189
01:31:55,740 --> 01:31:59,020
He visto liberales, izquierdistas e izquierdistas utilizados como,

2190
01:31:59,060 --> 01:32:00,280
del mismo modo.

2191
01:32:00,660 --> 01:32:02,240
Eso es una tontería de izquierda.

2192
01:32:02,660 --> 01:32:04,400
No es necesario escuchar a los expertos,

2193
01:32:05,540 --> 01:32:08,220
Incluso los expertos conservadores, si tienen una opinión equivocada,

2194
01:32:08,820 --> 01:32:10,360
no tienes que escuchar a los periodistas,

2195
01:32:10,480 --> 01:32:15,380
Incluso los periodistas conservadores, si tienen una opinión equivocada y entre el ala MAGA,

2196
01:32:15,900 --> 01:32:17,080
hay una cuarta proposición,

2197
01:32:17,740 --> 01:32:18,820
hay una disposición cuarta.

2198
01:32:19,240 --> 01:32:22,260
No es necesario escuchar a nadie que no sea pro Trump.

2199
01:32:22,820 --> 01:32:25,500
Sí. Y lo llamamos eficiente porque elimina

2200
01:32:26,280 --> 01:32:27,400
mucha gente probablemente

2201
01:32:27,400 --> 01:32:28,720
deberías escuchar al menos algunas veces,

2202
01:32:28,720 --> 01:32:31,300
Ya sabes, como señalamos a veces, como cancelar

2203
01:32:31,300 --> 01:32:33,320
la cultura puede interferir con la fe y la experiencia.

2204
01:32:33,800 --> 01:32:36,960
Entonces empezamos a sospechar un poco de los expertos,

2205
01:32:37,440 --> 01:32:38,280
pero al mismo tiempo,

2206
01:32:38,280 --> 01:32:40,320
si sigues eso y lo sigues mecánicamente,

2207
01:32:40,320 --> 01:32:45,800
Y definitivamente, ya sabes, creo que todos en los EE. UU. probablemente tengan algún tío mayor,

2208
01:32:45,920 --> 01:32:48,340
um, uh, quién ejercita algunos de estos.

2209
01:32:49,140 --> 01:32:51,980
Es una forma realmente eficiente de,

2210
01:32:52,320 --> 01:32:55,080
así que debes aislarte del resto del mundo y descartar,

2211
01:32:55,080 --> 01:32:57,980
ya sabes, al menos algunas personas a las que realmente deberías escuchar.

2212
01:32:58,360 --> 01:32:59,340
La forma en que lo presentaste,

2213
01:32:59,460 --> 01:33:00,660
Me hizo darme cuenta de que simplemente

2214
01:33:01,500 --> 01:33:03,220
ocupan gran parte de nuestro poder cerebral.

2215
01:33:03,820 --> 01:33:04,940
Estas cosas,

2216
01:33:05,280 --> 01:33:06,260
es literalmente el momento.

2217
01:33:06,340 --> 01:33:07,460
Podríamos estar resolviendo cosas.

2218
01:33:07,640 --> 01:33:08,360
Y te pones como,

2219
01:33:08,500 --> 01:33:12,860
te agotas a través de este proceso de estar indignado basado en

2220
01:33:12,860 --> 01:33:14,600
en estas etiquetas y nunca llegas a hacerlo,

2221
01:33:15,580 --> 01:33:17,420
casi no hay suficiente tiempo para la empatía,

2222
01:33:17,820 --> 01:33:19,200
por como mirar a una persona pensando,

2223
01:33:19,400 --> 01:33:20,220
bueno, tal vez tengan razón.

2224
01:33:20,400 --> 01:33:23,460
Porque estás muy ocupado categorizándolos.

2225
01:33:24,280 --> 01:33:25,220
¿Qué tiene de divertido la empatía?

2226
01:33:25,660 --> 01:33:27,640
Y quiero decir, lo que es tan interesante de esto es que

2227
01:33:28,440 --> 01:33:32,260
tanta energía social parece gastarse en estos

2228
01:33:33,100 --> 01:33:36,600
desagradables deseos primarios donde esencialmente mucho de eso es como,

2229
01:33:36,680 --> 01:33:38,140
Por favor dime a quién puedo odiar.

2230
01:33:39,100 --> 01:33:41,500
¿Dónde puedo ser legítimamente cruel?

2231
01:33:41,680 --> 01:33:42,600
¿Dónde puedo realmente

2232
01:33:42,600 --> 01:33:44,780
¿Ejercer alguna agresión contra alguien?

2233
01:33:45,400 --> 01:33:49,780
Um, y a veces parece estar simplemente encontrando nuevas justificaciones para eso.

2234
01:33:50,300 --> 01:33:51,260
Y es comprensible,

2235
01:33:51,260 --> 01:33:55,060
ya sabes, falla humana, uh, eso a veces puede ser

2236
01:33:55,080 --> 01:33:56,720
utilizado para defender la justicia.

2237
01:33:57,000 --> 01:33:59,440
Pero repito, nunca te acercará a la verdad.

2238
01:34:00,500 --> 01:34:04,840
Uh, un caso interesante que cubre sobre experiencia es el de COVID.

2239
01:34:05,000 --> 01:34:05,360
Sí.

2240
01:34:05,700 --> 01:34:09,260
Entonces, ¿cómo entró en juego la cultura de la cancelación en el tema de COVID?

2241
01:34:10,020 --> 01:34:17,640
Sí, creo que COVID fue un gran golpe para la fe y la experiencia de las personas y la cultura de la cancelación jugó un papel importante en eso.

2242
01:34:18,420 --> 01:34:21,700
Um, creo que uno de los mejores ejemplos de esto es Jennifer Say en Levi's.

2243
01:34:21,960 --> 01:34:24,580
Ella es una mujer encantadora.

2244
01:34:24,840 --> 01:34:27,740
Ella era vicepresidenta de Levi's.

2245
01:34:27,740 --> 01:34:29,460
Uh, ella habló de realmente potencialmente

2246
01:34:29,480 --> 01:34:31,160
ser el presidente de los jeans Levi's.

2247
01:34:32,200 --> 01:34:35,440
Y ella era una gran defensora de los niños.

2248
01:34:36,060 --> 01:34:36,980
Y cuando empezaron

2249
01:34:36,980 --> 01:34:38,020
cerrando las escuelas,

2250
01:34:38,680 --> 01:34:39,640
ella empezó a decir,

2251
01:34:40,000 --> 01:34:41,620
esto va a ser un desastre.

2252
01:34:41,760 --> 01:34:42,780
Esto va a doler,

2253
01:34:43,490 --> 01:34:45,980
uh, los niños pobres y desfavorecidos son los que más.

2254
01:34:46,700 --> 01:34:50,520
Um, tenemos que encontrar una manera de volver a abrir las escuelas.

2255
01:34:50,880 --> 01:34:53,120
Y ese era un punto de vista tan herético.

2256
01:34:53,680 --> 01:34:55,380
Y el tipo típico de cultura de cancelación,

2257
01:34:55,930 --> 01:35:00,360
uh, Wave se hizo cargo porque tenía todo tipo de peticiones para que la despidieran y que ella

2258
01:35:00,360 --> 01:35:02,060
Necesitaba disculparme y todo ese tipo de cosas.

2259
01:35:02,700 --> 01:35:03,660
Y,

2260
01:35:04,040 --> 01:35:07,000
Ya sabes, le ofrecieron, creo que una indemnización de un millón de dólares.

2261
01:35:07,040 --> 01:35:09,520
que ella no aceptaría porque quería decirle al mundo

2262
01:35:09,520 --> 01:35:10,960
lo que ella pensaba sobre esto y,

2263
01:35:10,960 --> 01:35:13,100
y que ella quería seguir diciendo,

2264
01:35:13,100 --> 01:35:15,860
um, que ella no había cambiado de opinión,

2265
01:35:15,980 --> 01:35:17,840
que esto fue un desastre para los jóvenes.

2266
01:35:18,200 --> 01:35:20,180
Y ahora esa es una especie de

2267
01:35:20,200 --> 01:35:22,780
la sabiduría convencional y la investigación son bonitas,

2268
01:35:22,820 --> 01:35:25,600
está bastante claro que esto fue devastador

2269
01:35:26,300 --> 01:35:28,660
a jóvenes especialmente desfavorecidos.

2270
01:35:28,720 --> 01:35:30,200
Como la gente entiende esto como

2271
01:35:30,200 --> 01:35:32,000
estando bien, probablemente tenía razón.

2272
01:35:32,400 --> 01:35:33,080
Pero uno de ellos,

2273
01:35:33,080 --> 01:35:34,420
uno de los aspectos realmente tristes

2274
01:35:34,420 --> 01:35:40,260
de la cultura de la cancelación es que la gente olvida por qué te cancelaron y simplemente saben que te odian.

2275
01:35:40,660 --> 01:35:42,620
Um, hay una especie de persistente como,

2276
01:35:42,740 --> 01:35:43,400
bueno, no tengo que tomar

2277
01:35:43,400 --> 01:35:44,220
ya no los tomo en serio.

2278
01:35:44,480 --> 01:35:44,940
Pero por cierto,

2279
01:35:44,960 --> 01:35:46,220
¿Notaste que tenían razón?

2280
01:35:46,380 --> 01:35:47,940
en algo muy importante?

2281
01:35:48,860 --> 01:35:50,340
Ahora, una cosa curiosa sobre la libertad de expresión,

2282
01:35:51,260 --> 01:35:55,780
La libertad de expresión no existiría si no tuvieras también el derecho de decir cosas que están mal.

2283
01:35:56,160 --> 01:35:56,720
Porque si no puedes,

2284
01:35:57,220 --> 01:35:59,120
ya sabes, participar en una idea para ti,

2285
01:35:59,120 --> 01:36:00,820
Si en realidad no puedes especular,

2286
01:36:01,080 --> 01:36:03,540
En realidad, nunca llegarás a algo que sea correcto en primer lugar.

2287
01:36:04,000 --> 01:36:05,440
Pero es especialmente irritante

2288
01:36:05,740 --> 01:36:07,120
cuando la gente que tenía razón

2289
01:36:07,660 --> 01:36:08,440
fueron censurados

2290
01:36:09,060 --> 01:36:11,720
y tú, uh, y nunca obtienes el crédito que merecen.

2291
01:36:13,320 --> 01:36:16,920
Bueno, este podría ser un buen lugar para preguntar un poco más sobre la libertad de expresión.

2292
01:36:18,100 --> 01:36:22,680
Y entonces dijiste que en la libertad de expresión está incluido decir cosas que están mal.

2293
01:36:22,940 --> 01:36:23,440
Sí.

2294
01:36:23,860 --> 01:36:26,760
¿Cuál es su perspectiva sobre el discurso de odio?

2295
01:36:27,840 --> 01:36:33,320
El discurso de odio es la mejor campaña de marketing para la censura.

2296
01:36:33,440 --> 01:36:36,000
Um, y vino de la academia,

2297
01:36:36,250 --> 01:36:38,260
um, del, del siglo XX.

2298
01:36:38,460 --> 01:36:41,320
Y que cuando hablé del movimiento contra la libertad de expresión,

2299
01:36:41,800 --> 01:36:43,700
uh, ese fue uno de sus primeros inventos.

2300
01:36:43,900 --> 01:36:46,300
Allí se habló mucho sobre la teoría crítica de la raza,

2301
01:36:46,400 --> 01:36:48,680
um, y, y estar en contra de la teoría crítica de la raza.

2302
01:36:49,240 --> 01:36:55,040
y el fuego demandará si dices que la gente no puede defenderlo, enseñarlo o investigarlo,

2303
01:36:55,640 --> 01:36:59,920
porque tienes absolutamente el derecho de seguirlo académicamente.

2304
01:37:00,680 --> 01:37:01,140
Sin embargo,

2305
01:37:01,480 --> 01:37:08,660
Cada vez que alguien menciona CRT, también debería decir el primer proyecto de las personas que fundaron CRT.

2306
01:37:09,020 --> 01:37:11,500
um, Richard Delgado, Mary Matsuda, um, etcétera,

2307
01:37:12,060 --> 01:37:15,360
iba a desaparecer, era crear esta nueva categoría de desprotegidos

2308
01:37:15,460 --> 01:37:18,020
discurso llamado discurso de odio y prohibirlo.

2309
01:37:18,780 --> 01:37:20,420
La persona que permitió esta deriva,

2310
01:37:20,420 --> 01:37:22,760
Por supuesto, fue Herbert Marcuse en 1965,

2311
01:37:22,760 --> 01:37:25,700
ya sabes, básicamente cuestionar si la libertad de expresión debería ser o no

2312
01:37:25,700 --> 01:37:26,820
un valor sagrado para la izquierda.

2313
01:37:27,260 --> 01:37:29,640
Y estuvo en el bando perdedor durante mucho tiempo.

2314
01:37:29,780 --> 01:37:30,540
Los liberales,

2315
01:37:30,840 --> 01:37:31,940
ya sabes, la forma en que crecí,

2316
01:37:32,120 --> 01:37:35,500
eso básicamente era estar a favor de la libertad de expresión era sinónimo de estar

2317
01:37:35,960 --> 01:37:36,460
un liberal,

2318
01:37:36,920 --> 01:37:40,120
pero eso empezó a quedar grabado en el campus.

2319
01:37:40,660 --> 01:37:42,240
Y la forma en que fue, fue con,

2320
01:37:42,580 --> 01:37:43,980
con la idea del discurso de odio,

2321
01:37:44,260 --> 01:37:48,780
um, eso, eso esencialmente, oh, pero deberías, um, podemos designar particularmente

2322
01:37:48,840 --> 01:37:52,060
mal discurso como, uh, no protegido.

2323
01:37:52,320 --> 01:37:53,320
Um, y, y

2324
01:37:53,920 --> 01:37:54,880
¿quién lo va a hacer cumplir?

2325
01:37:54,880 --> 01:37:55,720
¿Quién va a decidir qué?

2326
01:37:55,840 --> 01:37:56,920
¿Qué es realmente el discurso de odio?

2327
01:37:57,500 --> 01:38:01,020
Bueno, por lo general, de manera abrumadora, sólo puede suceder en un entorno

2328
01:38:01,020 --> 01:38:04,760
de una diversidad de puntos de vista realmente baja porque realmente tienes que estar de acuerdo,

2329
01:38:04,960 --> 01:38:07,320
sobre cuáles son las cosas más odiosas y equivocadas.

2330
01:38:08,000 --> 01:38:10,580
Y hay un principio fundamental.

2331
01:38:11,060 --> 01:38:16,600
Um, se hace referencia a esto en un gran caso sobre la quema de banderas en la primera enmienda que creo que todos los

2332
01:38:16,600 --> 01:38:17,680
el mundo podría beneficiarse.

2333
01:38:18,140 --> 01:38:20,960
No se puede prohibir la expresión sólo porque sea ofensiva.

2334
01:38:21,340 --> 01:38:22,640
Es demasiado subjetivo.

2335
01:38:22,940 --> 01:38:24,920
Básicamente, es una de las razones por las que estos,

2336
01:38:24,920 --> 01:38:27,400
uh, ese tipo de códigos han sido más felices

2337
01:38:27,400 --> 01:38:29,040
adoptado en lugares como Europa,

2338
01:38:29,060 --> 01:38:31,320
donde tienen la sensación de que hay como un alemán modal

2339
01:38:31,320 --> 01:38:32,520
o un inglés modal.

2340
01:38:32,940 --> 01:38:36,360
Um, y creo que esto es ofensivo y por lo tanto puedo decir que esto es,

2341
01:38:36,680 --> 01:38:38,620
esto está mal en una forma más

2342
01:38:39,300 --> 01:38:42,480
multicultural, en un, en un país genuinamente más diverso

2343
01:38:42,480 --> 01:38:47,180
En realidad, nunca se ha pensado honestamente que existe un solo tipo de estadounidense.

2344
01:38:47,520 --> 01:38:49,120
Nunca ha habido como,

2345
01:38:49,500 --> 01:38:50,860
Tuvimos, tuvimos la idea del tío Sam,

2346
01:38:50,880 --> 01:38:52,100
pero eso siempre fue una especie de broma.

2347
01:38:53,000 --> 01:38:57,580
Um, Boston siempre supo que no era Richmond siempre supo que no era Georgia siempre supo que no era, ya sabes, Alaska.

2348
01:38:57,900 --> 01:39:03,180
Como si siempre hubiésemos sido una mezcolanza y nos encontráramos en una sociedad tan diversa

2349
01:39:03,560 --> 01:39:04,260
eso

2350
01:39:04,940 --> 01:39:07,180
No se pueden prohibir cosas simplemente porque sean ofensivas.

2351
01:39:07,180 --> 01:39:09,320
Um, y ese es uno de los

2352
01:39:09,320 --> 01:39:12,560
Razones por las que el discurso de odio no es una categoría de discurso no protegida.

2353
01:39:12,940 --> 01:39:14,020
Y yo, y voy más allá,

2354
01:39:14,380 --> 01:39:18,400
Mi teoría sobre la libertad de expresión es ligeramente diferente a la de la mayoría de los otros abogados constitucionales.

2355
01:39:19,560 --> 01:39:22,000
Um, y creo, y creo que eso se debe en parte a que algunas de las formas,

2356
01:39:22,120 --> 01:39:23,040
uh, algunas de estas teorías,

2357
01:39:23,160 --> 01:39:26,040
aunque muchos de ellos son realmente buenos, son inadecuados,

2358
01:39:26,500 --> 01:39:27,780
no son lo suficientemente expansivos.

2359
01:39:28,300 --> 01:39:29,720
Y a veces llamo a mi teoría,

2360
01:39:29,740 --> 01:39:31,940
la pura teoría informacional de la libertad de expresión.

2361
01:39:32,400 --> 01:39:34,600
Um, o a veces cuando quiero ser elegante,

2362
01:39:34,640 --> 01:39:38,340
el laboratorio y la teoría del espejo y es más

2363
01:39:38,340 --> 01:39:43,060
Lo importante es que si el objetivo es el proyecto del conocimiento humano,

2364
01:39:43,200 --> 01:39:43,660
que es saber

2365
01:39:43,680 --> 01:39:44,580
el mundo es,

2366
01:39:44,900 --> 01:39:50,420
¿No se puede conocer el mundo tal como es sin saber lo que la gente realmente piensa?

2367
01:39:51,000 --> 01:39:54,920
y lo que la gente realmente piensa es un hecho increíblemente importante que hay que saber.

2368
01:39:55,780 --> 01:39:57,380
Así que cada vez que dices,

2369
01:39:58,040 --> 01:40:00,900
no puedes decir que en realidad te estás privando del conocimiento

2370
01:40:00,900 --> 01:40:07,020
de lo que la gente realmente piensa que estás causando lo que Tim o Karan, que están en nuestra junta de asesores, llaman falsificación de preferencias.

2371
01:40:07,380 --> 01:40:09,940
Um, terminas con una imagen inexacta del mundo,

2372
01:40:10,160 --> 01:40:10,840
que por cierto,

2373
01:40:11,320 --> 01:40:12,300
en muchos casos,

2374
01:40:12,700 --> 01:40:15,260
um, porque hay activistas que quieren restringir más

2375
01:40:15,260 --> 01:40:18,620
discurso, en realidad tienden a pensar que las personas tienen más prejuicios que ellos,

2376
01:40:18,620 --> 01:40:19,960
uh, de lo que podrían ser.

2377
01:40:19,960 --> 01:40:21,860
Um, y en realidad este tipo de restricciones,

2378
01:40:21,900 --> 01:40:23,120
habia un libro llamado racial

2379
01:40:23,420 --> 01:40:29,420
paranoia, um, que salió a la luz hace unos 15 años y que señalaba que la imposición

2380
01:40:29,420 --> 01:40:33,060
de algunos de estos códigos a veces puede hacer que la gente piense que lo único que te retiene

2381
01:40:33,060 --> 01:40:35,060
de volver de ser un racista furioso,

2382
01:40:35,620 --> 01:40:36,840
um, son estos códigos.

2383
01:40:37,020 --> 01:40:38,060
Entonces debe ser realmente,

2384
01:40:38,060 --> 01:40:38,560
Muy mal.

2385
01:40:38,600 --> 01:40:40,020
De hecho, puede empeorar todas estas cosas.

2386
01:40:40,380 --> 01:40:41,880
Y uno, del que hablamos en el libro,

2387
01:40:42,080 --> 01:40:44,800
una manera muy práctica y real de empeorar las cosas

2388
01:40:45,400 --> 01:40:46,700
es cuando censuras a la gente,

2389
01:40:47,140 --> 01:40:49,200
no cambia su opinión.

2390
01:40:49,440 --> 01:40:53,400
Simplemente los alienta a no compartirlo con personas que los meterán en problemas.

2391
01:40:53,740 --> 01:40:58,800
Esto los lleva a hablar con personas con las que ya están de acuerdo y la polarización grupal despega.

2392
01:40:59,360 --> 01:41:03,040
Así que tenemos algunos datos interesantes en el libro, um, sobre cómo

2393
01:41:03,620 --> 01:41:06,200
sacar a la gente de Twitter, por ejemplo, um,

2394
01:41:06,540 --> 01:41:08,200
ya sabes, en 2017.

2395
01:41:08,200 --> 01:41:13,000
Um, y de nuevo, creo que en 2020 llevar a la gente a hablar llevó a, ya sabes,

2396
01:41:13,300 --> 01:41:15,420
una mayor radicalización entre esas personas.

2397
01:41:15,520 --> 01:41:17,860
Es una fuerza muy predecible.

2398
01:41:18,080 --> 01:41:20,180
En realidad, la censura no cambia la opinión de la gente y

2399
01:41:20,180 --> 01:41:23,240
los empuja en direcciones que en realidad son muy,

2400
01:41:23,240 --> 01:41:25,320
Ya sabes, una investigación sólida en realidad

2401
01:41:25,320 --> 01:41:26,320
radicalizarlos aún más.

2402
01:41:26,720 --> 01:41:28,180
Así que sí, creo que,

2403
01:41:28,460 --> 01:41:30,780
Creo que el intento de prohibir el discurso de odio,

2404
01:41:31,080 --> 01:41:32,780
realmente no nos protege de ello,

2405
01:41:33,040 --> 01:41:34,040
pero le da al gobierno

2406
01:41:34,680 --> 01:41:40,540
Un arma tan enorme para usar contra nosotros que nos arrepentiremos de haberla entregado.

2407
01:41:41,500 --> 01:41:42,220
¿Hay alguna manera de

2408
01:41:42,800 --> 01:41:45,040
algo así, para mirar casos extremos,

2409
01:41:45,660 --> 01:41:47,120
para probar esta idea un poco?

2410
01:41:47,360 --> 01:41:48,520
Entonces, si miramos en el campus,

2411
01:41:49,420 --> 01:41:54,520
¿Cuál es su opinión sobre permitir, digamos, supremacistas blancos en el campus?

2412
01:41:54,520 --> 01:41:55,760
hacer, hacer discursos?

2413
01:41:55,920 --> 01:41:56,100
Bueno.

2414
01:41:56,980 --> 01:42:02,140
Creo que deberías poder estudiar lo que piensa la gente.

2415
01:42:02,240 --> 01:42:04,620
Y creo que es importante que realmente lo hagamos.

2416
01:42:05,340 --> 01:42:06,060
Entonces creo que,

2417
01:42:06,060 --> 01:42:08,080
ya sabes, tomemos, por ejemplo, QAnon.

2418
01:42:09,060 --> 01:42:09,880
Sí, QAnon está equivocado.

2419
01:42:10,220 --> 01:42:13,060
Um, pero ¿de dónde vino?

2420
01:42:13,380 --> 01:42:14,520
¿Por qué pensaron eso?

2421
01:42:14,640 --> 01:42:15,720
¿Cuál es la motivación?

2422
01:42:15,820 --> 01:42:16,800
¿Quién se lo enseñó?

2423
01:42:16,800 --> 01:42:18,140
¿A quién se le ocurrieron estas ideas?

2424
01:42:18,260 --> 01:42:20,220
Esto es importante para entender la historia.

2425
01:42:20,360 --> 01:42:23,520
Eso es poco importante para entender la política estadounidense moderna.

2426
01:42:24,220 --> 01:42:26,420
Y así, si pones tu acto,

2427
01:42:26,420 --> 01:42:26,840
si pones tu

2428
01:42:26,860 --> 01:42:33,780
sombrero de erudito y sobre el cual deberías sentir curiosidad por saber de dónde vienen.

2429
01:42:34,440 --> 01:42:35,080
Darrell Davis,

2430
01:42:35,380 --> 01:42:38,960
con quien estoy seguro estás familiarizado, parte de su objetivo era simplemente

2431
01:42:38,960 --> 01:42:40,540
para saber de dónde venía la gente.

2432
01:42:40,600 --> 01:42:41,340
Y en el proceso,

2433
01:42:41,860 --> 01:42:43,080
en realidad se desradicalizó

2434
01:42:43,280 --> 01:42:46,660
varios miembros de clientes cuando realmente se dieron cuenta de que este hombre negro

2435
01:42:47,260 --> 01:42:49,480
quién sería su amigo en realidad fue compasivo,

2436
01:42:49,600 --> 01:42:50,500
era una persona decente.

2437
01:42:50,660 --> 01:42:51,520
Se dieron cuenta de todos sus

2438
01:42:51,520 --> 01:42:52,460
las ideas preconcebidas estaban equivocadas.

2439
01:42:52,540 --> 01:42:55,120
Por cierto, puede tener un factor desradicalizador.

2440
01:42:55,440 --> 01:42:56,440
pero incluso cuando no es así,

2441
01:42:56,840 --> 01:43:00,720
Sigue siendo muy importante saber qué piensan las personas malas de tu sociedad.

2442
01:43:01,800 --> 01:43:03,640
Sinceramente, en cierto modo es para,

2443
01:43:03,740 --> 01:43:04,540
por su propia seguridad,

2444
01:43:04,560 --> 01:43:05,820
probablemente sea más importante

2445
01:43:05,820 --> 01:43:07,860
saber qué piensan realmente las personas malas de su sociedad.

2446
01:43:08,120 --> 01:43:10,760
Yo personalmente, no sé qué piensas sobre eso,

2447
01:43:10,760 --> 01:43:12,120
pero personalmente creo que la libertad

2448
01:43:12,120 --> 01:43:13,320
del discurso en casos como ese,

2449
01:43:13,400 --> 01:43:14,420
como el KKK y el campus

2450
01:43:15,060 --> 01:43:17,800
puede causar más daño en el corto plazo,

2451
01:43:18,660 --> 01:43:21,240
pero mucho más beneficio a largo plazo.

2452
01:43:22,040 --> 01:43:24,000
Porque a veces puedes argumentar a favor de,

2453
01:43:24,180 --> 01:43:25,200
esto va a doler.

2454
01:43:25,480 --> 01:43:25,820
Sí.

2455
01:43:25,820 --> 01:43:26,620
A corto plazo.

2456
01:43:27,560 --> 01:43:30,540
Pero quiero decir, Harvey dijo que esto es como considerar la alternativa.

2457
01:43:31,110 --> 01:43:34,180
Porque simplemente defendiste el caso,

2458
01:43:34,180 --> 01:43:35,520
esto potencialmente sería una buena

2459
01:43:35,520 --> 01:43:36,900
algo incluso a corto plazo.

2460
01:43:37,160 --> 01:43:38,160
Y creo que a menudo es así.

2461
01:43:38,660 --> 01:43:40,620
especialmente en una sociedad estable como la nuestra,

2462
01:43:41,400 --> 01:43:44,640
uh, con una clase media fuerte, todo este tipo de cosas donde la gente tiene como el

2463
01:43:44,640 --> 01:43:46,060
comodidades, la razón a través de las cosas.

2464
01:43:46,260 --> 01:43:46,540
Sí.

2465
01:43:46,660 --> 01:43:46,980
Eh,

2466
01:43:47,500 --> 01:43:49,700
pero ya sabes, para mí es como,

2467
01:43:50,060 --> 01:43:51,320
aunque duela a corto plazo,

2468
01:43:51,700 --> 01:43:54,000
incluso si crea más odio en el corto plazo,

2469
01:43:54,560 --> 01:43:56,060
la libertad de expresión tiene esto

2470
01:43:56,800 --> 01:43:58,360
algo realmente beneficioso,

2471
01:43:58,720 --> 01:44:00,480
que te ayuda a avanzar hacia la verdad,

2472
01:44:00,480 --> 01:44:03,280
toda la sociedad hacia un proceso más profundo,

2473
01:44:03,280 --> 01:44:05,400
comprensión más precisa de

2474
01:44:05,940 --> 01:44:09,740
la vida en la tierra, de la sociedad, del funcionamiento de las personas,

2475
01:44:10,460 --> 01:44:10,940
de ética,

2476
01:44:11,300 --> 01:44:12,540
de la metafísica, de todo.

2477
01:44:12,700 --> 01:44:15,980
Y eso a largo plazo es un beneficio enorme.

2478
01:44:16,340 --> 01:44:18,560
Se deshace de los nazis a largo plazo,

2479
01:44:18,680 --> 01:44:20,500
incluso si se suma al número

2480
01:44:20,500 --> 01:44:21,720
de los nazis a corto plazo.

2481
01:44:21,720 --> 01:44:21,820
Sí.

2482
01:44:22,180 --> 01:44:26,000
Bueno, y mientras tanto, solo por, y la parte de verificación de la realidad es que la gente siempre menciona,

2483
01:44:26,120 --> 01:44:27,140
¿Qué pasa con el clan en el campus?

2484
01:44:27,240 --> 01:44:27,840
Soy como,

2485
01:44:28,300 --> 01:44:29,200
nunca están invitados.

2486
01:44:30,200 --> 01:44:33,580
Um, el, el, el, no he visto un caso en el que hayan sido invitados.

2487
01:44:34,040 --> 01:44:34,640
Eh,

2488
01:44:35,020 --> 01:44:40,120
Por lo general, este argumento, el del clan, se descarta cuando la gente intenta excusarse.

2489
01:44:40,380 --> 01:44:42,220
Y es por eso que rechazamos a Ben Shapiro.

2490
01:44:42,800 --> 01:44:45,620
Y es por eso que no puedes tener a Bill Maher en el campus.

2491
01:44:45,820 --> 01:44:48,200
Por eso, ya sabes, y es como, está bien.

2492
01:44:48,240 --> 01:44:51,940
Um, ya sabes, y es un poco de eso, ¿qué pasa con el ismo otra vez?

2493
01:44:52,020 --> 01:44:55,700
sobre decir, bueno, esa cosa de ahí es terrible y por lo tanto este comediante no debería venir.

2494
01:44:56,780 --> 01:44:59,640
Uh, entonces tengo una pregunta tal vez a modo de consejo,

2495
01:45:00,540 --> 01:45:00,900
sabes,

2496
01:45:01,280 --> 01:45:02,940
entrevistar a la gente y ver

2497
01:45:02,950 --> 01:45:05,440
esto como un podcast como plataforma

2498
01:45:07,320 --> 01:45:10,080
al decidir con quién hablar y con quién no,

2499
01:45:10,240 --> 01:45:12,760
No es algo con lo que tenga que enfrentarme cara a cara en ocasiones.

2500
01:45:13,560 --> 01:45:17,220
Mi inclinación natural antes de comenzar el podcast era hablar con cualquiera.

2501
01:45:18,000 --> 01:45:22,120
e incluyendo personas, que todavía me interesan, quiénes son,

2502
01:45:22,480 --> 01:45:22,800
sabes,

2503
01:45:23,460 --> 01:45:24,300
los actuales miembros del

2504
01:45:24,300 --> 01:45:24,720
KKK.

2505
01:45:24,720 --> 01:45:26,240
Y a mí,

2506
01:45:26,940 --> 01:45:29,620
hay una responsabilidad de hacerlo con habilidad.

2507
01:45:29,660 --> 01:45:30,500
Sí.

2508
01:45:31,260 --> 01:45:35,340
Um, y esa responsabilidad ha estado pesando cada vez más sobre mí porque

2509
01:45:35,340 --> 01:45:39,560
te das cuenta de cuánta habilidad realmente se necesita porque tienes que saber,

2510
01:45:39,840 --> 01:45:40,980
para entender tanto,

2511
01:45:41,360 --> 01:45:43,600
Porque he llegado a comprender que el diablo

2512
01:45:44,140 --> 01:45:45,700
Siempre va a ser carismático.

2513
01:45:46,140 --> 01:45:46,400
Sí.

2514
01:45:46,900 --> 01:45:48,800
Um, el diablo no se parecerá al diablo.

2515
01:45:48,800 --> 01:45:51,080
Y entonces tienes que darte cuenta de que tienes que hacerlo,

2516
01:45:51,540 --> 01:45:52,820
no siempre puedes

2517
01:45:54,080 --> 01:45:57,280
venir a la mesa con una profunda compasión por otro ser humano.

2518
01:45:57,420 --> 01:45:58,000
Tienes que tener,

2519
01:45:58,100 --> 01:46:00,140
ya sabes, como 90% de compasión y,

2520
01:46:01,080 --> 01:46:03,800
y otro 90% de conocimiento histórico profundo

2521
01:46:03,800 --> 01:46:06,840
sobre el contexto de las batallas en torno a este tema en particular.

2522
01:46:06,940 --> 01:46:08,360
Y eso requiere sólo un enorme

2523
01:46:08,360 --> 01:46:10,460
cantidad de esfuerzo, pero no sé si hay

2524
01:46:11,080 --> 01:46:12,320
pensamientos que tienes sobre esto,

2525
01:46:12,520 --> 01:46:15,620
cómo manejar el habla,

2526
01:46:16,860 --> 01:46:17,180
em,

2527
01:46:17,820 --> 01:46:18,520
en cierto sentido

2528
01:46:19,640 --> 01:46:22,100
sin censurar, sacándolo a la superficie,

2529
01:46:22,400 --> 01:46:23,400
pero de una manera que crea

2530
01:46:23,400 --> 01:46:24,460
Más amor en el mundo.

2531
01:46:25,040 --> 01:46:26,000
Recuerdo

2532
01:46:26,780 --> 01:46:27,600
Steve Bannon

2533
01:46:28,160 --> 01:46:32,260
fue desinvitado del festival New Yorker y Jim Carrey

2534
01:46:32,260 --> 01:46:34,960
se asustó y todo tipo de personas se asustaron y le retiraron la invitación,

2535
01:46:35,280 --> 01:46:39,660
um, de, de, y me invitaron a hablar con una sonrisa sobre esto.

2536
01:46:40,480 --> 01:46:42,000
Y yo estaba diciendo, escucha,

2537
01:46:44,740 --> 01:46:49,080
no tienes gente en tu conferencia porque estás de acuerdo con ellos.

2538
01:46:49,080 --> 01:46:53,980
Um, como si ese fuera el, el, tenemos que salir de esta idea de que eso es porque estaban tratando de hacerlo.

2539
01:46:53,980 --> 01:46:55,540
Suena como si fuera un respaldo a Steve Bannon.

2540
01:46:55,600 --> 01:46:56,480
Como si eso fuera una tontería.

2541
01:46:56,580 --> 01:46:59,020
Me gusta, si realmente miras las opiniones de todas las personas que están allí,

2542
01:46:59,800 --> 01:47:01,040
no puedes respaldar

2543
01:47:01,040 --> 01:47:03,860
todas las opiniones que realmente tienen todas estas otras personas que estarán allí.

2544
01:47:04,460 --> 01:47:06,420
Y luego, en el proceso de presentar ese argumento,

2545
01:47:06,640 --> 01:47:08,580
Tengo, um, y, y también por supuesto,

2546
01:47:09,180 --> 01:47:12,660
el muy clásico, es muy valioso saber lo que piensa alguien Steve Bannon.

2547
01:47:12,660 --> 01:47:13,300
deberías tener curiosidad

2548
01:47:13,320 --> 01:47:13,980
sobre eso.

2549
01:47:14,260 --> 01:47:16,080
Y recuerdo que alguien respondió diciendo:

2550
01:47:16,540 --> 01:47:17,940
bueno, ¿qué querrías a alguien?

2551
01:47:17,940 --> 01:47:18,740
entrevistar a un yihadista?

2552
01:47:18,940 --> 01:47:21,020
Y yo digo, porque en este momento,

2553
01:47:21,200 --> 01:47:22,300
como fue en el momento en que,

2554
01:47:22,300 --> 01:47:23,460
cuando ISIS estaba realmente en

2555
01:47:23,980 --> 01:47:24,260
yendo,

2556
01:47:24,700 --> 01:47:25,860
yendo a por ello.

2557
01:47:25,880 --> 01:47:27,620
Um, y yo estaba como,

2558
01:47:28,020 --> 01:47:29,480
¿No querrías ir?

2559
01:47:29,480 --> 01:47:32,980
¿A una charla en la que alguien intentaba descubrir qué es lo que motiva a algunas de estas personas?

2560
01:47:33,240 --> 01:47:36,160
Um, porque eso cambia tu encuadre y esencialmente es como,

2561
01:47:36,220 --> 01:47:37,280
no, es curiosidad.

2562
01:47:37,520 --> 01:47:40,200
Es la cura para muchas de estas cosas.

2563
01:47:40,200 --> 01:47:44,060
Y necesitamos mucha más curiosidad y mucha menos certeza injustificada.

2564
01:47:44,760 --> 01:47:45,920
Y hay una pregunta como,

2565
01:47:46,120 --> 01:47:48,000
¿Cómo se llevan a cabo esas conversaciones?

2566
01:47:48,740 --> 01:47:48,840
Y,

2567
01:47:49,540 --> 01:47:51,460
Um, me siento profundamente poco calificado.

2568
01:47:51,700 --> 01:47:53,100
¿Quién crees que es especialmente bueno en eso?

2569
01:47:54,100 --> 01:47:57,440
Siento que los realizadores de documentales suelen hacer un trabajo mucho mejor.

2570
01:47:57,860 --> 01:47:59,820
Y el mejor trabajo lo suelen hacer los biógrafos.

2571
01:48:00,320 --> 01:48:00,720
Sí.

2572
01:48:00,720 --> 01:48:04,140
Entonces, cuanto más tiempo le dediques a una conversación en particular,

2573
01:48:04,860 --> 01:48:06,660
como un pensamiento realmente profundo y

2574
01:48:06,660 --> 01:48:09,920
contexto histórico y estudiar a la gente, cómo piensan,

2575
01:48:10,280 --> 01:48:10,900
mirando todo diferente

2576
01:48:10,920 --> 01:48:13,300
perspectivas, mirando la psicología de la persona,

2577
01:48:13,780 --> 01:48:16,540
crianza, sus padres, sus abuelos, todo esto,

2578
01:48:17,100 --> 01:48:18,620
cuanto más tiempo pasas con eso,

2579
01:48:19,760 --> 01:48:20,700
eh, cuanto mejor,

2580
01:48:21,500 --> 01:48:24,000
mejor será la calidad de la conversación porque

2581
01:48:24,580 --> 01:48:25,520
llegas a entender el,

2582
01:48:26,700 --> 01:48:29,360
puedes realmente empatizar con la persona,

2583
01:48:29,740 --> 01:48:30,900
con las personas que él o ella

2584
01:48:31,380 --> 01:48:34,340
representa, um, y puedes ver la humanidad común,

2585
01:48:34,520 --> 01:48:35,160
todo esto.

2586
01:48:35,420 --> 01:48:38,900
Los entrevistadores a menudo no hacen ese trabajo.

2587
01:48:39,140 --> 01:48:39,420
Sí.

2588
01:48:39,640 --> 01:48:43,840
Um, lo mejor que he visto son entrevistas que son parte de un documental.

2589
01:48:43,920 --> 01:48:44,360
Sí.

2590
01:48:44,640 --> 01:48:46,200
Pero incluso ahora los documentales son como,

2591
01:48:46,220 --> 01:48:48,680
Hay un gran incentivo para hacerlo lo más rápido posible.

2592
01:48:48,820 --> 01:48:51,860
No hay ningún incentivo para pasar realmente tiempo con la persona.

2593
01:48:52,000 --> 01:48:55,820
Hay un gran documental nuevo sobre Floyd Abrams que realmente recomiendo.

2594
01:48:56,340 --> 01:48:59,160
Hicimos un documental sobre Ira Glasser llamado Mighty Ira.

2595
01:48:59,300 --> 01:49:01,900
um, cual era mi video

2596
01:49:01,900 --> 01:49:06,540
equipo y mi protegido Nico Perino, Chris Mulvey y Aaron Reese lo armaron.

2597
01:49:07,140 --> 01:49:10,160
Y simplemente sigue la vida y la época de, um,

2598
01:49:10,600 --> 01:49:13,120
de Ira Glasser, ex jefe de la ACLU.

2599
01:49:13,540 --> 01:49:14,980
Si pudieras detenerte en eso,

2600
01:49:15,040 --> 01:49:16,360
Esa es una historia fascinante.

2601
01:49:16,360 --> 01:49:16,860
Oh sí.

2602
01:49:18,280 --> 01:49:18,440
Asombroso.

2603
01:49:18,660 --> 01:49:20,240
Um, Ira, él no era abogado.

2604
01:49:20,440 --> 01:49:23,300
Empezó a trabajar en la NYCLU.

2605
01:49:23,480 --> 01:49:24,600
Unión de libertades civiles de Nueva York

2606
01:49:25,220 --> 01:49:26,460
Creo que en los años sesenta.

2607
01:49:26,600 --> 01:49:26,780
Él era,

2608
01:49:27,160 --> 01:49:30,540
uh, creo que Robert Kennedy le recomendó ir en esa dirección.

2609
01:49:30,600 --> 01:49:31,200
Eh,

2610
01:49:32,520 --> 01:49:37,100
y se convirtió en presidente de la ACLU justo en el momento en que ellos eran, um,

2611
01:49:37,480 --> 01:49:41,760
sufriendo por defender a los nazis en Skokie y Nico,

2612
01:49:41,760 --> 01:49:46,980
Uh, y, y, y Aaron y Chris armaron esto y nunca antes habían hecho un documental.

2613
01:49:47,320 --> 01:49:49,420
Y salió tan, tan bien.

2614
01:49:50,040 --> 01:49:53,100
Um, y cuenta la historia de los nazis en Skokie.

2615
01:49:53,720 --> 01:49:57,760
Cuenta la historia del caso que lo rodea, cuenta la historia de la ACLU en ese momento.

2616
01:49:57,760 --> 01:49:59,540
Y qué gran líder fue Ira Glasser.

2617
01:49:59,840 --> 01:50:02,280
Y una de las cosas tan geniales es como,

2618
01:50:02,300 --> 01:50:03,420
cuando llegues a ver

2619
01:50:04,020 --> 01:50:04,980
los nazis en Skokie,

2620
01:50:05,600 --> 01:50:08,920
Salen como los idiotas que uno esperaría que fueran.

2621
01:50:09,020 --> 01:50:10,340
Hay un momento en el que,

2622
01:50:10,340 --> 01:50:14,410
cuando el rally no va muy bien y el líder se pone nervioso.

2623
01:50:14,980 --> 01:50:17,340
Y casi parece que le va a gustar gritar algo así como,

2624
01:50:17,420 --> 01:50:20,280
Estás, estás, estás, estás convirtiendo esta manifestación nazi en una burla.

2625
01:50:20,300 --> 01:50:20,420
Y

2626
01:50:21,000 --> 01:50:26,760
así que demostró cómo permitir que los nazis hablaran en Skokie les quitó el viento a sus velas.

2627
01:50:27,180 --> 01:50:29,180
Como si tuvieran todo el movimiento,

2628
01:50:30,040 --> 01:50:31,320
como si todo el mundo fuera así,

2629
01:50:31,320 --> 01:50:34,100
Todo se disolvió después de eso porque parecían

2630
01:50:34,780 --> 01:50:36,120
Tontos racistas que eran.

2631
01:50:36,280 --> 01:50:38,580
Ya sabes, incluso los hermanos del blues hacían bromas,

2632
01:50:38,580 --> 01:50:39,580
ya sabes, chistes sobre ellos.

2633
01:50:40,160 --> 01:50:45,360
Um, y eso, y no se convirtió en el desastre que la gente pensó que sería simplemente por dejarlos hablar.

2634
01:50:45,920 --> 01:50:46,800
E Ira Glasser, está bien.

2635
01:50:46,820 --> 01:50:47,560
entonces el tiene

2636
01:50:48,380 --> 01:50:54,800
esta maravillosa historia sobre cómo Jackie Robinson se unió a los Dodgers de Brooklyn y cómo

2637
01:50:55,320 --> 01:50:57,980
hubo un momento en que estaba viendo a alguien,

2638
01:50:58,360 --> 01:51:03,800
un afroamericano como literalmente en su equipo y cómo eso realmente los entusiasmó

2639
01:51:03,800 --> 01:51:05,460
la causa de la igualdad racial.

2640
01:51:05,660 --> 01:51:07,820
Y eso se convirtió en una gran parte de lo que fue su vida.

2641
01:51:08,700 --> 01:51:11,920
Y simplemente pienso en eso como una gran metáfora.

2642
01:51:12,440 --> 01:51:14,540
ampliando tu círculo y

2643
01:51:14,600 --> 01:51:19,920
ver a más personas literalmente en su equipo es la solución a muchos de estos problemas.

2644
01:51:20,560 --> 01:51:24,260
Y me preocupa que una de las cosas que es absolutamente una realidad de la vida

2645
01:51:24,260 --> 01:51:25,440
en Estados Unidos es como,

2646
01:51:26,000 --> 01:51:30,160
Nos vemos más como campos enemigos que como personas del mismo equipo.

2647
01:51:30,940 --> 01:51:32,720
Y eso fue realmente algo en los primeros días,

2648
01:51:33,060 --> 01:51:34,200
como yo y Will Creely,

2649
01:51:34,260 --> 01:51:39,700
El director legal de Fire escribió sobre los próximos desafíos a la libertad de expresión para todos los que estén en Facebook.

2650
01:51:41,200 --> 01:51:46,300
Y una cosa que esperaba era que a medida que más personas expusieran

2651
01:51:46,300 --> 01:51:47,340
más de sus vidas,

2652
01:51:47,700 --> 01:51:49,720
Nos daríamos cuenta de muchas de estas cosas que sabíamos intelectualmente,

2653
01:51:50,100 --> 01:51:52,780
Como si los niños fueran al bar, se emborracharan y hicieran estupideces.

2654
01:51:53,380 --> 01:51:53,920
Eh,

2655
01:51:54,380 --> 01:51:55,460
que, eh,

2656
01:51:55,780 --> 01:51:56,620
que cuando empezamos

2657
01:51:56,690 --> 01:52:01,500
Al ver la evidencia de que están haciendo cosas estúpidas, al principio podríamos sorprendernos,

2658
01:52:01,520 --> 01:52:03,540
pero luego eventualmente se vuelven más sofisticados y dicen,

2659
01:52:03,540 --> 01:52:04,720
Bueno, vamos, la gente es así.

2660
01:52:05,400 --> 01:52:06,960
En realidad, eso nunca pareció suceder.

2661
01:52:07,300 --> 01:52:09,880
Um, eso, eso, eso no creo que creo

2662
01:52:09,920 --> 01:52:13,920
que hay muchas cosas que sabemos sobre la naturaleza humana y sabemos sobre cosas tontas

2663
01:52:13,920 --> 01:52:20,340
la gente dice, uh, y hemos llegado a un entorno donde simplemente hay alguien

2664
01:52:20,340 --> 01:52:22,220
ahí fuera esperando ser algo así como,

2665
01:52:23,120 --> 01:52:24,300
Oh, recuerda esa cosa tonta que dijiste que éramos

2666
01:52:24,300 --> 01:52:24,700
14?

2667
01:52:24,980 --> 01:52:26,620
Bueno, me aseguraré de que no te metas en el,

2668
01:52:26,720 --> 01:52:27,700
a la escuela de tus sueños porque

2669
01:52:27,720 --> 01:52:28,200
de eso.

2670
01:52:28,380 --> 01:52:29,680
Esta arqueología ofensiva.

2671
01:52:30,300 --> 01:52:31,140
Aunque ese no es mi término.

2672
01:52:31,340 --> 01:52:32,040
Es un gran término.

2673
01:52:32,080 --> 01:52:38,160
Robamos a los mejores investigando los comentarios anteriores de alguien para encontrar un discurso que no ha envejecido bien.

2674
01:52:38,940 --> 01:52:39,760
Y eso es táctico.

2675
01:52:39,940 --> 01:52:41,380
Así, ese no es sólo alguien que no está

2676
01:52:41,380 --> 01:52:41,880
empático.

2677
01:52:41,960 --> 01:52:44,560
Dicen, te voy a castigar por esto o,

2678
01:52:44,740 --> 01:52:45,240
y esa es una de las razones

2679
01:52:45,240 --> 01:52:47,200
¿Por qué me deprimí al escribir este libro?

2680
01:52:47,720 --> 01:52:52,680
porque ya sabes, ya hay gente que no me quiere por mimar la mente americana,

2681
01:52:52,820 --> 01:52:54,300
generalmente basado en un malentendido

2682
01:52:54,440 --> 01:52:56,880
de lo que realmente dijimos y mimos en la mente estadounidense, pero aun así.

2683
01:52:57,940 --> 01:53:04,280
Uh, pero en este, ya sabes, estoy criticando a la gente por ser muy cruel en muchos casos,

2684
01:53:05,120 --> 01:53:09,240
pero dicho, pero una cosa que realmente daba miedo era estudiar mucho

2685
01:53:09,240 --> 01:53:11,560
estos casos es que una vez que tienes ese objetivo en tu espalda,

2686
01:53:11,680 --> 01:53:14,220
Lo que van a intentar cancelarte podría ser cualquier cosa.

2687
01:53:14,860 --> 01:53:17,100
Ya sabes, podrían volver a tu antiguo,

2688
01:53:17,220 --> 01:53:20,840
tus viejos barcos, encuentra algo que dijiste en 1995,

2689
01:53:21,040 --> 01:53:22,500
ya sabes, haz algo,

2690
01:53:23,020 --> 01:53:26,980
um, donde esencialmente parece que es otra cosa,

2691
01:53:27,160 --> 01:53:28,500
pero realmente lo que son,

2692
01:53:28,500 --> 01:53:30,740
Lo que pasa es que no les gustó tu opinión.

2693
01:53:30,820 --> 01:53:32,400
No les gustó tu punto de vista sobre algo.

2694
01:53:32,620 --> 01:53:33,480
Y van a encontrar un,

2695
01:53:33,560 --> 01:53:34,860
encontrar una manera de que de ahora en adelante,

2696
01:53:34,920 --> 01:53:35,900
cada vez que aparece tu nombre,

2697
01:53:36,220 --> 01:53:38,620
Es como, Oh, recuerda esto, esa cosa que no me gustó de ellos.

2698
01:53:39,100 --> 01:53:41,280
Y de nuevo, es cruel.

2699
01:53:41,300 --> 01:53:42,980
No te acercará más a la verdad.

2700
01:53:43,340 --> 01:53:45,540
Y, pero da un poco de miedo arriesgarse.

2701
01:53:46,700 --> 01:53:47,080
Bueno.

2702
01:53:47,160 --> 01:53:48,120
En términos de soluciones,

2703
01:53:48,460 --> 01:53:49,700
Voy a preguntarte algunas cosas.

2704
01:53:50,020 --> 01:53:50,320
Así que uno,

2705
01:53:51,440 --> 01:53:52,600
eh, paternidad.

2706
01:53:52,860 --> 01:53:53,060
Sí.

2707
01:53:54,080 --> 01:53:54,820
Cinco y siete años.

2708
01:53:56,380 --> 01:53:58,240
Entonces estoy seguro de que lo has descubierto todo.

2709
01:53:58,240 --> 01:53:59,160
Oh, Dios, no.

2710
01:53:59,340 --> 01:54:00,780
Desde una perspectiva de libertad de expresión.

2711
01:54:01,180 --> 01:54:01,600
Sí.

2712
01:54:01,780 --> 01:54:03,860
Uh, desde una perspectiva de la cultura de la libertad de expresión,

2713
01:54:03,960 --> 01:54:04,760
cómo ser un buen padre.

2714
01:54:05,380 --> 01:54:05,600
Sí.

2715
01:54:06,340 --> 01:54:10,780
Creo que la primera cualidad que deberías cultivar en tus hijos,

2716
01:54:10,780 --> 01:54:12,820
si quieres tener una cultura de libertad de expresión

2717
01:54:14,140 --> 01:54:15,200
es curiosidad

2718
01:54:16,100 --> 01:54:20,580
y una conciencia de la inmensidad que siempre será desconocida.

2719
01:54:21,560 --> 01:54:24,500
Y hacer que mis hijos se entusiasmen con la idea es como,

2720
01:54:24,640 --> 01:54:25,540
vamos a gastar todo nuestro

2721
01:54:25,540 --> 01:54:26,600
vive aprendiendo sobre cosas.

2722
01:54:27,640 --> 01:54:32,680
Y es rápido, emocionante e interminable y nunca lo lograremos.

2723
01:54:32,680 --> 01:54:33,600
una gran abolladura en él,

2724
01:54:33,660 --> 01:54:35,240
pero el viaje será asombroso.

2725
01:54:36,120 --> 01:54:38,760
Pero sólo los tontos creen que lo saben todo.

2726
01:54:39,560 --> 01:54:41,660
Um, y a veces tontos peligrosos además.

2727
01:54:42,840 --> 01:54:44,560
Entonces dando el sentido de humildad intelectual.

2728
01:54:45,060 --> 01:54:45,680
Temprano

2729
01:54:46,220 --> 01:54:47,960
siendo también, ya sabes,

2730
01:54:48,360 --> 01:54:50,380
decir cosas que realmente suenan un poco pasadas de moda,

2731
01:54:50,760 --> 01:54:52,140
Me gusta, pero les digo cosas a mis hijos,

2732
01:54:52,540 --> 01:54:53,020
como, escucha,

2733
01:54:53,780 --> 01:54:54,280
si usted

2734
01:54:55,540 --> 01:54:57,720
disfrutar del estudio y el trabajo,

2735
01:54:58,040 --> 01:54:59,480
ambas cosas que disfruto mucho,

2736
01:54:59,520 --> 01:55:00,320
Lo hago por diversión.

2737
01:55:01,400 --> 01:55:04,220
Um, tu vida se sentirá genial y fácil.

2738
01:55:05,000 --> 01:55:07,900
Um, entonces algunas de, algunas, ya sabes, algunas de esas virtudes pasadas de moda son cosas

2739
01:55:07,900 --> 01:55:08,600
Intento predicar,

2740
01:55:08,900 --> 01:55:12,680
um, cosas contraintuitivas como jugar al aire libre,

2741
01:55:12,680 --> 01:55:16,720
Um, tener tiempo que no sean experiencias intermedias es realmente,

2742
01:55:16,760 --> 01:55:18,120
eh, es realmente importante.

2743
01:55:19,020 --> 01:55:19,440
Y

2744
01:55:20,120 --> 01:55:25,800
Pequeñas cosas como, um, de las que hablo en el libro, cuando mis hijos ven algo que da miedo.

2745
01:55:25,920 --> 01:55:28,320
y no me refiero a películas de zombies,

2746
01:55:28,320 --> 01:55:30,240
Sabes, estoy hablando como de una caricatura.

2747
01:55:30,240 --> 01:55:31,520
eso tiene un momento aterrador

2748
01:55:32,300 --> 01:55:34,220
y diciendo que quieren apagar la televisión.

2749
01:55:34,660 --> 01:55:36,960
Y yo, y hablé con ellos y les dije, escuchen,

2750
01:55:37,920 --> 01:55:40,180
Lo extraño a tu lado y vamos a terminar este show.

2751
01:55:41,080 --> 01:55:44,520
y quiero que me digas qué piensas de esto después.

2752
01:55:45,220 --> 01:55:47,560
Y me senté al lado de mis hijos.

2753
01:55:48,300 --> 01:55:49,920
Um, y al final,

2754
01:55:49,980 --> 01:55:51,380
cada vez que yo,

2755
01:55:51,460 --> 01:55:52,460
ya sabes, cuando les pregunté,

2756
01:55:52,580 --> 01:55:53,940
¿Fue tan aterrador como pensabas que iba a ser?

2757
01:55:54,660 --> 01:55:55,140
Y hubo como,

2758
01:55:55,240 --> 01:55:56,260
No papi, eso estuvo bien.

2759
01:55:56,300 --> 01:55:58,460
Y pienso que esa es una de las grandes lecciones de la vida.

2760
01:55:59,060 --> 01:56:00,060
El miedo a que no lo hagas

2761
01:56:00,800 --> 01:56:05,000
Lo que atraviesas se vuelve mucho más grande en tu cabeza que simplemente enfrentarlo.

2762
01:56:05,620 --> 01:56:07,340
Ésa es una de las razones por las que estoy luchando contra esta cultura.

2763
01:56:07,500 --> 01:56:08,220
Amo,

2764
01:56:08,540 --> 01:56:14,420
ya sabes, que todos nuestros niños puedan crecer en un ambiente donde la gente te da gracia y, ya sabes,

2765
01:56:15,160 --> 01:56:17,860
Acepta el hecho de que a veces la gente va a decir cosas que te cabrean,

2766
01:56:18,100 --> 01:56:20,740
tomar en serio la posibilidad y equivocarse y,

2767
01:56:20,740 --> 01:56:21,700
y, uh, tener curiosidad.

2768
01:56:22,260 --> 01:56:24,560
Bueno, tengo esperanzas de que lo que mencionaste,

2769
01:56:24,560 --> 01:56:26,560
que se debe a que gran parte de los jóvenes

2770
01:56:26,560 --> 01:56:28,400
las cosas de la gente están en internet

2771
01:56:29,040 --> 01:56:31,600
que se van a dar un respiro porque entonces

2772
01:56:31,600 --> 01:56:32,920
todo el mundo es digno de cancelar.

2773
01:56:33,600 --> 01:56:35,700
La Generación Z es la que más odia la cultura de la cancelación.

2774
01:56:35,840 --> 01:56:37,860
Y esa es otra razón por la que es como si la gente

2775
01:56:37,960 --> 01:56:39,240
Sigo afirmando que esto incluso está sucediendo.

2776
01:56:39,460 --> 01:56:39,720
Es como,

2777
01:56:39,800 --> 01:56:41,520
no, en realidad puedes preguntarles a los niños

2778
01:56:41,980 --> 01:56:44,320
lo que piensan de cancelar la cultura y lo odian.

2779
01:56:44,600 --> 01:56:47,080
Sí. Bueno, creo que son como el sistema inmunológico.

2780
01:56:47,480 --> 01:56:47,600
Eso es como,

2781
01:56:48,360 --> 01:56:50,080
esa es la cultura que se despierta y le gusta,

2782
01:56:50,140 --> 01:56:51,000
no, esto no es algo bueno.

2783
01:56:51,260 --> 01:56:52,520
Aunque me alegro.

2784
01:56:52,620 --> 01:56:55,360
Quiero decir, yo, yo, soy uno de esos niños que,

2785
01:56:55,360 --> 01:56:56,820
ya sabes, está muy contento de que

2786
01:56:56,820 --> 01:57:01,620
Yo era un niño pequeño en los ochenta y un adolescente en los noventa porque tenerlo todo

2787
01:57:01,760 --> 01:57:04,560
potencialmente en línea, uh, no es un,

2788
01:57:04,940 --> 01:57:05,520
una crianza.

2789
01:57:05,820 --> 01:57:05,980
Yo envidio.

2790
01:57:06,880 --> 01:57:11,080
Bueno, yo, porque también puedes hacer la absoluta libertad de expresión.

2791
01:57:11,920 --> 01:57:12,660
Me gusta

2792
01:57:13,380 --> 01:57:20,000
conduciendo hacia allí donde espero un futuro donde muchas de nuestras inseguridades,

2793
01:57:20,540 --> 01:57:20,860
defectos,

2794
01:57:21,580 --> 01:57:22,940
todo está ahí afuera.

2795
01:57:23,380 --> 01:57:25,700
Y para ser sincero,

2796
01:57:25,800 --> 01:57:28,600
uh, creo que eso conduce a un mundo mejor.

2797
01:57:28,840 --> 01:57:29,960
Porque los defectos son hermosos.

2798
01:57:30,340 --> 01:57:32,120
Quiero decir, esos son los defectos,

2799
01:57:32,120 --> 01:57:34,300
uh, los ingredientes básicos de la conexión humana.

2800
01:57:34,780 --> 01:57:35,400
Eh, Robert Wright,

2801
01:57:35,820 --> 01:57:37,000
escribió un libro sobre,

2802
01:57:37,120 --> 01:57:38,280
uh, adelante, sobre el budismo.

2803
01:57:38,340 --> 01:57:40,100
Um, y hablé de intentarlo.

2804
01:57:40,100 --> 01:57:41,940
utilizar las redes sociales desde un,

2805
01:57:42,080 --> 01:57:43,840
desde una perspectiva budista y como,

2806
01:57:44,000 --> 01:57:48,220
como si estuvieras, como si fuera el inconsciente colectivo meditando y

2807
01:57:48,800 --> 01:57:50,060
viendo esos pequeños como

2808
01:57:50,580 --> 01:57:56,820
partes enojadas que están tratando de cancelarte o hacerte callar y simplemente dejarlas ir.

2809
01:57:56,820 --> 01:57:58,940
de la misma manera que se supone que debes observar cómo tus pensamientos se desvanecen.

2810
01:57:59,240 --> 01:58:02,700
Me encantaría verlo así visualizado sea cual sea,

2811
01:58:02,940 --> 01:58:04,520
Cualquiera que sea el drama que esté sucediendo,

2812
01:58:04,800 --> 01:58:07,180
pasando, simplemente viendo el mar de ello,

2813
01:58:07,180 --> 01:58:08,600
de la conciencia colectiva,

2814
01:58:08,660 --> 01:58:11,220
simplemente procesando esto y teniendo

2815
01:58:11,220 --> 01:58:14,200
un poco como un ataque de pánico y algo así como,

2816
01:58:14,200 --> 01:58:16,860
Sí, leyéndolo, mirando el pequeño tipo de odioso,

2817
01:58:16,860 --> 01:58:18,360
Aparecen voces enojadas y dicen:

2818
01:58:18,480 --> 01:58:19,360
Vale, ahí estás.

2819
01:58:19,740 --> 01:58:21,220
Y todavía estoy concentrado en

2820
01:58:21,220 --> 01:58:22,960
en esa cosa porque eso es,

2821
01:58:23,600 --> 01:58:25,240
Esa, esa es una de las cosas,

2822
01:58:26,280 --> 01:58:26,300
bueno.

2823
01:58:26,480 --> 01:58:28,440
Sí, en realidad esto probablemente sea una etapa avanzada del juego,

2824
01:58:28,440 --> 01:58:30,740
para dar mi gran teoría sobre estas cosas.

2825
01:58:31,760 --> 01:58:32,600
Eh, pero,

2826
01:58:32,920 --> 01:58:34,580
uh, nunca es demasiado tarde.

2827
01:58:35,220 --> 01:58:35,360
Entonces,

2828
01:58:35,720 --> 01:58:37,060
entonces lo que estaba estudiando,

2829
01:58:37,060 --> 01:58:39,740
um, en la facultad de derecho, cuando se me acabaron las clases de la primera enmienda,

2830
01:58:39,740 --> 01:58:42,620
Um, decidí estudiar censura durante la tutoría.

2831
01:58:42,620 --> 01:58:46,080
dinastía, eh, porque de allí obtenemos nuestras ideas de restricción previa,

2832
01:58:46,080 --> 01:58:49,220
uh, eso, eso viene de la licencia de la imprenta,

2833
01:58:49,360 --> 01:58:51,040
um, que era algo que Enrique VIII

2834
01:58:51,040 --> 01:58:52,520
fue el primero en hacer lo que básicamente,

2835
01:58:53,060 --> 01:58:56,140
um, la idea era que si no puedes imprimir nada

2836
01:58:56,160 --> 01:58:58,360
en Inglaterra, a menos que sea con estos, uh,

2837
01:58:59,200 --> 01:59:01,080
uh, imprentas aprobadas por su majestad,

2838
01:59:01,580 --> 01:59:06,840
Um, evitará que salgan trabajos heréticos y anti Henry el octavo.

2839
01:59:07,060 --> 01:59:08,380
Soy bonita, bonita, bonita, bonita.

2840
01:59:08,880 --> 01:59:10,000
bonita, um,

2841
01:59:10,420 --> 01:59:11,700
idea eficiente al menos.

2842
01:59:12,400 --> 01:59:19,100
Um, y yo siempre, así que comenzó a enojarse con la imprenta alrededor de 1521 y luego pasó algo.

2843
01:59:19,120 --> 01:59:23,880
que requería que las impresiones estuvieran junto con el parlamento en, uh, 1538.

2844
01:59:24,620 --> 01:59:27,760
Uh, y siempre pienso en eso como donde estamos ahora,

2845
01:59:28,260 --> 01:59:29,560
um, porque tenemos esto,

2846
01:59:29,920 --> 01:59:33,040
teníamos, en aquel entonces teníamos la tecnología disruptiva original,

2847
01:59:33,160 --> 01:59:34,120
Ya sabes, escribir fue probablemente,

2848
01:59:34,420 --> 01:59:36,980
pero el siguiente, que, que era la imprenta,

2849
01:59:37,020 --> 01:59:38,340
lo cual fue absolutamente calamitoso.

2850
01:59:38,560 --> 01:59:42,920
Y quiero decir, y digo calamitoso a propósito porque en el corto plazo,

2851
01:59:43,380 --> 01:59:44,580
la caza de brujas aumentó

2852
01:59:44,580 --> 01:59:49,060
como loco porque la imprenta te permitió conseguir ese manual de cómo encontrar brujas

2853
01:59:49,460 --> 01:59:52,540
que las guerras religiosas se volvieron locas.

2854
01:59:52,780 --> 01:59:56,360
Esto llevó a todo tipo de angustia, desinformación,

2855
01:59:57,300 --> 01:59:57,700
suciedad.

2856
01:59:58,460 --> 02:00:00,760
Y Enrique octavo estaba intentando devolver al genio a la botella.

2857
02:00:00,880 --> 02:00:01,980
Ya sabes, él era algo así como,

2858
02:00:01,980 --> 02:00:04,680
Puedo, puedo, puedo, quiero usar esto para siempre.

2859
02:00:04,860 --> 02:00:06,380
Como, uh, como si siento que podría,

2860
02:00:06,500 --> 02:00:07,140
podría usarse,

2861
02:00:07,780 --> 02:00:12,580
pero se encontraba en un período inevitable de anarquía epistémica.

2862
02:00:13,320 --> 02:00:17,360
No hay nada que puedas hacer para que llegue el período posterior a la imprenta,

2863
02:00:17,560 --> 02:00:19,960
uh, resultó ser algo no disruptivo,

2864
02:00:20,180 --> 02:00:23,900
período no loco aparte del totalitarismo absoluto

2865
02:00:23,900 --> 02:00:25,500
y destruir todas las imprentas,

2866
02:00:25,880 --> 02:00:28,200
lo que simplemente no era posible en Europa.

2867
02:00:28,920 --> 02:00:30,060
entonces me siento como

2868
02:00:30,060 --> 02:00:31,220
así es como estamos ahora.

2869
02:00:32,140 --> 02:00:33,700
Esa interrupción surgió al agregar,

2870
02:00:33,900 --> 02:00:38,280
Creo que varios millones de personas participan en la conversación europea y que eventualmente el mundo

2871
02:00:38,280 --> 02:00:43,740
conversación, pero finalmente se convirtió en la mejor herramienta para la desconfirmación,

2872
02:00:43,900 --> 02:00:47,320
um, para deshacerse de la falsedad, para detectar malas ideas.

2873
02:00:48,420 --> 02:00:49,800
Y son los beneficios,

2874
02:00:49,900 --> 02:00:51,140
los beneficios a largo plazo

2875
02:00:52,000 --> 02:00:54,940
de la imprenta son calculablemente grandes.

2876
02:00:55,780 --> 02:00:58,100
Um, y eso es lo que me da algo de optimismo.

2877
02:00:58,100 --> 02:00:59,940
dónde estamos ahora con las redes sociales,

2878
02:01:00,000 --> 02:01:02,580
Porque estamos en ese período inevitablemente anárquico.

2879
02:01:02,580 --> 02:01:04,440
Y me preocupa que, que haya,

2880
02:01:05,180 --> 02:01:07,720
um, uh, que hay intentos en los Estados de aprobar cosas

2881
02:01:07,720 --> 02:01:09,240
para intentar devolver al genio a la botella.

2882
02:01:09,300 --> 02:01:13,160
Como si prohibiésemos un tic tac o decimos eso,

2883
02:01:13,520 --> 02:01:15,880
um, nadie menor de 18 años puede estar en el,

2884
02:01:15,980 --> 02:01:17,940
en Internet, a menos que tengan el permiso de sus padres,

2885
02:01:18,660 --> 02:01:20,620
vamos a algo que

2886
02:01:22,140 --> 02:01:25,840
ninguna medida de arriba hacia abajo podrá solucionarlo.

2887
02:01:26,000 --> 02:01:30,000
Tenemos que adaptarnos culturalmente al hecho de ello, um,

2888
02:01:30,420 --> 02:01:33,580
uh, de maneras que nos hagan más sabios que en realidad,

2889
02:01:33,580 --> 02:01:41,160
um, y permitir que sea potencialmente ese maravilloso motor de desconfirmación del que todavía no estamos ni cerca, por cierto,

2890
02:01:41,560 --> 02:01:42,680
pero piensa en

2891
02:01:43,300 --> 02:01:43,480
él.

2892
02:01:43,480 --> 02:01:46,040
Millones de ojos adicionales puestos en los problemas,

2893
02:01:46,380 --> 02:01:48,060
um, gracias a la imprenta ayudó

2894
02:01:48,060 --> 02:01:50,560
crear la revolución científica, la ilustración,

2895
02:01:50,960 --> 02:01:52,000
el descubrimiento de la ignorancia.

2896
02:01:53,380 --> 02:01:55,800
Um, ahora hemos agregado miles de millones

2897
02:01:56,360 --> 02:01:58,620
de ojos y voces para resolver problemas.

2898
02:01:58,780 --> 02:02:01,320
Y simplemente los usamos para videos de gatos y los cancelamos.

2899
02:02:02,760 --> 02:02:05,660
Pero esos son sólo los primeros días de la imprenta.

2900
02:02:05,840 --> 02:02:08,460
Todo comienza con los gatos y la cancelación.

2901
02:02:08,480 --> 02:02:11,900
¿Hay algo sobre X sobre Twitter?

2902
02:02:12,640 --> 02:02:15,520
que es quizás el más enérgico

2903
02:02:16,140 --> 02:02:17,720
fuente de gatos y cancelación.

2904
02:02:17,900 --> 02:02:19,680
Parece el inconsciente colectivo de la especie.

2905
02:02:19,840 --> 02:02:28,980
Quiero decir, como si fuera una de esas cosas en las que la tendencia a querer ver patrones en la historia a veces puede limitar

2906
02:02:30,220 --> 02:02:34,580
la verdadera y loca experiencia de lo que realmente es la historia.

2907
02:02:34,700 --> 02:02:38,620
Porque sí, nosotros, nosotros, tenemos estas lindas y reconfortantes ideas de que será como la última vez.

2908
02:02:38,880 --> 02:02:39,700
No lo sabemos.

2909
02:02:39,960 --> 02:02:41,860
No ha sucedido todavía.

2910
02:02:42,420 --> 02:02:43,300
Y yo pienso

2911
02:02:43,920 --> 02:02:49,340
qué inusual es Twitter porque lo considero como algo parecido a los niños,

2912
02:02:49,460 --> 02:02:50,120
porque la gente habla de

2913
02:02:50,800 --> 02:02:54,820
ya sabes, escritura y comunicaciones masivas y,

2914
02:02:54,900 --> 02:02:58,740
uh, como expandir el tamaño de nuestro cerebro colectivo.

2915
02:02:59,400 --> 02:03:02,220
Pero ahora estamos mirando nuestro cerebro colectivo en tiempo real.

2916
02:03:03,000 --> 02:03:07,860
Y está lleno, como nuestro propio cerebro, con todo tipo de pequeñas cosas locas que aparecen y,

2917
02:03:07,860 --> 02:03:11,720
y, y, y aparecen como partículas virtuales por todas partes de, de personas,

2918
02:03:12,020 --> 02:03:13,380
ya sabes,

2919
02:03:13,740 --> 02:03:15,440
reaccionar en tiempo real a las cosas.

2920
02:03:15,680 --> 02:03:18,580
Nunca ha habido nada vagamente parecido.

2921
02:03:18,580 --> 02:03:20,320
Y puede ser en su peor momento,

2922
02:03:20,920 --> 02:03:21,180
horrible de ver.

2923
02:03:21,800 --> 02:03:22,900
En su mejor momento,

2924
02:03:23,240 --> 02:03:29,640
A veces, ver a la gente simplemente se pone eufórico por algo que está sucediendo y hace chistes absolutamente brillantes de inmediato.

2925
02:03:29,660 --> 02:03:30,780
ya sabes, al mismo tiempo,

2926
02:03:31,120 --> 02:03:31,960
puede ser,

2927
02:03:32,620 --> 02:03:34,820
Ni siquiera puede ser una experiencia alegre.

2928
02:03:35,400 --> 02:03:36,080
Um, yo, siento que,

2929
02:03:36,760 --> 02:03:44,880
uh, y ahora vivo en un vecindario en X donde trato principalmente con personas que creo que son realmente reflexivas,

2930
02:03:44,940 --> 02:03:45,180
incluso si no estoy de acuerdo con ellos.

2931
02:03:45,420 --> 02:03:45,820
Eh,

2932
02:03:47,020 --> 02:03:49,220
y no es tan mala experiencia.

2933
02:03:49,600 --> 02:03:55,880
De vez en cuando me encuentro con ese otro tipo de barrios en X donde todo cancela toda la maldad.

2934
02:03:55,880 --> 02:03:57,940
Y siempre es una visita desagradable a esos lugares.

2935
02:03:58,580 --> 02:04:00,540
No estoy diciendo que todo tenga que ser así.

2936
02:04:00,540 --> 02:04:02,460
uh, como, como mi experiencia,

2937
02:04:02,820 --> 02:04:03,980
pero creo que eso

2938
02:04:04,820 --> 02:04:12,120
La razón por la que la gente sigue volviendo a él es que revela aspectos crudos de la humanidad que a veces preferimos fingir que no existen.

2939
02:04:12,560 --> 02:04:12,820
Sí.

2940
02:04:13,500 --> 02:04:13,880
Sí.

2941
02:04:13,880 --> 02:04:15,240
Pero también es totalmente nuevo.

2942
02:04:15,460 --> 02:04:15,880
Como dijiste,

2943
02:04:16,260 --> 02:04:17,300
es solo una viralidad,

2944
02:04:17,360 --> 02:04:22,380
A la velocidad viajan las noticias, viajan las opiniones, viaja la batalla de las ideas.

2945
02:04:22,740 --> 02:04:23,860
La batalla por la información también.

2946
02:04:24,160 --> 02:04:24,380
Sí.

2947
02:04:24,440 --> 02:04:26,720
De lo que es verdad y no mentira viajó,

2948
02:04:27,160 --> 02:04:29,180
el viejo Mark Twain bastante rápido en el

2949
02:04:29,180 --> 02:04:29,440
cosa.

2950
02:04:29,440 --> 02:04:29,940
Sí.

2951
02:04:29,940 --> 02:04:33,800
Y luego cambia tu comprensión de cómo interpretar.

2952
02:04:34,420 --> 02:04:35,140
información.

2953
02:04:35,260 --> 02:04:36,720
También te estresa muchísimo.

2954
02:04:37,280 --> 02:04:38,760
A veces me acordaba de dejarlo.

2955
02:04:39,060 --> 02:04:41,520
Las estadísticas son bastante malas en cuanto a salud mental.

2956
02:04:41,960 --> 02:04:42,620
con, con, con los jóvenes.

2957
02:04:42,780 --> 02:04:46,540
Y definitivamente estoy en el campo de las personas que piensan que las redes sociales son parte de eso.

2958
02:04:46,700 --> 02:04:48,260
Entiendo el debate,

2959
02:04:48,300 --> 02:04:51,100
pero estoy bastante convencido de que una de las cosas que es,

2960
02:04:51,160 --> 02:04:56,340
No ha sido bueno para la salud mental de las personas, simplemente está expuesto constantemente.

2961
02:04:56,920 --> 02:04:57,360
Si absolutamente.

2962
02:04:57,540 --> 02:05:02,220
Creo que es posible crear medios sociales que generen un gran impacto

2963
02:05:02,220 --> 02:05:04,220
cantidad de dinero, me hace feliz la gente,

2964
02:05:04,280 --> 02:05:07,490
como si fuera posible alinear los incentivos.

2965
02:05:08,260 --> 02:05:08,900
Entonces en términos de,

2966
02:05:09,540 --> 02:05:10,580
sí, haciendo adolescentes,

2967
02:05:10,920 --> 02:05:11,260
haciendo,

2968
02:05:11,760 --> 02:05:12,920
uh, cada etapa de la vida, dando

2969
02:05:13,560 --> 02:05:19,320
su satisfacción y felicidad a largo plazo con su existencia física fuera de las redes sociales y en las redes sociales,

2970
02:05:19,860 --> 02:05:21,420
ayudándote a crecer como ser humano,

2971
02:05:22,220 --> 02:05:25,640
uh, ayudándote a desafiarte con la cantidad justa y la cantidad justa de videos de gatos,

2972
02:05:25,880 --> 02:05:29,180
lo que sea que proporcione esta rica experiencia humana.

2973
02:05:29,940 --> 02:05:30,760
creo que es solo

2974
02:05:31,340 --> 02:05:32,640
Un problema de aprendizaje automático.

2975
02:05:32,680 --> 02:05:35,700
Es como si no fuera fácil crear un feed.

2976
02:05:36,380 --> 02:05:38,960
Entonces, el feed más fácil que puedes hacer es maximizar la participación.

2977
02:05:39,340 --> 02:05:39,740
Sí.

2978
02:05:39,740 --> 02:05:41,020
Pero eso es como un algoritmo realmente tonto.

2979
02:05:41,730 --> 02:05:42,280
Sí.

2980
02:05:42,600 --> 02:05:43,800
Es como para el,

2981
02:05:43,840 --> 02:05:48,240
para que el algoritmo aprenda lo suficiente sobre usted para comprender

2982
02:05:48,960 --> 02:05:52,360
lo que te hará verdaderamente feliz como ser humano para crecer a largo plazo.

2983
02:05:52,860 --> 02:05:55,100
Ése es simplemente un problema muy difícil de resolver.

2984
02:05:55,720 --> 02:05:56,720
¿Alguna vez viste Fleabag?

2985
02:05:57,340 --> 02:05:59,560
Es absolutamente brillante, un espectáculo británico.

2986
02:05:59,560 --> 02:06:01,940
Um, y te prepara.

2987
02:06:02,040 --> 02:06:05,920
Una de las razones por las que a la gente le encanta tanto es que te hace mirar como si,

2988
02:06:06,020 --> 02:06:07,940
un obsceno Sex and the City británico,

2989
02:06:08,160 --> 02:06:10,060
excepto que el personaje principal es el más destacado.

2990
02:06:11,080 --> 02:06:11,620
Eh,

2991
02:06:12,580 --> 02:06:13,400
es como, está bien.

2992
02:06:13,620 --> 02:06:16,480
Y pones los ojos en blanco un poco y es algo divertido y algo lindo.

2993
02:06:16,620 --> 02:06:18,480
y algo picante.

2994
02:06:19,340 --> 02:06:24,140
Y luego te das cuenta de que la persona en realidad está sufriendo y pasando por un momento difícil.

2995
02:06:24,800 --> 02:06:25,780
y se pone

2996
02:06:26,620 --> 02:06:28,560
más y más profundo a medida que avanza el espectáculo.

2997
02:06:28,960 --> 02:06:31,640
Y ella hará estos increíbles discursos sobre,

2998
02:06:32,080 --> 02:06:32,800
Dime qué hacer.

2999
02:06:33,220 --> 02:06:35,400
Como acabo de decir, sé que hay expertos por ahí.

3000
02:06:35,500 --> 02:06:36,920
Sé que hay conocimiento ahí fuera.

3001
02:06:36,960 --> 02:06:38,320
Sé que hay una manera óptima

3002
02:06:38,880 --> 02:06:39,700
para vivir mi vida.

3003
02:06:39,720 --> 02:06:42,320
Entonces, ¿por qué alguien no puede simplemente decirme qué hacer?

3004
02:06:42,460 --> 02:06:44,480
Y es así de maravilloso,

3005
02:06:45,840 --> 02:06:46,540
em,

3006
02:06:47,700 --> 02:06:52,120
Es exacto, creo, un aspecto del deseo humano de que ¿qué pasaría si algo pudiera

3007
02:06:52,120 --> 02:06:54,620
¿En realidad dime cuál es el camino óptimo a seguir?

3008
02:06:55,120 --> 02:06:57,400
Porque creo que hay un deseo de dar.

3009
02:06:57,400 --> 02:07:04,100
Haga uso de cierta cantidad de su propia libertad y discreción para que le digan que haga lo óptimo y correcto.

3010
02:07:04,540 --> 02:07:05,300
Pero ese camino

3011
02:07:05,840 --> 02:07:07,180
me da un susto de muerte.

3012
02:07:07,260 --> 02:07:09,000
Sí, vemos la forma en que lo expresas.

3013
02:07:09,220 --> 02:07:10,480
Eso sí, a mí también me da miedo.

3014
02:07:11,100 --> 02:07:12,520
Entonces hay varias cosas que una,

3015
02:07:12,660 --> 02:07:14,540
Puedes distraerte constantemente en un

3016
02:07:14,540 --> 02:07:17,480
TikTok busca cosas que te mantengan interesado.

3017
02:07:17,480 --> 02:07:18,880
Así que quitando eso

3018
02:07:19,480 --> 02:07:22,580
y brindándote un montón de opciones constantemente

3019
02:07:23,100 --> 02:07:29,080
y aprender a largo plazo lo que resulta en su felicidad real a largo plazo.

3020
02:07:30,020 --> 02:07:33,920
Entonces, ¿qué cantidad de ideas desafiantes son buenas para ti?

3021
02:07:34,120 --> 02:07:34,260
Oh,

3022
02:07:35,480 --> 02:07:37,160
eso, ya sabes, para alguien como yo,

3023
02:07:39,220 --> 02:07:42,120
pero hay un número como ese para ti, Greg, como

3024
02:07:42,720 --> 02:07:45,100
para mí, ese número es bastante alto.

3025
02:07:45,260 --> 02:07:45,560
Amo

3026
02:07:46,240 --> 02:07:46,680
debate.

3027
02:07:46,860 --> 02:07:47,120
Amo,

3028
02:07:47,660 --> 02:07:50,120
Me, me encanta la sensación de querer darme cuenta,

3029
02:07:50,420 --> 02:07:51,720
Joder, me he equivocado.

3030
02:07:51,940 --> 02:07:52,040
Sí.

3031
02:07:52,680 --> 02:07:57,680
Pero, ya sabes, me encantaría que el algoritmo supiera eso sobre mí y me ayudara.

3032
02:07:57,740 --> 02:07:59,040
pero siempre dándome opciones.

3033
02:07:59,080 --> 02:08:01,760
Si quiero descender a videos de gatos y demás.

3034
02:08:01,760 --> 02:08:03,040
Bueno, el aspecto educativo de la misma.

3035
02:08:03,240 --> 02:08:03,520
Sí,

3036
02:08:03,840 --> 02:08:04,060
educación.

3037
02:08:04,940 --> 02:08:08,180
Me gusta la idea de ir a la velocidad que necesitas y correr lo más rápido posible.

3038
02:08:08,180 --> 02:08:08,800
lo más rápido que puedas.

3039
02:08:09,080 --> 02:08:09,180
Sí.

3040
02:08:09,660 --> 02:08:11,780
Ya sabes, quiero decir, está eso, ya sabes, todo el asunto del flujo.

3041
02:08:12,100 --> 02:08:15,240
Siento esa recomendación de YouTube para,

3042
02:08:15,580 --> 02:08:17,500
para bien o para mal, si se usa correctamente,

3043
02:08:18,220 --> 02:08:19,540
parece que hace un trabajo bastante bueno.

3044
02:08:20,160 --> 02:08:22,300
Cada vez que me niego a hacer clic en cosas

3045
02:08:22,900 --> 02:08:26,460
eso se basa solo en la dopamina y solo hace clic en cosas educativas,

3046
02:08:26,980 --> 02:08:29,000
La recomendación proporciona una muy buena.

3047
02:08:29,360 --> 02:08:31,560
Entonces siento que es solucionable.

3048
02:08:32,360 --> 02:08:35,460
problema, al menos en el espacio de la educación de desafiarte a ti mismo,

3049
02:08:36,020 --> 02:08:38,820
pero también ampliar tu ámbito de conocimiento y todo este tipo de cosas.

3050
02:08:38,920 --> 02:08:40,460
Y definitivamente estoy más en el,

3051
02:08:40,460 --> 02:08:45,620
Estamos en un período ineludiblemente anárquico y requerimos grandes ajustes culturales.

3052
02:08:45,780 --> 02:08:48,380
Y no habrá manera de que esta no sea una transición difícil.

3053
02:08:49,020 --> 02:08:54,160
¿Hay alguna cosa específica, pequeña o grande, que te gustaría que X hiciera en Twitter?

3054
02:08:54,720 --> 02:08:56,420
Tengo muchas ideas sobre eso.

3055
02:08:57,060 --> 02:09:00,180
Con la imprenta y millones de ojos extra puestos en cualquier problema

3056
02:09:00,420 --> 02:09:01,900
puede derribar cualquier institución,

3057
02:09:02,140 --> 02:09:03,560
cualquiera, cualquier persona o cualquier idea.

3058
02:09:03,720 --> 02:09:05,020
Y eso es bueno en algunos aspectos,

3059
02:09:05,040 --> 02:09:07,480
porque era necesario derribar muchas instituciones medievales.

3060
02:09:07,540 --> 02:09:08,400
Y algunas personas también lo hicieron

3061
02:09:08,540 --> 02:09:10,760
y era necesario derribar muchas ideas.

3062
02:09:11,140 --> 02:09:11,820
Lo mismo es cierto ahora.

3063
02:09:11,900 --> 02:09:16,560
Miles de millones de ojos adicionales puestos en cada problema pueden derribar a cualquier persona, idea o institución.

3064
02:09:17,100 --> 02:09:20,680
Y algunas, nuevamente, algunas de esas cosas necesitaban ser derribadas,

3065
02:09:21,160 --> 02:09:22,400
pero aún no puede construir.

3066
02:09:22,600 --> 02:09:23,080
no estamos en el

3067
02:09:23,160 --> 02:09:24,160
escenario que aún se puede construir,

3068
02:09:24,340 --> 02:09:26,760
pero nos ha demostrado cuán escasos eran nuestros conocimientos.

3069
02:09:27,000 --> 02:09:29,480
Es una de las razones por las que también somos conscientes de la crisis de replicación.

3070
02:09:29,560 --> 02:09:30,540
Es una de las razones por las que estamos

3071
02:09:30,600 --> 02:09:33,240
También somos conscientes de lo deficiente que es nuestra investigación,

3072
02:09:33,460 --> 02:09:35,940
¿Qué tan arrogante es nuestra clase de expertos?

3073
02:09:36,200 --> 02:09:41,920
en muchos casos, pero la gente no quiere vivir en un mundo donde no haya personas que

3074
02:09:41,920 --> 02:09:43,600
respetan y pueden mirar.

3075
02:09:43,900 --> 02:09:45,480
Y pienso que esta pasando

3076
02:09:46,200 --> 02:09:53,020
posiblemente ahora, pero seguirá sucediendo si las personas se establecen como personas de alta integridad,

3077
02:09:53,180 --> 02:09:54,240
que siempre serán honestos.

3078
02:09:54,260 --> 02:09:57,340
Creo que te estás estableciendo como alguien de gran integridad,

3079
02:09:57,960 --> 02:09:59,940
donde pueden confiar en esa persona.

3080
02:10:00,060 --> 02:10:01,300
Un fuego quiere ser,

3081
02:10:01,740 --> 02:10:03,460
Ya sabes, la institución a la que la gente puede acudir es como,

3082
02:10:03,620 --> 02:10:04,420
si es libertad de expresión,

3083
02:10:04,500 --> 02:10:05,840
Lo defenderemos y punto.

3084
02:10:06,520 --> 02:10:08,740
Y creo que la gente necesita algo nuevo,

3085
02:10:09,720 --> 02:10:12,360
necesitan tener autoridades en las que realmente puedan confiar.

3086
02:10:12,540 --> 02:10:16,620
Y creo que si realmente tuvieras una transmisión que la gente pudiera ver en acción,

3087
02:10:16,660 --> 02:10:18,860
pero no inundarlo, ya sabes,

3088
02:10:19,440 --> 02:10:21,800
estúpidas cosas de cancelar cultura o gato tonto significa,

3089
02:10:22,100 --> 02:10:23,240
donde en realidad es un serio

3090
02:10:23,240 --> 02:10:24,960
discusión circunscrita a reglas,

3091
02:10:25,500 --> 02:10:26,740
ninguna fortaleza retórica perfecta,

3092
02:10:26,900 --> 02:10:30,200
ninguna fortaleza retórica eficiente, ninguna de las tonterías que debatimos.

3093
02:10:30,760 --> 02:10:33,460
Creo que podrías empezar a crear algo.

3094
02:10:33,460 --> 02:10:38,600
En realidad, eso podría ser una mejora importante en la velocidad con la que creamos nuevos,

3095
02:10:38,700 --> 02:10:41,200
mejores ideas y establecer y separar la verdad de la falsedad.

3096
02:10:41,960 --> 02:10:42,240
Sí.

3097
02:10:42,460 --> 02:10:43,900
Si se hace bien,

3098
02:10:43,920 --> 02:10:46,880
Puede inspirar a un gran número de personas a ser cada vez más altos.

3099
02:10:46,900 --> 02:10:51,160
integridad y puede crear integridad como un valor por el cual luchar.

3100
02:10:51,600 --> 02:10:56,640
Quiero decir, ya sabes, ha habido proyectos en Internet que han hecho un

3101
02:10:56,640 --> 02:10:57,540
increíble trabajo de eso,

3102
02:10:57,600 --> 02:10:59,220
pero también han sido muy defectuosos.

3103
02:10:59,580 --> 02:11:01,920
Como Wikipedia es un ejemplo de una gran

3104
02:11:01,920 --> 02:11:03,800
dar un paso adelante al hacerlo.

3105
02:11:03,840 --> 02:11:04,800
Es bastante impresionante.

3106
02:11:04,940 --> 02:11:05,880
¿Cuál es su opinión general?

3107
02:11:06,160 --> 02:11:07,600
Quiero decir, estoy sobre todo impresionado.

3108
02:11:07,780 --> 02:11:09,220
Entonces hay algunos realmente

3109
02:11:10,080 --> 02:11:11,060
ideas poderosas

3110
02:11:11,600 --> 02:11:13,280
para las personas que editan Wikipedia.

3111
02:11:13,760 --> 02:11:15,300
uno de los cuales es cada

3112
02:11:15,580 --> 02:11:18,740
El editor declara por sí mismo:

3113
02:11:19,040 --> 02:11:19,480
sabes,

3114
02:11:19,820 --> 02:11:24,340
Me gusta la política y soy un tipo de tendencia izquierdista.

3115
02:11:24,780 --> 02:11:26,460
Entonces realmente no debería estar editando

3116
02:11:27,140 --> 02:11:29,300
Artículos políticos porque tengo prejuicios.

3117
02:11:29,420 --> 02:11:31,220
Entonces declaran sus prejuicios

3118
02:11:31,220 --> 02:11:34,020
y a menudo hacen un buen trabajo al declarar los sesgos,

3119
02:11:34,100 --> 02:11:36,010
pero todavía les gustará,

3120
02:11:36,960 --> 02:11:39,160
encontrarán una manera de justificarse.

3121
02:11:39,320 --> 02:11:41,440
Como si algo los enojara y quisieran hacerlo.

3122
02:11:41,540 --> 02:11:46,160
corregirlo porque les encanta corregir la falsedad para convertirla en verdad.

3123
02:11:46,780 --> 02:11:50,040
Pero la perspectiva de lo que es verdad y lo que no se ve afectada por su sesgo.

3124
02:11:50,160 --> 02:11:51,280
La verdad es difícil de saber.

3125
02:11:52,100 --> 02:11:56,720
Y es cierto que existe un sesgo izquierdista en los editores de Wikipedia.

3126
02:11:57,360 --> 02:11:57,780
Así que para eso,

3127
02:11:58,860 --> 02:12:00,680
lo que pasa es en los artículos,

3128
02:12:00,780 --> 02:12:04,360
lo cual aprecio sobre todo que no tenga una política

3129
02:12:04,920 --> 02:12:05,860
aspecto de ellos,

3130
02:12:06,280 --> 02:12:07,440
sabes,

3131
02:12:08,100 --> 02:12:11,220
um, artículos científicos o, uh, artículos técnicos,

3132
02:12:11,840 --> 02:12:13,120
van a ser muy fuertes,

3133
02:12:13,300 --> 02:12:17,400
incluso la historia, simplemente describiendo los hechos de la historia que no tienen un elemento subjetivo,

3134
02:12:18,000 --> 02:12:18,580
eh, fuerte.

3135
02:12:19,100 --> 02:12:19,280
También

3136
02:12:19,900 --> 02:12:21,180
simplemente usando mi propio cerebro,

3137
02:12:21,620 --> 02:12:22,980
Puedo filtrar

3138
02:12:23,580 --> 02:12:24,220
si es,

3139
02:12:24,600 --> 02:12:26,780
uh, ya sabes, si es algo sobre el 6 de enero o algo así,

3140
02:12:27,120 --> 02:12:28,000
sé que voy a

3141
02:12:28,000 --> 02:12:30,200
decir, no soy lo que sea que esté pasando aquí.

3142
02:12:30,280 --> 02:12:32,060
Voy a leerlo,

3143
02:12:32,720 --> 02:12:34,320
pero la mayoría voy a buscar otras fuentes.

3144
02:12:34,320 --> 02:12:36,640
Voy a analizar un montón de perspectivas diferentes al respecto.

3145
02:12:36,740 --> 02:12:37,820
Va a ser muy tenso.

3146
02:12:38,220 --> 02:12:39,940
Probablemente habrá algún tipo de sesgo.

3147
02:12:40,000 --> 02:12:43,260
Tal vez alguna redacción sea tal,

3148
02:12:43,560 --> 02:12:44,180
que es una palabra.

3149
02:12:44,660 --> 02:12:46,980
Aquí es donde Wikipedia hace esto.

3150
02:12:47,540 --> 02:12:50,300
La forma en que expresan las cosas será parcial,

3151
02:12:50,700 --> 02:12:51,640
la elección de las palabras,

3152
02:12:52,920 --> 02:12:56,400
pero los propios editores de Wikipedia son muy autorreflexivos.

3153
02:12:56,480 --> 02:13:01,020
Literalmente tienen artículos que describen estos mismos efectos sobre cómo se pueden usar.

3154
02:13:01,020 --> 02:13:05,800
palabras para inyectar prejuicios en todas las formas en que hablas de ello.

3155
02:13:05,800 --> 02:13:07,140
Eso es más saludable que la mayoría de los entornos.

3156
02:13:07,500 --> 02:13:08,880
Es increíblemente saludable

3157
02:13:09,200 --> 02:13:10,580
pero creo que podrías hacerlo mejor.

3158
02:13:11,000 --> 02:13:12,880
Para mí, uno de los grandes defectos de Wikipedia,

3159
02:13:13,280 --> 02:13:19,060
Lo que las notas de la comunidad sobre X funcionan mejor es la accesibilidad de convertirse en editor.

3160
02:13:19,560 --> 02:13:24,240
Um, es difícil convertirse en editor y no es tan visible.

3161
02:13:24,240 --> 02:13:25,380
el proceso de edición.

3162
02:13:26,120 --> 02:13:26,820
Entonces me encantaría,

3163
02:13:27,140 --> 02:13:36,140
como dijiste, un stream, para que todos puedan observar este debate entre personas con integridad de cuando discuten cosas como el 6 de enero,

3164
02:13:36,160 --> 02:13:43,500
Temas muy controvertidos para ver cómo va el proceso del debate en lugar de estar escondido en las sombras.

3165
02:13:43,520 --> 02:13:44,800
que se encuentra actualmente en Wikipedia.

3166
02:13:45,060 --> 02:13:45,780
Puedes acceder a eso.

3167
02:13:45,820 --> 02:13:47,740
Es simplemente de difícil acceso, pero,

3168
02:13:48,080 --> 02:13:51,520
y también he visto cómo usarán ciertos artículos,

3169
02:13:52,680 --> 02:13:53,680
como en ciertas personas,

3170
02:13:54,080 --> 02:14:01,140
como artículos sobre personas en las que he aprendido a confiar cada vez menos porque literalmente los usarán para realizar ataques personales.

3171
02:14:01,160 --> 02:14:02,420
Y esto es algo sobre lo que escribes.

3172
02:14:03,060 --> 02:14:03,660
Ellos usarán,

3173
02:14:04,340 --> 02:14:08,540
uh, descripciones de diferentes controversias para pintar una imagen de una persona que es,

3174
02:14:09,840 --> 02:14:12,440
Eso no me parece al menos una representación precisa.

3175
02:14:12,640 --> 02:14:13,840
de la persona.

3176
02:14:14,100 --> 02:14:18,240
Y es como escribir un artículo sobre Einstein mencionando algo sobre,

3177
02:14:18,760 --> 02:14:22,880
uh, teoría de la relatividad y luego decir que era un mujeriego y abusador y un,

3178
02:14:22,880 --> 02:14:27,720
como controversia, ya sabes, sí, él también es Feynman,

3179
02:14:27,720 --> 02:14:32,780
ya sabes, no, ya sabes, fue, ya sabes, no son exactamente el ser humano perfecto en términos de mujeres,

3180
02:14:33,160 --> 02:14:39,060
pero como hay otros aspectos de este humano y para capturarlo adecuadamente,

3181
02:14:39,400 --> 02:14:40,860
hay una cierta manera de hacerlo.

3182
02:14:41,000 --> 02:14:42,820
Creo que Wikipedia a menudo se inclinará.

3183
02:14:43,520 --> 02:14:45,880
Realmente intentan ser reflexivos sobre sí mismos y

3184
02:14:46,880 --> 02:14:47,800
intenta detener esto,

3185
02:14:47,880 --> 02:14:52,040
pero se inclinarán hacia el drama si coincide con el sesgo.

3186
02:14:52,500 --> 02:14:52,940
Pero otra vez,

3187
02:14:53,960 --> 02:14:57,040
mucho mejor que el mundo creo que es mucho mejor.

3188
02:14:58,340 --> 02:14:58,480
Oh,

3189
02:14:58,900 --> 02:14:59,800
porque Wikipedia existe,

3190
02:15:01,020 --> 02:15:03,660
pero ahora que estamos en estas etapas de la adolescencia,

3191
02:15:03,780 --> 02:15:05,690
Estamos creciendo y tratando de idear diferentes tecnologías.

3192
02:15:05,980 --> 02:15:08,000
La idea de una corriente es realmente,

3193
02:15:08,000 --> 02:15:12,720
Realmente interesante a medida que involucras a más y más personas en este discurso.

3194
02:15:12,940 --> 02:15:14,680
que donde esta el valor,

3195
02:15:14,780 --> 02:15:16,120
Intentemos conseguir la verdad.

3196
02:15:17,080 --> 02:15:17,160
Sí.

3197
02:15:17,420 --> 02:15:17,640
Sí.

3198
02:15:17,640 --> 02:15:19,860
Y básicamente, ya sabes, obtienes las tarjetas pequeñas para,

3199
02:15:19,980 --> 02:15:21,320
No, mal, no, mal.

3200
02:15:21,620 --> 02:15:22,400
Y lo diferente,

3201
02:15:22,720 --> 02:15:25,100
las diferentes, las diferentes técnicas retóricas que se están utilizando

3202
02:15:25,160 --> 02:15:26,460
para evitar realmente discutir.

3203
02:15:26,500 --> 02:15:26,800
Sí.

3204
02:15:26,880 --> 02:15:29,460
Y creo que, de hecho, puedes hacerlo un poco divertido si tienes un número limitado.

3205
02:15:29,460 --> 02:15:30,220
de ellos.

3206
02:15:30,220 --> 02:15:32,300
Um, ya sabes, es algo así como,

3207
02:15:32,580 --> 02:15:33,940
obtienes tres, ¿qué tal algunas cartas?

3208
02:15:34,420 --> 02:15:35,420
Así que gamificando todo.

3209
02:15:35,660 --> 02:15:36,560
Absolutamente.

3210
02:15:36,760 --> 02:15:37,180
Sí.

3211
02:15:37,220 --> 02:15:38,240
Uh, déjame preguntarte sobre,

3212
02:15:39,460 --> 02:15:42,480
Uh, entonces mencionaste haber pasado por algunos momentos difíciles en tu vida.

3213
02:15:42,520 --> 02:15:43,560
Eh,

3214
02:15:44,760 --> 02:15:45,740
¿Cuál ha sido tu

3215
02:15:45,740 --> 02:15:47,980
experiencia con, uh, con, con depresión?

3216
02:15:48,460 --> 02:15:50,220
¿Cuál ha sido tu experiencia al salir?

3217
02:15:50,220 --> 02:15:51,020
de ello, superándolo?

3218
02:15:52,230 --> 02:15:52,380
Sí.

3219
02:15:52,520 --> 02:15:54,840
Quiero decir, todo el asunto, todo el viaje, um,

3220
02:15:55,240 --> 02:15:56,700
th th th th th th th th

3221
02:15:56,700 --> 02:15:59,600
con mimos la mente americana empezó conmigo, um,

3222
02:16:00,240 --> 02:16:02,340
en el psiquiátrico de Belmont

3223
02:16:02,340 --> 02:16:05,760
instalación en Filadelfia allá por 2007,

3224
02:16:06,380 --> 02:16:09,760
Había llamado al 911 en un momento de claridad porque

3225
02:16:09,760 --> 02:16:12,620
Fui a la ferretería a, a, um,

3226
02:16:13,740 --> 02:16:14,980
Asegúrate de que cuando me suicidé,

3227
02:16:14,980 --> 02:16:16,000
que yo, se quedó pegado.

3228
02:16:16,220 --> 02:16:17,160
Quería asegurarme de que yo,

3229
02:16:17,160 --> 02:16:19,160
ya sabes, tenía mi cabeza envuelta y todo.

3230
02:16:19,460 --> 02:16:22,000
Entonces, si todos los medicamentos que planeaba tomar no funcionaran,

3231
02:16:22,040 --> 02:16:22,580
que no podría

3232
02:16:22,600 --> 02:16:24,360
para salir con garras.

3233
02:16:25,300 --> 02:16:29,580
Había sido un año muy difícil y siempre tuve problemas con la depresión.

3234
02:16:29,780 --> 02:16:31,580
um, pero estaban empeorando.

3235
02:16:32,280 --> 02:16:34,440
Y, francamente, una de las razones por las que esta cultura de la cancelación

3236
02:16:34,440 --> 02:16:37,440
Esto es tan, um, importante para mí es que

3237
02:16:38,820 --> 02:16:40,840
Lo que no enfaticé tanto en mimar

3238
02:16:40,840 --> 02:16:42,080
la mente americana, que por cierto,

3239
02:16:42,760 --> 02:16:44,240
esa descripción que doy de intentar matar

3240
02:16:44,260 --> 02:16:46,740
Yo mismo fue la primera vez que lo escribí.

3241
02:16:47,280 --> 02:16:49,240
Nadie en mi familia estaba al tanto, um,

3242
02:16:49,600 --> 02:16:49,780
de como,

3243
02:16:50,220 --> 02:16:51,580
uh, de que sea así.

3244
02:16:51,660 --> 02:16:52,980
Mi esposa nunca lo había visto.

3245
02:16:52,980 --> 02:16:55,140
Y básicamente la única forma en que pude escribir eso fue,

3246
02:16:55,280 --> 02:16:57,640
Al hacer, ya sabes, cómo puedes engañarte a ti mismo.

3247
02:16:58,240 --> 02:16:59,840
Si, um, y yo dijera,

3248
02:17:00,140 --> 02:17:03,880
Voy a convencerme de que esto es sólo entre mi computadora y yo y nadie lo verá.

3249
02:17:03,880 --> 02:17:05,760
Y probablemente no sea lo más público que he escrito.

3250
02:17:06,960 --> 02:17:12,840
Um, pero lo que no enfaticé en eso fue en qué medida la guerra cultural influyó en mi depresión.

3251
02:17:13,040 --> 02:17:14,180
porque yo era originalmente

3252
02:17:14,200 --> 02:17:15,140
el director jurídico de incendios.

3253
02:17:15,360 --> 02:17:17,220
Luego me convertí en presidente de bomberos en 2005,

3254
02:17:17,960 --> 02:17:19,680
Cuando me mudé a Filadelfia es donde me deprimo.

3255
02:17:19,680 --> 02:17:23,360
Um, y, en fin, no tengo familia allí.

3256
02:17:23,580 --> 02:17:24,720
Hay algo en el pueblo.

3257
02:17:24,820 --> 02:17:26,060
No parece que les agrado mucho.

3258
02:17:26,480 --> 02:17:27,120
Eh,

3259
02:17:27,540 --> 02:17:28,480
pero lo principal

3260
02:17:28,480 --> 02:17:29,880
Estaba en el mundo de la cultura todo el tiempo.

3261
02:17:29,920 --> 02:17:32,400
Um, había una chica con la que estaba saliendo.

3262
02:17:32,740 --> 02:17:33,190
Eh,

3263
02:17:33,540 --> 02:17:36,260
Recuerdo que ella no parecía aprobar realmente lo que hice.

3264
02:17:36,280 --> 02:17:36,940
y mucha gente

3265
02:17:36,940 --> 02:17:37,940
Realmente no lo parecía.

3266
02:17:38,220 --> 02:17:41,220
Y mientras tanto, como si estuviera defendiendo a la gente de izquierda todo el tiempo

3267
02:17:41,400 --> 02:17:43,080
tiempo y dirían,

3268
02:17:43,080 --> 02:17:44,300
Oh, qué bueno que estés defendiendo a alguien en el

3269
02:17:44,300 --> 02:17:46,960
izquierda, pero aún así nunca me perdonarían que defendiera a alguien de derecha.

3270
02:17:47,260 --> 02:17:49,560
Y recuerdo haber dicho cómo soy en un punto,

3271
02:17:49,680 --> 02:17:52,220
Escucha, soy como, soy, soy un verdadero creyente en estas cosas.

3272
02:17:52,280 --> 02:17:53,500
Estoy dispuesto a defender a los nazis.

3273
02:17:54,020 --> 02:17:55,430
Ciertamente estoy dispuesto a defender a los republicanos.

3274
02:17:56,420 --> 02:17:57,880
Y ella realmente dijo,

3275
02:17:57,880 --> 02:17:59,380
Creo que los republicanos podrían estar peor.

3276
02:18:00,040 --> 02:18:00,740
Eh,

3277
02:18:01,080 --> 02:18:03,640
y eso no fue así, esa relación no fue muy bien.

3278
02:18:04,000 --> 02:18:06,640
Y luego estuve a punto de pelearme a puñetazos un par de veces con,

3279
02:18:06,640 --> 02:18:07,420
con gente en el

3280
02:18:07,440 --> 02:18:07,760
bien.

3281
02:18:08,040 --> 02:18:11,500
Porque descubrieron que defendía a la gente que hace chistes sobre el 11 de septiembre.

3282
02:18:11,680 --> 02:18:13,240
Así sucedió más de una vez.

3283
02:18:13,580 --> 02:18:15,500
Y eso, ya sabes, cuando tenga veintitantos años,

3284
02:18:15,580 --> 02:18:16,840
No volveré a pelear a puñetazos.

3285
02:18:17,820 --> 02:18:20,060
Um, pero sí, siempre fue así.

3286
02:18:20,120 --> 02:18:22,040
Tú, tú, ya ves que gente hipócrita.

3287
02:18:22,040 --> 02:18:22,640
puede ser.

3288
02:18:22,740 --> 02:18:26,780
Puedes ver cómo tus amigos pueden volverse contra ti si no les gusta tu política.

3289
02:18:27,120 --> 02:18:29,220
Así que obtuve una vista previa de esto,

3290
02:18:29,300 --> 02:18:33,460
de, de, de cuál es la cultura a la que nos dirigimos al ser el

3291
02:18:33,480 --> 02:18:34,300
presidente de fuego.

3292
02:18:34,360 --> 02:18:35,340
Y fue agotador.

3293
02:18:36,460 --> 02:18:39,500
Um, y esa fue una de las cosas principales.

3294
02:18:39,500 --> 02:18:40,560
que me llevó a ser,

3295
02:18:40,560 --> 02:18:41,720
ya sabes, deprimido suicidamente,

3296
02:18:42,480 --> 02:18:44,180
uh, en el centro Belmont.

3297
02:18:44,240 --> 02:18:48,420
Si me dijeras que ese sería el comienzo de una vida nueva y mejor para mí,

3298
02:18:48,740 --> 02:18:50,260
Me habría reído si pudiera,

3299
02:18:50,600 --> 02:18:51,940
pero yo, ya sabes, no me gusta,

3300
02:18:52,360 --> 02:18:53,540
Puedes decir que estoy bien si todavía me río.

3301
02:18:54,220 --> 02:18:54,800
Y no me estaba riendo

3302
02:18:55,280 --> 02:18:56,280
Mmm, en ese momento.

3303
02:18:57,000 --> 02:19:01,880
Entonces, busqué un médico y comencé a hacer terapia cognitivo-conductual.

3304
02:19:02,280 --> 02:19:07,480
Empecé a tener todas esas voces en mi cabeza que eran catastróficas y,

3305
02:19:08,160 --> 02:19:10,100
Um, ya sabes, me dio un over,

3306
02:19:10,140 --> 02:19:16,900
sobre la generalización y, um, uh, adivinación, ya sabes, uh, leer en la mente todas estas cosas que te enseñan a no hacer.

3307
02:19:17,580 --> 02:19:18,200
Y eso,

3308
02:19:18,580 --> 02:19:25,720
uh, y lo que ellos, lo que haces en la TCC es esencialmente que tienes algo que te molesta y luego simplemente

3309
02:19:25,720 --> 02:19:27,020
Escribe cuál fue el pensamiento.

3310
02:19:27,160 --> 02:19:29,920
Um, y sabes, algo menor podría pasar en tu

3311
02:19:29,940 --> 02:19:31,880
La respuesta fue, ya sabes, como, um,

3312
02:19:32,440 --> 02:19:32,600
Bueno,

3313
02:19:33,300 --> 02:19:34,780
La cita no pareció ir muy bien.

3314
02:19:34,920 --> 02:19:37,540
Um, y eso es porque estoy destrozado y moriremos solos.

3315
02:19:37,640 --> 02:19:39,200
Y tú dices, está bien, está bien, está bien.

3316
02:19:39,280 --> 02:19:40,860
¿Qué, qué, cuáles son los siguientes?

3317
02:19:40,860 --> 02:19:45,240
Ya sabes, eso es catastrófico, eso es leer la mente, eso es adivinar el futuro, eso es todo esto.

3318
02:19:45,820 --> 02:19:48,520
Um, y tienes que hacer esto varias veces al día.

3319
02:19:49,400 --> 02:19:49,740
para siempre.

3320
02:19:49,820 --> 02:19:51,580
De hecho, necesito repasarlo en este momento.

3321
02:19:51,580 --> 02:19:52,300
Eh,

3322
02:19:52,780 --> 02:19:54,840
y poco a poco se acabó

3323
02:19:54,860 --> 02:19:58,880
tiempo voces en mi cabeza que habían estado diciendo horrible, ya sabes,

3324
02:19:59,200 --> 02:19:59,960
horrible charla interna,

3325
02:20:00,640 --> 02:20:02,380
simplemente ya no sonaba tan convincente,

3326
02:20:02,860 --> 02:20:05,240
lo cual fue realmente un efecto sutil.

3327
02:20:05,300 --> 02:20:06,200
Como si fuera algo así como,

3328
02:20:06,260 --> 02:20:09,000
oh espera, no creo que esté roto.

3329
02:20:09,440 --> 02:20:11,100
Ya sabes, eso no suena cierto.

3330
02:20:11,340 --> 02:20:14,380
Eso ya no suena como una verdad de Dios como antes.

3331
02:20:15,380 --> 02:20:18,020
Y nueve meses después de que fui

3332
02:20:19,000 --> 02:20:19,940
planeando suicidarme,

3333
02:20:19,960 --> 02:20:22,060
Probablemente era más feliz de lo que había sido en una década.

3334
02:20:22,940 --> 02:20:26,140
Um, y esa fue una de las cosas que,

3335
02:20:26,380 --> 02:20:30,660
ya sabes, que la TCC es lo que me llevó a notar esto en mi propio trabajo,

3336
02:20:30,680 --> 02:20:32,120
que se sentía como si los administradores estuvieran

3337
02:20:32,760 --> 02:20:34,840
una especie de venta de distorsiones cognitivas,

3338
02:20:34,940 --> 02:20:36,080
pero los estudiantes aún no estaban comprando.

3339
02:20:36,140 --> 02:20:40,040
Y luego, cuando comencé a darme cuenta de que parecían haber llegado ya creyendo en muchas de estas cosas,

3340
02:20:40,040 --> 02:20:41,080
que sería muy peligroso.

3341
02:20:41,080 --> 02:20:43,620
Y eso llevó a mimar la mente estadounidense y todo eso.

3342
02:20:44,640 --> 02:20:48,500
Pero lo difícil de escribir el Hansling de la mente americana,

3343
02:20:48,540 --> 02:20:50,440
Ya lo habría mencionado un par de veces,

3344
02:20:50,720 --> 02:20:52,520
Me deprimí mucho el año pasado,

3345
02:20:52,900 --> 02:20:54,060
mmm porque estaba estudiando

3346
02:20:54,400 --> 02:20:56,180
ya sabes, hay un amigo ahí dentro

3347
02:20:56,180 --> 02:20:58,740
que hablé de quién se suicidó después de ser cancelado.

3348
02:20:58,900 --> 02:21:00,020
Hablé con él una semana antes.

3349
02:21:00,020 --> 02:21:01,900
Se suicidó y yo en realidad no lo había hecho.

3350
02:21:03,120 --> 02:21:04,960
En realidad no había hablado con él porque

3351
02:21:04,960 --> 02:21:06,000
Parecía tan confiado.

3352
02:21:06,000 --> 02:21:08,140
Pensé que estaría totalmente bien porque él, él

3353
02:21:08,800 --> 02:21:11,780
Tuve un tweet insensible en junio de 2020 y,

3354
02:21:11,940 --> 02:21:13,640
ya sabes, me obligaron a salir

3355
02:21:14,220 --> 02:21:15,320
de una manera que en realidad no

3356
02:21:15,320 --> 02:21:16,940
Suena tan mal como muchos de los otros profesores.

3357
02:21:16,940 --> 02:21:18,280
De hecho, al menos recibió un paquete de indemnización.

3358
02:21:18,440 --> 02:21:20,100
entonces sabían que demandaría y ganaría, um,

3359
02:21:20,620 --> 02:21:21,400
porque lo había hecho antes.

3360
02:21:22,360 --> 02:21:26,200
Y entonces esperé para ver cómo estaba porque estábamos tan abrumados con la solicitud de

3361
02:21:26,200 --> 02:21:26,380
ayuda.

3362
02:21:26,380 --> 02:21:29,180
Y él decía que todavía venía gente a su casa.

3363
02:21:29,360 --> 02:21:31,260
Y luego se pegó un tiro la semana siguiente.

3364
02:21:31,420 --> 02:21:36,360
Y definitivamente, y porque todos saben que hablo públicamente de mis luchas con estas cosas,

3365
02:21:37,280 --> 02:21:37,620
todos

3366
02:21:38,240 --> 02:21:41,040
Quien lucha contra esto viene a mí cuando está pasando por un momento difícil.

3367
02:21:41,100 --> 02:21:45,780
Y este es un negocio muy difícil desde el punto de vista psicológico.

3368
02:21:45,920 --> 02:21:47,400
E incluso admitiendo esto ahora mismo,

3369
02:21:48,840 --> 02:21:50,240
como pienso en como todos los,

3370
02:21:50,240 --> 02:21:51,180
todos los buitres que hay por ahí,

3371
02:21:51,200 --> 02:21:52,080
se divertirán con ello.

3372
02:21:52,120 --> 02:21:53,140
De la misma manera cuando,

3373
02:21:53,140 --> 02:21:54,400
cuando, cuando mi amigo Mike Adams se suicidó,

3374
02:21:54,580 --> 02:21:56,480
había gente como celebrando en Twitter,

3375
02:21:56,560 --> 02:21:58,620
um, eso, que un hombre estaba muerto,

3376
02:21:59,400 --> 02:22:01,420
uh, porque no les gustaban sus tweets.

3377
02:22:02,240 --> 02:22:06,640
Y, de alguna manera, eso los hizo sentir compasión por alguna otra persona abstracta.

3378
02:22:07,420 --> 02:22:09,080
Entonces me estaba poniendo un poco deprimido y ansioso.

3379
02:22:09,160 --> 02:22:13,560
Y lo que realmente me ayudó más que cualquier otra cosa, um,

3380
02:22:14,420 --> 02:22:16,200
estaba confesando a mi personal

3381
02:22:17,070 --> 02:22:18,220
que yo,

3382
02:22:18,560 --> 02:22:19,080
Tú sabes que yo,

3383
02:22:19,580 --> 02:22:20,660
Yo, los libros consumen mucha energía.

3384
02:22:20,820 --> 02:22:22,520
Entonces supe que no querían escuchar eso.

3385
02:22:22,620 --> 02:22:24,920
Esto no sólo le estaba quitando mucho tiempo al jefe,

3386
02:22:25,400 --> 02:22:26,660
esto lo estaba deprimiendo y ansiosa.

3387
02:22:26,820 --> 02:22:29,860
Pero cuando finalmente le dije a mi, el liderazgo de mi personal,

3388
02:22:29,940 --> 02:22:32,860
um, ya sabes, gente que, aunque trato de mantener

3389
02:22:32,860 --> 02:22:33,820
mucha distancia de,

3390
02:22:34,220 --> 02:22:36,340
Me encanta mucho, um, hizo

3391
02:22:36,860 --> 02:22:37,440
tal diferencia,

3392
02:22:37,920 --> 02:22:40,000
Ya sabes, um, porque podría ser abierto sobre eso.

3393
02:22:40,180 --> 02:22:41,880
Y la otra cosa fue,

3394
02:22:41,960 --> 02:22:43,260
¿Has escuchado este diálogo de la conferencia?

3395
02:22:43,720 --> 02:22:44,160
Oh sí.

3396
02:22:44,420 --> 02:22:45,760
Es como una cosa sólo por invitación.

3397
02:22:46,060 --> 02:22:47,500
Soy Orrin Hoffman.

3398
02:22:48,100 --> 02:22:48,440
lo ejecuta.

3399
02:22:48,880 --> 02:22:50,440
Um, intencionalmente intenta conseguir

3400
02:22:50,460 --> 02:22:51,880
personas de todo el espectro político,

3401
02:22:51,880 --> 02:22:53,140
um, para unirnos,

3402
02:22:53,700 --> 02:22:56,200
uh, y tener conversaciones extraoficiales sobre temas importantes.

3403
02:22:57,160 --> 02:23:01,360
Y fue agradable estar en una sala donde los conservadores liberales,

3404
02:23:01,800 --> 02:23:02,600
Ninguna de las anteriores,

3405
02:23:02,740 --> 02:23:05,180
Todos pensamos, oh, gracias a Dios, alguien ha adoptado la cultura de la cancelación.

3406
02:23:05,260 --> 02:23:06,640
Y donde sentí que yo

3407
02:23:07,440 --> 02:23:08,580
sentí que tal vez

3408
02:23:09,200 --> 02:23:13,000
este no será el desastre para mí y mi familia que fui,

3409
02:23:13,000 --> 02:23:14,700
que estaba empezando a tener miedo.

3410
02:23:14,840 --> 02:23:17,700
Sería que asumir las cosas podría tener un final feliz.

3411
02:23:18,160 --> 02:23:20,600
Bueno, una cosa que destaco de eso

3412
02:23:23,540 --> 02:23:29,200
Es así, el dolor de la cancelación puede ser realmente intenso.

3413
02:23:29,620 --> 02:23:33,480
Y eso no significa necesariamente perder el trabajo, sino incluso,

3414
02:23:34,000 --> 02:23:36,040
puedes llamarlo acoso, puedes llamarlo como quieras,

3415
02:23:36,480 --> 02:23:39,120
pero solo un número de personas en Internet.

3416
02:23:40,060 --> 02:23:43,360
Y ese número puede ser un poco pequeño.

3417
02:23:44,540 --> 02:23:45,820
cosas malas para ti.

3418
02:23:45,820 --> 02:23:46,000
Sí.

3419
02:23:46,500 --> 02:23:49,540
Esa puede ser una fuerza bastante poderosa para la psique humana,

3420
02:23:49,540 --> 02:23:51,160
Lo cual es, pero fue muy sorprendente.

3421
02:23:51,600 --> 02:23:53,620
Y luego también la otra cara de eso,

3422
02:23:54,300 --> 02:23:56,960
Um, realmente me hace

3423
02:23:56,960 --> 02:23:58,900
Es triste lo cruel que puede ser la gente.

3424
02:23:59,360 --> 02:24:00,400
Es tal,

3425
02:24:00,900 --> 02:24:05,680
pensar que tu, tu causa es una justicia social en muchos casos puede llevarte

3426
02:24:05,680 --> 02:24:09,520
La gente piense que puedo ser tan cruel como quiera para lograr esto.

3427
02:24:09,840 --> 02:24:10,560
Cuando, muchas veces

3428
02:24:10,740 --> 02:24:18,280
es solo una forma de desahogar cierta agresión hacia una persona que consideras solo como una abstracción.

3429
02:24:18,980 --> 02:24:23,120
Por eso creo que es importante que la gente se dé cuenta de que son lo que sea,

3430
02:24:23,820 --> 02:24:24,860
como lo que sea,

3431
02:24:27,060 --> 02:24:31,100
cualquier energía negativa, cualquier negatividad que quieras transmitir,

3432
02:24:31,920 --> 02:24:33,140
como si hubiera gente real

3433
02:24:33,140 --> 02:24:34,060
eso puede lastimarse.

3434
02:24:34,340 --> 02:24:37,060
Como si realmente pudieras conseguir gente,

3435
02:24:37,740 --> 02:24:40,180
um, ser la peor versión de

3436
02:24:40,300 --> 02:24:42,100
ellos mismos o posiblemente quitarse la vida.

3437
02:24:42,220 --> 02:24:43,600
Y no lo es

3438
02:24:44,540 --> 02:24:45,060
como real.

3439
02:24:45,880 --> 02:24:47,740
Sí. Bueno, esa es una de las cosas que hacemos en el libro,

3440
02:24:47,740 --> 02:24:54,560
um, para, realmente dirigirme a las personas que todavía intentan afirmar que esto no es real, solo citamos,

3441
02:24:55,500 --> 02:24:56,220
citamos al Papa,

3442
02:24:56,540 --> 02:24:57,280
citamos a Obama,

3443
02:24:57,640 --> 02:24:58,680
citamos a James Carville,

3444
02:24:58,920 --> 02:25:01,000
Citamos a Taylor Swift sobre la cultura de la cancelación.

3445
02:25:01,780 --> 02:25:03,840
Como, um, y la cita suiza de Taylor es,

3446
02:25:04,020 --> 02:25:05,820
Se trata esencialmente de cómo detrás de todo

3447
02:25:05,820 --> 02:25:07,800
esto, está el, cuando se pone particularmente desagradable,

3448
02:25:07,800 --> 02:25:09,880
Hay esto muy claro, ya sabes,

3449
02:25:10,440 --> 02:25:12,860
suicidarte como una especie de trasfondo.

3450
02:25:13,280 --> 02:25:14,580
Um, y es,

3451
02:25:14,960 --> 02:25:15,560
Es cruel.

3452
02:25:16,280 --> 02:25:20,360
Y el problema es que en un entorno tan abierto,

3453
02:25:20,700 --> 02:25:22,220
siempre va a haber

3454
02:25:22,240 --> 02:25:26,560
alguien que quiere ser tan transgresor y decir lo más hiriente, ya sabes,

3455
02:25:26,980 --> 02:25:27,460
Cosa terrible.

3456
02:25:27,900 --> 02:25:30,660
Pero luego hay que recordar la tergiversación,

3457
02:25:30,780 --> 02:25:31,820
Volviendo a los viejos modismos,

3458
02:25:32,500 --> 02:25:33,980
palos y piedras me romperán los huesos,

3459
02:25:34,120 --> 02:25:35,920
Pero los nombres nunca, nunca me harán daño.

3460
02:25:36,260 --> 02:25:37,860
Ha sido

3461
02:25:38,560 --> 02:25:42,940
reinventado en los debates universitarios de la manera más estúpida.

3462
02:25:43,240 --> 02:25:44,960
La gente literalmente dirá cosas como,

3463
02:25:45,240 --> 02:25:46,600
pero ahora sabemos que las palabras pueden herir.

3464
02:25:46,880 --> 02:25:49,080
Y es como si ahora supiéramos que las palabras pueden herir.

3465
02:25:49,430 --> 02:25:50,180
Tipo,

3466
02:25:50,640 --> 02:25:55,420
no tenías que inventar una cosita especial que les enseñas a hacer a los niños

3467
02:25:55,420 --> 02:25:56,460
sus palabras duelen menos.

3468
02:25:56,600 --> 02:25:57,920
Si nunca duelen en primer lugar,

3469
02:25:57,940 --> 02:25:58,960
Ni siquiera tendría sentido.

3470
02:25:59,380 --> 02:26:03,980
El dicho es un dicho que te repites a ti mismo para darte fuerzas.

3471
02:26:04,220 --> 02:26:07,180
Cuando los matones se hayan dado cuenta de que eres un poco raro,

3472
02:26:07,440 --> 02:26:08,880
tal vez un poco personal,

3473
02:26:09,400 --> 02:26:10,340
em, el,

3474
02:26:10,800 --> 02:26:11,820
Ah, y ayuda.

3475
02:26:12,160 --> 02:26:14,140
Realmente ayuda ser como,

3476
02:26:14,160 --> 02:26:16,460
Escucha, está bien, los idiotas van a decir cosas idiotas.

3477
02:26:17,000 --> 02:26:20,260
Um, y no puedo permitir que tengan ese tipo de poder sobre mí.

3478
02:26:20,560 --> 02:26:20,840
Sí.

3479
02:26:21,580 --> 02:26:22,020
Sí.

3480
02:26:22,060 --> 02:26:24,400
Sigue siendo una experiencia de aprendizaje porque,

3481
02:26:24,720 --> 02:26:25,880
lo hace, duele.

3482
02:26:26,280 --> 02:26:28,420
Pero para la buena gente que en realidad,

3483
02:26:28,420 --> 02:26:30,560
ya sabes, a veces pienso, pienso que se están desahogando,

3484
02:26:30,680 --> 02:26:31,680
ya sabes, piénsalo.

3485
02:26:31,700 --> 02:26:33,560
Recuerda que hay gente al otro lado.

3486
02:26:35,100 --> 02:26:35,240
Sí.

3487
02:26:35,240 --> 02:26:37,620
Para mí, perjudica mi tipo de fe en la humanidad.

3488
02:26:38,070 --> 02:26:39,160
Um, sé que no debería,

3489
02:26:39,160 --> 02:26:39,980
pero a veces lo hace

3490
02:26:40,620 --> 02:26:41,800
cuando solo veo gente siendo

3491
02:26:41,860 --> 02:26:43,120
son geniales el uno con el otro, es algo así como,

3492
02:26:44,700 --> 02:26:45,200
es,

3493
02:26:45,800 --> 02:26:46,620
eh, flota

3494
02:26:47,620 --> 02:26:49,940
una nube sobre mi perspectiva del mundo.

3495
02:26:50,360 --> 02:26:52,820
Y eso no, desearía que no tuviera que estar allí.

3496
02:26:53,280 --> 02:26:53,340
Sí.

3497
02:26:53,340 --> 02:26:55,000
Ese siempre fue mi tipo de frivolidad,

3498
02:26:55,120 --> 02:26:56,960
pero, uh, responde a eso.

3499
02:26:57,180 --> 02:27:02,660
Si, si la humanidad es básicamente buena o básicamente mala, es como el mayor debate en,

3500
02:27:02,660 --> 02:27:04,200
en, en filosofía y ser como,

3501
02:27:04,500 --> 02:27:06,440
Bueno, el problema con el primero es que hay

3502
02:27:06,440 --> 02:27:08,080
Nada básico sobre la humanidad.

3503
02:27:09,460 --> 02:27:09,800
Sí.

3504
02:27:09,940 --> 02:27:12,600
¿Qué te da esperanza sobre todo este asunto?

3505
02:27:12,720 --> 02:27:16,080
sobre este estado oscuro en el que estamos

3506
02:27:16,080 --> 02:27:18,440
En, como usted describe, ¿cómo podemos salir?

3507
02:27:18,460 --> 02:27:20,480
¿Qué te da esperanzas de que salgamos?

3508
02:27:21,300 --> 02:27:23,460
Creo que la gente está harta de esto.

3509
02:27:24,020 --> 02:27:26,280
Um, creo que la gente está harta de

3510
02:27:27,080 --> 02:27:28,620
no poder ser auténtico.

3511
02:27:28,790 --> 02:27:31,600
Um, y eso es realmente, ya sabes, lo que es la censura.

3512
02:27:31,780 --> 02:27:32,620
Básicamente te está diciendo,

3513
02:27:32,760 --> 02:27:33,140
no seas tú mismo.

3514
02:27:33,420 --> 02:27:35,380
En realidad, no digas lo que piensas.

3515
02:27:35,900 --> 02:27:37,360
Um, no muestres tu personalidad.

3516
02:27:37,520 --> 02:27:38,280
No discrepes.

3517
02:27:38,500 --> 02:27:39,120
No seas raro.

3518
02:27:39,140 --> 02:27:39,840
No te equivoques.

3519
02:27:40,800 --> 02:27:42,020
Um, y eso no es sostenible.

3520
02:27:42,460 --> 02:27:43,120
Creo que

3521
02:27:44,400 --> 02:27:45,940
la gente ya ha tenido suficiente.

3522
02:27:46,050 --> 02:27:50,460
Uh, pero una cosa que definitivamente quiero decirle a su audiencia es

3523
02:27:51,140 --> 02:27:53,680
no puede ser simplemente

3524
02:27:53,680 --> 02:27:58,080
Depende de nosotros, nuestros espectadores, intentar solucionar este problema.

3525
02:27:58,760 --> 02:28:00,360
Um, y creo que,

3526
02:28:00,760 --> 02:28:03,280
y esto puede parecer que es un problema no relacionado.

3527
02:28:03,880 --> 02:28:05,240
creo que si hubiera

3528
02:28:06,220 --> 02:28:07,440
altamente respetado,

3529
02:28:07,760 --> 02:28:11,180
digamos formas extremadamente difíciles de demostrar que

3530
02:28:11,180 --> 02:28:14,260
eres extremadamente inteligente y trabajador que cuesta poco o nada,

3531
02:28:15,360 --> 02:28:16,540
que realmente puede dar

3532
02:28:17,660 --> 02:28:20,680
los Harvard y Yale del mundo se postulen para ganar su dinero.

3533
02:28:20,780 --> 02:28:23,840
Creo que eso podría ser lo más positivo que podríamos hacer para,

3534
02:28:23,840 --> 02:28:24,580
para, para lidiar con un montón de

3535
02:28:24,580 --> 02:28:28,700
estos problemas y por qué creo que el hecho de que nos hayamos convertido

3536
02:28:29,320 --> 02:28:31,440
una América extraña con una gran

3537
02:28:31,660 --> 02:28:35,060
La tradición antielitista se ha vuelto extrañamente elitista en esto,

3538
02:28:35,340 --> 02:28:36,640
en, um, en el respeto que

3539
02:28:36,640 --> 02:28:38,300
nosotros no solo otra vez,

3540
02:28:38,320 --> 02:28:41,920
nuestro liderazgo proviene de estas pocas escuelas elegantes,

3541
02:28:42,480 --> 02:28:44,380
De hecho, sentimos una gran admiración por ellos.

3542
02:28:44,520 --> 02:28:45,700
Los admiramos,

3543
02:28:46,020 --> 02:28:47,340
pero creo que tendríamos mucho

3544
02:28:47,340 --> 02:28:49,740
Una sociedad más saludable si la gente pudiera demostrar,

3545
02:28:50,380 --> 02:28:52,480
ya sabes, su excelencia en formas que son

3546
02:28:52,480 --> 02:28:54,600
provenientes de corrientes completamente diferentes y,

3547
02:28:54,840 --> 02:28:56,040
y eso, eso, eso es muy respetado.

3548
02:28:56,140 --> 02:28:56,960
A veces hablo de

3549
02:28:57,340 --> 02:29:00,540
Debería haber una prueba que cualquiera que la pase obtenga como,

3550
02:29:00,900 --> 02:29:01,120
sabes,

3551
02:29:01,580 --> 02:29:05,260
una licenciatura en humanidades que es como una súper licenciatura,

3552
02:29:06,020 --> 02:29:06,480
como algo,

3553
02:29:06,860 --> 02:29:08,000
como alguien, no un GED.

3554
02:29:08,100 --> 02:29:09,040
Eso no es de lo que estoy hablando.

3555
02:29:09,180 --> 02:29:10,500
Estoy hablando de algo que como,

3556
02:29:11,580 --> 02:29:13,380
ya sabes, uno de sólo un par,

3557
02:29:13,500 --> 02:29:16,860
Como cien personas pueden pasar de otra manera, en realidad, um,

3558
02:29:17,220 --> 02:29:21,160
uh, de no pasar por estas instituciones enormes, infladas y costosas que la gente

3559
02:29:21,160 --> 02:29:22,240
pueden levantar la mano y decir:

3560
02:29:22,240 --> 02:29:23,140
Soy inteligente y trabajadora.

3561
02:29:23,700 --> 02:29:26,340
Creo que podría ser una forma increíblemente saludable.

3562
02:29:26,600 --> 02:29:29,740
Creo que necesitamos corrientes adicionales para que la gente creativa resuelva problemas,

3563
02:29:29,820 --> 02:29:31,400
ya sea en X o en otro lugar.

3564
02:29:32,080 --> 02:29:35,720
Um, creo que hay muchas cosas que la tecnología podría hacer para ayudar realmente

3565
02:29:35,720 --> 02:29:35,940
este.

3566
02:29:36,160 --> 02:29:38,580
Creo que algunas de las cosas en las que está trabajando Sal Khan,

3567
02:29:38,920 --> 02:29:40,020
uh, Khan Academy realmente podría ayudar.

3568
02:29:40,720 --> 02:29:42,380
Um, entonces creo que hay muchas maneras,

3569
02:29:42,480 --> 02:29:45,980
pero existen en gran medida en torno a la idea de nuevas formas de hacer las cosas,

3570
02:29:46,120 --> 02:29:49,220
no solo esperando las viejas cosas que dicen

3571
02:29:50,140 --> 02:29:51,860
40 mil millones de dólares en el banco

3572
02:29:52,440 --> 02:29:53,900
que se van a reformar.

3573
02:29:54,180 --> 02:29:56,600
Y aquí está mi, ya sabes, he estado molestando mucho a Harvard,

3574
02:29:56,660 --> 02:29:57,700
pero voy a molestarlos un poco más.

3575
02:29:58,580 --> 02:29:58,660
Eh,

3576
02:29:59,180 --> 02:30:02,380
el, y, y, uh, hablo mucho sobre la clase otra vez,

3577
02:30:02,640 --> 02:30:05,380
y ya sabes, hay un gran libro llamado Poison Ivy,

3578
02:30:05,380 --> 02:30:07,880
um, de Evan Mandry, que recomiendo a todo el mundo.

3579
02:30:07,880 --> 02:30:08,740
Y es indignante.

3580
02:30:08,780 --> 02:30:10,280
Suena como yo y una perorata en Stanford,

3581
02:30:10,760 --> 02:30:14,620
um, que era, uh, y yo, y creo que el estado, ya sabes,

3582
02:30:15,080 --> 02:30:17,020
la educación superior de élite tiene más niños de

3583
02:30:17,020 --> 02:30:21,780
el 1% superior que el 50 o 60% inferior, dependiendo de la escuela.

3584
02:30:22,580 --> 02:30:27,000
Um, y cuando miras cuánto les gusta replicar el privilegio de clase,

3585
02:30:27,160 --> 02:30:28,640
Es realmente angustioso.

3586
02:30:28,840 --> 02:30:30,300
Así que todo el mundo debería leer Poison Ivy.

3587
02:30:31,300 --> 02:30:32,280
Y sobre todo,

3588
02:30:32,480 --> 02:30:35,580
uh, si eres raro, sigue siendo raro.

3589
02:30:37,620 --> 02:30:39,760
Y eres uno de los más interesantes,

3590
02:30:39,800 --> 02:30:41,560
uno de los más raros de los más bellos

3591
02:30:41,560 --> 02:30:42,940
la forma en que la gente se ha conocido.

3592
02:30:43,000 --> 02:30:45,580
Greg, gracias por el trabajo realmente importante que haces.

3593
02:30:46,300 --> 02:30:48,820
Esto fue, esto es

3594
02:30:51,960 --> 02:30:55,220
Aprecio la clase, toda el área que trajiste aquí hoy,

3595
02:30:55,220 --> 02:30:55,600
hombre.

3596
02:30:55,600 --> 02:30:57,280
Um, esta es una conversación increíble.

3597
02:30:57,540 --> 02:30:58,540
Gracias por el trabajo que haces.

3598
02:30:59,140 --> 02:30:59,840
Gracias.

3599
02:30:59,860 --> 02:31:00,200
Gracias.

3600
02:31:00,760 --> 02:31:04,260
Y para mí, que me preocupa profundamente la educación, la educación superior,

3601
02:31:04,620 --> 02:31:08,520
gracias por responsabilizar a los MIT y a Harvard,

3602
02:31:09,080 --> 02:31:09,980
uh, para, um,

3603
02:31:10,620 --> 02:31:12,020
haciendo lo correcto por la gente que

3604
02:31:12,620 --> 02:31:13,420
recorrer sus pasillos.

3605
02:31:13,600 --> 02:31:15,480
Así que muchas gracias por hablar conmigo.

3606
02:31:16,040 --> 02:31:20,260
Gracias por escuchar esta conversación con Greg Lukianoff para apoyar este podcast.

3607
02:31:20,680 --> 02:31:22,520
Consulte nuestros patrocinadores en la descripción.

3608
02:31:22,660 --> 02:31:25,760
Y ahora déjenme dejarles con algunas palabras de Noam Chomsky.

3609
02:31:27,000 --> 02:31:28,520
Si crees en la libertad de expresión,

3610
02:31:29,220 --> 02:31:31,440
crees en la libertad de expresión para las opiniones, no

3611
02:31:32,400 --> 02:31:34,060
como. Gables estaba a favor

3612
02:31:34,060 --> 02:31:36,020
de la libertad de expresión para las opiniones que le gustaban.

3613
02:31:36,640 --> 02:31:37,360
También lo fue Stalin.

3614
02:31:38,060 --> 02:31:39,700
Si estás a favor de la libertad de expresión,

3615
02:31:40,180 --> 02:31:44,330
eso significa que estás a favor de la libertad de expresión precisamente para opiniones que desprecias.

3616
02:31:45,800 --> 02:31:48,620
Gracias por escuchar y espero verte la próxima vez.

START TRANSCRIBING NOW!

Top of Page