All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
April 1, 2022 - The Charlie Kirk Show
35:20
Why America is at the 'Abyss of Infinite Insanity' with Dr. Gad Saad
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Epistemological Terrorism Explained 00:11:21
Hey, everybody, Tana Charlie Kirk Show.
My conversation with Gad Saad.
I laugh harder on this episode at one point than I have laughed in a long time.
So you'll have to listen to hear exactly what he says to make me laugh that hard.
You guys can email me your thoughts as alwaysfreedom at charliekirk.com.
What are the parasitic ideas?
What can you do to push back against it?
We've had Dr. Saad before on this topic, but this is a much deeper and I think much more fulfilling conversation than we even had the first time.
I think you'll really enjoy it.
Subscribe to the Charlie Kirk Show podcast.
Take out your podcast app and type in Charlie Kirk Show.
So make sure you are subscribed.
Support our program at charliekirk.com/slash support and get involved right now with TurningPointUSA at tpusa.com.
Turning point USA, we're making hope happen, starting high school and college chapters across the country.
Come to our young women's leadership summit, tpusa.com/slash ywls.
That's tpusa.com/slash ywls.
Come to our student action summit at tpusa.com/slash s-as.
That's our student action summit at tpusa.com slash s-a-s.
And if you want to get engaged and get involved with turning point USA, go to tpusa.com or come to our tour, tpusa.com/slash tour.
Email me your thoughts as alwaysfreedom at charliekirk.com.
Buckle up, everybody.
Here we go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country, he's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at AndrewandTodd.com.
With us right now is one of my favorite guests.
He's a lot of fun.
Gad Saad is the professor of marketing at Concordia University and former holder of Concordia University Research Chair in Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences.
He has held the visiting associate professorships at Cornell University, Dartmouth College, and University of California, Irvine.
And he also has a phenomenal book that he has authored called The Parasitic Mind.
And he is one of the most articulate and effective opponents of wokeism and the moral decay that is occurring in the West.
Professor Saad, welcome back to the Charlie Kirk Show.
Oh, so nice to be with you, sir.
So I think it would be helpful, Doctor, for you to kind of introduce the thesis behind your book, The Parasitic Mind.
A lot of our audience is new, and it's been a while since we've had a conversation.
Reintroduce kind of the argument you make in that book and why you believe that these parasites, otherwise known as kind of the woke variants, are so dangerous to Western society.
Right.
So I faced two great wars in my life.
The first great war was growing up in Lebanon when the civil war began.
And that allowed me to see the dangers of identity politics because everything in Lebanon is viewed through the prism of your religious identity.
And then the second great war that I faced was the one, the war that was being waged on reason, science, logic, common sense that we saw on university campuses.
I've now been a professor for almost 30 years.
And so I wanted to write a book that documented all of these dreadful ideas, which I refer to as idea pathogens, postmodernism, you know, radical feminism, cultural relativism, biophobia, the fear of using biology to explain human affairs.
So all of these idea pathogens have parasitized human minds, leading us to the abyss of infinite lunacy.
And so I wanted to explain first the pandemic of the human mind, of the viruses of the human mind, and then to hopefully offer an inoculation, a vaccine against these dreadful ideas.
So, Dr. Said, I want you to kind of explain to our audience how some of these ideas end up being so persuasive to people.
Let's just take one in particular: this idea that men can become pregnant.
It's something that Apple, a multi-trillion dollar company, has embraced.
It's something that you're not even allowed to push back against.
However, 95% of people in the West think this is patently insane.
How is it that things that we know are not true, that we know are filled with this kind of lack of wisdom and just war on reality, how do they end up becoming so embedded in our society and persuasive, not to lots of people, but to people at the top of the hierarchies in the West?
That's a great question because as I, in the book, as I was going through all of the idea pathogens, all the parasitic ideas, I wanted to find some commonality across these otherwise very different, dreadful ideas.
And so, in the same way that different cancers manifest themselves in very different ways, right?
Leukemia is very different from melanoma.
What they do share in common is that they all involve the unchecked cell division.
They all have that as an inherent feature of any form of cancer.
And so, what makes all of these idea pathogens so alluring is that they free us from the pesky shackles of reality.
So, for example, if I want to be freed from the pesky shackles of my biological reality, then I just need to put some prefix before my name and voila, I become of a different sex.
Postmodernism frees us from the shackles of any scientific phenomenon because it says that there are no objective absolute truths.
We are completely shackled by subjectivity.
We are completely shackled by our personal biases, by relativism.
Social constructivism, another idea pathogen, frees us from the shackles of realizing that my son will not become the next Michael Jordan because social constructivism basically says that we are all born tabula rasa, empty slates, with equal potentiality.
And then it's only the nefarious forces of socialization that make us become either Michael Jordan or flipping burgers.
Well, of course, socialization matters, but not so much.
Michael Jordan was certainly born with a set of athletic tools that made him more likely to be a great NBA star than I would have been.
But it is a very hopeful message to presume that any of our children can become anything.
So, because of this desire for always kind of navigating an orgiastic hope, we end up trying to eradicate the pesky shackles of reality.
And that's why all of these idea pathogens become so alluring and intoxicating.
Yeah, and they are alluring.
That's a great way to put it.
I love, I just wrote this down.
I'm going to use it.
It allows us to reject the pesky shackles of reality.
I suppose it's, is it an escapism type ideology then?
Is that what you're saying, Professor, that people kind of want to no longer be governed by the laws of nature?
They no longer want to live under these kind of this acceptance of a very finite reality of that you can't fly when you want to.
You have to live under the laws of thermodynamics.
Is there something within us?
Is there something within who we are as human beings that's always trying to escape the type of reality that we're in?
And it's, I suppose that's connected to the now unprecedented momentum that we're seeing with these literally insane, and as you put it, parasitic ideas.
Yeah, I'm not sure that it's due to, because escapism almost makes it sound as though there's kind of this hedonistic pursuit.
I think it's much more insidious.
It's much more psychoanalytic than that, right?
Reality creates boundaries for us, right?
Know that if I jump off from a building, I will be constrained by this thing called gravity, whereby my head will splatter on the pavement once I hit it.
Imagine if I can just jump off a building and float nicely while singing kumbaya.
My god, that sounds nice, and so it's really.
It's much more than just kind of a, a innocuous form of escapism.
It's really an epistemological form of terrorism.
Right, i've always, i've often analogized postmodernism which is probably the, the nastiest of all idea pathogens.
I've analogized it to the 911 hijackers, right, the 9-11 hijackers flew uh, planes onto our buildings.
Well, postmodernists fly planes of bs into our edifices of reason.
Right, it's a form of orgiastic nihilism right, by the way, you're you're.
When you asked me the question about, you know, men becoming pregnant and so on I uh, I had a prophetic story happen to me back in 2002 so this is 20 years ago and I recount the story in the parasitic mind where uh, I can't remember if I mentioned the story when I last came on your show, but it's worth repeating even to those who might have heard it.
Uh, one of my doctoral students had just defended his, his phd dissertation and we were going out for a celebratory dinner.
It was myself, my doctoral student, my wife and then the date that he was bringing along.
So the student in question calls me up before the the dinner date to give me a heads up that the, the lady that he was bringing to to the dinner, was a graduate student in postmodernism, radical feminism and cultural anthropology, to which I answered, ah, I get it, the holy trinity of Bs.
And so uh, I then promised him that I would be on my.
I promised him that I would be on my best behavior which, of course, was an utter lie.
So about halfway through the evening, I turned to the lady in question and I said to her, uh, I hear you're, you're a student of postmodernism.
There are no universals, correct?
She said yes.
I said well, do you mind if I propose what I think are some universals, and then you can correct me?
She goes, yeah, go for it.
I said, well, is it not true that within Homo Sapiens, only women bear children?
This is 20 years ago, Charlie.
Uh, she looked at me with utter disdain and disgust and said, absolutely not.
I said, it's not true that only women bear children, how?
So explain it to me?
She said, well, because there is some Japanese tribe off some Japanese island whereby, within the mythological realm, within their you know cultural folklore, it is the men who bear children.
So, by you restricting the conversation to the biological realm, that's how you keep us, you know, barefoot and pregnant.
So once I recovered from the mini stroke that was due to her stupidity, I then said, okay well, how about I propose a slightly less controversial example of a human universal?
So I asked her, is it not true that since time immemorial uh, sailors have relied on the fact that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west?
And there she turned to a variant of postmodernism called deconstructionism, which is, Jacques De Rida, is the the leader of that movement whereby language creates reality.
There is no reality outside of language.
And so she said, what do you mean by east and west, and what do you mean by the sun?
That which you call the sun, I might call dancing hyena, literally her words.
I said, well fine, then the dancing hyena rises in the east and sets in the west.
And then her answer was, well, I don't play those label games.
Protecting Your Online Activity 00:02:00
So this was a graduate student.
This was not an escapee from a psychiatric institution, although you can't tell the difference between the two.
So if I, so if I can't get a graduate student who is spending certainly her parents hard-earned money to agree that only women bear children, and there is such a thing as east and west and the sun, then you ask yourself what is the point of that exercise.
So that's, by definition, the epitome of a parasitic idea, it leads to nowhere.
Does it make any sense that the same company who controls half of online retail also passively eavesdrops on your private conversations at your home?
What about the idea of a single company controlling 90% of all internet searches, run your email service and gets to track everything you do on your smartphone?
Big tech is more powerful than ever.
In fact, they're more powerful than most countries, and they profit by exploiting your personal data.
It's time to put a layer of protection between your online activity and these tech oligarchs and juggernauts.
That's why I use ExpressVPN.
Think about how much of your life is on the internet.
Sadly, every site you visit, video you watch, or message you send gets tracked and data mined.
But when you run ExpressVPN in your device, the software hides your IP address, something big tech can use to personally identify you.
So ExpressVPN makes your activity harder to trace and sell to advertisers.
Express VPN also encrypts 100% of your internet data to keep you safe from hackers and eavesdroppers on your network.
ExpressVPN does all this about slowing your connection.
That's why it's rated number one VPN by Mashable and Tech Radar.
What I like most about ExpressVPN is how easy it is to use.
Download the app on your phone computer, tap one button, and you're protected.
So stop handing over all your personal data to big tech monopolies that mine your activity and sell your information.
Protect yourself with the VPN I trust to keep me safe online.
Visit expressvpn.com/slash Charlie.
E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N.com slash Charlie to get three extra months free.
Go to expressvpn.com/slash Charlie right now to learn more.
Finding Spine to Speak Out 00:04:53
I haven't laughed that hard in a long time, Dr. Said.
So thank you for that.
Escapee from a psychiatric institution.
There's a lot of places I want to go with that.
When you had that encounter at the time and the years that followed, were you at all concerned that that fringe ideology would soon all of a sudden kind of govern the top levels of society?
Or did you think this is insane, but it's going to kind of just stay in its own corner in the university, you know, and it's never going to kind of get much traction?
Where have you been on that in the last 20 years?
Because it's now kind of the dominant philosophy of major cultural shaping institutions.
It's a fantastic question.
And I hate to toot my own horn.
I was the guy standing in the back row screaming while nobody listens, saying these ideas may start off in an esoteric department in the humanities and in the highfalutin world of the ivory tower.
But just like actual physical biological viruses break out of a lab, bad ideas are not geographically constrained to the women's studies department at Wellesley.
They eventually break out.
And so I kept warning people: this is going to become normalized.
And people would say, oh, come on, you're being hyperbolic.
You're exaggerating.
Who cares about what some idiot and postmodernist feminist thinking is espousing?
But I knew.
Now, I can't pretend to have been able to predict that it would have become such a tsunami of lunacy, but I certainly was well aware that dreadful ideas may start among the intellectual class, but eventually it infects every nook and cranny of society.
And that's what's happened.
Yeah, and that's, it wasn't taken seriously.
It's USA Today.
And it's the Women of the Year Award.
And it has here Rachel Levine as Woman of the Year, someone who spent 54 years as a man.
I'm sure you saw this.
Yes.
It's at the top levels.
We're now the government in USA Today.
So how did we get here?
Did no one fight along the way?
You were trying to warn it, but I guess people just didn't take it seriously.
And now they're afraid of this kind of regime of insanity.
Look, I tell you, you know, the seven deadly sins.
I'm sure you're familiar with them.
I've always said that they are incomplete because we need to do an amendment and add an eighth sin called cowardice.
The level of cowardice that shapes people's lives is simply astonishing.
Now, I happen to be, I always tell people, activate your inner honey badger because the honey badger is a ferocious animal, the most ferocious animal.
You need to be ideologically fierce.
When you see people espousing nonsense, stand up and be hurt by this attack on truth.
Now, I happen to have the personality to do it, but everybody can certainly weigh in to whatever level they feel is appropriate for them.
But what they can do is sit quietly in a fetal position while sucking their thumb.
That's called cowardice.
That's called you're an invertebrate, you don't have a spine.
Find your spine and speak out.
Well, my wife is Lebanese and you're Lebanese.
And I could say there's something Lebanese culture about standing up against nonsense.
A little more likely to be outspoken.
I got to tell you what.
Spring and summer are the seasons for finally getting outside for entertaining pool parties and barbecues.
But if your yard looks like a plant cemetery, you're not going to enjoy it as much.
Get your place looking like a resort easy with fast-growing trees.
When it comes to caring for your plants, know-how matters.
That's why fastgrowingtrees.com experts curate thousands of plants, varieties that will thrive in your specific climate, location, and needs.
There's no waiting in lines and no messy cars from hauling plants all over town because you order online or over the phone.
Even if you've never had a green thumb, they'll always make you feel like you do.
One million home gardeners have already seen fastgrowingtrees.com can do for them.
Fastgrowingtrees.com is amazing.
We are using it for our condo.
I think you'd love it.
There's lots of different options.
Plus, with their 30-day alive and thrive guarantee you can trust everything will be healthy for years to come.
Just go to fastgrowingtrees.com slash Kirk right now and get 15% off your entire order.
Get 15% off at fastgrowingtrees.com slash Kirk.
That's fastgrowingtrees.com slash Kirk.
So Dr. Said, I want to tell you a problem that I run into.
I talk on college campuses a lot.
Last night, we had a couple, you can call them postmodern trans activists.
I think we handled it pretty well.
Prior, a couple of weeks ago, I had another one of those people.
And when I had an opportunity to really dive into it, I found myself getting a little frustrated.
I didn't really let it show very much, but at some point, we couldn't agree on any form of absolute truth at all whatsoever, no universals.
And it got, it became this kind of endless mess of word play and word games.
I'm sure you've experienced this before.
For example, I would say, you do agree that there are the laws of gravity.
Well, that's your opinion.
And at some point, you just kind of throw up your arms.
Why People Choose Inaction 00:15:35
And so I guess my question, Dr. Said, is, is that worth engaging in?
If yes, how do you combat it or counter it?
What are your best practices to help navigate that?
Fantastic question.
So the way you've set up the question is spot on.
It's only worth navigating such individuals as long as they don't have their, you know, their fingers in their ears going, la, la, la, I'm not going to listen to you.
So as long as they have the humility to at least give you an opportunity to plead your case, then I think it's worth engaging.
So that said, if they are willing to engage you, I do have a, if you like, a manual of best practices.
And it's one that I cover in chapter seven of the parasitic mind when I talk about how to seek truth, right?
So if I want to convince you of something, Charlie, how would I go about to offer you unassailable evidence that proves that my position is vertical?
And to do that, I do what's called the building of nomological networks of cumulative evidence.
It's a mouthful.
So maybe if you give me a minute or two to give you a specific example, then I think it'll be very clear.
So let's suppose I want to prove to you that toy preferences, the sex-specific toy preferences that children prefer, are not due to social construction.
They're not due to the fact that your parents are, you know, sexist, patriarchal pigs.
How would I go about doing it?
Okay.
So what I'm going to do is I'm going to get you data from across cultures, across time periods, across species, across methodologies, all of which point to that unassailable fact.
So let me give you examples.
I can get you data from vervet monkeys, rhesus monkeys, and chimpanzees that shows you that infants within those species exhibit the exact same sex-specific toy preferences that human infants do.
I can get you data from developmental psychology showing you that children, human children, who are too young to be socialized already exhibit those sex-specific toy preferences.
Therefore, they couldn't have been socialized by definition.
I could get you data from pediatric endocrinology, whereby little girls who suffer from a condition called congenital adrenal hyperplasia, this is a condition that masculinizes the behavior of little girls.
Well, guess what happens to the toy preferences of such little girls?
They are perfectly reversed.
They become like those of little boys.
I can get you data from completely different cultures from ours in sub-Saharan Africa, where the sex-specific toy preference are exactly the same as those in the Western tradition.
I can get you data from 2,500 years ago, where you do an analysis of funerary monuments, mausoleums in ancient Greece and ancient Rome, where children are depicted on those mausoleums, playing with exactly the same types of toys as we do now.
So look how I have put the epistemological noose around your neck.
I got you data from different species, different disciplines, different cultures, different time periods, different theoretical frameworks, all of which point to that unassailable fact.
So the challenge, of course, is that it takes a lot of effort for you to build that network.
And it takes the epistemic humility of your interlocutor to actually give you the opportunity to present it.
So that's why when I started the answer to your question, as long as you don't go, la la la, I'm not going to listen, then I'm going to convince you.
And one other quick point, and then I'll seed the floor back to you.
What this allows you to do, Charlie, is that when I go into a very hostile room, knowing that people are a priori against anything I'm going to say, I walk with all of the swagger that is befitting of someone who's already built his nomological networks.
You're not going to defeat me in a debate.
On the other hand, if you were to ask me, hey, what is the net benefit or cost of the legalization of marijuana policy in Canada?
My answer to you would be, I simply haven't done the homework.
I haven't built the requisite nomological network to answer that with full assuredness.
So when I know, I know, and good luck to you in trying to debate me.
But when I don't know, I have all the humility necessary to say, you know what, I simply don't know.
So I think if people were to use this type of epistemological power tool to be able to construct their arguments, I think we'd be in a much better place.
Yeah, so Dr. Saad, two thoughts on that.
Number one, there are what happens to be what we'd be considered a common sense fits perfectly into that very well-articulated argument that you just put forward.
The challenge is I don't think most people are going to be able to put together arguments from separate data sets and over periods of time.
Instead, it kind of just descends into an argument where I know what a man is, I know what a woman is.
Guess what?
They're not wrong, by the way, by saying that.
They're actually totally right.
Their gut instinct actually is confirmed by the voluminous amount of data that you articulated.
As a tangent of that, I'd like to ask you, though, because there is, we get a lot of feedback from our audience, and we've taken some very strong stances on the entire kind of trans issue, if you will, about how this is a civilizational defining issue, about how this is fundamental.
Do you agree with that?
And if yes, what is the proper way that we should societally approach this issue?
Is it something where it's just kind of an annoyance, we kind of cast it aside?
Or is this something that is in some ways different?
That if we don't fight on this particular issue of what is a man, what is a woman, can men become pregnant, all these sorts of different things that are just kind of being repeated as incantations of our society.
If we don't fight against it, then who knows what comes next?
What's your take on that?
Yeah, again, such an amazing question.
Look, there are two ways to answer this.
Number one, no, I don't think it is the singular definitional issue on which we, you know, we need that this is the hill that we need to die on.
But then any context whereby you are murdering truth is one where you should stand up.
So that's kind of like saying, should I intervene when this person is being mugged in an alley or this person?
Well, all cases where someone is being innocent, you know, an innocent person is being attacked, you should hopefully intervene if you have courage.
So the unique circumstances around the trans issue is that it is such a departure from what defines us as a sexually reproducing species.
So what do I mean by that?
I appeared in front of the Canadian Senate back in 2017, along with Jordan Peterson, where I was arguing that as an evolutionary behavioral scientist, when I teach evolution, I have to teach, for example, sexual selection, which is Darwin's explanation for why species evolve certain traits that confer a mating advantage.
Why is the peacock's tail the way that it is?
It certainly doesn't, it serves no benefit to the peacock to have such a big tail from a survival perspective.
As a matter of fact, it reduces its survivability because it makes it more difficult for the peacock to take off into flight.
It makes it easier for predators to see you.
And so it evolves precisely because it confers a mating advantage.
The peacock's tail is saying, look, despite this burdensome cost of this tail, I am here.
I've survived.
Shouldn't you pick me?
So the recognition that there are two phenotypes for sexually reproducing species is not just an esoteric question.
It's what defines us.
Now, that doesn't mean that trans people don't exist.
It doesn't mean that trans people shouldn't be afforded every single right and human dignity that anyone else should have.
But I could walk and chew gum at the same time.
I could defend the right of transgender people to not face any institutional bigotry while also not murdering truth.
Therein lies the problem with many of these idea pathogens.
The proponents of these idea pathogens believe that in the service of a noble goal, if I have to murder truth, so be it.
So they have a very what's called consequentialist perspective on truth.
In other words, if I have to kill truth in the service of a higher goal, so be it.
Whereas I come on to defense of truth from what's called a deontological perspective.
Deontological means you never lie when it comes to the truth.
Now, if your spouse asks you, do I look fat in those genes?
Then you better quickly put on your consequentialist hat and engage in a white lie and say, no, of course not, sweetie, you look gorgeous.
So I'm not saying that for everything in life, you need to be deontological, but when it comes to truth with a capital T, I never see a millimeter.
So the trans issue is not the unique civilizational defining issue, but it certainly defines who we are as a biological species.
And so we should address it.
And it seems as if people are very afraid to engage on it.
As you said, the eighth sin is cowardice.
And I completely agree.
And why do you think that is?
I have a personal theory, which is that the very people that are pushing this particular trans issue, because there's a lot of these kind of, you know, let's say cultural instances happening that are being affected by your pathogens.
It's as if the people that are pushing the trans issue, they are unafraid to embrace the role of the tyrant.
They're unafraid to get people fired from their job.
They're unafraid to get people kicked off of social media.
It's a particular issue where the oppressed quickly becomes the oppressor instantaneously.
What's your take on how, because you're starting to see this deliberalization of the West when it comes to people that supposedly want equal rights, when in reality, they just actually want to be in charge and to make us conform to their specific pronouns and the way of life that they want us to kind of accustom to.
Look, it's a standard dynamic.
If you're at a bar and you start picking a fight with someone, you may have the courage to stand up to them.
But if you correctly predict that they have nothing to lose, they are irrational.
They're willing to go to any length to knife you for some small slight, then you might decide to walk away because you realize that you stand to lose more than they do.
So that's really the dynamic between the typical rational person and the blue-haired Taliban, right?
They're willing to go to any length to fight you.
And so you say, you know what, they're completely non-malleable.
I'm never going to be able to convince them.
So let me walk away.
But you can't do that in all circumstances because if I walk away and you walk away and the next guy walks away, so they are completely unimpeded in the promulgation of their nonsense.
So again, the people that landed in the Normandy beaches knew that they were going to be mowed down like little mosquitoes, and yet they signed up to do it.
They weren't guaranteed safe passage.
So of course, speaking out has some risks, but ultimately we all have to bear some of these costs.
Some of us will be more courageous than others, but what you can't do is simply say, let Gat Sad worry about it.
He's big enough.
He wears big pants.
He'll handle it on my behalf.
Don't diffuse responsibility.
Speak out, activate your inner honey badger, and we'll get rid of these problems by next Tuesday.
Hey, everybody, Charlie Kirk here.
The war in Europe is the kind of chaos foreign identity thieves love and an easy target for American homeowners.
No, not your credit cards.
That's small time stuff.
These hackers want your home.
The crime is home title theft.
It's exploding in the United States and you're not covered by homeowners insurance or common identity theft services.
The problem is the title to our homes are kept online.
An identity thief knows his big payday is as easy as forging your signature, stating you sold your home to him.
Then he'll take out loan after loan against your home and you won't know until the collection calls start or you get an eviction notice.
How do you protect your home from home title theft?
Go to the county recorder's office and check your home's title every single day.
Our register address now at hometitallock.com to see if you're already a victim.
This is how we protect our most valuable asset.
Go to hometitalock.com.
That is home titlelock.com.
We use home titlelock.com and I'm blown away at their amazing service.
Do not allow your home to be stolen by thieves.
Hometitlelock.com, home titlelock.com.
So Dr. Sand, you talk about activating your inner honey badger, rejecting kind of cowardice.
Talk about other technical things people can do, immediate action steps that people can take to push back against these parasitic ideas, the woke ideology that they feel so, they feel alone, they feel isolated.
What else can people do?
So before I answer this in a very pragmatic way, let me just explain some of the reasons why people are driven to inaction.
So there's something in ecological economics called the tragedy of the commons.
Let's suppose I've got 10 farmers, all of whom are using a particular patch of land for their livestock to graze, but the land needs a couple of years to recover.
And so we come to a gentleman's agreement, all 10 farmers, that none of us will use the land.
Honor's word, I won't violate it.
Now, the ideal thing is for me to violate it, hoping that the other nine people will stand up to their agreement.
Therein lies the tragedy of the common.
All end up violating the agreement, and then the land can never recover now.
How is that relevant to what we're talking about?
That's exactly what happens when you diffuse responsibility onto others to speak on your behalf, right?
Each of us says, You know what?
I'm going to speak, but you know what?
It's probably too risky for me because people are not going to like me on Facebook.
Maybe I'm going to get fired.
Maybe I'll be kicked off Twitter.
You know, someone else will do it.
So, hopefully, they will be courageous enough to speak, whereas I can lay in my cowardly action, and then hopefully the problem will be solved without me having to bear any costs.
So, we've already explained psychologically the mechanisms that lead to inaction.
The way you've taught to come to answering your question in a direct way, don't diffuse responsibility by taking whichever steps you think are appropriate for your own calculus of risk to reward, you know, ratio, right?
So, until about a year or, you know, I don't know, you know, 10, 12 months ago, maybe few people had heard of Christopher Ruffo, and then serendipitously it fell on him to become sort of all things anti-CRT.
And now, look at the number of parents that have stood up, right?
A year ago, it would have seemed impossible for anybody to fight against the infusion of CRT into the schools.
So, we mystify what it takes for us to make changes.
We overestimate the power of the blue-haired Taliban, and so we are all cowed into inaction.
But you don't need to be cowed into inaction, right?
Here's another thing I would say: you need to develop a personal code of conduct, a very exacting one.
So, when people tell me, Why do you do the things that you do?
I tell them that when I go to bed at night and I put my head on the pillow, I need to feel as though I never walked away from any opportunity to defend the truth.
If I did walk away, then I would feel like a fraud and I wouldn't be able to sleep at night.
It would be the perfect recipe for insomnia.
Now, I'm not expecting all people to have my exacting standards, but move from wherever you are today, which is your utter, complete apathy, to just weighing in.
If one of your friends says something idiotic at the bar, challenge them privately.
So, I'm not asking everybody to build tomorrow a Joe Rogan's platform and spew all of their anti-CRT to the world, but do something.
Some of us will do a lot, some of us will do a little, but if we accumulate and amalgamate all those actions, I tell you, we will resolve the problem.
Defending Truth Against Silence 00:01:28
As you well know, Charlie, most people detest these parasitic ideas.
So, the silent majority is on our side.
Out, find your spine, grow a pair, and I promise you, we will turn this around very quickly.
All it takes is action, and we win.
If we act, we are going to win.
It's that simple: it's that their ideas are so bad, they're so unpopular, they're so easy to disprove.
The missing ingredient is the will, the will to fight, the will to oppose it, the will to call it out, the will to, quite honestly, not tolerate it.
That's something that people don't want to say because tolerance has become a fake virtue of the West.
That's a separate topic, actually, for another time, Dr. Saad.
But I want to thank you for coming on The Parasitic Mind, one of my favorite conversations I've had recently.
Incredibly smart.
And I love to have to come have you come out to Phoenix for a long, um, long-form interview.
It would be a lot fun.
It's gadsaad.com.
Parasitic Mind.
Thank you so much, Dr. Saad, for what you're fighting for and your effective and entertaining, I have to say, voice against these parasitic ideas and the damage that these people are doing to our civilization.
Thank you so much.
Thank you, sir.
Cheers.
Thank you so much for listening, everybody.
Email us your thoughts.
As always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Deeply appreciate all the support.
Thanks so much.
Talk to you soon.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk. com.
Export Selection