Episode 2030 Scott Adams: Welcome To The Third Act. Don't Try This At Home
My new book LOSERTHINK, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/rqmjc2a
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
DEI "Compelled speech"
Trying to reduce racism
China weapons to Russia for Ukraine war?
The 3rd act begins
What to look for in the controversy about me
Topics we know to be racist
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you would like to enjoy this same content plus bonus content from Scott Adams, including micro-lessons on lots of useful topics to build your talent stack, please see scottadams.locals.com for full access to that secret treasure.
---
Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scott-adams00/support
If you're here because you think I might cause some trouble, well, maybe.
Maybe.
Well, we'll get to all of that, but if you'd like your experience to be the kind of thing that your grandkids will hear about, all you need to take this event up to levels never before heard of, all you need is a cupper, a mug, or a glass, a tanker, gels, or stein, a canteen jug, or a flask, a vessel of any kind.
Fill it with your favorite liquid.
I like coffee.
I like my coffee black.
Stop it.
I like my coffee black.
Stop it.
Sip.
Ah, that's so good.
So good.
What the hell was that?
Something loud just fell over?
Alright, well, I didn't have time to check the news today.
today let's see if anything is trending on Twitter wait it's me We'll get to that.
We'll get to that.
But you're going to have to wait for it.
I know there's a story you probably want to hear about today.
Maybe a little bit.
But let's talk about some other stuff first.
Number one, there's a new study, Fox News is reporting, a growing body of evidence suggesting that cannabis is not entirely without harm.
And there's a suggestion.
Stanford University physician says the study, which has not been published, will be presented Sunday, I guess.
And it shows that there might be some cardiovascular disease associated with heavy use of marijuana.
Now, let's take you through the analysis cone.
Number one.
Marijuana is either good for people or bad for people, right?
It can't be both.
Well, it actually could be both.
But if you're talking about whether it causes you potentially greater disease, that's either a yes or no.
Now, separately, you could say it helps you with other various things, but those are usually comfort-related, not survival.
But in terms of survival, And in terms of cardio, the study says that there could be cardiovascular implications.
All right, so before there was a study, what did you know?
Let's say it was the only study that had ever happened.
What would you know?
Well, nothing.
It'd be sort of a coin flip.
If somebody said, hey, does it hurt you or help you?
Or hurt you or not hurt you?
It's sort of binary, right?
It either hurts or it doesn't.
50-50, coin flip.
If you didn't know anything, you had no information whatsoever, 50-50.
So now there's a study, probably peer-reviewed.
And what does that change the odds to?
So the study says it could be dangerous.
So the odds were 50-50 when you didn't know anything.
You're just flipping a coin because you got... But now you have a study.
What are the odds now?
Still 50-50.
Because half of all studies are wrong.
They point in the wrong direction.
Half.
So there's actually no, this is no information.
Now it's the beginning of something that could be information, if lots of other studies confirmed it, and if every way you looked at it and every way you studied it gave you the same answer, or even if most of them did, well then you'd know something.
But when you get like a new, bold, brand new study, it's 50-50.
You didn't learn anything actually.
So just keep that in mind.
Big news that probably should have been bigger news.
AOC seems to be quite solidly pro-nuclear now.
Did you know that?
So I guess she visited some nuclear site and she was talking positively about how well they can control radiation.
And also, specifically positively, about how France uses its nuclear waste as fuel for its reactors.
And other countries don't, and she's saying that's a good way to handle it.
That's a pretty big deal.
If you can get AOC to say, you know, nuclear is just unambiguously a good idea.
And I think she's there.
That's got to make a huge difference.
Because that would be one of the few things that the right and left could completely agree on.
Completely.
So, it looks like unity is breaking out.
Does it feel like that to you?
Maybe not everywhere.
Well, Fox News reports that the University of North Carolina is moved against what they call the encroaching woke culture.
And I guess the university is voting to ban diversity, equity, and inclusion, the DEI statements, and politically preferential hiring.
So they're working against racism, but that will be called being racist.
Do you know that whenever you try to reduce racism, there's a name that you will be called?
What is it?
What happens when you try to reduce racism?
A racist, yeah.
A racist is a person who tries to reduce racism or a person who has racism, who is one.
It's a word that works for both.
Sort of like bi-monthly, you know, could be twice a month or, yeah, well, anyway.
And I like this phrase that they use.
I don't, maybe you've heard this phrase before, compelled speech.
So I guess they're calling DEI, and things that go with it, a form of compelled speech.
Meaning that whether you believe it or not, you're going to have to talk this way.
Which is an interesting way to put it.
Because they don't talk about DEI changing your mind.
Which would be a different argument, wouldn't it?
Yeah, we're gonna do this training to change your mind.
I don't think anybody believes, yeah, that's probably Jordan Peterson's take, you're right.
I don't think anybody believes that DEI changes anybody's mind.
There's sort of a tacit appreciation that it's only changing the way you speak so you won't get fired and canceled.
Am I wrong about that?
That all of the DEI and CRT stuff is only forcing you to talk about it like you believe it.
It's not really changing anybody's mind.
Have you ever met anybody who changed their mind?
About anything?
It's like nobody ever changes their mind.
Especially on stuff like that.
I would agree.
So here's where the black community and I are in complete agreement.
All of the bad stuff in the past has to be fully reported.
You can't hide anything.
So certainly you want a complete and useful education about all things discrimination in the past.
From slavery on to systemic racism.
So I think we'd all agree on that.
But it's interesting that we can't keep it with, let's all be educated.
It has to change to, let's all talk this way.
You have to talk a certain way.
All right.
Compelled speech.
Do you know anybody in the news who's trending today who's the victim of forces who are trying to compel his speech?
Just looking at my messages.
Jesus, a lot of text today.
All right.
China is rumored to be thinking about sending deadly weapons to Russia for the Ukrainian invasion.
Now, here's my take on this.
Do you think China is a stupid country full of stupid people?
Does anybody think that?
Somebody said, yes, you racist.
No, you don't believe that.
Or do you think that China is a smart country who understands their self-interest and is pursuing it quite aggressively?
I would say China is a smart country full of smart leaders who have their own interests at the top of their list.
And I can't really complain about that.
Can't really complain about that.
It's just that you have to, you know, be awake and know what to do about it.
Can't complain about it though.
Everybody gets to pursue their self-interest.
But here's my take on it.
I think China is not stupid, the leadership specifically, and therefore they would be crazy to give deadly weapons to Russia.
Because I think they totally understand that's a red line.
That whatever economic blowback they're getting now, The U.S.
would very quickly increase that to levels that they don't want to deal with.
Very quickly.
So, what is China's best play?
Because they want to be allies to Russia, because they have to live next to them, they trade a lot, but they can't really make the U.S.
mad in that specific way, like they can make us mad a hundred different ways, but not that specific way.
That specific way is going to be too far.
There's only one thing that could happen here, in my opinion.
China will yank Putin around and tell him that any day now they're going to be sending him weapons, or they've got a committee looking into it, or they've said yes, but they need to collect the weapons, it's going to take a long time, or we've got a bunch of weapons to send you, but oops, they're accidentally, they need maintenance, we better need a little more time.
I don't believe that they're going to send him any weapons.
I believe that they're going to pretend they are, which is probably what our intel is picking up, and in the end they're just going to try to stall and hope it gets negotiated before anybody needs any extra weapons.
Wouldn't it be, it would be stupid for China to actually send the weapons, but it would be just as stupid to tell Putin, absolutely no, I'm not sending you weapons, nope, not going to do it.
The only smart way to play this is to sort of, you know, pull Putin along.
Then maybe, there may be some little gray area here where you say, all right, we'll give you some non-weaponized drones for surveillance, you know, which they would immediately weaponize as soon as they got them.
And then China will say, we didn't give them any weapons.
We just gave them our drones.
Drones with no weapons.
Surveillance.
Probably for crop maintenance.
Something like that.
It's not our fault.
Those Russians, who saw it coming?
They put weapons on our drones.
So it could be something like that.
But I don't think China is going to be shipping artillery and large caches of weapons to Russia.
I don't think so.
What do you think?
Do you think China is just going to go, yeah, let's sell you or give you a bunch of weapons?
Do you think that's going to happen?
That seems like the least likely thing that could ever happen.
But remember, remember the one that I got wrong on this.
I said that Putin would never, well, not never, but I said he would not invade Ukraine because it was a stupid play and he wasn't stupid.
And then he invaded.
And it was a stupid play.
I didn't think he was that stupid.
To me, it looked like a suicide play for Russia.
But he was.
He was.
Now, of course, he was probably operating on completely different information, because I had none.
Except common sense.
And, you know, he had lots of information.
But his information was probably all lies from his own generals.
Oh yeah, we're ready to go.
Give us three days, we'll take Ukraine.
No problem.
So apparently I had better information than he did because I had no information except, you know, an understanding of the world.
And what he had was all of his generals lying to him because if they didn't lie they would be immediately, you know, executed or something.
4chan's going crazy, somebody says.
I wonder why.
All right, so that's what I think is happening.
What else is happening?
Yeah, so China has recommended an outline for a peace plan.
Listen to this non-helpful suggestion.
So this is China trying to be helpful with the Ukraine-Russia thing.
They've recommended that it be ended by negotiation.
Oh!
Now that's something that nobody had thought about before.
You know, a lot of people were thinking, how could we end the war without winning it?
What would be any other way you could end a war?
Let's see, there's winning.
There's losing.
There's a third way.
I know there's a third way.
It's on the tip of my tongue.
What is China saying?
China, that's it.
That's what I was trying to think of, negotiating.
And China, helpfully, reminded us that that's one way to end a war without killing each other.
Didn't see it coming.
Yeah, it's China's free money.
China gets to be anti-war while risking nothing.
It's just perfect.
I don't even think China wants the war to end, do you?
Do you think China cares?
It seems like they have more access to Russian energy.
And their adversaries are being degraded.
Why would they want to end it?
Really, why would they?
Yeah, depleting US arms, getting us all worn out in case they make a move on Taiwan.
It wouldn't really make any sense.
To help Russia.
All right.
Today, at 2 o'clock my time, 5 o'clock Eastern time, I'm going to be talking to Hotep Jesus on his podcast.
And I will answer all of your questions about my recent provocative comments.
Now, there are some updates.
We're entering the third act.
If you don't know how a movie is set out, then you don't understand why you're watching here.
In the first act, there's something that changes the life, let's say, path of whoever's the protagonist in the movie.
So often in a movie, somebody will die, or there'll be some tragic event, and it sets a person off on a course for something else.
Now in this case, I made my controversial comments, and that would be the first act, where everybody's like, whoa, whoa, what's happening here?
The second act of the movie, if I can borrow some language from Save the Cat, it's one of the most famous script writing books.
is the fun and games scene.
So the second act of a movie is where you have a bunch of scenes which, you know, collectively they fit together, but they're just a bunch of fun scenes.
Like it might be fight scenes that are fun to watch if it's a fight movie, or it might be some car chases, or, you know, basically it's just a bunch of fun things to watch.
So each of these scenes can stand alone, but collectively they, you know, they tell a story of something.
Yeah, the 5pm is Eastern Time for the HOTEP Jesus talk today.
Alright, so then the third act, which I've told you before, is where the protagonist of the movie is in an impossible situation and could not possibly get out.
That's today.
That's today.
So the Fun and Games was the last few days where there was lots of back and forth and stuff on social media.
Today, right on schedule, and you might say to yourself, Scott, did you anticipate this happening?
I wrote the movie.
I wrote the movie.
Of course I anticipated it.
Yeah, today is the day I'm supposed to get cancelled by newspapers.
So USA Today has already announced they've cancelled.
The Cleveland Plain Dealer has cancelled, and apparently there's a number of other newspapers that have cancelled.
Now, I assume this is the beginning, and probably because it's the weekend, you're not seeing the major move.
By Monday, I should be mostly cancelled, or maybe a third, or half, or something like that.
So most of my income will be gone by next week.
Now, that's a third act.
Not only that, but the income is actually the least important part.
The important part is that my reputation for the rest of my life is destroyed.
You can't come back from this.
Am I right?
There's no way you can get out of this.
So that's what makes it a third act.
That's why you watch.
You watch because there's no way to escape.
Is there?
Well, let's talk about what's going on.
Because the simulation is just a gift, one after another, my cancellation happened by complete chance.
And I had no idea this was happening.
By complete coincidence, it's happening on the day of hate.
Apparently some neo-Nazis are marching, and today they've designated the day of hate.
Now, do you think this movie could have been written any more perfectly?
To correspond to what I did, which was the opposite of racism, but also racism.
It was the opposite, but it was also racism, as the opposite always is.
The opposite of racism is racism.
I'll talk about that in a minute.
It's like the perfect storm of the worst-case scenario.
The worst-case scenario is that that story literally was trending on Twitter.
My name was like right above Day of Hate.
That's like the perfect third act because it's like everything bad happening exactly the same time.
When I saw that, I was just laughing.
I was like, oh, well, that's perfect.
Like, I thought I wrote this movie You know, to hit all the notes.
But it turns out that that one was accidental, but it was just, like, hit perfectly.
It's like, oh, everybody's going to think I'm part of that.
So watch for that.
Let's see.
So yeah, the Cleveland Plain Dealer canceled me.
You know, I like to think of this as a learning experience for all of us.
Not just for you.
I feel that I'm here to learn as well.
And when the Cleveland Plain Dealer cancelled Dilbert, I guess that happened yesterday, I learned something.
And I learned something that I did not know, and it's probably going to be important to me for the rest of my life.
And what I learned from this is Cleveland had a newspaper.
Did you know Cleveland had a newspaper?
I guess I did.
So that will stay with me for the rest of my life.
Now, one of the questions I asked on Twitter was, if a young person asked you for career advice, would you recommend moving to Cleveland?
Would you recommend moving to Cleveland?
Surprisingly, 90% said no.
It seems like such a nice place, I don't know why you wouldn't move there.
Yeah.
And especially if you're a non-racist, it's 53% black.
I checked.
So if you were a non-racist, that would be exactly where to go.
That'd be like one of the best places.
So Cleveland has rejected me.
I'm probably going to change my advice, because I've learned so much from this.
If somebody asks me for advice, I'm going to say, move to Cleveland, because they've got it going on.
Let me clarify what I was intending to say.
You'll see if this sounds like what you heard.
So here's something I say all the time, including lately and today.
I can abide by no discrimination against individuals.
Does anybody disagree with that?
Is there anybody who would say, no, you should discriminate against individuals?
Anybody?
Is there anybody in the world?
Like, I've never even met anybody who thinks you should discriminate against individuals.
Oh, somebody says they do.
You're a troll.
So some people are saying, yes, discriminate against individuals.
No, you don't mean that.
I know you don't mean that.
All right.
So does anybody believe that I don't mean that?
Is there somebody here who believes that I don't mean it when I say you should not discriminate in any regard, not personally, not professionally, no exceptions.
Does anybody not believe me?
Now, from a constitutional and a legal perspective in the United States, should you discriminate against anybody for race or religion or ethnicity or...
I guess that's the same thing, sort of, almost.
Should it?
No, no.
So does anybody think that I oppose the Constitution?
Has anybody watched me for a while and said, that guy does not believe the Constitution.
I think he really secretly believes that we should discriminate against people in a legal, legal sense.
No, of course not.
Do you think that I said you should shun your neighbor if you're white and your neighbor is black?
Does that sound like something I would say?
Shun your neighbor because they're black.
Nobody would say that.
Literally nobody.
So if you believed you heard that, do you think maybe there was some context you were missing?
Perhaps.
All right, let me ask you this question.
If you were a black family, or even if not, And you lived in a home, and suddenly a bunch of neo-Nazis bought all the homes right around you.
So you found yourself accidentally living in a neo-Nazi clan neighborhood, and you're not with them.
Would you stay or would you go?
Would you move or would you stay?
Try to work with them.
Make it work out.
You'd go?
You'd go.
Interesting.
So, would you agree, in general, with the notion, and this was my other major point, that if there's a group of people who, on average, not individually, but on average, have a racist opinion about you, or a negative opinion about you, would you recommend that somebody stay in that situation if they had the option of moving?
What would you recommend?
Stay around neo-Nazis?
Or to make some distance?
Get away from there?
You would leave?
Well, that's pretty racist.
Pretty racist.
All right.
So.
So here's the question.
You know, my comments were in the context, of course, gets removed.
The way most hoaxes are created is the same way.
The fine people hoax in Charlottesville was created by taking the middle of the statement, but lopping off the beginning and the end.
The drinking bleach hoax was created by showing the middle of the video, but lopping off the end and the beginning.
The Covington kids hoax video was created by showing the middle, But lopping off the end and the beginning.
The Scott Adams video that got me cancelled?
Same way.
You just remove the context.
The context was that nobody, white or black, should hang around with people who, on average, if we're talking about a group, not individuals, but on average you should avoid situations where you're disliked.
Does anybody think that you should play it the other way?
Does anybody think that good, let's say, life or career strategy would involve going where you have the least chance of success?
Because people dislike you.
Is that good career advice?
So I think here's the frame that people were missing.
On an individual level, you should absolutely be nice to your neighbor.
Unless they're neo-Nazis, of course.
But if you've got a black neighbor, or a black family member, increasingly there's more of that.
If you have a black family member, do you think I'm saying you should avoid them?
Does anybody interpret it that way?
Does anybody think that you should shun your co-workers?
Who would interpret it that way?
No, I'm saying that if you know a population, an identifiable population, has a high level of disregard for you, You should stay away.
Now suppose you think it's true, but you're not sure.
How would you play that?
You think it's true, maybe because you're racist.
You think it's true, but you don't know.
How would you play it?
Somebody says AB test.
I'm not sure you can do that too easily, because it would involve moving.
Here's the thing that everybody's missing.
In the story.
And when you hear it, you're going to go, oh.
You ready?
The country isn't ready for this.
This is going to fuck up your heads a little bit.
When it comes to the Constitution, there's no wiggle room.
Everybody has to be treated as an individual.
Cannot discriminate legally based on any kind of legal, constitutional stuff.
Justice system?
Has to be as fair as it could be.
Individual decisions.
Who you hire, who you sleep with, who you marry, who you associate with, all needs to be on individual basis.
No exceptions.
But, there's one category that we don't speak about.
Career advice.
Can you do something for your own personal career That's racist.
Yes.
Completely legal, and completely ethical.
Completely.
Let me give you an example.
If you were a young black person, and you wanted to take advantage of your racial advantage, which would be Fortune 500 companies in particular, they have diversity objectives, And they would love to hire you.
So, would it be a good career decision to use your race to your advantage if you were black?
And you knew that companies were looking for you.
They really wanted to put you at the top of the list.
I think it would.
In fact, this is the exact advice I give to all black young people.
I say, look for the place where you have an advantage, right?
Don't stay where you have a disadvantage.
Where would be the worst place for a, let's say, a young black person who wanted to succeed, really had the ambition, where would be the worst place for them to live?
What would you say?
Or the worst place for them to go get a job?
Cleveland.
Cleveland.
Cleveland would be the worst place to go.
Right?
I would go somewhere where I had an advantage.
If you go to Cleveland, it's 53% black.
If you're competing against a large pool of other black candidates, then whatever advantage you got, because Fortune 500 companies are looking for you, you would be in a larger pool of candidates.
So should you go where you're special, and you'll stand out as being special, or should you stay where you're competing with people who are a lot like you?
It has nothing to do with white or black.
You should always go where you have a career advantage.
So that would require this hypothetical black person to make a racist personal decision, which I would totally back.
If you're making decisions for your own personal life, it can be as racist as you want.
That's not illegal, and it's definitely not unethical.
Suppose you believed that your company or school should have more CRT classes or DEI or something like that.
Would that be racist?
Yeah, of course.
By definition.
But would it be bad racism?
See, racism is whenever you're treating any group like they have something in common, which is what the DEI and CRT stuff does.
So, anytime you're introducing almost any change into society, it's a racist change.
If you change the tax code in any direction, You know that's racist, right?
Like actually, not jokingly, it's actually racist.
Because any way you change the tax code is either going to benefit people at the low end, which disproportionately affects black people, or disproportionately the high end.
There's almost no change you can make in the world that doesn't have a racial or racist overtone.
So I would say this for sure, whether you're black or white, When you're managing your own career, you should be as racist as you need to be to get the advantage.
So I tell everybody to seek their advantage.
Let me put it this way.
If you're a man, should you go work for a company that's mostly women?
Let's say, I don't know if this is true, but let's say the Avon company.
Let's say they've got a lot of women in high executive roles.
I think they do.
If you're a man, would it be a good individual strategy to go work for a company that is very female-centric?
No.
No, that would be crazy.
That would be pretty crazy.
Now, reverse it.
Suppose you're a woman and you want to go work in a male-dominated industry.
Is that a plus or a minus?
Well, I'll give you an example.
So my ex, Christina, became a pilot.
She's instrument certified and she's actually certified to be a trainer now.
She can teach people how to fly.
Knows a number of aircraft, etc.
Do you think she has an advantage being female in an industry that's probably 95% male?
Or do you think it's a disadvantage?
I think it's an advantage, because I think that airlines would want to increase their diversity, both gender-wise and race-wise.
So if I were advising her on her career, I would say, don't join Avon.
If you join Avon, you're going to be competing with all the other women who are also awesome.
If you go compete against pilots, you're going to be at the top of the list every time.
Why would you not go there?
Why wouldn't you?
Now, who disagrees with the idea that you should stay away from pockets of people where the odds are they're not going to like you?
Again, it has nothing to do with any individual.
And no discrimination involved here.
I'm just saying that as a personal career decision, You should absolutely be racist whenever it's to your advantage, and that's for men, for women, for black, for white, for Asian-American, for Hispanic.
Every one of you should be open to making a racist personal career decision, because we all have that option.
It's not illegal, and it is not unethical.
It's very difficult to say out loud, though, because you'll get cancelled.
All right.
Somebody's saying it's boring because it's not controversial enough.
The guy who's saying it's boring is saying it a hundred times because that's not boring.
Well, we'll make you go away.
All right, so that's the framing.
Let me summarize that.
No discrimination against individuals, not your neighbor, not your family members, not your co-workers, ever.
No constitutional violations, ever.
But in your personal career decisions, yeah, you should make decisions about avoiding people who dislike you.
And you should go where there are clusters of people who have a favorable opinion of you.
That would be your best career move.
Now, let me tell you what happened as I was watching all the comments to my comments.
Number one, I was expecting something like, you know, maybe black people would not like it and white people would be signaling.
And here's what happened.
There's a weird non-racial correlation to the comments, which I wasn't really expecting.
I don't know what I expected, but the number of black people who have said to me, either privately or on Twitter, that that sounds about right.
About half of black people have a bad opinion of white people.
Now, what do you think?
Now, some people questioned the Rasmussen poll, and I think that was good criticism.
You can't trust any poll if the question is ambiguous.
So the question on the poll was, is it OK to be white?
And that could be interpreted so many different ways that you don't know if you're getting a good answer there.
But do you think the general concept is wrong?
So let me put it in context.
In the context in which DEI is being taught, CRT, and there's another one I think, but am I wrong to say that the narrative of the new trends in both education as well as company, ESG, yeah, ESG, am I wrong to say that the trend is to create a narrative in which white people are the cause of current problems?
Would you say?
Would you say that all of those three things, ESG, DEI, and CRT, have as a common element that white people are the cause?
Now what would be the predictable outcome of that?
I don't think there's any way it could go other than black people would start having a bad feeling about white people.
How would that be avoidable?
If you were trained to think that a certain class of people were your oppressors, even if it's just historically mostly, but, you know, it lingers today with systemic violence, I'm sorry, systemic racism.
Yeah.
So what I see is that the media is continuously brainwashing the public that white people are the problem.
And having nothing to do with black people, you could replace black people with any population of people.
And if they were brainwashed the way the media is brainwashing all of us today, there's a predictable outcome.
So let me ask you this.
If you're black, Is it useful to know what the cost of those programs is?
I guess it's the economist in me.
The economist in me says you should always know the cost and the benefits of everything you're doing.
Now the benefits of ESG and CRT and DEI, the benefits will be presumably to give minorities and women A little, little leg up.
A little, little advantage, maybe some context.
Make things better.
To make things better.
Now, I don't know if it does, but the part that I can speak to with some authority, is that it has an expense.
And the expense is, you can have what you want, but I don't want to be near you.
Do you remember the Pence rule?
The Pence rule was he wouldn't go to lunch or dinner with a woman who was not his wife.
Now, do you think that Pence dislikes women?
Would that be a reasonable conclusion?
That Pence won't go to lunch unless his wife is there.
He won't go with another woman.
Is that an anti-woman thing?
By the way, he's totally right.
Here's how I interpret it.
It has nothing to do with any individual woman.
Mike Pence is not saying, oh, this one woman who wants to go to lunch with me is bad.
This Jezebel wants to go to lunch with me.
He's not saying that.
He's just playing the odds, isn't he?
I think he's just playing a statistical game.
He's just saying, if I don't put myself in a situation where a bad thing could happen, well, less chance of a bad thing happening.
So I just won't be in that situation.
But there are two situations that I would think Mike Pence would want to avoid.
One is getting any kind of a romantic interest with a person that he didn't intend to.
That's the first thing to avoid.
But the second thing to avoid is getting me-too'd when maybe you didn't me-too anybody.
Right?
So that's a more modern risk is getting me-too'd falsely, because we know that happens.
So he removes the risk of being me-too'd, you know, falsely, or even Even if he did it.
He removes the risk of doing it and also the risk of being accused of doing it, just by getting rid of the situation.
Now, given the way black Americans have been primed by DEI and CRT and ESG and the media, would you expect that they would be primed to see racism everywhere?
Of course.
That's just how it works.
And does this have anything to do with being black?
No.
No.
Because white people are being primed the same way.
Most of the people who are mad at me today are white.
Most of the people who are mad at me today are white.
Because they've been primed to have a certain reaction to what they think happened.
Now, most of them don't know what I'm doing.
They're missing the movie entirely, which makes it a movie.
That's what makes it fun.
Yeah, so we are trained to see race as a primary variable and not a, you know, one of the variables.
No, I don't.
Maybe it is.
Maybe it is the primary variable.
So whether or not those programs are accurate or not, that's not related to my point.
It could be that everything that CRT and DEI and all those say is accurate.
I don't know.
I haven't experienced it.
But whether it's accurate or not, it would prime people the same way.
It would prime you to look at white people as a source of racism.
And so, The Mike Pence rule would say, you want to get some distance.
You want to get some distance.
Now, is that racist?
Yeah.
Yeah, by definition.
But it's racist in a personal success context, which is completely allowable.
It's completely allowable.
And by the way, black people can do it too.
Everybody can do it.
You can take care of yourself first.
There's no law against that.
And you can do it for any reason, as long as you're not bothering other people.
If it's an internal conversation, it doesn't bother anybody.
You just don't go to Cleveland.
Is anybody disadvantaged because I don't move to Cleveland?
It's just a decision I make that is racist, but it's good for the individual.
Now, do you think that all racist things are bad?
It's a trick question.
Because affirmative action is racist.
Is it bad?
I mostly have supported it historically, but where I have, let's say, my complaint is that at some point you have to get rid of it.
And that's better for everybody.
Like, everybody's better if you can get people close enough to, you know, similar situations that you could get rid of it.
You need to start planning for that, right?
But that doesn't make it bad, just because it's racist.
Yeah.
I think we're primed to hear that word and just go... Now, here's what I think is the most interesting part of the reaction to the video that's going around of my comments.
White people were most likely to say, racist!
Cancel him!
Racist!
Black people Mostly the men, for some reason.
I don't know why.
But black men were more likely to say, I think there's some context missing.
It's kind of wonderful.
I wasn't really knowing what to expect exactly.
But black men, by and large, they smell a rat.
They're like, wait a minute.
This doesn't smell right.
Could those comments be the way they're being presented?
Is that even possible?
People asked me if it was a deep fake.
They were so disbelieving.
Is this a deep fake?
Other people said, contacted me directly, black men, mostly, and said, is there some context here I'm missing?
And I would, you know, send them to the context.
So, I love the fact that black Americans were on to me.
They were like on to me right away.
And white Americans totally fell for everything.
They just fell for the entire second act.
So today on Jotep Jesus' podcast, it's the only one I'm going to do.
So I think I'll just do one and then done.
I was planning to do no interviews all year before this popped up, but this was sort of irresistible.
Like I had to do one.
He's not in the 46%, but here's what you should look for on this controversy.
Look for the people who are mad.
That's the big part of the story.
Now here's the fun part.
Look for somebody to disagree with my opinion.
Have you seen it?
Nobody has.
Literally nobody disagrees with me.
They're just sure I shouldn't say it.
Am I right?
The entire point is that I shouldn't say it.
Nobody disagrees with it.
Who would go on the side of saying, yes, you should hang around with people who have a bad opinion of you?
The closest somebody got to disagreeing is saying that the Rasmussen poll might not be an accurate poll, which I accept.
It might not be.
But I'll tell you, what nobody is arguing with is that black Americans are developing and have A pretty negative opinion of white Americans.
Now, not all of them.
Anytime I talk about a group, it's never everybody in the group.
I trust you to be adults.
And no, if I say Republicans own guns, that doesn't mean every Republican owns a gun.
If I say Democrats are woke, that doesn't mean every Democrat is woke.
It never means that.
So if I say black people do this or that, it never means every black person acts like every other black person.
That's not a thing.
The funniest comments were from black men who said, oh, I totally understand why you'd say that, Scott, because my own experience is that half of black people don't like white people.
I could see why you'd want to stay away from that situation.
That's from black people.
Now, that's something that the white people can't say.
Only the black men have said that so far.
It's all men.
But the black men are like, yeah, you got a point there.
I see where you're coming from.
But the white signalers, I don't know if you've seen some of the ones who are into super signaling.
They want to be so black, they're trying to be black.
Like, oh, I love black people more than black people love black people.
I'm going to signal so hard, I'm the best person on the entire internet.
So a lot of narcissists have been surfaced.
Now the...
Oh, damn it, I didn't write down my favorite...
My favorite comment was from a black man on Twitter who said that white people should be examining, I hope I'm paraphrasing correctly, he said that white people should be examining how white people are demonizing other white people.
To which I said, Player enters the simulation.
Player enters the simulation.
Yeah.
Yeah, white people are mostly being called racist by white people.
Mostly.
It's mostly white people attacking white people to show that we're better than them.
And let me tell you something that I think is being poorly appreciated.
So I've told you that I lost two corporate jobs because I was white and male.
There's a black editor, I think, for a newspaper who's been challenging me because he doesn't believe it.
He doesn't believe that I lost two corporate jobs directly because I was told in direct language, you're male and you're white so we can't promote you.
Directly.
I'm not reading between the lines.
My boss, in both cases, told me directly, in a specific meeting, just to tell me that.
Just to tell me that.
But here's the part I don't talk about.
It was all white people.
I've experienced severe discrimination in my life, but only from white people.
Only.
In fact, if this situation were only between me and black people, it would already be over.
It's only the white people keeping it alive.
It's only the white people trying to be blacker than the black people.
I'll be blacker than you, dammit.
I'll be so open-minded that I'm more black than you are.
Yeah.
If you took the white people out of the conversation, here's how it would go.
Scott, why are you saying that white people should stay away from black people?
And then I'd say, oh, it's because my understanding is that within the black population, there's a very high percentage of people who don't like me.
And since I don't know which ones it is, and since it's completely legal for me to move or associate with whoever I want, I'll reduce that risk by not being with people who don't like me.
What would a black person say to that?
I think they'd say that's the same thing I do.
I don't want to live with racists.
Right?
Is there any black person who says, you know where I'd like to live?
In like the most racist white part of the country.
That's what I want.
I want to get me some of that.
Nobody says that.
So I believe that if the conversation were between me and either all black people or any black person, they would immediately say, oh, that's what you're saying.
You're saying you don't want to be around people who don't like you.
Totally on board.
I get it.
Yeah, we don't like it either.
Yeah, it's too bad you're in that situation.
You know, I like you.
So, you know, can you and I hang out?
To which I say, well, you seem nice.
Yeah, I'll hang out with you.
Absolutely.
All right.
So the two things, my two points that people are disagreeing with and hate me and are canceling me, is that everyone should be treated as an individual, no discrimination in person or constitutionally or legally.
But you should also avoid any group that doesn't respect you, even if there are people within the group who are fine.
It's legal.
And it's the obvious response to DEI and CRT and ESG and all that stuff.
So it's the obvious response.
All right.
By the way, I blame systemic racism for this situation.
I think it sounds like I'm blaming black people.
Is that what people are interpreting?
That I'm blaming black people?
I'm blaming white people.
All of the discrimination that I've experienced.
In fact, the newspapers that are cancelling me, do you think they're cancelling me because of black people?
Maybe.
But probably it's white people.
So I'm being cancelled by white people.
Almost entirely.
I guarantee it.
Blame the patriarchy.
Yeah.
All right.
Here are some topics that we know to be racist.
Taxes.
Like I said, any change to taxes is going to favor or disfavor some group.
Border policy.
Climate, we've been told.
Healthcare, obviously.
Differences in healthcare.
And housing.
And of course, economics and everything else.
Schools.
It's hard to think of anything that isn't objectively racist at this point.
Because it's racist if it has a racist outcome, right?
So anything you do to the school system, taxes, the economy, will have some kind of disproportionate outcome.
So it's all racist.
And certainly what I've suggested was.
But not all racism is something you should run away from.
Like I said, affirmative action, I think helped.
Like on the whole, On the whole, I think it helped.
We just have to be smart about when we wind that down.
All right.
I'm going to give you one.
Does anybody have any questions?
Are you surprised?
On locals, maybe you can't see this, but I'm looking at the comments.
Did I see the Charlie Cheon video?
What are we doing to white people?
No.
No.
I did not see that.
Send that to me if... I think what's going to happen is you're going to see a lot of interesting people enter the conversation.
And you might be surprised.
You might be surprised.
Because there are a lot of people who, even if they don't like what I said, Feel that anything that sounds honest is like a breath of fresh air.
Like I'd rather just hear your honest opinions.
By the way, I love black people.
I don't know if I've ever said that directly.
I think that's useful to say.
Like, I love black people.
That's partly why I've worked extra hard.
for much of my adult life to specifically benefit black Americans.
I thought it was worth doing.
So, I always feel like you should say that directly, because anything you say where you don't say that directly, I believe is misleading.
Wouldn't you say?
So let me say it directly.
I love black people.
Always have.
In fact, my personal interactions with black Americans, and even Africans actually, has been universally positive.
Universally.
I've had... I believe I've had zero bad experiences with any black American.
I've had lots of bad experiences with white Americans, like right now.
Like right now, this is mostly a problem with white Americans.
By the way, the reason that my corporate experience was white people cancelling me is that white people with power will cancel any white person without power to protect themselves.
Did you know that?
Well, I guess all the white people did.
But you know that white people will throw other white people under the bus immediately.
Like, immediately.
And black people are more, well, let's look at the situation.
Because I think white people are trying to get the signaling game, so they have to hurry.
They have to get in fast.
And black people are saying, well, I think I should understand this situation.
And then I'll make my opinion.
And there's a real difference.
There really is a difference.
The black people who are weighing in are saying actually smart, useful things, such as, let's hear the whole context.
And the white people are just going fucking nuts, which is what makes it a good movie.
The woke cloak.
You said, I've known some people that take advantage of being a minority in an unkind way.
Well, I don't know what that means.
But if you're not taking advantage of whatever racial benefit you have, be you black or be you anybody else, you should.
Because when it comes to your personal life and your personal success, you can do anything you want.
That's legal.
That's legal.
Ideally, you should be ethical as well.
Right.
What is the financial gain of getting cancelled?
Yeah, I don't think there is one.
Are you ready for the European river cruise?
That's weird.
It's like you're reading my mind.
There's actually nothing I'd rather do than take a European river cruise right now.
Like that would be way high on my list of cool things to do.
That's weird that you would mention that.
I was literally just thinking about it like yesterday.
All right.
I was going to say something about Ukraine and nukes.
So I'd like to make you feel better about what is going to look like a nuclear holocaust.
Under all scenarios in Ukraine, we're going to get right to the edge of a nuclear war.
You know that, right?
So being close to the edge of a nuclear war won't tell you anything about the likelihood of nuclear war.
No matter how close we get to it, it doesn't change the odds.
That's what you need to know.
You're going to think that the closer you get, the more likely it's going to happen.
But the only way you get a negotiated settlement is for both sides to think nuclear war is likely.
Anything short of that, nobody's going to negotiate.
So you have to get to almost nuclear war, whether you're having a nuclear war or whether you're doing the opposite and negotiating.
So when we get right up to the brink of nuclear war, which we will, it doesn't mean it's likely.
You get that?
It doesn't mean it's likely.
It means it had to happen.
It just had to happen.
In fact, the entire point of nuclear deterrent is that when the risk becomes real, then everybody changes their behavior.
Until the risk feels real, people are going to act like it's not there.
But the moment it looks like, oh God, we're like one minute away from nuclear holocaust, then people get flexible, right?
Or Putin gets overthrown, or something.
Or we change our president, or something.
Yeah, Cuban Missile Crisis.
Yes, thank you.
Perfect example.
The Cuban Missile Crisis had to get to a crisis.
Because nothing was going to change otherwise.
So, don't be afraid of the crisis that's coming.
It's going to be manufactured.
It's a psychological crisis that we have to pass through to get stuff done.
All right.
All of you, I expect you to be watching.
Today, I don't know if it's recorded or live, but if it's live, make sure you catch it live.
We'll see if... What makes this the third act is that I'm racing to the conclusion at the same time I'm getting cancelled.
So it's like a movie where you're running up the stairs and the stairs behind you are crumbling at the same rate that you're running.
So that's what makes it a good movie.
Will I be totally cancelled by the end of the week?
Or can I find an impossible way out?
What do you think?
We shall see.
I'm going to say bye to YouTube.
I'm going to talk to the special people on the Locals platform for a little bit more.