My new book Reframe Your Brain, available now on Amazon https://tinyurl.com/3bwr9fm8
Find my "extra" content on Locals: https://ScottAdams.Locals.com
Content:
Politics, Food Addiction, J6 Insurrection Hoax, President Trump, Owen Shroyer, Free Speech Illusion, Political Prisoners, Discrimination Self-Defense, Queers For Palestine, President Biden, Palestinian Refugees, BBC Gaza Reporting, Climate Change Models, Scott Adams
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
There's a new study that found that people who have the most sex have the lowest all-cause mortality, especially in hypertension patients.
So generally speaking, the people who have the most sex were also the healthiest.
So, backward science.
I wonder how much sex people who look really sick have.
Do they have a lot of sex?
Or is it possible that the people who are healthy looking have more sex?
Backwards science!
Once you spot it, you see it everywhere.
I saw a story that apparently members of Congress are going to be able to go into a skiff that highly The highly highly secure place and look at UFO stuff Is that really gonna happen?
There's really gonna be a skiff Where we're gonna have some of our professional liars go in and tell us what they saw Is Adam Schiff gonna go in the skiff?
What happens when Adam Schiff comes out of the skiff and says?
Oh, yeah There's actually an alien body in there.
I saw it.
I touched it And everybody else says, uh, I didn't see an alien body.
We'll be right back where we were.
Do you think that all the people who look, look at whatever's in the skiff will have the same opinion when they walk out?
No, nothing works like that.
It's going to be exactly the same as if there had been no skiff.
Some people will walk in and say, I can't tell you what I saw, but my God, aliens.
And other people will go in and say, I looked at the same thing you did.
I didn't see any proof of aliens.
That's what it's going to be.
Two worlds on two movies on one screen.
Well, here's another more science you didn't need to do.
So there should be another category of science.
If somebody paid a lot of money to do a study, but it would have been easier just to ask me my opinion.
Because you really got the same answer.
Let me give you an example.
The study says that 14% of adults and 12% of children show signs of addiction to ultra processed foods, which are high in sugar and carbs.
This addiction can be as strong as alcohol and tobacco.
And it's all about refined carbs and added fats and a lot to make it addictive.
Now, did they need to study that?
Was there somebody who was unaware that some people have a lot of trouble avoiding certain foods?
Was that something that science needed to really dig into?
I wonder if there's some people who really, really like sweets.
They like them so much that they'll weigh 300 pounds rather than cut down on their sweets.
Is it because they're addictive?
Or they just like being 300 pounds and eating sweets?
Hmm.
Did anybody need to study that?
I mean, really?
So, but it gives me an opportunity to remind you of the best way to lose weight.
This is the Scott Adams patented way.
And I realized after I read this, about this study, that there was a better way to explain it than I've been doing so far.
And it goes like this.
The reason people weigh too much, in their own opinions, people who want to lose weight, they think of it as willpower and calories.
Would you agree?
If you're trying to diet, if you're the average person, the average person says, it's just the number of calories.
It's just my willpower.
I can ramp up my willpower.
I will eat fewer calories and boom, I'm done.
I lose weight.
Doesn't work.
And for hundreds of years, people keep being confused.
Well, why isn't it working?
It's so simple.
Just willpower and calories.
Well, it's because the reframe is this.
You are fighting an addiction.
You're not dealing with willpower or calories.
You have an addiction.
And it's because modern food has been engineered to have the right amount of salt, sugar, and fat.
to trigger addiction parts of your brain.
So if you deal with it as an addiction, that suggests a different way to approach it.
So here's my way to approach it, which I've mentioned before, but now you'll see it under this frame.
It'll make a little more sense.
The worst way to lose weight is to stop eating as much as you were eating before and use your willpower to stay that way.
Willpower!
I will eat less than the day before!
Never works.
But if you were to treat it as an addiction, which is my recommendation, you would say to yourself, all right, there are about five things I eat that I need to stop eating.
Like one would be that big bowl of ice cream, maybe, you know, whatever, whatever your thing is.
Maybe it's that big bag of chips or whatever.
But instead of stopping all of your eating, Which would be a horrible hardship if you'd be hungry all the time and you've already got an addiction to food.
It's the worst thing.
If I stopped eating, I don't have a serious addiction to food.
If I stop eating, it doesn't really hurt.
I just get a little hungry.
But if I were addicted, like I really, really need that food of whatever addicted type, then I don't think I could, you know, cut down on food.
So here's what you do.
You target just one food.
And you tell yourself you can eat as much as you want of everything else.
And that's it.
If you don't eat that one food, whatever it is, let's say it's ice cream, about two months later, you'll notice that you have a substantially decreased craving for that one food.
And now no willpower required because you lost the craving.
So now you say to yourself, all right, pick the second one.
All right.
Now, I also drink too much diet soda or something.
You say, all right, I'm going to eat as much as I want of everything else.
I'll never be hungry.
I just won't have soda.
But it's easy not to have ice cream also because you've already lost the taste.
So if you treat it as an addiction, you never let yourself be hungry.
You eat as much as you need to fill yourself up all the time, every day.
But it might be broccoli by the time you're done.
It might be veggies, berries and nuts and stuff.
So, uh, or clean protein, whatever that is for you.
So treat food as an addiction, not a question of calories and willpower, and you'll do great.
TikTok has announced that for some users, they're going to allow longer videos.
I guess the original TikToks were only 15 seconds.
And then they extended it to a minute and a few minutes.
Now they're looking at 15 minutes.
I got to say, TikTok is doing an excellent job of raising your children.
So good work on that, parents.
You've delegated the raising of your children to China, and China is doing a good job of raising American children to be non-competitive with Chinese children.
Now, if that bothers you, that China is brainwashing your children to make them less competitive, here's something you could do about it.
Have you tried Pickleball?
It's this cool sport that'll take your mind off of all that.
Yeah, you won't even think about it.
Go play some pickleball.
You can buy some paddles and balls.
They're generally made in China.
So if you want to forget about China's influence of your child's brain, go play some pickleball.
That will totally clear you up.
I saw this series of posts on the X platform from the Prince of Fakes.
Who's a parody account, does a lot of AI stuff.
Some of you might know the Prince of Fakes, but he's anonymous.
But he posted this that was fascinating.
He said, I took a charisma slash communication course before embarking on this cruise.
So I guess he's on a cruise somewhere.
So I've been practicing meeting people and having conversations.
It's amazing how rules based all of this is.
And how easy it is after you learn them.
Does that sound familiar?
It's the Dale Carnegie thing I've been telling you forever.
Yeah.
What Dale Carnegie teaches you is that social interaction is rules-based.
You just follow the rules.
But if you didn't know the rules, you'd be like, oh my God, I don't know what to say, what to do.
What do I do with my hands?
Do I keep talking?
Do I let myself go?
It's rules-based.
Once you learn the rules, it's really easy.
And it takes about, oh, five minutes to learn all the rules of human interaction.
Introduce yourself, use the person's name, look in their eyes, ask questions about them, show genuine interest, and when you're done, say something like, well, I need to get back to whatever, or I need to get back to mixing with, I need to do a little more mixing, gotta refresh my drink.
That's it.
If you just do those things, You're done.
But I was interested that apparently the course that the Prince of Fakes took encouraged you to try to go for the hug, even in situations where you don't think it's appropriate.
Imagine that.
Could you do that?
Could you practice as homework, offering to hug people you just met?
Now, apparently the Prince of Fakes, now remember he's on a cruise ship So everybody on a cruise ship's in relaxed mode.
You know, nobody's in business mode.
And apparently he's just offering hugs to people.
And he's being shocked and amazed at how often people will, even if they seem uncomfortable, will still enthusiastically take a hug.
Even if they're not comfortable, they'll still take a free hug.
Because a free hug is like money.
Like, who gets free hugs?
So, so he's having this mind blowing experience to find out the strangers, somebody you just met and just applied a little bit of your social skills to.
So what they know about you is like 1%, but it was your good 1% that you put forward.
They'll take a hug.
It's like one of the greatest lessons in life that people will actually take a hug if you offer it to them.
Like if you mean it, everybody likes a hug.
All right.
Guy-on-guy, not so much, but sometimes that too.
All right.
I had a realization about January 6 that made everything come together.
So January 6, as you know, Trump was accused of inciting an insurrection.
Now let me ask you this.
Imagine a world where that didn't happen.
There would be something really, really wrong with that world, wouldn't there?
You know what that would be?
It would be after five solid years of the media telling half of the country that Trump was Hitler, on January 6th, he was a few days from leaving office without doing anything Hitler-like.
Think about it.
What would that have done?
To the entire media narrative for five years, they hammered it non-stop that he would never leave office, that he was looking to be a dictator, that he was basically Hitler, and that it was always 1939 Germany every day he was alive.
Right?
I'm right, right?
So after five years of saying he's gonna be Hitler, suppose he had just left office, and January 6th is the only thing that was different.
That's the only thing.
The media would have exposed itself for having run an op on the American people for five years.
The biggest op that you would have seen in your life.
But what happens if they sell you that January 6th was an insurrection?
Then they were right for five years.
They were wrong for five years and they had one chance left because he was almost out of power.
In the moment he was out of power, it would be obvious that he didn't have any remaining power.
He would just be out of office, you know, the way he was.
So if they had not taken that last chance to demonize him as the devil, their last five years would have been a lie.
So that explains why they tried so hard to demonize somebody who just lost an election.
I mean, typically you don't demonize the loser, right?
That's pretty unusual.
But they needed to, not only to keep him from running again, but to cover up five years of fake news and fake narrative.
It wasn't even fake news.
It was pure brainwashing with the complete knowledge of all the people involved.
It was propaganda slash brainwashing for five solid fucking years, and it would have all been exposed If they had not run this little op at the end to make you think that, oh yeah, yeah, yeah, oh yeah, oh yeah, there's still a little time.
We were right.
My God, we were almost, we were a few days from being so embarrassingly wrong about the biggest thing in the world.
But wow, wow, we got lucky on that, that last, you know, last public event.
Yeah, yeah.
You went all Hitler, just like we thought he would.
Wow, we're smart.
Five years we told you this would happen.
It almost didn't.
But we were right.
We were right in the end.
Right?
Now, once I explain it to you that it was their last chance to prove he was Hitler and they didn't have any proof so they manufactured it in the last weeks, you can see it, right?
It's super obvious as soon as I say it.
Am I right?
Is there a single person here who would deny But that's exactly what happened.
They realized they had no Hitler material after five years.
So they had to manufacture it just before we walked out the door to keep their game alive.
It's pretty remarkable.
And the country largely bought it, half of the country.
It's the only half they needed to give it.
It's quite amazing.
And as part of that, Owen Schroyer is going to prison for free speech.
Let me say this not as hyperbole.
This is not hyperbole.
We don't have free speech in the United States.
Don't give me your constitution doesn't include private companies, because we now know that the government has been pressuring private companies to do their censoring for them.
And we can see in this Owen Schroer case that nobody else would have, you know, if it hadn't been a Trump supporter, this wouldn't have happened.
So we can say for sure, there's no fucking free speech.
You only have the ability to say things that are not dangerous to the people in power.
That's not free speech.
You can agree with them as loudly as you want.
Oh, I got my free speech.
I'm agreeing with the people in power.
Yeah, that's like opposite of free speech.
So, no, we don't have free speech.
I'm not even going to listen to an argument that we do.
You're fucking stupid if you think we have free speech.
Let me just say that directly.
Anybody in America today who thinks that Americans have free speech, as in they can go against the official narrative, you're a fucking idiot.
What have you been looking at?
Seriously?
Now, I know that doesn't apply to the people in this audience, but really, I'm actually angered by people who imagine that there's free speech because that's the problem.
The problem is some fucking idiots think they still have it.
And that there's nothing, there's no problem.
That's the problem.
Anyway.
So Owen Schroer is a political prisoner in the United States in 2023 for a political opinion.
That's, that's reality.
And he's not alone.
The January 6th people have to be punished hard to keep alive their January 6th Hitler thing because they lost for five years in a row on that narrative.
So Owen Schroeder gets to go to jail so that they can maintain their narrative.
There's your fucking free speech right there.
Yep.
God, I hate the government.
Mostly the Democrats.
Well, you may have heard some stories that there are some students at Harvard and maybe some other places, Jewish students, Jewish American students, I think mostly, who do not feel comfortable in that environment because the pro-Palestinian, some would say pro-Hamas, but I'll say pro-Palestinian activism.
Now, I feel like it's my job, Because I have the closest thing to free speech.
I don't have it either.
But I'm a little closer than you do.
Because I'm already cancelled.
So I'm going to say this as many times as it takes to make the point.
I'm going to make this a thing.
Oh yeah.
I'm not a quitter.
Here's the thing.
Discriminating against an individual is despicable.
It's bad for society.
And it's morally unacceptable.
So don't do it.
Don't do it.
Don't discriminate against individuals, or their religion, or their race, or their anything.
It's despicable, bad for society, and morally unsupportable.
However, avoiding a collection of people In which you believe, and this is important, it's just in your own mind, in which you believe there are too many in that group who openly hate you, that's just self-defense.
And you should definitely do that.
So, for example, if you were a Jewish student at Harvard, and you thought that there were too many students who harbor negative feelings about you that could actually be dangerous, then that's a self-defense question.
And certainly you should not be worried that you are discriminated against them as a group.
You can absolutely discriminate against groups as an individual.
As a government, you can't.
Do you understand that?
As a government, you shouldn't be discriminated against people for anything.
Right?
That doesn't work.
It's a bad system.
But as an individual, you have a personal risk, maybe a family risk as well, and you have to manage that.
The only tools you have to manage your personal risk, your family's risk, is what you believe to be true.
Nobody can take away your right to act on what you believe is true for your own self-defense.
Now, you might break the law in doing so, then that's a problem, you've got to deal with it.
But morally, and safety-wise, you'd be making the right choice to reduce your risk in any way that you think is appropriate.
Nobody gets to question that.
So if these Jewish students were to say, I think I'll take a semester off or maybe transfer to someplace I feel safer, that would be a reasonable decision based on self-defense and security.
It would not be discrimination.
Well, let me take it.
Let me change that.
It might be discrimination, but who gives a fuck?
It might be.
It's perfectly acceptable for self-defense.
Again, discriminating against any one individual is despicable, morally unacceptable, and it doesn't work for society as well.
It doesn't work for anybody.
Nobody wins.
But, looking at a group of people, a collection of people who have anything in common mentally, in other words, if there's anything about that group that they would harbor Even by, let's say, 2% of them.
Might only be 2% of the group.
Has a really bad feeling about people like you, whoever you are.
You should get the fuck away from that situation, if you can.
Get some distance.
So, every day that goes by, I will look more right.
Because I started out being right.
I just expressed it in a way that allowed people to cancel me because, you know, we live in a Cancel Dopamine Society.
So people got dopamine from canceling me, and that's why they did it.
Because they got dopamine.
It had nothing to do with what I said.
They can imagine or make an argument that's about what I said, but it wasn't.
It was opportunistic.
It's like, oh, I get a little dopamine hit from canceling this guy I disagree with.
So in every situation, In which there's a group that have been brainwashed to think you're the problem.
You should get some distance.
And you should not apologize for it.
But don't discriminate against individuals.
Well at the moment, or I think it was yesterday, there was a trans and gay protest.
They were marching in support of the Palestinians.
Does that seem Like maybe not good self-defense.
If I were worried about my safety, and I would be if I were trans and gay, a little extra security issue, I would certainly not want to spend more time around a group of people who mostly probably fine people.
But there might be a high percentage among them, predictably, that would want to throw you off a roof.
Maybe only 1%.
But would you be in favor of bringing over a hundred people if you were pretty sure that one of them would want to kill you?
I would.
No.
No, I would say that would be perfectly acceptable discrimination.
However, if it were an individual, and let's say you were talking to just one person, and they said, hey, you know, I used to live over there in Gaza, but I got to tell you, I don't even believe in religion.
And I don't even think there is such a thing as a Holy Land.
I was sort of in the wrong place.
Do you mind if I come into the country?
Well, hold on.
Let's say in my hypothetical there's something that allows you to check that it's real, that it's not a liar.
If you vetted that one individual and you're pretty sure they didn't have any bad feelings about Israel, I'd be fine letting them in.
It'd be like anybody else.
Well, there's no red flag here.
Just because you lived in a place, all of your attitudes are the kind that don't look dangerous?
Yeah, fine.
But, where you would not discriminate against said individual, you could definitely discriminate against the group of people, just based on your belief, even if it's wrong.
Just based on your belief that there might be some people who want to kill you in that group, even if it's only one.
One percent.
You get to avoid that one, if you have an option.
You should do whatever you can to make sure there are fewer people around you who want to kill you.
Completely reasonable.
Even if 99% don't.
Alright.
Rasmussen asked people what they thought about bringing Palestinian refugees into America.
How many U.S.
voters, approximately, just approximately, how many U.S.
voters do you think Thought it would be a good idea to welcome the Gaza refugees.
Oh, that's a pretty good guess.
Yeah, 28%.
A little higher than normal, 28%.
But your guesses were extraordinary.
Once again, your ability to guess what pollsters have to check on, it's incredible.
But 52% say no, and another 20% are not so sure.
I feel like the not-so-sure should be eliminated from all polls.
Don't you?
If somebody says, I don't know, just mark him down as an NPC, just go on.
And during his visit to Israel, Biden said, the vast majority of Palestinians are not Hamas.
Hamas does not represent the Palestinian people.
True or false?
Actually, I think Hamas literally represents them, don't they?
As in, they're actually the leader of the Palestinians in Gaza?
Am I wrong about that?
That, like, literally, they represent them.
Now, to be clear, that's not to say that the Hamas views are shared by the people that they represent.
But they're, it is kind of their job.
They're in charge.
Now, I don't know if You know, they haven't had elections in a while, so it's not fair to say that they elected them.
But where Biden is wrong is that he's using an individual standard to judge a group.
That doesn't work for self-defense.
Because he's saying, should we bring a group over?
He's not saying, should we very carefully check each individual?
You know, I mean, they would do some checking, but how much could you do?
No, he's using a standard which makes you less safe so that he can feel more woke.
I feel like that's what it is.
So he's saying we want to create a situation that would be more dangerous for Jewish Americans, for sure, but you don't know if it's like slightly, slightly more dangerous, in which case it might be morally acceptable.
Because if you're, you know, Saving the lives of thousands of refugees and the downside from that was well in some Like hard to define slight way.
It might be worse for some other people who are still here Jewish Americans in particular you'd probably still do it As you know, the world is always a balance of interests.
So there's always somebody who's a little worse off if you make somebody better off even if it's an indirect way, but in the context of
of the Palestinians in Gaza literally being bombed by the state of Israel, you wouldn't expect the average Palestinian coming out of that hot war to have a good attitude about Jewish Americans.
Why?
Even though the Jewish Americans are not Israel.
Well, they may support them.
And that would feel like supporting the people bombing you.
So under this situation, it's actually insane to allow refugees from the war area.
There are lots of situations where I might say, hmm, maybe yes.
But not if they've been infected with a mental virus that's not their making, not their fault, has nothing to do with their genes or their culture.
They specifically have been infected with a brain virus That would make them dangerous to other citizens of the United States.
So I say, too much risk, no immigration for just that.
Now, later, if 10 years go by and everybody is peaceful in the Middle East for some reason, sure.
I mean, if things change.
So it's not about the people.
It's about the situation plus the people.
That's too dangerous.
BBC reported that there are already 5,000 deaths in Gaza, mostly of the Gaza residents and fighters.
Two questions you must ask about that.
Number one, where does the BBC get that kind of information?
How in the world would they know how many people died in Gaza?
Who would tell them that?
Well, probably Hamas, right?
Don't you think they got it from Hamas?
Not exactly dependable.
And then also, how many of the 5,000 do you think were civilians?
Kind of important, because people have a different opinion about killing the Hamas fighters than they do of civilians.
So I would warn you that 100% of the news that comes out there about deaths is unreliable.
But if we were to talk about it from just the PR perspective, whatever gets reported by the BBC is going to be somebody's truth.
So at the end of this, the BBC is going to report a number of casualties and deaths.
And there may be other sources.
Let's say Israel is reporting a much lower number, which I'd expect.
Which one do you believe?
And the answer is neither.
And the answer is people will choose the one that agrees with their opinion.
So if you think it was a A brutal genocide, you're going to pick the big number that Hamas comes up with.
If you think it was a reasonable self-defense act, you're going to pick Israel's smaller number.
But you'll never know.
Don't think you'll ever know.
Don't know if it'll even be between those numbers in any kind of way you could pick the midpoint or anything.
So you probably just won't know.
The only thing you'll know is that I have a hard time even visualizing 5,000 dead people.
Like my brain maxes out around that point.
5,000 dead people in like a week, all in one place.
That's an insane amount of dead people.
Like if you try to imagine them piled up like cordwood, it's a big fucking pile of dead people.
So when you get to 20,000, You're already beyond, way beyond what I can sort of imagine.
So, at some point it becomes irrelevant because, you know, it hits a 10 out of 10 in our brain, no matter what the actual number is.
I think we'll be at 10 out of 10.
All right.
There's been a climate change adjustment to some Chinese hotspot model.
I guess they had a model.
They predicted where the hotspots would be for climate change.
And they did a complicated, you know, tweaking and adjustment to make it a better model and fit the past better.
And there's no way I can read that, being an experienced individual in the world, and think that anybody can measure the temperature of Earth.
How many of you think that the temperature of the planet can be measured?
And that you can look at the average over time and learn something.
That is so obviously not something that humans can do.
We've been told, oh, scientists can do things that you can't do.
No, they can't do this.
This isn't science.
The measurements are not science.
If anybody thinks they're science, you're lost.
No, the measurements are something that engineers might do.
Or people who were just paid to put something in a field that looks like a thermometer?
Now, I don't even have to tell you all the ways that could go wrong.
But let me give you the Dilbert version of measuring the temperature of the Earth.
All right, guys, let's take a measurement of the Earth and compare it to the one we took last year.
All right.
Ooh, a number of our measuring devices seem to be offline.
All right, we'll just put in a number that's like the average of the other ones to compensate for these broken ones.
All right, but we also have big areas where in which there's no measurements at all.
So we're going to make some assumptions about those.
That they're similar to how they've always been.
Or there's the average between the things that we can measure.
By the time you're done, It's all just a human being making a bunch of assumptions that can't be tested.
That's it.
You wouldn't know if your measurements are right because there's nothing to compare them to.
Right?
The measurements of the satellites take of the upper atmosphere are different than what you're getting on the ground.
Now, if one moves in one direction and the other moves in the other direction, what do you know?
Maybe nothing.
Let me put it this way.
Anybody who's ever had, let's say, business corporate experience, and you've watched what happens behind the curtain, you've watched actual real people try to figure out how to measure anything, or to get data on anything.
If you've seen real people try to measure or get data on anything in the real world, It's always the same.
You can't.
It's not doable.
So you end up making assumptions and trying to sell it to people as though you did it.
It's not doable.
At all.
Now, I'm not saying that the planet is or is not warming.
I don't know.
And I'm not saying it is or is not a problem.
I don't know.
I think that if it is a problem, we'll figure it out.
And if it isn't, if it is not a problem, Well, I wouldn't be surprised.
I mean, it would perfectly fit the evidence as I see it, that people don't really know how to measure stuff.
All right.
So someday, someday that will be the funniest thing we look back at and imagine we believed.
You know, from today's perspective, you look back and you think, oh, isn't it funny that we used to think that smoking was good for you?
Like it was good for your health.
People actually believe that.
Now, we look back and go, how stupid we were.
Oh, my God.
How dumb we were to have believed something so ridiculous by today's standard.
That's what measuring the temperature of the Earth is going to look like in 40 years.
In 40 years, we're going to look back and say, oh, my God.
The entire civilization was built around the belief you could measure the temperature of the Earth, or even the direction of the temperature, either one.
And we will laugh at it, as obviously absurd.
Or that we could even know which variables are the major variables pushing climate.
We will think it's so funny someday.
But when you're in it, you're like, am I surrounded by people who don't know how the real world works?
Yes, I am.
Well, Hamas apparently stockpiled a bunch of fuel in anticipation of What's happening now, so Hamas itself might have a lot of fuel But the hospitals might be running out of fuel being keeping the lights on and that Israel is pointing out that Hamas has an option They can give their fuel to the hospitals and if they don't Is that on is that on Israel?
you know if Hamas doesn't want to share their the Sufficient fuel that they have same with the food.
It's a good point But ultimately, it's only about power.
All right, did I tell you about my mission to brand Marxism?
Because, in my opinion, no more than 1% of people even know what Marx is about.
They would say, uh, communism?
Socialism?
Something like that?
And that's all they would know.
So when you say, we must not elect that politician because they're a Marxist, Just know that that doesn't influence anybody, because they don't even know what it is.
And if they think it means socialism, they're going to say, you mean like health care?
I like health care.
You mean like social security?
That kind of socialism?
What's wrong with that?
That's what people will say.
So you're not going to make Marxism go away by saying, oh, that Marxist, because nobody knows what it means.
In any useful way, they don't know what it means.
So you're going to need persuasion, not the facts.
The facts are on your side.
They're just not persuasive.
So you're going to have to abandon the facts if you want to persuade.
And the way I would abandon them is this.
I would say it's called Marxism because it's about marking people as oppressors to justify taking their stuff.
Somebody added taking their stuff and burning it, but I don't think you need to add that.
Now you say to me, but somebody's going to say, Scott, it's after Karl Marx.
It's not Marx as in marking something with a magic marker to which I say, I know, but you're never going to forget it, are you?
You're never going to forget it.
So that was all I was going for.
And sooner or later, people will start associating Marx with marking people for death because that's actually Indirectly that's what ends up happening because it's a oppressor oppressed model And the idea is you identify who your oppressors are You identify who the oppressed are and you organize you oppressed To do bad things to the oppressors because damn it.
They deserve it.
They've got all your stuff.
They stole it from you so Marxism is about marking people for As oppressors so that you can take their stuff It is a complete, corrupt, and broken process.
And it's, you know, the driver of Antifa and Black Lives Matter.
A lot of stuff you don't like.
All right.
it's not the same but what yeah the teachers unions The Tale of Robin Hood is Marxist.
Yep Marcus couldn't see his penis without two beers.
Okay Okay.
You're a Marxist.
You're either a Marxist or a Marxist.
Marxists are capitalists.
Yeah, and anybody who calls me a colonizer, I don't want to be around.
Don't want to hire them, don't want to know them, don't want to live in their town.
How do we persuade liberal white women to stop pushing guilt as the operating system of life?
Well, I don't know what to do about the fact That most of the bad ideas are coming from one segment of the population.
What do you do about that?
There does seem to be a market segment that is the problem.
And it does seem to be single white women.
So I've never known anybody that could tell a single white woman anything.
So I don't know how you would persuade that group.
Vulnerable narcissists.
Yeah.
Mocking them?
Hmm.
I think they're already mocked.
It doesn't seem to make a difference.
You're an exception?
Good.
Oh, I don't know if I've conquered DEI.
I think there's just as much DEI and ESG as there ever was.
They just might stop saying the names as much.
But boy, you say colonizer around me, and you're my mortal enemy.
Colonize women.
and Oh, I am a colonizer, but it's like the N-word.
You can call yourself a colonizer, but if somebody else calls you one, it means they're "marxing" you for death.
Colonizer?
Your son's learning about colonizers.
Anatoly just tweeted word thinking.
Did he retweet mine or he was using it on his own?
Your son was forced to read Trevor Noah's biography in high school.
Oh my God.
No, word thinking is not word salad.
Those are different concepts.
Word salad is a whole bunch of words in a paragraph or a sentence that sort of the grammar is right, but it doesn't make any sense.
That's word salad.
Word thinking is where you try to win an argument by making your definition of the word the one the other one has to accept.
So for example, Nikki Haley
Tweeted that Zion anti-zionists are just anti-semitic Now Community notes immediately fact-checked her and said no, those are just different words They mean different things, you know one one is about the territory of Israel you know and the other is about the people and there's big difference between the the dirt on the ground and the people standing on it, so but
It is also true that some number of the anti-Zionists are also anti-Semitic.
So she's directionally right, but she is incorrect.
Directionally, there's a big Venn diagram correlation, of course, but not all that way.
So it's word thinking to try to win your argument by saying, the new definition that I just made up Is that anti-Zion by definition means anti-Semitic?
But you can't win an argument just by changing the definition of stuff.
Scott, you say you're not right or left for years.
How do you articulate your position?
I still don't understand.
Why do you need to?
Why do you need a label for me?
You can't understand me without the label?
Why can't I just be open-minded?
I always reject people who tell me I have to identify with the left or the right.
I don't have to do that.
I absolutely do not have to do that.
That's something in your mind that has nothing to do with me.
All right.
Oh, I identify Left of Bernie as a joke.
It's the same way I endorsed Hillary Clinton for president for my personal safety.
How do you reframe the feeling of loneliness when you can't find people who think alike?
Well, you know, that's part of the reason I do these live streams.
Because my personal life, I have almost zero contact with anybody who is even interested in what's happening in politics.
Close to zero.
So if I did not do this sort of professionally, I wouldn't have any contact with anybody who cared about any of it.
Well, I'm talking about people local.
You know, Greg's a friend, but he lives on the other coast.
Of the people I see in person, none of them are interested in politics.
It's just the rarest thing.
I can think of one, but I haven't seen him lately.
Yeah, maybe two.
I can think of like two people who would actually want to have a conversation.
I should get chickens. - Yes.
I know somebody who got chickens and ruined her life.
Chickens is literally the worst idea anybody ever had.
Because you know what happens when you get chickens?
Sooner or later, what happens?
Sooner or later, you get a rooster.
Because you can't tell if it's a rooster or a hen when it's a chick.
And if you've got chickens, sooner or later, somebody's going to give you a chick.
Say, hey, you need another one of those.
And if that thing is a rooster, do you know what happens in my town?
If you kill the rooster, you'd go to jail.
Seriously.
If you keep the rooster, you'll lose your house.
Because the rooster will crow, and your neighbors will complain, and you will have to move or go to jail.
Because you can't have a rooster.
So you can't have a rooster, and you can't kill a rooster.
So you can't hurt it, and you can't have it.
You actually have to move out of town.
You gotta move.
For a fucking rooster.
So my, uh, My restaurant partner had this exact scenario.
A chicken that somebody gave her as a pet and she loved it because she was allergic to other kinds of pets.
One chicken turned into two.
Then there was a rooster and her life was ruined.
Now you might say to me, Scott, you could just sort of down low kill that rooster.
But the people who have chickens as pets tend to be animal lovers.
No, you can't give it away.
There's nobody who will take a rooster.
You cannot give it away.
If you give it away, you'd be giving it away to somebody to kill it, probably.
So you'd be complicit in the crime, I suppose.
Shouldn't be any chickens in the suburbs and the city.
That's correct.
The worst thing you could ever do is get a chicken.
Never, never do that.
Key West has chickens walking all around, right?
So it's illegal to kill them.
That makes sense.
I feel like in the Key West, I saw chickens everywhere.
They were just wandering around everywhere.
I'm cockfighting.
In Kauai. In Kauai. In Kauai.
Just leave the rooster outside the coop and let predators do the work.
You harvest it.
Oh, quietly drop off the rooster where there are other chickens.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Yeah, I suppose if you've got a pet coyote.
But again, I'm talking about animal lovers, not people who would be willing to kill a chicken or a rooster.
Do I have a victory garden?
No, I'm not really a gardener, I've learned.
What do I think of Google?
Well, I agree with Dr. Epstein, who says it's controlling the election outcomes.
Hey, my laptop's on the way.
Got a new laptop coming.
Looks like they're flipping all Trump lawyers, or are they just pleading out and they were overcharged?
So I used to feed chickens at my uncle's farm.
Chickens are really scary in groups.
So I'd go into the chicken coop, you know, so it'd be sort of a big indoor area, and I'd be bringing the food.
And imagine, if you will, the floor is just solid chickens.
There's just chickens everywhere.
But normally, if you bring food to animals, they, you know, they go for the food.
But the chickens go for you.
I would like to give my impression of the chickens in the room when you walk into it.
Remember, I'm like 10 years old or something.
I walk in, I've got this bucket of feed.
Here's what I'd hope to see.
Oh, food!
That's not what I saw.
Imagine a room full of chickens, and they've all got this attitude, and they're slowly walking toward you.
But it's all of them.
And they're kind of quiet.
And it looks like they're ready to jump you.
And you're like, if you jump me, I won't be able to come back with food.
No, no chickens.
No, don't do it all.
I'll give you twice as much food.
Don't do it all!
And then the chickens kill you.
Well, that's how I saw it playing out in my head.
I imagined it that way.
All right, now I have to go figure out why the YouTube stopped working.
Because I think my cable stopped working.
You know, I used to used to work in a laboratory that did a lot of technology testing and we would test things and they wouldn't work and they wouldn't work and we'd, 90% of the time, we'd find out that a cable had gone bad.
Well, it was just sitting there.
I don't know how that happens.
But the number of times it was a bad cable, when we thought one of the devices was bad, probably at least 80% of the time it was the cable.
Now, these little cables are just like USB-Cs.
And I've got a couple of them that one does power and one goes to the mixer.
One of them stopped working this morning.
I don't know why.
I have no idea why.
It just stopped working.
And it was too late to fix it.
So I was so I was using the speaker in the device.
And I knew that one second and the YouTube people would be bitching.
So fuck them.
like I you know if they can't handle that.
And the one minute warning.
You're very clever.
You knew I was stalling to eight o'clock, didn't you?
It was oxidation on the contacts.
Um, no.
So you asked, can I just turn YouTube comments off?
The answer is yes, but also totally no.
Totally yes, but also totally no.
The yes part is it does have that option.
The no part is remembering where it is from the last time you used it.
It's sort of a buried option.
Yeah, you have to go like on a journey to find it.
Probably have to Google it, ask a friend, that sort of situation.
By the way, I finally figured out how to log out from the X platform on my iPad.
Oh my God, did they hide that?
It's like four layers of menus down.
And none of the menu choices would give you any indication that at the end of it would be a logout thing.
It is really well hidden, and intentionally, of course.
So I was looking for it this morning in anticipation of the audio sound.
Couldn't find it and didn't have time to find it this morning.
You have to call to log out.
Is this double the usual audience?
It looks like it is.
Looks like a number of people went to YouTube and then came over here for the excellent show.
Which, by the way, is time to wind down.
Thanks for coming.
Appreciate everybody.
I wish YouTube worked a little bit better, but we do what we can do.
