YouTube Transcript:
Uncomfortable Topics with Heather Mac Donald: Race, Skills Gap, Disparate Impact & the Role of Women

Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.

AutoDub

Understand YouTube Foreign Videos

Immersive YouTube Voice Translation

Break language barriers, embrace global quality content

Solve Foreign Video Barriers Instantly

Video Transcript

Video Summary

Summary

Core Theme

This content is a wide-ranging interview with Heather Mac Donald, who argues that a focus on "diversity, equity, and inclusion" (DEI) and concepts like "disparate impact" are actively undermining meritocracy, leading to a decline in standards and societal well-being. She contends that these policies are based on a false narrative of systemic racism and that inherent differences between sexes and races are being ignored or suppressed.

Mind Map

Click to expand

Click to explore the full interactive mind map • Zoom, pan, and navigate

Shut it down.

>> College students screamed to prevent

Heather Macdonald from giving a talk

that said, "Blue lives matter."

>> Black lives, they matter here.

>> McDonald is controversial because she

writes about uncomfortable topics like

race, a war on cops, and the diversity

delusion. I've released short videos

with McDonald, but she has much more to

say about things like discrimination,

crime, feminism, and America's welfare

state. So, here's our full interview.

You've written these horrible, say some

controversial things for years, been

vilified, ignored. Now, Donald Trump is

president and he's saying, "Yeah, these

things are true and I'm going to fix

them." Whether you are a doctor, an

accountant, a lawyer, or an air traffic controller,

controller,

you should be hired and promoted based

on skill and competence, not race or gender.

gender.

>> I think he's going to liberate us. It is

an extraordinary thing to have the man

with the greatest bully pulpit in the in

the world really saying, "You can't

scare me by calling me a racist." It is

really hard to calculate what the

effects of that are going to be long

term, but it is going to make a

difference because for far too long the

left, people who hate Western

civilization, who hate American

civilization, who hate the idea of

excellence and merit, have been able to silence

silence

dissenters from their their orthodoxy by

calling them a racist. And you can say

to Trump all you want, you're a racist

for downsizing the federal bureaucracy.

You're a racist for saying that science

awards should be granted based on get

this scientific knowledge and not race

or gender. And he doesn't give a damn.

He just keeps on doing it. So it's

really from that respect, it's an

extraordinary moment to be living through.

through.

>> Well, let's break some of that down.

hatred of Western civilization. What do

you mean

>> for the left to claim that the West is

the source of inequity in the world, of

inequity in history, of oppression, of

systemic racism, of the

crushing of minority voices, of

indigenous populations

that is so ignorant, it is so blind to

the reality of history. The fact of the

matter is there is not a single culture

or a single civilization that has not

tried to gain as much power and as much

dominance over its neighbors as possible

to the limits of its technological capacity.

capacity.

>> But the West was powerful and did it and

did dominate.

>> Yes. Because we had the technology to do

it. It wasn't for lack of trying on

everybody else and unfair

>> unfair up to a point. Uh we also brought

the rule of law. We brought science. We

brought engineering to cultures that for

millennia had lived with devastating

disease with devastating poverty. Uh and

in fact really rather soon within the

era of colonialism

the west began rethinking this entire

project. It was England that put its

treasury to at to bear on trying to end

the transatlantic slave trade. They

blockaded the coast of West Africa with

their navy. They spent 13% of their

naval resources to try to stop that

trade. They occupied Lagos, Nigeria to

try to get them to stop trading in

slaves. There's still slave trading

going on in parts of the Arabic world.

The ideas that the left uses to

discredit the West are uniquely Western

ideas. The West came up with the idea of

rights. The West came up with the idea

of equal rights, of tolerance, of

freedom from religious domination. These

are all Western ideas that now the left

hurls back against us and say, "Well,

you're not perfect in them." No, we're

not, but no other civilization is as well.

well.

>> You make the left sound like they

controlled everything.

>> They pretty much did. They controlled

the elite establishments. They have

dominated universities. They've

dominated the curriculum. I think that

white people are committed to being

villains in the aggregate, right?

>> Silly people in universities,

but they got power. How did they get

power to change our world?

>> That's a good question. Why did people

give in? And this is something I

struggle with all the time, John, of

what is it about Western civilization

uniquely about Western civilization that

subjects itself to this this corrosive

acid of unending critique. Critique is

>> we're open to criticism. Critique is

very good. That's what made us the

success we were of Plato and Socrates

saying an unquestioned life is not worth

living. You know, consider your received

assumptions. Are they correct? That is

very good. Do not accept superstition.

Do not accept authority. Now, here we're

getting into some problems, you know,

because if you and as a libertarian,

you're going to take a different stance

on this.

>> I resist authority.

>> You resist all authority. And I would say

say

>> all authority, but

>> Okay. Well, there's your your your

technique. Well, not all authority,

certainly. And I would say, you know,

obviously there's a pendulum swing here,

but it can go too far when you have

people believing that they have the

right to resist arrest that they they

get to decide on the on the spot uh you

know what's legitimate authority or not.

That can be too far. And that certainly

parental authority is valid and at some

point teachers authority is valid. So we

can go up the line of of aging at what

you know, how much do you question uh

college authority? Right now you have

this weird blend where you have these

college students that are acting out

little psycho dramas of oppression and

rebellion, pretending that they're

questioning authority when they're not.

They're simply paring the anti-colonial

rhetoric that they're getting from their

universities and they're play acting

being revolutionaries in their college

quad. But they won. They changed

government. They changed corporations.

>> I know

>> white people are all racist.

>> They cancelled people.

>> At the Anza College, uh I was being

accused of white speaking and white

slaining and supporting white supremacy.

It is understandable that we have a

guilty conscience when it comes to all

issues related to race because of our

>> centuries long betrayal of our founding

ideals and not being willing to accord

black Americans the same rights as we

proclaimed were inherent in all human beings.

beings.

>> So that's all they're saying. Remember that.

that.

>> No, they're saying much more than that.

That's right. We should remember it and

we do remember it. And believe me,

there's not a single American textbook

today that does not give vast amounts of

attention to the abomination of slavery

and to the courage of black

abolitionists, of Frederick Douglas, and

the voices in the 20th century that were

also fighting the still incomplete

uh fight until the 1960s for legal equal

rights. We are susceptible to that but

we have way overcorrected.

>> You say desperate impact is destroying

America. Most people don't even know

what it is.

>> It is a concept that was one of the

greatest success stories of the a civil

rights bar that was running out of cases

to prosecute and wanted to expand its jurisdiction

jurisdiction

indefinitely into the future and and

massively across society. it the history

of it. We had civil rights statutes that

were passed in the 1960s necessarily,

necessarily, belatedly,

belatedly,

long overdue, that said as employers,

you may not discriminate

against applicants based on the color of

their skin. And you may disagree with

those. You may think that that's

>> I do. I think that's your right. Okay.

But for but for now we'll we'll we'll uh

give that a pass and say so so so you're

going to be more radical than I am on

this. Um that you couldn't intentionally discriminate

discriminate and

and

that was seen as the way to dismantle

America's long legacy of racism. Well

then it turned out that employers

sort of got their act together and

stopped discriminating as intentionally.

So the courts and activists came up with

a new definition of what would be

illegal discrimination

and it gets rid of the idea of intention

and intentional discrimination

completely. Disperate impact is the

conceit that if there's a standard that

blacks do more poorly at, it's discriminatory.

discriminatory.

So if you have a certain expectation of

reading level or math skills to qualify

to be a teacher, to be a firefighter, to

be a police officer and a employer

administers a test and blacks do more

poorly on that, that's a racist test.

Instead of meeting the standard, our

response is to throw out the standard.

And the employer is not racist. You

don't have to show that the employer

wants to discriminate against blacks.

The employer just wants a qualified

workforce. But if he has used some kind

of standard that means that there are

less blacks qualifying, that then

becomes something that violates civil

rights. I'll give you an example right

out of the Biden administration.

Maryland State Police hoping to settle a

US Justice Department investigation into

its alleged racial discrimination by

paying almost $3 million. The Maryland

State Police wanted to make sure that

the state troopers could read at a very

basic level because as a police officer,

you're going to need to write police

reports. You're going to need to

understand the patrol guide. you're

going to need some level of of dealing

with written language and being able to

read and write. Very minimal level. So,

the Maryland State Police had a written

exam. And this is the type of question.

Four very simple paragraphs

written at like maybe a third grade

level that discussed theft from

libraries in the United States and then

followed up a true or false question. Is

theft a problem in US libraries? Just

reading comprehension, have you been

able to understand this four paragraph

passage? Well, this test and the

questions were all at that level of

simplicity had what's known as a

desperate impact on black applicants to

be Maryland state troopers. Black

applicants failed the test at higher

rates than whites. The Maryland State

Troopers didn't intend to exclude black

state troopers. Racism had nothing to do

with it. It was a color-blind neutral

test of skills. But because it had a

disperate impact on black applicants and

disqualified more black applicants, the

Biden Justice Department brought a suit

against the Maryland State Police for

having a discriminatory test. hiring

tests that unfairly and unlawfully

excluded them from employment.

>> This is ridiculous. Taxpayers should not

be on the hook for this. It was not a

racist department. Desperate impact

means that an institution can be

completely colorblind. It can want to

have as many different races as

possible. But if it has a standard that

it's colorblind, meritocratic, but that

blacks do pearly on, you got to throw

out the standard. And it's not just sort

of public service jobs like policing.

Our taxpayers in New York recently paid

out $2 billion in damages because the

exam for licensing teachers in New York

State, which I can tell you went through

decades of being dumbed down to

prolleptically avoid disperate impact.

Blacks still didn't do as well on it.

And so a court decided even though

you've spent decades throwing out every

question on this exam that has too wide

a racial divergence, it's still you

still didn't have the same proportion of

black applicants passing as white

applicants. We're going to throw out the

exam and you New York taxpayers are

liable for $2 billion. Disperate impact

is our greatest weapon against merit. It

is their greatest weapon against

excellence. And it is an abuse of the

spirit of our civil rights laws, which

was to say, "We're going to allow

everybody to reach their highest

potential. We ban discrimination, but we

do not ban excellence. We do not ban

high expectations. We want all people to

reach the same level of competence.

We're not going to have two standards of

achievement. One for a particular race,

another for another race. One for a

particular sex, another for a different

sex. We are going to have a single level

of excellence in this society. And that

is how we're going to move forward.

>> There is a deliberate effort to hire

more people from more diverse

backgrounds to work as paramedics and

EMTs. you're also maybe putting people's

lives at risk because again, these are

very simple skills that are being

tested, but in an emergency situation,

uh you want people that have the

cognitive skills to to make some back

the envelope calculations or simply be

able to read. We saw this in New Haven

as well, uh, a firefighter exam where

you're you're asking people, they need

to be able to read instructions on

hazardous chemicals so that you don't

mix the wrong chemicals. This is not a

racist uh, demand. It is a color-blind

bare minimum demand for these these

types of jobs where public safety is at

risk. But public safety is also at risk

in medicine. There is a test for

licensing doctors in medical schools

called the medical licensing exam and

it's admitted in a series of stages.

Step one of the medical licensing exam

used to be graded and so you would be

able to see how students are doing on

the curve and those grades were used for

a number of things but for one thing by

hospitals to choose residents for the

most competitive highly demanding

residencies whether it's neurology or

very complicated surgery. And because

black medical students were at the

absolute bottom

of the medical grading exam on step one,

the licensing board for physicians

decided to throw out the scores and make

the exam pass fail so that hospitals and

future employers have no way of

evaluating whether this student is

struggling to absorb are basic medical

facts or is succeeding marvelously and

is likely has a good chance of becoming

the next physician scientist that might

give us a breakthrough in understanding

Alzheimer's disease. This pressure on

medical licensing is going to continue

into step two of the medical licensing

exam. You already have medical schools

that have simply waved the medical

college admissions tests for black

students because they do so poorly on

them and are bringing blacks into

medical schools with qualifications that

would be automatically disqualifying if

presented by whites or Asians. It's

really a cruel thing for anybody to be

catapulted into an environment for which

he's not competitively qualified. They

don't do well. And this is the same

thing if for gender preferences. If MIT

admitted me with math SATs of 650 on an

800 point scale because they needed they

felt they needed more gender diversity

in their engineering class because there

weren't enough females there. As if I

care about the sex of somebody that is

building a bridge that I want to get

across safely. All I care is is that the

best possible engineer for that job. But

MIT has different ideas and thinks the

gonads of engineers matter to their

competence. So it admits me with 650 on

an 800 point scale on math. And my peers

who've been admitted based on merit, not

gonads, all have 800s.

I am going to struggle in my math

classes in freshman year because I've

been admitted to a peer group that is

more academically qualified than I am.

Now, I can still go to engineering

school. I should go with students that

also average 650 and my freshman

calculus class and my freshman

engineering and chemistry class will be

pitched to my level of academic

preparedness. But if I'm sent into MIT,

it's frankly going to be hell on earth

because I'm going to be behind. And lo

and behold, what happens? The diversity

bureaucrats show up and tell me, "If

you're feeling out of place, if you're

struggling, if you're not doing as well

as your peers, it's because you're in a

rape culture. It's because you're in a

patriarchy. it's because you are

surrounded by a female hostile

environment. They're not going to be

honest and say no, it's because you've

been catapulted into an academic

environment for which you are not

competitively qualified. Now, the

argument is always but they'll do

better. They'll they'll catch up. They

don't. It would be nice if they did, but

they don't catch up. They struggle. It

is cruel. It is an act of narcissism and

ego on the part of these college

administrators who only care about the

photos that show up on their college

website and making sure that they're

suitably diverse and do not care about

the fate of black students who have been

admitted. More people of color are

attending colleges and universities than

ever before, but a graduation rate for

black and Hispanic men is far behind the

general public. Nobody such as myself

and other opponents of racial

preferences is saying blacks shouldn't

go to college. We are only saying blacks

should go to college on the same

conditions as everybody else.

They should go to colleges for which

they are academically prepared and not

catapulted into environments where they

are set up with a handicap from the day

they start school. That is cruel. It is

thoughtless and it is done simply for

the egos of college administrators.

>> Blacks don't have the background and the

money and the culture of many doctors in

the family others have. It seems fair to

give minorities a boost.

>> It's not fair to the alleged recipient

of a racial preference because you are

putting them into an environment where

they are going to struggle. That is

cruel. It is hard. You may have been an

800 math SAT, John, but if Okay, if you

were not, imagine

>> that was my brother.

>> Okay, so you got all of the you got all

the critical thinking and he just got

the like the math wonkery, but would you

want to be sent to MIT or Caltech

without comparable skills to your peers?

>> I don't see the black recipients of

affirmative action complaining. Well,

that's a that's a a a good point because

there is a networking capacity there.

So, one can ask

whether that should dominate everything

else. But the fact of the matter is we

have less black doctors. We have less

black scientists because of racial

preferences. There was a very good study

that came from a Duke economist that

found that black male freshmen at Duke

enter intending to major in a STEM field

at a higher rate than white male

freshmen at Duke intending to major in a

science field. But by senior year, the

science fields were practically

exclusively dominated by whites and

Asians because the black males had been

admitted with a standard deviation below

in SAT scores and they couldn't keep up.

So they ended up transferring out of

their intended STEM major into black

studies or anthropology or postcolonial

studies. So yes, they're graduating

maybe uh but they are not graduating

with the skills that they might have

picked up had they been instead of going

to Duke with a standard deviation below

of of of academic skills to your peers?

What's wrong with going to a North

Carolina University school? The elitism

of this discourse is amazing. It's

basically if you don't go to Harvard,

your life is over. Like all these

blacks, they'll never have a chance in

life if they don't go to Harvard. Or I

remember the chancellor of you,

University of California, Berkeley, when

the California voters, one of the few

smart things they've done, passed a

constitutional amendment saying there

shall be no racial preferences in

government, including in college

admissions. And the chancellor of

Berkeley said,"Well, where will we get

the leaders of tomorrow?" Meaning, you

can't be a leader of California unless

you go to Berkeley. Well, if that's the

case, let's shut down University of

California, Riverside. Let's shut down

University of California, Los Angeles,

and have everybody go to Berkeley if

that's the only way you can succeed. In

fact, there are many ways to get an education.

education.

>> I'm told the tests are racist. They've

been scoured for any question vaguely

relating to a riotta for like 50 years.

That was the idea that these tests are

based on this wasp cultural heritage.

>> My understanding actually is that blacks

did better on the riata question,

>> right? Well, the sports I guess I don't

know maybe they they they knew what to

study for. But the fact of the matter is

if the if the tests were racist, they

would underpredict

black achievement in school because they

were not sufficiently measuring

black skills.

And in fact, SATs overpredict

overpredict black

black

college performance. So they're not

racist. But yes, we have the Chicago

teachers union head who recently said

that these standardized tests are just

another vestage of white supremacy and

whites, you know, racist obsession with

excellence and objectivity and whatnot.

The fact of the matter is SATs were

created in order to overcome class bias

that was favoring for the elite Ivy

schools, the graduates of of prestigious

prep schools in New England, the

Andovers and Exits and CHOs and whatnot.

We knew there was a lot of kids in the

Midwest that didn't have access to those

schools, but they had the academic

skills to succeed. and that started

breaking down what was actual class

bias. So these tests have been ex

examined and examined and examined.

There is nothing better out there to

predict uh

college performance. The attack on

merit, the attack on color-blind

standards, the attack on high

expectations of achievement

is all being waged

because we have this very troubling and

very depressing, persistent

academic skills gap on the one hand,

meaning that and this is something

that's very difficult to talk about and

I need to give a trigger warning. It's

something that well-meaning Americans

turn their eyes away from. Uh, but the

average skill level of black students is

very, very low. According to the the

most widely used objective, respected

measures of student competence, the NAP,

the National Assessment of Educational

Progress, which is given to hundreds of

thousands of uh high school students and

elementary school students every couple

of years. 66%

of black 12th graders do not possess

even the most basic 12th grade math

skills. Blacks are way unprepared for

college. They're way unprepared for

graduate school, for medical school, for

law school.

>> You've been called a racist repeatedly

for saying stuff like this. And

reasonably people can say the only

reason they're behind is because of the

legacy of slavery. White people like us,

we have capital, human capital and

actual capital. many people have

inherited and no wonder blacks are behind.

behind.

>> Well, there's two different issues

there. Is it racist to

notice the skills gap or the crime gap

and to offer that gap as an alternative

explanation for what is now the only

allowable explanation for the fact that

for instance Google does not have 13%

black engineers

or uh cancer research lab does not have 13%

13%

black oncologists working

>> 13% being the percentage

>> the percentage of blacks. The assumption

is our dominant assumption today is if

you have any institution that is not proportionally

proportionally

represented with blacks which is 13% of

the population the only allowable

explanation is racism. there there must

be discrimination going on that that

that oncology lab or the Google

engineering lab or AI lab is

discriminating against competitively qualified

qualified

uh black engineers, black nano physicists,

physicists,

uh black experts in Alzheimer's disease.

>> Maybe they are

>> I profer the skills gap as an

alternative explanation. The fact of the

matter is, given the degree of that

skills gap, the average black SAT score

on math is 440 on an 800 point scale.

The average combined black SAT score is

9007 on a 1600 point scale. That is very

low. That skills gap means that you can

have meritocracy in an institution or

you can have diversity. You cannot have

both. Any institution that tells you

that we are giving priority to diversity

is telling you we have discarded

meritocracy because again there are

simply not enough competitively

qualified black applicants to go around

to make those

numbers match the proportion in the

population. So that's one thing. Am I a

racist for bringing this up? I am not.

The facts are the facts. I don't care.

The facts need to be looked at. They

have been completely kept out of the

public eye in order to keep the systemic

lie of racism going on. Now, as far as

what's the cause for that, that's a

completely different discussion. But it

does not have any bearing on whether

right now there are institutions that

are discriminating against qualified

blacks. The opposite is the case. I talk

to so many parents, Asian parents and

white parents that tell me, "I've got

this son. He had near-perfect medical

college admission tests. These are the

standardized tests, the MCATs, to get

into medical school or nearperfect

law school admissions tests, the LSATs.

These are admissions tests to get into

law school.

incredible GPA, record of doing, you

know, medical lab work as an undergraduate.

undergraduate.

My son didn't get into any medical

schools because he is white and Asian

and a male. This is very corrosive.

This is

>> those kids have money. They've had

tutors. They have all the advantages.

>> They have the skills. I do not care, frankly,

frankly,

uh, if they've had tutors. I want the

best possible doctor. We don't have an

over supply of doctors. If you tried to

get an an opening appointment in a in a

specialist recently, well, that'll be

nine months away. You know, we clearly

need more doctors. We are turning away

the best applicants because they are the

wrong race. We are not discriminating

against black applicants. The University

of California in San Francisco, it used

to have about a third of its admitted

medical school class was white. After

the George Floyd race riots in 2020,

the proportion of white students at UC

San Francisco dropped to 15% equal to

the 15% of black students. Blacks are

about 6% of the population in

California. Their MCAT scores would be

automatically that are admitted to the

University of California, San Francisco

would be almost automatically

disqualifying if presented by a white

applicant. And yet there they are equal.

Now, of course, if they're qualified,

open arms. But I can tell you the

reality of our world today is not white

privilege, it's black privilege. That's

just the the simplest way to say it. I

will believe that the reality is white

privilege when I hear about a black

college senior saying, "How can I put my

race down as white because that'll give

me an admissions advantage to Harvard?"

In fact,

Harvard until recently had about 16%

blacks in its freshman class. If it

admitted based on academic merit, there

would be less than 1% and

>> class would be mostly Asian.

>> Asian and Asians are being screwed.

>> Harvard University's admissions process

discriminates against Asian-American applicants.

applicants.

>> They are being kept out. And this is a

problem because we want to give people

the incentive to succeed. And so far,

what's been going on with Asians is we

keep raising the bar.

>> The GPA was 4.42 weighted. Uh SAT score

was 1590.

>> Jong was rejected by 16 of the 18

colleges he applied to.

>> I really thought, you know, I had a good

chance. And it turns out uh however good

of a chance I had, I didn't get in.

>> We say, okay, not enough to play two

instruments, not enough to have perfect

SATs, not enough to have perfect GPA.

you also need to have like discovered

some new cellular process to get into

Harvard and then we say not good enough

you know that we're going to raise the

bar and they keep meeting it but at some

point they must just say to hell with

this you want to be able to tell people

that if you work hard if you develop

your skills to contribute to

civilization to be able to push back the

boundaries of ignorance which continue

to hem around human progress, you will

be rewarded and you will not be

jeopardized based on your skin color.

That was the fact with blacks for most

of our history. And now we've just

turned around and we're doing the same

thing with regards to whites and Asians.

And you could say, well, turnaround is

fair play, but it is not in anybody's interest.

interest.

>> I'm surprised you preceeded this by

saying trigger warning.

Is that serious?

>> No. Well, it's tongue and cheek, but it

I mean people don't like to hear it. It traumatizes.

traumatizes.

>> Trigger warnings were part of the

leftist cult at colleges. Anytime

somebody might be bothered by something,

they said, "I feel threatened and

therefore I don't want to hear it. I

want to run away if I'm warned."

>> Well, let's be more precise.

>> Yes. Trigger warnings were specifically

demanded by females who now drive the

academic culture and they have been the

biggest enemies of free speech on

college campuses for decades now. They

are the ones that claim to be so fragile

that if they read oid's metamorphoses,

one of the great works of literature

that is a absolute extraordinary vision

of constant transformation of a of a

world that is in constant flux where one

form changes into another where

there's no stable knowledge, no stable

reality. And Avid was writing about the

Greek myths and in ex just e exquisite

language, exquisite imagination. But in

some of those myths, Jove and other

males did abduct females.

Okay, that was a literary conceit. But

these females who are the absolute king

of the hill that have had every

privilege that has ever been available

to females in history, they claim to be

so delicate and and and vulnerable that

they can't read oid because it will make

them relive non-existent rape memories

or something. and and they're the ones

that gave us the absolutely we've

learned now lethal

uh connections between non-orthodox

speech is hate speech

and if you are a hater and if you use

hate speech, hate speech must must be

suppressed because it is allegedly so

dangerous and hurtful to marginalized

groups and females hilariously get to

claim that they're marginalized even

though they're about like twothirds of

the student body at undergraduate levels

and the vast majority of these

ridiculous administrators that do

absolutely nothing. So dissenting speech

if you disagree with the theories about

ubiquitous white supremacy or or postc

colonial hegemony in in Israel or or

endemic sexism, you're a hater. your

hate speech has to be canceled and

you're driven off campus. Here's another

example of it. If I believe that my sex

as a female is written into every cell

of my body through the genetic code and

that there are two biological sexes as

determined by the overwhelming majority

of sex organs in males and females. and

that the sex is not some whim that the

obstitrician decides at birth or just

flip a coin, I'm going to assign you

male or female. It's not that you've got

a male organ there. It's just just whim

and you can change it when you get older.

older.

>> But that idea has been pushed back,

>> but that uh too was seen as a form of

hate speech and it wasn't pushed back by

Tyler Robinson. Charlie Kirk, before he

came to Utah Valley University, there

was a student petition that went around

saying he he may not come to campus

because he is a purveyor of hate and

hate speech and he will put us students

at risk. We will be in danger because

Charlie Kirk is going to step on campus

and debate us because he's a hater. And

this was the language that Tyler

Robinson used in explaining his decision

to assassinate Charlie Kirk because some

forms of hate cannot be negotiated with.

>> President Trump says he's getting rid of

affirmative action, DEI. So these

problems are solved.

>> We're bringing meritocracy, the American

way, back. DEI at hood is dead. It's

gone. Trump does have greater power over

the federal bureaucracy for sure. So

those claims may be true. It may be true

that uh the official offices of

diversity hiring in these agencies are

now gone. Now, you still have a lot of

personnel that believe deeply in the

need for screwing white and Asians in

the name of racial justice.

But for now, it probably is the case

that federal hiring is based on merit.

That is less the case in the

universities. I go between being

optimistic and being pessimistic. You

know, if I'm in a unusually for me

optimistic mode, I do think that having

a presidential role model for four years

and maybe we'll get another eight of of

somebody else who also is not cowed by

the race hustle that we will be able to

really beat back racial double standards.

standards.

>> What do you mean race hustle? Race

hustle is a possibility of an entire

industry played upon racial guilt. The

idea that you can get whites basically

to endlessly apologize for

non-existent racism that you can demand

handouts. You can have quotas. You can

have set aides. We've seen this in

government contracting for years where

firms are chosen not on the basis of

their capacity to build a bridge but

based on the the race or sex of their

owners. The race hustle is the idea that

you can get uh benefits and goodies by

charging racism on absolutely fictitious

grounds. The Trump administration

sending a letter to nine prestigious

colleges telling them to change course

when it comes to things like deciding

college admissions based on gender and

race. At first it seemed like

universities were a little bit worried

by that. But now I see a lot of

regrouping going on. Uh the all of these

ridiculous offices of diversity, equity,

and inclusion which have no function at

all. Like please, none of your viewers

should give any benefit of the doubt to

these bureaucrats. There is no expertise

behind it. To be a diversity bureaucrat

does not mean you've got some

specialized knowledge. No, there's no

knowledge required to be a diversity

bureaucrat. The only thing that's

necessary is you're willing to prosecute

the race hustle at the highest levels of

the administration and you're willing to

lie through your teeth about the fact

that you exist in a racist institution.

So Trump said no more federal money if

you have a DEI office or if you're penalizing

penalizing

highly qualified white and Asian

students because of their skin color in

admissions and hiring um and promotions.

So the universities, some of them did

kind of dismantle the DEI offices, but a

lot of the other ones just renamed them

with some with some code words that were

already circulating in use, but they've

become even more popular now.

>> We had to change the names of some of

our programs and stuff. Uh like we had

queer brunch. We can't call it queer

brunch anymore.

>> Yeah, you got to call it cozy brunch.

diversity and equity becomes belonging

and community. But it's still about the

same conceit that without a special

cadre of bureaucrats that these colleges

are going to be filled with such hate

and discrimination and we need protection.

protection.

>> We're going to stop the destructive and divisive

divisive

diversity, equity, and inclusion mandates.

mandates.

>> You call Trump a role model. I have

trouble with that. He's a crude, selfish

bully. Born to privilege.

>> He's done some good things.

>> Born to privilege. You know, I'm sorry

that that uh doesn't

>> that triggers you?

>> It it it mean leaves me completely

unmoved. I don't care. Uh I would agree

with you on a lot of his personality,

particularly as a male role model. He is

a very poor one because he's vindictive.

He's nasty. He lacks magnuminity.

I was speaking exclusively to his

courage in standing up to the race

hustle. But you know, if we want to get

into a Trump discussion here, it's a

very day by day, it's an increasingly

complicated picture. One can admire and

support his ends and be very

uncomfortable with his means. And uh the usual

usual

Republican or conservative response when

somebody points out that he is arguably

abusing power, using his own lawfare,

going after his enemies, sicking the

power of the IRS or the Justice

Department, uh interfering in the normal

processes of of neutral government. the

usual responses, but the left's been

doing that for decades. And they're

right. It's hilarious. I It makes me

really I both laugh and want to throw up

when the universities complain that

Trump is politicizing education. The

administration is intentionally creating

confusion using diversionary tactics in

order to make those who don't fit their

agenda the enemy.

>> He's telling us we can't do unaloyed

victim studies any longer. we have to

have ideological balance or we can't

admit based on race and sex. He's

politicizing education. Excuse me. You

were the guys that said no conservatives

allowed here in in in in essence. I

mean, that was the de facto rule. uh

you're the ones that say if you want to

give a speech on climate change but in

your off hours as a as an academic you

have written that that universities

should operate on merit not on

diversity. You will not be allowed to

give your climate change speech at MIT

because that is too uh too too against

the orthodoxy. So universities have

politicized themselves. Now they're

claiming Trump is politicizing. That's

ridiculous. So, yes, the left got there

first, but that doesn't mean it can't

get worse. And that the precedent that

Trump is setting for

for

a very, very muscular, if not unconstitutional,

unconstitutional,

use of executive power will come back to

haunt conservatives. One reason you're

called the notorious white supremacist

fascist is because you claim there are

things called the Ferguson effect. The

data shows that there is the Ferguson

effect. When you demonize police

officers and say that they are the

biggest threat facing blacks and that

black parents should fear every time

their child goes outside that he will be

killed by a police officer, which was a

favorite uh refrain of President Barack

Obama and President Joe Biden. You

demoralize those cops when you tell them

that if they go to high crime

neighborhoods and get descriptions from

the victims of shootings as to who's

doing the shootings and make arrests,

they are racist because they're being

brought into high crime neighborhoods

based on crime data.

>> The post George Floyd riots resulted in

excess of over 15,000 black male deaths

in this country.

>> You're literally making a connection out

of your own conjecture.

It's a real thing. Look up Look up the

Ferguson effect. Look up the Floyd

effect. It is a real term.

>> You cannot You cannot

>> It's a real term. I didn't make this up.

>> Invent a connection between two things.

>> The media's in a bubble. They only hear

what they want to hear. They only see

what they want to see. It's like, you

know, mostly peaceful protests with the

fires burning in the in the in the

background. Same with like the ice riots

in Los Angeles. Oh, these were peaceful.

No, they were. You had people throwing

cement blocks off of freeway overpasses

on on police California Highway Patrol

below. We all have our blinders. I'm

sure I do, too. We all have confirmation

bias. We pick up what we want to believe

and we ignore evidence that counteracts

that and we can excuse that away, you

know. So all of us have real

epistemological limitations and it's

very hard to fight against and it's not

pleasant to to be forced into debating

your ideas. But the media has become

really very ideologically monolithic. As

a conservative, I can say I exist in a certain

certain

world of ideas and we all feel familiar

with those ideas. And it can be sobering

to realize how little they penetrate

outside of the conservative intellectual

environment or the libertarian one for

that matter.

>> Few Americans know that according to activists,

activists,

>> it's not just the cops that are racist.

Technology is racist.

>> Shot Spotter has been a failure. Uh, the

Chicago mayor Brandon Johnson wanted to

get rid of a technology called Shot

Spotter, which is just an acoustic

device that picks up the sounds of of

shots so that when people are not

calling in shootings, the officers can

get there anyway and often save lives if

they find somebody who's, you know, in

one case some a guy who was shot in a

wheelchair. Nobody called in the

shooting, but Shot Spotter picked it up

and uh they were able to get him to the

emergency room. But technology is racist

because it shows that the vast vast vast

majority of shootings happen in black

neighborhoods. Black youth in Chicago,

Philadelphia, New York, and Boston after

the George Floyd race riots were shot at

100 times the rate of white youth.

That's not the cops that is making that

up. The cops can't help those numbers.

But it means that the cops cannot go

where people are most being shot without

being overwhelmingly black

neighborhoods. But if you tell the cops,

as we did after the shooting of Michael

Brown in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014,

that turned into the biggest one of the

biggest hoaxes. This was the hands up,

DON'T SHOOT HOAX.

>> HANDS UP,

>> DON'T SHOOT.

DON'T SHOOT.

>> Michael Brown, a very burly teenager,

had just stolen something from a store

and a police officer was called and and

tried to stop him. And we were told that

uh Brown in fleeing had his hands up and

and said, "Hands up, don't shoot." Was

shot, which was a complete lie. But this

triggered months of rioting, not just in Ferguson.

Ferguson.

>> Hands up, don't shoot.

>> What was the truth? The truth was that

he'd been trying to grab the officer's

gun and had put the officer at justified

fear of his life. The Obama Justice

Department, to its incredible dismay,

looked into the narrative and found it

was untrue. Um, nevertheless, Obama

said, "Nevertheless, there still is cop

racism. Let's not forget that." I

paraphrase. I paraphrase greatly.

>> Isn't there cop racism?

>> Not at all enough to worry about,

frankly. I don't even want to talk about

it because it is so minor an issue

compared to what the real problem is

facing blacks today. You could get rid

of all police shootings of civilians

tomorrow and it would have virtually no

effect on the black death by homicide

rate. Blacks between the ages of 10 and 25

die of gun homicide at 25 times the rate

of whites in that age category. And

they're not being killed by the cops.

They're being killed by other blacks.

And nobody wants to talk about it. We're

supposed to believe that we're all

racist. It's the media that's racist.

They don't give a damn about black

lives. They don't give a damn about the

dozens of blacks who are killed by

homicide every single day. That's more

than all white and Hispanic homicide

victims combined. Even though, as we

said, blacks are 13% of the population.

None, virtually none of those black

homicide victims gets covered. We are

not saying their names because they're

killed by other blacks and we don't want

to talk about that. So, the Ferguson

effect says when you demonize the cops,

the cops back off. And guess what

happens? When the cops stop

making stops, when they stop looking at

hot spots where shootings have happened,

and they back off, criminals get

emboldened and more black lives are

taken. That's what happened after the

Ferguson riots, after the George Floyd

race riots in 2020. We had an even

greater meltdown. We had every single

American elite institution declaring it

was racist to the core and the cops were

of course as usual uh the one of the

main targets of this. 2020 saw the

largest one-year increase in homicide in

this nation's history. 29%

and thousands more black lives were

taken. That's what happens when you

demonize the cops. Is there room for

better training? Of course, there's

always room for better cop training, but

you're not going to get that by shooting

the messenger, which is what we're doing.

doing.

Policing today is data driven. One of

the greatest government revolutions that

you should support, John, began in the

New York Police Department in the 1990s

under Rudolph Giuliani and William

Bratton. And it said, "Government has to

be accountable. We're going to measure

outcomes, not inputs. We're going to

hold precinct commanders ruthlessly

accountable for crime in their

precincts. And if they are not

controlling it and lowering it, their

job is on the line. Good intentions

don't matter anymore. What matters is

are you performing? And we're going to

measure that with data. So now policing

in New York and elsewhere is rigorously

data driven. They are they are

monitoring on an hourtoby- hour basis

where shootings are happening, where

robbery patterns are breaking out.

They're going where 911 calls are

calling them. They would prefer not to

be told that it's another black-on-black

shooting. When I started writing about

the cops, I was in the 67th precinct in Brooklyn

Brooklyn

and the cops there took me to the wanted

poster for rob wall for robberies

and and the victims of these robberies.

It's not the racist cops,

the victims are overwhelming black. The

wanted posters were exclusively

of black criminals.

And the cops said to me, "We're not

creating this world. This is the world

as as we receive it. What are we

supposed to do?"

That's the problem. But we would rather

talk about this fake epidemic of cop

racism than be honest about

the pathologies

in inner city culture in gang culture

that is leading to a rate of crime

that is inconceivable. the black

children that I've documented over the years

years

who've been playing on trampolines,

at barbecues, sleeping in their beds, at

birthday parties. One-year-olds, threey

olds, 5y olds, 9year-olds who are shot

by stray bullets in driveby shootings,

who are killed, who are rendered brain

damaged for the rest of their lives. If

white kids were killed at that rate,

there would be a revolution. The It's a

very bizarre thing. We talk about racism

all the time

as an abstraction

and we we claim that we care so much

about black lives, but these black

children that are getting gunned down,

nobody talks about them. Above all the

media, above all the Black Lives Matter

activists, I have never ever witnessed a

Black Lives Matter rally to protest

three-year-old Honesty Cheetel. She was

killed July 5th at a Fourth of July

barbecue in Washington DC

drive by shooting. Have we said her

name? We're supposed to say the name of

George Floyd. We're supposed to say the

name of Michael Brown. Nobody said the

name of Honesty Sheetle. Trump called in

the National Guard. He said, "This crime

has got to end.

>> I'm announcing a historic action to

rescue our nation's capital from crime,

bloodshed, bedum, and squalor, and worse.

worse.

This is liberation day in DC, and we're

going to take our capital back." I would

say Trump was much more

realistic and justified in saying that

death is too many. This is a national

emergency. And if it was white people,

if it was white toddlers being gunned

down in their beds or in their parents'

cars, there would be a national

emergency declared. Well, this is why

you're called racist, antilack,

capitalist, imperialist, fascist.

fascist.

>> Well, they can call it all they want. I

don't care. I I take

>> You really don't care all the heat

you've taken?

>> I've had black people come up to me and

say, "Thank you." I've gone to black

police community meetings in Harlem on

the south side of Chicago and what I

hear those good people say is, "We want

more cops. Why aren't you getting the

kids off the corners? Why don't you

arrest for loitering any longer? Why

don't you arrest for disorderly conduct?

I'm scared to go down to my lobby

because there's kids down there smoking

weed, hanging out, selling drugs. The

only time I feel safe is when the police

are there. I've I've seen elderly black

ladies stand up in these meetings and

say, "Thank God for the police. They are

my friends." So, those are the people

that I care about, not the ones that are

living in a in a fantasy bubble of

victimhood and uh hatred for the thing

that they should be down on their knees

and gratitude for. what you call

scientific policing, going where the

crime is does mean that black kids are

stopped and frisked more often. My kids

never got frisked.

That's not fair. That's cruel.

>> Well, I remember when Giuliani was first

starting his um crusade to try and bring

safety back to New York, there was a

community activist in Brooklyn called

Richard Green. and he said, "Between

getting stopped and between getting

shot, I'd rather be stopped." Now, if if

the cops are making stops without legal

grounds, you know, there's a legal

standard for this. It's called

reasonable suspicion. The cop has to

have reasonable grounds for believing

that there may be criminal activity of

foot. Uh if the cop is simply pulling

people over for no reason whatsoever,

that's a problem. The fact of the matter

is, given, again, I'm going to speak the

truth here, and this is not pleasant for

people to hear, but given the

pervasiveness of crime

within the black community, one in three

black adults has a felony conviction.

It is the case that

as a as a law-abiding black man,

>> maybe they have a felony conviction because of racism because they're more

because of racism because they're more likely to be stopped, more likely to be

likely to be stopped, more likely to be prosecuted.

prosecuted. >> The PE police are going where the crime

>> The PE police are going where the crime is happening. If there was that degree

is happening. If there was that degree of crime going on in white

of crime going on in white neighborhoods, those parents would be

neighborhoods, those parents would be calling the cops all the time. There's

calling the cops all the time. There's not, it's not as if cops have like all

not, it's not as if cops have like all this extra time on their hands that, oh,

this extra time on their hands that, oh, let's just go hassle some blacks. Uh,

let's just go hassle some blacks. Uh, we've got nothing else to do. They are

we've got nothing else to do. They are running from call to call. They are ba

running from call to call. They are ba barely getting through that night's

barely getting through that night's crime and they're having to triage all

crime and they're having to triage all the time. Prison remains a lifetime

the time. Prison remains a lifetime achievement award for persistence in

achievement award for persistence in criminal offending. Most offenders are

criminal offending. Most offenders are given community supervision if they're

given community supervision if they're prosecuted at all. Because what we have

prosecuted at all. Because what we have now, what we've had for the last decade

now, what we've had for the last decade at least, is massive decriminalization

at least, is massive decriminalization and deprosecution. Our prosecutors have

and deprosecution. Our prosecutors have decided that they're not going to

decided that they're not going to prosecute crime because doing so has a

prosecute crime because doing so has a disperate impact on black criminals. Not

disperate impact on black criminals. Not because the laws are racist, not because

because the laws are racist, not because the prosecutors or the judges, the

the prosecutors or the judges, the juries are racist or the police officers

juries are racist or the police officers are racist. It's because there is an

are racist. It's because there is an objective difference in crime

objective difference in crime commission. But if you don't take

commission. But if you don't take criminals off the streets, the result is

criminals off the streets, the result is more chaos in society. You have now, you

more chaos in society. You have now, you know, the preposterous situation that

know, the preposterous situation that we've been living through since the

we've been living through since the George Floyd race riots of not being

George Floyd race riots of not being able to shop in a far in a drugstore

able to shop in a far in a drugstore because everything is behind plexiglass.

because everything is behind plexiglass. And so we're moving even more so online

And so we're moving even more so online because we're not willing to arrest for

because we're not willing to arrest for shoplifting. Prosecutors are saying

shoplifting. Prosecutors are saying we're not going to arrest for we're not

we're not going to arrest for we're not going to prosecute shoplifting because

going to prosecute shoplifting because that has a disperate impact on black

that has a disperate impact on black criminals. And so we've had these

criminals. And so we've had these progressive prosecutors, whether it's

progressive prosecutors, whether it's Alvin Bragg in Manhattan or George

Alvin Bragg in Manhattan or George Gasone in Los Angeles who was voted out

Gasone in Los Angeles who was voted out of office or Pamela Price in Oakland,

of office or Pamela Price in Oakland, Alama County, California, voted out of

Alama County, California, voted out of office, or Kim Fox in Chicago. All these

office, or Kim Fox in Chicago. All these people have said, "We're not going to

people have said, "We're not going to prosecute shoplifting, turn style

prosecute shoplifting, turn style jumping, resisting arrest, which is

jumping, resisting arrest, which is really pernicious, because it will have

really pernicious, because it will have a disperate impact on black criminals."

a disperate impact on black criminals." So in fact we're not over prosecuting,

So in fact we're not over prosecuting, we're not overpolicing, we are

we're not overpolicing, we are underpolicing and underprosecuting. The

underpolicing and underprosecuting. The result of this is a society that does

result of this is a society that does not govern itself in which there's no

not govern itself in which there's no security of property. There's no

security of property. There's no security of persons. We are refusing to

security of persons. We are refusing to put criminals in jail in New York City.

put criminals in jail in New York City. >> Resisting arrest would normally land you

>> Resisting arrest would normally land you on Riker's Island, but not anymore. Just

on Riker's Island, but not anymore. Just days on the job, Manhattan District

days on the job, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is changing what

Attorney Alvin Bragg is changing what crimes he will prosecute.

crimes he will prosecute. >> We need to reserve our our our justice

>> We need to reserve our our our justice system for real public safety

system for real public safety challenges.

challenges. >> We live through this. The people that

>> We live through this. The people that are committing assaults on subways, on

are committing assaults on subways, on the streets, have wrap sheets that are

the streets, have wrap sheets that are endless. They've been picked up again

endless. They've been picked up again and again and again. And the reason

and again and again. And the reason they're not going to prison is because

they're not going to prison is because doing so as a system will have a

doing so as a system will have a disperate impact on black criminals.

disperate impact on black criminals. We've decided it's better not to

We've decided it's better not to incarcerate and in and to prosecute than

incarcerate and in and to prosecute than to do so in a color-blind fashion if

to do so in a color-blind fashion if that has a disperate impact on black

that has a disperate impact on black criminals. The victims for that

criminals. The victims for that primarily are going to be black

primarily are going to be black themselves. The people that live in the

themselves. The people that live in the inner city that have to live with these

inner city that have to live with these criminals who are not off the streets.

criminals who are not off the streets. But it affects all of us. The story that

But it affects all of us. The story that got publicity was the pretty white UK

got publicity was the pretty white UK Ukrainian woman.

Ukrainian woman. >> A grizzly stabbing in Charlotte, North

>> A grizzly stabbing in Charlotte, North Carolina, getting the White House

Carolina, getting the White House attention. The victim is a Ukrainian

attention. The victim is a Ukrainian refugee. The suspect is an ex-con

refugee. The suspect is an ex-con >> D. Carlos Brown Jr. had 14 arrests. He

>> D. Carlos Brown Jr. had 14 arrests. He was allowed on the streets again and

was allowed on the streets again and again because the system had been

again because the system had been changed. Sh. This happened a a stabbing

changed. Sh. This happened a a stabbing in the neck. The video is absolutely

in the neck. The video is absolutely terrifying. This woman is scared out of

terrifying. This woman is scared out of her life. She doesn't know what's

her life. She doesn't know what's happened to her. She turns around and

happened to her. She turns around and looks around. It's it's absolutely

looks around. It's it's absolutely heartbreaking to see her vulnerability

heartbreaking to see her vulnerability as she just sinks down as in a pool of

as she just sinks down as in a pool of blood. But Charlotte, where this this

blood. But Charlotte, where this this stabbing in August happened, had a long

stabbing in August happened, had a long history,

history, at least since George Floyd raised

at least since George Floyd raised riots, if not before, of fighting for

riots, if not before, of fighting for racial equity in the criminal justice

racial equity in the criminal justice system. They had trainings for the

system. They had trainings for the prosecutors. The police chief said, "I'm

prosecutors. The police chief said, "I'm going to cut back on discretionary

going to cut back on discretionary arrests because policing, you know,

arrests because policing, you know, comes out of racism." The judicial

comes out of racism." The judicial system had, you know, all these goals

system had, you know, all these goals for racial equity, which means basically

for racial equity, which means basically deprosecuting,

deprosecuting, deincerating.

deincerating. And so that was the environment in which

And so that was the environment in which D. Carlos Brown Jr. was operating. the

D. Carlos Brown Jr. was operating. the entire system had now been set up to

entire system had now been set up to make it very hard to incarcerate any

make it very hard to incarcerate any criminal. Uh, and he was the beneficiary

criminal. Uh, and he was the beneficiary of that.

of that. >> And she was the victim.

>> And she was the victim. >> And she was the victim. And frankly,

>> And she was the victim. And frankly, that is the norm for interracial crime

that is the norm for interracial crime in this country. Another huge fiction,

in this country. Another huge fiction, which is that this is a white

which is that this is a white supremacist country. And as Obama and

supremacist country. And as Obama and Biden says that blacks are right to fear

Biden says that blacks are right to fear for their children from racist cops or

for their children from racist cops or from white supremacists, as the mayor of

from white supremacists, as the mayor of Kansas City, Quentyn Lucas, he has said,

Kansas City, Quentyn Lucas, he has said, existing while black is another thing

existing while black is another thing that blacks do to their lethal risk. At

that blacks do to their lethal risk. At this point, the fact of the matter is uh

this point, the fact of the matter is uh the vast majority of interracial crime

the vast majority of interracial crime between blacks and whites and whites and

between blacks and whites and whites and blacks is committed by blacks. This is a

blacks is committed by blacks. This is a horrible, highly publicized event. But

horrible, highly publicized event. But you're a Manhattan Institute scholar.

you're a Manhattan Institute scholar. You're supposed to go by the data.

You're supposed to go by the data. What's the data?

What's the data? >> The data is is that the Charlotte

>> The data is is that the Charlotte stabbing was typical of interracial

stabbing was typical of interracial crime. The typical interracial crime is

crime. The typical interracial crime is black on white, not white on black. A

black on white, not white on black. A National Academy of Sciences report came

National Academy of Sciences report came out in 2023. The National Academy of

out in 2023. The National Academy of Sciences is a left-wing highly, you

Sciences is a left-wing highly, you know, it's a it's the epitome of

know, it's a it's the epitome of academic mindset outlook. One of the

academic mindset outlook. One of the authors of this report was Bruce

authors of this report was Bruce Western, a very left-wing academic at

Western, a very left-wing academic at Colombia. And it found that blacks are

Colombia. And it found that blacks are 35 times more likely to commit an act of

35 times more likely to commit an act of violence against a white person than a

violence against a white person than a white person is to commit an act of

white person is to commit an act of violence against a black person. The

violence against a black person. The Bureau of Justice Statistics finds that

Bureau of Justice Statistics finds that in the universe of interracial crime

in the universe of interracial crime between blacks and whites, blacks

between blacks and whites, blacks commit, depending on the year, about 80

commit, depending on the year, about 80 85% sometimes a little less than that of

85% sometimes a little less than that of all interracial crime. So that's the

all interracial crime. So that's the reality. And of course, our narrative is

reality. And of course, our narrative is just the opposite

just the opposite >> because publicizing that doesn't make

>> because publicizing that doesn't make anybody feel good,

anybody feel good, >> right? And that's fine. I believe in

>> right? And that's fine. I believe in racial etiquette. I would prefer

racial etiquette. I would prefer not to have to talk about the skills

not to have to talk about the skills gap. I would prefer not to have to talk

gap. I would prefer not to have to talk about the crime gap. Nobody likes

about the crime gap. Nobody likes hearing these things, including whites.

hearing these things, including whites. I mean, the people who feel worst about

I mean, the people who feel worst about this is whites. So much for us being

this is whites. So much for us being white supremacists. But the reason I

white supremacists. But the reason I have to bring these things up is because

have to bring these things up is because I'm living in a false narrative that is

I'm living in a false narrative that is impugning our civilization, that is

impugning our civilization, that is impuging our present society, that is

impuging our present society, that is tearing down standards in the name of

tearing down standards in the name of fighting phantom racism. And so I have

fighting phantom racism. And so I have to speak the truth because I fear the

to speak the truth because I fear the consequences if this lie continues much

consequences if this lie continues much longer. Jumping to this, Karen Fleshman,

longer. Jumping to this, Karen Fleshman, an anti-racist educator, says, "Your

an anti-racist educator, says, "Your rhetoric divides people by race, which

rhetoric divides people by race, which inevitably escalates to violence, making

inevitably escalates to violence, making black people feel unsafe everywhere."

black people feel unsafe everywhere." >> She's just throwing various terms. She's

>> She's just throwing various terms. She's string them together. This was a woman

string them together. This was a woman who was brought in by Pamela Price, the

who was brought in by Pamela Price, the Alama County prosecutor. Alama County is

Alama County prosecutor. Alama County is the county that Oakland sits in, which

the county that Oakland sits in, which is across the San Francisco Bay from San

is across the San Francisco Bay from San Francisco, the East Bay from San

Francisco, the East Bay from San Francisco. Pamela Price came into office

Francisco. Pamela Price came into office vowing to bring racial equity to pro to

vowing to bring racial equity to pro to prosecution, meaning she had double

prosecution, meaning she had double standards for blacks and whites. To

standards for blacks and whites. To bring a prosecution against a black gang

bring a prosecution against a black gang member, you had to have a much higher

member, you had to have a much higher standard of evidence. she was going to

standard of evidence. she was going to uh discourage prosecutions against black

uh discourage prosecutions against black criminals. And she she had a a workshop

criminals. And she she had a a workshop that was teaching

that was teaching her prosecutors

her prosecutors how to deal with white victims

how to deal with white victims on the theory that somehow white crime

on the theory that somehow white crime victims were a threat to black

victims were a threat to black prosecutors. This gets back to this

prosecutors. This gets back to this whole safety idea

whole safety idea um that we talked about in the

um that we talked about in the universities that that somehow if you're

universities that that somehow if you're marginalized

marginalized uh your safety is at risk in various

uh your safety is at risk in various American environments. Flechman is this

American environments. Flechman is this diversity trainer who goes around to

diversity trainer who goes around to police departments and also other uh

police departments and also other uh workplaces.

workplaces. And it's the usual scam, you know, that

And it's the usual scam, you know, that that all you managers, you think you're

that all you managers, you think you're colorblind, but you're really racist and

colorblind, but you're really racist and white people have to get up and do their

white people have to get up and do their white privilege walks and and atone for

white privilege walks and and atone for their inherited endemic racism. I simply

their inherited endemic racism. I simply argued that this was um an absurd waste

argued that this was um an absurd waste of taxpayer money.

of taxpayer money. >> These types of trainings have also been

>> These types of trainings have also been given by private companies. diversity

given by private companies. diversity training where employees were told to be

training where employees were told to be quote less white.

quote less white. >> But there's been push back against some

>> But there's been push back against some companies policies.

companies policies. >> Harley-Davidson is the latest company uh

>> Harley-Davidson is the latest company uh to drop diversity, equity, and inclusion

to drop diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.

initiatives. >> I was gratified to see how quickly a lot

>> I was gratified to see how quickly a lot of these CEOs junked their DEI

of these CEOs junked their DEI >> a lot functions,

>> a lot functions, >> but many kept,

>> but many kept, >> not all of them. That's absolutely

>> not all of them. That's absolutely right. The human resources departments

right. The human resources departments there are staffed by the products of the

there are staffed by the products of the university overwhelmingly female and

university overwhelmingly female and they're not going to change their point

they're not going to change their point of view. This is really a very long

of view. This is really a very long battle and I think it's going to take

battle and I think it's going to take more young white and Asian males saying

more young white and Asian males saying we're not buying into the hustle. It's

we're not buying into the hustle. It's going to take more parents willing to

going to take more parents willing to stand up for their sons who are getting

stand up for their sons who are getting screwed at academic institution after

screwed at academic institution after academic institution.

academic institution. Uh it's going to take more CEOs not to

Uh it's going to take more CEOs not to be browbeaten by their wives

be browbeaten by their wives >> by their wives.

>> by their wives. >> Females are are overwhelmingly far more

>> Females are are overwhelmingly far more leftwing and they're they push their

leftwing and they're they push their husbands, their CEOs, I think, to buy

husbands, their CEOs, I think, to buy into the entire gender.

into the entire gender. >> Why is that? Why are females more

>> Why is that? Why are females more left-wing? I can't tell you, but it is

left-wing? I can't tell you, but it is absolutely the case.

absolutely the case. >> And you say this has changed America.

>> And you say this has changed America. >> The feminization of our institutions.

>> The feminization of our institutions. Yes, it has.

Yes, it has. >> Women are the problem.

>> Women are the problem. >> Well, in certain

>> Well, in certain numbers and in in certain institutions,

numbers and in in certain institutions, I would say they certainly change the

I would say they certainly change the ethic and the ethos of that institution.

ethic and the ethos of that institution. You can say for the better or you can

You can say for the better or you can say for the worse. But do they change

say for the worse. But do they change things? Absolutely. The change in the

things? Absolutely. The change in the universities towards a victim identity

universities towards a victim identity towards a attack on free speech is

towards a attack on free speech is absolutely parallel with the rise in

absolutely parallel with the rise in female representation above all in the

female representation above all in the administration but in the student body

administration but in the student body and in vast swads of the faculties as

and in vast swads of the faculties as well. Poll after poll shows when you ask

well. Poll after poll shows when you ask either people within academia or outside

either people within academia or outside of academia, which do you value more?

of academia, which do you value more? Academic freedom and the pursuit of

Academic freedom and the pursuit of truth on the one hand or equity and

truth on the one hand or equity and emotional safety and security on the

emotional safety and security on the other. There's no overlap. The vast

other. There's no overlap. The vast majority of males choose the pursuit of

majority of males choose the pursuit of truth, academic freedom, whatever the

truth, academic freedom, whatever the cost. The females

cost. The females favor

favor emotional safety and equity.

emotional safety and equity. >> Both are good qualities.

>> Both are good qualities. >> No, they're not. Not in a university

>> No, they're not. Not in a university setting. The university exists for the

setting. The university exists for the pursuit of truth. And to be perfectly

pursuit of truth. And to be perfectly honest, the claims of unsafety, of

honest, the claims of unsafety, of danger, of jeopardy are completely

danger, of jeopardy are completely hysterical neurosis in the first place.

hysterical neurosis in the first place. There's no safer environment as far as

There's no safer environment as far as like just crime or rape than a

like just crime or rape than a university. But they are also exquisitly

university. But they are also exquisitly sensitive to people's feelings and are

sensitive to people's feelings and are there as a should be a community of

there as a should be a community of scholars united by their passion to push

scholars united by their passion to push back the boundaries of ignorance. the

back the boundaries of ignorance. the idea that they are unsafe or that one

idea that they are unsafe or that one becomes unsafe

becomes unsafe because here we get back to the hate

because here we get back to the hate speech conceit. The hate speech concept

speech conceit. The hate speech concept is related to this idea of emotional

is related to this idea of emotional unsafety. For females to claim that they

unsafety. For females to claim that they are emotionally unsafe on a college

are emotionally unsafe on a college campus is complete fiction. It is just

campus is complete fiction. It is just parading around in a little fake drama.

parading around in a little fake drama. I've never been discriminated against in

I've never been discriminated against in my life. Now, does that mean of course

my life. Now, does that mean of course that's I'm I'm I'm generalizing from a

that's I'm I'm I'm generalizing from a one case to many, but I would say that I

one case to many, but I would say that I am pretty representative and I know that

am pretty representative and I know that I have been put on panels or chosen for

I have been put on panels or chosen for conferences for this and that because

conferences for this and that because they need a female. Am I going to take

they need a female. Am I going to take deep offense at that? No, I'm not going

deep offense at that? No, I'm not going to take offense at anything. But it's

to take offense at anything. But it's pretty ludicrous. And we had the head of

pretty ludicrous. And we had the head of the National Institutes of Health,

the National Institutes of Health, Francis Collins, under Joe Biden,

Francis Collins, under Joe Biden, really an obnoxious man. He was all in

really an obnoxious man. He was all in favor of the lockdowns, of the insane

favor of the lockdowns, of the insane COVID measures.

COVID measures. He had called on his colleagues in the

He had called on his colleagues in the biomed research world to boycott

biomed research world to boycott mannels.

mannels. And if you or your listeners don't know

And if you or your listeners don't know what a manel is, a manel is a is a panel

what a manel is, a manel is a is a panel of experts, scientific experts or

of experts, scientific experts or academic experts that is predominantly

academic experts that is predominantly male. Manels are verboten in Francis

male. Manels are verboten in Francis Collins's view. So he called on his

Collins's view. So he called on his colleagues to boycott any scientific

colleagues to boycott any scientific conference that had a predominant number

conference that had a predominant number of males there

of males there >> because that's the tradition. We men

>> because that's the tradition. We men have dominated life dominated so many

have dominated life dominated so many institutions

institutions making things bring in female talent

making things bring in female talent >> only based on merit. I do not care to

>> only based on merit. I do not care to have a mediocre Alzheimer's researcher

have a mediocre Alzheimer's researcher up there who is not going to be at the

up there who is not going to be at the cutting edge based on her sex. I do not

cutting edge based on her sex. I do not care.

care. >> And men achieve more in the sciences.

>> And men achieve more in the sciences. >> They have they maybe they won't in the

>> They have they maybe they won't in the future, but right now we'll never know

future, but right now we'll never know because we have double standards. Until

because we have double standards. Until Trump came along, your taxpayer dollars

Trump came along, your taxpayer dollars were being administered in the sciences

were being administered in the sciences not based on scientific merit, but based

not based on scientific merit, but based on race and sex. That is not relevant to

on race and sex. That is not relevant to scientific achievement. It has nothing

scientific achievement. It has nothing to do with it. It is a waste of your

to do with it. It is a waste of your taxpayer dollars. taxpayers should

taxpayer dollars. taxpayers should demand that only the very best

demand that only the very best scientists. And I don't care if an

scientists. And I don't care if an Alzheimer's lab is all black or all

Alzheimer's lab is all black or all Chinese or all female if those are the

Chinese or all female if those are the best scientists.

best scientists. I don't care. And I also don't care if

I don't care. And I also don't care if they're all white males. If those are

they're all white males. If those are the best scientists. So far, the history

the best scientists. So far, the history of science came out of Europe. It came

of science came out of Europe. It came out of this passion

out of this passion for discovery that began in the 17th

for discovery that began in the 17th century with the Royal Society in

century with the Royal Society in London, had its counterparts in France.

London, had its counterparts in France. It was a miracle.

It was a miracle. And you now have portraits of the

And you now have portraits of the greatest white male scientists being

greatest white male scientists being taken down from the Harvard Medical

taken down from the Harvard Medical School, from the Pennsylvania Medical

School, from the Pennsylvania Medical School because it might make female

School because it might make female medical students feel unsafe to look

medical students feel unsafe to look upon the greatest minds of medical

upon the greatest minds of medical science. If we disappear males from

science. If we disappear males from civilization, we will be living off the

civilization, we will be living off the fumes of their accomplishments. You're

fumes of their accomplishments. You're definitely striking a chord with some

definitely striking a chord with some people and that I noticed you did an

people and that I noticed you did an interview with a very small fine group,

interview with a very small fine group, the Independent Institute

the Independent Institute that doesn't normally get big attention,

that doesn't normally get big attention, but you got half a million views on

but you got half a million views on Twitter saying

Twitter saying >> is not an accident. It is not a product

>> is not an accident. It is not a product of systemic misogyny that males brought

of systemic misogyny that males brought us the scientific revolution that they

us the scientific revolution that they circumnavigated the globe. If we weren't

circumnavigated the globe. If we weren't so insane, it would be perfectly obvious

so insane, it would be perfectly obvious that there are innate differences

that there are innate differences between males and females in terms of

between males and females in terms of risktaking, passion for novelty,

risktaking, passion for novelty, competitiveness, aggression.

competitiveness, aggression. You have to be a very ideologically

You have to be a very ideologically um

um dominated parent not to notice that

dominated parent not to notice that there are differences between male and

there are differences between male and female children almost from the start.

female children almost from the start. as far as levels of aggression, the

as far as levels of aggression, the types of toys that they gravitate

types of toys that they gravitate towards. And

towards. And males

males have a greater predilction towards

have a greater predilction towards insanity, towards like really stupid

insanity, towards like really stupid behavior. I hear these motorcycles

behavior. I hear these motorcycles trying to go 50 miles an hour down

trying to go 50 miles an hour down Second Avenue outside of my apartment in

Second Avenue outside of my apartment in New York. I know what the the sex of

New York. I know what the the sex of who's riding those. You idiots, running

who's riding those. You idiots, running red lights, you know, massive amounts of

red lights, you know, massive amounts of alcohol, drug taking, fighting, dueling.

alcohol, drug taking, fighting, dueling. These are all male traits. Females are

These are all male traits. Females are they're nurturers. That is, you know,

they're nurturers. That is, you know, obviously there's I'm talking about the

obviously there's I'm talking about the norm, the average.

norm, the average. >> You say it wasn't women who

>> You say it wasn't women who circumnavigated the world, but that was

circumnavigated the world, but that was because their societies wouldn't allow

because their societies wouldn't allow it. That's true, but they haven't been

it. That's true, but they haven't been doing much in the interim. Frankly,

doing much in the interim. Frankly, nothing.

nothing. >> If you women are so far behind us men,

>> If you women are so far behind us men, how come you have these highlevel

how come you have these highlevel degrees from these fancy institutions

degrees from these fancy institutions and I don't

and I don't >> because you got pulled into the the

>> because you got pulled into the the grubbiness of of doing journalism, which

grubbiness of of doing journalism, which is uh you're involved in the world, you

is uh you're involved in the world, you know. So, but I'm I'm obviously playing

know. So, but I'm I'm obviously playing both sides because I also I value

both sides because I also I value academic degrees highly.

academic degrees highly. >> She has a bunch. She graduated from Yale

>> She has a bunch. She graduated from Yale and got advanced degrees from Cambridge

and got advanced degrees from Cambridge and Stanford.

and Stanford. >> There's obviously

>> There's obviously exceptions, individual exceptions.

exceptions, individual exceptions. There's highly aggressive, competitive

There's highly aggressive, competitive females who has this

females who has this >> and highly nurturing, empathetic males,

>> and highly nurturing, empathetic males, of course, taking a step back from their

of course, taking a step back from their own careers to care for their families.

own careers to care for their families. >> But we're talking about averages. And

>> But we're talking about averages. And the average male, there's a greater

the average male, there's a greater chance that he's going to be a risktaker

chance that he's going to be a risktaker and a seeker of knowledge. And I can

and a seeker of knowledge. And I can prove this with by

prove this with by what I collect of natural experiments

what I collect of natural experiments that don't have gatekeepers because the

that don't have gatekeepers because the usual feminist argument is, oh,

usual feminist argument is, oh, there's no there's no 50/50

there's no there's no 50/50 representation

representation in cancer research or chess champions

in cancer research or chess champions because there's all these racist sexist

because there's all these racist sexist gatekeepers keeping females out. So,

gatekeepers keeping females out. So, it's not an evil play even even playing

it's not an evil play even even playing field. But we have institutions without

field. But we have institutions without any gatekeepers that allow us to see

any gatekeepers that allow us to see what are the natural predelections of

what are the natural predelections of populations

populations on their own. What did they do on their

on their own. What did they do on their own without anybody keeping them out?

own without anybody keeping them out? And the perfect example for that, but

And the perfect example for that, but there's others, is Wikipedia editing.

there's others, is Wikipedia editing. Wikipedia is a new institution.

Wikipedia is a new institution. >> Wikipedia is obviously highly biased.

>> Wikipedia is obviously highly biased. The majority are 87% male. You can say

The majority are 87% male. You can say in chess, you know, the argument is,

in chess, you know, the argument is, well, we've had, you know, virtually no,

well, we've had, you know, virtually no, maybe one female chess master at the

maybe one female chess master at the highest level in hundreds and hundreds

highest level in hundreds and hundreds of years. There's this centuries long

of years. There's this centuries long tradition of discrimination against

tradition of discrimination against females in chess. So, if you start out,

females in chess. So, if you start out, if you're a young Bulgarian girl now,

if you're a young Bulgarian girl now, you're just not going to try because

you're just not going to try because somehow you're aware that in the 17th

somehow you're aware that in the 17th century, females were not attended to

century, females were not attended to enough. It's like some inherited

enough. It's like some inherited acquired characteristic. But Wikipedia

acquired characteristic. But Wikipedia is what 30 years old. There's no

is what 30 years old. There's no long-standing

long-standing sexist Wikipedia tradition. It grew out

sexist Wikipedia tradition. It grew out of nothing. And anybody can be an

of nothing. And anybody can be an editor. It's blind. Anybody can be an

editor. It's blind. Anybody can be an editor. There's not a crew of of sexist

editor. There's not a crew of of sexist Wikipedia gatekeepers saying, "It's a

Wikipedia gatekeepers saying, "It's a female. We're not going to allow her to

female. We're not going to allow her to revise this entry on Napoleon's invasion

revise this entry on Napoleon's invasion of Egypt or the deciphering of the

of Egypt or the deciphering of the Rosetta Stone. We're not going to allow

Rosetta Stone. We're not going to allow females to edit that. But they can't

females to edit that. But they can't because you don't know who they are. You

because you don't know who they are. You do not give your your sex in being an

do not give your your sex in being an editor. Anybody can do it. And guess

editor. Anybody can do it. And guess what? Who is the vast vast majority of

what? Who is the vast vast majority of Wikipedia editors? males. Nobody's

Wikipedia editors? males. Nobody's keeping females out. They just aren't

keeping females out. They just aren't interested. And don't give me a

interested. And don't give me a Wikipedia tradition against females

Wikipedia tradition against females because there are no traditions. You can

because there are no traditions. You can also look who is writing letters to the

also look who is writing letters to the editor. Nobody is is preventing females

editor. Nobody is is preventing females from writing letters to the editor.

from writing letters to the editor. Skews way male. who subscribes to

Skews way male. who subscribes to journals of public interest of world

journals of public interest of world affairs, The Economist, The Atlantic,

affairs, The Economist, The Atlantic, The New Republic. Nobody prevents

The New Republic. Nobody prevents females from subscribing to those

females from subscribing to those journals. The readership is

journals. The readership is overwhelmingly male. Why? Because males

overwhelmingly male. Why? Because males are more outer oriented. They're more

are more outer oriented. They're more data oriented. This again got James

data oriented. This again got James Deore fired from Google by saying that

Deore fired from Google by saying that males care more about data. Females have

males care more about data. Females have different interests.

different interests. >> Years ago, I did a 2020 special, boys

>> Years ago, I did a 2020 special, boys and girls, men and women, the sex

and girls, men and women, the sex difference, pointing out there are real

difference, pointing out there are real differences. Tonight, a touchy subject

differences. Tonight, a touchy subject to some people even suggesting there are

to some people even suggesting there are differences between the sexes beyond the

differences between the sexes beyond the obvious ones is just unacceptable. A

obvious ones is just unacceptable. A step backwards in the hard-fought

step backwards in the hard-fought battlefree equality. One of my fellow

battlefree equality. One of my fellow correspondents backed the producer into

correspondents backed the producer into the bathroom at 2020. How could you work

the bathroom at 2020. How could you work with John Staceil on that video? She

with John Staceil on that video? She said, "How could you say those things?

said, "How could you say those things? >> Prove us wrong. Prove us wrong. I love

>> Prove us wrong. Prove us wrong. I love this. All the pictures in the New York

this. All the pictures in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal of these

Times and Wall Street Journal of these AI startups, you know, it's like hot.

AI startups, you know, it's like hot. San Francisco's hot. I was just there

San Francisco's hot. I was just there like every billboard is AI." these these

like every billboard is AI." these these sort of runic uh phrases that I have no

sort of runic uh phrases that I have no idea what they mean, but they're all

idea what they mean, but they're all males

males and nobody's preventing females from

and nobody's preventing females from doing an AI startup. And nobody's

doing an AI startup. And nobody's stripping females of venture capital

stripping females of venture capital funding as we saw with the fraudster

funding as we saw with the fraudster Elizabeth Holmes who had, you know,

Elizabeth Holmes who had, you know, George Schultz and everybody else under

George Schultz and everybody else under the sun shoveling billions of dollars at

the sun shoveling billions of dollars at her. Everybody wants there to be more

her. Everybody wants there to be more female entrepreneurs in whether it's

female entrepreneurs in whether it's biio medicine or whatnot, but they're

biio medicine or whatnot, but they're just they don't have that same drive to

just they don't have that same drive to stay up till 3:00 a.m. eating cold pizza

stay up till 3:00 a.m. eating cold pizza coding.

coding. They, as James Deore said, they have

They, as James Deore said, they have other alternatives. There's many

other alternatives. There's many explanations. Females tend to be have

explanations. Females tend to be have maybe both the strongest math. Females

maybe both the strongest math. Females also have verbal skills, so they have

also have verbal skills, so they have greater options. But frankly, that drive

greater options. But frankly, that drive to conquer facts and data

to conquer facts and data is disproportionately male.

is disproportionately male. >> I bought this strange Zara dress. I'm

>> I bought this strange Zara dress. I'm trying on six spring dresses at Kohl's.

trying on six spring dresses at Kohl's. >> Hey guys, I have another really big

>> Hey guys, I have another really big shopping haul. What do I see females

shopping haul. What do I see females doing these days? They're influencers. I

doing these days? They're influencers. I love to use a really fluffy brush.

love to use a really fluffy brush. >> They're talking about makeup.

>> They're talking about makeup. >> These are the colors. They're so pretty.

>> These are the colors. They're so pretty. They're talking about fashion. Okay,

They're talking about fashion. Okay, let's talk about this lace leather

let's talk about this lace leather skirt.

skirt. >> Google is desperate to hire more

>> Google is desperate to hire more females.

females. Caltech is desperate for more female

Caltech is desperate for more female engineers.

engineers. I was asked at one point to do a panel

I was asked at one point to do a panel on Fox Nation on interest rates.

on Fox Nation on interest rates. And I said, "You're just asking me

And I said, "You're just asking me because I'm a female, right? because I

because I'm a female, right? because I don't I'm not a I don't know monetary

don't I'm not a I don't know monetary policy.

policy. And at least they had the honesty to say

And at least they had the honesty to say yes, female privilege exists.

yes, female privilege exists. There's not a mainstream institution

There's not a mainstream institution that isn't over represented in females.

that isn't over represented in females. And they're still going to say we need

And they're still going to say we need more females. You know, it's incredible.

more females. You know, it's incredible. They're not going to stop until there's

They're not going to stop until there's no males left.

no males left. >> Women are inferior. You're saying less

>> Women are inferior. You're saying less useful for society. They are very useful

useful for society. They are very useful for raising children as individuals.

for raising children as individuals. They are very useful in f as t terms of

They are very useful in f as t terms of their consciousness. Every individual is

their consciousness. Every individual is useful. Again, I mentioned George

useful. Again, I mentioned George Elliott before. One of the great

Elliott before. One of the great novelists, Edith Wharton, one of the

novelists, Edith Wharton, one of the great novelists, Insights. We've got

great novelists, Insights. We've got some great female composers, Fanny

some great female composers, Fanny Mendelson, Cecilia Lee Cod. I want to

Mendelson, Cecilia Lee Cod. I want to hear all of them. Absolutely. But I am

hear all of them. Absolutely. But I am not going to try to tear down an

not going to try to tear down an institution

institution because it is predominantly male.

because it is predominantly male. >> Men drove the 30 years war. Men drove

>> Men drove the 30 years war. Men drove the hundred years war. Women aren't

the hundred years war. Women aren't responsible for the endless Palestinian

responsible for the endless Palestinian Israeli conflict. Maybe it would be

Israeli conflict. Maybe it would be better if women managed governments.

better if women managed governments. >> Well, we're seeing that in Europe.

>> Well, we're seeing that in Europe. They're managing governments and we've

They're managing governments and we've got these insane green energy policies

got these insane green energy policies that are the very epitome of

that are the very epitome of irrationality. Now Europe is is in the

irrationality. Now Europe is is in the doldrums economically in large part

doldrums economically in large part because of the war on on its energy

because of the war on on its energy sources. males ran have war but

sources. males ran have war but balanced against that you have

balanced against that you have 1500 years of extraordinary success in

1500 years of extraordinary success in vanquishing

vanquishing um

um disease

disease poverty

poverty want our standard of living today it's a

want our standard of living today it's a miracle everything around us every piece

miracle everything around us every piece of furniture,

of furniture, hot water,

hot water, showers, clean milk, clean water. These

showers, clean milk, clean water. These are all miracles. Let's We won't even

are all miracles. Let's We won't even talk about flight. We won't even talk

talk about flight. We won't even talk about telephones.

about telephones. It's extraordinary. Our existence bears

It's extraordinary. Our existence bears no resemblance to even being in the

no resemblance to even being in the aristocracy in the 19th century. As we

aristocracy in the 19th century. As we make progress now and things are much

make progress now and things are much better

better >> at the same time it happened as women

>> at the same time it happened as women got more power.

got more power. >> Women got power in the 20th century. Uh

>> Women got power in the 20th century. Uh the progress that brought us into

the progress that brought us into scientific

scientific dominance I think began much before

dominance I think began much before that. We had these European wars but

that. We had these European wars but we've also developed the nation state

we've also developed the nation state that minimized tribal warfare. We

that minimized tribal warfare. We developed ideas of constitutional

developed ideas of constitutional government, of due process, of human

government, of due process, of human rights. Those are much more powerful

rights. Those are much more powerful than the 30 years war. Yes, there's

than the 30 years war. Yes, there's still

still incredible barbarism in the Middle East.

incredible barbarism in the Middle East. And there's endless savagery in Africa

And there's endless savagery in Africa between tribes that have not yet really

between tribes that have not yet really absorbed the concept of a

absorbed the concept of a constitutionally controlled national

constitutionally controlled national government. violence driven by men.

government. violence driven by men. >> By men. That's right. Um,

>> By men. That's right. Um, but I I don't see what the alternative

but I I don't see what the alternative is. Most people prefer to be managed by

is. Most people prefer to be managed by males, not females, because of the

males, not females, because of the vindictiveness that they feel is often

vindictiveness that they feel is often shown, and this is females that feel

shown, and this is females that feel this as well, by female managers. So

this as well, by female managers. So it's interesting because when when

it's interesting because when when feminism was sort of first getting its

feminism was sort of first getting its becoming quite uh presumptuous in the

becoming quite uh presumptuous in the 60s and 70s the war argument was used a

60s and 70s the war argument was used a lot that

lot that >> the world would be better safer if women

>> the world would be better safer if women >> if women ruled the world.

>> if women ruled the world. >> Women and children have long paid the

>> Women and children have long paid the price for wars started and waged by men.

price for wars started and waged by men. >> Women leaders must step up.

>> Women leaders must step up. >> Women want peace.

>> Women want peace. >> And that hasn't really proved to be the

>> And that hasn't really proved to be the case. It's very curious, you know, some

case. It's very curious, you know, some of these the Green parties, uh, the the

of these the Green parties, uh, the the female dominated parties in Europe,

female dominated parties in Europe, some critics think that they're they're

some critics think that they're they're the war parties, you know, they're

the war parties, you know, they're they're all for continuing to arm

they're all for continuing to arm Ukraine and and there's some people that

Ukraine and and there's some people that are skeptical of that or they were all

are skeptical of that or they were all for the uh, you know, involvement in the

for the uh, you know, involvement in the Serbian conflict. So, it's curious. A

Serbian conflict. So, it's curious. A lot of the female EU politicians

lot of the female EU politicians are no more pacifistic than some of

are no more pacifistic than some of their colleagues, male colleagues.

their colleagues, male colleagues. >> McDonald's has written many

>> McDonald's has written many controversial books. The burden of bad

controversial books. The burden of bad ideas.

ideas. >> The burden of bad ideas was a collection

>> The burden of bad ideas was a collection of essays that looked at the rise of the

of essays that looked at the rise of the welfare state. The New York Times since

welfare state. The New York Times since the early 20th century has done an

the early 20th century has done an annual Christmas charity appeal that

annual Christmas charity appeal that used to be called the hundred neediest

used to be called the hundred neediest cases and it was started by Albert Ox.

cases and it was started by Albert Ox. of the whole start of the Times uh

of the whole start of the Times uh legacy family and they started

legacy family and they started publishing profiles of what they viewed

publishing profiles of what they viewed as the needy members of New York City to

as the needy members of New York City to and ask readers to please give donations

and ask readers to please give donations to help these people. And they had at

to help these people. And they had at that time what was the ubiquitous

that time what was the ubiquitous understanding of poverty and need which

understanding of poverty and need which was based on a distinction between the

was based on a distinction between the deserving and the undeserving poor.

deserving and the undeserving poor. And they were unapologetic about this.

And they were unapologetic about this. Examples of the deserving poor, people

Examples of the deserving poor, people that should you should give your charity

that should you should give your charity to are the widows of people that have

to are the widows of people that have husbands, workers that died in

husbands, workers that died in industrial accidents or orphans who were

industrial accidents or orphans who were orphaned because their parents both died

orphaned because their parents both died of tuberculosis.

of tuberculosis. And now you have a 14-year-old

And now you have a 14-year-old sister who's doing seamstress work to

sister who's doing seamstress work to try and, you know, help her young

try and, you know, help her young younger siblings survive. They are

younger siblings survive. They are working. They are trying to better

working. They are trying to better themselves. The undeserving poor are the

themselves. The undeserving poor are the alcoholics, the vagrants that are

alcoholics, the vagrants that are begging, that are demanding handouts

begging, that are demanding handouts without trying to help themselves. And I

without trying to help themselves. And I went into the archives and looked at

went into the archives and looked at decade by decade how the Times was

decade by decade how the Times was making its hundred neediest cases

making its hundred neediest cases appeal. And what was remarkable as you

appeal. And what was remarkable as you got into the 1940s and 1950s, the

got into the 1940s and 1950s, the rhetoric started changing and those

rhetoric started changing and those bright line distinctions which were used

bright line distinctions which were used by FDR, he opposed giving welfare

by FDR, he opposed giving welfare benefits to single mothers. He said this

benefits to single mothers. He said this is going to be very corrosive of the

is going to be very corrosive of the most important pillar of civilization

most important pillar of civilization and personal responsibility, which is

and personal responsibility, which is the married two parent family. We

the married two parent family. We shouldn't be rewarding single mothers

shouldn't be rewarding single mothers unless they're widows with benefits.

unless they're widows with benefits. FDR, who gave us a vast expansion of the

FDR, who gave us a vast expansion of the welfare state, nevertheless maintained

welfare state, nevertheless maintained that distinction between those who are

that distinction between those who are trying to help themselves and those who

trying to help themselves and those who are not. the Legal Aid Society, now like

are not. the Legal Aid Society, now like one of the biggest advocates for no no

one of the biggest advocates for no no strings attached welfare, when they

strings attached welfare, when they started out offering legal services to

started out offering legal services to the poor, they said, "I don't care if

the poor, they said, "I don't care if you have no money. You're going to pay

you have no money. You're going to pay us a quarter for services because

us a quarter for services because anything that we give out for free will

anything that we give out for free will be devalued. We want this to be a fair

be devalued. We want this to be a fair transaction so that you feel like you're

transaction so that you feel like you're offering something and you're getting

offering something and you're getting something back. We don't want things

something back. We don't want things that are just handouts with nothing

that are just handouts with nothing asked of the recipient in return. But in

asked of the recipient in return. But in the 40s and 50s, you got a new mentality

the 40s and 50s, you got a new mentality coming up as as manifested in the 100

coming up as as manifested in the 100 cases appeals. You had the rise of the

cases appeals. You had the rise of the whole juvenile delinquency. You know, we

whole juvenile delinquency. You know, we can't expect teenagers to behave and

can't expect teenagers to behave and follow the law because they've been

follow the law because they've been raised by parents that don't understand

raised by parents that don't understand them. you know, they're just like

them. you know, they're just like alienated and they need psychiatrists to

alienated and they need psychiatrists to help them. And then in the 60s, you had

help them. And then in the 60s, you had welfare rights coming up and the Times

welfare rights coming up and the Times totally discarded the distinction

totally discarded the distinction between the deserving and undeserving

between the deserving and undeserving poor and started writing about these

poor and started writing about these single mothers that have been on welfare

single mothers that have been on welfare for decades and have had many children

for decades and have had many children by many different fathers and they

by many different fathers and they became the target of the charity appeal.

became the target of the charity appeal. And so this was a unwitting

And so this was a unwitting documentation

documentation of the revolution in thinking in the

of the revolution in thinking in the 20th century that was so profound that

20th century that was so profound that is something that you've talked about

is something that you've talked about John of the assumption of a dependent

John of the assumption of a dependent class of which nothing should be asked

class of which nothing should be asked in return whose solution to poverty is

in return whose solution to poverty is allegedly

allegedly unconditional transfer payments

unconditional transfer payments redistribution of wealth from the

redistribution of wealth from the so-called wealthy to the poor. That's

so-called wealthy to the poor. That's what's going to help people when that's

what's going to help people when that's not what's going to help them is the

not what's going to help them is the expectation of self-reliance.

expectation of self-reliance. >> And what harm did that do? Giving them

>> And what harm did that do? Giving them money. How did that change the culture?

money. How did that change the culture? >> It destroyed the ethic of self-reliance

>> It destroyed the ethic of self-reliance and independence. Being responsible for

and independence. Being responsible for yourself,

yourself, if you don't have something, you work

if you don't have something, you work for it. You don't expect that the

for it. You don't expect that the government owes you a living for doing

government owes you a living for doing nothing. The welfare rights revolution

nothing. The welfare rights revolution which began with two academics Richard

which began with two academics Richard Clower and Francis Fox Pivven they

Clower and Francis Fox Pivven they wanted to destroy any stigma attached to

wanted to destroy any stigma attached to welfare. They said this is very bad.

welfare. They said this is very bad. There's

There's >> stigma is cruel.

>> stigma is cruel. >> There's people that that like don't are

>> There's people that that like don't are not collecting food stamps because they

not collecting food stamps because they don't want the stigma. Uh and they said

don't want the stigma. Uh and they said we should just get rid of this and

we should just get rid of this and people should feel I'm entitled to this.

people should feel I'm entitled to this. I'm not going to feel apologetic. Stigma

I'm not going to feel apologetic. Stigma is necessary to maintain certain

is necessary to maintain certain positive social behaviors. Society has

positive social behaviors. Society has to have some way short of like criminal

to have some way short of like criminal penalties of trying to create incentives

penalties of trying to create incentives for behavior that is going to help the

for behavior that is going to help the individual. And hooking up to the

individual. And hooking up to the welfare system as early as possible for

welfare system as early as possible for as much as you can get is cruel because

as much as you can get is cruel because that person is never going to learn

that person is never going to learn to be able to support himself to realize

to be able to support himself to realize his own

his own capacities. that can only come about by

capacities. that can only come about by challenge, by learning,

challenge, by learning, by having to deal with setback and

by having to deal with setback and moving towards something where you feel

moving towards something where you feel like you're responsible of yourself and

like you're responsible of yourself and not the entitlement mentality. Right

not the entitlement mentality. Right now, we have this problem of all these

now, we have this problem of all these able-bodied

able-bodied males that are sitting around collecting

males that are sitting around collecting Medicaid. They watch over four hours of

Medicaid. They watch over four hours of TV a day. This has been done by time

TV a day. This has been done by time studies. They spend two hours

studies. They spend two hours socializing and and entertaining

socializing and and entertaining themselves otherwise beyond TV and

themselves otherwise beyond TV and they're not working. They're able-bodied

they're not working. They're able-bodied and they're collecting Medicaid. That's

and they're collecting Medicaid. That's a problem. That's a lot of human talent

a problem. That's a lot of human talent that is sitting there.

that is sitting there. >> It's the incentives. Before welfare,

>> It's the incentives. Before welfare, Americans were lifting themselves out of

Americans were lifting themselves out of poverty every year. The poverty level

poverty every year. The poverty level was dropping a bit, but the progress was

was dropping a bit, but the progress was slow. Welfare helped a lot. poverty line

slow. Welfare helped a lot. poverty line dropped, but then progress stopped. For

dropped, but then progress stopped. For the first time in history, there was a

the first time in history, there was a dependent class that stayed dependent.

dependent class that stayed dependent. >> Well, I'd like to map that with the uh

>> Well, I'd like to map that with the uh out of wedlock birth rate and look at

out of wedlock birth rate and look at family formation because basically in

family formation because basically in the United States today, poverty is just

the United States today, poverty is just a synonym for single motherhood. There

a synonym for single motherhood. There are very, very few married couples that

are very, very few married couples that count as poor. It is very hard to raise

count as poor. It is very hard to raise children with two parents. If you only

children with two parents. If you only want to think of it in terms of

want to think of it in terms of finances, which I think is like the

finances, which I think is like the least relevant thing for raising

least relevant thing for raising children, uh what's much more important

children, uh what's much more important is the emotional support, the fact that

is the emotional support, the fact that males and females on average bring

males and females on average bring different psychological

different psychological skills and approaches to children. But

skills and approaches to children. But if you just want to talk about money, uh

if you just want to talk about money, uh you've got more resources. you got twice

you've got more resources. you got twice the kinship resources to draw upon. You

the kinship resources to draw upon. You have either one possible income or two

have either one possible income or two to raise that child. So poverty today is

to raise that child. So poverty today is really all about the breakdown of the

really all about the breakdown of the American family.

American family. >> Why did that happen?

>> Why did that happen? >> Possibly because of welfare, saying,

>> Possibly because of welfare, saying, "Okay, we're no longer going to expect

"Okay, we're no longer going to expect you to be married. Uh you can be single

you to be married. Uh you can be single and we're going to give you the

and we're going to give you the benefits." But it's also, I think

benefits." But it's also, I think there's a lot of things that were going

there's a lot of things that were going on. There was also feminism which

on. There was also feminism which devalued males. Basically said that you

devalued males. Basically said that you know males are an afterthought. They can

know males are an afterthought. They can maybe come into the family but they

maybe come into the family but they don't have to. Strong women can do it

don't have to. Strong women can do it all. The concept of American poverty is

all. The concept of American poverty is uh

uh sort of a fiction. You go up to 125th

sort of a fiction. You go up to 125th Street in Lexington.

Street in Lexington. You walk out into a sea of fast food

You walk out into a sea of fast food detritus that people have just dropped

detritus that people have just dropped there. If you're buying fast food,

there. If you're buying fast food, you're not poor. You could you could eat

you're not poor. You could you could eat much more cheaply by cooking for

much more cheaply by cooking for yourself. So, it's very very relative.

yourself. So, it's very very relative. Our concept of poverty today, the real

Our concept of poverty today, the real poverty is a poverty of values that has

poverty is a poverty of values that has been emedded by the growth of the

been emedded by the growth of the welfare state. uh and it's also been

welfare state. uh and it's also been embedded by the fact that we are no

embedded by the fact that we are no longer willing to speak up for the

longer willing to speak up for the values that I think human society does

values that I think human society does need to stay on a path that will allow

need to stay on a path that will allow more individuals to really realize

more individuals to really realize themselves. And also I I just think to

themselves. And also I I just think to get back to the Western civilization

get back to the Western civilization point, knowledge is an end of it in

point, knowledge is an end of it in itself. and to appreciate

itself. and to appreciate what Western civilization has done with

what Western civilization has done with the beauty of the scientific method with

the beauty of the scientific method with this insatiable curiosity that members

this insatiable curiosity that members of the West have had that Europeans had

of the West have had that Europeans had to figure out planetary motion,

to figure out planetary motion, navigate the globe,

navigate the globe, figure out geology, figure out

figure out geology, figure out physiology.

physiology. It's an extraordinary thing. And we're

It's an extraordinary thing. And we're all beneficiaries of that. Ignorant

all beneficiaries of that. Ignorant beneficiaries of that. I couldn't

beneficiaries of that. I couldn't possibly replicate any part of the

possibly replicate any part of the knowledge that has given me everything

knowledge that has given me everything that I take for granted. And we

that I take for granted. And we shouldn't be ingrates. We should be

shouldn't be ingrates. We should be grateful and know our history and know

grateful and know our history and know how much

how much we

we should be so thankful for what we've

should be so thankful for what we've got. Thank you, Heather McDonald.

got. Thank you, Heather McDonald. >> Thank you, John.

>> Thank you, John. >> Thank you for watching this longer than

>> Thank you for watching this longer than usual conversation. If you want to help

usual conversation. If you want to help us bring you more extended interviews,

us bring you more extended interviews, click that button.

Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps

Paste YouTube URL

Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.

Add to Chrome — Free

Works with YouTube, Coursera, Udemy and more educational platforms

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube

←

→

↻

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YoutubeToText

←

→

↻

https://youtubetotext.net/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YouTube TranscriptPreparing your results…

YouTube Transcript:Uncomfortable Topics with Heather Mac Donald: Race, Skills Gap, Disparate Impact & the Role of Women