I want to go sergeant Peterson Peterson 00:00:00

I want to go sergeant Peterson Peterson do you have any comments on the Nazi 00:00:02

presence at your protest the presence of 00:00:04

Nazis or white supremacist assaulting 00:00:07

people at your protest you have any 00:00:09

comment on that yeah then why why were 00:00:10

they here how can I are there other have 00:00:14

you been alignment with yours at some 00:00:17

time in your life this question book you 00:00:19

want to know what my views are I've 00:00:21

watched all of your videos yes including 00:00:23

Gregory yes I have yes and why would you 00:00:25

ask such a question because this is my 00:00:27

interpretation in the video apparently 00:00:29

all of the people who arranged the 00:00:31

protest against you washed all of your 00:00:32

videos do you want to disavow 150 videos 00:00:34

on you know your lectures which starts 00:00:37

the day not under Savalas before you let 00:00:40

me talk to her for a moment 00:00:43

don't call me that leave so I have a 00:00:44

hundred fifty lectures on YouTube 00:00:48

there's 500 hours of what you do you 00:00:49

really think that you're worth all of 00:00:52

that time so I will answer your question 00:00:53

okay 00:00:56

I've studied Nazism for a very long time 00:00:56

it's been for decades and I understand 00:00:58

it very well and I can tell you that 00:01:01

there's some awful people lurking in the 00:01:03

corner and they're ready to come out and 00:01:04

if the radical left keeps pushing the 00:01:06

way that was very much like a terror 00:01:08

army to come that sounds very much very 00:01:09

much like a threat would you like to 00:01:12

disavow the physical violence trans 00:01:13

people were physically assaulted at this 00:01:16

rally in your name would you like to 00:01:17

disavow that virus so you wish that 00:01:19

didn't happen and you want to and I'm 00:01:22

going to post this online that you would 00:01:23

like people to not to be to be more 00:01:25

accommodating of trans people and people 00:01:28

of color at your events in future I'm 00:01:30

I'm a person of color and I felt very 00:01:33

economy person I thank you so if you 00:01:35

like this guy's you want to be Ramon you 00:01:39

wanted to disavow it and this is the 00:01:43

disavow Latoya I am NOT an advocate of 00:01:44

violence I'm speaking out the way I'm 00:01:47

sleeping out because I think this is a 00:01:48

roof to no violence and violence is 00:01:50

lurking and you can say that that sounds 00:01:53

like a tree with no violence at our 00:01:54

protest though there was violence at 00:01:56

your protest so what does that say about 00:01:57

our view my provide violence 00:01:58

asking me continually fray the question 00:02:01

is a very Helen society don't have 00:02:03

eternal you have no idea if I'm your 00:02:04

enemy you have no idea about you won't 00:02:06

you my pronoun so I'm pretty sure you're 00:02:08

my enemy yes yeah well I know what you 00:02:10

think that but I don't believe that 00:02:11

using your pronouns is going to do you 00:02:13

any good in the long run but would you 00:02:15

use alternate pronouns if a student 00:02:18

asked you to I think I've made my 00:02:20

position on that clear already well 00:02:23

perhaps not to our audience at home who 00:02:25

are just being introduced to this would 00:02:27

you use alternate notes and why not I 00:02:28

because I don't believe that other 00:02:32

people have the right to determine what 00:02:33

language I use especially when it's 00:02:35

backed by punitive legislation and when 00:02:36

the words that are being required are 00:02:39

the constructions there are artificial 00:02:41

constructions of people I regard as 00:02:43

radical ideologue who's viewpoint I do 00:02:45

not share and building up c16 is 00:02:47

actually not about cisgender people it's 00:02:51

about protections for transgender people 00:02:54

and that's not you know it's not about 00:02:56

Jordan Peterson so you know we should 00:02:58

have people learning to listen more we 00:03:01

have two ears and one mouth for a very 00:03:03

good reason when things get political I 00:03:05

like to ask who benefits and who gets to 00:03:07

decide the rules of the game so you know 00:03:11

mostly with this Peterson controversy 00:03:13

which is really just a small drama 00:03:16

tempest in a teapot you know he could 00:03:17

just get over learning to program a few 00:03:20

pronouns into his phone by the way I 00:03:22

only have half a dozen or so that I 00:03:23

actually use on an everyday basis so 00:03:24

it's not all that difficult 00:03:27

sorry now that's been good job because I 00:03:28

think professor Peterson wants to get in 00:03:30

on that 00:03:32

yeah well kindness is the excuse that 00:03:33

social justice warriors used when they 00:03:36

want to exercise control over what other 00:03:37

people think and say so you know if 00:03:39

we're banding back and forth our 00:03:42

differences in values you know I would 00:03:44

say that the highest possible value is 00:03:48

truth and that one of the concomitant is 00:03:49

that is that is that we need stringent 00:03:52

protection for freedom of speech so that 00:03:54

we can utter the truths that we see fit 00:03:56

and I think that that's a value that's 00:03:57

much higher than than kindness for 00:04:00

example I mean there's lots of 00:04:02

situations in life where where kindness 00:04:04

in the immediate present is not the 00:04:06

appropriate way to react at all but so 00:04:08

for example when you discipline children 00:04:11

you are 00:04:12

to hurt their feelings in the short term 00:04:13

so that they can learn to behave 00:04:15

properly in the medium to long term so 00:04:17

that their lives go well and so this 00:04:20

automatic assumption that the people on 00:04:22

the social justice warrior side of the 00:04:24

equation are motivated only by kindness 00:04:26

when they're also clearly motivated by 00:04:28

power is something I find completely 00:04:30

untenable and I don't think that Pete's 00:04:31

solution to program my cellphone so that 00:04:33

I can remember what names people need to 00:04:35

be called is a reasonable solution at 00:04:38

all we're actually supposed to now use 00:04:39

electronic devices to bolster our 00:04:41

ability to speak freely how do you a 00:04:43

memory Ames and someone that these 00:04:46

made-up pronouns of which there are many 00:04:49

dozens in fact and there's no consensus 00:04:52

on them and that doesn't even begin to 00:04:55

start a discussion about the use of the 00:04:57

other kin pronouns and you can look 00:05:00

those up if you want because if you can 00:05:02

define your identity subjectively any 00:05:04

way you want then there's absolutely no 00:05:06

reason that you can't claim a nonhuman 00:05:07

identity and you may not know but in the 00:05:09

LGBT rainbow coalition there is Q plus 00:05:11

and the Q plus people include the other 00:05:15

kids who claim a nonhuman identity and 00:05:17

they're arguing in that rainbow 00:05:19

coalition that they have the same right 00:05:21

to their to their pronouns that everyone 00:05:23

else does and their pronouns include 00:05:25

such things as work worm self you're not 00:05:27

supposed to interrupt actually I was 00:05:31

just going to ask if you could go back 00:05:33

to the point about the analogy between 00:05:35

the racial slur and the end I don't 00:05:38

think there's any analogy at all but I 00:05:40

think what difference when we hear I'm 00:05:42

talking about compelled speech there's a 00:05:44

difference between saying that there's 00:05:46

something you can't say and saying that 00:05:48

there are things that you have to say 00:05:50

and I regard these made-up pronouns all 00:05:52

of them as the neologisms of radical PC 00:05:55

authoritarians 00:06:00

you understand that and I don't I'm not 00:06:01

a fan of that sort of person and the 00:06:04

reason I'm not a fan of that sort of 00:06:06

person is because I've done my homework 00:06:08

I've read everything I can get my hands 00:06:10

on in the development of authoritarian 00:06:13

political systems and I know the 00:06:14

literature inside out and backwards and 00:06:16

I am NOT going to be a mouthpiece for 00:06:18

language that I detest 00:06:22

and that's back who I'm a great admirer 00:06:25

of once described an old religious idea 00:06:32

and that was that God ruled the world 00:06:35

with two hands right and left mercy and 00:06:39

justice and the world couldn't survive 00:06:42

if only mercy applied because then no 00:06:45

one would ever be encouraged to adopt 00:06:48

the trappings and responsibilities of 00:06:53

adulthood you end up in a situation 00:06:56

where you're forgiven for absolutely 00:06:58

everything you do or fail to do you're 00:07:01

you're you're thrust into the Freudian 00:07:03

nightmare of the oedipal family where 00:07:06

your utter uselessness is forgiven on 00:07:09

the grounds of compassion and you end up 00:07:13

living in your mother's basement until 00:07:17

you produce fantasies as a consequence 00:07:19

of your squelched development of perhaps 00:07:24

going out and shooting up a high school 00:07:26

Mercy in its success produces pathology justice and antic set in its excess 00:07:36

produces pathology too because people 00:07:38

are not 00:07:40

are not perfect and that means that we all fail when we attempt to do the 00:07:50

things that we know that we should do 00:07:52

and so being held to account for our 00:07:53

failures has to be tempered by Mercy but 00:07:58

both principles have to apply justice 00:08:01

means their structure and rules and the 00:08:04

people who abide by the structure and 00:08:08

play by the rules and move towards the 00:08:09

top win and mercy means we're forgiving 00:08:11

our failures so that we can rise up and 00:08:16

play again but you can't have one 00:08:18

without the other because the world 00:08:22

falls apart if you do and this is my 00:08:23

problem with tolerance because tolerant 00:08:26

people first of all let's say those who 00:08:29

claim proclaim the virtues of tolerance 00:08:32

believe that they're tolerant but 00:08:34

generally that's not the case 00:08:36

they just don't want to accept the 00:08:38

responsibility that playing by the rules 00:08:40

would bring 00:08:43

one of the problems with post-modernism is that and this is a big problem like 00:08:55

there's a fatal problem apart from the 00:08:58

fact that it's incoherent and there's no 00:09:00

value structure in it and it's 00:09:02

fundamentally divisive and destructive 00:09:03

there's a logical problem with it too 00:09:05

that's even worse and so you might be 00:09:07

noticing that the LGBT set of acronyms 00:09:09

keeps growing hay and its kind of its 00:09:12

kind of a form of its own parody in some 00:09:15

sense it's like well I'm impressed it's 00:09:17

like yeah you are and well I'm impressed 00:09:19

too yeah you're also oppressed and maybe 00:09:21

I'm even impressing you being part of 00:09:23

this other marginalized group but at 00:09:25

least we share our oppression well I'm 00:09:27

also oppressed well so am i I'm 00:09:28

oppressed to it's like okay so here's a 00:09:30

problem there's a big problem here the 00:09:34

problem is it's true 00:09:36

yer oppress your oppressed your 00:09:38

oppressed you're oppressed 00:09:40

god only knows why maybe you're too 00:09:41

short or you're not as beautiful as you 00:09:43

could be or you know your parent your 00:09:45

grandparent was a serf likely because 00:09:47

almost everybody's grand great 00:09:49

grandparent was it's like you know and 00:09:50

you're not as smart as you could be and 00:09:53

you have a sick relative and you have 00:09:54

your own physical problems and it's like 00:09:57

frankly you're a mess and you're 00:09:59

oppressed in every possible way 00:10:01

including your ancestry and your biology 00:10:03

and the entire sum of human history has 00:10:05

conspired to produce victimized you with 00:10:08

all your individual pathological 00:10:11

problems it's like yes true well so what 00:10:14

do you do in the face of that suffering 00:10:18

try to reduce it start with yourself 00:10:20

what good are you get yourself together 00:10:24

for Christ's sake so that when your 00:10:27

father dies you're not whining away in a 00:10:28

corner and you can help plan the funeral 00:10:30

and you can stand up solidly so that 00:10:32

people can rely on you that's better 00:10:35

don't be a damn victim of course you're 00:10:37

a victim Jesus obviously how do you 00:10:39

overcome the suffering of life is be a 00:10:43

better person that's how you do it well 00:10:45

that's hard it takes responsibility 00:10:49

there's all these rude people out there 00:10:51

they've got problems like you can't 00:10:54

believe off they go to work and do 00:10:55

things they don't even like and look the 00:10:58

lights are on my god it's unbelievable 00:11:00

it's it's a miracle it's a mirror 00:11:02

and we're so ungrateful college students 00:11:05

the postmodern types they're so 00:11:09

ungrateful you know they don't know that 00:11:10

they're surrounded by it just a bloody 00:11:12

miracle it's a miracle at all this stuff 00:11:14

works with all you crazy chimpanzees 00:11:17

that don't know each other can sit in 00:11:19

the same room for two hours 00:11:20

sweltering away without tearing each 00:11:22

other apart because that's what chimps 00:11:25

do so with regards to respect you know 00:11:26

you said well human civilization 00:11:34

progresses a lot better if we respect 00:11:36

one another and I actually don't believe 00:11:39

that at all I believe that human 00:11:40

civilization progresses and maintains 00:11:42

itself when we respect people who've 00:11:45

earned respect they don't just respect 00:11:47

everybody randomly what the hell use is 00:11:49

respect if you just respect people 00:11:51

randomly 00:11:53

it's like inflating the currency you 00:11:54

know it's like the Simpsons episode 00:11:56

where you know Bart gets a trophy 00:11:58

because it's every child gets a trophy 00:12:00

day all you do is inflate the currency 00:12:02

respect is actually limited to that 00:12:04

category of people who have earned 00:12:06

respect in some manners so whatever 00:12:08

you're talking about with regards to say 00:12:10

common decency between people it's not 00:12:12

respect and the definition is actually 00:12:14

not they matter a law and so I hear the 00:12:16

respect argument all the time but you 00:12:20

also can't force me to respect you you 00:12:22

mean you might be able to force me to 00:12:24

act like I respect you but you can't 00:12:26

force me to respect you it's just not 00:12:28

possible there's a complex issue here 00:12:30

which is to what degree do you allow 00:12:32

individuals to to govern the 00:12:34

conversation that's had about them in 00:12:37

their presence or otherwise but I would 00:12:39

just revert back to my original argument 00:12:41

which is that's a negotiation it's 00:12:43

either in negotiation 00:12:45

you got three states to negotiate with 00:12:46

someone you can be their slave or you 00:12:48

can be their tyrant and I would pick 00:12:52

negotiation but as far as I'm concerned 00:12:54

the law right now as it's currently 00:12:56

instantiated is a tyrant and it makes 00:12:57

people into its slave and we're going to 00:12:59

pay for that and it's paid predicated on 00:13:01

hypothetically on respect and compassion 00:13:04

I don't buy that for a second I don't 00:13:06

think that's true in the least and 00:13:08

there's a huge literature on compassion 00:13:09

here's a problem with compassion mother 00:13:12

grizzly bears are very very compact 00:13:15

towards their Cubs but if you get near 00:13:18

those Cubs they'll carry the pieces and 00:13:22

that's the flipside of compassion and 00:13:23

I'm speaking not as a lawyer here but as 00:13:25

a psychologist that's already well 00:13:27

documented compassion is by no means a 00:13:29

an emotion that produces the desired 00:13:32

social outcome quite the contrary 00:13:35

quite the contrary life is very much 00:13:37

more complicated than then well if you 00:13:40

were just empathic everything would work 00:13:42

out it's like you can't be equally 00:13:44

empathic to everyone and that's a big 00:13:46

problem 00:13:48

they basically in order to not bother 00:13:48

anyone who they had consulted with they 00:13:52

decided for example that gender identity 00:13:54

should be nothing but subjective choice 00:13:56

which is I don't even know what to say 00:13:58

about that if you're a psychologist and 00:14:00

you have any sense at all that's a 00:14:02

completely insane proposition it's first 00:14:04

of all predicated on the idea that your 00:14:06

identity is your subjective choice and 00:14:08

that's never been the case for any sort 00:14:10

of identity anywhere so partly your 00:14:13

identity is the set of tools with which 00:14:15

you function in the optional world and 00:14:17

part of it is a negotiated agreement 00:14:19

with the other people around you and 00:14:21

that's all being taken out of them 00:14:23

that's that's all actually as far as I 00:14:24

can tell that's lying theorizing is 00:14:26

technically illegal now in Ontario and 00:14:28

I'm not even talking about the potential 00:14:31

biological basis of identity because the 00:14:32

idea that identity has no biological 00:14:35

basis that's just wrong 00:14:37

it might've actually wrong so and we've 00:14:40

written a social constructionist we've 00:14:43

written a radical social constructionist 00:14:45

view of identity into the law but even 00:14:48

worse than that we've gone beyond social 00:14:51

constructionism because Piaget was a 00:14:52

construction is into just pure whim your 00:14:54

identity can be at any moment what you 00:14:57

assume that it's going to be that's not 00:14:58

a tenable solution there's nothing about 00:15:01

that proposition that's reasonable so 00:15:03

I'm going to read you something that a 00:15:06

graduate student sent me from the 00:15:07

University of Toronto the other day and 00:15:10

I can also tell you that I've received 00:15:11

hundreds of letters like this today I 00:15:13

had a tutorial at the University of 00:15:16

Toronto where I talked about Jordan 00:15:18

Peterson and issues of personal identity 00:15:20

legally sanctioned identity categories 00:15:23

etc I brought up a video of a tall white 00:15:25

man in his 30s who asked students at 00:15:28

to see how they'd react if he told them 00:15:31

he identified as a woman as black as 00:15:33

short and as five years old 00:15:36

spoiler alert students in the video 00:15:39

resist some of the later categories a 00:15:43

bit but are mostly accepting still 00:15:44

students were not engaging in discussion 00:15:48

I asked them why one said it was because 00:15:50

she was worried to share her opinion for 00:15:54

fear of being singled out or saying 00:15:57

something offensive I asked who else was 00:15:59

not speaking for that reason the whole 00:16:02

class put their hands up no 00:16:06

participation why they weren't 00:16:09

uninterested they were afraid to speak 00:16:15

their minds I'll start with lawyer one 00:16:18

who was the counsel to several prime 00:16:20

ministers he talked to me about the 00:16:22

Human Rights Tribunal because I went and 00:16:23

saw him two weeks after this all started 00:16:25

Human Rights Tribunal is a kangaroo 00:16:27

court in my opinion and it should be 00:16:30

abolished as fast as possible it's one 00:16:31

of the many institutions in Canada that 00:16:34

pose a threat to your to your freedom 00:16:35

that that is of almost unimaginable 00:16:37

proportions here's what this top lawyer 00:16:40

told me if I'm taken in front of the 00:16:42

Human Rights Tribunal it will cost me 00:16:46

two hundred and fifty thousand dollars I 00:16:48

will pay the legal costs for my 00:16:49

opponents and I will lose he said go 00:16:51

back to your safe little life and shut 00:16:55

your mouth the proposition that your 00:16:57

identity is somehow unmoored from a 00:17:00

reality outside of your subjective 00:17:04

saying linguistic space is also if it's 00:17:05

wrong there's no other way of putting it 00:17:09

so like and this is written into the law 00:17:11

already so the proposition is that 00:17:13

biological sex which many of the holders 00:17:16

of saying what admiration for this law 00:17:19

don't even believe exists which I don't 00:17:22

even know what to say about that but the 00:17:24

proposition is that biological sex 00:17:26

gender identity gender expression and 00:17:29

sexual preference vary independently 00:17:32

that's the law and it's wrong it is even 00:17:36

close to right the bloody human 00:17:39

resources department 00:17:42

University of Toronto have the docket 00:17:43

inequity position okay so what equity 00:17:45

means is that the doesn't mean equality 00:17:48

of opportunity it means equality of 00:17:50

outcome and that is the so this is the 00:17:52

idea the idea is that you take us a 00:17:56

social institution like a university and 00:18:00

then you look at the organization of 00:18:02

that university at every single strap 00:18:05

from that executive level all the way 00:18:07

down to the student level then what you 00:18:09

do is you do an analysis of each level 00:18:11

by community democracy right you get to 00:18:13

define the demographic characteristics 00:18:17

that you're going to discuss however 00:18:18

which is actually a big problem then you 00:18:20

make the presupposition that unless that 00:18:22

organization at every level matches the 00:18:25

demographic representation of the people 00:18:28

at every level then is corrupt 00:18:31

oppressive and discriminatory and it 00:18:33

needs to be changed okay so you think 00:18:36

what's wrong with that every level 00:18:38

should have 50/50 men and women let's 00:18:40

say it's like you're really sure about 00:18:42

that are you so sure about that 00:18:43

you don't think there's any natural 00:18:45

differences in interest between men and 00:18:46

women well if you don't think so then 00:18:48

why are most psychology classes 80 00:18:50

percent women and that and that amount 00:18:52

on differentiation is accelerating 00:18:55

rapidly like I've seen it over the 00:18:58

course of my career maybe sixty percent 00:19:00

man at the beginning of my career is 00:19:02

he's like 80 percent women now and man 00:19:04

occupy more of the positions of the 00:19:06

Stemmons in the stem stem fields at 00:19:07

least for now it's the same in bloody 00:19:11

Scandinavia 20 to 1 nurses 20 to 1 women 00:19:13

to man nurses in Scandinavia and 20 to 1 00:19:17

men to women in engineering a massive 00:19:20

Scandinavian so what's happened in 00:19:24

Scandinavia that they made this 00:19:26

assignment or egalitarian in terms of 00:19:27

its legal and social structures is that 00:19:30

the gender differences in personality 00:19:32

between men and women have not bigger 00:19:33

not smaller so what that means is that 00:19:36

social constructionism is wrong that's 00:19:39

what it means 00:19:42

wrong disprove it's exactly the opposite 00:19:43

of what the theory would have predicted 00:19:46

because the theory predicted 00:19:48

Daugherty knew how it was gonna sort 00:19:49

itself out it's like not like people 00:19:51

knew this to begin with 00:19:53

the idea was that as you Iike lies the 00:19:54

social the social structure that the 00:19:58

differences between men and women would 00:20:02

disappear guess what that didn't happen 00:20:03

and it's not studies of just a few 00:20:06

hundred people in a few locations those 00:20:08

are population wide studies and they've 00:20:10

been replicated multiple times so and 00:20:12

the funny thing is is that so there are 00:20:14

temperamental differences between men 00:20:17

and women 00:20:18

it's and neuroticism agreeableness are 00:20:19

not the only temperamental differences 00:20:22

so if you fragment extraversion it 00:20:24

fragments into assertiveness and 00:20:27

gregariousness women are more gregarious 00:20:29

many more assertive if you fragment 00:20:31

conscientiousness it's orderliness and 00:20:34

industrious that's women are more 00:20:36

orderly at men are more industrious if 00:20:38

you fragment openness which is the 00:20:40

creativity dimension into interest in 00:20:42

ideas and the interest in aesthetics you 00:20:44

find that women are more interested in 00:20:46

this day and men are more interested in 00:20:47

ideas so so because you've been 00:20:49

fractionated the big five into ten you 00:20:51

get gender differences across all of 00:20:53

them and they're not trivial either they 00:20:55

make a difference so okay so anyway back 00:20:57

to the equity thing all the preposterous 00:21:01

and idiotic idea so first of all to make 00:21:03

gender equity across every dimension of 00:21:08

an organization you have to assume that 00:21:10

men and women have identical interests 00:21:13

or and temperament and that if they 00:21:15

don't the state should intervene to 00:21:19

bloody well ensure that they do which is 00:21:21

something for all you women to figure 00:21:23

out because now there's many many what 00:21:24

positions in society that women 00:21:29

preferentially occupied so what's going 00:21:32

to do about that and what are you going 00:21:34

to do about the ages because they occupy 00:21:36

preferential positions as well you know 00:21:39

they're over-represented in all sorts of 00:21:41

professional institutions and the 00:21:43

probability is that that's going to 00:21:44

increase what are going to do about that 00:21:46

what about the Jews what are going to do 00:21:47

about them because they're 00:21:49

position as the Indians you know put 00:21:51

quarters on all those people what kind 00:21:53

of stupidity is that and then it's worse 00:21:56

too because let's say you equalize women 00:21:58

and just for the sake of argument across 00:22:01

all these different dimensions of 00:22:03

society well then what are you going to 00:22:05

do are you going to equalize for black 00:22:06

women and Latino women and Asian women 00:22:09

are you going to stop tight black women 00:22:12

it's not like they're all the same are 00:22:14

you going to ensure that women from 00:22:16

lower classes are represented just as 00:22:19

much as women from upper classes and how 00:22:21

many generations back are you going to 00:22:24

go to check that what about intelligence 00:22:25

what about attractiveness how about 00:22:28

height how about weight so the problem 00:22:29

with the fractionation by group identity 00:22:32

is that it's endless there's no way of 00:22:34

ensuring equality across groups comes 00:22:38

with an infinite number of groups you 00:22:40

can spread that group identity all the 00:22:41

way down to the level of the individual 00:22:43

which is exactly what you should do 00:22:45

which is what we already did in the West 00:22:46

we figured well the ultimate diverse 00:22:48

population is a population of 00:22:52

individuals so you let the individual 00:22:53

sort it out no no then replace that with 00:22:55

group well what that means for the 00:22:58

bloody social activists is the they'll 00:23:00

be able to play this game forever 00:23:02

because you can continually traction a 00:23:03

group identity ad nauseam so the system 00:23:05

will never be equal and you can bloody 00:23:07

well be sure that as we implement social 00:23:10

policy to make sure that all outcomes 00:23:12

are equal but the amount of space that 00:23:14

you personally are going to ask the 00:23:16

maneuver in it's going to shrink and 00:23:18

shrink and shrink and shrink we've 00:23:19

already seen that happen in many 00:23:21

societies you think we would learn from 00:23:23

the 20th century I was just going to ask 00:23:25

if you could go back to the point about 00:23:27

the analogy between the racial slur and 00:23:29

the and I don't think there's any 00:23:33

analogy at all but I think my different 00:23:34

one here I'm talking about compelled 00:23:36

speech there's a difference between 00:23:38

saying that there's something you can't 00:23:40

say and saying that there are things 00:23:42

that you have to say and I regard these 00:23:44

made-up pronouns all of them as the 00:23:47

neologisms of radical PC authoritarians 00:23:50

do you understand that and I don't I'm 00:23:54

not a fan of that sort of person and the 00:23:57

reason I'm not a fan of that sort of 00:23:59

person is because I've done my homework 00:24:01

I've read everything I can get my hands 00:24:04

on in the development of authoritarian 00:24:06

political systems and I know the 00:24:07

literature inside out and backwards and 00:24:09

I am NOT going to be a mouthpiece for 00:24:11

language that I detest and that 00:24:15