Trans and woke ideologies have convinced me of the existence of good and evil, and a Divine – that manifests in so many ways: a newborn infant and babies, a voice like Jonathan Antonie's, some works of art. An ideology that wants to mutilate perfectly physically healthy children is the definition of evil. That evil and the ugliness of destroying wholeness and beauty, desecrating priceless art (I'm thinking the tomato soup!), and creating chaos cuts at the core of one's being. This is not about politics, about Right and Left. It's about Right and Wrong.
I want to push back on Peter’s position on abolishing police.
Firstly, I want to say that I DO vote: Every. Single. Time. And that’s important, because there are many people in each city who consistently vote, but whose candidates are not elected. And you may say, “Well, that’s democracy”, (and it is, to some extent) BUT it’s also true that people elected to office should serve everyone they represent, not only those who voted for them. And you may say “OK, you can move away if you don’t like a city without police”. But can I? No. With that laissez fair approach, I can’t afford to move away because as soon as the abolition of the police is announced, property values will tank, which will prevent me from being able to afford to move elsewhere. Most people have a significant amount of their total assets tied up in their home. Why should those of us who were outvoted by stupidity be held hostage (literally!) because of other people’s luxury beliefs? And finally, the highest turnout voters are exactly those to whom the term “luxury beliefs” applies, whereas working class (esp. Whites/Hispanics) are generally low-turnout... Which may go a long way to explain why our political system is so messed up.
I live in a city with a Soros funded progressive prosecutor. Before the election, I read that person’s policy document, and as a lawyer, I was terrified. [Obviously, I voted for the other candidate!]. It was clear from their statement that, if they were elected, the penalties for criminal behavior in our city would be abolished or reduced, and crime would rise (which it has). When I tried to explain the policy statement to non-lawyers, they either would not, or could not, understand that those policies would likely lead to increased crime and violence. That’s why Soros’ organizations have targeted prosecutorial elections: people simply do not understand our adversarial legal system -- so they don’t think it’s a problem to essentially elect a defense attorney as prosecutor. In fact, that would be a great question for you to ask in one of your videos. I would be willing to bet that less than 10% of the population would understand that having progressive (pro-criminal) prosecutors is a form of systemic dysfunction.
Great conversation - Peter are you familiar with Ian Rowe? He has written a book on Agency - Agency: The Four Point Plan (F.R.E.E.) for ALL Children to Overcome the Victimhood Narrative and Discover Their Pathway to Power - He does a great job of discussing the gap between the victim ideology and the bootstraps. He'd be great for a sit down!
I enjoy your writings and podcasts. Its a reminder of what is really going on in academia these days. I have to write with a pseudonym to be honest, because my academic peers and friends would literally shun me otherwise. Thanks for talking for the rest of us who lack the guts to do what you are doing. -Da Fellow Academic, for Dem (all other academics who lack true freedom of speech).
Really good conversation! A couple of thoughts about the "defund the police" part. First, I think if you defund the cops, you cede control of the streets to those willing and able to control it with violent means, who become the defacto police, but with even less accountability. Second, Peter, I'm not in favor of your idea regarding allowing voters to defund/disband the cops because it would leave our country vulnerable to insurgency from foreign agents and terrorists, and large-scale domestic financial criminals might also flock there to conduct operations that could disrupt and harm our economy.
It’s funny how folks having this conversation never come right out and say it but what I’m taking away is that women’s susceptibility to woke ideology and general biologically driven inclination to status jockey is the core of the issue. I’ve never yet seen the argument that women’s shallow understanding of the world driven by social media is the issue, but I’m convinced it’s true based on my experiences with college educated women.
It’s hard to claim because psychological research on the antisocial behaviors of women doesn’t make this connection. But if you consider that among elite women, degrees in humanities and the social sciences are most common and that these women populate the elite institutions perpetuating these ideologies, it isn’t hard to see that it could be possible. Women in this class are also anecdotally most likely to claim victim status despite being financially stable. And men don’t often tell women we’re wrong either. I see almost zero pushback among my own peer group in Austin to this ideology, while I generally only see it from men.
I can tell you from experience that these are the people heavily weaponizing emotion in these online spaces, talk through therapy speak, and are most likely to destroy the reputations of the non woke.
All I have for you is anecdotal observations. These connections aren’t studied empirically because they can cause offense to this very group.
Crazy. I visited a few months ago and was saddened to see the decline. I planned on visiting two friends but both fled the city.
Portland as you likely know is known for being a bicycling paradise(I disagree...as the state has atrocious discriminatory laws) but the city has seen a sharp decline in ridership figures.
I do wonder if it's in part due to the defunding of police.
Ironically the woke bike activists are also huge on the whole "defund the police" movement.
Next door in California, CalBike, the state's largest bicycling organization has been in support of a law to legalize sidewalk cycling for woke reasons, neglecting that any legitimate bicycling advocate worth their salt knows that sidewalk cycling increases the risk of bike-ped and bike-car crashes.
Trans and woke ideologies have convinced me of the existence of good and evil, and a Divine – that manifests in so many ways: a newborn infant and babies, a voice like Jonathan Antonie's, some works of art. An ideology that wants to mutilate perfectly physically healthy children is the definition of evil. That evil and the ugliness of destroying wholeness and beauty, desecrating priceless art (I'm thinking the tomato soup!), and creating chaos cuts at the core of one's being. This is not about politics, about Right and Left. It's about Right and Wrong.
I want to push back on Peter’s position on abolishing police.
Firstly, I want to say that I DO vote: Every. Single. Time. And that’s important, because there are many people in each city who consistently vote, but whose candidates are not elected. And you may say, “Well, that’s democracy”, (and it is, to some extent) BUT it’s also true that people elected to office should serve everyone they represent, not only those who voted for them. And you may say “OK, you can move away if you don’t like a city without police”. But can I? No. With that laissez fair approach, I can’t afford to move away because as soon as the abolition of the police is announced, property values will tank, which will prevent me from being able to afford to move elsewhere. Most people have a significant amount of their total assets tied up in their home. Why should those of us who were outvoted by stupidity be held hostage (literally!) because of other people’s luxury beliefs? And finally, the highest turnout voters are exactly those to whom the term “luxury beliefs” applies, whereas working class (esp. Whites/Hispanics) are generally low-turnout... Which may go a long way to explain why our political system is so messed up.
I live in a city with a Soros funded progressive prosecutor. Before the election, I read that person’s policy document, and as a lawyer, I was terrified. [Obviously, I voted for the other candidate!]. It was clear from their statement that, if they were elected, the penalties for criminal behavior in our city would be abolished or reduced, and crime would rise (which it has). When I tried to explain the policy statement to non-lawyers, they either would not, or could not, understand that those policies would likely lead to increased crime and violence. That’s why Soros’ organizations have targeted prosecutorial elections: people simply do not understand our adversarial legal system -- so they don’t think it’s a problem to essentially elect a defense attorney as prosecutor. In fact, that would be a great question for you to ask in one of your videos. I would be willing to bet that less than 10% of the population would understand that having progressive (pro-criminal) prosecutors is a form of systemic dysfunction.
Great conversation - Peter are you familiar with Ian Rowe? He has written a book on Agency - Agency: The Four Point Plan (F.R.E.E.) for ALL Children to Overcome the Victimhood Narrative and Discover Their Pathway to Power - He does a great job of discussing the gap between the victim ideology and the bootstraps. He'd be great for a sit down!
Thanks. No, I'm not familiar. Do you have some links for me, please?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWueH5HhnFE, https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/56614419-agency
Rob, I hope you are also keeping up with John McWhorter and Glen Loury: https://youtu.be/3Ybyf1_W_rw?si=GgGgVRR6nAX8_fth
I enjoy your writings and podcasts. Its a reminder of what is really going on in academia these days. I have to write with a pseudonym to be honest, because my academic peers and friends would literally shun me otherwise. Thanks for talking for the rest of us who lack the guts to do what you are doing. -Da Fellow Academic, for Dem (all other academics who lack true freedom of speech).
Great interview. I’ve been following Rob’s work for a few years and really appreciate his deep insights into human psychology.
Really good conversation! A couple of thoughts about the "defund the police" part. First, I think if you defund the cops, you cede control of the streets to those willing and able to control it with violent means, who become the defacto police, but with even less accountability. Second, Peter, I'm not in favor of your idea regarding allowing voters to defund/disband the cops because it would leave our country vulnerable to insurgency from foreign agents and terrorists, and large-scale domestic financial criminals might also flock there to conduct operations that could disrupt and harm our economy.
It’s funny how folks having this conversation never come right out and say it but what I’m taking away is that women’s susceptibility to woke ideology and general biologically driven inclination to status jockey is the core of the issue. I’ve never yet seen the argument that women’s shallow understanding of the world driven by social media is the issue, but I’m convinced it’s true based on my experiences with college educated women.
Many have claimed that, but I see no hard evidence for such claims.
It’s hard to claim because psychological research on the antisocial behaviors of women doesn’t make this connection. But if you consider that among elite women, degrees in humanities and the social sciences are most common and that these women populate the elite institutions perpetuating these ideologies, it isn’t hard to see that it could be possible. Women in this class are also anecdotally most likely to claim victim status despite being financially stable. And men don’t often tell women we’re wrong either. I see almost zero pushback among my own peer group in Austin to this ideology, while I generally only see it from men.
I can tell you from experience that these are the people heavily weaponizing emotion in these online spaces, talk through therapy speak, and are most likely to destroy the reputations of the non woke.
All I have for you is anecdotal observations. These connections aren’t studied empirically because they can cause offense to this very group.
Great discussion, gentlemen!
Is Portland seriously only down to one traffic cop?
Yes, that's true to the best of my knowledge.
Crazy. I visited a few months ago and was saddened to see the decline. I planned on visiting two friends but both fled the city.
Portland as you likely know is known for being a bicycling paradise(I disagree...as the state has atrocious discriminatory laws) but the city has seen a sharp decline in ridership figures.
I do wonder if it's in part due to the defunding of police.
https://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=20739
Are you familiar with the term, "traffic violence?"
It's a term used by the woke who've largely taken over bicycling and similar advocacy circles.
These, er, folx have completely taken over our movement.
https://sdbikecoup.substack.com/p/do-you-believe
https://sdbikecoup.substack.com/p/does-the-coalition-have-a-white-supremacy
Ironically the woke bike activists are also huge on the whole "defund the police" movement.
Next door in California, CalBike, the state's largest bicycling organization has been in support of a law to legalize sidewalk cycling for woke reasons, neglecting that any legitimate bicycling advocate worth their salt knows that sidewalk cycling increases the risk of bike-ped and bike-car crashes.
https://principledbicycling.substack.com/p/ab-825-is-peak-platitude-driven-bicycling
Calbike, as are the majority of "bicycle organizations" are also huge on "defund the police"
Would you be able to tell the difference even if they were?
In Portland? Likely not.