 Look forward here, just a devastating article in the New York Times that came out I think Sunday. Let me read just a few excerpts from it before we get into a discussion here with Duvid. So in Hasidic enclaves, failing private schools flush with private money. So I'll just read the beginning from this New York Times article. New York's Hasidic Jewish religious schools have benefited from $1 billion in government funding in the last four years, but are unaccountable to outside oversight. So this article is by two reporters, Eliza Shapiro and Brian Rosenthal. Both sound obviously Jewish and photographer also sounds Jewish. So the Hasidic Jewish community has long operated one of New York's largest private schools on its own terms, resisting any outside scrutiny of how its students are bearing. But in 2019, the school, the Central United Medical Academy, agreed to give state standardized tests in reading and math to more than 1000 students. Every one of them failed. So we're talking students with an average IQ of around 110. So these are not unintelligent students yet they receive so little reading and math education that every single one of them fail state standardized tests in reading and math. So Duvid, what are your reactions to this story? Well, the story's basically a hit piece. So if you follow the Karate News, they knew it was coming, they were bracing for it. And the real news isn't the story. The news is the vote in New York City state regents in whether they're going to enforce state standards on private schools in New York. And so actually, it's not specific to Yeshiva, it's to all private schools. So the legislation that New York Regents are passing is not specifically Yeshiva's. And this has been a big issue for decades. And generally, you know, it's one of the biggest it's probably the single biggest issue for Hasidic voters in New York and Eric Adams, like I mentioned, God forbid, you know, counter semites hit me all the time. I've talked more than I want to talk about the Mitzvitz of Valpa. But you know, when Bloomberg had you made limitations and state requirements on Mitzvitz of Valpa regarding circumcisions, de Blasio, one of his main running points was that he would reverse Bloomberg's regulation around that Jewish practice. And, you know, since that has been a non issue, the main black vote issue for Hasidic Jews is not regulating Yeshiva's. So this New York Times article was purposely released the day before the vote, probably largely because it was known that the regions weren't going to pass it. And in somewhat like a defense against anti Semitism, because, you know, we turn back to like conservatism or your various political topics, politically, there's a strategy and calling someone anti Semitic is a really good strategy. So, you know, for Hasidic people who don't want their Yeshivas to be regulated, the the accusation of being anti Semitic is, you know, devastating for someone's political career. So in Albany or the state regions, if they're going to vote on enforcing these religious standards, and they're going to get called anti Semitic, it could be devastating for their career. So like the New York Times, and your last week, Steinhart, one of the wealthiest Jews, you're from, I think the Seagrams and he's in New York, but you know, the family dynasty that founded birthright and donated huge amounts of money to Jewish charities, wrote an op ed in the New York Post. And you know, for in terms of strategy, I would say the main purpose of this post is to allow the vote to pass without the regents being accused of anti Semitism. So if you want to talk about the issue, you want to talk about what's going to happen. To some extent, it's going to be a non issue in terms like it's bad for Jewish schools, because the legislation is changing. And now they have the oversight before they didn't have any oversight, they didn't have to meet New York standards. So at this point, now they have to meet New York standards. They might still be able to fight it in court. They might still be able to get like an injunction. Lee Zeldin, who's running for governor is specifically running for governor. This is one of his main issues that he will reverse this. And even if it gets passed and everything, still, it has to be enforced. And even the legislation as is, will be enforced by the local school board. So in terms of like, Oh, is karate education going to change? Unlikely. So I said like the steps that would take to actually change karate education, you know, it still has to be enforced by the local school board. And generally, Jews, especially karate Jews, have a significant amount of power, at least in their local jurisdictions. And Eric Adams, who was universally endorsed by orthodox Jews, like a handful of orthodox Jews, enforced, endorsed Andrew Yang, but the vast majority of orthodox Jews endorsed Eric Adams. And after Yang lost, all the people who endorsed Yang endorsed Adams, and Adams promised election that he would not touch us. So say that even if this legislation passed, it will have to be enforced by the New York City Department of Education, which is now under Adams. So it's unlikely that Adams would, you know, do something. But yeah, I'm interested to talk about other the intersectionality of the politics. And you know, Adams is probably going to want something in return. So like, you know, Eric Adams is likely to save the yeshivas, but he's certainly going to want something in return for doing it. Okay, so let me just run through some some segments of the the article. So this is just a stunning lead. So the Central United Talmudic Academy, right, gives a test in basic reading and math, the more than 1000 students and every one of them failed. So I don't know how ordinary people are going to read this and think, Oh, this is no big deal. So you really think people who read this article who aren't already committed one way or another are going to read a statement like that, that every one of over 1000 students at this Academy failed basic math and reading. You think they'll just not care about it? Or do you think this will permanently change the way a lot of people think of aesthetic education? It's a known issue. So I think I don't think this is a known issue to who it's a known issue to you and it's a known issue to me. It's not a known issue to 98% of people in America. No, I mean, the New York Times publishes article. This was on the front page of the New York Times. But I'm saying the New York Times publishes articles critical of yeshivas and the education system regularly. If you think like, you know, these various organization, and I think we've talked about in the past, like, if you're a former Hasidic Jew in willing to say bad things about the community, the New York Times is basically going to make an article about you. And like, you know, God forbid, I know like half of the people like God forbid that are like in these organizations and saying because, you know, so I mean, it's not new organizations, you know, half the people in which organizations, footsteps, the main organization. I mean, God forbid, you know, Nick Master, Naftali Master, like, you know, I remember, like, you know, like, I remember him very well, you know, we went to the same synagogue, like I knew his father. And, you know, like, I told him himself, it's really his father that he's mad at. You know, his, his, like, he's like, his father is the one that wanted him educated like that. It wasn't the school that wronged him. It wasn't the community that wronged him. It was his own father that wanted wanted him to be raised like that. And you're generally the, the community, it's the parents. It's not like there's, you know, some tyrannical system that's that's raising kids the way that their parents don't want them to be raised. That the ushevas, the parents feel that way. That's why they send them to these places. There's all types of ushevas of different standards. And we had this discussion last time, I think it'd probably be more interesting to your viewership about the racial dynamics of New York. So I mean, you quote the one test, you know, the one academy where they all failed. But generally, ushevas are on par with their local public schools. Like I said, like, you know, like, there's not many whites left in these areas. I lived in Burl Park. And generic whites, there's basically none, like Anglos. There's some Polish, most of the polls in Brooklyn, where I lived are real polls, like they don't speak English. They speak Polish. There's some Italians. But it's mostly Puerto Ricans, some African Americans and some Chinese. And the Cosidum are basically on par with their minority leaders. So I mean, I shared with you quite a few links where you think, you know, do the Hispanics and blacks perform better. So, you know, God forbid, like, you know, you follow the alt right or various racial things. So it was interesting that Hasidic leadership were saying, well, the public schools cheat. Like really, the reason our kids did poor on these tests than the public school is because the public schools cheat. And, and even saying like, well, they don't speak English, but our neighbors don't speak English either. And, you know, it's the New York City, like less than like half a people in New York City speak English as their first language. And, you know, in Burl Park, like probably less than 20% of the population speaks English as their first language. And, you know, so who are these standards in comparison to? And in the greater dog whistle, that generally, Cosid Jews cost less money, put more money into the system than they take out because they pay your property tax or for state for education. And then they send their kids to public school. So the amount of state funding in New York, I mean, the issue of those, they haven't hooked up that they get a decent amount of funding. But it's about a billion dollars to over 30 billion dollars. So statistically, New York City spends significantly less money on Hasidic children than they do on other children. They gave numbers like, you know, your average African American that goes to New York City public schools get spent $25,000 a year on. So, you mean, there's definitely a question about education in budgets, but to crackdown on the Hasidic, I don't think there's that great like crackdowns and like the New York Times, I've been found the New York Times, I lived in New York, the New York Times has been writing bad negative press towards Hasidic for decades now. And the greater issue that's why so Eric Adams is going to save the Yeshivas. But you know, there's going to be a whole bunch of issues like you like saying, well, what does it say about New York City public school and all the money that's being used for blacks and Hispanics and Chinese who ironically scored better on tests than Qasidim. And you're claiming that Qasidim, you know, they're Ashkenazi Jews, they probably have an IQ of 110. Well, that may or may not be true. It could be that, you know, the IQ of Qasidim is not as high, maybe it is that high. But you know, it's interesting factor that you're claiming that these Jews are probably so smart. But, you know, according to the, you know, and that's why there's a focus that's like, oh, it must be the parents who are doing something wrong because we know they're Jews, and they have so much potential. And if we just freed them from being brought up the way their parents want to raise them, then they would be able to do so much more. It's kind of racist. Because, you know, was it possible that the Qasidim are basically just as smart as blacks, you know, or their Hispanic neighbors? There I go. There I get my volume back. No, there's no evidence that Latinos, blacks, and Hasidic Jews, Ashkenazi Hasidic Jews have the same IQ. So from all the evidence, we're talking about an approximate 15 to 25 point IQ gap. And But in the politics here, we're saying, no, there is evidence because blacks and Latinos score better on state tests than Qasidim. That's not evidence. Are smarter. And if they're scoring worse on the test than blacks and Latinos in public schools, it's because their schools are messed up, and they need to be freed from their own schools. You're because you're assuming that because they're Jews, they have higher IQs than the blacks and Latinos, but it would just go like, no, the state gave them tests, and the blacks and Latinos scored better than them. Okay, so educational attainment is does not rank 100% with IQ scores. The correlation is about point three. So school test results sometimes correlate with IQ scores, and sometimes they don't. But let me get back to another point that you made, you said, there's essentially no difference between these Hasidic test results and their test results of public schools around them. And that's ridiculous. Nobody out of these more than 1000 Hasidic students passed the test. There's no secular equivalent of that that the public schools around them don't have a 0% test pass rate. So the public schools around them will have anywhere from a 30 to a 70% success rate in passing these tests. So how on earth you come up with the idea that the test scores of these Hasidic academies are the same as public schools that there's no evidence for that. Well, I looked at that, and that's one thing appears to be an anomaly and that you're generally like the Hasidic girls schools score on par with public schools and that one test was like, I don't call like a surprise where they just gave them the test. They didn't know they were going to take the test and they didn't prepare them for the test. So that black blacks and Latinos or your average New York public school student. They prepare them specifically for the test. They know the test they're going to take and they prepare them for the test. And according to conspiracy or critical people, they cheat. And so if you're saying the Hasidic all failed the test because they didn't prepare them for the test. They didn't really know what was going to go on the test and they gave them the test and they all failed because they didn't know grammar. They didn't know those basic stuff as opposed to schools where 30% of you know, or you know, of the similar economic category because generally, I see them are in the poor economic category where, you know, 30 to 60% of their neighbors passed the test. But you know, those schools teach to the test. So they don't necessarily just give an education. They give an education knowing that this is going to be the test that the kids have to take as opposed to the Hasidic school where they just gave them that test and they didn't know what was going to be on it and they hadn't prepared them for it. And other schools where they did prepare them specifically for the test where Hasidic schools knew in advance that that was the test that they were going to be taken and were able to prepare them for it performed on par with the local public schools. Okay, I'll read a little more from this New York Times article students at nearly a dozen other schools run by the Hasidic community recorded similarly dismal outcomes that year, but where other schools might be struggling because of underfunding or mismanagement. These schools are different. They are failing by design. Leaders of New York's Hasidic community built schools, private schools to educate children in Jewish law, prayer and tradition, and to wall them off from the secular world. So offering little English and math, virtually no science or history, they drill students relentlessly, sometimes brutally, during hours of religious lessons conducted in Yiddish. So this is another good point. These Hasidic schools are failing testing in reading and math by design, right? They don't want their kids to be particularly skilled in math or in English, because that would, you know, open up the secular world to them. And so they want to keep their kids within the community. And so not doing well in English and math is a design of the Hasidic system to keep kids Hasidic. Do you think that's fair? Well, I might agree. But I mean, just theoretically, like the New York Times is just seething racism and saying, OK, like the New York Times is basically saying, we know the blacks and Latinos do that poorly on the test because they're blacks and Latinos. If the Jews are doing that poor on those tests, and like we know we spend a ton of money, like New York City, they spend, I think they said close to $25,000 per child in public school. So I mean, you don't see the underlying race. I mean, you might agree with the underlining racism of the New York Times. They're saying blacks and Latinos get those low test scores because they're blacks and Latinos. Hasidic Jews get those low test scores because they're being, you know, unfairly treated by their own community? No, I don't think. That's what the Times is saying? No, I don't think race has anything to do with it. They're pointing out that the Hasidic school system is designed to create students who are not competent in English and math. The black, the overwhelmingly black and Latino schools are not designed to create students who don't do well in math and English. This is part of the Hasidic design, which makes it unusual compared to other failing schools that this is built into the system. And I asked you, is that fair? And you said, yeah, that is fair. That is part of the Hasidic group strategy capable of successfully negotiating the outside world of their own, you know, mixing and living with the Gentiles. Well, yeah, so saying that the Hasidic purposely don't want to teach their kids these required subjects, as opposed to the public schools, where that's the main purpose of the public schools is to teach them these subjects. And and I think overall, on average, certainly with the Hasidic girls school, the Hasidic girls schools performed on par with New York City public schools of the same income group. So you're saying that in even some of the boys schools, depending on in performed on par. So there's two questions. One is forcing the education. So there was the legalities of how the private schools got around the regulation beforehand. They didn't like the regulation. I think they call it like, you're basically some form of equivalence. It was a substantive equivalence that you don't have to do the state backed curriculum, as long as the kids have the equivalent outcome on basic skills, which would include English and arithmetic. So if there's a level to say, like, I don't want to have to teach my kid English and arithmetic, you're like, you know, Ilan Omar or something like that. I'm just as American as you, even if I don't speak English. And you're saying that they couldn't really get away with that. That wasn't the law. So they had to show that they had an equivalence. And so the equivalence mean that they could educate their kids however they want, as long as they had the basic equivalence results on the test scores. And then it's going to come into you're really the racism where it's saying there's high expectations for Jews. So it's not necessarily like the Jews are wasting so much taxpayer money, or the Jews are so much more a drag on the welfare state or uneducated that this is mostly a push from other Jews who want to prevent Hasidic Jews from living as they see fit in raising their kids as they see fit in interfering in saying like, no, this is America. And we will stop you from raising your kids as you see fit because there's minimal standards. And, you know, so the question is going to be largely the comparison to their neighbors and their neighbors are largely black and Hispanic. And then so you're going to come in there. Well, the blacks and Hispanics are doing better. And so you can have these interesting racial questions in that, you know, it can't be that the Jews aren't doing as good because we all know that Jews are smart and have a high IQ is it can't be that the blacks and Hispanics are smarter than them. So it has to be that there's some sort of educational problem that requires the state to step in and you'll start running their schools for them. Yeah, one interesting element to this story is that it's not non Jews who are driving this crackdown on Hasidic schools. It is ex Hasidim who feel like they were robbed of the chance for a normal life. So it's not non Jews. It's not counter semi who are driving this. It's all those kids who were raised Hasidic and then chose to leave that world and realize how ill equipped they were to make it in America. So how would you feel if you'd been raised in one of these Hasidic schools without the ability to be competent in math and English and what kind of impact would that have had on your life? I would say that's inaccurate because like relatively it's the secular or modern Orthodox Jewish community and most of these people are put on the payroll. So these are Hasidic kids that are you're dropped out of the community and are given charity jobs, low middle class incomes to be community activist and try to force change upon the larger community, but they're paid to do it. And most of the money that they get to do it comes from the secular and modern Orthodox community that is purposely trying to recruit these kids. And it's questionable how many there are. You're saying there's over 60,000 kids in the Hasidic school system. And there's only a few hundred people in these organizations. And the reality is, is that any one of these Hasidic people could take their kid out of Hasidic school and send him to public school. If the public schools are that substantially better, they pay like they have to, you know, saying every single one of those kids there is there because their parents wants them there. And you know, it's funny because like, you know, God forbid I used to have problems with that guy Nick master's father, because he was kind of an extremist. And so like it was his father that wanted to educate his son that way. The Hasidic community in schools did not wrong him. The Hasidic communities in schools educated him the way that his father wanted him to be educated and had his father wanted to send him to public school, he could have had any of these people wanted to send him to saying we want to send him to Hasidic schools. But we want the Hasidic schools to teach these secular subjects. And it seems overwhelmingly that that's not the case, that there's some activists and like I said, the majority of these activists are being paid by Jewish organizations, Modern Orthodox Secular Federation. And most of the Hasidic in Brooklyn, that's how they want to educate their kids. Okay, so you're saying there is no real movement of people who are raised in these Hasidic schools to reform them, that this is astroturfing, that this is an artificial development that's funded by Modern Orthodox Jews. But there's no evidence for that. You're just making something up. Very few of these kids become Modern Orthodox. Very few of these kids are subsidized into a Modern Orthodox or a middle class way of life. I mean, you just you just made something up. You didn't have any evidence that these kids are either Modern Orthodox or B that the majority of them are being subsidized by anti-Heredi activists. Well, not necessarily. I mean, the majority is from secular Jewish organizations, just a handful generally, the Modern Orthodox are more defensive of the Yeshivas. But obviously, you could look at who funds these organizations like Footsteps and Yafid, and they're funded by the Federation like Steinhardt who wrote the op-ed and and secularists and say like, no, I mean, the evidence is that the people that they quote in these articles are basically the same handful of people for decades now. And they're all in the payroll. And you could look at that you have no evidence that all these kids are on the payroll. That's just something that you're making up. No, I'm saying you could go their page, go to Yafid's page. And you can see every single member of that organization is on the payroll. So how hundreds of people, their lifestyles are being underwritten by, you know, anti-Heredi forces? No, I mean, there is some element. But I mean, there's a few things is that you could, there's a lot of various Jewish schools. There's a lot of public schools. Any given parent could take their, no, you don't, you don't get, you don't forcefully get put into a private school. Wait, the kids are not forced to go to a private school. Their parents give them a choice between going to a aesthetic school and going to a public school? What? I mean, the parents usually don't give their kid a choice. The kids don't have any choice by saying the parents have choice between multiple Jewish schools that have a different level. So there's plenty of Jewish schools in English. So if a Hasidic person sends their kid to a Yiddish speaking school, that is almost certainly because the parents want their kid going to a Yiddish speaking school. If their parents wanted them to go to a school that speaks English and teaches more secular subjects, those schools exist, they could send them to them if they wanted to send them. Oh, of course, of course. But they would no longer be members of the Hasidic community. So the point doesn't hold up. If Hasidim chose to send their kids to non Hasidic schools, they would be shunned by their community. They would no longer effectively be Hasidic. So if you're going to be a Hasidic Jew, your only choice is to send your kids to a Hasidic school. What's a voluntary community? It's America. You don't I mean that you could pick up and move or you could be in the community. You could go to the plenty of people doing the numbers were overwhelming. They had the public comment by the Board of Regents and they received like 350,000 comments. And there was only, I think the numbers exist. There was only a few hundred comments from Hasidic student Hasidic parents that wanted their education to change. Oh, obviously Hasidic parents aren't going to say anything different because they would be shunned by the community. I mean, by definition, Hasidic parent is someone who sends his kid to Hasidic schools and is not going to want to rock the boat. I mean, that's just definitional. But what about the enormous damage that this does to the children who are being raised in the system? Do you have any empathy or sympathy for the kids who are being raised in America without the ability to be competent in English or math, let alone science and history? Yeah, I mean, we've spoken about this at length and as a Bultruva or half Jew who was trying to become more Hasidic, most of my friends were people from Hasidic backgrounds trying to become less Hasidic. But I have more sympathy for Hasidic trying to protect their way of life and raise their kids as they see fit. And I think like relatively, I don't think it's that hard to leave the community. I know countless people that left the community that there's a regular flow of people leaving the community. You almost all modern Orthodox Jews, you know, even conservative Jews, you know, my own my own ancestors come from Orthodox Jews that became less religious that secularized and, you know, so so to say, like, I don't want my kids to speak English. I want them to speak Yiddish is the first language. And I don't want them to know all these secular things that I think that generally is overwhelmingly how these parents feel they like their Yiddish Hasidic culture. They're not interested in American culture. And they don't want it forced upon them. And in terms of like, OK, they're being robbed of economic opportunity or of a life, a better life that they could have had is that you're really going to come in with the government and force that upon their kids. And I think that this article The New York Times and these organizations are largely fraudulent. And I've seen that because they recruit like people who go off Derek, these organizations recruit them and then we'll send them back to be activists against their own community. I think that's generally, you know, America or a pretty common thing. And so I'm all for government intervention here because these Hasidic schools are effectively organized criminal enterprises because they're raising people who will not be able to earn an honest living. You graduate from one of these schools. What percentage of the kids who graduate from these schools do you think can earn an honest living and do earn an honest living? I'd say maybe 25 percent at most. So that means 75 percent are effectively thieves. I'm a God forbid. I'm saying like, I mean, that's I mean, it's kind of like your classic anti-Semitism, but it's the way that your large portion of the Jewish community feels. But I say, no, I say the majority of them could earn an honest living. And, you know, I used to joke that you're like 770 where Crown Heights is, is no organization has produced more life insurance agents than 770. And because the little Babaj Rebbe himself endorsed the profession of life insurance and said that it was an honorable profession for the Babaj Rebbe to be a life insurance agent. And, you know, I knew countless, I don't know how many life insurance agents, you know, there in LA, but even here in Michigan, I know tens of orthodox Jewish life insurance agents in New York. When I day trade, I knew hundreds like like New York life. There's whole like had a whole floor of orthodox Jews in the same building where I day trade. But they weren't orthodox Jews from an aesthetic background. Kids who can't pass a basic math or reading test are not going to become life insurance agents. So what you're just talking about is irrelevant to the graduates of these aesthetic schools. I mean, I trade, I mean, I didn't go through with it. But I went to the Eglutus Ysrael. Eglutus Ysrael is not aesthetic. I'm talking about aesthetic schools. You then Eglutus Ysrael represents is the blanket organization that represents all the Yashivas and they have training courses for life insurance life insurance you have to take. I think it's only like 10 hours of courses and pass a test. And I would say your average Yashiva graduate. Yes, can become a life insurance agent. They might have to learn some math. And as someone who lived in Brooklyn, I taught basic math to hundreds of facetum. Like I did basic math all the time, like on a daily basis, smart, even, you know, business people would ask me to do basic math for them. And a lot of them was embarrassing that they didn't know this stuff. And personally, like, I would want my kids to know math. But I would disagree. I think your average, because it a kid, kid, you know, with the education they had could pull themselves together and pass the life insurance test and become and be an honest life insurance agent. You honestly think that that your average because that a kid can't become an honest life insurance agent? First of all, I want to correct myself. Much of our good Israel is Hasidic. And if if a kid can't pass a basic English or math test, as as this article describes now, I don't believe that they can become insurance agents. But maybe months of adult education. By saying like, yeah, with a few months of adult education. And like, I was in Bubba. And I mean, so you say all Bubba verse or thieves God forbid, like, no, and we you're like, I said my joke that Joseph Cohn, who you know, was calling me out for even even kind of liked and agreed is they like, I went to a special school where they teach you how to be a landlord. It's called Yeshiva. And the fact is in Bubba, lots of those people go into real estate, accessory schools, being a contractor, you could get a contractor's license. Certain ones you don't actually have to take a test. There's Hasidic things like appraisers where you do actually have to take a test in schooling. But there's businesses of all Hasidim in Yiddish of appraisers and you could apprentice under a Yiddish speaking appraiser and you might even be able to have language like on time test because you speak English as a second language, real estate agents. There's a whole bunch of professions, stock brokers, mortgage brokers. I mentioned to you on the stream of the name slipping me, the man who you know, who opened up a meridian brokerage Orthodox Jew, who got forbid another Orthodox Jew, took out a hitman to have him killed, but he blocked the bullet and took a bullet to his arm and healed. And he was, you know, Donald Trump's mortgage broker. And he had almost all Orthodox Jews working for him. And they were all sorts like they were modern Orthodox Polychuva, but he had a lot of Hasidim and a lot of the Hasidim just had a basic Hasidic education. And they were able to pull themselves together enough to become a mortgage broker. And you know, then there's certain Jewish professions like diamond dealers, but just thinking like the middlemen of of stuff like I did finishing jobs and construction of you like tile, wallpaper, carpeting, Orthodox Jews dominate. Why do you keep conflating Orthodox Jews? We're talking here about when I'm at most Orthodox Jews are not Hasidic. Cosidic Jews dominate New York City, finishing contractor jobs, specifically because you don't need much of an education and you don't even need to take that much of a test to be an insured contractor that does tile, carpet, wall paneling. And, and, and, you know, the most thing, like I said, I went to a special school where they train you how to be a landlord. It's called Yeshiva and Hasidic Jews dominate New York real estate. And to some extent, you don't need a great secular education to buy a property and be a landlord. First of all, many of these are sedum that you're talking about are Lubavitch's who do get much more of a general education than other forms of Hasidic. And the Lubavitch is a race we have to interact with non-Jews. So very different from the other branches. I went to Bubav and I remember in Bubav, they confiscated my books. I was in Bubav and I had library books, not like happy courses, like books on psychology and philosophy, and they confiscated it. And I had a friend who begged me to take him to the library and take out books for him. And one day his father followed him. He confronted me and his son outside of the library and he said, you never come here again. And this was in Bubav and that's how they felt. And, you know, they didn't allow, you know, like, you know, just library books, even something on basic psychology or philosophy or science in their school. But Bubav is basically a real estate training school. You're saying like most of the community, all sorts of business, import, export. I went with sophomore people to like auctions, repossession also. I remember, you know, got it for big, you know, first time I went to a repossession auction with the Satmar custom, he's like, I buy everything. And, you know, like close outs, stuff that had been repossessed. And he was like, I buy everything. And he did, he bought a lot in just the, you know, buying and selling. And so there's different fields. So like Bubav, I mean, to buy it, I said like life insurance, but maybe endorse life insurance. There's life insurance agents all over the place. But the Rebbe actually endorsed the profession of life insurance. Real estate, landlordship, all Hasidim are into landlordship in real estate. But construction jobs, Satmar, Bubav, with very little English education dominate these trades in New York. So I'm not sure usually saying you might say, okay, the dishonest, are they, you're saying their Judaism makes them dishonest, their lack of education. Some of them might be dishonest. But you're just saying from experience, you could be an average cathetic guy with very little secular education, minimal English skills, minimal math skills, get a balltrooper like me to help you out and become a major contractor. I don't know if you're muted. Here we go. So let me read more from the New York Times article. So the result is that generations of children have been systematically denied a basic education, trapping many of them in a cycle of joblessness and dependency. So I would estimate the percentage of the graduates of these aesthetic schools who can't pass a basic math or reading test that the percentage of them trapped in a cycle of dependency would probably be something around 50%. But you would think it'd be much lower than that. No, I mean, I think if you make the dividing line, Yiddish, if they speak English as a second language, because the like the reality is most Orthodox Jews don't speak Yiddish. If they like in the Ushivan, Detroit, almost no one speaks Yiddish in their home in the upper level classes. The classes are in Yiddish, but the school's not in Yiddish. Besides, like when you get into school, you might learn Yiddish. In Brooklyn, most aesthetic schools are completely in Yiddish. The people speak English as a second language, and they have no to little formal training in English. So I would make the dividing line on English. If the school is a Jewish school, but it's in English, they're probably OK. They probably do better than the public schools. Like a typical Orthodox, you know, like Black Hat Orthodox schools where the average person shaves and speaks English as their first language. Their kids probably do better on the tests than the public schools. Slipping away from the topic of discussion, the topic of discussion is not Orthodox education. It's Hasidic education. There aren't Hasidic schools in New York teaching in English. They teach in Yiddish, with the possible exception of some Lubavitch schools. And so the question I asked you is the New York Times is noting that children who go through these Hasidic schools where education is in Yiddish, they get trapped in a cycle of joblessness and dependency. And I asserted to you that it would make sense to me that up to 50% of the boys who go to these Hasidic schools where instruction is in Yiddish, do get trapped into cycles of joblessness and dependency. And so my question to you, which you didn't answer, was do you think 50% is an accurate figure? Do you think it's substantially lower than that? Yeah, I think it's lower. I was trying to make the point that the main thing is English is a second language in wanting to... Well, the topic is Hasidic schools where English is not taught. It's the instructions in Yiddish. Yeah, but I would say the majority of Hasidic men eventually get a job like 75%. And it's a tough road out there not having education, even having an education, it's a tough road out there. New York has a big welfare state, Section 8, Medicare, food stamps and various things. I told you like my first job in Burl Park was getting food stamps for people. But now I say eventually the majority, probably 75%, even more of Hasidic men eventually work. There are some people that live off a charity their whole life. But no, I mean the Hasidic community is not designed for people to live off a charity their whole life. And most places like Satmar, you bubble of bells encourage people to get jobs. And usually there's big companies. So they might have lowly entrance jobs. But to make $8, $10 an hour, there's abundance of Hasidic owned businesses that hire Hasidic Jews that they could start on the bottom. And the majority of them do. Okay, so back to this New York Times article, it says that Hasidic neighborhoods have some of the highest poverty rates in New York City, which would seem to contradict what you're just saying. So do you think the New York Times is wrong? When it says that many of these Hasidic neighborhoods have the highest poverty rates in New York City? Well, they probably do. And saying like, because it's hard to get ahead, you know, like as someone who doesn't know the dominant culture who doesn't want to assimilate to the dominant culture, and because they have such large families. But you know, if you're comparing them to you're really their neighbors who are majority black and Hispanic, you're going to say that how much of a difference is there in, you know, saying, you know, why do the food stamps? You're saying like that you're the area of relatively how many Jews are on government aid and government programs and the cost of the educational system versus blacks and Hispanics. And you're relatively like financially that, you know, although maybe percentage wise, there's certain Hasidic communities where there's a higher poverty rate or higher rate of people on certain government programs, but certainly the government spends more money on blacks and Hispanics. Okay, I think I'm going to move on for today. Any final words, Dover? Yes, I had issue. It's probably going to go on. And there's a lot of angles on it because I said that this law that passed was not unique to just Hasidim. The New York Times focused on Hasidim and the Hasidim were one of the biggest lobbying arms trying to stop the law from being passed. And that's what I say to some extent, the New York Times article serves as a defense to pass the law without being accused of anti Semitism or saying we're not passing these laws because we want to end the Hasidic way of life. And they have a lot of Jews who support them. But in the actual political implication, like we were talking like Republicans, most Hasidim are Democrats, like their neighborhoods are Democrats, and it's related to the welfare state. And a lot of the arguments that the New York Times are making have overtones of racism to blacks that are assuming that the Jews, because either they're Jews or because they're white, have more potential than the blacks and like had the Hasidim not been in their own system that they certainly would have done much better than their black neighbors. And so it gets lumped together with well, okay, you want to end welfare and government programs and handouts and letting these people live their own life as they see fit and define what it means to be American, you know, because they're Hasidim, but are you going to say that about blacks in Hispanics? And so then you get the political coalition, like Eric Adams, who you're one mayorship with a coalition of votes, including the blacks. And so that's why I said that Eric Adams will likely save the Jews. But by saving the Jews, he will save the same welfare program and lack standards for blacks and even on criminal reform. So it's just the nature of the big city, you know, democratic politics. And then also, if you want to talk about it more, the nature of assimilation, where he's saying like, well, the Hasidim, they're Jews, they're white, they could assimilate into whiteness, as opposed to their black and Hispanic neighbors that couldn't assimilate into whiteness. And the some level of the Hasidic community, they know that. And they say, well, if our kids speak English, they're not going to want to be Jews anymore. And I, you know, you even had pictures today that, you know, assume, you know, God forbid saying that they would rather die than, you know, give up their way of life. But that's kind of what they're saying is that they're considered them. They want to remain being considered them. And they would rather be poor or God forbid even to be martyred than give up their lifestyle. So it creates a whole bunch of interesting intersections, you know, like Lee Zeldin, you know, Republicans coming in to defend the Hasidim that live in white areas from different angles. But ultimately, it's going to be the blacks that will protect the Hasidim historically in these issues because when it comes down to the defense of the welfare state and money in these government programs that you know, so it's just interesting, you know, it's one of my favorite issues. So blessings, thanks for having me on to talk about it. Okay, thanks, David. Great to talk to you. Okay, let me go back to this New York Times article. So yeah, I think this is a shot. I think this is a scandal. It says in the Gamora, the Talmud that if you don't raise your son with a skill, you're raising a thief. And so these Hasidic schools that don't teach even basic levels of math and English are raising thieves. And so because these these school systems are effectively raising thieves, I starting to think of them as essentially organized criminal enterprises. And yeah, I do want government intervention, that thousands of Hasidic children are denied a basic education. They're trapped in a pathetic and downward cycle of joblessness and dependency. And they're creating Hasidic neighborhoods with about the highest poverty rates in New York City, because these schools create students who are unprepared to navigate the world. And so who pays for this? Non Jews pay for this and Jews who work hard and pay taxes. So tax payers are subsidizing this anti social dysfunctional education system of the Hasidic. And so the Hasidic boys schools have collected more than one billion dollars in the last four years from from the government. And New York City and New York State officials have avoided taking action because of the disciplined nature of Hasidic voting. And so Moishi Klein here says when he graduated from Hasidic schools, he realized he'd not been taught basic grammar, he'd not been taught the skills needed to find a decent job. He was 20 years old. He didn't know any higher order math. He never learned any science. So this New York Times article interviewed more than 275 people and provides a rare inside look at these schools that are keeping 50,000 boys from learning, you know, basic English math science history schools, right? So these boys are not simply falling behind. They are suffering from levels of secular educational deprivation, not seen anywhere else in New York City. So only nine schools in the state had less than 1% of their students testing at grade level in 2019. All of them were Hasidic boys, right? There's no other level of secular educational deprivation in New York that is comparable to what these Hasidic schools are doing 80 percent of Hasidic goals who take these standardized tests fail, right? That is a higher percentage of failure than among blacks and Latinos. So the boys schools cram secular, stubby studies in only after four day of religious lessons, usually for only up to perhaps 90 minutes a day and only for children between the age of eight and 12. These schools tend to discourage secular study at home. No English books whatsoever. One school's rulebook warns that the English teachers tend not to be able to even speak English fluently. Many of them earn as little as $15 an hour. And many of these kids get smacked around, kicked, you know, beaten. So some schools boys have called 911 to report being beaten. Hasidic leaders have opened more than 50 new boys schools in the past decade, and they are very effective at tapping into government subsidies. So people who work are subsidizing this criminal and dysfunctional educational system. So the consequences of attending these schools tend to ripple out across time. Students grow up and can't support their own families. Many become addicted to drugs or alcohol. Those who remain in the system feel they have little choice but to send their children to the schools because you're not going to be able to be a Hasidic Jew and send your kids to any other type of school. So there are about 200,000 Hasidic Jews in New York. They make up about 10% of New York's Jewish population. So for many Hasidim, these schools are succeeding, right, by placing religion at the center of daily life. And sector education is viewed as distracting and leading to a simulation to Gentile norms. Now many Hasidic parents know the limits of these schools, but they enroll their children there nonetheless, because they want to maintain their status in the community. So the way these kids are crep order, the best analogy for me is that what used to happen to Chinese girls who would be raised with bound feet to make their feet really small, right? So the Hasidic boys in particular, essentially, you know, raised with, you know, bound functioning skills, right? They are essentially crippled with respect to earning an honest living. So they're essentially raised to be thieves at welfare parasites. So have a look at the chat. Babs broke fees, real estate tycoon, but Babs was never acidic. Sounds like some people want to criminalize their acidic community because they want to continue their acidic lifestyle. No, it's if the community is acting dishonestly by taking the disproportionate amounts of welfare, creating cultures of dependency and dysfunction. Woman needs to know how to make good holla. What else does she need to know? Says Glyb Badly. Oh, God forbid, Luke wants to tell us that they don't understand Judaism. Yeah, I will tell them that they are creating a culture of thieves. And they they will lean on certain traditions in the in Jewish history and I will lean on other traditions. So Jewish history, the Jewish tradition is very broad. There are many different strains of thought. So New York politicians tend to take a hands off approach and allow these acidic schools that are essentially turning out moral cripples because that they need their and need their votes. But we have a growing number of kids who who are raised in these schools who are now outraged and leading the movement to enforce government regulations for minimum levels of education in English and math. Now, Lubavitch, acidic schools are quite different. All right. So they encourage their followers to speak English. They are encouraged to develop skills for interacting with the wider world. So one man who graduated from these schools, Hillary Rubin, is quoted, they could have education and still have their religion, but they don't and the people are suffering. He said he tried to go to a community college. He could not keep up. He's now in debt. He's trying to stay afloat and it's really inhumane. So when in 2019, half of all New York students passed the test, 99 percent of the Hasidic boys who took the exams failed. And many of the schools did not even administer the tests. And so they can't even many of these kids can't even, you know, write a proper English sentence. They didn't know how to spell. They didn't know how to add or divide or multiply. And also many of them just have the hell beaten out of them by teachers. And the trend is secular education in many Hasidic schools is getting worse. So many Hasidic boys, she was up at zero non religious classes at all. Others make attending the classes optional. Hi, I'm Fisherman attended one of these schools. He said when he asked English teachers the meaning of words, they often said they did not know them. Most of my teachers barely knew the subjects, the secular subjects they were supposed to teach because they had the same education offered it to us. He tried to learn English by secretly listening to the radio. After leaving Yeshivi enrolled in public school, he was embarrassed by how little he knew. I was age 15. He says I could barely speak English. I don't wonder what Tucker Carlson has to say. Good evening and welcome to Tucker Carlson's Happy Monday. Yesterday marked the 21st anniversary of 9-11. That was, as you know, the single deadliest terror attack in all recorded history. If you're over 30, you did not need to be reminded. You remember it vividly 9-11 changed America completely and changed it forever. Nothing has been the same here since, especially the relationship between Americans and their government. A decade ago, the New York Times admitted this. The Times marked the anniversary of 9-11 by publishing a piece on the rise of domestic surveillance abuses, which exploded after the 9-11 attacks. The Patriot Act, according to the New York Times, quote, quickly became a sort of shorthand for government abuse and overreaching, which, quote, inflicted collateral damage on political dissent, religious liberty, and the freedom of association, end quote. That is still true, in fact, truer than it's ever been, and it is still a tragedy. What's fascinating is that the New York Times has stopped acknowledging it. In fact, remarkably, there was not a single mention of the 9-11 anniversary on the front page of yesterday's paper, the paper that purports to represent New York, the epicenter of the 9-11 attacks. Now, why would the New York Times ignore 9-11? Well, good question, because the New York Times and the tiny leadership class it panders to and in fact represents. Now, wholeheartedly endorses the nationwide crackdown on civil liberties that 9-11 made possible. And why wouldn't they endorse it? They're benefiting from it. It's how they keep power. So for them, in retrospect, 9-11 was less a tragedy than it was an opportunity. And if you don't believe that, watch how Joe Biden, the president of the United States, commemorated that anniversary yesterday. It's not enough to gather and remember each September 11 those we lost more than two decades ago. Because on this day, it is not about the past, it's about the future. We have an obligation, a duty, a responsibility to defend, preserve and protect our democracy. It's not about the past, it's about the future. This was in a speech that was spoke to mark the anniversary of the deaths of thousands of Americans at the hands of foreign adversaries. So when Joe Biden speaks about the future, you should listen. The future of what? Don't focus on the dead, focus on what I want to do. OK. But what is it that Joe Biden wants to do? Fight Islamic terrorism? No. Protect democracy. But what exactly is this democracy that Joe Biden speaks of? Why won't he define it ever? And how exactly is that democracy imperiled? These are pivotal questions. And that's a great point by Tucker. You'll notice whatever you hear, lamentations in the news media by our leads about how democracy is imperiled. They never bother to define democracy. So what they usually mean is our democratic institutions, particularly the ones that we control are getting pushed back. But institutions are not the same as democracy. So looking at the chat, Duvod says there will be a coalition New York City between Blacks Jews and Hispanics. The pressure on his city schools is not coming from Blacks and Hispanics, but mostly from secular Jews and whites from other neighborhoods. Well, the pressure is entirely driven by former Hasidic kids. It's not driven by non-Orthodox Jews who are raised secular. It's from kids who went through the meat grinder of these schools. Duvod says the key is the whites all left New York City. They didn't all leave New York City. The number of whites in New York City today are about the same as 50 years ago or 30 years ago or 100 years ago. It's just there's been an influx of non-whites. But there are there are millions of white people still left in New York City. Duvod says if you want the government to enforce these rules for basic education in private schools, you'll have Black and Hispanic government officials overseeing Hasidic schools. Yes, the pressure on Hasidic schools is not coming from Blacks and Hispanics, mostly secular Jews, whites from other neighborhoods. There will be a coalition within New York City between Blacks Jews and Hispanics. So whites from outside of New York looks like they're trying to force minorities in New York City to be more white. So the Hasidic benefit from minority status. And this is another example of why it's trying to take away government benefits from minorities in New York City. So the New York Times, the Jewish advocates try to separate the issue to just Hasidic yeshivas. But Hasidic yeshivas deal with Black and Hispanic community leaders for the win-win fighting whitey. So Luke and the New York Times represent whitey trying to come in and tell minorities the reason they are poor is their way of life, not racism. This is a win-win issue in New York City for Hasidic. Makes Hasidic look good to non-whites who don't want government interfering in the way they want to raise their kids. Just like Luke and the New York Times want to force kids to learn critical race theory. Where do I want to force kids to learn critical race theory? So Judas keeps talking about how his rabbi is very religious and is a licensed therapist and has a master's degree. I would suspect that your rabbi does not come from a non-Lubavitch Hasidic education, particularly in an insular place like New York City. John Wolf says, should the NYPD start to stop and frisk the young Hasidic man? No, they have very low rates of violent crime. So you only want to stop and frisk those who are at very high odds of committing violent crime. How do failing Hasidic schools impact African Americans? Well, they compete and often will outcompete African Americans for welfare dollars. And also African Americans and Hasidic often share the same neighborhoods. So with dollars and with political influence often comes policing. And so the more power and influence you have, the more you can shape a public policy and can shape policing. Questions and for answers, we're going to turn to the source. That would be Chuck Todd of NBC News, when practices a slightly more articulate version of Biden publicist Kareen Jean-Pierre. If you want to know what the Biden administration is really thinking, listen to the guy with the comb over in the anchor chair at NBC. Here is his exchange with Kamala Harris, the sitting vice president yesterday. Not quite 20 years after 9 11, the Capitol came under attack from domestic terrorists. I began by asking the vice president about how over two decades our focus has had to shift from foreign terror to the threat from within. I think it is very. Okay, that is an abominable comparison. Okay, 9 11 killed over 2000 people. Right. Only one person was murdered or deliberately killed on January 6th. And that was Ashley Barber. So that's that's an odious, odious comparison that just in terms of lives, devastated, crippled, absolutely no comparison between 9 11 and January 6th. And just in general, to compare 9 11 with January 6 is absolutely absurd. Were there elements of terror in what happened on January 6th? Yes. Were innocent people terrorized on January 6th? Yes. But it was nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing in the same ballpark of sending planes into buildings. Right. Absolutely no comparison between the level of terror on 9 11 and the level of terror created on January 6th. What a horrible comparison. Dangerous. And I think it is very harmful and it makes us weaker. So you look at everything from the fact there are 11 people right now running for Secretary of State, the keepers of the integrity of the voting system of their state, who are election deniers. You've got and what's that sending? Well, as Cabla Harris had extensive plastic surgery, I mean, something's weird above her upper lip. What message does that send to the world? Well, you couple that with people who hold some of the highest elected offices in our country, who, who refuse to condemn an insurrection on January 6th. So you're slack jawed watching something like this. Did I just see that? And I'm quoting and the idea that the January 6th was an insurrection. It was a riot got out of control. There was no concrete plan or even capability of seizing power. So it had nothing to do with an insurrection. I began by asking the Vice President about however, two decades, our focus has had to shift from foreign terror to the threat within the threat within. What does that mean? What the hell are you talking about? You freaking lunatic. There is no group of Americans anywhere in the United States, half as dangerous as the 9 11 hijackers to suggest otherwise is literally insane. Drawing a parallel between the election justice protest of January 6th and the fall of the Twin Towers. True lunacy. But Kamala Harris didn't even pause, almost like the whole question was a setup. She just nodded. This unspecified internal threat she confirmed is in fact just like Al Qaeda. Well, very dangerous and very harmful. You may be wondering at this point, what is this threat? Since we just declared a new war on terror, but against whom? Who is this threat? Well, of course it's you and anyone else in the way of the Biden administration and especially as the vice president just said and you saw it, anyone who questions the legitimacy of the last election. But wait a second. You ask, didn't Kamala Harris herself call the 2016 presidential election illegitimate? Your memory is not failing. Yes, she did. And so did every leader of the Democratic Party and they will say the same to this day. And yet she is telling us the sitting vice president that anyone who questions the 2020 election should be in jail. Watch. What is a semi fascist? Listen, I think that when we let's not get caught up in politicizing the fact that most people in America now that it is not helpful to our country when we have people who are denying elections or trying to obstruct the outcome of an election where the largest number of people in our country voted for the president of the United States. And when we look at where we are, I think that we have to admit that there are attacks from within to your first question and we need to take it seriously. So again, that's the sitting vice president, who they tell us over and over and you just heard her say it, receive more votes than any vice president in history. And if you don't believe that and there are reasons not to believe that, if you don't believe that, you're like Muhammad Ata. Your beliefs are acts of terror. You're comparable to a mass murderer and you need to be pursued by law enforcement. They're saying that. She just said the greatest threat to our country is that Republicans might be elected to statewide office in 11 states. That's comparable to 9-11. Is no one noticing this? The Biden administration's message, and of course, as it always is, completely consistent across the board. On 9-11, on the anniversary of 9-11, was that any American who disapproves of Joe Biden's performance is a terrorist? Here's the DHS secretary, Myorkas. The threat landscape has evolved considerably over the last 20 years. We are seeing an emerging threat, of course, over the last several years of the domestic violent extremists. The individual here in the United States radicalized the violence by a foreign terrorist ideology, but also an ideology of hate, anti- government sentiment, false narratives propagated on online platforms, even personal grievances. Is no one paying attention to this? Does no one see this happening? That's the DHS secretary saying that opinions he doesn't agree with expressed online, which most of us thought were constitutionally protected. In fact, we thought there was the whole reason we lived here. That's why this is a different nation from, say, Iran. But the fact that people have different political opinions, including about the last election, Stacey Abrams has spent the last five years saying she's the rightful governor of Georgia. We think she's a lunatic, we also believe that view is constitutionally protected. There's the DHS secretary saying those people are al-Qaeda. This is terrifying, and it's not just words, they're acting and they're acting at scale. It was just a few weeks ago on Thursday, September 1st, two months before the midterm elections, not an incidental fact, that Joe Biden declared his political opponents enemies of the state. You remember it. Here's a clip. Too much of what's happening in our country today is not normal. Donald Trump and the Maga Republicans represented extremism that threatens the very foundations of our Republic. We're all called by duty and conscious to confront extremists who put their own pursuit of power above all else. Democrats, independents, mainstream Republicans, we must be stronger, more determined, more committed to saving American democracy than Maga Republicans are to destroy an American democracy. So the upside of having a senile president is that no one takes him very seriously. And so it's possible for the rest of us to see something like that, a declaration of war and an entire political party in a two-party system which would leave this, if we were to follow his urging, a one-party state. It's very easy to dismiss that as the ramblings of a man who has no idea what he's saying, and a lot of people did. And yet, the very next day, the morning after Joe Biden delivered that speech, at 8 30 a.m., a woman called Lisa Gallagher was sick and bedded at her home in suburban New Jersey. Her daughter came upstairs and told her that the FBI was waiting outside. Now, Lisa Gallagher is not a criminal, never has been. She is an active Trump supporter, particularly on Facebook. She had a Trump lawn on her flag. She's a patriotic American. She describes herself as a rule follower. She's never once been in trouble with the law at any level, and she had nothing whatsoever to do with January 6th. And yet outside her door were three FBI agents with guns. Quote, we got an anonymous tip. You were at the Capitol on January 6th. That's what they said. Gallagher was terrified. Quote, I thought they were going to take me out of here in handcuffs, she told the show this morning. Ultimately, her husband came home and the two of them showed the FBI agents her daily calendars from January of 2021 and finally convinced the agents that she was not at the Capitol that day. Imagine armed FBI agents showing up at your house because you supported Trump on Facebook and demanding records of your whereabouts on a date nearly two years ago. And of course the FBI already knew that Lisa Gallagher was not there because they have sophisticated facial recognition software. So they were never planning to arrest her. The point, and this is a theme in every authoritarian regime, the point was to use government agents to intimidate enemies of the regime on the basis of an anonymous tip. Quote, I have never been so frightened in my life, Lisa Gallagher said. The rest of us should feel the same way. Snitches, anonymous snitches, the secret police showing up at your door when you're in bed. This is Soviet and there's no other word for it. But it's not just Lisa Gallagher. The same thing is happening to dozens, maybe scores of other supporters of the former president. Amy Kremer, for example, is a former Tea Party member and a candidate for the House representative. OK, so this makes a pretty good case for Ring. Didn't they get the names of the FBI agents, right? Their names and their photos should be publicized, right? So people should have Ring. The software and hardware that enables you to keep live streaming of anything going on outside your door. Anyone who comes to your door, you get a live stream recording of that. So it's a shame she doesn't have that to play. So people responsible for harassing someone just as Tucker described. If that's a fair and accurate representation, they should be named and shamed. And so maybe we need, just like if you ever give an interview to a journalist, you should tape record it so that you have a record in case they want to distort it, in case they want to, you know, take a little segment here that is completely out of character with what else you're saying. So. In a more hostile world, we have to take more and more precautions and the automatic deference that we give to law enforcement, we may need to rethink. We should not cease to be polite. You should be polite to anyone who has the capacity to hurt you, right? Even evil people, right? You should be very polite to evil people who have the capacity to hurt you. You should be very polite to anyone carrying weapons. You should be very polite to anyone who can ruin your life. But we also have to take steps to protect ourselves and I think getting, getting a ring set up via Amazon so that we can record and have live streams of anyone who comes to our door. Anyone who's hanging around and means us harm, right? We should have recordings of that. We should have these agents names, faces that we should publicize, name and shame them. She also obtained special permits for the National Park Service, which authorized Donald Trump's rally on January 6th, 2021. To be perfectly clear, Amy Kramer never went to the Capitol on that day. She never encouraged anyone else to go either. But for the crime of organizing a lawful political event, an election justice rally. So Bell says no Luke Ford show, which was 9 11. Tucker remembered to do a show. Donovan Whallon, too. YouTuber, broadcasters, biggest spot, Luke, eight recaller bonbons washed out with crystal light. So I got up at 4 am on Sunday and I read books solidly until 10 am and then I watched a lot of football for most of the next for most of the next nine hours. The Dallas Cowboy game was a very painful disappointment. But it's important for me to stop doing shows, take time to just read books, make notes, reflect, pause, settle in away from the camera, lead a life. Protected by the Constitution, Amy Kramer is now being terrorized by Merrick Garland's DOJ. On Wednesday morning, FBI agents showed up at her home first at the home of her ex husband, carrying subpoena for her daughter, Kylie. Kramer received a call from Kylie's stepmother saying, quote, the FBI is here for her. The FBI subpoena demands all communications from Amy Kramer and Kylie, including their social media posts. What? From October 1st, 2020 to the present day. Now, why would the FBI, Joe Biden's FBI, need Amy Kramer's daughter's Instagram posts? Because this isn't about the events leading up to January 6th. Obviously, it's about. So I obviously have a lot of sentiment for Tucker Carlson's sentiments, right? I was a lot of sympathy for his sentiments. The problem is Tucker Carlson has a really bad track record for being unfair, inaccurate, sloppy. So I have a very little faith that what he is sharing here is a fair, reasonable and accurate compendium of the facts. So I appreciate his passion. It's a shame that his show is so reckless that that he on a nightly basis just practices in an absolute reckless disregard for the facts. Almost no consideration for for fairness. And so he's not someone who has credibility when it comes to fidelity to the truth, unfortunately. Mining all of her personal information. This is harassment on political grounds. It's illegal. It's unconstitutional. It shocks the conscience of everyone who sees it. But the number of people who see it is very small because it is not covered by any media. And it's not just happening to Amy Kramer. This show has obtained a subpoena for Merrick Garland's deal, Jay, issued in the past week. And what is. Not covered by any media. So there's extensive, you know, right wing media. And they do cover it. The problem is right wing media is so pathetic, right? The quality of the reporting compared to the left wing media of The New York Times or The New Yorker or New York Magazine just doesn't compete. So if if the right is serious about Tucker Carlson sentiments here, then they should put some money together and they should do some work and do some documenting and reporting. So if, you know, elections are stolen, then go report the facts and dig them up and do it in a reasonable manner, like compile evidence so that people who don't have a dog in the race can look at what you're doing and go, oh, maybe maybe there's a good argument there. So I mean, how is the right wing so pathetic that they can't develop, you know, a solid news media? I mean, Mickey Kouse is right. Whenever he tries to read these right wing MAGA outlets, it's just your eyes glaze over because they're just simply aimed at true believers. Right. If people on the right want to be effective, they develop news outlets that would develop a readership of people who aren't already MAGA true believers, right? They develop a readership of non MAGA Republicans of centrist and even leftists. If you have good, solid information and if you have valuable information, people will beat a path to your door. But the right is too lazy and too inept to develop solid right wing news sources. That demands is both unlawful and without precedent in American history. The subpoena claims to be investigating, quote, any claim that the vice president and or president of the Senate had the authority to reject or choose not to count presidential electors. Now, keep in mind that any claim you make as an American citizen about electors, any claim you make about American politics period is protected explicitly under the First Amendment. That's our core freedom. It's. OK, just because you have a right that's protected doesn't mean that it's a good thing, right? You have the right to commit adultery. That doesn't make it a good thing. You have the right to be sexually promiscuous. That doesn't make it a good thing. You have the right to gossip about people, but that doesn't make it a good thing. There are all sorts of things that we have rights to that the exercise thereof is immoral. So this this right wing fascination with you know, our freedoms, our rights, don't don't tread on our rights. It needs to be counterbalanced by responsibilities. We also have responsibilities to other people. It's not just all about us as individuals trying to strive for, you know, all we can get. I mean, let's talk about moral injury, right? Let's talk about moral psychology. Let's let's talk about Dr. John and Doris philosopher when it goes wrong. And at times I thought about a little bit about how the pathogen and crimes of war. So I'll talk a little bit about that today, but try and put it in a wider context. So I've got three research questions. How much does character matter for morality? My answer is going to be maybe not as much as you might think, can character be cultivated, maybe a little? Are there alternatives to cultivating character for improving moral behavior? And the answer is I hope so and yes. OK. So how much does character matter for morality? Again, especially under the influence of Nancy Sherman people, philosophers have started to think about that in a military context. There are individual differences amongst people, which we talk about in terms of personality character traits. I'm more timid. Someone else is more bold or extroverted. But these traits are not usually robust, issuing in behavior that is highly consistent. So maybe I'm right. So the the school of personality psychology is enormous. And I was hearing someone, Vanessa Van Edwards talk about how this is the one scientific basis for studying personality. It's scientific. It's based on people just bubbling in answers, right? Self reported answers. So the big five personality traits that they're not scientific. All right. There's not this whole body of science behind big five, you know, personality traits, meaning openness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, extroversion, agreeableness, right? This is a whole school of psychology that is based upon very flimsy foundations. But his point that that moral education and character education doesn't make much of a statistical difference to how people behave is a very solid and very important point. The number one determinant of how we behave, the number one determinant of whether we're extroverted or introverted, whether we're conscientious or not, whether we're agreeable or not. In many cases, depends upon the situation that we're in. Right. You put me in a situation where I'm confident, I will be extroverted. And I'll probably be more conscientious and I'll have substantial levels of agreeableness. I'll have low levels of neuroticism and, you know, moderate levels of openness and new experience. You put me into situations where I'm insecure. I'm going to have high levels of neuroticism. I'm going to have lower levels of openness. I'm going to have lower levels of extroversion. I'm going to have lower levels of conscientiousness. You're more extroverted than me, but it doesn't mean we can always count on you to be the life of the party. Okay. So I want to put this in a context, start with an observation and that's just that atrocity is a persistent feature of armed conflict. One example is this book by Jonathan Glover called Humanity, which actually turns out to be a chronicle of horror. I mean, not really much, so it might have been called inhumanity. And then if you're somebody like me and my colleague, Dominic Murphy, who's worked on this, you say character is insufficient bulwark against atrocity. The fact that someone is a good person is not going to be a sufficient prophylactic against aberrant behavior in the wrong circumstances. Maybe more interesting, recently there's been some work by Martin Cook who's probably known to some of you about the recent, unfortunately, named procurement scandal and you find the same thing not just with horrors of war but sort of more ordinary or banal misconduct. This isn't because so I sort of started my career with what we call a character skeptic and was dubious that virtue ethics was going to be a big help in our thinking about hard moral problems. But in fact, we don't really need to have that fight here. What I'm going to claim is there's just a general fact about human psychology that sets an upper limit on what we can expect from characters. It's not that character matters less than you might think but everything matters less than you might think. I told you I study failure and not just because it's good to write about what you know. Here's the bit about numbers which I'll try and keep simple. In fact, I'll necessarily keep it simple because I don't understand it in more than a simplistic way. But 50 years ago, a very smart personality psychologist deceased this fall, Walter Michelle, he noticed that what he called the personality coefficient seemed to hover around .3 or substantially below. And the idea is any say I test out an extroversion with extroversion as an extrovert, let's put it that way. Then the correlation with extrovert relevant behavior and test situations, am I going to be the one with the lampshade on my head at the party, the correlation .3 or less that's closer to no relationship. No relationship at all. So-called extroverts the correlation with extroverted behavior is less than .5 meaning that it's closer to no correlation between the so-called extrovert and them acting in an extroverted fashion than there is to a correlation. This is John M. Doris a philosopher author of a terrific book influential powerful book from 2005, lack of character personality and moral behavior. A perfect relationship something like being a human and being mortal. Everybody agrees on this number. Everybody agrees on this number. The defenders of personality and character, the critics, the question is what does it mean? The way psychologists think about this in the rough and ready is do this guy Jacob Cohen who wrote this page turner statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences that's not my book recommendation. I mean he said .1 is a small effect and Chad says this guy is autistic he's not autistic he's funny people who crack jokes are not autistic right this guy this guy is the king he's the king of moral philosophy so listen and learn. .3 is a medium effect a correlation of .5 a co-variation of .5 we're missing a point there it's a large here's a way to think about it so he said a correlation of .15 is invisible to casual observation say there's a guy at your coffee shop who really shouldn't be wearing skinny jeans and he's there a lot when you're there you start to notice well if the correlation is .3 you're like that guy's there a lot if it's .15 there's actually a relationship there's a relationship but you couldn't see it without statistical magnification so it's not hit you over the head if you like because it got mentioned before this is perceptible but it's not destiny this is barely perceptible so it's real but it's far from .3 perceptible to the naked eye of a sensitive observer it turns out life is small in a certain sense so this famous paper by Myrie said yeah, correlations in psychology are small but they're small everywhere so correlation between antihistamine use and reduced respiratory sense of .11 again kind of invisible psychology should be satisfied with that plead with the correlation of .26 gender and weight, who knew you would thought the relationship was stronger even gender and arm strength is around .5 wow I would have thought it'd be more the world is made of small effects medical effects tend to be really small this is in our case aspirin which they've now rescinded the recommendation right, unless you are and the chat says character changes how you react to situations and that's absolutely true I would contend to you however that in most situations situation influences your quote unquote moral character much more than your character influences how you behave in a situation because there's a slight benefit but there's a risk of gastric and so on so not worth it for most of us now you might say well that just shows that medicine is a mess everybody knew that progress has been a little bit slow since the invention of soap but soap probably a pretty big effect so Dr. Snow said put your head in the lion's mouth I say wash your hands thinking small here alright, okay so one more way to think about this that maybe will be helpful the way you get taught into a psych if you've had into a psych how do you think about a correlation think about in terms of what's called the coefficient of determination you just square it and then the idea turn it into a percent and that means a correlation question in the chat how would this go over in the jogger community this guy is huge in the jogger community and influence in the jogger community correlation of 0.3 if you know that you've explained like 10% in the difference in outcome and 90% you don't know why it happened okay so you don't know so much some people have come along and suggested the binomial effect size display I won't do the math it's actually simple even I can do it but you just compare a non correlation to a 50-50 base rate for an AB or dichotomous choice and it turns out if the relationship say between a medical intervention and getting better is a 0.3 correlation that's 15% over a point flip outcome okay so you definitely want to do this right you got a 15% chance better chance of beating cancer you want to do it right but it's not it's not the whole bang far from it far from it okay so I want to suggest that so press 1 in the chat if you've gotten the latest covid booster and press 2 if you've already gotten your flu shot so I haven't had either of those yet but I'm reading articles on you know when should I get the flu shot one argument was middle of October because once you get the flu shot the protection the flu shot gives declines about 10% a month and so other people say get the new booster right away particularly if you're in a high-risk group but if you're not in a high-risk group then maybe wait a while that's the kind of expectation you should have for thinking about the kind of variables we refer to when we refer to character why nothing bad about character it just turns out that's how the universe is put together okay so character matters what short of destiny but better than the coin flip something so here's how Jenna Wester said before the most complex thing on the battlefield I mean character matters but so does whether you're running on time or not I notice that when I'm running late I become much less empathic I become much ruder I just kind of narrow my vision so that I can you know meet my schedule so the situation of running late just has a profound effect on my moral character I become a kind of a mean even nasty guy when I'm running late and I need to ask you what you do when you're walking down the sidewalk and there's someone let's say a fatty just takes up the entire sidewalk so it used to be that I would just like walk around them I would even like walk onto the street to you know get around the big fat person or someone's got his dog on the sidewalk and they are blocking your path should do you like oh go around you cross over to the other side of the street maybe even walk in the street or do you walk on the grass to get around them since I've been doing more push-ups and pull-ups I've been saying excuse me excuse me so yeah I'm walking down the street and there's a big fatty in front of me or someone who's not fat but just taking up the entire sidewalk or someone with a dog running around on a leash that could trip me up do me harm I'm saying more and more excuse me and so far everyone goes oh and then they step aside and then I walk down the path like why should I be taking myself out onto the street for these anti-social people who take up the entire sidewalk who just let their dogs run around even on a leash without any consideration for the welfare and well-being of other people like why should I have to keep deviating for these anti-social people who are blocking a public thoroughfare I say it's time that we stand up I say I'm mad as hell I'm not going to let anybody rip me off how long are we going to allow these anti-social people to just take up space on the sidewalks that are public thoroughfares that our tax-paying dollars go to support these public thoroughfares and these inconsiderate anti-social people with their dogs with their obliviousness with their addiction to their iPhones just like standing there taking up all the space so that God fearing productive citizens such as myself people with a mission such as vouch nationalism people who are dedicated to doing God's service we really are going to deviate because of these anti-social people blocking public thoroughfares are we going to start speaking up and not letting these people rip us off maybe we should speak up and not allow these people to block our way through public thoroughfares I think it's time that we speak up and I find saying excuse me right I find that so far that always works you say excuse me and everyone looks around as though they did something wrong and then they step back and they allow me to pass so that I can continue of my godly duties right I mean why should I have to risk my life going into the streets because these inconsiderate people just take up all this space public thoroughfares and then people who own dogs and the dogs are yapping like what if I'm trying to study Torah what if I'm trying to make my way through a complicated piece of Gomorrah what if I'm trying to master the big book what if I'm working on the phytos books in the English literature tradition what if I'm reading Dostoyevsky is this annoying yapping dog like what about us right tax-paying God fearing humble but proud Americans what about us and we just cannot allow people to keep ripping us off are we going to stop lifting and saying excuse me excuse me right I'm on a mission to do God's will excuse me that's the person right right and so I think this is just what we should expect there are many factors implicated in complex psychological outcomes but relatively seldom are individual factors implicated especially strongly with large effect sizes it would say in psychology all prediction is small prediction this means there's few simple problems about things that matter and there's fewer simple solutions okay so now moving on you say okay that's what basically how things are like matters for what they do but kind of surprisingly little if you just predict that they'll do what most people do in that situation you'll do quite well that's called betting the base rate but maybe we can cultivate virtue and train it up so let's take a look at some of the things we should know if we're going to think about that so you've probably heard of the Minnesota twin studies but in behavioral genetics the truism the half of the variance in personality is attributed to genetic influence very little attributed to shared environment like family now something is innate doesn't mean you can act on it you know teeth you can pull teeth right so it doesn't mean but you can't act on it that it's not intervenable but it does suggest that there are from the shop differences that are going to be hard to change and are going to be constraints on any kind of character cultivation program you do so you need to pick the right person now to intervene on what about parents which is the obvious place parents think well we'd like to raise our children to be good I don't care if you're a doctor or lawyer I just want you to be a decent person it turns out that parents it's the same as I suggested it was for character parents probably matter but surprisingly little so here's a famous quote yeah it means that you don't have to drive your kid back and forth to soccer practice and violin less than three hours a day they'll be fine have a drink okay right so the environmental variables most often named in socialization science such as social class parental warmth one versus two parent households maybe devoid of causal influence on such child outcomes as intelligence personality and psychopathology so this is a terrific book called the nurture assumption okay so here's a characterization of this literature the environmental variables most often named in socialization science social class parental warmth one versus two parent households maybe devoid of causal influence on such outcomes as intelligence personality and psychopathology notice these claims are not are limited to what they call normal environment which is they're not talking about abusive homes they're not saying abuse doesn't matter okay so that's why people can write books do parents matter so I'm not saying it's not true I'm saying it's an actual credible scientific thesis that you need to think about well what about schools same kind of story same kind of story so the character education movement of now 30 or 40 years old there wasn't a lot of study right so there's no evidence that character education makes that much of a difference it's very it's so small it verges on nonexistent in the beginning in the beginning there was a lot of spending without a lot of study okay and it looks like it's the same thing character education may increase academic performance decreasing negative behaviors which for our purposes acting better it's a significant effect but not huge same thing now around here you're coming in later in the game right if you're thinking that we're thinking about how in a context like this we can educate for character with young adults and so one model that's appealing that Dr. Snow already talked about is that notion that virtue is a skill so here's Julie Annis who was already mentioned the acquisition of exercise in virtue can be seen to be in many ways like the acquisition and exercise of more mundane activities such as farming building or playing the piano here's your colleague Dan Russell the cognitive and effective barriers to acquiring a virtue are no different from the barriers to learning a complex skill that we can apparently learn to recognize and overcome albeit with much focused effort so this is particularly important to me because when I was sick with chronic fatigue syndrome and I was listening to Dennis Prager on the radio I saw a way out for my life I saw a path back to God to transcendence to an interesting way of life that seemed to be divinely inspired and I thought wow Dennis Prager is right there's nothing more important than morally educating people but we simply have no evidence that morally educating people makes much of a difference now my own bias is and I don't know what the evidence for this is that if you can encourage people to become more securely attached encourage people to develop ties with other people to bond with other people to live a life that is interconnected with others that will have a salutary effect on their morality but in my 20s listening to Dennis Prager I thought oh wow you know ethical monotheism is where it's at there's one God his primary demand is ethics and I thought this is the most important teaching this is the most important thing in the world but it turned out to be the most important thing for Dennis Prager because that was his claim to fame this was very lucrative and prestigious that line of thought for him to base his career on and that there was no evidence for what he was arguing was irrelevant he was on a very good wicket right he he had something that made him feel important he had a great ladder to fame and fortune and to prestige and that there was no evidence supporting this ladder you know it didn't really matter but it certainly was an inspiring vision that captured me in my 20s led to my conversion to Judaism and so now at age 56 you know I look back and think how naive I was that like many a young person with a desperate need for meaning remember people have a desperate need for meaning that primarily indicates that they lack normal levels of human connection if you have if you have good friends you'll find your meaning in life almost all the meaning you need friendships from your family from your work from your education and from your hobbies but if you don't have that normal level of human connection which I didn't when I was so isolated by my illness then I became desperate for meaning and like many young people you know I latched on to one path you know Dennis Prager's articulation of ethical monotheism you know followed it to an absurd degree just arbitrarily you know seized on this because it resonated with me because Dennis Prager kind of met my father hunger like he was like the ultimate father figure and I was lucky that Dennis Prager compared to everyone who I could have you know followed and cast in a heroic role Dennis Prager is a fairly sensible middle of the road you know reasonable pretty decent chap you know if you're going to have a hero that's going to transform your life you know Dennis Prager is a good choice but I seized on some things he said that just sounded so good and turned out that there wasn't much evidence for it Fox News cracks me up says Art Bell the text on the screen says what we're witnessing is terrifying and Art Bell says we were doomed from the 1960s mates with the Immigration Act and civil rights women vote left so it locks in gimme stuff make others pay the easy choice Luke may learn to love a career in time another conversion make up your mind did I meet anyone in Scientology 40 yeah I once went to one of those Scientology places where you could do a test and they tried to talk to me about the evils of psychiatric medication I was on Nardil at the time I was new in LA and I was trying a lot of things it was 1994 I thought oh let me let me just step into this Scientology booth but I didn't didn't agree with their prescribing the opposite of prescribing prescribing Nardil which medication an MAO inhibitor that had raised me from the sick bed to a normal life so I wasn't going to mess around with that so I stream in something like you know 1260 but I see it comes across on YouTube as 480 so yeah maybe I stream in 1080 so yeah maybe I'm not a convert to save energy think of the Ukrainians 40 without they're charged up cell phones so are you digging John M. Doris isn't he great I mean this guy would make a great father figure so we can get good at playing the piano maybe we can get good at getting good father hunger and then you'd like to know how for a father figure so there's a large literature and performance science the most famous theory is Erickson's deliberate practice theory which he persisted wildly overstating here's a representative from his group not from him high level performance is a function of a very high investment in deliberate practice alone okay you've heard of the 10,000 hour rule which is 10 years at 20 hours a week okay that's absolutely not think that practice is going to be enough which most of us who have tried and failed it skills that we'd like to get good at new already intuitively so if it's not just practice what is it in what turns out to happen um player ever but now his cases okay expertise is domain limited so is morality all right you may be honest in business that doesn't mean you're going to be honest in your sex life right so morality is domain specific in certain areas you're going to be honest other areas you're going to be dishonest certain areas of life you're going to be confident other areas you're going to be lacking in confidence after LeBron's dismal season but he washed out of the minors with the 206 batting average in double A so think about medical specialties think about medical specialties right you don't have your dermatologist excise your brain tumor because your neurologist is booked right okay and it might be a deep fact not just that right so when it comes to personality and moral character it's domain specific so I would suspect that most accountants are honest when it comes to their job but they're not necessarily any more honest with regard to their relationships so let's say you're a professional athlete you may be brave with regard to you know 100 mile an hour baseball being thrown at you but when it comes to dealing with women you may well be as cowardly as the next guy and you may be outgoing in domains where you are strong and confident and have a long track record of success but you start participating in areas of life where you struggle your extra version is going to get turned down considerably so morality very much domain specific the things we can get good at are going to be pretty local but the same thing is going to hold for moral domains the compassionate person might not be the fairest person the brave person might not be the most prudent person I know there's controversy about this we heard about the unity of virtues last time the problem with the unity of virtues is just this kind of plain observation about right that different kinds of moral goodness don't seem to go together so that means if you are looking to train someone up and wondering what it would be like to cultivate virtue you're probably going to be better served by thinking about what the very specific attributes can do in different domains are which I think is probably implicit in military context too there's lots of ways to be good okay are there alternatives to cultivating character for improving moral behavior I meant to give a slightly pessimistic message there that maybe we can say some things about cultivating character but we're not there yet so we might want to think of some other things we could think about okay and so I think both of this morning speakers I guess have found a lot to disagree with but I think that there is a common theme and this will be the lunchtime yeah diminish focus on the individual encourage focus on the situation how do we create situations that encourage human flourishing moral probity right decency is not an individual achievement it's a social one and it's enabled by well informed and ordered institutions so for example if you got a tax code that encourages cheating then you'll have more cheating but if you have a tax code that does not encourage cheating then you'll have less cheating moral probity is not an individual achievement but a social one right we're ultra social organism we should expect it to be the case that what we do well we do well together of course what we do badly we do badly together too okay okay so what we should be thinking about is what the institutions should look like that are going to conduce to the best behavior and say I'm not against combat atrocities unfortunately in the public discourse it seems to me that we badly under emphasize the importance of the social so this is the health and representatives report on me lie right right probably most famous so isn't this very similar to much of academic analysis which tends to come from the left that it's institutions that matter most it's social structures that matter most so conservatives place more emphasis on individual free will and the this left-wing academic critique is saying that individual free will is a very slender and frail read on which to base decency what you need are strong institutions so I think that if you focus on individualizing explanations you're likely to be badly misled about what's going on in fact what we know is that individual behavior is very much a function of war fighting culture say in combat so here's some very famous reporting by Solon Weiss about Tiger force special operations group in Vietnam to put it politely had some very unsavory practices I knew it was wrong but it was an acceptable practice I didn't feel right about it but I thought I was doing my job when I did it it was to me like any other day in Vietnam so what I want to insist is that if you start thinking about bad apples you'll miss the point and we know what we needed to think about in this case we needed to think about lack of bright line combat and non-combat and distinctions or racialized conflicts where success was measured in terms of body counts institutional factors not individual factors and in fact I think the best writing on this stuff suggests that the presence of aberrant individuals is generally unnecessary to explain atrocity and other misconduct occasional psychopaths noted right although right so war crimes and you know horrible behavior isn't primarily the result of aberrant individuals it's largely the result of aberrant situations and if you want to stay out of committing war crimes you know stay out of those aberrant situations psychopaths have other properties that probably tend to be weeded out of organizational context because it's not just that they're unpleasant but they just in general don't play well with others right so they're not going to succeed in these kinds of contexts okay okay by the way this is William Cali who after his brush with the law he came back that's him leaving his father-in-law's jewelry store where he went on with his life as a perfect so he committed that me lie massacre in Vietnam okay William Cali so now I think so I said I was interested in failure and so I talked a little bit about moral failure in military context but again I want to suggest that it's an instance of a particular kind of observation that understands failure in terms of systems so Diane Vaughan very good book on the Challenger disaster she says in 1992 after six years analyzing the history of launch decision making in the years before the Challenger launch I had found no evidence of rule violation in misconduct right so people in general the general public Americans they want to find the individuals who screwed up the Challenger lodge they want to find the individuals who are responsible for the Challenger disaster I mean that's the general human tendency in general American tendency like which individuals screwed up but much the time it's not you know an individual it's a system that hasn't been working particularly well so six years analyzing the history of launch decisions made before the Challenger lodge and the author found no evidence of rule violation and conduct by individuals behind the Challenger disaster what was behind the Challenger disaster was a systemic problem by individuals right it was a series of collaborative decisions which were individually not terrible decisions but there was a accumulative drift lowering lowering standards for acceptable test results and so on and so forth the same thing is true although I'm more ambivalent about this is probably the BP disaster where people weren't people weren't successfully prosecuted has anyone seen the movie pretty good movie right even the the real life analog of the slimy John Malkovich character even he did not get prosecuted and it becomes very unclear who was guilty right what individuals made mistakes they're kind of a bunch of reasonable decisions or seemed so at the time now so where should we look BP still has four platforms in the Gulf okay so one question is what would you have to do to lose your license but that's not that's not this that's not this talk two of the platforms are named mad dog and thunder horse okay so imagine the sign safety first on the mad dog platform okay so I want to say there's a labeling effect here that matters that manifests the thought culture that doesn't emphasize safety and it's not of course it's not it's not the the guy who said yeah mad dog that's a good name for an oil platform but that that's part of a system which values a certain kind of instantiator and able to certain kind of risky behavior right so again we can explain moral failure without having deposit individuals a bad character so what should we do okay so just to now go back from the corporate context to the military context so this is the purest commission report on me lie Barker was the Italian commander I guess above Medina who was above Cali I mean says Lieutenant Colonel Barker's minimal or nonexistent instructions concerning the handling of non combatants created the potential for grave misunderstandings to his intention and for the interpretation of his orders as authority to fire without restriction on all persons found in the target area okay and towards the end one of his suggestions for creating a more moral society is to increase the stigma against hate speech the use of ethnic racial and religious slurs he's saying that the use of this kind of language dehumanizes other people it encourages dehumanization of the other and so that's why we need to keep very strong stigma against the use of slurs which is not something that I wanted to hear but have to have to pray on that right so take up your God given constitutional all-american right to walk down public thoroughfares if there are inconsiderate people blocking you say allow excuse me and don't let anyone rip you