 Just looking at a good thread here on YouTube by Melissa Chen, not wearing a mask, outright denying vaccines preemptively, and refusing to abide by social distancing guidelines are slowly becoming badges of honor and signaling devices for a growing contingent. Too eager to show off their special status as non-sheepel. It's a new woke. America's cultural psychology is antithetical to swimming with the tide of conformity, especially when promoted by fiat or authority. Sure, it keeps us from succumbing to tyranny, but overdoing it backfires, just like when an overactive immune system backfires with allergies. Pandemic conditions are precisely when radical individualism may sometimes not be adaptive. What we need is recognition that in these circumstances, communitarianism may be more adaptive. It's a philosophy that emphasizes the connection between the individual and the community. The virus makes it clear that we are not isolated individuals living in vacuums. We are all potential vectors. It's time that we act like it, or we're not going to overcome this. All this is to say that, yes, Mr. Pence should have worn a mask at Mayo. It's a hospital, and he is the vice president. If we adopt a more communitarian mindset in the first place, then it's less likely the government have to legislate these new norms into the books. For those who value personal responsibility so much, surely they can see the connection between that and freedom. Perhaps the media did this. Perhaps they took things out of context, pushed half the population to not believe what they were told. Science and facts don't mean anything anymore when you don't know which source is truthful. The mainstream media could tell me that water is wet, and I'd have to check this their sources. So suppressing free speech in a confusing time like this seems a particularly maladaptive strategy. Eric Kaufman, author of the book White Shift tweets, Scottish politicians are debating a bill that is a grave threat to free expression, promising to criminalize opinions that offend groups sacralized by the identity left. Marco Corian talks about moratorium interruptus. Last week's immigration pause was something of a dud, but the president suggested a second order might be on the way. Here are some ideas for a pause 2.0 essay in American greatness, moratorium interruptus. Study. When a provocatively dressed woman left the room, women assigned to this condition laughed at her and ridiculed her appearance when the same woman was dressed conservatively. The women greeted her in a friendly manner and none discussed her when she left. Elon Musk tweeted March 19, based on current trends probably close to zero new cases in the United States by the end of April. So Elon Musk, not a super forecaster. We had now a long list of dropouts on the distant right. Millennial woes are just the latest. We've also had Katie McHugh, Chuck Johnson, Pac Stinkson, Marcus Halberstram, Josh Neal, Brundle Fly, Kyle Bristo, who is Richard Spencer's lawyer, Teela Tequila, Tara McCarthy, Frame Games. Frame Games is the biggest loss. Patrick Chauvinick tweets, I think before social media, we were just insulated from each other's true awfulness. 65% of Americans want to stop all immigration. Donald Trump, it's time to expand the ban. Did you have your copy of Dave Rubin's new book? No, but I know there's a new book out, Biography of Lucy Davidowitz, who was scorned by historians but had a huge popular following. I might read that. Nathan Coffinus retweets something about police in Central China's Wuhan, arrested eight people for spreading rumors. Rumors of COVID-19. Nathan Coffinus tweets, purveyors of unpopular truth untreated much better in the West, but reality always catches up with us in the end. So, here's a professor at the University of Chicago, Scott Ashworth. Professional ethics question. When you see apparently respectable members of your profession interacting with someone who is both a graduate student in the discipline and a Steve Saylor and Neil Kierkegaard fanboy, how do you respond? Nathan Coffinus, I think it's problematic that you interacted with professors who interacted with a student who didn't disavow Steve Saylor and Neil Kierkegaard doesn't that technically make you alt-right? The professor says this is not a hypothetical. Russell Warren, easy. Encourage and join in the free dialogue so that correct ideas and theories can chase away flawed theories. That depends. As an academic, your duty bound to do whatever will increase your status in the local petty academic political environment. If murdering them both will garner you more grants, publications, awards, and appointments, then your correct course is clear. Scott Ashworth continues, they are interacting on Twitter where those beliefs are visible. Nothing that you even raise the question suggests you're not the right person for the roles described in your bio. So, what he does is he mentors PhD students. Perhaps you should intensely study the writings of Saylor and Kierkegaard to understand why graduate students would prefer reading their work to yours. I hope that the University of Chicago doesn't smile on faculty members bullying students. Wait, isn't there something called the Chicago statement or some such? Wouldn't that be relevant to your situation? So, yeah, I've got a lot of sound foam up. It's very incomplete, but eventually cover the whole room in sound foam. Tell them to hook you up with the verboten literature. Summer start is cool, bro. Start by constructing an unassailable philosophical defense of guilt by association and ad hominem attacks. Tell an adult immediately be safe. Someone such as you should really make a comprehensive list of who is and who is not, we are not allowed to talk to. Surely this will advance learning. You can call the NKVD to shoot him. Could you translate this? Scott Ashworth says this graduate student is a fan boy of Steve Saylor and his work is shoddy statistics about race. You should take a deep breath and ask yourself if it's possible that you are the problem. Well, you won't get booted from a university for being a mainstream scientist with unoriginal ideas. Citations and accepted research articles are a better reference of academic relevance, simply having a desk at a university. Richard Lynn, for example, is hunted like a witch during the Salem trials. His emeritus title was even taken from him, yet he has 10,000 citations. He's one of the most cited psychologists alive. Burn the witch. Maybe you mind your own business and stop worrying about who is interacting with whom. I'm more concerned how you sleep at night given that you are a faculty member at an undoubtedly white supremacist institution like the University of Chicago. Instead of trying to virtue signal on Twitter, why not step down and let a person of color take up the space you are currently monopolizing? I see people with different opinions to me. How do I respond? Take a deep breath, try to lower your heart rate. Try to eat more vegetables, fruit, clean meat, and remember to stay hydrated. Stay active. Make sure to work out at least three times a week. If this fails, seek professional help. Professional ethics question. When you see apparently respectable members of your profession, suggesting there should be no interactions with someone they disagree with on ideological grounds, how do you respond? And mining your own business works as well. So I've got Ashworth here, University of Chicago. He's a professor and director of the PhD program in political economy and democracy. He wants to know how to respond to someone who's a fan of Steve Saylor because there's not much of a line between criticizing and demonizing. Strong norm against demonizing different views would be likely to chill free speech. So former Harvard Medical School Dean says scientists who express different views on COVID-19 should be heard not demonized. Let's hear scientists with different COVID-19 views not attack them. This is from the former Dean of Harvard's Medical School. Okay, bye-bye.