Episode 593 Scott Adams: Census Controversy, Conspiracy Theories, Social Media Summit at WH



pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pom pop oh hey everybody come on in here it's time for coffee with Scott Adams the best part of the day your adrenaline and dopamine hit maybe a little bit of serotonin today yep today it's gonna be special a whole bunch of good chemistry it's gonna happen in your body get that get that day going right and you know the best way to do that is with the simultaneous app it starts with a cup or a glass or a mug could be a tanker to tell us or a stein maybe a thermos maybe a flask any kind of vessel that you can fill with a liquid I like coffee and join me now for the unparalleled pleasure of this simultaneous it whoa tingly all right I've got a bunch of things to talk about today let's talk about the census controversy so the question on the census which I guess we do every 10 years or so by constitutional requirement is the question of whether a president Trump's administration can put on the questionnaire are you a citizen which apparently is something that we have asked in the past for hundreds of years but in recent years we haven't and the thought is that if we include that question bad things will happen now I have made the mistake of watching the news on this topic and if you watch the news talking about this topic of whether we should have a citizenship question on the census you're gonna want to put a gun in your mouth because I don't know what happened to the news that broke it means yeah you're not we're not that surprised that there's fake news it's not a big deal if somebody gets us act wrong but watching the news talk about the census question I just want to I just want to punch the television because here's the conversation goes hey if we put that question on there then maybe people who say they're not citizens will not get properly represented because the census determines representation in Congress and then somebody else says no that has nothing to do with representation because the Constitution says you count all the people it doesn't say count all the citizens so even if you knew this summer citizens and some were not it would have no impact on representation because you would still use the big number for representation and then the next person will act like nobody had ever clarified that in other words somebody will clarify that that question does not change representation and the very next person who talks will talk as if it does and say you can't do that because then they won't be represented and then the other person will say no actually the question has nothing to do with representation it's just information we can use in different ways so I I don't know what's wrong with the news the news is just broken they can't explain to us that that information is not part of representation it might be important for questions yeah somebody's naming the name here you know what I'm talking about but here's the question that I haven't seen anybody ask and there's something missing I guess there's a gap in my knowledge that I don't know the answer to this so maybe you can help me why do we have to ask that don't we already know and when I say don't we already know who is a citizen what I mean is donal citizens have to have social security numbers you don't we have enough data in the country to know who is a citizen what we don't know is how many people are here who are not citizens am i right I'm all right we know everybody's social security number you know that includes people have fake social security numbers but those are the people who would also fill out a form and say they were citizens so if you're saying that the fake people with fake social security numbers matters I say it doesn't because if you had a fake social security number you would fill out a census and say yeah I'm a citizen so you get the same same result it's inaccurate but it'd be the same so here's my question let's say everybody filled out the census and they do not tell you if they are citizens or not they tell you their name and they tell you do they tell you the address they're living at let's say that's part of the census do we not have a database of all of the names and addresses of people that we can compare to the people who have social security numbers in other words if we had a data of all the people whether they'd be residents or not if we knew what that population was and we also know how many of those exact same people are citizens does that not tell us who is not a citizen because they answered the census but they do not have a social security number that puts them at that address I wouldn't be exact but neither is the census the census isn't exact you know sort of a reasonable estimate that's good enough so who has who has asked that question am I the only one to say do we even need it we probably have all the information we need if we also have the census information that's the part that's missing somebody says what database what I'm talking about is the government knows it who has the social security number and who doesn't and to have a social security number is pretty close to being a citizen somebody says permanent residents have social security numbers that's okay we know that too right that's in the database that doesn't doesn't matter at all because we know they're permanent residents that's in the database too so I don't know if we really need to ask but either way there's gonna be an unintended consequence whether we do it or we don't do it if we do it then maybe non-citizens will get extra power and if we do it maybe fewer people will fill out the census and illegal or non-residents they don't have to be illegal would get less representation would it matter with the country be worse off either there's no I don't have a reason to believe that the country would be worse off if some people didn't fill out the census we know it would be different but we don't have any and any suggestion hint evidence that we would be worse off so let's say if California's count let's say California's count was under counted so well what difference does it really make you know I get that the Electoral College make a difference and then we could get different outcomes but with the different outcomes which we there would be different outcomes but with the different outcomes be worse no how do you know that so we're trying to fix a problem that no one has identified as a problem if we have an inaccurate let's say it's 10 percent inaccurate if your representative government is 10 percent inaccurate that would get you a different result than if it were accurate but would it be worse in other words would the laws be worse would you be less free somebody's saying you would get less money yeah I guess I guess those people would get less money and they would also have an option of filling out the census or not so I guess they could control that much money they got by whether they filled out the census so as I wonder what is the penalty for not filling out a census is there a legal penalty if you decline to fill it out is that's just another gap in my knowledge so I think the government has a legitimate need to know this this information and I would come down on the side of if the government can't ask you if you're a citizen and I'm not sure if you have a government right that's sort of the point where you don't really have a government anymore if your government can't even determine if if you're a legal citizen can't even ask the question I'm not sure that's really a government so I do think there's importance there's importance to try to count the actual human beings are here somebody said it involves money how much money gets a portion that probably does make a difference but those are all things that states can also control to some degree because states can stop being sanctuary cities for example if a state wanted to have fewer illegal or let's just say non-citizens there are things I could do and if they don't do those things and that causes them to get less money or a bad result well at least they had the choice so yesterday I spent way too much of my time debunking the fine people the fine people fake news you know the one it's the one where people say the President Trump called neo-nazis and white nationalists fine people in Charlottesville but if you read the transcript he said the opposite so it's a news that's reported as the opposite of the actual news that's easy to prove because you just look at the transcript you listen to the video and he says exactly the opposite of what the news is easy to demonstrate so I got into it with a pastor yes a pastor online what happens when you show somebody that their entire worldview something that was very important is fake do they say to you well thank you Scott I'm glad you cleared that up for me so now they don't do that even the pastor I actually caused a pastor to use the f-word and said eff me because he was so angry when his worldview fell apart in public and but I also learned three new things that I'm gonna share with you on persuasion if you can get the person you're debating with online or somewhere else to say one of these three things it means you won the debate and I heard this a lot yesterday and when you hear this it means you won and when the other person says blah blah blah full-stop or blah blah blah period or blah blah blah end of story if you hear any of those things full stop period end of story it means you already won the debate because those are those are direct signals that somebody doesn't want to hear any of the information that they're actually not dealing with data when somebody says and I heard this about the Sharla's Ville because people would say it was all Nazis full stop not and I would say well actually I've talked to a number of people who went it was a very diverse group I've talked to them personally they they disavow all forms of racism they were there for free speech person purposes and I know this because I spoke to them personally now if somebody said that that would seem like a direct proof you know to the extent that people believe died I've actually had those conversations and I have that would be a direct proof that there were some people there who were not bad people now wouldn't somebody say oh well Scott I didn't know that you actually talked to people who were there it does sound like you've collected information and that maybe maybe most people weren't good people but there were some good people there I get it what do people say in response to I talked to those people and found out you were wrong they were all racist full stop and end of sentence period so declare victory when you hear that the funny one was somebody said I was trying to revise history I'm trying to rewrite history my response was I'm literally copying and pasting history I'm copying the transcript that we're talking about and I'm pasting it into Twitter so you can read it I'm not rewriting history I'm literally literally copying it and pasting it and some of it and what does somebody say to that you're rewriting history no I'm copy pasting history so here you're tell so you'll see if you know if you were following me yesterday a few hundred of you were watching me interact with these people and slap them down you saw a lot of them would change the topic so I would I would show conclusively that the President did not call the racist fine people because that's the transcript but they would not say oh man I was wrong all along never they changed the subject two other people were there and they were bad it's just a different topic so I used to chase them down the funnel and argue that but now I just declare victory and I just say I accept your surrender you also saw the word salad reply where somebody is their belief is debunked they get into cognitive dissonance and instead of just saying oh yeah okay right they start spewing words and sentences that almost sort of look like they could make sense but they don't and that's when you know you've won they've just they've gone into the word salad category and then the other thing is if they resort to anything that's magic there and in this case the magic is the secret racist dog whistle so a lot of people once they had had their world debunked on this topic don't say yeah sure yeah maybe he maybe he technically said the right thing but even though he technically said the right thing we're pretty sure that he was sending a clear racist dog whistle when you hear that you can you can kind of declare a victory did you see that Lee Alyssa Milano tweeted today that we can't normalize this behavior about the president's tweet in which he did a humorous poll a survey on his website in which the choices were you know with things such as would you who would you trust with the economy President Trump or a lousy lying Democrat now it's obvious that the whole thing was just a joke it was nothing but a joke it wasn't a real survey just a joke and what is Alyssa Milano say we can't normalize this and you know what I say I'm sure glad we'd normally is this does anybody get hurt by that was I know did your taxes go up did it did it affect your health care No yeah half of the country to laugh at the other half I suppose that's maybe maybe good for half the country at least but it certainly didn't hurt anybody and I think that after President Trump said administration you really don't need to worry about somebody else doing this do you do you really think that whoever is the president after Trump do you think that they would do something like that no you don't have to worry about it being normalized because this is very specific to his personality his brand the way he interacts with people nobody's gonna do this you couldn't normalize President Trump if you wanted to because he's a one of a kind there's no such thing as normalizing him that was pretty funny apparently the British ambassador whose tweet or whose email insulted the president it was a private email but he became public and the president would add him hard and said bad things about him called him stupid he quit today I don't think anybody's surprised he's sort of had to resign didn't he he didn't really have a choice let's talk about the border detention centers and the dog that didn't bark are you ready for this I like to talk about the things that have not been reported I'm going to delete the volume people all right everybody who complains about the volume gets deleted we do know that the volume plays okay on playback so all the complaints we hear are either trolls or people who are disturbing the flow like like it's being disturbed right now so let me stipulate I do know that some of you hear that sound differently there's nothing I'm doing differently and when the replay is is played if when you see it on on YouTube it will look fine or good enough anyway so everybody who talks about it will get blocked okay everybody good on that and there's nothing personal it just ruins the show like it's doing right now right it ruins the show so that's the only reason you're getting blocked it's not because you're wrong it's not because you weren't sure you weren't trying to be helpful and I think it's just I don't want it so it's for the good of the flow all right here's something that's missing the dog that didn't bark on these border detention centers are you frustrated as I am that you don't feel like you know the real story of what's going on in there because I hear the you know you hear the aoc version of drinkin a no toilets and you say to yourself well that's probably not exactly true but then you hear the official Border Patrol story that says everything's great we've got lots of supplies you know things are humane people are doing well but can you believe that not really and I'm not going to say that this is a problem with the Trump administration per se I'm just going to say that if an entity is being criticized and the entity being criticized says no that's not true I'm doing great well that's not really credible it could be true it might be true but it's not credible because they have an interest to say that they're doing it well here's what's missing why don't we have an independent somebody was just watching these places why why is there not I'll just throw out an example why is the Catholic Church not sending volunteers in just to be observers well how about FEMA why don't we send into some FEMA observers to see if any of these centers are doing so poorly that there are basically a humanitarian disaster so that FEMA can quickly step in with some extra supplies or build some tents or something so if somebody says they do I do not believe that if you're saying that there are auditors or there were members of the government who were who are checking other members of the government I'm not going to call that credible and I've never seen an interview have you have you ever seen an interview with anybody whose job it was to be independent somebody who doesn't work for the government and does not have a job like Congress person somebody who's not in that line have you seen anybody say yeah we're just observers and we stop in every day we talked to people see how things are going right that's the dog that isn't barking I so wanted to trust the administration that that they're telling us they're doing the you know a good job and that it's true and it might be it might be true that we're doing a pretty good job of keeping things humane there I mean I certainly wouldn't want to spend any time there I know you wouldn't either but maybe we're doing as well as we could could it be true but because we don't have any independent voice anybody I would trust to be independent and accurate to tell me that they're doing a good job I don't trust it so I'm going to go on record as saying I do not believe the government is doing a good job in the detention centers I also don't believe they're doing a bad job what I do believe is we don't know and that's unacceptable the fact that this is such a big big deal is such a big deal now of course some of you you're saying well but the politicians visit all the time you know that people people can go there and they visit I will say that's useless if if a detention center finds out that a or C is gonna visit tomorrow do you think they act the same as if that she's not going to visit of course not when the boss visits you clean up your act you vault but some of you I have worked at big companies when the CEO is going to visit your visit your department do you act the same when that when the CEO is gonna show up no now do you act the same when the auditors are gonna show up and how no you don't we the country have at least the question being raised as to whether we have something like concentration camps that's the provocative word used by the critics on our own border that are filling with thousands and thousands of people might be true ish might be completely false do you know which one it is do you know what's happening in those detention centers I don't I don't because the only information I've had is not credible it's from partisans on both sides that's all I have partisan information is not information it's nothing you could trust so I'm gonna I'm going to come down hard on the administration on this point I'm not going to come down hard on Border Patrol for doing their job or not doing their job because that's the part I don't know and I can't no I am going to come down hard on the administration for not providing some kind of mechanism then a church group or some kind of independent auditors can check out these facilities at a detailed level actually talk to people show up without an appointment and you know show up anytime they want day or night if you don't have that you have something like a giant concentration camp slash detention / / processing center with no visibility that lack of visibility is a completely unacceptable problem and I'm going to say that the Trump administration is completely failing on that the dog that doesn't bark is missing and that's a big big problem for me as a citizen of this country and as a less a citizen of the world it is unacceptable to me that we don't have visibility on this it might be acceptable to be what the conditions are if I knew what they were but absolutely I am NOT pleased as a citizen I have not been served and I am concerned that we don't have visibility of a very important issue to the country completely unacceptable so those of you who like to say you support the president no matter what he does this is a clear exception I do not support the President on this topic because there's a part missing that's just so obviously missing nobody could give that a pass you just can't give that a pass if somebody says we might have a concentration camp and it's on your property do you say well I don't need to look no you can't give that a pass all right let's talk about Michael Isikoff latest story I guess Michael Isikoff is working there for a Yahoo News investigative reporter type and his news story says that the the Seth rich conspiracy story the idea that Seth rich stole data and gave it to WikiLeaks and was murdered by Clinton for it he says that conspiracy theory which as far as we know is not true was started by the Russians just let that hang there so Michael Isikoff says that the whole Seth Richardson that FoxNews and in Hannity especially hammered on that that was actually planted by Russia as part of their disinformation efforts and so I read an article about it and I thought wow in order to say something like that I would think that you'd have to have pretty good evidence and when I read that evidence I'd say wow there it is but I did not find pretty good evidence for this claim and so I would say I asked myself is Michael Isikoff credible and then I said well what else has he ever done well one of the things he did was he was one of the primary people behind the steal dossier now to be fair he also said publicly and fairly soon that the dossier had a lot of unverified things and certainly some things that were likely not to be true so he did have his skepticism about it but he also was a primary reporter for that for that piece of disinformation so Michael Isikoff we know is a promoter of Russian disinformation is is that too strong a statement because I don't want to say something that's libelous or is not obviously true from the facts we all can see would you now say that the Russian dossier was was at least filled out by Russians in other words the information in there came from Russia we know that it's not true and we know that Russia often gives us untrue information for their own purposes and we know that Isikoff transmitted it and made and so he was part of the channel that brought that information to the public and and created a lot of a lot of what we believe about the story so if the person who is very associated with promoting Russian disinformation tells you without evidence this conclusive to you tells you that the Russians were really behind this s rich story is that credible it might be true I'm not gonna say it's not true but is it credible it is not it might be true but it is not credible if we don't live in a world anymore in which of this sort of story should be taken seriously to back that point you know how everybody knows and the Muller report said that the Russians tried hard to interfere in our election the two pieces of evidence they give are they the troll forum that was doing these little crappy ads they had no effect whatsoever that was one piece of information then the other was that they hacked the Democrats email and gave that to WikiLeaks so those are the the two hard pieces of evidence that Russia interfered so yesterday on Tucker Carlson show our writer for the nation I think was talking about how the Muller report doesn't say that the null report does not connect the dots we know there was a Russian troll for him and we know what they did we know that it was nowhere near the quality you would expect from a state action it was it was sort of like looking at a piece of art that your three-year-old made with macaroni that you you know in first grade or whatever let's say that your eight-year-old made in school made of macaroni and crayons and put on your refrigerator and somebody said I think that's an go is that a van Gogh and you say no that's not van Gogh that's like my 8 year old made this was macaroni and crayons that's what the Russian troll forum looks like the Russian troll farms entire effort which is pretty well understood was no better than the 8 year old macaroni and crayon art on your refrigerator and yet the national story is that Putin interfered with our election well we must accept that that the best job that Putin can do at interfering with an election is equivalent to an eight-year-olds of macaroni art on your refrigerator now if you think I'm exaggerating about how low effectiveness that troll farm was take a look at the actual ads look at what the total ad budget was compared to the you know the elections total budget and then and then the reporter for the nation whose name I can't remember says the molar report doesn't connect the dots it does not show a chain of control from Putin to this troll farm now everybody just says well certainly this wouldn't have been happening without Russia without Putin knowledge to which I say anybody who says that has never been involved in any kind of large organization Russia is a large organization how many things is Putin personally involved with versus how many things are being done by people acting independently maybe they think Putin will like it maybe if it works out they'll tell him about it maybe they think he would like it maybe somebody that he knows said something and they're trying to make somebody happy who knows Putin maybe they want to be able to later say that dinner party hey I helped you out you know maybe you should give me a favor too who knows but if you're telling me that Putin oversaw personally the macaroni and crayon art on the refrigerator this tiny little troll farm that did nothing if you're telling me he was personally managing that effort first of all it's not demonstrated and secondly the facts do not suggest it the facts suggests the opposite that there's no way the boss Putin could have watched this effort being you know being operational I thought haha this will work no way so what he's saying plausible deniability so the I do understand that it would make sense if this troll firm working for Putin doesn't that that would cause some separation so he'd have plausible deniability that's not the part I'm talking about so that part makes sense that it would fit with the theory that he was involved what I'm talking about is that the quality of the work was so far below government level cyberwarfare it was macaroni art there's no way that Putin authorized macaroni art it just didn't happen that's my personal opinion and secondly the the Muller report when it talks about the hacking says that it seems or it appears I think the word is it appears or yes what's the exact word basically they say it looks like Russia was behind it in other words we don't know that what there was a hacker we think they're associated with with the Russian intelligence appears yes but it appears that the Russian government was behind it if you knew it was behind it would you use that word would you say appears probably not so we don't really know oh and then here's the other part that's that's tied to the Seth rich thing so I've made some comments in the past and let me let me update those okay so there are two comments that I know I've made maybe three about the the Seth rich conspiracy theory and I'm gonna call it a conspiracy theory because the the central part of it or at least a central part of it is the idea that Hillary Clinton had him knocked off okay that part I've never thought was credible likely worth considering I don't actually believe Hillary Clinton has a body count of 65 dead people or whatever the story is so that part I've never bought here are the parts that I have made positive comments about there was one article written by some retired Admiral I don't remember some right-wing type of guy who is detailing all of the circumstantial evidence that would support the conspiracy theory that the Seth rich was murdered by some political operative for political purposes as opposed to just a random crime on the street and what I said was it was hard to read that and not be persuaded but being persuaded as you know is not related to being true so I hoped I was careful with my choice of language because the the conspiracy theory has lots and lots of details of well how could this happen you know why is it that the police don't do more how come we don't know what the how come you still have this wallet right so there are all these questions about coincidences but coincidences are usually just coincidence and and usually that's all they are so so I have said that the theory itself is persuasive which is separate from being true so that part I'm still saying because a lot of people were persuaded it was true so I think that's that's a valid statement to make objectively speaking the other thing I've said and and this might be a revision of something I've said I'm not sure but I'll say it the way I believe it to be true now in an interview Julian Assange some few years ago when he was offering a reward for Seth Rich's to solve Seth Rich's murder he he very clearly signaled in that interview that he wanted us to believe that the Seth rich thing was important to those emails in other words Assange very clearly signaled to the audience watching that he wanted you to believe that Seth rich was murdered because of something involving getting those emails now I said it's very clear that Assange is telling us Seth rich was part of that process and I also said that that WikiLeaks and the sons being the you know the they had person of WikiLeaks I've said that WikiLeaks has never been proven to be liars in other words they haven't published anything that wasn't true so that made me think well he's clearly telling you something and it's coming from a group that has a track record of being right or honest or accurate so put those together I'm gonna now revise my statement so I think this is different from what I might have originally said I would now add to the mix that Assange is not a credible voice on that because he was being accused of working with the Russians and he was suggesting wink wink wink that there was other another explanation for how he got the information and conveniently it was somebody who couldn't talk because he was deceased now if you're Assange and you're trying to stay out of jail you tried not to be killed by the CIA with a drone I mean remember Hillary Clinton actually talked about droning him right so he this was life and death for Assange if you put somebody in a life-and-death situation and perhaps they did get their information from the Russians just speculating here I'm not saying they did if they did would you believe somebody who was trying to save his own life by sending you down the wrong trail not credible might be true but it's not credible you cannot believe that even though Julian Assange has a track record of being accurate you know at least WikiLeaks does you cannot believe him on this topic because his own life was at stake you can't believe somebody's telling you the truth if you know that the lie is the way to stay alive and the truth might get you killed under those conditions there's no such thing as an honest person or there shouldn't be because I would I would trust all of you to lie to save your lives as well we would all lie to save our lives so in summary I am a hundred percent sure that Assange wanted us to believe that Seth rich was part of this story and I'm confident of that his actions in that interview were so plain and obvious and the fact he was offering a reward for Seth Rich's killer which would have no connection to WikiLeaks unless this theory were true all of us suggests that Assange is sending the clearest possible message that he wants us to believe Seth rich was involved and he probably knew that at least the press on the right would take that and run with it which they did so I'm not going to say my current thinking is that we can't trust the sonj on that question and that the Seth rich conspiracy theory is mostly if not entirely a conspiracy theory certainly the killing part I don't believe any part of that all right let's talk about the social media summit that's coming up you know if you all heard about the White House's social media summit it's happening on Thursday tomorrow I guess and the White House has invited a number of creators who have had issues with no I'm not going somebody's asked me I'm I will not be attending that and did I get invited I'm going to say no comment so somebody asked me if I got invited to the White House summit and I thought to myself I I don't know if that would be private or personal if I had so I think that the so if I had been invited to worry if I had not been invited I don't think I would comment on it so that's so it's a no comment coming but I'm not attending and I was just watching John Avlon over at CNN doing doing a little piece talking about it and here's how he described it he said that the social media summit would be like a Star Wars bar scene from the right now if you haven't seen the Star Wars movies with the bar scenes that's where all the different aliens and creatures go that's in the same bar so the implication was that it's a bunch of freaks so CNN is already trying to prep the world for this summit being a bunch of freaks so that it can't be taken seriously so that's pretty pretty harsh now to make his point he gave some examples and so he wanted you to think that the following people were basically Star Wars alien like freaks associated with the political right and so he talks about Ben garrison cartoonist and there's a few cartoons that have been accused he's been accused of anti spent ik cartoons I haven't heard his response to any of those accusations so I don't have an opinion on whether whether he intended anything like that or what he was thinking so I'm gonna hold my opinion on that because I've only heard one side although I will say that the cartoons are certainly alarming as Jake Tapper called called out when he tweeted about it you can't really look at his comics and say well I don't see what you're talking about with that anti-semitism because looks anti said it looks anti-semitic too but I haven't heard the cartoonists explanation of what he was thinking whether it was interpreted the way he wanted to be interpreted and without that I'm not gonna I'm not gonna give you a final opinion but keep in mind that the White House social media summit is about free speech on the social platforms the whole point of free speech is you don't want to invite a bunch of mainstream down the middle people who have never violated anybody's rules what would be the point of inviting people who had never had a problem with censorship there would be no point of a summit of those people so the whole point of the summit is to get the people who were who were kind of in that dangerous zone and to see how they were treated because if the people who are saying dangerous things that maybe you think are inaccurate maybe you think are a little bit too Haiti that's where you need to figure out where the line is they're they're the people defining the boundaries so of course they should be invited so whether or not they've done things which you don't like or they haven't there are the very people who need to be invited they they define the edge but but the next person he throws into the list is our famous meme maker carpe dump them so see the inventions that carpe dump them is invited in the context of saying it's going to be like a Star Wars bar scene now if you don't know carpet ontem he makes these great memes the president has tweeted his memes two or three times so far so you sort of the premier meme maker for the political right but he's also the most normal person you'll ever meet like there's there's nothing controversial at all his memes get a lot of attention but he's the most normal average guy except that he just used in the right place at the right time with the right skill set so they can ease getting a lot of attention deservedly so but Jonathan throws him in that list like he's a freak base Don what that he's great at making means that that makes you a Star Wars bar freak think about to think about the the bias that's being put into that presentation and then the funny thing is that CNN says that a lot of the people who are being invited our quote conspiracy theorists now I'm sure that that's true meaning that I'm sure that some people who have spread conspiracy theories are probably invited because they again would be exactly the people you would invite because they're the people who are defining the edge and that doesn't mean that they all get their way or that the president's going to back every conspiracy theory that this group of folks is promoting nothing like that but there's simply the people who define the edge and that's the whole point of the summit is to find the edge but anyway for CNN to say that this group is a bunch of conspiracy theorists sort of begs the question what was the whole Russia collusion thing what was the whole fine fine people hoax the primary news on CNN is conspiracy theories it's fake news so that's sort of the pot calling the kettle black there all right let's talk about something else is it my imagination or are Democrats little by little making the brand of the United States racism this is my imagination because when it happened with the make America great again hats and mega I said to myself okay well that's really about Trump you know people hate Trump's so they're they're gonna say that if you wear a trump hat you must be a racist so it's a racist symbol so I thought to myself well that's not going too far you know I don't like it I wish it didn't happen but they're just it's a standard political process no big deal and then there was the attack on the Betsy Ross flag to which I said well they're not really they're not really against the flag they're against this early version of the flag because it reminds them of slavery and a bad time for you know some people in this country a lot of people so I thought well okay that's a special case but then you also think you've got you've got a capper neck and wrap it now and disrespect for standing for the flag and maybe the flag itself a lot of flag burning going on to which I say well it's just it's sort of in the margins that's you know people have always been burning flags didn't really change much and then but then I saw a story that apparently in the elite Yellin Omar's district there's a local as at board meetings where they've decided to not have the Pledge of Allegiance before the meeting and the reasoning is that they they service all of the residents of the area it's the local government so they service everybody who lives there and there are so many people who live there who are not citizens they're starting with a pledge of allegiance was not appropriate for their local public because so many of them were not Americans to which I say it said to myself again well sort of a special case you know most of America will probably still do their Pledge of Allegiance but there's this one little area where people cared about it and well how much difference does it make you know it's just a local thing but I'm starting to feel that when you start putting it all together that the Democrats have made us a a racist brand it feels like that we're not quite there but it feels like the ruining brand USA and you might say to yourself well maybe we should maybe we should ruin that brand because it has a legacy of slavery bad things do whatever but here's the problem the reason that the United States works as an entity is not the Constitution Constitution is very important but it's not the reason everything works it's not just the capitalism capitalism is great but it's not the reason the one reason that the United States works the reason the United States works is a common set of thinking if we don't have that common set of thinking then all of the other things that are irrelevant if we're not thinking the same way you know nothing works and that thinking is built into our young citizens largely through brainwashing now I say brainwashing because it's a provocative word but we do brainwash our youth we brainwash them to put their hands of their heart and pledge allegiance to actually give their life for their country at a time when children can't make decisions if you're telling the children to to literally stand and pledge allegiance to a flag children don't have critical thinking they are literally being brainwashed is the same I'm not saying we shouldn't do it I'm gonna come down very strong on the side of we should brainwash our youth not just for that but for everything that's that's good and and useful children have to be brainwashed they need to be trained like dogs with treats because they're not capable of making independent good decisions their children so you have to simply give them their programming so that by the time they can make their own decisions they're operating off of some base that would they're already biased toward the country right so even people who end up growing up and turning against their country still feel probably some allegiance to it because it's hard to get all that programming out of your body even if you're higher thinking it overcomes it so here's the thing if you get away if if we accidentally got rid of the Pledge of Allegiance because let's say we decided that there are so many classrooms that don't have a high percentage of citizens yeah there are non-citizens there if we take that thinking and extend it it will get further and further until if you have just one or two non-citizens in a classroom perhaps that teacher will say well let's not do the Pledge of Allegiance it wouldn't be fair to these these two kids if you get to that point every decision you make along the way will make sense so what I just described actually makes sense right that teacher just let's say one teacher or one classroom will say you know I like the Pledge of Allegiance but I can see how it will bother these two students don't need the trouble let's just skip it so you could imagine how you would sort of accidentally get to a place where the brainwashing was no longer effective and that the brand of the United States was racist and nobody would have planned it it would have been nobody's idea to get there it's just what is sort of happened by a whole whole bunch of decisions now I'm seeing in the comments that people are saying Scott Scott you say the slippery slope is not a thing and that I'm saying the word slippery slope all over the screen now and I'm going to confirm that I don't think it's a thing because here's why something's a slippery slope when you notice it's happening if you don't notice it's happening it's just something that's happening that you didn't know about that's not the slippery slope the slippery slope is when we all can see it's happening and then it just keeps on happening forever I say that doesn't exist in the real world because in the real world if you see something that's sliding toward doom the fact that you know it's sliding toward doom is what causes you to get together and fix it so everything that's sliding toward badness gets fixed in our in our human history because we we were rise to the challenge this is different because we don't really see it coming this all of these independent decisions you know one is about the NFL and kneeling one is about some local administration and the Pledge of Allegiance another is about colonial flags there's a little bit about taking down George Washington every one of these things has a pretty good reason I'm in favor of taking down Confederate statues because they're offensive I have a pretty good reason we don't need to talk about that but what I'm suggesting is we should all be aware that the collective effect of all of these small changes even the census I would say is part of this larger picture that if we're not aware that this would chip away at the brainwashing of our children we should be and once we understand that brainwashing the children is necessary and good to maintain something like a coherent country I think we can understand that these little things might be heading us in a direction that's counter productive we'll get rid of this trouble all right so I would say we should just be aware of the unintended consequences of making lots of individual decisions which look good individually we have to be aware that we don't want to lose our brainwashing of the children because that's what makes us an effective country and now here's question what percentage of non-citizens in the United States would make patriotism disappear now you know how these things work you don't have to replace all of the people in the country who are patriotic with you know 100 percent people who are not in order for patriotism to essentially be ineffective but what is the percentage let's say we let's say 20% of the country was not born here and maybe they're just sort of going along with the patriotism thing because it's asked of all citizens but they're not really buying into it that much they just like their situation here at what point do the number of non-citizens become great enough that patriotism has to go away at what point are there enough people in the classroom that nobody has the Pledge of Allegiance anymore right so if if the average classroom is I don't know what percentage over the entire country the average classroom five percent non-citizens maybe for the whole country is it higher than that 20 percent 30 percent but there's some percentage at which we have to stop doing the normal things that brainwash children such as the Pledge of Allegiance so we may be creeping toward that and one way we could know is by a census so the census might help us understand whether the brainwashing we're doing is going to work in the long run all right I think I had at least one other thing I wanted to say yeah I think I hit the big points all right how is this productive I was what productive yeah so I'm making a distinction between the slippery slope that you can all see coming versus something that's happening that you don't see coming so the the loss of patriotism falls into the category of things that I don't think we fully understand is happening and if we did we probably would stop it so there would be a counter force that would pop up somebody says do you think patriotism is bad no I just said patriotism is essential to keep a country together whether this country or another country patriotism is the the idea glue that allows you to work collectively others farm people have pointed this out but that you know human beings we naturally collect into you know family units and that it's not much harder to collect into tribes of I don't know hundred and fifty people but as soon as you get beyond something like a hundred or so people and you become country size or state size you need a common set of beliefs and rules that can make you act cooperatively and this brainwashing is a necessary part of that why does the Pledge of Allegiance equal patriotism seriously somebody's asking me why the pledge of allegiance equals patriotism the pledge of allegiance is literally the brainwashing if you make people say so and by the way if you don't know this maybe there's a part that I should clarify one way one way to brainwash somebody is to get them to say out loud the thing you want them to believe that they don't already believe so let's say you wanted somebody to believe that the the Boston Red Sox were evil I'm just picking something ridiculous alright so somebody likes the Boston Red Sox but you want them to believe that they're the worst team in the world let's use that example so you would say to the person hey I want you to repeat every day the Boston Red Sox are a bad team and the person will say well I don't believe that I think they're a great team they're my favorite team now you say to them I know I know how you believe and I'm not even saying they are bad team but I'm gonna pay you twenty dollars a day to say out loud 15 times a day that the Boston Red Sox are a bad team I'll just I'll just pay you to do it you don't even have to believe it I'm not even asking you to believe it just say it if you came back you would find that if you paid a hundred people to do that and if they started loving the Red Sox they added a hundred people maybe ten of them a few months later would actually have changed their opinion and the book influence gel Dedes work shows this effect if you can get somebody to write or say something that is not their opinion and you check back with them in a year there's a high likelihood that it has become their opinion because they said it or because they wrote it saying and writing things actually changes how you think about them that's a well-known phenomenon so the Pledge of Allegiance when people say I pledge allegiance to the to the United States causes them to have a mental state it causes them to be rewired fairly permanently to have an allegiance to the country it's what it's what allows us to have a military if we didn't have them if we didn't have allegiance to the country it's good luck forming a volunteer military and that's pretty essential so the Pledge of Allegiance is a necessary part of keeping the country functioning it's the brainwashing that makes a difference and likewise through the sporting events when when everybody stands up at a sporting event to salute the flag what happens mentally to the people who were not so the people who were not as respectful to the flag well they look around and they're in this giant stadium and they see all the others all the other people stand up and put their hands over their heart and face the flag and the people who are just like I'll just go along with it I don't want to be the one everybody looks at if I don't stand up there's no law that says I have to stand up but everybody else is standing up I'm just gonna go along with it what happens to you if you just keep going along with it well you become you become that simply pretending you are going along with it will actually make you more respectful of the flags so all of these little customs that we have are not for fun they're not to feel good they have a deeply important functional absolutely required purpose and if you miss that and you just think it's a it's a tradition it's just a ceremony it's a stupid thing that conservatives do if you think any of those things you're missing one of the most important aspects of human existence that we have to form beliefs that become who we are and then collectively who we are as a country all right just looking at your comments social cohesion that is correct team building somebody says he likes opening doors for women or standing when they come into a room and they those days are over I'd like to ask that question so there's a generational difference obviously how many of you if your honor let's say you're on a date or you're just with your spouse or your girlfriend going somewhere how many of you the guys will walk around and open the car door for the woman that you're with in the comments tell me how many of you if it's just you and your wife or your girlfriend and you're going somewhere how many of you will walk around and open the door for the woman so look at the comments for those of you who are watching it in replay if you don't see the comments we've got one never but I'm getting usually yes yes yes yes yes I do I do I do mimimi I do yes yes yes always now that's probably because a lot of you are Trump supporters you're more likely to be conservative if you're watching this periscope yeah so there's some customs that that looked sticky yeah it looks like most of you do yeah you know I I used to appreciate the the door opening tradition in part because it created order you know if I'm walking toward a door at the same time with Christina I like knowing that it's my job to open the door not because of any you know brainwashing reason it's not just you know a show of you know affection or respect it's because then we don't have to like oh you got the door no I got the door it just it just makes everything easier I just like knowing who's supposed to do what in which situation because it's just one less thing to think about so I appreciate having these little rules that make things easier we've got one who is not a trump supporter but a persuasion student well welcome Molly somebody says do I I do I do but not every time so so I tend to make a distinction for opening car doors I open regular doors anytime that I'm near that near them but for car doors it sort of depends on the context so if I went out to a nice dinner and Christine is dressed up and we're leaving a restaurant heading to the toward the core car I would most likely open that door if we stopped at CVS to pick up a prescription and she walks through the door first and she gets to the car before I do you know she doesn't really want to wait for me to catch up to her to open the door so in those cases I don't but I do it when the situation seems to call out for it and not when it doesn't all right yes car doors are a different situation than regular building doors he says I don't understand this car door opening thing Jenny says that Jenny I'm guessing that you were a younger person because I think some of these traditions probably don't make sense at a certain age you should carry an extra jacket just in case the puddles how many of you have had this experience have you ever gone out on a date and you check the weather and you see that it's gonna be cold later it's not cold at the moment but it's gonna be pretty cold by the time you're driving home and you're the guy just talking to the guys now I want to see how many have had this experience and so you you say to your date hey you might want to bring a jacket because it's gonna be cold and your date says I don't need a jacket and you say well I just checked the weather it's gonna be 60 you know we might be sitting outdoors or something you might want a jacket and your day says I don't need a jacket now it could be because it doesn't have a jacket that goes with the outfit it could be any reason and so you say all right well I think I'll be cold so I'll bring a jacket for myself and I made sure that you'd knew that was gonna be cold and you could bring a jacket too now you get to the restaurant you sit down and there's a draft and it's really cold in the restaurant what happens to your jacket where's your jacket go well you're not going to be sitting there with your warm little jacket while your date is freezing on the other side of the table right you give up your jacket that's the first thing you do you what you've all done it right you give up your jacket somebody here says never I'll never give up my jacket I can't tell you how many times I've said it I've said someone somewhere very cold because I remember to bring my jacket but but I gave it up if somebody says I keep a straight jacket in the backseat fur so he says bring a spare jacket it's throw to in the car I I have done that I have I have brought two jackets and one in the back just as the emergency jacket I'm looking at your comments that I'm laughing because so many of you have had the same the same experience and so somebody that somebody is saying she won't bring a jacket ever I keep a spare in the car most of I've seen the guys here just laughing because I've never heard anybody talk about this before but it seems to be a universal experience somebody says I stopped giving up my jacket so somebody's using tough love on their on their wife I teach my wife freezing is awesome somebody says oh and somebody's ask about what about walking on the road side of the sidewalk how many of the guys choose the side that you're gonna walk on if you're walking somewhere in public so that you're on the the defensive side in other words you're closer to the street or you're closer to wherever the dangerous how many of you will change your position to make sure that you're on the protective side how many guys do that let me see that in the comments now I do that when it's obvious to do that but I don't do it everywhere because most places I walk are so completely safe than it doesn't make any difference but I'm always thinking about it and there's some places that I'll walk with Cristina where I have to keep changing like I'll be on this side and because we're on this side of the street but then I've got to change to the other side because we're on the other side of the street so I'm continually like changing sides to be on the one that's the more protective side if somebody's I see somebody in the distance walking down the street who looks a little sketchy I like change sides again so I'm continually changing sides it's a big pain than they ask somebody says they wrote a paper on that subject it looks like most of the guys do yeah I have to say that can you believe that I got to the I got to my current age without ever hearing that was even a thing christina is actually the first person who told me that's even a thing I've never even heard of it I you know instinctively I of course would always put myself between the woman I'm with and danger so if I saw a danger I would of course position myself so I was between the danger and the person I was protecting you know I've always done that that's just automatic you can't even turn that off if you want to there's just automatic but I've never thought that walking down the street in a safe place it would make any difference and I've been informed that at least from a psychological feeling about whether or not you feel that somebody is there for you it does make a difference it makes it different psychologically and so I'm willing to buy into that set of manners if you will because it if it makes somebody else feel good that's okay somebody says if my husband did those things I might think he lost his mind elevators somebody says men should enter an exit elevators first – hmm I don't know anybody who doesn't let women and children and the elderly end of elevators first I think we all do that and I'm worried about the day will come when somebody starts letting me out of the elevator first like I I think that day I think I think I'm done when that happens I'll pack it up here's another one have you ever have you ever gone for a walk and when you're getting ready for a walk you don't want to have a a lot of things in your pockets you don't want to you don't want to be carrying anything because you're gonna go for a walk the last thing you want to do if you go for a walk is to have something in your hand right I hate going for a walk if I'm carrying something I want my my hands to walk free and so you'll say to your date or your wife you say we're gonna go for a walk and I'll clear my pockets I'll make sure I'm not I don't have a camera with me back in the days when people have cameras and and your date or your wife will walk out and she'll have something in her hand and she'll say do you have an extra pocket and the next thing you know you're sort of a pack mule like all your pockets are filled with phones and chargers and and lipsticks and stuff because women don't have pockets and or don't have as many pockets so somebody says not in Japan I wonder if it's wonder is different so it's very hard to if you're a man it's very hard to plan taking your walk Oh Larry David has a funny skit on that I'll bet he does I haven't seen it cargo shorts yeah I understand there's a there's a controversy about whether men should ever wear cargo shorts some say no I would I would extend that controversy to say that beyond a certain age let's say the age is 30 ish you know maybe mid 30s beyond a certain age there are no clothes that look good on men except maybe a suit or a tuxedo or something but in terms of normal everyday clothes clothes don't look good on men over 35 or so there's just nothing you could do you could wear cargo shorts on your head you could wear a dress it doesn't matter there's nothing you could do men do not look good in clothes over maybe 35 period now here's a little exercise for you go to your local mall and go to the men's clothing department go to the casual section where it's you know casual shirts and pants and stuff like that go to the casual section and then find a man's shirt that you like and you think would look good on you if you're a man over to say 35 go in the dressing room and try on that shirt and you'll say to yourself what the hell is going on I'm in an entire show or full of shirts made for people who're male and not a single piece of clothing looks good on me what's up with that and then then here's the second part walk out of the changing room and walk around the mall and look at all the men who dressed themselves that day presumably to go to the mall what are they wearing a hundred percent of the men at the mall are wearing t-shirts they got for free they have usually a company name or some kind of organization on them a hundred percent every man who decided how to dress himself put on a t-shirt you got for free then look at all the clothing in Macy's or Nordstrom or whatever that's the casual clothing you won't see any of that on a human being you won't see anybody wearing those clothes the the entire clothing industry for men I don't even think they're pretending to make clothes for men anymore I'm starting to think that the men's department in clothing stores is just because they want to make sure they have a men's department I don't even think they're trying I do have some untucking shirts and the untucked shirts are the first time that I've seen the company saving themselves huh what if I'm just going to spit ball this what if I now don't I don't think anybody's tried this and maybe there's a reason nobody's tried it before but I'm just going to throw this out with your crazy idea that this is the untuck it people having their first meeting just go throw this out there what if we made a shirt for men that looked good on a man and the other people in the room said ah can you do that like it seems like somebody would be doing that you know if that were a thing I'm pretty sure somebody would have done it already right and you see the crazy founder of untucking saying no no nobody's done it but I think I think people would buy it if we made it and so he makes this company untuk is one of the the huge success stories because they made a shirt that looks good on demand nobody thought of that before now to be fair as soon as I saw this I said I gotta have one of those the first day I saw their commercial on TV I said I will own that shirt somebody actually is trying to make a shirt that looks good on a man I've got a hole measured so I went out and got a few untucking shirts I was like these are great I'm gonna buy like all of their clothes I'll just get everything that's my size and then you find out that the first few shirts fit you perfectly the other ones are weird and they get wrinkly and they have strange material and they look terrible but I will say that there's I did find within the untuck it universe pretty much all of the shirts that I wear that are button-up there's there's nothing else I don't even see another shirt from another company that I would put on my body really somebody's saying Tommy Bahama Tommy Bahama makes these big shirts for overweight people let's just call it what it is Tommy Bahama's is a store that makes clothing for overweight people and if you're not overweight you can't wear any of that stuff and also big people you just got to be big foot to wear that stuff anyway how many of you necks do I own all of my vmx are from the same company American Rag and I just bought a bunch of them and I just wear them until they wear out that I'll buy some more yeah I'm going to long so I'm gonna end now that's all for now talk to you later bye for now

33 thoughts on “Episode 593 Scott Adams: Census Controversy, Conspiracy Theories, Social Media Summit at WH

  1. If I recall correctly, I read in Mayhew's London Labor and the London Poor that walking on the inside of the street was to shield your significant other from people throwing the waste from their chamber pot on them from out of a window.

  2. Scott Adams is a writer who is fully aware of nuances of words, hence, it is not lost on him that “brain washing” is always used in a negative sense.

    When a father teaches his children to respect their mother, is that teaching or brain washing?

    The Leftist tendency to re-define the nuance of words may treat all teaching as being brain-washing.

    The Judeo-Christian teachings from the Bible believes there are intrinsic universal truths. Hence, to pass these onto children is teaching, not brain-washing.

    Whereas, if someone does not believe in universal truths – but merely sees morals as the preferred behavior that brings most benefit to a social group, then, from that perspective, all education may be seen as brain-washing towards societal norms.

    In many ways, Scott is still, at heart, a Leftist who happens to have seen the logical side of the Right.

  3. "men over 35 don't look good in clothes, period" "people who say 'blah blah, period' concede the argument because they're not interested in data" i accept your apology.

  4. 7:49 "… but would the different outcomes be worse?" Scott, of course that question is indeterminate. The fact is that the different outcome would be of lower integrity. For better or worse, the closer to reality, the better. The truth is always the best data.

  5. Once again, Scott shows his ignorant understanding of the Federal Government. No Scott the federal government manifestly does NOT have a database of every citizens address linked to their social security number.

  6. Sounds like Scott is redefining 'slippery slope' to not lose the argument. We see the slippery slope of gun control and social media censorship just like he sees the slippery slope of anti-patriotism in Omar's district. It's just a matter of who sees it and who doesn't.

  7. Lol its not that over the age of 35 nothing looks good, its just most men have no idea what looks good on them, after the age of 30 -35 the clothes that made you look like a young 20 something makes you look like a badly dressed dad. lol

  8. The census is used to adjust representation in the House. Allowing non-citizens to be included in the count will add delegates in areas with high illegal immigrant populations.

  9. Wouldn’t the ideal way to honor people who embody important civic virtues (like gallantry, idealism, patriotism, independence, bravery) be to link them, in our collective memory, with the terrible things those ESSENTIAL virtues were once used to conceal and rationalize?

    Isn't that an ideal public monument? It's a vital message from the past about a very complex set of truths that are easy to forget if not on permanent public display.

  10. Putin macaroni art lol
    i use a cane and i use to do landscaping fanny pack are cool i have ms so yes my boyfriend does walk to make sure im not going to fall down. i will trip over anything

  11. It is an injustice, and should be regarded as sedition, that the number of illegal aliens is used along with the number of citizens to determine the number of electoral college votes allotted to each state. Illegal aliens should not have voter representation through the electoral college. By not including the citizenship question, the states that harbor the most illegal aliens will be rewarded with more electoral college votes and more funding, which is tantamount to giving foreigners who live in this country illegally voter representation through the electoral college and, of course, will enable Democrats to get more electoral college votes. How that strikes any person who wants America to remain sovereign as an acceptable idea is beyond me. Do you want your political parties engaging in foreigner-importation contests to win elections? Did you witness the nonsense that went on during the Democrat debates — speaking Spanish and promising illegal aliens every free government handout that they could think of? This will eventually lead to the end of United States sovereignty if the citizenship question is blocked and all the other measures the Democrats are trying to implement to increase the influx of foreigners continue to be tolerated.

  12. Just count all the people you deport and keep going until there aren't any more to deport. The number you get will be all of the illegal aliens who were in your country.

  13. The leftists hearing all the racist dog whistles none of the rest of us can hear are just declaring themselves to be racists. After all, it's a whistle only racists can hear, right?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *