The Comedy Cellar: Live from the Table - Chemda Khalili & Sally Satel

Episode Date: November 9, 2018

Chemda Khalili is a singer and podcaster. She is the co-host of the long-running podcast, “Keith and the Girl.”   Sally Satel is an American psychiatrist, lecturer at Yale School of Medicine, and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. She is the author of several books, including, “P.C. M..D.: How Political Correctness is Corrupting Medicine,” and “Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience.” Her writing often appears in such outlets as The Atlantic and the Wall Street Journal, where she penned the article titled, “Does it Take a Shrink to Evaluate Trump?”  

You're listening to The Comedy Cellar, live from the table, on the Riotcast Network, riotcast.com. Good evening, everybody. Welcome to The Comedy Cellar show here on Sirius XM Channel 99. We're here the day after the midterms. Dan's very upset. Our guest, Chemda Khalili. Is that always been your last name? Yeah Remember you never went by it before? Yeah, I usually leave it out Because more people can't pronounce my first name

So we'll get through that first And Chemda was a singer in my band years ago She's a singer and podcaster She is the co-host of the long-running podcast Keith and the Girl Which is one of the first podcasts to really... Exist? No, well, to make an impact, a national impact.

I mean, you guys had one of the first people to have a big viral following. And Sally, how do I pronounce her? Sattel? Sattel. Sally Sattel is an American psychiatrist, lecturer at Yale School of Medicine, and resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. She's the author of several books, including PCMD, How Political Correctness is Corrupting Medicine, and Brainwashed, The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience. Her writing often appears in such outlets as The Atlantic and The Wall Street Journal, where she penned the article, Does It Take a Shrimp?

Does It Take a Shrink? Does It Take a Shrink to shrink to evaluate Trump? By the way, just before we get into that, I would like to issue a warning to you. I'm sure she's a very bright woman and probably has a lot of good things to say. What a preface. Don't be afraid to challenge her

if you feel that something that she says is incorrect. You're getting permission. Because sometimes we have an expert, somebody that wrote a book, and you just assume that since they wrote a book, everything must be true. And I want you to go with your instincts because you have good instincts. I don't know that that's the case or not. I haven't read the book. So I read this column a long time ago.

But I would say, so, okay, there's so many things to talk about with a real doctor. A psychiatrist is a medical doctor. It's not like a psychologist. I don't really believe in psychology at all. I can write the scripts. Psychiatrists, in my understanding of it, they actually view the brain as another physical part of the body. It's not like this mystical thing where you just talk to somebody and it just straightens

everything out up there. In the spirit of Descartes, yes, you do. Talk into the microphone so I can... I am. This is it. There are psychiatrists that practice Freudian therapy as well that do believe in the talking cure, if you will. Sure, but Freud was a neurologist, and actually he moved into psychoanalysis afterwards

because he felt we'll never really capture the neuroscience of the mind. And we're certainly learning things, but some people are very skeptical, and that's the ultimate question. But I want to get to Trump right away. Did you see this movie, Three Identical Strangers? Yes.

I want to ask you about that later. Okay, so tell us about Trump. Is Trump a narcissist? First of all, is it okay for you to diagnose him without ever meeting him? Yeah, frankly not according to the American Psychiatric Association, but that's the whole point of what I wrote

is you don't have to be a psychiatrist. When you're talking about character pathology, personality disorders, which almost every one of my colleagues will endorse, say that he has such. And a certain number of books have been written about it. You look at the behavior,

and when you have months and now years of behavior and, you know, transcripts and TV. It's so well documented, his patterns of behavior and speech and attitudes and dispositions, that you have all the evidence is there for everyone to see. That he's a narcissist. Well, to be honest, the diagnosis almost doesn't matter. If you're talking about fitness for office, then you can observe the kinds of attitudes that he has. And it's no secret. It's not something that is privileged information. I mean, you can see the lack of curiosity. You can see the tendency towards revenge and vendettas and

in his lack of knowledge about so much about the world and the political process. But is it psychosis or carelessness? Oh, certainly not. I don't believe he's lost touch with reality. Some might disagree. But I don't think we're talking about psychosis at all it's a long standing series of behavioral traits that served him quite well in one domain don't translate very well

arguably into the political realm did you ever see that Albert Brooks movie Defending Your Life and you get up there and they show clips from their childhood that explains why. If you could see clips from Trump's childhood that in your mind would explain what we're seeing now as the adult, what kind of things do you think we see?

Oh my God, I so picture him being diaper changed at five. But, you know, I'm not a psychiatrist. All right, you would. It's a good question All right, you would. It's a good question, right? Yes. If you were dealing with a male narcissist, you'd probably hone in on, you know, wait for it, father-son, you know, dynamics. And I understand they're quite complex. Well, they've really been, a lot of them have been exposed already in the press. But you would, I think, you'd look for patterns of whether the father, the kinds of expectations,

whether the father showed much love, whether he... You would think the father didn't show a lot of love? I'm just throwing out the kinds of things you'd be interested in. Whether there was a sense of unconditional love, that no matter what I did, I was loved and accepted. And you'd wonder if those kinds of transgressions... You're saying we don't need to wonder, and he's trying to ask you... No, I'm saying that's what you'd look for. Right, but I'm saying if you did get unconditional love as a child,

that would make you less likely to be a narcissist? Well, you know, these kinds of situations are... There's so many variables involved. But, you know, formative years and relationships with parental figures usually figure pretty prominently

in how your personality develops. There is a genetic dimension. I was going to say, if you take identical twins separated at birth, I bet you they're both narcissists. That's my theory. Well, temperament does have

a significant heritable component. You know, whether you're a conscientious person, whether you can tolerate stress, whether you're open-minded. I mean, these things do have actually genetic components, and one would inherit that from a father and mother as well. So exactly as you mentioned, these sort of adopted away twin studies, that's why they're so prized in personality science and psychology, because at least you have one variable that's controlled for, which is a genetic composition. Can I ask a question?

If I had a kid, what behaviors would I be looking for knowing that I'm creating a Trump? Well, wouldn't it be based more on her behavior? If you had a kid, how you treat your kid. What would that kid's response to my behavior or his atmosphere or whatever it is. She wants to make sure she doesn't create a Trump. Like, what are

we looking for in our kid? We go, oh, we need to step back and talk about. What are the danger signs of budding narcissism in our children? Yeah. Okay, one thing would be how he relates or she relates to other, you know, peers. And how would they relate to others if they are a narcissist? There's usually a deficit of empathy. Okay.

So that's very important. And how do kids display that? Well, they feel, I mean, even, you know, Paul Bloom was a psychologist at Yale. Because kids hate each other. I remember loving my brothers, and I broke their faces. Well, that's different. You were like, there is a difference in siblings, the way siblings interact. But actually, babies, you know, humans within the first year of life actually show a degree of empathy.

And when they see another child being treated unfairly, in other words, every other child is given a piece of candy but that one. They might either give him that candy or somehow try to comfort them. I mean, this is, if something is expressed so early in life, it's clearly an inborn trait. Well, I'll tell you this. Of all the things you don't want your kid to be, narcissism is certainly not on the top of the list. You know, you've got borderline personality disorder. Depressed. Psychopathology.

Bipolar affective disorder. Pedophilia. You know, all those things. How many have you been diagnosed in that list? I'm trying to remember what I said. I think that the question with you, if you're a parent, like, Noam, you have kids. Yeah. So if you treated one of your kids better than the other one throughout.

The nicest ones usually get, yeah, go ahead. And always did that, I think he has a better shot at being narcissistic. Am I right? Well, when it comes to how you form a personality, I think the important point is there are just so many variables. And you can see that with two kids raised in the same family, with the same parents, not separated by so many years that they've effectively grown up with other parents, which is the case if you're 10 when your sibling is born, let's say, and your father's already more wealthy or has lost a job, where the dynamics in the family have changed.

But even when kids are born closely together, raised together, gone to the same school together, largely share the same peer group, they can still be differences. Now, in terms, if we look at mental illness, one defines mental illness, or at least one definition, is that which impacts your life and makes it worse. Seems like Trump's having a great old time. Now, to what extent, you know, is it really, at least for him, maybe other people are being adversely affected.

But don't narcissists hate themselves regardless of how we see it? Well, that's why it's so hard, frankly, to get them into therapy, because they don't think that anything is wrong. And the typical scenario is the wife dragged them in saying, I'm going to leave you unless you get help. And he's sitting there with his arms folded. There's nothing wrong, honey. It's you or it's, you know, blaming, displacing responsibility on everyone else. I have two questions about that. The first question, I don't know. Okay. The first question is, I was reading about narcissism and one of the classic traits of narcissism is a bad

relationship with your children. And I just noticed that actually Trump doesn't seem to have that symptom. He seems to have a real bond with his kids, except for maybe Tiffany. Didn't the wife of a woman raise most of the kids? He wasn't that involved. I don't know. I mean, they could be all an act,

but it seems to me like Reagan, for instance, famous, had a bad relationship with his kids, and it was well known. I mean, they could be all an act, but it seems to me, like Reagan, for instance, Lee Famous had a bad relationship with his kids, and it was well known. I mean, it was just not a... Yeah, but he wasn't as sexually attracted to his kids as Trump is. I know. But the other question,

maybe the more important question is, if he has a personality disorder, does he warrant our hatred or our sympathy? Because I'm always confused sometimes. People say, he's crazy. He's got cognitive decline, whatever. I can answer that question. Then why do they, let the doctor say, why do they hate him so much?

That's such a good question. You wouldn't hate your grandmother if all of a sudden they started acting crazy. Right, but what I read about narcissism is that empathy feeds the narcissist, and so it scares me, so I love that you asked that. Oh, well, doctor, go ahead. I think, well, to tell you the truth, it depends on how close you are with them. I mean, if it is a relative, you can have both those sentiments, just like people have when they're, frankly, some family members have drug problems. Of course, they want the best for them. They wish they'd get help, but they also, you can't

help but resent people who've made such a hash of the family sometimes. Can they get better? It's hard. Personality disorders are hard to change. But one of the things you don't want to do is, frankly, enable it. And unfortunately, when people are in a position... I mean, once... But once you're in that position,

and this is true of people in Hollywood, too, it's very hard to say no to powerful and wealthy people. I'm sorry, we know this. We know a lot of famous people, and I haven't figured out the chicken and egg question yet, but there is an aspect to them that does seem to be different than you and me. The way they just basically dominate the conversation, will just change the subject as if no one else is talking,

interrupt or whatever. I mean, Keith, you know what I'm referring to? Yeah. Well, because I think that the fact that when someone's made it, made it, so-called made it or whatever, they feel like they have the answer to everything. When they get on top of the game, they're like the first one in time.

They know for sure what's going on. They're sure of themselves. Right, even though it just landed on you this time. Well, I just wonder sometimes just after a certain amount of time of everybody just catering to you. Of course, you're rewarded for it. I mean, it's simple. You lose your way.

It's also a lot of behaviorism. I mean, you do something and there's no consequences and there may even be a reward. So why not keep repeating it? I'd like to address briefly with Noam's question about whether we blame them or feel sorry for them. Because I think that question has less to do with psychiatry and more to do with philosophy. Okay. And the answer is...

Oh. I told you you'd get answers. Go ahead. The answer to the question is, no one is to blame, to quote the great Howard Jones. Remember that song? Yeah. Because free will does not exist.

Oh. As the doctor may or may not agree. I knew you were going to say that. Well, because I've made this point in the past. We can resent people because that's the natural human inclination. But to be perfectly rational, you wouldn't resent anybody.

When I pass by a prison, I feel the same sadness as I do when I pass by a hospital. People that, through no fault of their own, wound up in prison or a hospital, to me, I see fundamentally no real difference. Well, even if you are a hard determinist, and it sounds like where you are...

And a hard determinist is good to find. Yes. Even then... That's officially your meme. That's a good one, actually. But even then, which is to say, basically, you know, everything's caused, and you can't interrupt that causal chain. So essentially everything that happens is sort of destined to happen.

It's not fatalism so much, but everything that came before leads up to what is present now. Even if you believe that, which I don't, I'm more of a compatibilist, you have to recognize that people respond to contingencies. They respond to carrots and sticks, incentives and sanctions. Absolutely. Hence the prison, which is very contingent. Can we just agree

that we need to be prison? There is a difference between hospitals and prisons. For deterrence as well. Can we just get that out there? There's a definite difference between hospitals and prisons. Okay. Yeah, because he said he has the same...

Dan's point is... What it really comes down to is whether a person has any control. And, you know, people who are schizophrenic, who are hallucinating, who are psychotic, their control is significantly diminished. But if we're going to let the schizophrenic slide because he's ill, then we've got to let the

asshole slide. No, that's what not guilty for reason of insanity is. But I'm saying people who have personality disorders still can control it. You've seen him in various situations. That capacity still exists. Right, but he thinks even the controlling it... So let me just make clear what I think Dan is saying.

Everything is atoms, electrons, neutrons, all that. And if you knew every possible law of nature, of physics, and how every atom will respond, you could, from the beginning of time, predict to the end of time because everything happens as a response,

as a predictable response of something else. And so what Dan is saying is that it's all, it's already all in the cards, right? That's what you're saying? Yeah, roughly, although... And even in the hospital, even the medicine, even the doctor giving you the medicine, that's all, it's all one grand preordained thing.

Well, it may not be predictable, but it's also not changeable. Do you believe in randomness? Well, it may not be predictable, but it's also not changeable. Do you believe in randomness? Well, I don't know. That doesn't get you any further. That's scary, right? If there is real randomness, then it's not predictable. I'm just saying this. If you were born in

1886 to the Hitler family, with Hitler's exact brain, you would be Hitler. All right. And that's it. Does that mean we can't disrupt our own timeline? That's what it means.

No, it's not fatalism. It's different. You can. Sorry, Norm. You can deliberate. You can think about things. You can make different choices. But you is a...

No, but there is... But you are certainly biased towards making certain decisions based on your background. Yes, but once I'm aware of my bias, doesn't that change my time? It can. That's the whole point of therapy.

Yeah, but you're a compatibilist and I'm a hard... Hard. Hard. What's the word again? Determinist. What happens to you when you change your mind? Does it blow your mind?

When I change my mind, it's because it was preordained that I would change my mind. I see. So you would have come to that information that would have you change your mind. That's already predetermined. Well, what I'm saying is that you are who you are. Without putting too fine a point on it. As I said, if you were born in Hitler's exact situation with Hitler's exact brain,

you'd have been Hitler. That's my point. I just want to say... But the doctor disagrees. But she's a compartmentalist. Compatibilist. Getting back to just the initial point is that it is not very evolved

to think that somebody is suffering from a neurological decline and use that as a reason to hate them or to feel resentment towards them. They're sick. And people can't seem to decide with Trump whether he's a healthy guy who is detestable or a sick person,

who obviously you're not supposed to detest a sick person. You can feel we need to protect ourselves from him, get him out of office, get him in a hospital, but you don't hate somebody for the manifestation of their sickness. That's why we don't put crazy people in jail when they commit crimes. Well, we also don't put crazy people in jail because we feel that deterrence doesn't work with the crazy. I mean, we do put crazy people in jail.

We contain them for our safety, though. But we don't punish them. That's right. We don't take a punitive approach. Okay, so you also wrote PCMD, How Political Correctness is Corrupting Medicine. I'm dying to hear about this

because I believe it's true and I don't know anything about it. I guess how much I hate political correctness. Go ahead. Tell us how it's correct. You're so delighted. Because it has to be.

One of my favorites. Because it has to be. I don't know anything about it, but it has to be. I wrote that 20 years ago. Wow. Now I know I'm so advanced. Rewrite it. Do an update.

But in that book, one chapter is on something called, I think I called it therapy for victims. But it's about a kind of therapy called multicultural therapy, which actually still exists and is taught. And in fact, at the University of San Francisco in their psychiatric unit, it was divided up. And I've understood from friends that this structure still exists. They actually have a ward for patients who are African-American, a ward for Asians. I don't think there's one for Caucasians. There's one for Hispan don't think there's one for Caucasians. There's one for Hispanics. Everything else is for Caucasians. Oh, that's how it is. And the basic philosophy behind this is that the reason that you are

having psychiatric problems, probably not outright psychosis, but depression, anxiety, difficulty coping is because of the environment, because it is biased against you. It's just victimology on steroids. And it's such a dangerous way to do therapy because the whole point of people who have problems in living, they have to know what part they can control, even if it's true that they may have been discriminated against. Even if all that is true, you have to think carefully about what are the things that can come under your control, how you can circumvent it. You want to map out the landscape of factors that are impinging upon you.

And some you, frankly, have no control over. And others, you know, you do. So if you don't separate, put a lot of thought into trying to separate things out and say, well, I'm depressed because racism, that's not very therapeutic. You're not learning anything about yourself. You're not learning how to navigate the environment any better or your relationships, which is not to say that racism

and malign forces in society don't exist. They do, but you can't. And we're against them. Yes. Can I say to your point of the quote, I'm mad because... We've been joined by Dave Jaskow, by the way,

but don't mind him. Go ahead. The quote, I'm mad because racism, I think is just the starting point that I think people who are the victims

of racism are saying because we haven't acknowledged that worldwide yet. So we're still yelling about that because we're still trying to acknowledge it,

which is the first step. I know I'm not a psychiatrist but it's the first step is admitting to blah blah blah and I think that's part of the first step and I think people are angry because everyone's responding from the place of I don't agree about this first step

I don't agree that you're a victim of this you could do this you could do that this is here for you blah blah blah is dismissing that first point and trying to rush through it to get to the rest of the therapy. But, you know, I understand what you're saying. And I think there's some I think there's certainly some some truth to unacknowledged forms of oppression. And again, in a therapeutic setting, the job is to separate out what sort of was preexisting and may have held you back and really may have been impinged upon you and how you're reacting to it.

There are more or less constructive ways to react to it. But are people not looking for that? They're just, some people are stuck on that first step of racism. They're stuck on it because. They might be stuck on it. But the last thing you need is a therapist to come along and say, you're right to be stuck on it because... They might be stuck on it, but the last thing you need is a therapist to come along and say, you're right to be stuck on it. Not right to be stuck on it.

You're right to have felt this way. You're right that this did happen to you. You're right that these are the causes outside of you, but in your perspective. Now we're going to go from there and go, here's how you responded to that as a kid. Exactly. It's just it doesn't go further. But that's the therapist's problem, not the victim's problem, right? Exactly.

But doctor, this is the thing. I see people reacting to things with tremendous emotion today. That they didn't react to the same things when I was a kid in that way. For instance, hearing a racist speaker. I remember going to see Mayor Kahana speak at Tufts. And we handled it. You weren't the object of his ire. Doesn't matter. And there were

people who were. There were Arabs there, too. And now, people would be going into safe rooms and trembling and crying. What's going on there? We're almost priming the pump. Give me another example. When Norm MacDonald got in trouble for defending Louis C.K. a little bit,

and Jimmy Fallon had to disinvite him from The Tonight Show, and he said to Norm MacDonald, Jimmy said to him, Norm, people are crying. People on my staff are crying. Like, we can't put you on because of these words you said about Louis. And I thought to myself, well, 15 years ago when Michael Richards used the N-word over and over and over again,

two days later he went on the Letterman show and nobody told him how to go. And the staff didn't cry. I'm like, why didn't they? There were no black people working on that show. No, no, no. I'm being very serious. And I feel like we're creating sensitivity here. And then no, no, no. I'm being very serious. And I feel like we're creating

sensitivity here and then humans, I mean, you could see, we see in different cultures, you can create a tremendous sensitivity

to something and the response is real but we're feeding into it rather than trying, like I said, a sensitivity training. We should be giving desensitivity training.

Well, can I speak from? No, let Dr. Yes. Two things. The first is, and I know you've had him as a guest before, Jonathan Haidt's book, Coddling of the American Mind. That tells you a lot of how it goes into the elements of child rearing that may have contributed to this sensitivity. But I'll tell you, I think that my profession actually contributed to it in a way.

And one of the things that captured me back after 9-11 was the obsession that psychiatry and psychology and the well-meaning helping professionals had about how traumatized the normal person would be after 9-11. Now, we're all traumatized with sort of a small T, if you know what I mean, because it was horrific. I mean, it was beyond imagining. But whether we needed professional help, if you didn't have that kind of outraged, horrified, I can't sleep, I'm numb, I can't even think, I can't concentrate, if you didn't have that kind of reaction, it would have been pathological.

But the Fed spent over a billion dollars and they just, I think, made one of their last installments last year for therapy. There was an, for New Yorkers. Now, clearly, if you were in the vicinity of the towers, had some relative who died, were involved, you know, yourself, and had a history of psychiatric difficulty, which can be exacerbated in the midst of a, you know, a subsequent horrific event, then you probably are, you know, were at greater risk for a significant depression or a significant or post-traumatic stress disorder. But the average person... Would you say it would trigger you? Yeah, yes. But the, you. But the average person is quite resilient.

People didn't need professional help. They needed each other. They needed information, which is what most people need in a disaster. They needed a community, which they had. And yet the expectation of fragility was so strong that people were basically urged, come into therapy. We can help you. You can't handle

this yourself, which is an absolutely pernicious message to get out there. Okay. I agree with you. I know you wanted to say something. So I'm wondering if, you know, from, from like a general perspective of just growing up. Right. So, um, there was a time where I was more emotional about, um, just generally what happened to me because all of a sudden I woke up from it because I did get, you know, sexually harassed and, you know, all the stuff that comes from you grow up where we grow up and people are just empowered to kind of yell things at you and touch you inappropriately and whatever. And for a long time, I dismissed it and I wouldn't have called it any of these words that now we're putting on it because it's just that's how boys behaved.

I expected it. I expected it. And when it happened, I understood that this is how sex was going to happen. They were going to try to convince me constantly until I gave in. When I woke up from that, like, oh, wait, I was taught wrong. They were taught wrong. They are actually continuing to do this. And all of a sudden

I'm upset. It seems a little out of nowhere, but I feel like in this waking up, when we wake up, even physically, we're groggy and we're a little emotional if somebody starts talking to us. I think that's what's happening as a society. And instead of yelling at each other awake, we might take into account that we're waking up at different times and that this is affecting us all of a sudden, quote unquote. And also on the second point is, I don't think that we're saying this all of a sudden. I think that a lot of people have been saying this for a very long time. And for the first time, it's coming into our Twitter feed or our personal lives. And we're finally admitting things to each other because we were

empowered maybe by anonymous, being anonymous on the internet or writing it down and sending it out instead of face to face because we don't know how to deal with our emotions. And I think that's why maybe everybody went to therapy because no matter what, you need therapy. No matter what, yes, you need the community, but we don't even know how to begin to talk to each other to create a community for ourselves. We've been shut down so much. Our generation, the next generation, then all of a sudden we're seeing these kids going, I know how I feel and I'm upset about it. That's only step one.

I do think we need to take them to step two. Now we take accountability for everything that we can. And that's it. Does that make sense? Well, but you're talking about, she's not denying the doctor, Dr. Sattel. Sattel. Is not denying what you're saying. She's saying in certain instances, the psychiatric profession is encouraging therapy where perhaps none is needed in the situation of sexual harassment.

And the things that you were talking about I don't know that I don't know that you would have the same opinion I guess I'm talking about general trauma so you know that's I just know that my father growing up would tell me stories like that basically like really rank overt anti-semitism was an everyday part of his life and he was like yeah you know like he didn't look back at it for you no but he was he no no for real like it wasn't it was for me. No, not for me.

No, no. I went to a very anti-Semitic junior high. Okay, so. Hold on. Which is more than I can say for the liver. So, my point being is that he just regarded it like that's the way it was, and he didn't feel particularly traumatized by it. And then today, some kid would be in college, and they see one, like, somebody draws a swastika in a bathroom somewhere. And they have a legitimate meltdown.

And at some point, I think that there's something wrong going on. They shouldn't be having that meltdown. Well, part of it is because maybe in your father's generation, this was expected. And when it's not expected, it's all that more dramatic. I don't know. Maybe it's also squished down. Like our father, I don't know how your father is, but my father is not exactly... Did you know...

Your father felt less threatened. I mean, when people feel threatened at baseline is when these kinds of insults mean so much. He was alive during the Holocaust. This is what I'm saying, but he was now in America. Okay, so this was relatively benign. No, actually, though, the reason I became familiar with traumatology is actually the field.

It was because I worked at a VA, and it was after the Vietnam War, but we still treated Vietnam-era vets. You look too young to have been in the profession at that time. I was going to say the same time. My favorite hard determinist. And again, in the name, I guess I should emphasize this more, that everyone's

well-meaning. I don't doubt that for a moment, but in the name of trying to help these poor guys, some of whom were in combat, most of whom actually weren't. You know, only 15% of soldiers in the Vietnam War were actually exposed to combat. And then there was a penumbra of, there were others who were exposed to life-threatening situations like truck drivers, this kind of thing.

But most people did not have legitimate reason to fear for their life. They had other kinds of reasons to think about whether their sacrifice, no matter what form it was, was something warranted. I mean, these are the kind of thoughts that soldiers have all the time, and they've witnessed horrible losses of their friends. But the point is, when they came into the VA, there was a rush to put them on, and I fear there still may be, a rush to put them on what's called service-connected disability. And these were people with rehabilitative potential. And unfortunately, they were in a fragile position. It was suggested to them, look, you've been traumatized by war.

Effectively, you're not going to be a functional person. You get on that disability, and it becomes a cycle downward into invalidism because then you don't work. And the less you work, the less you work. You know, your skills atrophy, any kind of confidence you have to return to the workforce erodes. And it's a very malignant cycle. And there are so many men mostly, although now there are more women in the military, but, you know, who probably could have had much more productive and, I'm going to say rewarding lives.

To the extent that reward has to do with how productive one is. Not exclusively, but that's a big part of it. And they were basically talked into the fact that they were trauma victims. So can it all be true? Isn't it true that a lot of people suffered in silence in very many ways in our society for hundreds, thousands of years, basically since human beings began, and we are now waking up to some of those, particularly like with, with transsexuals and, and, and, and, and sexual orientation where people like, you know, really had to live with this.

But at the same time, it does feel great to be outraged. And when you encourage people to be outraged, they will, you know, they will do it. And also, there is a sadistic element in human nature. And when you can twist somebody in the wind by making out that you're a victim of them. It's a kind of power. It's a power and people will do it. We've all seen people do it. I mean, I don't know if this is quite related, but in this whole Louis,

you probably know about this Louis C.K. thing we're going through. I've heard. You know, there's so many good arguments about me putting Louis on. But do you know how many people have written to me and referred to my race? Really? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, like, it's like a tick now.

And you're a patriarch and you're a white male and you're putting Louis. I'm like, what does this have to do? Like, I could parade like I tell you I think they're saying that you can't be a victim of this

so you have a different perspective I grew up in a time where you weren't supposed to talk about somebody's like I can't talk about your sexual preference or your color

or my wife's when I'm making an argument about what she's doing that's right or wrong that's a logical argument I'm making but now except if it was about white males in which case and I'm like and then about what she's doing that's right or wrong. That's a logical argument I'm making. But now, except if it's about white males, in which case, and I'm like, and then if I

try to defend myself, it becomes further evidence. So it's like, and I can tell that when I get into these arguments, they love it. It's like they got me like defending myself. Like, it's like, I don't defend myself for being born white any more than a German has to defend himself for being born German or somebody. I mean, It's madness. And, of course, the irony is that so many of the

black comedians have no problem. There's nothing white about putting Louis C.K. on or not. To me, that's symptomatic of the erosion of reason, frankly. But, you know, I feel, in some ways, I feel lucky. But she's sympathetic to it. I can tell by her answer. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I can see it's like, oh yeah, it's okay to talk about white males. Let's talk about everybody's color. No, I feel, in some ways, I feel lucky. But she's sympathetic to it. I can tell by her answer. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I can see it like,

oh, yeah, it's okay to talk about white males. Okay, then let's talk about everybody's color. No, I'm not saying that it's okay to just throw out because you're a white male because you're a white male. Is it ever okay to bring up to somebody their color when they're making a logical argument? I understand what you're saying. It's like, it feels derailing.

It feels like, what conversations are we having? I was raised that that was wrong. Oh, we were raised as if we don't see color. No, not don't see color. That if somebody's making an argument about something, they make a point about a principle, whatever it is. I think we're learning about people's perspective based on... I should be able to...

If I want to make a point about something, I should be able to write it down on a page. And then I should get you to read it. And you shouldn't need to know, wait, what color was the person who wrote this? Then I'll tell you what I think of it. What I think people are saying is that based on your response,

we can see your race and gender. Does that make sense? Yeah, that's kind of nice. Maybe you think there's something white about putting, you think like a black club owner in my shoes wouldn't put him on? If I were to bring up your white male cis whatever in the Louis C.K. situation,

it is just specifically in that situation. Yeah. Because you're not female, just so you know, you have a different perspective. You don't have the perspective of ever being threatened by him in that way. Your perspective, you're shaking your head, but I don't know.

I'm shaking my head because, yes, if you wanted to bring up the fact that I were male, I would understand that there is some connection. Like maybe I don't know I'm shaking my head because yes if you wanted to bring up the fact that I were male I would understand that there is some connection like maybe I can't identify with it because I'm a man but not because I'm white

I think you're a horrible person now having said that I've gotten an amazing number of letters I don't want to talk about Louis again but just an amazing

number of letters I love how many times you bring up Louis when you don't want to talk about him because it's this whole PC thing but I got an amazing number of letters. I love how many times you bring up Louie when you don't want to talk about him. Because it's this whole PC thing. But I got an amazing number of letters from people who identified themselves as victims of sexual assault. Who nevertheless felt that we were doing the right thing.

That you were doing the right thing by your sexual assault. I mean, like 30, 40 letters like that. Meaning that you can't just predict somebody's opinion on something. The thing that bothers me so much is the tyranny of the group membership. As a blank, well, that's not necessarily true of everyone in that category. So that's important. But I think it is important, I think you're implying though, to consider if you really want to have an in-depth discussion

about someone's reaction to someone, is there past experience? But you do that on an individual level um i get that i feel like we're walking around telling people how many points they have over their head like we're video games so you have the white point the male point the cis point um maybe because but to experience something that's different than other people makes you possibly have a response. So your name is Noam, right? Maybe you understand where a name like mine, Chemda, everyone's going to mispronounce your name.

That's what you're dealing with your whole life. So you add other things to it. They used to call me Nutter Butterman, Nature Boy, Noodleman. And that has affected your personality. It might have affected. I doubt it, but it could have. But don't you understand it works both ways? And then now I can start saying to somebody, well, you're black, so that's the way you feel.

And how would you finish that sentence? I would never say such a thing. I would only make the case to them where I thought they were right or wrong. Because I know, the same thing like the music street example, if you want to argue about abortion with a woman, and let's say you're

let's say you're pro-life and they'll say blah blah blah and you say well you know what i could get a woman here it's not like the things i'm saying is a man that are pro-life it's not like there's no women who are pro-life so i gotta drag a woman in here so now you could now you now you now you can't bring that up so we can deal with the the logic either way it's it to me it's such a dodge i just let's make logical arguments. Yes, of course it is okay to point out to somebody, listen, you haven't had, we're talking about such a harassment, and you haven't

had that experience, so let me tell you what it's like. That's relevant. Could you consider something like, you're asking them to skip over it, can you for now skip over it? What do you mean? Skip over what? You're asking them not to bring that up. So when they bring that up, could you

not respond to it? No, I'm bothered by the fact that it's considered okay to bring that up. It bothers me a lot. I think it's society really moving in the wrong direction. It doesn't add anything to the discourse. As a matter of fact, I think you'll probably agree with me. During the time that

they were, this is related in my mind somehow, during the time that they were protesting the Confederate statues, the Confederate flag, I had known a lot of people from the South, including Jim Webb, the Democratic senator, who said, you know, yes, that was the Confederate flag, but when we were kids, we would see it everywhere. It was kind of our Southern thing.

It was my favorite. The Dukes of Hazzard was my favorite car. The General Lee. Dukes of Hazzard, whatever. And I said, how stupid to put these people in a position, rather than say to these people, listen, I understand that the Confederate flag means something not racist to you, but you have to understand how it makes me feel. It's a symbol of when we were slaves.

So if you put yourself in my shoes, you would want to take it down. No, they don't do that, which I think would be very effective. That's kind of what Martin Luther King did. So they did do that already. You know what I mean? No, what they do to them now is say, you're a racist. The only reason you'd have that flag is you're a racist. Can I have another reason why they would have that flag?

And somebody says to themselves, well, I'm not a racist. And now you put me in a position where if I take the flag down, I have to admit to you I'm a racist. So go fuck yourself. And that's what you're seeing. It's like, just explain to them why it's wrong. Stop with the name calling. Stop with all of it.

It doesn't help anything. What is it representing to them that's different than the division of race? What does a Confederate flag represent? If you said, if I go, that's a racist flag, and you go, no, I have it flown for a different reason, what is the reason? Southern pride. They would say, this was our, I'm not a Southerner, I just know what I've heard said,

that this is something we always grew up with, it was the South. And we're telling you that that represents racism. Right. And so after we tell you that for a couple of decades, what happens? Some people get upset and they start yelling at you. I'm making a practical argument here. I'm saying that it's not

effective at all to call somebody a racist and put them in a position of if they're going to do what you tell them, they have to admit to you that they're racist, especially if they don't feel that they're racist. And that's what's going on here. And I think that there's a...

Listen, I think a lot of people were moved to take down these flags when they're explained how it feels to someone else. People have more empathy than people may realize. So then you are saying that one side should have more empathy than the other side. Every side should have empathy. Do you know what I mean? It's like you shouldn't tell me this. You should cater to me and speak to me a different way.

If you want results, he's suggesting that the best way to get results is not to accuse somebody of racism straight away when they may not be racist. As recently as the 1970s, as Dave Jessica was mentioning, nobody perceived the Confederate flag on the General Lee as racist. It was the greatest car of all time. You know, Bo and Luke were very sympathetic characters. You know. Do you think that everyone had that experience,

that the Dukes of Hazzard wasn't? Well, a lot of people did. So Noam's point is that people might have in those days worn a Confederate flag, Dukes of Hazzard shirt, and not had any racist notions. Didn't think about it. Didn't even think about it for a second. Actually, I'm living, this year I'm living in Kentucky. Racist. I've seen a lot of these flags.

That was a border state, I think. You've seen the flags, and what do they mean? Yeah, and I admit I never went up to anyone and questioned them, but I did ask others. I mean, not the people who had them on their cars, but I asked other people, you know, what does that mean to these folks? And they said, you know, it really isn't that much about racism, which is, and they always say,

I'm not saying that some people who have them aren't racist, but in general, it's, as you said, a pride. They call it a rebel flag, not so much a Confederate flag. But the KKK calls themselves... No, fair enough. And that it also connotes a kind of... Just we're not... We're basically not the elite.

We're not the establishment. We're not... This is our own... It's just wrapped up in identity. And almost to send... One person said said it was kind of a middle finger to people who just almost want us to take it down. That's my point. The middle finger. That's a very natural reaction.

State's right. A resistance. But who are we blaming for that middle finger? Why don't we blame the person giving a middle finger as a response also? You know, that flag as a whole was kind of a middle finger to the North in general, right? Because it's like we won, so they shouldn't have played. Let the doctor first. You don't need to be a psychiatrist to say what I'm about to say,

and I think you agree with me on this, is that, and I often think, you know, I'm Jewish, so I immediately think Hitler. What if there were monuments to Hitler? How would I feel? And I would maybe have to explain that to someone. I would hope not. And then I think there's just a kind of human communal response, which is, well, frankly, if it's that upsetting, and I understand why it would be so upsetting,

then we'll take it down. They should take it down. I've always been for them taking it down. I was always against it in the state houses, whatever it is. What he's against is accusing them of racism straight away. But what I'm against is the, what basically is the untruth. At root, it's an untruth of saying that everybody who has that flag is a racist. Because I know, we basically know that's not true.

But we pretend that it is and we tar them with it. And I think it's totally possible to believe that the flag should all come down yet still... Why do you think it should come down then if it's not? Because it upsets some of our fellow citizens so much. And why don't people who have those flags understand that?

You know what? Some do. But they won't take it down. But this is the arrogance, forgive me if this is of your part. No, I'm really asking. I'm going to answer you. You weren't born a young girl in the South growing up with it your whole life. You have no idea what that really means to

them. And you think you know. And this is typical of people on all sides. We think we know. And in the same way you're questioning them, you don't stop and think, well, let me think about it. Let me ask them. I don't know what it means to grow up in the South.

I mean, you have, I don't know much about all that history. But I do know that a defeated people, whatever that means, remains a defeated people. And they still consider themselves a people. And they might cling to certain aspects, certain symbols of their people. Yeah, and I'm saying stop it because I grew up a certain way also and I went against the way that I grew up.

So maybe I don't know what it's like to live in the South. Okay, but at the point where you don't recognize that there's an awkward thing, I'm like, well, okay. Listen, I think that what I'm saying is self-evidently true, that if you're calling people racist who are not racist, that's not a good thing. There's no plus to that.

We should be accurate. And I think it's also true that the Confederate flag stands for the South, which had slavery, but does not mean support of slavery the Confederate flag stands for the South, which had slavery, but does not mean support of slavery or lamenting the end of slavery to many people who have it on their cars or whatever it is, the Dukes of Hazzard, whatever it is. And so this is a difficult, nuanced situation. And I come down squarely on the side of taking down the flags

yet some part of me when I see the vitriol says you know this doesn't seem to be quite the way I would handle this that's you have to be all one or all the other this is just to be clear do we

I swear I'm really asking are you saying don't yell racist at them? You shouldn't yell racist at somebody unless you're sure they're a racist. Okay, but instead explain it? Absolutely. Okay, so. That is how Martin Luther King made such progress in the civil rights movement. Then he got killed.

By allowing white people to wake up to what they were going through. He didn't succeed in getting the laws changed by calling everybody a racist, telling them what assholes they were. He succeeded by making people understand what they were going through. And that's how you get the Confederate flags to come down, by making people understand how it hurts them. Yeah, so it seems like you're saying

we need to have more empathy than they need to have empathy. No, you're putting words out. I'm not saying that at all. I think you guys are just talking in circles. Both of you have made your point, I think, adequately. I'm not saying that at all. I would like to make a book recommendation, which we don't usually do on this show.

I read 12 Years a Slave, the book. I know you've all seen the movie. And books are always better than movies. I didn't see it. You didn't see the movie? Me neither. But if you really want to, if you really want to you know, know

what slavery was like, at least in Louisiana, where Solomon Northrop was a slave for 12 years, read this book. It will blow you away, and the movie, as is typically the case, is nothing by comparison. And also, the story of Solomon's rescue is even more,

is far more interesting than what we saw in the movie, where they just kind of show up one day. Yeah, they show up, yeah. But it was far more intricate than that. So that's a comedy seller book recommendation. Can we get to the midterms just briefly? We don't have a lot of time. Can I put it that way?

What are the midterms? Hold on. I think it's backfiring is what I'm saying. I understand that. And I think there's backfiring is what I'm saying. I understand that. And I think there's a practical consideration that every movement needs to make about what is the best way to accomplish your goals. Coleman? Coleman Hughes, everybody. And I just think this is backfiring.

I don't have... We got Coleman right over there. All right, Dan. Go ahead. Hey, Dan's excited. Hi, Dan. I'm excited to see Coleman. Coleman.

You want to join us for a second? Come here. Hi, Dan. I'm excited to see Coleman. Coleman. You want to join us for a second? Come here one second, Coleman. So, we're in for a treat here. Do you know who Coleman is? Yeah. She knows who you are. Does he know who I am? Be thrilled about it.

Coleman is a writer for Quillette. What are we talking about? So, Coleman, how do you know who Coleman is? We met at the Jonathan Haidt Hedridox. I remember your face. Sally Satale. Nice to see you again. Nice to see you too.

So Coleman, you know, I didn't want to tell anybody. It doesn't matter what his race is. So we're talking about, because I really don't think it should matter. You're so late on that now. Now they're all wondering. We're talking about the Confederate flag. Well, the name like Coleman. We're talking about the Confederate flag. Well, the name I call them. We were talking about the Confederate flag

and I was making the point that I thought that given the fact that we know that not everybody who felt attachment to the Confederate flag... You're leading the witness. I'd want to hear his thoughts without your What exactly is the controversy

about the Confederate flag? What do you think about the whole Confederate flag issue in the South and the way they handle it, getting people to take it down, all of that? Well, I mean, I think on the one hand, it's clearly something that means different things to different people. For some people, it seems to have no association with slavery. It just has this kind of sort of Southern pride association. So I'm willing to extend those people good faith and say

that they actually aren't associating it with slavery in their mind. But on the other hand, a mainstream reading of American history is that it is associated with slavery. It's hard to get around the fact that it's associated with the Civil War and the half of the country that wanted to defend that institution. So I also can't blame people who are saying, just take it down. I mean, for God's sakes. And I agree with everything you said. And what would you, so what do you think the best strategy is to accomplish getting the flags taken down and the monuments?

You think the monuments should come down as well? Monuments are so dumb. Well, I mean, my position in these situations is I want to persuade people rather than force something down their throat because that's a, that just seems like

a recipe for resentment. And I think, again, I think I'm just one for conversation and persuasion over just forcing them. So this is a beautiful example of what we were talking about.

But you know I am too, by the way. No, I know. I am. I just can't blame the people who yell racist. So this is a beautiful example of what we were talking about. But you know I am too, by the way. No, I know. I am. I just can't blame the people who yell racist. Listen to what a beautiful example we just had of something else I was talking about.

He's black. I'm white. I made basically exactly the same argument as him. Yet, somebody would attack the argument because it came out of my white mouth. And my point is,

what I was saying before, it shouldn't matter that I'm white or black saying it because he could come sit down and say the very same thing and now what you got? I think it does matter. Now you got to deal with the argument, right? Well, I think it does matter a little bit more.

Really? So you're going to counter his argument with a different argument and you're going to counter mine when we say the same thing? No, then I must have misunderstood what you said. This is the world we live in where I will say what he just said

and instead of dealing with it like with the Louis thing, they'll bring up the fact that I'm white. And I said to you before, okay, do I gotta go find somebody black? Because I know they're black. No, I think you're misunderstanding. I was not arguing anything that he just said that came out of your mouth. What I was saying

is I can't blame someone for just associating the flag with racism and for telling that person, hey, you have to be a racist if you're waving that flag. I'm going back to the previous conversation. I said that it didn't make sense that people were bringing up my color

with regard to Louis. Oh, well, we're going back to stuff. No, but they're related. He just proved exactly the point I was trying to make is that deal with the words on the page. Deal with the arguments. Stop bringing up somebody's race or color or who they sleep with or what genitals are attracted to. Then you respond that way. I always do.

That's it. But that's it. You know what I mean? That's all we have. Then if you're saying you don't want that response coming at you, then take what you like, leave the rest, and respond back. So they're calling you a white male cis person. You go, alright, and you keep talking. And you keep talking. Whatever it is that they're

labeling you that you actually are, keep speaking. You still are speaking from that perspective. Don't worry about it. If you're telling people to be kind and to understand and to empathize, empathize then, and you don't respond. Does that make sense? Well, yeah, I mean, I think he does that. I don't respond okay does that make sense well yeah i mean i think he does

that i i don't think noam stops talking right no i talk to anybody when someone accuses him but the point is it's asymmetric warfare because when you're when you label someone you're a white person so you don't get to talk about this i don't you realize i'm black i have my opinion matters more than you my emotions are involved in this that such a powerful, at least it seems to be a powerful argument technique, that it's a bit of a conversation. You are taking up space as a white person. That's the argument. You're taking up space that doesn't belong to you.

Oh, he's taking up space, but not as a white person. Right. I mean, well, oh, okay. That was a joke about his size. No, it was a joke that he's annoying. That's what it was. Okay, okay. But you see the point I'm making, right? It's an asymmetric argument.

It's not an argument between two equal human beings anymore. It's an argument that you fundamentally aren't as entitled to an opinion as I am because of how I was born and how you were born. Yes, I don't think we should take people's... Yes, I think people sometimes use it just to get back, just to shut down the conversation. But I think other people use it to to get back, just to shut down the conversation. But I think other people use it to say, hey, remember your perspective.

You might be speaking from it without realizing and not being even. Not even, but you know what I mean? You don't need to remind me of my perspective. You might not be understanding what I'm saying because of that. Sometimes it comes into play. That's all. Sometimes. And I'm not saying they should yell at you

over everything and shut down the conversation. That's why I'm saying that it's up to us who understand that next level to then ignore that and keep going if we're going to have

a conversation. We keep asking ourselves to be the better person. You know, you're saying, hey, why can't they be the better person?

I'm saying, we can't tell people to do that. We have to go, I'm going to be the better person from here. It's much more than that. Does that make We have to go, I'm going to be the better person from here. It's much more than that. Does that make sense? Yes, it does make sense.

Because we're all on the same side here is the most frustrating aspect of this. This has seeped into the highest realm of society that this is acceptable talk. You had senators referring to people's race during the Blasey Ford hearing. I mean, this is

just, it is, we've lost all sense that this used to be something that we thought was anti-intellectual. And it's, I mean, if you're worried, we can talk about the midterms, if you're worried about Trump, this is fuel for his voters.

I mean, it's only so many times the most liberal white guy is going to get shut down by somebody saying, you know, it's just because you're a white voters. I mean, it's only so many times the most liberal white guy is going to get shut down by somebody saying, you know, it's just because you're a white male. He says, fuck that shit. I guess I am a white male. I guess I got to start voting my interest because these people actually,

they seem to hate me and they discount anything I say by my skin color and my sex. So let's end this charade. Let me vote with the people who don't think I'm an idiot. That's what they're doing. Not taking responsibility? No, I think what they're doing, how are you going to get people to vote for you if your party, as it were, is ready to use what you were born as an epithet? White male has become an epithet. How can you get white males

in the numbers that you want to vote for the people who view the way you were born? You coddle them like we always did? Again, I'm talking practical results here. You are not going to get a fake... I'm not getting frustrated with you. I'm really just talking with you. I'm saying that it's wrong

to use somebody's race as an epithet. It's wrong to use somebody's sex as an epithet. This ought to be basic civility 101. But it's not anymore. And it's going to have consequences.

That's what I, I think it is having consequences. Like these midterms. I don't know if I said anything about the midterms. That's a pretty good segue. I called, I didn't know, I texted Noam before the midterms, and I've never voted in midterms in my life, because I

just don't, but this year they seem so, everybody's talking about him. So I text Noam, Noam, I need guidance. I could just vote

the Democratic ticket, which is I have done in the past, but I want to be more thoughtful than that, and I do have my issues with the Democrats

on many levels. I said, Noam, give me some guidance. Help me out here. Who should I vote for? No one wrote back. I have no idea. I didn't vote. And actually, I read today that apparently true independents, a lot of them don't vote. I didn't vote. You don't vote. So, Doctor, you traveled here.

I want to make sure you speak as much as we possibly can. Do you have anything to say about you're not into politics so much, are you? Well, almost by osmosis since I'm at the American Enterprise Institute. Oh, that's right. Now the rural-urban split seems even more defined.

I stole this from the Daily, but it makes so much sense that now as far as the Congress is concerned, basically now, this sounded right to me, the House is going to turn into an investigative body and the Senate is going to turn into a judge appointing body. And the tension and division is probably going to even get worse. I heard somebody on Facebook wrote yesterday, they're complaining about the fact that the Senate is not a popular vote institution.

And he says, we need to change this, we need to change the Senate. I don't want to be ruled by these rednecks. And I said, well, maybe the ease with which you're calling them rednecks is part of the reason that it's good to have the Senate, you know? Who wants to be ruled by people

who dismiss them as rednecks? I mean, you know, so just... Well, was this a person whose opinion you normally value that wrote this? Yeah, this is a smart person. I'm saying the hatred has gotten so visceral. But obviously, having a non-popular vote body ought to then force everybody into the middle a little bit to try to... Something that everybody can agree on, which I used to think

was a good thing for the country, but now apparently if we can't have 100% the most left-wing... Well, the founding fathers certainly thought it was a good thing

as they put it into the... Right, but I'm saying the left now feels if they have to make any accommodations, any slowdown, anything to these, that this is

an anti-democratic process and they're really, literally ready to burn down the House to get rid of the cockroaches. I mean, they're talking about ending 250 years of constitutional government. Well, I was going to say, the counter-argument, which has something to it, is that when that system was created,

cities weren't nearly as big as they were. Now we have 8 million people in New York City, whatever, 20 million-plus people in the state of New York. Each of them gets one Senate representative. And then you have what, like 1 million people in like... Montana or something. Montana or whatever. So you get 500,000.

So for something like the Kavanaugh hearing, in theory, you're talking about 500,000 people in Montana that have as much power as 10 million in New York State. And on its face, it seems that there's something a little upsetting about that in terms of if you're a New Yorker. I could see why someone might say, well, let's rethink this. Is this antiquated? Maybe it made more sense.

Because it was part of the deal. I totally understand the historical rationale because it was part of the deal when states came together. They said, why the hell should we become in the United States? I don't want to be subject to the whims of someone from some other state who has some different values. And this was part of the deal. And maybe it should

continue to be part of the deal. And certainly even back then, Maine must have had way fewer people than New York. I mean, way fewer. Yeah, so maybe the ratios actually haven't changed. I actually haven't looked at it, so I don't know. But would there be some ratio that's so egregious that it would be worth considering? Right, if there were literally two people living in Montana, and then they had all this power,

at some point you might reconsider it. For now, that's the system we have, and I don't think it's going to change anytime soon. Yeah, I mean, if we were inventing it from now, I don't think we'd have the wisdom to have the system we have now, given the ratios and everything. That's true. But it's probably still, if we do want to have one nation,

and we don't want it to feel like one part of the country is so just running roughshod over that one part of the country is so just running roughshod over the other part of the country. This is probably not such a bad system. I agree with that. Nothing's perfect. We were saying before, if we now

only had, like when we were kids, three television networks, a half an hour evening newscast, and like two or three local networks, a half an hour evening newscast, and like two or three local papers, and that was it. No computer, no internet. We would think this was the most awesome time in the history of the country. I mean, we have such a distorted view of how bad things are. Things are awesome. And I think one of the reasons we have such a distorted view is because the folks who hold the distorted views and who are nurtured now in many college campuses, I think, to hold them end up going into what I would call the amplifying institutions of the society. They end up being in journalism, they

end up being in law, and they end up being in education. So they're transmitting it. It's worrisome. Yeah, it is. I know Coleman... I think you're really right to point out how important it is that there only used to be like three major networks because they had to appeal to a large amount of people. The more networks there are, the more they can hone in on a niche audience

and niche audiences have niche interests, niche political interests and extreme political interests. So now Fox News can show some crazy person on the far left going off and calling white people this and that and import that to half the country and vice versa. And that just couldn't happen in the old days. So there are polls from the 1960s that ask people, would you be mad if your kid married someone of the other party? And you get like four or five

percent, virtually nobody cared. And now those polls are like 30 40 percent people saying they don't want their kid marrying a democrat or republican that's sad okay we're pretty much out of time i love i love this group i'd love to talk forever but we're out of time anything you want anything you want to get off your chest i don't know that was fun i like i talking. Are you back to singing? I'm starting to learn the guitar. I am terrible at it, but I'm practicing. So when I used to be a musician, she was actually a fan. She used to come to watch the band all the time.

At Cafe Wah. And then she sat in on singing sometime, and then we started an Israeli band one time, and she was a singer, and then she became a podcast star, a national podcast star. Coleman, by the way, plays a mean trombone. I heard him here a couple weeks ago on The Bone and boy can he blow. Catch me on Monday

nights at the Mingus Big Band. Oh shit, I didn't know you had a regular gig. A regular gig, Monday nights. Can you imagine this guy, I mean not only is he a well known writer and intellectual, but he's an accomplished musician as well. And only 21 years old, I believe. 22.

And his most recent article was about Deepity. Is that what it is? Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's such a good article. Thank you. In Quillette. I mean, I sent this to everybody I know. I don't know if I sent it to Dan.

So I invite you to look up Coleman Hughes on Quillette. And he writes a lot about race. But this last article is not about race. And he's just as brilliant on non-racial issues as he is on race. By the way, Coleman, every time you come in, the past few times you've brought in a group of people with you. I haven't seen any repeats. Is it always a brand new group of people?

That's Nico Perino. That's Nico's group. Nico brought me along tonight. Oh, I got you. Okay. Because last time you were here, you were here with like three other people. Uh-huh. And I guess they were Columbia students.

Yep. And then you were here with that dude whose grandfather was a big record guy. Dan's like way into you. So one time Coleman told me. I'm into Dan. I'm so glad I got to see you last time. You were hilarious. Thank you, Coleman.

Finally, I get the recognition I deserve. So did I say this to you, but you know, Coleman made his more But Coleman maybe twice made a comment about how much older I am than he is. Good job, Coleman. And I said, you know. Might as well tell him he's white, too. He knows. And actually, Harry ended it and called me like his father figure. I'm like, it's so weird for me because I don't feel any different than I do.

But I hang out with Coleman. I agree. I feel the same. So with this deepity, age is just a number. Right. That's a classic example. But I guess it's not because Coleman sees me as an old man. Part of the reason I point that

out is because it doesn't feel like I'm hanging out with an old person. I don't have that many 50 plus year old friends. I'm not really 50 plus year old. No, I am. 56. Oh my gosh, you're 56? Holy moly. 56 years old.

I'm 49, but I'm already like, and I just turned 49, but I'm already like, I basically call myself 50 because I know it's going to be traumatic, so I might as well get it over with and just say I'm 50 now. People my own age, I can barely tolerate them. They're so set in their ways. They're not curious about anything.

I mean, they're... Anyway. Anyway. You agree with that, Doc? She's nodding her head. I agree with everything. Well, but you're only in your 30s. Oh, I am.

So, Doctor, did you have a good time coming here? Oh, I had a great time. And actually, I realized how if you take sort of the therapeutic mindset, it is really one of the most constructive, I think, lenses to use because it really dovetails with the conversation you were having about race and groups. Just forget the group. You have to focus on the individual. That's what you would do in any kind of therapeutic exchange and setting. It's what's meaningful to you, what can you control,

how can you make better choices for yourself. But it doesn't matter. The word groups and labels don't even come up. Black men don't go into therapy because it's not masculine. Don't group. Are we grouping or not grouping? not masculine. Don't group. Ask Colton. Are we grouping or not grouping? Well, neither do, you know, rural white, poor white men either.

Or any real men. I would definitely guess yes on that. That there's a disproportionate masculine thing against therapy in the black community, for sure, among men. I would guess that. Open to being wrong. That's an empirical question. Yeah, it's an empirical question. And we'll have the answer to that

question in our next episode. And the irony is that to say what you're saying or what I'm saying, to focus on the individual now makes you sort of a conservative when the doctor and I are old enough to remember that it used to be exactly the opposite. That was what a

liberal was. And after like 50, 60 years of the civil rights movement, who knew that the ultimate nirvana, the ultimate conclusion of wisdom would be that, yes, it's okay to generalize based on race. We were just talking about the wrong race. We got to the end, and actually, the only mistake

we're making is that it's okay to talk about white people, but all the other races are still, and that's kind of absurd, right? All right. Thank you very much. Dan's leaving. Please email us podcast at comedyseller.com podcast at comedyseller.com Dan, we've been extended for another year

on Sirius Radio. Oh, alright. I guess, you know, are we going to be extended on Comedy Central is the bigger question. Oh, I don't know. And I did want to get into that, but we didn't have time. Alright. Goodnight, everybody.