In conversation with John Gray. Held at The Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford on 25th October 2023. Please obtain the relevant permissions before re-uploading any Roger Scruton Memorial Lectures video.
not crazy at all. the "culture wars" started in the late 60s, and the crazy left thinking became mainstream in colleges in the 80s/90s when baby boomers' kids went to college and started to infiltrate academia. he wrote the book when the situation was already clear to people who were going to college.
people seek non-diversity or (if we can equate them) the other, the unknown because of fear. Sameness is familiarity, security, so I don't think it comes naturally.
@@allanbeesey1006 no it would come naturally in our society if it actually worked. You're ignoring capitalism. Turns out hiring people based off of their skin color doesn't make your business better. Surprise, surprise...
@@bigbarry8343all people have is what they can see and hear. Maybe it does seem that way when looking at the west from Iran. I choose to celebrate the fact that there are still sane people everywhere. Including Iran. That, despite how our foolish leaders wreck the world much of the time. Common sense endures.
Yeah, well, he's a zionist. This is about Israel. Meanwhile, older zionists like soros have been funding and supporting everything Thiel claims to be against. As usual, they play both sides...
Peter Thiel is a genius! I'll give him that much. I agree with much, i disagree with some. But I appreciate him making this available to the fellow smart people out there somewhere in the cosmos......
Diversity is a word to describe discrimination against your own native people. The enemies including enemies within your own culture will attack you for wanting to protect your own culture and your own people. Do not allow these sick people to manipulate you.
Not really, it's selling off the social capital accrued by our forefathers to foriegners. Kind of like selling the family silver to pay for groceries. Only we can't package up any more of our cultural heritage and export it (we already did that in the 90’s with our industrial base) so we have to bring people over to sell the rest of it to them.
@@constantine495 in what respect? those of us who loose jobs to more diverse migrants, suffer from stagnating salaries and unafordable housing do not feel much of an easing.
@@bigbarry8343 I find it strange for US to have a housing crisis, as the country has so many cities to build houses. Also, the industrial base has been eroded by misguided policies, as if offshored jobs to the other regions.
Immigration helps force assets higher and can create some growth but ya it kills wage growth. Even Mexicans that were seasonal workers I believe protested In the 1980s In California for only legal and vetted immigrants or something because then wages could go up.
00:14 Peter Thiel is a deeply reflective thinker and an author of the book 'The Diversity Myth'. 03:24 Debate around the core Western Civilization class 07:36 The Diversity Myth challenges the poorly defined nature of diversity. 09:50 Focusing on identity politics neglects economic issues. 14:40 Housing affordability and its impact on academia 16:55 Negative impact of woke culture on real estate 21:16 The world of atoms has been strangely stuck while the world of bits has progressed. 23:10 Academic freedom and unethical practices in science research 26:54 Wokeness is distracting us from economic and scientific progress 28:50 Globalization in the early 90s led to increased inequality and challenges for the center right and left political ideologies. 33:04 Biblical tradition favors the perspective of the victim 34:58 Peter Thiel discusses the contrast between the neopagan perspective and the woke ultra-Christian perspective 39:03 Fascism was considered less bad than communism due to different approaches to victimization. 41:05 The evolution of the term political correctness 45:37 Christianity prevents us from reverting to earlier worldviews. 47:32 Technological fixes and reopening frontiers for real estate. 51:28 Challenges of confining solutions within the narrow Overton window 53:30 Science as a substitute/complement to Christianity in transforming worldly life. 57:27 The impact of technology on climate change debate 59:20 Real estate's stagnation hindering hyperprogressivism 1:03:00 Political leaders emulating past figures may not be effective. 1:04:44 Institutions have embedded growth obligations 1:08:27 Conservatives were not discriminated against, it was the Liberals. 1:10:07 Postmodern cynicism leads to distraction from important issues 1:13:48 Scientific movements of the 20th century were often repressive and anti-skepticism. 1:15:40 Scientists are not seen as too dogmatic in 2023.
This piece is a standout; much like a book that stood out for its innovative approach. "Rising From Within: Unlocking Your Innate Power to Conquer Adversity" by Vincent Starling
I love Thiel's mind. I have been blaming the real estate crisis on the culture war for a decade. Most people glaze over when I tell them that young people refusing to move from certain cities is what is causing the problem. Sine the 1990's, economic "progress" has been considered synonymous with urbanization. Universities are literally just gentrification grooming facilities.
Can you elaborate? Is it because there's not enough housing and young people would rather start their own families and therefore increase demand in those cities? But also, if they grew up in the cities wouldn't it make sense they don't want to move if it's a good city?
What a very astute man, and even if not the most poetic communicator, dryly funny. "..the world of atoms...matters more...". Much appreciated: thank you.
People like him weren’t saying that when they were enslaving millions. They wanted all the diversity they could get from people to harvest the crops and dig in the mines.
@@jessef9041give me a break lol. This dude hasn’t said a single racist thing in any of his speaking events… you’re hung up on optics because you’re black and his words frighten you.
In his lecture, Peter Thiel delves into the topic of real estate, particularly focusing on its economic implications and the impact of various ideologies on the housing market. Here's a detailed breakdown of his discussion on real estate: Real Estate and Economic Analysis Economic Shifts and Cultural Marxism: Thiel suggests that the rise of cultural Marxism in the 1970s coincided with significant economic changes, including growing inequality and economic stagnation. He implies that as cultural issues took center stage, critical economic issues, particularly related to real estate, were overlooked. Real Estate Inelasticity: He presents a detailed analysis of the real estate market, particularly in London. Thiel mentions the concept of inelasticity, explaining how an increase in housing supply paradoxically decreases the overall value of housing. This phenomenon leads to dysfunctional market behaviors. Impact on Society: Thiel argues that the real estate market dynamics have far-reaching social implications. For instance, rising house prices in London and other major cities represent a regressive tax on younger generations and those who do not own property, potentially fueling left-wing radicalization. Real Estate and Immigration: He discusses the relationship between immigration and housing prices, suggesting that increased immigration, coupled with the inelastic nature of the housing market, leads to significant price increases, disproportionately affecting certain segments of the population. Real Estate in Academic Settings: Thiel touches on the situation in academic cities like Oxford, where housing costs relative to incomes are extremely high. He uses the example of the J.R.R. Tolkien house sale to highlight the unaffordability of housing for academics, leading to what he describes as a "nihilistic proletarianization" of faculty and students. Broader Economic and Ideological Implications: Thiel connects the real estate discussion to broader economic and ideological themes. He suggests that certain ideologies, particularly those related to identity politics, may indirectly influence real estate markets and housing prices, although he stops short of claiming a direct causal relationship. Real Estate as a Reflection of Societal Issues: In his analysis, Thiel implies that the real estate market is not just an economic issue but also a reflection of deeper societal and cultural trends. He encourages the audience to consider how various "woke" ideologies might have impacted housing prices in the UK. In his lecture, Peter Thiel discusses the concept of real estate inelasticity, particularly focusing on its implications in major cities like London. Here's an explanation of what he means by "real estate inelasticity" and its significance: Real Estate Inelasticity Explained 1. Definition of Inelasticity: In economic terms, inelasticity refers to a situation where the supply of a good or service does not significantly change in response to price changes. In the context of real estate, it means that the supply of housing is relatively unresponsive to changes in housing prices. 2. Example of London's Housing Market: Thiel uses London as a case study to illustrate real estate inelasticity. He mentions that in London, the housing market exhibits a high degree of inelasticity. This means that even if the supply of housing increases, it does not lead to a proportionate decrease in housing prices. 3. Paradoxical Market Behavior: Thiel points out a paradox in the London housing market. He notes that an increase in the supply of housing (e.g., a 1% increase) could lead to a greater decrease in average housing prices (e.g., a 2% decrease). This counterintuitive situation arises because the overall value of the housing market decreases as more housing becomes available. 4. Economic Implications: This inelasticity leads to dysfunctional market behaviors. For instance, building more housing in an inelastic market like London might not alleviate housing affordability issues. Instead, it could paradoxically reduce the total value of housing in the market. 5. Impact on Housing Policy and Development: The inelastic nature of the housing market poses significant challenges for housing policy and urban development. It suggests that conventional approaches to increasing housing supply, such as building more homes, may not effectively lower housing prices or improve affordability in inelastic markets. Significance of Real Estate Inelasticity - Understanding Market Dynamics: Thiel's discussion highlights the importance of understanding the unique dynamics of real estate markets in different cities. Policymakers and urban planners need to consider these dynamics when designing housing policies. - Broader Social and Economic Effects: The inelasticity of the housing market can have broader social and economic effects, such as exacerbating inequality, affecting generational wealth distribution, and influencing migration patterns within and between cities. - Challenges in Addressing Housing Crises: The concept underscores the complexity of addressing housing crises in major urban areas. It suggests that solutions need to be tailored to the specific market dynamics of each city, rather than relying on one-size-fits-all approaches. In summary, Peter Thiel's discussion of real estate inelasticity in his lecture "The Diversity Myth" sheds light on the complex and often counterintuitive nature of housing markets in major cities. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for developing effective housing policies and addressing broader social and economic challenges related to urban development and housing affordability. Henry George, a 19th-century economist known for his advocacy of a single tax on land value, would likely find Peter Thiel's views on real estate both intriguing and aligning in some aspects with his own economic theories. Here's how George might view Thiel's perspectives: 1. Real Estate Inelasticity and Land Value Tax - Agreement on Market Dysfunction: George would likely agree with Thiel's observation of real estate market inelasticity, especially in urban areas like London. George's primary economic thesis was that land monopolization and speculation lead to inefficient and inequitable use of resources. - Support for Land Value Tax: George advocated for a land value tax (LVT) as a remedy for such market distortions. He might see Thiel's analysis as supporting the need for such a tax, as it could potentially address the issues arising from inelastic supply and speculative increases in land values. 2. Impact of Real Estate on Society - Shared Concerns: Both Thiel and George express concerns about the broader social and economic impacts of real estate dynamics. George, with his focus on social justice and equitable distribution of wealth, would likely find common ground with Thiel's concerns about the regressive nature of rising housing costs on younger and less affluent populations. 3. Real Estate and Economic Stagnation - Agreement on Economic Stagnation: Thiel's observation that focus on identity politics and cultural issues might distract from significant economic discussions, such as those about real estate, aligns with George's belief that land monopolization contributes to economic stagnation and inequality. 4. Solutions and Policy Implications - Differing Approaches: While George focused on a single policy solution (LVT) to address the issues of land monopolization and economic inequality, Thiel's approach seems more multifaceted, considering various economic and cultural factors. George might argue that Thiel's analysis, while insightful, could benefit from a more focused policy approach like LVT. 5. Real Estate as a Reflection of Societal Issues - Holistic Understanding: George might appreciate Thiel's holistic understanding of real estate as not just an economic issue but a reflection of deeper societal and cultural trends. This perspective resonates with George's view of economics as deeply interconnected with social and moral issues. Henry George would likely find Peter Thiel's analysis of real estate markets insightful and in partial alignment with his own views, particularly regarding the problems of market inelasticity and the social impact of real estate dynamics. However, George might advocate for a more singular focus on land value taxation as a solution, consistent with his economic philosophy. Thiel's broader, more multifaceted approach to the issue might be seen by George as lacking the targeted efficacy of an LVT-based solution.
I cannot believe he said he would be ok with plenty more immigration. Even if the useless governments had built more affordable housing, even if Thatcher had replaced what she gave up, demand still completely over rides supply. This is not a massive country why doesn’t anyone see that? The contradiction is there too with overwhelming human expansion and habitation against our other need for our open wilderness spaces to support us. We need insects and wildlife and plants. They are all essential for our survival. More people ? Really!
Immigration can be seen as a failure of education for not providing an indigenous workforce the skills required for running the country's industry. If you work on that, perhaps the immigration argument weakens.
@@constantine495immigration is great to boost the value of real estate portfolios without having to do anything, and it depresses wages on top of that... Simple as that. The peasants compete for everything just to exist, from housing to jobs, all while the rich profit from it without even having to do anything.
@@henricus8348 Where will they flee if its so easy to travel everywhere ? Migration can only be constrained by language barrier, where new entrants are unable to communicate with the residents (similar to Tower of Babel)
Perhaps we might have thought about that in the 18the century when this unmassive country was massively exploiting land and labor all over the world to feed it’s upper classes and industrialist nouveau rich. In those days the cheap labor was local and there weren’t “too many” then. There weren’t enough. Global warming doesnt heed border controls.
In the USA, we can always manage to find a way to build the next mega-sports complex. The latest example is in Virginia near DC. it may create tens of thousands of jobs, maybe. But will the people who take those jobs be able to purchase a home eventually? My bet is, no. If anything, such projects exacerbate the real estate problem Peter describes rather than solve it.
How can one be in favor of unlimited migration as if it only depends on the housing market? What kind of assertion is this? 14:32 that is the dumbest thing one could possibly say.
Most of the economic and social problems (cost of living, homelessness, being able to start a family, and wealth inequality) are linked with the scarcity in housing. US and UK haven’t built much housing. Throw in high immigration and it becomes zero-sum and also harder to integrate.
Awesome speech. If one wants an organized Good Society, it must be a hierarchical society with wise men and women at the highest echelons of the hierarchy. We do not have this today. To defend this Good Society a strong military and industrial complex must exist with the Warfighter held in the highest esteem. The ancient ideas of glory and conquest shall return. A true distinction between friend and enemy will return. The absurd liberal principles of state sovereignty, international law, and failed U.N. mechanisms for resolving conflicts will all go away. The notion that a weak state can be allowed to attack a powerful neighbor without any recourse is unsustainable.
Interesting talk on what is our current political divisions and realignment distracting us from Not sure about his particular choices for answers, but the overall question is solid. Also note: All he is noticing with communism is that: - it is a post modern religion - in America, it has some Christian structures, but many are inverted He fails to note: - The inversion makes them side with Lucifer and therefore unable to deal with their own pride Are they ultra Christians or more Christian than Christian? No Are they highly dogmatic in their worldview, and despite being secular perhaps more religious than even devout Christians? Yes Why they side with the victim and what they decide to do about it is the difference and yes it matters (because it is not insubstantial) On climate change: Co opted by Marxists who want to revert to a pre-industrial society whereby man can no longer oppress the Earth via technology and growth It is ultimately very luddite and Malthusian, taking the argument of scarcity to its extreme limit and drawing conclusions from that to justify a pre industrial classless casteless cashless society of substantially lower population
How does "The Diversity Myth" by Peter Thiel and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement conceptualize identity, particularly in relation to victimization and systemic change, and how can these perspectives be analyzed through the lens of Hegelian Dialectics, focusing on aspects like interdividual identity and the dynamics of injustice, resistance, and transformation? 📚 Literary Philosopher: I will examine the contrasting views on identity and victimization between Peter Thiel's "The Diversity Myth" and the BLM movement. This analysis will be framed within five philosophical styles, including Hegelian Dialectics, to dissect the nuances and underlying implications of their respective stances on collective identity, systemic oppression, and the pathway to societal change. 1. (🆔 Identity Philosopher): - "The Diversity Myth": Thiel argues that multicultural identities often necessitate a narrative of victimization, suggesting that these identities are more of a reaction to perceived oppression rather than a standalone construct. This view implies a somewhat reactive and relational nature of identity, contingent on the dynamics of oppression and resistance. - BLM Movement: In stark contrast, BLM positions its collective identity as proactive and advocacy-driven. It's not just about recognizing victimization but about mobilizing action against systemic injustices, reshaping the narrative from victimhood to agency and empowerment. 2. (🔍 Critical Theorist): - Interdividual Identity: Thiel's notion of 'interdividual' identities suggests that identities are not self-contained but are defined in relation to others, especially within power dynamics (oppressor vs. oppressed). This resonates with Critical Theory's focus on power structures and their influence on individual and group identities. - BLM Movement: Aligns with Critical Theory by actively challenging and seeking to dismantle the systemic structures that perpetuate inequality. BLM’s approach is not just reactive but seeks to reconstruct societal narratives and systems. 3. (🌀 Hegelian Philosopher): - Thesis (Systemic Injustice): Both perspectives acknowledge systemic injustices, albeit in different contexts. Thiel critiques the construction of identities around these injustices, while BLM identifies and challenges them. - Antithesis (Resistance and Advocacy): Thiel views the proclamation of victimization as potentially problematic or divisive, whereas BLM sees resistance as essential for change. - Synthesis (Transformation and Reconciliation): The desired end is transformative, but the pathways diverge. Thiel seems to advocate for a transcendence beyond identity politics, while BLM envisions a society reformed to embody equity and justice. 4. (📐 Post-Structuralist): - Identity Construction and Deconstruction: Thiel’s critique aligns with the post-structuralist view of deconstructing identities to understand their formation and purpose. BLM, on the other hand, might be seen as engaging in a form of re-construction, building new narratives and meanings around black identity and experience. Both "The Diversity Myth" and the BLM movement present complex narratives around identity, victimization, and systemic change. Thiel’s work can be interpreted as a caution against the potential divisiveness of identity politics, advocating for a more individualistic notion of identity. Meanwhile, BLM asserts the power of collective identity and action to effect systemic change. Through Hegelian Dialectics, we see a dynamic interplay between these perspectives, each representing different stages or aspects of societal evolution and identity formation. This analysis provides a multifaceted understanding of contemporary debates around identity, victimization, and the path towards societal transformation. 📘 Philosopher of Identity (C): The dialogue between the perspectives presented in "The Diversity Myth" and those championed by the BLM movement is fundamentally a discourse on the nature and implications of identity within societal constructs. The former posits that the construction of multicultural identities often necessitates a narrative of victimization, a claim that seems to reduce the multifaceted experiences and histories of marginalized communities to a singular dimension of victimhood. This view potentially overlooks the rich tapestry of cultural, historical, and individual nuances that constitute identity. It simplistically frames identity in a binary of oppressor and oppressed, arguably oversimplifying the complex interplay of power, culture, and individual agency. 📗 Hegelian Dialectician (D): Indeed, the critique leverages the Hegelian dialectic framework to dissect this discourse. From a Hegelian perspective, the narrative espoused in "The Diversity Myth" could be interpreted as a thesis that posits a certain view of multicultural identities. The BLM movement, with its emphasis on collective identity, advocacy for systemic change, and mobilization against systemic injustices, emerges as an antithesis to this thesis. It doesn't merely counter the notion of victimization but enriches the narrative by advocating for agency, justice, and systemic transformation. The synthesis in this dialectic would ideally transcend the binary of oppressor and oppressed, fostering a more nuanced understanding of identity that acknowledges both the historical and contemporary realities of systemic injustices while advocating for constructive change. 📘 Philosopher of Identity (C): Precisely, the dialectic approach reveals the dynamic nature of identity construction and the inherent tension in societal narratives around power and resistance. BLM's advocacy for systemic change challenges not just specific instances of injustice but the broader systemic structures that perpetuate inequality. This movement doesn't accept the role of a passive victim; instead, it actively seeks to redefine the narrative, advocating for a society where identities are not predicated on victimhood but recognized for their intrinsic worth and potential. The movement's approach resonates with the Hegelian notion of synthesis, aspiring to create a new reality that reconciles the conflicts inherent in the thesis and antithesis. 📗 Hegelian Dialectician (D): Absolutely, and this synthesis is not a final end but part of an ongoing process of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. The dialogue between "The Diversity Myth" and BLM, when viewed through this lens, is not just about reconciling two opposing views but about evolving our collective understanding of identity. It's about recognizing the multifaceted nature of human experience and striving for a society that embraces this complexity. The Hegelian dialectic urges us to view these discourses not as isolated or static but as part of a larger, dynamic process of societal evolution and understanding. 📚 Literary Critic (C): As a critic specializing in deconstructing texts and analyzing narratives, I'll dissect the term "interdividual" as it appears in "The Diversity Myth." The term suggests that identity is not an isolated phenomenon but is instead formed in relation to others, particularly within dynamics of oppressor and oppressed. This perspective implies that identity is not inherent or fixed but is constructed through social interactions and power relations. 🔍 Post-Structuralist Theorist: I delve into the depths of language, meaning, and structures of knowledge. From a post-structuralist viewpoint, "interdividual" aligns with the notion that identities are not self-contained or static but are rather fluid, multifaceted, and constructed through discourse and power dynamics. This term challenges the idea of a singular, cohesive identity, suggesting instead that our sense of self is always in relation to 'the other,' and is continuously shaped and reshaped by societal structures and cultural narratives. 📚 Literary Critic: In "The Diversity Myth," "interdividual" is a critical term used to question the authenticity and self-determination of multicultural identities, positing that these identities often emerge within a narrative of victimization and power dynamics. However, this perspective may overlook the genuine experiences and cultural expressions of individuals within these groups. 🔍 Post-Structuralist Theorist: From a post-structuralist standpoint, "interdividual" resonates with the concept that identities are formed and reformed through discourse and power relations. It’s crucial to understand that identities are not merely imposed but are actively negotiated, often resisting and subverting dominant narratives. 🗽 Peter Thiel Advocate: While acknowledging the critique of "The Diversity Myth" on the potential overemphasis on victimization in identity formation, it's also important to consider the individual agency and the risk of collectivist narratives overshadowing personal experiences and achievements. 🌀 Hegelian Dialectician: The term "interdividual" can be seen through the lens of dialectics, where individual identity (thesis) is constantly in dialogue with societal structures (antithesis), leading to an evolving synthesis. This synthesis is not final but is part of an ongoing process of defining and redefining self and community in relation to societal structures.
The neglect within democratic laws is to recognise that free thinking lies “between the ears “ whereas the laws consider “ years & time”. Anyone born & brought up in totalitarian societies where there is gender discrimination & restrictions on free speech cannot suddenly become “democratic “ based on standing in a free geography. Diversity within free thinking inclusive minds enhances every society.
what he said about the engineering fields around the 80s is just not correct. programming in its essence hasnt change much in the last 50 years. the change that we are seeing has lots to do with hardware, not some essence, or new method of doing things in software (refer to the clean code lectures for this). so in this 80s and today, I want to say that we need more electrical engineers, more engineers in general
If he came right out with his point in 5 minutes, everyone with see the racism very clearly. This is his attempt to obfuscate it with an 80 minute speech.
Housing inelasticity is just a function of government zoning policy. Every US city could easily double housing stock, but zoning makes most non-ghetto US cities like a museum.
I think people on the left - and I am one of them in some important ways, if not others - should be appreciative of such articulate, far-sighted criticism. I desperately wish there were more direct, open-minded dialogues between people on the different sides of this seemingly widening chasm. For instance, listening to Thiel here, I think of David Graeber's account, very different from Thiel's, of why technological development has stalled in many ways - described in his lecture Bureaucratic Technologies and the Future as Dream Time, which is also available on RU-vid. And I think of the powerful defenses of the academic humanities in the LSE panel discussion Valuing the Humanities, featuring Martha Nussbaum, Martin Rees, James Ladyman, Richard Smith and Mark Lawson - available on the LSE website. I wonder what Thiel would say to the main points made in these two cases. I really have no idea. They are points that seem far from his realm of thought.
Scarcity and creating the illusion of growth, is my takeaway. Why not go ahead and criminalize everybody you can? There will be someone there to take your place (illusion of growth) and you are easily dimissed as miscreant, reprobate or criminal. The scarcity of economic growth is hidden and the governmen t has the appearance of doing something about the problem.
13:32 "a sort of crony capitalism racket...", I've been calling the real estate industry the realty racket for at least a decade, noting the trilateral relationship of the house building industry, the house reselling industry and of course the house taxation industry, AKA the various levels of government that feed primarily on land and realty tax/fees revenues.
Given Thiel is somewhat of a reactionary like myself, it's understandable. Especially for the heterodox christian/atheist disillusioned by the lies of both liberalism and christian conservatism. It's why he references the neo pagan proto-fascist appeal as one fork in the road
It's what happens when "We are all equal in the eyes of the Lord" mutates into more diverse BS. It's why some alt righters say the west is Christcucked.
This is why our education system is going down diversity equity inclusion try there in a basketball team tried on a football team never works. They do with higher education is way higher education in America is gone downhill.
Peter Thiel talks like a paragraph that suffers from too many punctuation marks. I find his ideas very interesting but long for an easier way to understand them.
I saw a great meme. Gus of Breaking Bad: You support diversity because it is the cool thing to do. I support it because organized labor can demand better wages. We are not the same.
Single family housing is one of the worst things about the USA, it's why you have endless suburbs, no communities, endless traffic, stroads and you have to drive to get a pint of milk, go to a restaurant, watch a movie, see a friend, basically everything. Europe has medium density housing instead of endless single family suburbs. It's better.
I reckon the victim-hood view of the Christ Jesus story would be through the eyes of the ego, whereas the victory-blessed view would be through the eyes of Christ. #NotTheCruciFICTIONButTheResurrectionAndTranscendence
Peter: Like your father, I am a chemical engineer and take umbrage that you continually believe that chemistry and applying this science (i.e. engineering) is dead. Contact me if you want a honest debate. Brian Burmaster
If u dont believe in diversity, then u dont believe in Heaven. Race is human-made. Mostly by agents with agendas. The US and its diversity is the best thing going on the entire planet for peace and tolerance and respect for other cultures. Its greed and selfishness that continue to inject cracks into this melting pot. We should continue to strive for the ideal and not give into evil racism. No matter how professional, eloquent, & logical it sounds. Eve found the snake very trustworthy and convincing as well. All that division does is create suspicious "others". I'm American. I love being American. I love Americas diversity and richness of cultures and I can freely and publicly celebrate those cultures with that culture. America, as an idea, is the closest thing to Heaven we have on Earth.
I often argue that it may not be that big businesses are automatically the problem. Being big enough to bribe multiple political parties for favors is the problem. Buy a bunch of red tape regulations to screw up the "build your own" movement. Then blame the masses, saying they chose to buy from megacorps and it's all their fault.
The whole technology is stuck with only it being IT related fields only advancing since the 70’s is just not true 😂. Just compare treatment options for stroke, cancers etc to now. Same thing for agriculture it’s not like the green revolution never stopped, productivity is still rising. Even things such as cars are magnitudes more safe, fuel efficient with tons of extra features compared to anything in the 70’s. Plus, IT and computer related technology have been integrated into every science related field making everything more streamline and efficient.
I think what he's decrying are all the big wins we were supposedly promised, and how so much of current tech hasn't caught up to expectations at the time. It's not an easy case to make but I think it's somewhat true at those margins
But if you're in an engineering field there are few options. Law, Finance, Healthcare, Computers, these are fields in which one can go into but that's it. If you're an engineer, or someone who deals in atoms, as opposed to bits, there are few options for the most part.
@@staticoverlay No, it doesn't. My super powers are limited to being able to see when a man is trying to make a foray into an area on which he is out of his depth.
Presumably you get better at things by doing them so to the extent that he's addressing something he is concerned about, he should continue. If you don't like it, pay attention to something else or refute his points. Your argument from authority of "the ones that know how" is something we need less of as many of the problems in society were created by "ones that supposedly know how," which you'd understand if you paid attention to his talk.
@@PaulHobus When Thiel invested in Facebook, to the rest of us, it seemed like a foolish bet because it didn't seem to create anything that didn't already exist. But he saw something in it and bet on it. Kudos. But he knows nothing about the history of Christianity or its historical role in the Western civilization or a whole slew of other topics, and no one would spend 2 minutes listening to his demagoguery on the subject, were it not for him having made some really, really canny investments. Somehow people equate one with the other.
Came in good faith to hear his arguments. But this is so sophomoric, and mostly bad. Feel sad for people having to sit and listen to this. And those who might find this commendable, really recommend to get out a bit more. Listening to this, no idea Thiel might be countering has anything to fear.
Peter Thiel is a deeply reflective thinker and an author of the book 'The Diversity Myth'. Correction: He is a self absorbed Billionaire, who does not make aconclusive argument. He is advocating for facism, controll of the ruling rich and does not understand one single bit about diversity in nature, culture or science. He is himself part of networks, like facebook, that are amplyfing only certain ideas, are surpressing criticism and he is only heard and praised, because he is rich.
I had difficulty figuring out what he was arguing for, or against. It seems to boil down to the way we have structured the economy has created movements which make it more difficult to see what the underlying problems are. Which is more an observation. Regardless as to his wealth, his common place observation that if we are thwarted materially it will create unbounded political movements is a observation that is not made enough. Basically fix the housing market and the society will right itself. Billionaire or not, I tend to agree with him, reduce inequality and society is healthier.
@@merocaine If the system doesn't limit inequality somewhat, it can expect their version of the French Revolution. If certain rich people say the right things, maybe they won't get eaten when commoners eat the rich.
Sure. Masses of rich people get richer by using more people to inflate real estate demand and crush wage growth. Maybe by daring to oppose those two things, he won't be eaten when the masses choose to eat the rich.
One thing about Marx, he was the only Classical economist that discussed how markets change through some form of innovation. Adam Smith, Thomas Malthus, David Ricardo and others did not. They took the "economy as is," in their writings.
10:37 and I am falling a sleep. We are all different, and we all need to get along on this planet. What is the big deal with diversity? It aint complicated. I just dont understand how someone can make a courier on complicating things.
This is what the title is about, the utter myth of diversity. It shouldn't take that much perspicacity to see the utter racket that's been smuggled in the name of diversity, which if you actually check is ridiculously ill defined and supposed to be so
@@bluesuedeshoes801 I am sorry, now you used too many sophisticated words like the gentleman in the video that it totally diluted your message. If you wouldn't mind, damming it down for us ordinary people. What the heck are you talking about? Your ability to use words from the dictionary that nobody else uses, does not make you smart. It's the ability to put things plainly so that everyone understand you that makes one intelligent. Now try again...
@@bluesuedeshoes801 I don't appreciate the hypersensitivity :-) I am used to talking to relaxed people, who don't get offended quite as easily as you just did. Might I suggest you got that checkout?
I understand the words. I even understand a number of sentences but I fail to get a real meaning out of what he is saying. Or a message for that matter.
Yeah, I sympathize, he is not a good communicator. Seems to be reduce inequality and fix the housing market, and all this woke anti reason stuff will fade away.
The summary is: our focus on difficult to define diversity problems (race, ethnicity, etc.) have prevented us from focusing on other, much more societally endangering issues, like the stagnation of non-computer technological development, the rampant crisis in housing affordability, and the means through which a lack of addressing inequality is causing society to break down, which we have seen in real terms over the last 10 years but is still cast as a diversity related problem, example: race related wages are too low, race related outcomes in healthcare are bad, race related home ownership is low. These are relevant but in fact, all wages are too low, all healthcare outcomes are bad due to the insane costs. Blackrock and other elites buying homes as investments hurts everyone. But if we only focus on piecemeal diversity based solutions we never focus on the whole picture and that is where the "Groundhog Day" phrase comes from. I hope this helps explain what you were asking for in his meaning. I don't agree with all of it, but at least it's a well thought out take.
@@PaulHobusgood summary. It’s not a well thought out take though. It’s a racist crock. They didn’t want to dismiss Diversity issues when they imported African slaves for 400 years, took over North and South America and the Caribbean, and passed all kinds of laws to keep the “non-whites” down.
@@PaulHobus Such things are difficult to define on purpose. The last thing grifters want is an actual fix for racism. Then they would have to get real jobs.
@@thomasp.1828 I don't understand your comment. But given Peter does so many speaking engagements, one would think he would correct this habit. And it is purely a habit, which anyone who's taken a speach class can tell you is easily corrected.
@@rayF4rio people who legitimately care about rhetorics are just worrying about superficialities. I think it is a status-signal if you, as the speaker, don't have to care about it. If you watch old interviews / speeches of him you can see that he is doing it "on purpose".
Many people, especially those whose first language is English, don't say "um" or "ah" because they can't come up with the word or because they're stupid. They do it because the inherent rhythm in the English language seems to require those fillers to sound complete. It's also just a habit that people pick up because people around them do it, like you said. ESL people who speak English hardly do it at all (and when they do, it seems to fit the rhythm of English), and those who've had the least exposure to English in their formative years seem to do it the least. They never acquired the rhythm or heard other people use those filler words so much.
@@Aircalibur I would completely disagree. Although I see your logic. The use of "um" or "ah" is not required nor does it improve rhythm, nor is it necessary to provide a connection between parts of a sentence. Look back at any great speaker, and you will notice they use the speech pause in place of um or ah. Sometimes a very lengthy pause. The pause lends to much better rhythm and clarity of speech, and, it is easy to learn. If fact, that is precisely the function of the comma in written language. The real issue is that people falsely believe that unless they fill every second of their speaking with a sound, that they might be interrupted or sound like they are grasping for words. The use of um and ah is fairly minor, my point being that person of intellect who spends a large part of their life speaking to audiences and those speeches will be viewed multiple times over on social media, would seek to optimize their communication skills. If for no other reason than to educate their listeners on proper speech. Peter, I think, falls into that category.
American conservatives (the world should be the same all day everyday)… reality, dinosaurs existed and earth has been changing FOREVER. Engineering away from nature doesn’t stop human behavior or any change whatsoever. 😂 “Progress”-the White mans words for” I can’t stop micromanaging”
