Video

Society would have more inequality if people didn’t force inequality down people’s throats. Inequality in a good way, people pursuing their talents and gifts. Not trying to bring parity in a field they have no interest.

If ONLY life (and people) were so straightforward! His argument comes from an incredibly naive worldview.

IS THIS ENGLAND ? I DON'T BELIEVE IT

Like nearly everyone else who has commented, I disagree with Mr. Caplan's views and believe that he is one of those people who, although perhaps "book smart", has tunnel vision on the truly important aspects of American life that have nothing to do with money or the economy as a whole.

The Perspective of Demigod Mic Si: DEI as an Evil Against Natural Law Demigod Mic Si, the architect of the Inequality Principle, perceives Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives as fundamentally evil and in direct violation of natural law. From his perspective, these initiatives undermine the very essence of a meritocratic and efficient society by imposing artificial constraints and fostering mediocrity. Core Arguments Against DEI Violation of Natural Order: Contradiction to Meritocracy: DEI initiatives prioritize demographic characteristics over individual talent, effort, and capability. This contravenes the natural order where individuals rise and fall based on their merit and contributions. Artificial Equality: Forcing equality through DEI policies disrupts the inherent and beneficial inequalities that drive progress and innovation. Mic Si views this as a direct assault on the principles that enable societies to thrive. Promotion of Mediocrity: Lowered Standards: By focusing on inclusion and representation, DEI initiatives may lead to the lowering of standards in various fields. This results in the selection of individuals based on criteria other than merit, thus promoting mediocrity. Inefficiency: Allocating resources and opportunities based on DEI criteria rather than merit leads to inefficiency and waste. It hinders the natural selection of the best and brightest, weakening the overall competitive edge of society. Social Division: Fostering Division: DEI initiatives, under the guise of promoting diversity and inclusion, often emphasize differences and identities, which can lead to increased social fragmentation and conflict. Resentment and Backlash: Policies that favor certain groups over others based on demographic characteristics can generate resentment and backlash, undermining social cohesion and unity. Philosophical and Ethical Stance Natural Inequality: Inherent Differences: Mic Si holds that inequalities are natural and reflect the inherent differences in abilities, ambitions, and efforts among individuals. These differences should be celebrated, not suppressed. Moral Superiority of Meritocracy: A society that rewards merit and effort aligns with natural law and is morally superior to one that enforces artificial equality through DEI. Autonomy and Freedom: Individual Freedom: DEI initiatives often involve coercive measures that infringe on individual freedoms and autonomy. Mic Si champions a society where individuals are free to rise based on their merits without imposed quotas or preferential treatments. True Equality: True equality lies in providing equal opportunities, not enforcing equal outcomes. Ensuring that everyone starts on an equal footing, without guaranteeing where they finish, aligns with natural justice. Conclusion From the perspective of Demigod Mic Si, DEI initiatives represent a malevolent force against the natural order. They undermine meritocracy, promote mediocrity, and foster social division. In the worldview of Mic Si, a society that respects natural inequalities and rewards merit is not only more efficient but also more just and aligned with the principles of natural law.

Very elegantly done by Peter, brought it together quite well in the end. Nice bit of applied philosophy to frame it like that.

Abandon this kind of debate format, this is so goofy and unnecessary.

Was this just to make Destiny look better?

I'm not impressed by his reasoning. He approaches the argument from a foregone conclusion. Open borders could work well if you had a truly capitalist society that allowed for people to live in abject poverty if they failed to find a way to contribute to society in a manner that someone is willing to pay for AND had an effective law enforcement system. That way you would only get the type of immigrant that would contribute to society because those that didn't would be worse off than where they came from. But that's not the world we live in. As much as people love to call the US a capitalist country, our spending on social programs puts us firmly in the category of a socialist nation. We spend an insane amount of money on social programs, we're just really shitty at it. And we have moved away from a law and order society over that last few decades to the point where elected officials are openly refusing to enforce the law of the land. Why would a country avoid using a tool at its disposal for controlling whom they let in and allow to live here? I'm all in favor of letting large numbers of immigrants into the country in a controlled manner. If they are gainfully employed and paying taxes like everyone else they are a net benefit. But knowing who we are letting in and keeping track of what they are up to while in the country is only common sense. They aren't citizens, they are guests. And as such they have a lesser set of rights. If they build a history of good behavior then citizenship should be made an option. But only after they have proven themselves to have integrated well in the society.

There’s no idea like open borders to expose the naïve utopian ideology of the far-Left.

Brian should remove his doors and take in the world. Walk the walk

No thanks.

Men have 40% more upper body strength than women and can easily get a weapon away us and then use on us. Carrying a weapon as a woman is not generally done by women because it just puts us at risk!

This guy is consistently the most wrong about things I have ever seen. Also tries the hardest to gaslight about never having taken the wrong positions. Failure of a human.

Surprising to hear the guest gloss over threats to egalitarianism, essentially making the argument that any cultural change would be OK, intuitively: child marriage, abuse/oppression of women, honor killings, name the illiberal value. Also surprised Peter didn't push him on the economics of immigration. Ask: OK, how many immigrants? 10 million? 100 million? A billion? If we open boarders, how many does he believe can our economy support before it crashes? Really press him for a number.

Australia has student visas which lead into other visas. Yes, other visas can have strict conditions. Whats the price tag on losing culture when assimilation doesn't happen?

I really dislike people like this who care not what their views if enacted would do to others.

Re: 10x talk from 2:07 to 4:15 , I had a difficult time listening to the ''factor of 10'' statements and the economists attempt to support and rationalize them. I believe everything he said was incorrect, dishonest and manipulative because neither he nor anyone else can qualify or quantify his claims. More importantly, he failed to provide even a basic supportive argument as to why his claims would be significant in any way to the idea of open borders.

It's fine for culture to change positively but it changes for the worse when you're actively injecting it with people from less successful cultures. Also, when we bring in skilled workers, it does save a lot in education and the competition it brings to those skilled jobs is ok because they will still be paid well enough. When we bring in low skilled workers it's not saving much in education because it wasn't required and the competition introduced causes low skilled workers to not afford a living anymore.

That crazy actor on Rogan was hosted by Oxford about 8-10 years ago. He started going off about how he remembers being in the womb and was energy from a previous life. It was pretty wild. Having been close to several actors in my younger years, my immediate thought was that he was playing a character.

Yes the US should support Ukraine because if Ukraine looses, Europe wil be next and the US needs Europe the same as Europe needs the US..

Sure his salary multiplies by 10 but then they send that salary outside of the country. Wake the fuck up everyone. Including this guy. As cool and hip as he thinks he is, he has no clue that he is still in that wasteland bubble they call a college campus.

People who are “part of those groups” will very likely be worse at describing themselves in some very important ways. Has this educated lady never learned that we don’t actually know ourselves ver well? Or whether there is and if so what it might make sense to “identify” with as a person? Or that the very philosophies about identity and identification intelligibly and compellingly argue that identifying your sense of self with any particular thing is terrible for you and others?

Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania are members of both NATO and EU. This guy with the light brown shorts shouldn't be in this conversation if he doesn't have basic information regarding the question.

That people dont know anything about war between Russia and Ukraine.

What is the name for hatred towards upspeak? And narcissism? And a narcissist using ridiculous upspeak😮

21:20 THE GAY GAMES, HELLOOOO!!!!!!!!!

Would bringing American troops home from overseas bases serve the same functional net positive benefits as having immigrants come? And if demobilization leads to a reduction in military spending as well, that would be a good way to reduce the deficit right?

Both are cowards.

He said that he doesn't believe all peoples are equal in the beginning, in response to the Somali immigrant question. And he taught his kids about how the store shelves wouldn't get restocked if everything was free. Intresting. Maybe not everything in humanity scales down to his simplistic analysis, and national character doesn't get "restocked" to sustain the nation if just anyone and everyone is "free to become" a national (including what made it attractive to migrants in the first place; just like the store where everything is free). Endless reductionism applied humanity might seem like the scientific thing to do, but some sciences are more likely to stick to the facts than others. He should keep his biases in check or else he'll keep trying to reinvent the wheel on the fact and purpose of human values (in general, and what problems they literally evolved to solve)... beyond just his own. If kids have more in common with their immigrant friends than ethnic parents and grandparents, you could call it an ethnogenesis. But is it even true? In-group favouritism, the "ethnos" and the values it inspires is a real phenomenon that keeps popping up, even in simple simulations, and you can't ignore it or giggle it away. We'll only know if his globalist version of an ethnos is real when the future puts those kids' allegiances to the test. He implied that we should watch what people do, not say. Something tells me that he has no special knowledge, insight or motivation to research what the various groups will or won't do for the sake of his globalist ideals in the future of the West and the world. What about at present? I mean, he mentioned Hamas. Does he pick sides on that issue? Maybe their kids should go to school together, to "have more in common" with them than their own grandparents. It's foolproof, and all it costs them is everything they've valued for thousands of years.

This guy is an eternal optimist and a kook. What he proposes is lunacy. He sounds more like an ideologue. I remember recently looking up data from one of the immigration research centers, and it clearly stated that the masses of uneducated poor that we’re letting in are and have been a net deficit for our country. And with the recent and increasing move to automation with increased minimum wage and labor costs and unfounded liabilities of Medicare and social security systems, and the housing crisis -and the fact that we are bankrupt, being 36 trillion dollars in debt, it is not a sane position.

Corruption? Kinda bad reason to burn it to the ground. God help us if we burned everything to the ground if it was infected with corruption.

WAR OF THE SEXES!!

So great to hear a clever head teacher … She can see the dogmatic bs in her community.

This video is so so interesting. Thank god for videos like this I don’t have to watch mainstream news…. Eg BBC , ITV, SKY. The headteacher is so clever.

Why are their sleeves so short 😂

Some of the immigrants fundamentally dont agree or align with modern liberal democracies let alone constitutional republics

1:16:12 to 1:18:26 - Great answer to the communist question. 1:18:26 to 1:21:30 - Fascinating facts about the economics for professor salaries.

Open borders can be good, unless your country has institutions like welfare and unemployment benefits, etc.

I do feel really bad for the parents who got coerced into doing this to their kids by the old “they’ll kill themselves if you don’t do this” argument

This is all fine if your country doesn't have a Welfare State 😂

This is why you should never put an economist in charge of anything. There’s far more involved in immigration than balances on a spreadsheet. One of the biggest issues we’re facing is the loss of national character because so many people are coming in who share nothing in common with our country and have no intention of becoming a part of our country. Also, the influx of low wage people who are illiterate in their own language, makes them ultimately a drain on society. This is especially true as we transition to a more automated economy, where brain power is more valuable than horsepower.

You are the problem. This station is a woke joke. You spent the whole segment ranting about how un-racist we are....proof that your side has already lost.

This Destiny is a severe hypocrite. When the USA attacks other countries and steals their territory, that's ok (for example, Kosovo). When Russia does the same, it is not moral. For the USA, there is genocide in one place and not in another. So Srebrenica with 4000 people killed is genocide and Gaza with 35000 people killed is not genocide. I don't think Destiny knows anything about morality. And we already know why Russia attacked Ukraine, the expansion of NATO.

Here we go again!, the magic of the free market. What could go wrong? Family, ancestors, culture, history, religion..., what are they for? Screw everyone! Who would prefer that boring old-fashioned traditional society to a fun modern Western city full of movement, diversity, colors, smells, accents, surprises...?

So disturbing that measures to implement this highly successful teaching approach have been blocked at the highest level: how does our govt square off actively holding the children of their nation back? Utterly deplorable.

Oh man... We are doomed... :-D

I'm surprised I am not seeing comments on this "racial harm" argument. And Peter barely pushed back on that. Steven made absolutly no sense there. He is good at formulating sentences, I'll give him that, but some of his arguments are just absurd. Which seems to confirm my initial impression of him: that he sounds way smarter than he is.

Why are people taking Stephen Woodford seriously? Every time I see him in a video, he makes very shallow points using poor arguments while seeming incredibly self-satisfied.