0:01

We make USAA insurance to help

0:03

you save. take advantage of discounts

0:05

when you cover your home and

0:07

your ride. Discover how

0:09

we're helping members save at

0:11

usaa.com slash bundle. All.

4:01

Into. Human interaction through

4:04

these simplistic. Manichaean.

4:08

Lenses that we've gotten essentially out

4:10

of cultural marxists. Where

4:13

every interaction whether it's my

4:15

conversation with you or someone's

4:18

conversation with a teacher student

4:20

to were between nations can

4:23

be seen through the lens

4:25

of oppressor vs. oppressed. And

4:29

this goes back to. I

4:31

mean. Long decades ago

4:34

the French and German cultural

4:36

marxism, philosophers people like A

4:38

and we thought about them

4:40

as well. Above the Brazilian,

4:42

our frere were talking about

4:44

France and an call from

4:46

as harangues. Yeah right right

4:49

right. Martin Luther. I mean

4:51

answering all of them. My.

4:54

Head. And all of them understood

4:56

this as as really the. In.

4:58

Their own way. This

5:01

quest for identity. But identity.

5:04

Could. Only be seen through the

5:06

this manichaean. View

5:08

of the world. And.

5:11

Now we've seen it made

5:13

manifest in this new understanding

5:15

of anti semitism. That

5:18

is not just the normal bigotry

5:21

that we we have known about

5:23

and that has existed forever, but

5:25

as brought in this whole other

5:27

realm that we're hearing people talk

5:29

about. The. The.

5:32

State of Israel in such a

5:34

way that. Victims.

5:37

Innocent. Victims of a massacre

5:39

could be seen as oppressors.

5:43

You and and that's a different way

5:45

of looking at the world, right? That's

5:47

it. That's a way of understanding eighty

5:50

Semitism. That I don't

5:52

think even. Thirty.

5:54

Forty fifty years ago with the

5:56

height when colleges like Harvard. Are

5:59

going back The century ago

6:01

were not even allowing Jews

6:03

into. Their. University or are

6:06

certainly reducing their numbers. This

6:09

is something very different and the I

6:11

think. Because.

6:13

It's being revealed through the

6:15

anti semitism. I think it's

6:17

important for all Americans to

6:19

understand. That. Just to

6:21

say that we've got an anti semitism

6:23

problem on campus. Really doesn't

6:26

get at. What

6:28

this anti semitism is and how

6:30

it does differ from decades and

6:32

centuries past. He

6:35

you have some giving voice to and

6:37

articulated something that's been turning in my

6:39

head that I could not find her

6:41

words for. I'm so if you'll permit

6:43

me and forgive me, I'd like to

6:45

peel. Back. A little bit more

6:48

of this with you. You've you've articulated something

6:50

I haven't heard much of, but a lot

6:52

of people I think I've been thinking of

6:54

you. You, you gave up voice. Let me

6:56

try it this way and see if I'm

6:58

picking up what you're putting down. If you

7:00

go back and watch. How

7:02

did you put your father's anti semitism?

7:04

your grandmother's Entice You go back and

7:06

watch a gentleman's agreement from Nineteen Forty

7:08

Seven Booze A familiar with the movie

7:11

a little bit Yes, there was a

7:13

he. I'm. A

7:15

shame about the anti semitism within those

7:17

who were anti semitic. There wasn't a

7:19

little bit of us have a have

7:22

a hidden nature, a covert shame and

7:24

embarrassment to at there was no strutting

7:26

about it era kindness. Well we know

7:28

we shouldn't feel this way but we

7:31

kind a wink, wink nod nod do

7:33

but you know it's going to be.

7:35

We're going to put the quietest honored

7:37

as much as possible. That.

7:42

Is gone or is not what we're

7:44

talking about? What we're talking about his.

7:46

I'll use the word against strutting and

7:48

bloodlust. Not a pride

7:51

in it, right? That's what wheels are, isn't

7:53

it's I said Douglas where the other days

7:55

making the point. The

7:57

point that there's not a country

7:59

in the world where you couldn't

8:01

They were neighborhood and put up

8:03

posters of a lost dog on

8:05

lamp posts, and through those posters

8:07

of the last dogs would remain

8:09

intact and integral until perhaps the

8:11

rain washed them away or the

8:13

dog was found. or or ultimately

8:15

lost. Couldn't. Do that

8:17

with choose. Right And

8:19

do that with shoes. And the

8:21

leading. the leading. Ah, the people

8:23

leading the effort to take down

8:25

those posters. College. Students and

8:27

Professors. Yeah yeah, yeah.

8:30

Below dogs. We're. Now.

8:33

It is in I I think it it must

8:36

strike. All. Of us. As

8:38

Americans. How a strange

8:40

it is that this is happening

8:43

uniquely on America's college campuses. But

8:45

to hear some of the terminology

8:47

and it's been used in the

8:49

argument, you know you hear Israel

8:52

been described as a colonial settler

8:54

nation will see these words around

8:56

eighty. Colonialism righties this framework of

8:58

again oppressor vs. oppressed. That's. That's.

9:01

Just not normal rhetoric

9:03

that we use as.

9:07

as people outside of academia

9:09

and it does derived from.

9:12

A. Very well worn. A. Deep.

9:15

Political. Philosophy. That's

9:18

been developed over. Decades.

9:21

If not a century, That.

9:24

Again is being made manifest

9:26

in unique ways. Because of

9:28

this. Relationship. It's the

9:31

same thing. That. Drives

9:33

this. View. Of the

9:35

United States is being an oppressor

9:37

nation, right? I think that is

9:39

right, and it can be extrapolated

9:42

across the entire western civilization. But.

9:44

I think that's right I

9:47

have done. My best friend

9:49

pointed to the Nineteen Fifties,

9:51

the Own, an effort by

9:53

Nikita Khrushchev to tiny unite

9:55

the third world around those

9:57

notions of racism, imperialism, and.

10:00

O'neill ism, but it is the language

10:02

that was picked up by your friends

10:04

fan and of the world than the

10:07

others and scholars to justify every form

10:09

of violent terrorism we've seen since the

10:11

Nineteen fifties. Pete this some this anti

10:14

colonial business we were talking about? You

10:16

were saying this isn't normal language and

10:18

it's actually not even that normal. Academically.

10:22

Except through of late. Exclusively.

10:25

Almost tied to the one country, one of

10:27

the few countries, maybe two or three countries

10:29

in the Middle East that really isn't a

10:32

cookie host clutch require any? Definitely. But yeah,

10:34

but feel free to say some about that

10:36

if you want. but I wanna stick with

10:38

that sharansky thing to are lumpy, throw it

10:40

in the mix bit and ask you have

10:42

this is but this is gonna sound a

10:44

little rough because I'm just learning it from

10:46

you and it's. I

10:48

only have a tenuous grasp on a sofa.

10:50

Sounds rough, forgive me but you you were

10:53

saying that nut tons runs. He was. Saying

10:55

how anti semitism changes with the

10:57

tasks and it involves these quests

10:59

for identity. I think that's how

11:01

you put and me What is

11:03

that? This notion that it's not

11:06

your father's your grandfather's interceptors and

11:08

I wonder if you think about

11:10

that gentleman's agreement anti Semitism Arm

11:12

that Gregory Peck type of anti

11:14

semitism. That. Was

11:16

at. A time when jews were

11:18

probably. One. Of them. Near.

11:21

Near know dears of strength. It's just

11:23

two years after the holocaust when that's

11:26

kind of going on. They were weak

11:28

and they were beaten. The

11:31

anti semitism to day comes when

11:33

jews paved perhaps have never been

11:36

stronger. With a country that has,

11:38

let's make no bones about a

11:40

lot of strength in Israel. nuclear

11:43

weapons, god knows, and N N

11:45

n I wonder if there's something

11:47

there to the jews will face.

11:50

Anti semitism. Mr. Week, but they'll

11:52

face even more virulent anti semitism

11:55

is there? Strong. again

11:57

i'm sorry if that's rough i'm just kind of putting

11:59

the but

14:00

also one that is also a very current

14:03

time and place. And

14:07

I've heard some try to make the

14:09

argument, and some of these protesters, a

14:11

reporter will go

14:13

up and it'll be kind of a person

14:15

on the street interview, and they will say,

14:18

the person protesting will

14:20

say, oh, I'm not anti-Semitic, I'm

14:22

just anti-Zionist. I'm

14:25

against the state of Israel. And

14:28

because it does this, this, and this. And

14:32

essentially what Sharansky,

14:34

to go back to the purpose of the

14:36

book, is to peel back that onion

14:39

to say, in

14:42

most cases, that's not really

14:44

a true bifurcation. It

14:48

is near impossible to separate

14:51

anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism.

14:55

And when, as we've seen in

14:57

some of the debates, and you mentioned Douglas

14:59

Murray before, I've also seen Ben

15:02

Shapiro on some debate stages with

15:04

those saying, okay, well, where

15:08

do you see the state

15:10

of Israel existing in the future?

15:12

Do you see a two-state solution?

15:14

And most of the interlocutors will say, no, there

15:17

should not be a state of Israel once you

15:19

push them to the wall. And

15:22

in that, this whole thing around

15:24

identity really does get back to,

15:27

is there a place, can there be a

15:29

place called Israel on this earth? And

15:33

in the end, there are many, millions

15:36

who don't think that there should be. And

15:39

that, we should all, just as human beings, you

15:42

know, whether you're Jewish or not, or even a

15:44

person of faith or not, just as a human

15:46

being, you really have to

15:49

wonder, how could that be? How

15:51

could we live in a world where we

15:54

could foresee a place the size of New

15:56

Jersey, just almost

15:59

ipso facto? So not having the

16:01

right to exist. And

16:05

again, these are questions of identity, but

16:07

they are also, I think, deeply human

16:10

questions about questioning

16:12

our own motives. And

16:16

certainly for the progressive left, where a

16:18

lot of this political and

16:20

cultural ideology has come out

16:22

of, this cultural Marxism

16:25

has come out of, we

16:28

really need to be closely

16:30

questioning them on their

16:33

beliefs, because it's a really

16:35

poisonous way to

16:38

teach. And unfortunately, again,

16:40

much of this has been embedded

16:42

in Middle East studies and political

16:44

science departments of various

16:47

college campuses. But

16:50

we really, that to me

16:52

is the poisonous taproot of all of

16:54

this. That's so interesting. So you're saying

16:56

that there's a squint

16:58

that goes to Israel that happens to

17:00

no other nation. And

17:03

by dint of that squint, you

17:06

can recognize you're in the

17:08

realm of anti-Semitism. Dennis Prager puts it

17:10

this way. He says, I'll

17:13

grant you that you can

17:15

be a non-anti-Semite and not

17:17

believe that Israel has a right

17:19

to exist the moment you tell

17:21

me that Pakistan doesn't have

17:23

the right to exist, which came to being

17:25

the year before Israel. And

17:28

I think that's a pretty helpful construction,

17:30

actually. The other side of the

17:32

story is, what is

17:35

this nonsense about duplicative language? I

17:37

mean, what is this euphemistic nonsense that

17:39

used to cover what really is, I

17:42

think it's fair to say, an academic

17:44

felony in plagiarism? Am

17:46

I wrong? Am I overstating that plagiarism

17:48

is an academic felony? Never mind three

17:50

instances? Never mind 40? Right.

17:54

Well, the Harvard case is

17:56

interesting, as I've been

17:59

following that. that the – where

18:01

the penny dropped on that whole

18:04

series of events was

18:06

when a group

18:08

of faculty – and by that I think it was

18:10

somewhere in the neighborhood of 700 or 800 signatures by

18:13

Harvard faculty. To

18:16

the corporation, right? Yes, right. In

18:18

support of President

18:21

Gay's position, even

18:23

after the initial revelations were

18:26

known, but a

18:29

letter from that faculty to the

18:32

corporation and that

18:34

leadership. And for

18:37

those maybe outside of

18:39

academia, it may

18:44

strike some as strange that we

18:48

may or may not have formal unions

18:50

– some certainly do. There

18:53

are unionized faculty and workers in

18:55

academia. But that tension

18:59

between board

19:02

leadership of the nonprofit

19:04

that is an academic

19:06

institution and the faculty

19:10

is attention. And

19:14

that was, in my view, when that

19:16

letter came down that quickly with, frankly,

19:19

not a lot of time for any

19:21

of the faculty to understand the case

19:23

themselves. Oh, yeah. You got 800

19:25

faculty agreeing on a thing within the snap of

19:27

a finger. That was weird. That

19:30

was a shot across the bow because

19:32

they weren't going to make the decision, right? That was

19:35

going to be in the purview of the board. But

19:38

they were letting the board know if you

19:41

decide to go down this road, you're

19:44

going to have a real fight on your

19:47

hands. And the

19:50

board flinched. If they thought even early

19:52

on that this was something A, worth

19:55

investigating and B, rose to

19:57

the position that – You

20:00

know, we obviously saw Stanford,

20:03

you know, with their president, you know, some

20:06

differences certainly in the case,

20:08

but certainly issues related to

20:10

academic honesty. Yeah.

20:15

They flinched in the

20:17

weight of that, but that letter,

20:20

again, from the faculty was

20:22

really meant to intimidate

20:26

and let the board know that if they

20:29

move forward on this – and

20:31

now everybody looks foolish. Because with

20:34

each passing day, there's another

20:36

item that comes up that shows that

20:39

there are some real issues

20:41

here, and

20:43

the faculty themselves look foolish

20:46

for writing that signatory

20:50

statement without really knowing the

20:52

facts themselves. Yeah,

20:54

it's a situation of fouling your own

20:56

nest in a way because I

20:59

don't think they can ever really

21:01

– if they continue to maintain this

21:03

position, take plagiarism seriously at Harvard again.

21:06

No, it really questions the

21:09

entire – the academic

21:11

credibility of the entire operation.

21:13

They have that many people sign

21:16

on to that without really, again,

21:19

knowing the facts or even to the degree that they

21:22

might have. You

21:24

probably told the story of the

21:26

Roland Fryer attacks, the

21:29

economist there at Harvard who before

21:31

Gay was even president was in –

21:35

Roland Fryer was in her sights

21:37

as someone who needed

21:40

to be pushed out

21:42

of Harvard. So there

21:44

had certainly been some evidence that

21:48

now President Gay was ideological while

21:51

she was on faculty and then

21:54

dean, but this instance of the almost immediate reflection of

21:56

the fact that she was a student of the

21:58

Harvard School of Business, move

22:00

by the faculty and 800

22:02

signatures was

22:04

really intended to prevent

22:07

what happened again under different circumstances

22:09

but prevent what happened at University

22:11

of Pennsylvania. It's odd to

22:14

me as I said it

22:16

to get 800 faculty members

22:18

to agree on one thing and

22:20

to agree so quickly there

22:23

must be some value that

22:25

is so near and dear

22:27

to them that it's in

22:29

their vice grip beyond rational

22:31

thought and I wonder if we might

22:33

put our finger on that here how could

22:35

you have such a knee-jerk unanimity

22:39

of higher academic freedom

22:42

and if you saw Charles Fried's argument

22:44

oh my gosh one last

22:47

thought if I can unless you have more on

22:49

the Claudine Gay issue

22:53

of I guess what we now call duplicative

22:55

language there

22:57

was an interesting is

23:00

it tell I'm looking for by Charles

23:02

Fried for those that don't

23:04

know him he's a professor at the Harvard

23:06

Law School used to serve on the Massachusetts

23:08

Supreme Court served in the Reagan Justice Department

23:11

a very well-known establishment

23:14

Republican conservative

23:16

libertarian legal

23:20

scholar and he was quoted in

23:22

the New York Times Pete as why

23:25

he was unbothered by the charges

23:27

of plagiarism here he said because

23:30

the attack came from the extreme

23:32

right wing and he said literally

23:35

if it came from some other

23:37

quarter I might be granting it

23:40

some credence but not from these people

23:42

so first a lot of said there

23:44

so first of all what said is

23:47

that Christopher Rufo and the Manhattan Institute is

23:49

the extreme right wing that's that's in and

23:52

of itself interest right

23:54

or or or

23:57

I don't know Carol Swain I suppose is part

24:01

Second, this really

24:03

is that point that there's only

24:05

really one side in this country

24:07

now that has the credibility

24:09

of normative claims. And if you're

24:11

going to be conservative, you're subhuman,

24:13

you will get a

24:15

different standard. That's how I read it. I don't

24:17

know. Maybe I'm reading it too closely, but that's

24:20

how I read that. Well,

24:22

I certainly do agree that

24:25

the attacks

24:27

on Rufo

24:29

and his team, as

24:32

opposed to taking seriously the

24:36

very clear evidence that he was presenting

24:38

– you're right

24:40

– does speak to the broader

24:42

effort by Harvard to

24:47

essentially attack the attacker.

24:51

To blame the person that

24:53

has found this evidence. And

24:56

note that nothing that Rufo

24:58

and his team uncovered was

25:00

ever questioned. Right.

25:03

Nobody said that. No one said you got

25:05

it wrong, by the way. That's right. Nobody

25:07

said that this wasn't Claudine Gay's writing or

25:09

this did not come from a paper that

25:12

she wrote over. It

25:14

was really just part of this

25:16

broader strategy of trying to avoid

25:18

the reality of what's happening.

25:22

And in this – part

25:24

of this is ideological. That's certainly the

25:26

case. But

25:28

part of this is

25:31

just a

25:33

400-year-old

25:36

great institution and bureaucracy that has lost

25:38

its way and now is in a

25:40

place where it's doing – where it's

25:43

realizing in the course of just a

25:45

few years it is utterly

25:49

damaging its

25:51

brand and identity. I

25:53

don't know if you saw that early

25:56

admission applications to Harvard are down

25:58

17%. This

26:00

is just the beginning if this

26:02

continues, because the shoe I think

26:04

is going to drop on the Claudine, on

26:06

the President gay piece. I would

26:09

be surprised if

26:11

with the information that's continuing to come

26:13

out, and you cannot

26:15

believe Chris Rufo all you

26:17

want, but as things start

26:20

morphing into the Atlantic and

26:23

into other… CNN and Jake Tapper.

26:27

That's right. I mean, there comes

26:29

a certain point where well-meaning

26:33

liberals working in

26:36

other outlets are going

26:38

to be forced to pick up your

26:40

story, and it is going

26:42

to be increasingly difficult

26:45

to fight. But again, I really

26:48

do think that when you've

26:50

been a certain way for

26:53

decades and you've always

26:55

looked at people like a Chris

26:57

Rufo as being

26:59

not even worthy of listening

27:01

to because you've

27:03

done that with conservatives both

27:06

on your faculty and students. We've

27:08

talked about the challenges that conservative

27:11

faculty and students face in

27:13

places like Harvard, where Harvey

27:16

Mansfield was the last of

27:19

that group

27:21

teaching there. That's

27:24

something that infects the entire administrative

27:28

apparatus until

27:30

it gets to a place where it's

27:33

unavoidable. And

27:37

so I just think that

27:40

it's tragic, though it does speak

27:42

to what happened in Pennsylvania, where

27:45

not only was McGill let

27:47

go, but the chair of the board stepped

27:50

down as well. That

27:52

there was an understanding – this

27:55

probably sounds crass, but there was an understanding that we've

27:57

got to cut our losses here, folks. loneliness

30:00

as well as one that cuts

30:03

across all demographics and all

30:05

age groups. Certainly for the

30:07

young, the connection

30:10

between loneliness and social media

30:12

usage is pretty clear but

30:14

it's not just the young in this

30:16

instance. This really

30:18

goes into folks in

30:20

their later stages of life. Yeah, really

30:22

all. Really all. So many. I mean

30:25

you and I have been pretty kindred

30:27

in the notion that we can talk about

30:30

the youth crises but we really need to

30:32

also focus on the adult, which

30:34

by the way cause youth. Problems in

30:36

the area. Pete, bless you sir. Love

30:39

talking to you. Be well. Thanks

30:42

for listening to the Town Hall

30:44

Review. Our program is coming today

30:47

in partnership with the Pepperdine Graduate

30:49

School of Public Policy. It's America's

30:51

most unique graduate leadership programs offered

30:54

on Pepperdine's breathtaking campus in Malibu,

30:56

California. Learn more at publicpolicy.peperdine.edu. If

30:59

you're enjoying the podcast, please tell a friend to

31:01

go to Town Hall Review and sign up as

31:03

well today. Unfiltered,

31:26

unapologetic, truth. Find what you're

31:29

searching for at smc.tv and

31:31

on Local

31:34

Now channel 525. To bold

31:36

statements, you can express your style

31:38

exactly how you want. Choose

31:40

your own cut, fabric, lining, buttons,

31:42

lapels, and more to create the

31:44

suit of your dreams. All

31:47

at a surprisingly affordable price. They

31:49

also offer fully customizable blazers,

31:51

pants, outerwear, women's wear, and

31:53

more. Every endocino piece

31:55

is made to your exact measurements, and they

31:58

make getting measured easy. Simply

32:00

set up your measurement profile in less than 10

32:02

minutes. You can send your measurements

32:04

online from the comfort of your home, or make an

32:06

appointment at one of our showrooms. Find

32:09

the perfect fit with Indochino. Go

32:11

to indochino.com and use code PODCAST to

32:13

get started.