Jonathan Haidt: What makes someone a Republican or a Democrat? | Andrew Yang | Yang Speaks
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt joins the podcast to talk about moral foundations theory, human-centered capitalism, and how we can bridge today's political divide.
Follow Jonathan Haidt: / jonhaidt | jonathanhaidt.com
Follow Andrew Yang: / andrewyang | / andrewyang
Follow Zach Graumann: / zachgraumann | / zach_graumann
----
Subscribe to Yang Speaks:
Apple - podcasts.apple...
Spotify - open.spotify.c...
Jonathan Haidt is a voice of sanity and reason in our modern society that seems to get crazier every year.
Since you like Haldt, I think you might find find Chris Hedges and possibly Richard D. Wolff also interesting. While Haldt focus is on sociology and root of morality as the driving principal I our political affiliation and believes, Hedges speaks about how socio-economic forces like crony capitalism that lead to social decay and fascism, and Wolff focus full on economy and inequality as a source of social unrest.
@@checklostandfound I just perused the Wikipedia articles on Wolff and Hedges. They don't seem to be like Yang and Haidt. They seem to be part of the crazy that we need less of. Also, after Yang dropped out of the presidential race, I started considering my engagement with politics as a waste of time. My resolution for 2021 is to focus more on math and computer science.
@@mikeg9b I love it...
I'd love to see Wolff and Yang team up. Social Markets + Human Capitalism
Wolff/Yang 2024
he's the best!!
Yang's podcast reaching new Haidts
Underrated comment.
@mark carey 👏👏
Low five material. Well done⬇️ 🙌⬇️
best dad joke I've seen in a long while 🤣🤣
🤦🏼♂️
What a great, wholesome conversation. Everyone should listen to this.
Jonathan coaching Yang was my personal highlight. Hope to see them again in 2024.
2024? Kamala has that spot on lockdown
Johnny Kamala won’t be president think too many ppl making that assumption. I don’t dislike her the way most progressives seem to but she is not close to popular enough to get the nomination in four years unless nobody challenges her
@@Rowsy91 IF they take the nomination from her, it will have to be a woman or a person of color. Could you imagine the outrage if a female person of color was removed for an "old white guy"?
No it was two democrats failing to understand trump's support
@@John-wf5if she will have shown her colors by then.
That NYT article on Yang really got people mad on Twitter but nothing is said about the brilliant things he says on this podcast with intelligent minds.
Being someone on the right, Yang was one of the absolute best democratic candidates this election cycle who had new ideas and had a more realistic understanding of the other side than any other candidate. i have to wonder about his "vaccine proof identifcation" tweet, that's some gestapo stuff and doesn't seem like what he'd normally get behind but, i have respect for yang over all the other candidates and its too bad that the establishments in both parties completely protect their power structures over listening to their constituents. we watched bernie get shafted twice, even if we disagreed with bernie we still watched the democratic establishment screw him over. twice. understand that the same thing happened on the right for two election cycles in a row, and that's where Trump came from, and that's why as they said in this video the Republican establishment feared going against the president. enough of the Republican voter base is behind Trump regardless of what the news says, regardless of whether or not you think its wrong, it is what it is and it neutered the cocaine mitch's and the linsday grahams in congress for years and they came out swinging after the capitol was stormed. they cowered in fear while they politicized the burning and looting of cities around our country all summer long that ended in the deaths of over 20 people, and most of the damage was done to average people just trying to make a living in their hometowns, i sat and listened to the police radio frequency in my hometown and listened to the same thing happen in real time peaceful protestors went home, a bunch of jerks went burning and looting elsewhere in the city
I feel like this election cycle should've taught both the right and the left how the odds are stacked against them both but we're both just pocketed into our little social media corners only hearing what we want to hear from people who agree with us, we've all been dooped into hating each other while our country burns down around us by morons on both sides
@braddo pitto especially people on twitter
@braddo pitto no no no no an app in the phone for verification of what? so i can go to the store? so i can go to the movies or a ball game?
You're assuming i should be ok with that because google and huawei have stolen more data from me and i'm ok with that?
i'm ok with neither, and the fact that so many people are just getting behind the technocratic equivalent of gestapo "papers please" is alarming and i dont care what side of the political spectrum you fall on. There's a major difference between stealing my financial data and metadata, and requiring that i can verify my vaccination status for a disease with a 99% survival rate among most age demographics so that i can freely move about my homeland. we have rights and it doesnt matter what the reason to curb them is. democrats hated the crap out of the patriot act, you think this crap is any different than that? its the patriot act on steroids.
a vaccine that was developed in less than a year for a disease unknown until a year and a half ago when the average vaccine takes years to produce. simple google will already show you its killed people and doctors are saying that you still have to social distance and it could still allow you to spread the disease. so i ask this as respectfully as one can: WHAT THE FUCK IS THE POINT
no thanks
edit: here's his tweet in case you wanna reread
"Tough to have mass gatherings like concerts or ballgames without either mass adoption of the vaccine or a means of signaling."
twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1339987988718206976?s=20
That idea is not really far fetched, in Australia you have to prove your kid is vaccinated before they can attend childcare or school, it's an ideology in a moderate progress democracy, nothing excessive.
@@Yyxqq123 This isn't australia, we have to do that here too, if vaccines work, then give it to your kid take it yourself, and quit worrying about everyone else
"but but but you're endangering everyone else"
i reiterate: if they work, then why worry?
Great that Jonathan is getting to do what he set out to do all those years ago. His advice will help Andrew (who's already in the right track).
Jonathan Haidt giving Yang coaching.
Absolutely e.g. he rightly pointed out framing or Rhetoric although super important is no substitute for material conditions or substance.
@@kd6613 rather frame it to get the elephant to listen but provide the substance and evidence that speaks to the rider.
This is easily the best episode of Yang Speaks! Love Haidt, his books are fantastic. Truly "forward" in this one.
This was, in my opinion, the best episode of Yang Speaks yet
Jonathan Haidt is amazing! I've followed his work for years and recommend his books to everyone! If there's one thing his work has taught me, it's to be willing to understand other people's points of view, even when you disagree! The problem is when we assume everyone thinks exactly the same way we do (they don't)! 😁
Not sure the main problem is when we assume everyone thinks exactly the same as us .... but more to the point, that if you don't think exactly like 'I' then you are wrong, misguided, not informed, ignorant and thus it is necessary to censor, ignore, destroy, silence. Tribalism.
Are people really shocked or surprised, not aware that others don't necessarily share 100% of our beliefs?
Haidt's theory per se has significant problems. The basic point that people think differently is quite true. But you should read John Gibbs' Moral Development and Reality to see where his five-point model is wrong.
@@Sinleqeunnini Admit I have not read that work. Reading an abstract of the work, it states, By comparing, contrasting, and going beyond the key theories of preeminent thinkers Lawrence Kohlberg, Martin Hoffman, and Jonathan Haidt, author John C. Gibbs tackles vital questions
Would you be able to briefly offer upon what the author finds Haidt's work is wrong and why?
This is gonna be a must watch! Reading Righteous Mind and having mind blown.
Great Stuff Here! Hopefully New York City Mayor campaigning will give our favorite Andrew a real and tangible sense of how to consistently put the Elephant first, then get to the Rider, when talking about any subject of importance. Finally a chance to talk in a way that Everyone can hear--not just hear, but take the time to actually LISTEN. I really hope he wins Big in the upcoming primaries and general later this year.
Hey Sound Guy! I love and need Yang and his guest's messages. I want to support by listening to the sponsors. But the (huge) volume jump for the advertisement vs Hiadt's or Yang's voice makes me want to skip the ads. It makes my ears hurt and really puts me off. If you want money for a correctly mixed version, I will pay. Can we work this out?
Yang is the only politician who isn’t overly partisan doesn’t bash others and uses data. He’ll have my vote every time. This is the example of how all politics should be. NY, Be smart. Vote him in as mayor.
He certainly is partisan, but not overly
I think you could say this about Tulsi Gabbard too although Yang is more data driven.
@@JediTony81 agreed. They are the only two candidates in either party I actually likes
I get too much schadenfreude out of watching NYC fall apart to want them to have good leadership.
Very glad Andrew did not take a cabinet position for he is able to offer so much more.
It’d be nice to get the interviewees name in the title. I almost missed this one.
So glad Jonathan's eyebrows are retaining their swarthy youth.
You got ... 1500 on SATs didn't you. ;)
Yong Brows! He got the youngest eyebrows in the game!
Could it be that such an intelligent being is also vain enough to dye his...eyebrows? Wtf
@@skonther0ck He has his priorities right. That or he shares a few genes with Martin Scorsese.
@@coldwynn not quite, but I like to bloviate :)
I've been excited about this podcast. Johnathan Haidt's work and voice are, imo, vital to helping us all process what's been happening over the past decade or two and helping us move forward in a smarter way.
I wish more politically engaged folks understood that ideological fundamentalism is hurting us more than helping us. It blinds us into a fanatical and extreme state of mind - which many never get out of. This weakness of humans has been a major part of what's plagued humanity throughout our history.
This along with Katherine Gehl's work and propositions for moving forward could dramatically improve our way of life, our sanity, and our democratic process. All we have to do is unplug from the insanity and noise long enough to hear them out.
You're so right! Maybe now
that the "changeover" is
immanent people can start
to relax and withdraw from
mainstream media and take
time to listen/read. I know
I have. I've been listening to
this class of podcast/video
for 3 days now. Very good
for hope in my other fellow
Americans after watching
what happened in D.C. all
day on Wednesday the 6th!!
My faith in our nation's
future is starting to be
restored. Andrew is great!
I love his podcasts. Thanks
Andrew!
As someone who has read 3 of Haidt's books, and clicks on every interview he's in that get suggested, this interview is the first time that I'm disappointed. Even with all his research, he still does not understand Conservatives. To say that the authoritarians have taken over and the Never Trumpers are the "true" social conservatives...this is insulting and a gross mischaracterization of what is going on.
So what's really going on?
@@CH-ze6by a populist movement. Just like the bernie sanders left is. The trump base is not at all Republicans. They hate Republicans. The Never Trumpers are the establishment Republicans. That's why some of them are even switching to democrat bc it's all part of the same swamp. They have loyalty to the crony establishment system, not to party. Both the trump base and the bernie base have been demonized in the press bc they are both anti-establishment. Same with Yang actually. It's about the elites maintaining their power within the elite system (politicians, bureaucrats, mainstream media, wealthy people who make decisions for this country who we never elected). The trump voters (like bernie and yang voters) voted him in to disrupt that system.
I was part of the populist left (supported bernie) in 2016, but in 2020 i voted for Trump. I left the populist left pretty much bc I think the authoritarians on the left have taken over their party. I hate cancel culture, censorship and "wokeness." I'm very comfortable on the populist right now, and I prefer it here for many reasons, but I did very much like Tulsi, Yang and Marianne Williamson, even though I disagreed with them on some policy issues. I would have voted for any of them over an establishment republican.
@@CH-ze6by also I went to actually hear Haidt speak and met him personally once. This was in 2019 and he was asked who he supported politically. He said that he didn't really like to say but that he was interested in Pete Buttigieg. Talk about a sleazy swamp creature! So I don't think that Haidt actually does see things as establishment vs populist. And although I think his research is incredibly important in this moment, he is missing this key perspective when he talks about politics.
Tara, thank you for taking your time, it's appreciated. I was also supportive of Bernie, would have loved to see Yang or Williamson, too. However, I can't make the leap to Trump, I appreciate your honesty and it helps me to understand how some of my previously D friends were able to vote for Trump as a disrupter, I can understand that. It does seem the price might have been to high. I couldn't bring myself to vote for Biden either after watching the DNC and MSM, push the best candidates out, just voted down ballot 2020
@@CH-ze6by hopefully we'll have a better disrupter in 2024...someone who actually does hit all the populist boxes that both sides of the spectrum agree on!
Haidt :
"Trump capitalized on Identity"
( Yeah ~ but Obama
never did that! ..)
what a joker.....
😏😉😀😜😝
Yang laughing at his own jokes is cringe 😬🥴
Heterodox Academy has the tools to get us through this
I think so too. I joined them as soon as they started accepting PhD students
I hope Andrew takes the evaluation to heart, he can win in the future if he talks more like a politician, he has to do what works.
How refreshing....
I do have a concern that UBI could have unintended consequences, one that it could allow people to stay in an unmotivated state, being unfulfilled, the other is that with the additional income real estate cost could inflate in the same way that government loans for college facilitated the ridiculous college tuitions.
People are motivated by much more than survival. Humans inherently look for meaning-and that can take many forms, especially if they weren’t perpetually worried about starvation. They might start a business. They might write a novel. Etc. How many beautiful and amazing things is this world missing out on because most people are too worn down to take risks or experiment or think critically. They are too busy working three jobs to survive. Society loses. Humanity regresses.
I'm in a midwestern defacto sanctuary city. There's a lot of refugees in my apartment complex. Their kids are out running around all the time. They're probably going to be more well adjusted than the affluent suburban kids I know.
Haidt is bar none my favorite modern day thinker. Stoked to see him on the show today.
He did his research in Brazil because he spoke Spanish? Wut. They speak Portuguese
spanish is similar to portugese though
He sorta skipped a bit, he was looking for Spanish collaborators, but they were all doing something different so he found a Brazilian, so not Spanish speaking. He didn't connect that out loud though.
A higher percentage of people in the US speak spanish than in Brazil
This conversation shows how important is that we acknowledge and try to understand each other. It makes what has happened lately even more brutal and completely on the wrong track. I'm not a fan of Trump by any means, but we must try to understand his supporters instead of persecuting them across social media...
Spot on. I love Jonathan's tips for reaching across the aisle. I hope Andrew takes these on board
I know conservatives who over the years followed a lot of liberal news outlets like CNN, Time the whole range, yet I can't think of one liberal who ever followed FOX and any other conservative news outlet.....
This is the kind of education America needs right now.
"Mess of a party that sure ain't conservative" you ain't kidding sir.
When it comes to M4A, is it really how it is communicated or is it how will it affect the rest of people lives. I am not sold the rich will pay for it and even if we do tax them more, in the case of a Bezos, what keeps him from passing that cost on to the consumer, which in the end we are still paying for it. I have looked at the Nordic model and the whole of the tax base seems to be paying for everything. So if you plan to raise income tax, sales tax and put a 180% duty on automobiles how do you expect middle and lower income families to afford this? There are a lot of things about the Scandinavian countries that looks really good but the US must have a holistic approach and I think a lot of people are afraid you are going to break some people to fix others.
in some scandinavian countries everybody pays. This is not a literal example but let's say that means every tax payer would pay 10% of their income for m4a. If it's a system that is universal you can't ask the rich to pay for the majority of it. (The 1% already pays 40% of total taxes, we have a spending problem not a tax problem)
It’s refreshing to hear a thought provoking conversation instead of emotionally charged buzzwords and npc scripts.
Overall this was an excellent conversation (as always- thank you Yang Speaks!! :)), but I am a tad bit skeptical of the plausibility of a strong heritable component to "political leanings" in particular. If anything, there may be a heritable component to differences in emotionality, anxiety/risk aversion, etc., which could in turn lead individuals to affiliate with groups that espouse certain values. But political ideologies themselves are complex societal constructs that vary widely across cultures, and I would be curious to read the source literature to determine whether the authors controlled for covariance of other factors such as anxiety, disgust reflex etc. in their assessment of heritability and political views. I say this also as someone who identifies as having radically changed both my religious and political stances over time (from moderate-right Catholic as a child to very left-leaning, progressive, and atheist/agnostic as an adult), and from which I attribute my changes in position significantly to becoming more educated, meeting new people, traveling the world etc. (all ecological/environmental factors).
(Also side note: Kudos to Dr. Haidt for mentioning the WEIRD issue in psychological science! Very important to consider)
Why is it that if most in academics believe in liberal values and access to education, that they have made college education so unaffordable?
I have this distinct feeling that half of the Podcast is the guest's Interview of Andrew Yang and vice versa. They are very much in point on their observation and assessment. This episode might as well be called the "Science of our current politics."
I'm always skeptical of the ruling class establishment. Dems are now firmly the ruling class party and the establishment thats why I have been voting Republican.
It's been like that for too long.
@@astralislux305 yeah but some dems still really fight like they’re the underdog when it’s the exact opposite
I really just think Yang needs to up his production values. His lighting, microphone and picture quality are just terrible. It doesn’t match the quality of these conversations, nor the quality of Yang himself.
Is it really that necessary? The audio and video are clear enough to understand and due to covid, many of these convos are made possible through video chat and laptop hardware isn't going to be 4K.
It's not a priority. You don't even really need the visuals.
I agree. There are lots of amateur RUclipsrs who have much higher video and audio quality. The minimum acceptable standard is higher now than it was during the low-res, dial-up Internet days.
@@naruto_uzumaki2012 right, but this guy wants to be president. To me it just seems amateurish. These conversations are excellent-better than most political commentary on RUclips, but the presentation is among the worst. His camera looks like it’s 480. It’s not like it’s much expense to have a slightly higher quality setup and a proper mic. Just my opinion.
@@geggytar I understand your concerns.
The republican party has a funny way of showing compassion and altruism. In 1997 i went on a christian mission trip to Honduras to give eye exams and glasses. I asked my step dad. Why are we doing this? There are people at home that need it. He said, They don't Need it and it's a tax right off. Why do most republicans go to other country's but hate immigrants? I am a independent, i don't go left or right I go with good idea's. I Loved it when Yang said, it's not Left or Right it's FORWARD... I was trying to get my husband to run for mayor. He would make a Great mayor. He said, i can't run for mayor in a republican state. I tolled him to lie for the grater good of the people. We both grew up in Strong republican family's and know what to say. It was No in the end but he really did think about it.
This ad format is really obnoxious. Had to switch from my smart phone to my pc so I could skip them more easily.
This is probably the best Yang Speaks yet. I've been looking at how someone could primary Joe Manchin. This is a very useful video.
It's about time we see a conversation between Andrew Yang and Steven Kenneth Bonnell II. Especially after the work he's done with the help of the Math Movement in Georgia.
I'd love to see that, right in my feeeed.
There also are very few American History classes and Civics classes. People don't understand the difference between different types of government. Or even what the different branches and checks and balances do...
What a crossover!!! I have admired these two immensely it’s so awesome that they’re on the same podcast.
Yang for president 2024 with VP Haidt! How cool would that be!
Ive regularly wondered why nobody big in the politics game hasn’t picked him up as an advisor or cabinet member. Haha. Would love to see him as vp
I’d be on board, but for which party? Many, many left-leaning Democrats in academia are strongly opposed to Dr Haidt.
@@TischNew43 Why's that?? Because he focuses on a fair diagnosis and understanding of their politics? smh..
In relation to his righteousness mind book. I'm sure many say it, but to me (a UK citizen), republicans and democrats are both right wing. One is slightly less right wing than the other, but both are just as corporatist. Also, both like war. So it becomes quite peculiar that they hate each other so much.
No, you have it backwards. In the UK you have 2 left parties. One party (Labor) openly calls each other “comrade”, while the other (Tory) argues about how to run the NHS slightly more efficient.
Both are on the left. There is no right in the UK.
Yang call me when you want to understand conservatives and we can visit the VA hospital in Houston so you can see the government healthcare. They have grown men on the floor tonight. I am reaching out trying to listen to the leftest more.
For guy who was quick to dress someone down for framing, he sure was careful to frame his POV.
Tuning in again, thanks for the wonderful content.
Jonathan Haidt should also interview Prof Richard Wolff. Please have economist Richard Wolff on your podcast. He understand capitalism.
So much of the comments seem like they were fans of hadit before this episode, I think I'm going to look into this guy more now. ☺
i saw few things from him, didn't like it.. to me he seems like someone scared of new stuff
Been hoping they could connect in conversation for a long time! Very happy to see this!
@YangSpeaks If you really enjoy moral and political philosophy, you should check out my old professor; Professor Dungey from CSUN. He has a podcast called Dungey State University where he explorers the origins and implications of our philosophies.
"Speak to the elephant first." Very basic but I've never thought of that so much. I guess that with me it's a bit the opposite, I generally tend to be dismissive most emotional approaches to anything, doesn't matter if it's a left- or right-wing elephant appeal
Universal health care woyld create so many jobs as huge amounts of healthcare workers, equipment, construction of buildings would be needed not to mention administrators of this program and educators of all the workers needed. I cant understand how any one is against this.
I can't wait for this one. Most people don't understand the perspective of others with a different mindset. The two political parties were formed from our inherent mindsets (more liberal or more conservative), due to the predominant influence of either our cortexes (liberal minded) or limbic systems (conservative). Neuroscientists can accurately predict people's political persuasions with a brain scan, to see which area is most dominant (lights up). Yang is always on top of which topics need to be discussed. It's so much easier to have a little compassion for people with different views, when you know where they are coming from (their perspective).
Why do we have to cut jobs because of automation? Why not let people work less? Because Capitalism revolves around maximizing the profits of Capitalists, if we want a habitable planet, Capitalism needs to be significantly reformed and ultimately abandoned. It served it's purpose but we don't need infinite growth for the few on a finite planet that the many inhabit.
I don't want a return of the old Republican establishment, trickle down economics and endless wars. Social conservatives believe I have no right to consume cannabis.
As opposed to the new Republicans that believe you have no right to vote?
@@dennismitchell5276Actually, there not much different when it comes to policies. They both support the same thing. One is just nicer than the other.
You don't know how much the market values your wife's time in child care because you do not sell her services in the market. You value your wife's taking care or your kids = or < the cost of paying someone ells to do it. You are making a choice between your wife working and then paying for services and your wife forgoing work to do it for herself. I did the same thing when I fixed my plumbing, I was quoted around $800 and decided that the amount of time/effort it would take to do it myself was less than the market rate and I did it myself. You are to smart to make this "dumb" argument. 10 people in the economy, they all chose to clean their own house, who pays them ? 10 people all clean each others house and they pay each other the same rate, resulting net income assuming no tax/friction is the same in both cases. You are arguing that some other entity should pay them but from what pile of money, this economy has no additional production to divert. You can do better ..... you say you like math and understand economics and that suggests that this is an intentional omission of facts in order to avoid them.
get over your personal identity. it is false and destructive and you do not need it.
RyanZakMusic
I hear ya. I do have to keep my identity with truth and logic though. I need those things to be part of me, haha!
Seriously though, I think if more people worked on personal accomplishments, they wouldn't be so apt to seek pseudo accomplishments vicariously though like minded groups. It's not much of a feat to join a like minded group and certainly nothing to be proud of. It gives many people a false sense of pride.
Yes, turn the world entirely into gray little robots.
The more that the left talks the more they sound exactly like Hitler Youth.
What a waste of useful corporate fascist idiots so many on the left have become.
#PraiseJordanPeterson
that's great if your personal identity truly didn't affect your ability to navigate through society. because the default assumptions about you based on permanent, naturally occurring features often have dire consequences.
and i wonder how attached you are to your musical identity?
@@jepkofficial Group think is a conservative trait, I think you are projecting.
People aren't polarized because of different opinions, they're polarized because of different facts. If you use misleading facts to get your way, you're not a good person.
The term “progressive” is misused. I think the highlight of that term was 10 years ago, when progressive meant trying to progres to something better. Now it feels like people that label themselves progressive are more concerned with “change” versus “progress”, which is bad, because there is a difference.... I think we need to reevaluate the way we label ourselves, left, right, progressive, conservative, all are antiquated terms that we need to move away from
Yang, do the right thing. Call out ALL of those in the public and private sectors who are using the actions and principles of tyranny to silence those that they disagree with. Even if it makes you enemies.
That is a TRUE American.
Free speech is not an absolute right. There should be consequences for inciting violence. That's not tyranny at all. Mob justice is more traditionally the tool of tyranny.
@@SR-lh4rm Mob justice is not the tool of tyranny and you know it.
@@SR-lh4rm And yes, free speech is an absolute right. Its the very first amendment. The second says to use guns when they try to take the first.
@@SR-lh4rm You are a sucker for NAZIsm. Maybe read about the Reichstag fire to understand staged political events.
@@jepkofficial Mob justice is the tool of tyranny when a tyrant loses control of a weak state apparatus. Trump was using a mob, things got out of control, and the mob did what mobs do. Trump should be held accountable to the full extent of the law. Part of me feels for him and his family for the shitstorm that is about to utterly destroy them, but the law is the law. Where AOC seems more concerned with the _consequences_ of not prosecuting for future demagogues, my personal concern is respect for the law and what it is there to do - to let Americans know that their democracy is safe and they are safe.
Nowadays? It's just a matter of equally distributing those bought and paid politicians. Rep and Dem are pretty much a different side of the same coin atm.
"In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit."
Oof this will be a very interesting (and loud!) conversation.
Haidt has been mad about this since 2015
Thankfully this was a great calm chat 🥰
I'm so happy I found you! I would have voted for you had, you been on the ballot! UBI is necessary for everybody! And I believe that the pandemic will have that conversation going faster than ever now. Love Jonathan Haidt, always have.. I've taken classes at the University of Maryland and Yale and which he is mentioned quite often, as he should be. So I liked and subscribed and I can't wait to listen to future episodes! Thank you thank you thank you!!
Great interview! I was drawn in by the subject. Two comments: First, we should never underestimate the importance of emotional content in communication. Most of the information in a conversation is almost always non-verbal. Yes. Your first goal is to get people to like you. Sorry about that. We will never succeed with any campaign for social change using only words. So the first job of interpersonal persuasion is always to win the affection of the other. And we do that primarily by listening to them.
Note: This principle applies less to public figures who communicate on video, or primarily through verbal communication. If that is the case, however, you should seek to gather a staff that is very good at nonverbal skills. Grassroots persuasion happens primarily while listening.
Second: There are many approaches to increasing equality in a society. A GUI is one. Another one is to provide a vital human service, such as health care. It may be easier to convince more conservative people to support universal single-payer health care than to convince them that the government should send out a monthly check to everyone. I love the GUI idea, but why not do both?
Just a couple of thoughts.
Yang is getting schooled
46:00 onwards is like Q equipping 007
2024...A third party to bridge the gap!
I don't think that the Gap can be bridged now because the media lied about us on the right and then the democrats in congress pushed big tech to censor us so we couldn't defend ourselves, while the Republicans in congress pretended to fight for the people. It's so bad that the government and media have successfully caused our own families to hate us. Then when we fight back in any way, we are called nazis and terrorists. How do we come together when this has happened?
@@gloriakuhn8670 Vandalising our capital and killing its officers was not an acceptable response
@@tamberlame27 Trump making his own party would gain more prominence than the remnants of the GOP
@@chiangkaishrek5123 I never said it was.
@@gloriakuhn8670 We educate ourselves, then listen to the case being made by our detractors . . . then point out, patiently, what they are missing, and that these issues are not as easy to fully understand as they appear at first, then suggest reasons for a sense of urgency. (Possible strategy for the smaller, one on one discussions. For the larger conversation, we're going to need Andrew to keep stepping up his game.)
I remember watching Yang discuss men's issues on the trail to a confused and non-responsive liberal crowd. They all seemed confused while Yang discussed the problems men faced. After a minute of zero cheer, Yang reframed it with, "...and healthy men treat women better!"
It was just sad that on order for that crowd to care about men, it had to framed in how it helps women.
Get Eric Weinstein on
People are all the same. Only ideology make people to think that they are different and divisive.
I didn't know Haidt has become a pilot!?
How many times did Jonathan point out that conservatives because of their traits tend to be attracted to authoritarianism then only to say when authoritarian is growing in the Republican party that that's not the real party or ideology?...
Were the real conservative not involved in the lynchings OR every major step to devalue and segregate segments of our population?
Yeah, I mean progressive also love authoritarians, as long as authoritarianism is a future technocratic dystopia. Plus the cult of Trump never would have emerged without the cult of Obama. Progressives love a dictator as long as the individual aesthetically aligns with them. Which is why Kamala is the most dangerous person in the US Govt. As long as it’s a black woman dropping bombs, it’s perfectly fine.
@@orca_radical
1st... Let's acknowledge that you've confirmed in your statement the right-wing does lean authoritarian and if left unchecked would move us to a fascistic state there shredding democracy and the constitutional republic.
2nd... I agree that the "liberals" do tend to be party partisans to the Democratic establishment (blue no matter who) which allows them to support the likes of Joe Biden and Bloomberg who are "woke" republicans (if you look at the policies that they have historically supported). So yes, between the "selling our country is patriotic" Republicans and the do nothing dems that lead to a person like Trump is even thought of as a reasonable alternative.
3rd... Progressive are those who believe in the motto of a government Of the People, By the People, and FOR the People. This is to use government for the betterment of all people's lives and given that our government is the only thing that we have a faction of control of, this is where most of our effort should be placed.
Let's look at the current situation of Trump being internet dead (or, censored)... This is a direct consequence of the right's (and Dems following) efforts to regulate all areas of the corporate landscape. Given these organizations have no obligation to the constitution (the constitution only applies to government acts) means we DO NOT have any 1st amendment rights.
So if someone is on the right-wing/trump supporting part of this situation then they have to acknowledge that they themselves created/allowed this to even be though their actions (support of accountable corporate control/blocking monopoly recreation) or inaction (not actively fighting against the deregulation/monopolization of these industries) possible...
@@williammcfarlane6153 Elements of both lean authoritarian. However, they're authoritarian for different reasons. One is to be a constraint to reduce the role of government (in theory, in practice it was a mess), the other is to maintain the status quo, & really ramp up the power of the state over its citizens. The true authoritarianism in America isn't a single party, its the system as it exists, the GOP sucks as much as the DNC does, but people on the right primarily just want less government. We're a country run by lifelong government bureaucrats & corporate oligarchs, I truly cannot understand why people who call themselves Democrats don't question why so much corporate money is now backing the Democrats, while its fleeing the Republicans. A party that is "fascist" as so many are hyperbolic about doesn't push the donor class away.
Fascism is really when the state & the corporations merge for the same national goals. What might those goals be in 2021? Hmm, well I can really see where Silicon Valley & the NSA/CIA may have a significant interest in working together to further entrench & construct an even worse, unconstitutional surveillance state, simply to compete with China so that the US can perpetuate the empire & win AI supremacy. That’s an actual goal right now for Eric Schmidt, which is why he’s working closely with the DoD. So, let me ask you, where is the progressivism in any of this? Everyone who calls themself a progressive seems to have some type of idealism, that’s fine idealism is good. The right is just more rooted in realism, which is why the right is also extremely cynical.
So while todays progressives think the voters of the GOP are all ‘women haters, racists or white supremicists” or whatever the disparaging label of the day is, the truth is at one point we too were idealists, until we just saw the bigger picture. The reality is, there is NOTHING constraining this oppressive government. Conservative voters agree the justice system is f’d, that black people have been treated badly. Thats why we all were yelling during the election, it was Joe Biden who is responsible for writing the crime bill. That didn’t sell though, it didn’t matter that in the 90s Sheriff Joe shapeshifted into Empathy Joe, forgetting that Trump was the first president in forever to actually push for some meaningful reform in the prison system. We can see these things, all the Democrats/Progressives want to see with Trump is the raw emotion. The right is also very emotional, but for a reason, we feel we’re constantly being gaslit to insanity by the media. Its endless misrepresentation of what we see as endless hypocrisy, then we get derided as the racists while Biden plays the role of the arsonist & the firefighter. Its conservatives who are the enemy, is what the media tells its compliant audience.
Idealism doesn’t work when we currently live under this quasi-fascistic system, and re-electing Democrats just perpetuates it all, because they sell you nice idealists on false hope they’ll do something, then they just blame Republicans when they never intended to do it in the first place. George Carlin had a great quote that “inside every cynic is a disappointed idealist”. We see these games in real time, and nobody listens it seems. The only ones who do are the GOP opportunists, who tell the right to vote for them they’re the only ones standing against the rise of socialism. Except its socialism for the corporate cronies in the end. In the end, nothing gets done, nothing changes. I mean, name the last thing “progressives” did that significantly benefit average people? All the hope given to Obama just enabled him to bring us all a slightly cheaper version of the current corporate healthcare option, with costs that have far outpaced inflation in any other sector. So that's great, more govt-corporate cooperation, which again sounds to me like enabling fascism.
So, what is the progressive plan to constrain this totally out of control empire run by corporate oligarchs & kleptocrats (which as I said, the GOP establishment is just as at fault for)? Also, we’ve been living in a “Progressive” driven mixed economy ever since FDR. Let me ask you this, if you still think the answer is more government to solve the problems, why not just be a Marxist? Teddy Roosevelt believed that “wise progressivism and wise conservatism go hand in hand”. I can see when govt is needed to do things like break up powerful monopolies, National Parks are a good thing, food inspection is a good thing, these are all things he did. However, Wilson, another “progressive” was really the world’s first fascist. He was the first to warp this idea that govt could do good, to really turn it against the American people. It took several consecutive hands off presidents to unwind the damage, only to have FDR come in & start repeating terrible policies in the 1930s that perpetuated the Depression for another decade, until a global war came along. The only reason its actually never fully been unwound is because the US gets away being a world empire & running endless debt.
This is all a mass delusion though, it makes you think that our government, if only it was more progressive, could solve problems. I think if you took the same outlook from the right perspective, as in, "why does healthcare cost so much? why does college cost so much? is it really a good idea for the government to underwrite college loans?" you may start to see how govt will just perpetuate the problems progressives seem to care about. The answer is, you need to look at why prices are the way they are. You may think we’ve been living under some extreme libertarian era, but this is factually just not true, not when all government spending combined is 40% of the US economy. In Teddy Roosevelt's time it was 7%-8%, and after he Progressively did the things he did, govt spending actually decreased as a % of GDP.
So, you should start to at least realize, we still operate under the same quasi-fascist, govt-corporate partnership that Wilson, the fascist who called himself progressive, really got us going on.
I was under the impression that all of the objections were tossed out of court due to procedural or lack of standing or no relief. Can anyone provide any sources?
I keep a calendar, take pride in being well organized, and enjoy trying different cuisines. What does that make me?
Makes you someone I should be friends with! I am probably as liberal as they come according to other people… And I’m very organized and I keep the calendar and I run a business, so there with the generalizations… Or I’m just exceptional and we should be friends! Yay for organized people
It means you are W E I R D
I wouldn’t deny that. Proud of it
Weirder than weird!
Andrew, if you or your team read this...This was one of the best conversations on Yang Speaks. It did leave our one fact I'm sure you don't want to say outloud; most of the voters you are trying to win cannot come close to having as deep of a conversation like this. Have to keep messaging simple. Trump won with 3 word chants. Keep away from language like "one standard deviation" (most don't know what that means). Yes the donor class can deal with the fancy big word but the masses cannot...as you said, mostly a high school educated population and Trump spoke at a high school level. Keep it smart, but simple smart 🤓 🧢👍
Wtf, just because we don't speak the way the snobby upperclass do, doesn't mean that we don't understand it.
Average American vocabulary is at the 5th grade level
@@Photik that doesn't mean that it's productive to speak down to people that you assume is stupid. People are perfectly capable of asking what something means if they need clarification on something.
I disagree. Yang's focus on problem solving through rational thinking with data is why I like him. It is what distinguished him from the other candidates.
@@mikeg9b is your response directed at my comment?
Very engaging and thoughtful podcast. Saved it so I can listen a second time down the road.
It's a shame sometimes Jonathan Haidt gets lumped in with the anti-PC brigade of Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro etc. He's a much more sensible and deep thinker than them on social topics in my opinion. Even though I disagree with him on some things, his Righteous Mind book was one of my favourites in the last few years.
Yang. You need to listen to this guy. You can win the entire thing. He's telling you how you can win. Speak to value first (the elephant, american families are struggling for example and every other core values shared by both parties) then walk around it with the argument and the plan. Said again, appeal to bipartisan morality first and then substantiate with evidence as needed. You appeal to the brain. Personally I love it, but you've already won us over. People in my community distrust college educated intelligent authorities. Say what they understand first.
Mr. Yang, you are the president your country needed, and still does.
This podcast is perfectly timed
Andrew Yang should have on Dr. Christopher Ryan!!! - his book civilized to death is life-changing
I'd love to see Andrew's reaction to Sex at Dawn!
@@eemoogee160 andrew would probably be in favor of it.
I personally would respect Yang even more if he were an Independent and not a Democrat.
Anyone reading this comment should also read Haidt’s book Righteous Mind. Changed my world view.
2:40 wow, the righteous mind, I've just seen that, eh? You think AI might be intelligent, then? Perhaps even alive, yeah? Kewl.
Jonathan!! YOU were the moderator in the Ezra Clein/Sam Harris conversation?
You would have been the perfect guy for that!
Supremely wise and caring and prescient understanding of both; innocently-motivated interlocutors.
Love your work. And yours, Mr Yang!
This might just be my favorite meeting of minds in history. Incredible stuff.
I don't like much the wording "human- centered _capitalism."_ I believe among the left, the word "capitalism" itself is kind of a bogey-man, much like "socialism" to the right. "Human-centered market [economy]," in the other hand, sounds to me more objective, relatively free of the vague "evilness" of "capitalism," and equally as appealing to the right-wing as well.
A "thought experiment," it just feels like many leftists would readily agree with "capitalism is the fundamental cause of this crisis in X," where X can be healthcare, covid-19, racism, whatever. But if you phrase as "the market economy is the fundamental cause of this crisis in X," it removes significantly the vagueness and evil-baggage of "capitalism," and the acceptance is weakened, it sounds more dubious, it seems to require more "dots" to connect things. A step further would be phrasing "the rights of people to exchange goods and services is the fundamental cause of this crisis X," which probably would be the least agreed phrasing. But this phrasing is also the longest, and it's not that convenient to say "right to exchange goods and services" instead of "market," every time.
You need to be running your own campaign! Or have ethical psychologists advising you like this guy
51st min Dr Haidt is talking about direct response sales letter writing 101. Emotion first, then data to back it up.
"There is a very low correlation between one's policy viewpoints and one's identification"
^^ THIS. I grew up conservative, and though I now am open to a lot of progressive policies, I still do not identify as a "progressive" because I don't like that team/identity. This is because I hate seeing them mock my former conservative tribe, and because I don't like some of their excesses. I understand why people identify as progressive, I just don't think that "team" and identity is for me. We need to separate the way we talk about policy and identity. I think Andrew Yang does that very well. He doesn't tie his rhetoric around policy to a particular party identity like so many other pundits and politicians do. This could allow us to move forward as a country. Trouble is politicians are playing a completely different game and use policy talking points as a way to bash the other side and bolster their own, instead of a way to actually solve problems.
WHAT!!! So, Andrew Yang and Alex Jones both push supplements in their podcasts!?! Is that where the similarities end? hahahahahah
I would prefer the average person be able to filter at least some of their own information.
That might be overly optimistic.
I think you can largely isolated many economic elements that are exploitation and creation but not completely.
I think reading up on mutualism and georgism is helpful.
I think we can create market incentives for some sectors that don't have functioning markets but some need other management.
You need Finland style education with heavy focus on critical thinking and evidence-based judgements for average citizens to be able to make good judgements of whether a piece of information is likely to be true or total scam. Right now people just go with their intuitions, which results in beliefs in QAnon, Flat Earth, crystal healings, etc etc.
@@nyu3492 they realign on the heuristic of who said it a lot
So informative and enlightening! Thank you
What about the impact of propaganda on groups, especially high and low-status ones? The study of left and right political thinking is based in each country on propaganda. Higher status groups are prone to right-wing ways to preserve the status quo. Lower status groups seek change typically. The problem inherent in this line of investigation by Haidt is that the impact of the propaganda changing the political beliefs is unaccounted.
Does his webcam cost 5 peanuts?
Fair enough if Yang asked Haidt how he came to study morality so that his audience could learn, but if he didn't know, then he didn't read the righteous mind 😀 literally in the first pages
Mr. Yang, how familiar are you with Steve Keen's Debunking Economics?