page a 17 Helen we're on the front page of the New York Times. Oh man there's a picture of us too look at that. I wonder who took that picture. Turn into the camera with canine sex and hooters. Papers, jab, and academic journals. I've been getting a lot of messages today that the New York Times is the white supremacist sexist organization. So I think I think they came down in our favor. It's hard to make sense of what the hell is going on here. We've been talking for what? Months now about this moment and there was an expectation that we'd be utterly destroyed. For a good reason look what happened to Bretton Heather. But that hasn't happened to us. It hasn't happened to you. What's happening? Can you... No I can't. I have no idea what's happening. Something is happening. I don't know if something might still happen. But yeah at the moment we've been taken seriously, mostly and I'm reading good faith. Good and that's surprising. Very. Very surprising. There are hundreds of thousands of words to read through to even begin to understand what we did. Simplifying this into a book would even be difficult because it's so long. Usually you have to talk about ginning something up to book length. But summarizing this down to book length is difficult. So there's a great deal that people are going to have to take in. Do you think this thing could fizzle out as a result of people not properly understanding what is going on? Yeah, if people don't understand that this is a form of corruption that's political in nature that's trying to change how we validate ideas. Brett Weinstein called it idea laundering, which is a brilliant term. That you have these prejudices and opinions. Our work shows that you can start with the conclusion and work your way there. So you can conclude nearly anything as long as it's hostile to the right things, privilege in particular. And so then the universities... These grievance studies fields take them in. They do the peer review thing obviously in a way that's very concerning from our work. And then they put them out. And now they have this respectability of knowledge when they still are just prejudiced an opinion. Critical race theory is a mess, for example. It is an explicitly political situation in which whiteness has to be bad. And therefore it can't ever do anything right. And they take these ideas and launder them through the academic process. And these departments exist specifically to launder these ideas, to put them through the academic process and give them the appearance of being rigorous studies. So then activists can go and say, oh, a study has shown. These ideas disseminate straight out of the university into culture. They're everywhere. People run into them all the time. Everybody's confused about issues of race and racism and sexism now, because they seem to have been redefined. And this whole power structure is becoming the water we swim in. And this whole thing that everybody and everything is racist and sexist would never have been able to take off and get much traction if it weren't being made to look legitimate by a scholarly enterprise that's been pushing it for five decades. It's about knowledge. It's about how we decide what is true. People don't tend to think about the ways in which they decide what is true. It just seems to come naturally to them because it comes from the water that we swim in. And we're just gradually bit by bit undermining the long history of going with evidence, of going with consistent liberal ethics. It's frightening.