lately. In the California high schools they're going to embrace the CRT or critical, now actually critical ethnic studies. So I guess instead of critical race theory it's critical ethnic studies. And within that study apparently, reportedly, they talk about who has a privileged position in society. And what would be the point of saying that some group has a privileged place in society? What would be the point of that? Now some of it is education and context, etc. But wouldn't the express point be to discriminate against that group? Isn't that the point?

Now when I say discriminate, if you're discriminating against the group that's in power, well that doesn't feel so bad does it? You're discriminating against the strong. What would be bad would be discriminating against the weak as a general concept, right? Without getting into the details, generally speaking doing something against the strong not so bad. Doing something against the weak very, very bad, right? As a general rule. Now even better, don't do bad things to anybody. Can we agree on that? Best situation, don't do bad things to anybody.

But I think the critical ethnic studies and critical race theory essentially put white people as a privileged class which is very close to putting a target on their back. Hear what I'm saying. If you mark somebody as the privileged people you have marked them as the ones who should have less in the future. They're targeted. Now I don't mean targeted for violence. I'm not talking about that. Targeted for maybe you should have a little less of this privilege thing in the future. Maybe other people should have more. But the only way you get there is you have less. So in the sense that it's the group targeted to have less relative to the other people, they're targeted. Is that a fair statement? That they would be targeted to have less in the future compared to other people to make things more fair as the theory goes.

But here's where they made a small little mistake. Something that maybe they could have seen coming. And it goes like this. They decided to throw Jews into the category of privileged people. Do I need to finish the sentence? Critical ethnic studies in California high schools are going to call out Jews as targeted for privilege, meaning that they should have less in the future relative to other people.

Let me... there are some things which defy words. So if you're only listening to this on the podcast I'm going to have to do this with a physical expression that you won't be able to hear. So when you don't hear me for a moment it's because I'm doing something hilarious and spot on to the people who are watching. And it goes like this. That's it. What words could possibly express how bad this is, right? As a direction you're going anyway, right? Unbelievable.

Now I get the point that there are certain groups who are economically doing better than others, right? And I'm guessing that that's where they're coming from. But I think it has more to do with they've just decided let's throw the Jewish Americans in with everybody else who's white. Call them all privileged. Boom. And we're done. I don't feel like that's a good path. I feel like that's not going to work out. So there's a little bit of a unity that needs some improving, wouldn't you say? I think we can improve our unity on this question a little bit. A little bit.

So now I've told you that the obvious direction for wokeness is self-destruction because the whole woke thing, when you start breaking people into categories you can't stop. There's no logical place to stop once you start categorizing people. Which is why you don't want to do it, right? Either treat everybody the same or you categorize until you get this kind of problem. So this was the most predictable thing that could have possibly happened. Totally predictable. So we hope that there will be some force that pushes back on that.

All right. I think I had one other point I was going to say which is, remind me, did I talk about Aaron Rupar and Vox and the drink bleach drinking hoax? The amazing thing about this hoax, I think I did talk about it, is that people don't understand how communication works. Which is interesting for someone who's a professional writer that he doesn't understand how communication works.

Let me explain to you how communication works. It's a very basic concept and apparently some people don't get this. It goes like this. You have to assume what a speaker is thinking in order to understand what they're saying. So you have to consider the source. So if your best friend mocks you, you say that's my best friend. In my best friend's mind they're not being mean to me. They're just having fun. So who says it and what they're thinking completely determines how you accept it, right?

So let me give you an example. Let's say I said to you, hey I'd like to invite you over to my house for dinner. How would you interpret that? If somebody said I'd like you to come over for dinner tonight, what would be the logical assumption about what the person who said that was thinking? You'd probably say to yourself, well I think that what they're thinking is that they would like to entertain and they will make a meal and they will serve that meal and I will sit at the table with them and we'll eat that meal. But that's not said, right? That's all just assumed in your head. You're filling in all the blanks.

Stop getting ahead of me