Back to episode — Episode 33 - Hate versus Ideas and the Illusion Driving Hate
Context —
ard for somebody to take it out of context, right? So bear with me. If somebody like me—let's say not me but a person who was persuasive and non-racist, you know, not me, I'm talking about another person—if that person attended a KKK meeting, would that be a good thing or a bad thing? Well, if a non-racist who was very persuasive spent time with a bunch of KKK people, what is the most likely outc…
← Previous segment →se above it. Yeah, let the politics or now anyway they will.
Now let me amplify a point I made. I saw somebody on the right using the phrase that I believe Candace Owens has used a number of times, and I criticized it. And so let me clarify my criticism. If you're on the right and you're trying to make the point that African-American voters should leave the Democrat stronghold and maybe consider Republican policies, if that's your point, it is sort of nuclear persuasion to say that the left is in the Democrat plantation. I ain't even saying the words. I really don't like even the words coming out of my mouth. And here's why.
The point of what Candace is talking about, the point of what Kanye is talking about, the point of what I'm talking about is that if you focus on the past—which essentially doesn't exist except in our minds—you come to different conclusions than if you say, "What do we have right now? What's our current situation and how do we get from the current situation to even better?" That's a productive mindset.
And even though the reference to the Democrat plantation is—and so here's giving credit to Candace—this is a direct request to stop thinking in the past and move to the future. So the message is, you know, the content of the message is exactly correct. I think it's very productive. It's good for everybody to think about the future or think about the present and kind of leave all the dead bodies in the past.
But here's the problem with using those two words, "Democrat plantation." Those two words take your mind to the past. The point of those words is to help you get out of that and bring you to the future. But as a persuasion lesson, let me tell you that you don't want to take people's minds to the past if your message is focus on the current. If your message is let's figure out today, you want to bring their minds to today and let them not even think about it.
And here's the principle: their truth becomes whatever you think about the most. We are not a rational species. A rational species might hear that phrase, that statement, "Don't be in the Democrat plantation. You can be a Republican." A rational person would hear that, say, "Oh, I get the point. People are locked in. You'd like them to be more free-thinking. Yes, I see your point." But we're not really a rational species. And so it's more productive to understand that when you communicate. And as soon as you take people's minds to a thought, that thought becomes more real and more powerful simply because—and here's the important point—simply because you spend time thinking about it. Your brain accepts as truth the things you spend the most time thinking about. True.
So you're taking their minds to the past when you do that. And it's even hard for me to talk about how you shouldn't do it because in doing it I take your minds to the past. But I don't know a way around that. So just think of this in general. It's a general rule. Don't just say things that are true and that the other side might even recognize as true. Don't say things that are true. Say things that bring their minds to the productive place. What's the productive place? The productive place is what do we do today? What are your ideas?
So you saw me. I'm trying to use the same approach with Black Lives Matter and with Colin Kaepernick. I've blogged about both of them. I periscoped about them. For those who don't know, I am pro-Kaepernick, pro at least Hawk Newsom, who's a leader of Black Lives Matter of Greater New York. I'm pro those two individuals because of the effectiveness of their advocacy. So they're very effective at bringing attention to an issue that's important. But the next part is missing, which is okay, how can we actually make a difference? What would be a law that we could vote on? What would be a thing that I could do tomorrow that would help whatever it is that's bothering you?
So my approach to the—you know, and by the way I praised today on Kaepernick for being
Context —
so effective, for being really good at surfacing an issue, putting skin in the game, taking a personal risk. That's slightly different than the question of whether the kneelers should have continued kneeling. I saw last night—oh I damn it, I can't remember his name, but on the news last night I was watching a Fox News sports person characterizing the whole NFL kneeling situation. And maybe somebod…
Next segment → →