Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: In this episode, we react to the numbers that suggest that young men are having a tough time holding down romantic relationships, at least relative to historic trends. And later on, we'll try to make sense of the rise in what look like apologist attitudes and conversations about Hitler and the Nazis we've recently seen coming from figures on the political right.
Hello. Welcome to the Call Like I See it podcast. I'm James Keys, and joining me today is a man who's known to toot his own horn from time to time. Tunde. Ogonlana Tunde. Are you ready to throw out some of your favorite things today, or are you more in a sentimental mood?
[00:00:47] Speaker B: Let's see. That's a good question.
I'll be sentimental today.
[00:00:54] Speaker A: All right.
[00:00:55] Speaker B: All right.
[00:00:55] Speaker A: There we go. All right.
[00:00:57] Speaker B: Sentimental. Hey, you might even make me cry today. Let's see.
Let's see what happens, bro.
[00:01:03] Speaker A: Let's see what happens. Now, before we get started, if you enjoy the show, I ask that you subscribe and like on YouTube or your podcast platform, doing so really helps the show out. Now recording on March 21, 2025. And as far as young people and dating, we've seen some really interesting numbers get thrown out in recent discussions on the topic. One comes from a 2022 Pew Research center survey which found that 63% of men under 30 said they're single now. And this is contrast to only 34% of women in that age range said they were single. And, you know, that's. Obviously, women can date older men or something like that. You know, it's. It's not the, the numbers don't need to line up exactly. But considering men and women have been doing this kind of this relationship dance since the beginning of our species, it just seems a bit odd that nearly two thirds of men in kind of this their prime, at least from a physical standpoint, you know, are sitting on the sidelines, you know, from a relationship standpoint. So, Tunde, what are your thoughts on this research suggesting that young men are really having a tough time, having a tough go at it, you know, as far as holding down, maintaining romantic relationships with women?
[00:02:09] Speaker B: Well, first, I appreciate your observation that human beings have been doing this relationship thing for a while. I never, never thought of it like that, but I was like, yeah, the fact that you and I exist, actually the fact that every generation has been.
[00:02:21] Speaker A: Doing it for a long time, you know, I know.
[00:02:23] Speaker B: That's why I just. So it's interesting. Like, yeah, actually, you're right. So, no, but I find this another interesting topic. I feel like in our current cultural dialogue, because clearly, like you said, I mean, we'll be citing the stats and things that we've obviously read and researched, but clearly the figures and stats appear to back up this idea that the way young people, people under 30, are engaging with each other in a romantic way, if I can sound really technical about it, is much different than those of us who are older and maybe even from prior generations. So I do think there's something there. I think, and I say this in all fairness to the younger generation. I mean, after reading some of the stuff I read, like, man, I'm glad I'm out of that dating scene. I'm glad I've been married for a long time, because it seems like life is a lot harder for younger people as relates to relationships in general. And I know that we're kind of leading here with romantic relationships, but in the reading I did, and just understanding also the nature of the Internet, things like that, which I know we'll get into, it was evident that especially young men, more than young women, are having a tough time just building relationships, platonic or romantic. Yeah, and. And, you know, I kept thinking of the things we've talked about in the past, too, like the epidemic of loneliness. And I just thought, you know, there's something swimming in this kind of stew of ingredients that they're all kind of connected as well. So, yeah, you know, that's, to me, what I found interesting.
[00:03:59] Speaker A: One of the things for me that this kind of recalled back is, you know, we did the book Sapiens a while back, and in that the author talked about how one of the advantages or one of the things that can be an advantage for human beings is cultural evolution. And that, you know, with animals that operate on instinct, you know, it requires real evolution in order for them to kind of change their stripes, like in order to. To adapt and to adjust and so forth. Whereas humans oftentimes are able to adjust to new conditions. It's why humans are able to spread out all over the world. And, you know, all these different climates, all these different, you know, everything, you know, like, and to adjust to that is because not because our bodies, our biology changed, but because culturally we adapt and then we change and stuff, stuff like that. So what this really seems to me, because I don't think that the men now are, like, fundamentally different from a biological standpoint from the men in past. Like, maybe people across the board are more overweight now than they used to be, at least in America. But, you know, the stuff still works the same More or less. But the. I think from a cultural standpoint, basically, there must be something going on, like, as opposed to looking at the men and saying, what's wrong with these dudes? And it's like, well, what's going on in our culture? And so that's what really, like, I'm. That's what I'm looking at with this is like, okay, so we're in a culture right now where either two thirds of men, you know, whatever percentage of them are unable to. Or undesiring of. Hey, let's have a. Let me. Let me find. Let me find a woman to be with and to kind of try to grow and develop with and stuff like that. Either they don't want that or they're not able to do it. And so I'm saying for it to be a trend like this, it has to be something within the culture, the way that we're kind of living life. And, you know, like, there are many culprits for that. You know, one of the things that I've seen brought up with this is kind of like the establishing relationships like that, those initial steps. There's a level of discomfort that can be in that, going out of your comfort zone. And then when relationships end, there's a level of discomfort after that. You know, like, that can be, you know, how you're heartbroken or whatever or, you know, just all that kind of stuff. So there are these friction points that if you feel like the. You have all these other alternatives, so to speak, for whatever reason, whether it be porn or whether it be social media, feeling like you can. You have all these options. You're not just in a town of a thousand and it's like, yo, man, I only got so many options, so I better find one before they are all. All the ones that I would want are gone. And so, like, there must be psychological things going on. So that, to me is really where. Where the meat of this is. It's like, well, what's going on to make people feel like either they don't need them or the juice isn't worth the squeeze, so to speak.
[00:06:37] Speaker B: Yeah, well, let's tease that out. I want to. I want to give a stat and then. And then we can address, you know, this kind of ideas. Because I'm reading from one of the articles that we'll have this in the.
[00:06:47] Speaker A: In the show notes as well.
[00:06:48] Speaker B: Yeah. So a 2023 poll from the Survey center on American Life found that 56% of Gen Z adults said they'd been in a relationship Sorry. Said they'd been in a romantic relationship at any point in their teen years, compared with 76% of Gen Xers and 78% of Baby Boomers.
[00:07:11] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:07:12] Speaker B: And so what's. What's interesting is it says that ages 18 to 20, 18 to 34, reported not having a steady partner, 54% of them in 2021. And in 2004, that number was only 33%. So that to me was like, all right, so something's happened in the last 20 years. Why is it that people within this age range, 18 to 34, you know, why. Why have people that don't have. Have never been in a relationship? How's that skyrocketing half in that situation?
[00:07:45] Speaker A: And this is not just saying, were they in a relationship at that moment? Because that's obviously 20, 21.
[00:07:50] Speaker B: Have they ever.
[00:07:50] Speaker A: There's the pandemic going on, so that's creates its own hurdles. But this is like, had you been in one at all? And half are like, nah.
[00:07:56] Speaker B: Well, that's why I think you're right.
[00:07:58] Speaker A: Your.
[00:07:58] Speaker B: Your question about what has happened culturally is, I think, the right question. Because the other point you alluded to is very accurate, which was the human body has not changed in one or two generations. So.
[00:08:10] Speaker A: So we know that it's not a way.
[00:08:11] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah. It's not. It's. It, you know, so it's not something about the mechanics, hormones or anything like that, but.
Well, I'll say this.
[00:08:20] Speaker A: It could be something with the hormones, you know, like, apparently these plastics are.
[00:08:23] Speaker B: Yeah. Let's not get into too much of that, because that's a similar. Yeah. And that's unknown right now. But the thing is, is that I think what we can say that we know. And that's why I think this really, to me, a lot is. Falls on the parents, to be honest with you. I think that this style of parenting has changed a lot in the last generation or two. Parents are much more fearful of letting their kids outside and things. You know, the idea of young kids.
I tell this story often, actually, that my mom put me on the bus for the first time when I was nine years old in Washington, D.C. talking.
[00:08:57] Speaker A: About the city bus. Right.
[00:08:59] Speaker B: Yeah. She walked me to the bus station. Yeah. No, but we walked to the bus station together. She. I remember she asked the bus driver, can my son. I'm teaching my son to ride the bus. Can he sit right behind you? You just make sure he's okay. And he goes, yeah. And she goes, how long does it take you to do your route? He says an hour and a half. So she looked me right in the face and said, I'll be right here waiting for you when you come back. Watch how people come and put the money, blah, blah, blah. And I remember I sat there and when the route was over, my mom was there waiting for me and she looked at me when I got off and said, now you know how to ride the bus. So from age 9 in Washington D.C. i was riding the bus in the metro by myself. And I wasn't the only kid doing that. And what I realized is I'm thinking about this stuff when I was preparing for the show today of these reading about this, starting reminding me. I don't remember all my interactions, but I'm sure as this a 10, 11, 12 year old kid having that type of independence, what was I doing? I was dealing with adults from time to time, right. I was paying for my tickets and getting change from the machine. I was learning how to be more self sufficient, more self confident. And today if you see a 9 or 10 year old kid walking around some city by themselves, probably someone's calling the police and their parents would be put in jail. So I think part of it is young people are less exposed to opportunities to be independent today than they ever have been in the past. And probably a function of things like we'll get into like technology, right. Kids are inside playing video games, stuck on tv. Parents are freaked out by parenting styles have changed. Yeah, because how many times, Jamie, I don't know about you, but I've talked to peer parents of mine that'll say, oh well, today is just different, you know, kids aren't as safe. And I'm thinking like first of all, when we were kids and probably prior generations, things like child molestation and things like that, people just didn't talk about it.
[00:10:50] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:10:50] Speaker B: Today's culture, we train our kids, they're like, hey, if someone looks at you funny or someone touches you, you ring it. You know, you ring the alarm around.
[00:10:56] Speaker A: With a cell phone that has a key with GPS on it, then you can see where they are at all times.
[00:11:01] Speaker B: Yeah, that's what I mean.
[00:11:02] Speaker A: Like so if anything, it seems like it's safer now than it was.
[00:11:05] Speaker B: Like, yeah, exactly.
[00:11:06] Speaker A: Parents should just let their kids go and they'd be like, all right, come back. I agree, you don't know where they are.
[00:11:12] Speaker B: This is like the disconnect we have. Like it is actually safer than it's ever been in, at least in the American thing.
[00:11:19] Speaker A: But this gets into something different though.
[00:11:20] Speaker B: Because that's but let me just finish here. But we get told by now the technology, how everything is so scary.
[00:11:27] Speaker A: It's not just that, it's just that we're aware of it more. Like when something is mentioned to you more and more often, the more sensitive you are that it's out there. So if it's, if it's not in conversation ever, then even if it's present, you're just not going to think about it. But if people bring it up a lot, then even if it's not sinister, they're bringing it up to scare you or anything like that, it's just going to be more on your mind. I mean, I think, yes, like that's the trend what you're talking about. There is something that's also been observed is just kind of kids maturing more slowly from a social standpoint and the first rights, first rites of passage, they're just doing later and later and later. Whether it be more move out of the house or you know, like try to get their own place or things like that. Like they're just, all of those things are being delayed. And that of course, you know, has to do with the, the parenting styles now, you know what. But you also touched on kind of at home playing video games, which is more the kid driven side. And that is I, that, that's where I mentioned like when I was talking about the friction, you know, like the, there are things in terms of like even meeting people in person. There's more friction involved in that apparently than just kind of friending people online. And you know, like there's, there's, you're not exposing yourself for opening yourself up for rejection and stuff like that. And so I know like just, I mean, and this is anecdotal, but I mean this, this kind of plays out over time is just being a young man at a time when there wasn't social media and you weren't able to just kind of with these, with minimal friction, establish all these connections. You had to prepare yourself for the idea of facing rejection and in order to go out and meet people, you know, like that was just part of it. You just had to like steel yourself for the fact that okay, well if I'm going to talk to people, then some people are going to be like, yeah, hey, what's good? And other people be like, nah, nah, I'm not interested. And like, so that was kind of, you had to go through that. And then after a while, you know, some people get to the point where it's just a numbers Game, it's like, all right, well, if I talk to 10, I might get four or five, but I'd have zero if I didn't talk to the 10, you know, like, so I got to. I got to get through the nose to get to the. Yes, it seems like, you know, like. And the research suggests.
[00:13:26] Speaker B: I'm laughing because you're absolutely correct.
[00:13:28] Speaker A: Yeah, like, that was just part of the. The understanding. And so. But when.
[00:13:31] Speaker B: But that's the point of going to.
[00:13:33] Speaker A: A club isn't necessarily the same as dealing with that online. It is in person. And so if you're not used to the idea that, hey, I'll talk to three people and maybe one of them will reciprocate, and the other two were just, I had to get to those other two to get to the one, then that can be very harm hurting. You know, that can make hurtful. So I think that part of it is honestly, it comes from the fact that just kind of putting yourself out there, like, if you don't do it enough, then each individual up and down becomes some, you know, like, says something about you personally. Whereas if you do it a lot, it's like, oh, well, no, that's just kind of the way the game goes. So I think, again, from a cultural standpoint, making things. Making certain things easier can remove incentives for things that maybe may be rewarding, but ultimately have more friction involved in them. And I think meeting new people in person is one of those things. And so you end up making all these excuses, like, one of the. And one of the pieces we're looking at today in a VOX piece, it starts off talking about how, you know, a guy's looking. Oh, well, who. What. What girls want to get picked up nowadays. And then the woman's like, me, like, I would like.
So in that I remember, you know, kind of the conversations, and, you know, I do want to kick it back because I want to get out of this topic pretty soon. But one of the conversations like that we had, you know, 20, 20 years ago or whatever, or 30 years ago was, oh, well, how come the guy always has to approach the woman? Yada, yada, yada, we're talking about stuff like that. But that was more kind of, you know, the conversation, the exercise of it. It's not like guys were like, all right, well, I'm just not going to approach women, you know, like, because ultimately, you know, like, that's the way that the. The society evolved and the culture was evolved at that time. And it's just. It's a different Culture now, which, again, can be a strength for humans, but in other ways. It may end up with situations like this where you got this wild divergence.
[00:15:15] Speaker B: Yeah, I think there's. Look, I think there's a lot coming at this topic. You know, probably we have our own blind spots right now even, because probably more research and things coming out because, you know, there's so many interesting ways to look at it. One is, you mentioned earlier something like the pandemic, which I do think had an effect on younger people, the ability to go out, socialize, all that.
So that could be one thing in the.
[00:15:40] Speaker A: Well, and I want to specifically get to. Before we wrap up this. So I'm just like, what kind of factors do you think, you know, like, are probably the ones that we should be looking at? And so, you know, that's.
[00:15:50] Speaker B: That's.
[00:15:50] Speaker A: Let me just ask you the question to kind of frame.
[00:15:52] Speaker B: So because I got a few notes here, I'll go over because there's a couple of things. So one is, I do think that technology plays an effect and I think that we've seen. I've seen studies of things like the effect of. Of the way that porn.
With the Internet. Right. Because this is readily available.
[00:16:08] Speaker A: It is, yeah.
[00:16:09] Speaker B: That's. That's what I'm getting at. So. And this is where it's. We could be joking about this, but I'm gonna be serious, right? Like when you and I were kids. No, I mean, on a serious note, you and I were kids, like 12, 13, when boys are starting to figure it out, literally. I remember I had to go sneak a Playboy magazine or a Hustler magazine, something like that. And that was like Mission Impossible, you.
[00:16:29] Speaker A: Know, and that was the whole stack and everything.
[00:16:33] Speaker B: And so what you.
[00:16:35] Speaker A: But my bad. I know you're trying to be serious right now, so.
[00:16:37] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, so. So what? You know, because I'm just trying to get through the linear motion in my mind here because basically what happens is we still had to go figure it out if we actually wanted to go be with a girl, right? Like, the magazine obviously was limited.
And then you also. All we had was TV, right? Generally, we didn't have a flat screen TV in every room in our house. We had one TV in the living room in the 80s and early 90s, right. So the thing is the ability for us to be stuck at home. We didn't have a PS5 and all this other stuff, right. We didn't have TikTok on our phone.
[00:17:10] Speaker A: The games were less immersive. Like, you can't play Nintendo for like six hours straight. Like, so I think you just got to put it down. Yeah, yeah.
[00:17:18] Speaker B: And I think let's include Netflix and streaming shows, everything else. Right. Just the ability for you to be able to be solitary and have a lot more to do. Maybe that's a better way to many.
[00:17:29] Speaker A: Options basically for your attention.
[00:17:31] Speaker B: Correct. And I think at a young age too, because that's the other thing we. I had an experience. Again, these are anecdotal things, but one of my clients had a graduation party for her son like a year or two ago. My wife and I were just talking about it because we were reminding ourselves that There was about 15 kids, all age around 17, you know, seniors in high school that were in the living room and they were silent because literally they're all on their phones.
[00:17:56] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:17:56] Speaker B: Some of them were even messaging each other because you could see them giggling and looking up at each other and going back. But it was just. We were just like, hold on. When we were 17, if you put 15 high school seniors in a room together, all we'd be doing was talking. Right. And. And engaging each other. So I do think that especially in some of these articles, alluded to this when you don't have that as a teenager, those formative years then. Because remember, we even did the show on stress that bullying, that people that are bullied between age like 14 to 17, they develop a certain way long term because of the way the brain is developing at that age. Yeah.
[00:18:34] Speaker A: It actually changes the development of their brain.
[00:18:36] Speaker B: Yeah, correct. So we can assume that by not engaging and having good interpersonal communications at that age too, it may also alter or maybe not underdeveloped, let's put it that way.
[00:18:46] Speaker A: Good and bad, though, because part of it also is to be able to kind of get the bad, shake it off and keep it moving, you know, like, whereas I agree, James, you know.
[00:18:54] Speaker B: That'S where I guess I'll finish off is I learned in preparing for today that it's just like working out our bodies and a lot of other things, like, you know, dealing with corporate America and growing in that way as we grow our careers as adults. This whole relationship thing, to be a healthy human being as an adult with relationships means you gotta deal with a bit of adversity earlier in your relationship life. And I think that's what I realized in preparing for today is as teenagers, if we have healthy engagement, especially us men as younger men, we can learn a lot through trial and error as a teenager.
[00:19:31] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:19:31] Speaker B: And then as once you're in your 20s and 30s, you're better equipped of how to do things like date women and, and, and, and, and, and actually.
[00:19:40] Speaker A: You know, like, yeah, I think part of where you're going with that is just that it's easy now to kind of not deal with the downs or to kind of keep yourself out of. Easier to keep yourself out of situations that. To deal with the downs. And so you, you kind of in your mind that naturally will have. You build up more kind of an aversion to putting yourself in situations where there is a potential downside. And I don't want to romanticize the past and like, oh, yeah, everybody was super social and engaged, like, but I do think the idea of options plays a big role in it. And like, just your example, you know, you talk about put 15, 15 teenagers or so in a room together. And yeah, I think the phones play a big deal with that because I remember and this is something I observed myself and then seeing just different scenarios. The phone always gives people an option. This happens on dates, you know, like, stuff like that that gives you an option of something else to do besides what's in front of you. And it's almost like a socially acceptable option. Like, people don't look at you like, why do you have your phone out? You know, like, they're like, oh, okay, yeah, people just sitting there on their phones. And so the option, like, if you're sitting in a room with 15 people and there's no other choice, then eventually you're going to start trying to interact with people just because there's nothing else to do. Otherwise you're just standing there. And so the idea to not just stand there, it's like, okay, well, I can either stand here and do nothing, or I can try to spark up a conversation versus I can sit here and be imminently entertained on my phone, or I can take a risk to try to talk to somebody. It changes the calculation completely.
[00:21:07] Speaker B: And that's a good point, James. The phone. I think with some of the people, it's less even about being entertained. It's the convenient comfort of not having to take the risk. It's better to be down in your phone like this, because then I don't have to worry about being safe.
[00:21:21] Speaker A: It's a safe space. It's a safe space. And so you can carry a safe space around the time, but one that kind of turns you inward and doesn't kind of force you to experience outward. And so I think that again, these aren't like dire circumstances, but it's kind of it's interesting to see how the, The. The technological advances that have a lot of benefits, you know, you're talking about before. Like, now, you know, kids can consider kids safer because they can walk around with a GPS beacon on all the time, you know, and. And stuff like that. So. But also, this can affect in other ways from a social development standpoint. And we don't know, like, we're kind of. We've talked about this another times, like with all of these things, because all this stuff is so new and we're in a transition period. We don't know how this stuff is going to play out for people. Maybe, you know, ultimately by the time people are 30 or 40, it won't matter, you know, and everybody kind of resettles into a acceptable norm. Maybe they don't. One of the things, though, that is interesting to me and I like this kind of last point I wanted to get to is the idea of how the people that really are in charge of designing the technological environments that we're in are oftentimes not the most social people. Like, I would say, of all people in the world that I want to take social cues from, or I'd want, you know, like my kids to take social cues from, Mark Zuckerberg is not one of them, you know, like. So I wonder a lot of times, like, the kinds of people that are divine developing these technological environments that we then throw our kids in and let them kind of go. Like, those aren't the people that are. That would prioritize social interaction, you know, so we're kind of. This is kind of like, you know, there was a movie, you know, there's movies from, like, Revenge of the Nerds or whatever, but. And I'm not, you know, casting aspersion on nerds, so to speak, but just the idea of I want to create this, like, people seeing the social network, you know, I want to create this environment where I can, you know, kind of do this kind of stuff. But now it's like, well, now everybody else has kind of gone into this environment with you and turn their back on a lot of social interaction that, you know, like, maybe you were interested in turning your back on that interaction, you know, developing it, but now it's like, well, hold up now. I don't know that everybody should be kind of turning their back on each other in person so that we can interact with this screen.
[00:23:31] Speaker B: Well, I don't. I don't. It's interesting because that's a great point you make. And I actually want to sit on that real quick. Because if you look at.
This is interesting. So if you look at the technology and the way that a society kind of is dealing or it's kind of just where it is with all that, that kind of elevates what type of mindset is best suited in that environment. So I'll give you an example. Let's say Maybe the early 20th century Industrial Age time. It was actually the more a person, let's say. I'll say a man here. Because back then it was mostly men. Right. A man who's better at sales, honestly, like dealing with people and is gregarious and knows how to deal with relationships was probably the type that would thrive back then because the Internet, all that stuff didn't exist. So you still need to be able to motivate and get people to kind of move around. I'm thinking of someone like maybe Henry Ford, whatever he was most of the.
[00:24:28] Speaker A: Time is how well you were able to function in interactive human environments. So that's a. That can give you a big leg up, you know, that's kind of been flipped on its head now in many respects. Well, that's the point. I know you're going to.
[00:24:42] Speaker B: Yeah. So that's where I'm going is think about the last 30, 40 years of, you know, binary code has been the thing that has evolved as. As the way that not only businesses can grow and all that, but the way that wealth can be generated. So now the people who are best suited to dealing with computers and all that are people that aren't necessarily the most gregarious people getting out there. They weren't the valid. Sorry, they weren't the high school prom queen or the quarterback. Right. They were the guys sitting down on the computer in front of the screen and they were wired that way, which tend to be. And I'm not going to crash aspersions of someone like Mark Zuckerberg, but they tend to be people that are what we would consider maybe on the milder spectrum with issues like Asperger's or something like that. And those tend to be somewhere far on that one.
[00:25:29] Speaker A: I was just more so pointing at him because we saw they had a movie like a quote unquote, almost biopic, you know, like. So we kind of saw the way that it was portrayed, you know.
[00:25:39] Speaker B: Yeah. And I'm not sitting here trying to make a point specifically about Mark Zuckerberg, but I'm saying is the personality character that we saw in that film leads you to someone more on that side of how they are versus Someone very gregarious and who's, let's say a salesperson. Right.
[00:25:53] Speaker A: Well, I would say this. I mean, to me, where I was going is just a person. How much they value a person would value the, the. The ultimate goal here being to avoid contact or to enable to. To facilitate contact. And so like if you're. You're a very personable person, for example, if you designed some social media thing, it would be. It wouldn't be geared around keeping you at. At home, you know, like on your screen is trying to get more.
[00:26:20] Speaker B: Think about the mindset of the people that have become successful in the computer, in the information aid are people like that that aren't as socially gregarious and who don't want to be around everybody. They would want to create an environment where from their little room they can go affect the whole world. And it's. That's kind of what they.
[00:26:37] Speaker A: So yeah, my point being, and I guess, you know, you're piggybacking on is just like.
[00:26:41] Speaker B: That's exactly what I'm saying.
[00:26:43] Speaker A: It's creating more people in their image. You know, it's kind of.
[00:26:46] Speaker B: That's where I'm getting at. Exactly. It's. It's. I never really put that together until we're having this conversation that like. Yeah, actually if you had. In an environment.
What was that?
[00:26:56] Speaker A: I said actually I put it together.
[00:26:58] Speaker B: For you, for the audience, you know, Socrates over here. And I'll just be. Who can I be?
[00:27:06] Speaker A: I'm just messing with you, man.
[00:27:08] Speaker B: But no, no, because I'm trying. Okay, that was. I drew a blank there.
[00:27:12] Speaker A: But no.
[00:27:13] Speaker B: What's the guy? Elmer Fudd. I'll be Elmer Fudd.
[00:27:16] Speaker A: Elmer.
[00:27:18] Speaker B: No, but I know we want to get out of here.
[00:27:20] Speaker A: I want to wrap this up.
[00:27:21] Speaker B: The last thing.
[00:27:22] Speaker A: Go ahead.
[00:27:22] Speaker B: I'll say is that's why it doesn't surprise me that young men in recent years, if people look at the kind of quote unquote, what's called the manospher, you know, ideas. And we've had a show about this ideas like the trad wives.
Those have come, become popular because I think that that's the reaction of a lot of young men who find just dealing with women on a regular basis, like having a conversation or the idea of rejection is very difficult. So instead of again, taking the adversity route, it's like, I'd rather just have this woman. All she does is cook, clean and have babies. I don't want to be challenged.
[00:27:59] Speaker A: No, what it is, man, is if you're not comfortable dealing with women on an equal footing, then you want to put them in some place where they're subordinate to you. And that's a reaction to this thing where if you don't come up learning how to deal with women on an, on an equal footing and you give and you take and all that kind of stuff and learning how to do that dance, then yeah, you're just like, no, I just want a woman that does everything I say. And it's like, yeah, you know, like so. And that's not like something that's never been seen in history anyway, you know, other, you know, otherwise. But it is an interesting direction to go when we have supposedly have this super connected society now where now you got men that aren't even able to deal with women on a eye to eye basis and they're just opting out and being like, yeah, I'm just, you know, I'm super masculine and people just got to do what I say. And also it's like, you know, and that only works until you come up with somebody who actually really is masculine. And, you know, we'll tell you where you can, where you can take that.
[00:28:55] Speaker B: You're basically saying we're turning into the Taliban.
[00:28:57] Speaker A: Not me, not you.
[00:28:59] Speaker B: Well, not me and you personally. But yeah, elements of our culture.
[00:29:02] Speaker A: Yes, yeah, for sure, for sure. So, but I think we can wrap this topic from there. It's definitely an interesting.
[00:29:08] Speaker B: Or we could keep going. James. One or the other say what I was like. Or we could keep going.
[00:29:14] Speaker A: We appreciate all for joining us. We'll have a second part of this episode too and we'll talk to you then.
All right, tune day. Our next topic today we, we've seen recently, just in, whether it be podcasts or, you know, in social media, a lot of what looks like apologists and kind of an affinity and, and almost standing for like Hitler or the Nazis and what they did or didn't do and so forth. Coming from figures on the political right, what do you make of this kind of what looks like an affinity almost, you know, like, or kind of just this, this standing, you know, hey, we got to stand up for these guys and, and you know, they're misunderstood. You know, all this other stuff, what do you make of what we're seeing here?
[00:29:54] Speaker B: I don't know.
I just, I. It's, it's.
It would be laughable if it wasn't people in actual positions of power and influence.
So I would say, because I thought that, you know, that was one of the few things that, you know, the World in our kind of current culture, especially in the United States, had settled on that, you know, Nazis were bad, Stalin was bad. The Soviet Union got beat by us through the second half of the 20th century by us being better than them.
[00:30:28] Speaker A: And that they were murdering tens of millions of people.
[00:30:31] Speaker B: Yeah. And Mao wasn't good. Same thing, murdering tens of millions of people. And also that our system beat their system. I think that's the important thing like that kind of. Because at first I was thinking about a joke about trying to be sympathetic to the Jewish community, that they just can't escape anti Semitism because of your allusion to Nazis and the Hitler. But I'm reminded of the first man, Mr. Musk, having reposted something in the last week, and I'll read it here. The quote is, Stalin, Mao and Hitler didn't murder millions of people. Their public sector workers did.
And that's what I'm saying, James. I don't know. I don't know why this man feels the need to. And that's why it's not just anti Semitism, even though I do think he's an anti Semite. He's shown that enough. But by bringing in Stalin and Mao is something about that for some reason, these guys like him, J.D. vance and others, they seem to want this kind of control.
They seem to opine for Stalin, Mao and Hitler really the type of control they had on their societies, this dominating everybody. Everybody's got to have the imprint of those leaders. And they seem to not like the kind of society that we have had in the United States that beat those other societies in the 20th century, which is an open, pluralistic society that really stuck out to me.
[00:32:00] Speaker A: We're all moving. We're trying to do this all together, as opposed to one saying, it's my show.
[00:32:05] Speaker B: That's what.
[00:32:05] Speaker A: Well, so you're saying. I mean, so you actually you were misleading when you said you don't know. What you're saying is that it's an admiration thing going on.
[00:32:13] Speaker B: I think so.
[00:32:14] Speaker A: I don't know. Like, what's your suggestion? There's so good point.
[00:32:18] Speaker B: I. I guess I. I say I don't know. And maybe even James, that's maybe even me trying to defend still whatever I feel of normalcy. Because you're right, maybe I do know. Maybe it is this obvious.
[00:32:28] Speaker A: That's what you think. That's what I'm saying. Like what you're with admiration.
[00:32:33] Speaker B: Here's what I realized, James. This is the interesting thing, the Orwellian thing of the party's Last instruction was not to believe, you know, your lying eyes type of thing. Yeah, we're actually there because think about it. The first man did two Z kiles on inauguration night. We were told by everybody, including the Anti Defamation League, that immediately after that, we didn't see what we saw. We saw an awkward gesture. And since then, others have copied it, including Steve Bannon. All that then that got me thinking, James, this is psychological warfare by this group on us. Has been going on for a long time because I thought about Charlottesville in 2017. We saw a bunch of young men with tiki torches that appear to look like crystal knocked in the US Saying Jews will not replace us. And we were again told by our leadership at the time that we didn't see that. Don't think that you saw what you saw. So you're right, James. There's something going on here. Maybe I'm still trying to be nice and trying to be Mr. Both Sides and all that. When I say I don't know and thanks for correcting me, I guess I do know these guys do admire 20th century, mid 20th century authoritarians. And for some reason, and it's kind of like, James, and sorry if we keep going, but just to finish here, because I wouldn't mind your thought. We've done shows and discussions about the Confederacy, and you're very good at always bringing up people make a choice. They can choose to support the Union or the Confederacy. And in one of our shows, who they relate to, and if you think about it, we made the comment the Confederacy. First of all, they were very clear about what they were doing. They said it in writing, and they lasted four years and they lost. And I was thinking about the same thing.
The Nazis lasted 12 years. Stalin's Russia lasted about 70 years, and Mao lasted about 40 years, and they all lost. And these people want to go to that side versus decide that one, which is us.
[00:34:23] Speaker A: I was just curious because what this actually reminds me of is this kind of apologist attitude. It reminds me of the Lost Cause and this idea. Now, to your point, the point I've made with that is that when we were having all the discussions about the Confederate monuments and you know, and all that kind of stuff, what I. What is revealing to me and that, you know, is very. Is something I always take note of is in the. For the United States, for someone to look back and say, okay, the Confederacy, that's who I identify with. Like, that's just very interesting to me because, like, like, they lasted. They. They weren't very long. Lasted. And the only thing they really stood for was white supremacy and keeping slavery in place. Like, that's what they stood for. And so when you look at you, you could alternatively, if you're an American, you can say, hey, I identify with the Union. You know, they stood for the Constitution. They won, you know, all this other stuff. Or you could say, hey, I, I, you know, I like the guys who rebelled against the Union and who took an L. And, you know, but they were, you know, like. And if you were saying, oh, well, those guys were tougher, like, no, that's not at all. You could just as easily look at Stonewall Jackson, be like, yeah, that was a cool dude. Or you could look at Ulysses Grant, or you could look at John Brown, you know, like, and say, oh, yeah. So it's always this choice that people are making as far as what emotionally they resonate, that resonates with them. And so it was always interesting to me that so many people, even in this day and age, they would emotionally say, what emotionally resonated with them was the Confederacy, you know, like, they didn't win. They stood for, you know, white supremacy and slavery, you know, and so it's just like, okay, so what's going on there? Are you. Do you like them because they didn't win, or did you like them because of the other thing? But either way, yeah, in this case, the Lost Cause part of what the Lost Cause was, and that was not some accident in history. It was an effort because of this affinity that now, at least then, people were closer to it. Like, you know, the Daughters of the Confederacy, a lot of them were related to people in the Confederacy. So you can understand then an affinity there. But what they did was like, hey, we want to recast what happened. We want to make it so that people in the future don't remember the Confederacy as only standing for white supremacy, as written by Alexander Stevens, you know, the member of the Cabinet of the Confederacy and, you know, and all the leaders, basically, the Confederacy, we don't want them to be remembered for those things. We want to create a new history, what these people can be remembered for. And it's been successful in many respects because you start having people talk about, oh, well, the Civil War wasn't about slavery and all that. So this Lost Cause was a concerted effort made after the fact to recast the history so that future generations, at minimum, would be arguing about it. It wouldn't be some clear fact of history. What we're seeing now, I think with historians going on Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan talking about, oh, well, Winston Churchill is the villain in World War II and all that. It's an effort to recast, rewrite the history so that people now and people in the future will not see this clear delineation between the murderers lost and the liberators who came in and kicked their butt. And so, yeah, so more people can emotionally identify with the murderers who lost. And that's really what's happening. And these people emotionally, what resonates with them is the murderers who lost.
[00:37:26] Speaker B: Yeah. What's fascinating is it works. I mean, we have people like Kanye west, who's a black American, saying Hitler's cool. And I get it that he's a little bit off his rocker. But what it does is it gets. No, but what it does is it gives a permission slip for others who may not be that much off their rocker, but also may be very uneducated. Right about. But they made.
[00:37:49] Speaker A: I see what you're saying, though. Like, it gives more. It allows people who actually it. Emotion. The.
[00:37:54] Speaker B: The.
[00:37:54] Speaker A: The idea of the oppression and the murdering resonates with them. And the exertion of power, like you were talking about, you know, like, hey, I want to be a dictator. So I admire other dictators. And, you know, it gives them permission to kind of do it out loud, you know, more. So the more people that. The more consensus it appears there is, the more people that are. That are behind. Yeah.
[00:38:12] Speaker B: And also what it does is just like the Lost cause did. It diminishes the importance of the topic in history and also diminishes the suffering of the victims. You know what I mean? So, because if you make the Holocaust an unserious thing, then, you know, people aren't really thinking about the fact that to children, screaming children into ovens, you know, and stuff like that, and just kill people. And not only that, it's not just the killing of people, it's the confiscation of property. That's why to me, the Holocaust and the way that Jews were treated and especially in eastern Europe, late 1800s, early 1900s, was very similar to the way black Americans were treated after Reconstruction, which was a lot of theft, a lot of theft of land, property, and other people got wealthy and it. Nobody. Most people don't want to admit to their children that they live in a nice house because they took it from someone else. So what they do is they reinvent history and say, well, those people were bad people and they were stupid or they were lazy or whatever. Right. And so it's. It's and that's why, it's just curious to me that I thought a lot of this was solved culturally and that we were in agreement as a culture that those things were bad in the 20th century and that the United States won. We were the shining city of the hill.
[00:39:27] Speaker A: Correct with that. We were in agreement. But the people who were the fringe people now are making a push. And the reason it's notable is because.
[00:39:34] Speaker B: They'Re now in power, they're no longer fringe.
[00:39:36] Speaker A: Well, we get to see it in real time. Like, we've read about this, we've heard about this. Like, why did you remember the American generals who came in and when they came into Germany after, when they were running the war and everything like that, they made a conscious decision that they wanted to document this stuff because they were like, yo, people are not going to believe this.
[00:39:53] Speaker B: You're right.
[00:39:54] Speaker A: If we don't document this stuff, people aren't going to believe it. And then they also know that impulse in human history that some people are going to come around and be like, no, no, no, it wasn't like that or anything like that. They will try to be apologists for it. So the people. And it's really a tell, though, it really does tell because again, most people don't walk around desiring to identify with people who lose. So when you have people that are apologists for a lot of these people, the Nazis or whatever, a lot of times the reason isn't because they like them because they lost. The reason is because they like them because of what they stood for. And that's what I can tell about that person. And so that's what.
[00:40:27] Speaker B: Exactly.
[00:40:27] Speaker A: And we're seeing those people now make a live and in color effort to rewrite the history, to bring more people over to them who may either have that emotional pull or at least to try to make it even to where you can pick one or the other without feeling social repercussions, which like you said previously, because society had decided the way they felt on it, you could, you would feel social repercussions on, on choosing the side of the murderers who lost.
[00:40:53] Speaker B: Yeah, no, it's, it's fascinating because maybe this does speak more to the idea of living memory. Right. We just have enough people, unfortunately, who passed away that were alive during that time. And, you know, you make a good point. I'm gonna go back to what you said about some of the modern or today's media influencers, and I would say entertainment media types like Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan. Joe Rogan recently had A gentleman who Tucker Carlson said was one of the great historians in America right now. And maybe you're most honest or something like that. Yeah.
[00:41:24] Speaker A: Which is just like they call that dude honest.
[00:41:27] Speaker B: I don't even want to name the guy because I don't want to give him the. People can go figure out who it is if they watch one of Rogan's shows. But Rogan asked him, when did Hitler start going after the Jews?
I guess regular question. And the guy's answer is, quote, his anti Semitism is what allowed him to love the German people.
I mean, that is one of the most offensive things you could, you could say. Right.
[00:41:49] Speaker A: I mean, it's also stupid. But yeah, it's just.
[00:41:51] Speaker B: Yeah. I mean these arguments, like you said, this is the same guy that said that Winston Churchill was the aggressor. But James, think about what we're seeing. It's the same trying to rewrite history of three years ago.
[00:42:02] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:42:02] Speaker B: We have the same type of people saying that now it was Ukraine that was the aggressor against Russia.
[00:42:07] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:42:07] Speaker B: It's the same type of thing about putting so much crap out there and try, like you said, trying to muddy the waters enough for people emotionally and historically so that they might just give up and say, oh, okay, I don't know who's good or who's not and just let them do what they want. And so. But, but here's what I'll say. James. This is why I'm personally offended by a lot of this stuff. Because I feel like we're not that old. I just turned 47. I'm born in 1978. I grew up in the Washington D.C. area. I can vividly remember right now, my grandma used to be in a retirement home in Takoma park right outside of D.C. called Tacoma Towers. That's how much I accurately remember it. And she would play bridge every day with her friends. And I would come home from elementary school and my mom would be at work. So I go to my grandma's apartment thing and hang out with her and two of her friends every day that had played bridge work had tattoos on their arm from concentration camps that they survived.
And that's what I'm saying when you see tattoos on an old lady who's maybe at that time she was 70 years old, you see her wrinkless skin and you see the way the numbers were done very, you know, like someone was in a rush.
It's hard to say that that never happened or that was a hoax or something like that. And I think that you think about the suffering of people. Like we go back to, whether it's the civil war, whether it's the people getting bombed in Ukraine unfairly, or whether it was people in World War II dying or dying from Stalin starving 20 million people. That's to me why it's, it's just sad.
I won't even say it's offensive. I'll say it's sad like you say that this many people now think it's okay to revisit this part of history with fondness for those people, it's just interesting.
[00:43:48] Speaker A: I just don't understand. It's a conscious effort though. And that's, that's like.
[00:43:52] Speaker B: Exactly, I don't understand it. And it's a conscious effort to reject the facts. That's really the big.
[00:43:56] Speaker A: Well, but that's, remember with all these kind of conflicts, you know, whether it be, you know, like hot wars or even just skirmishes and so forth, there's the battle that actually happens with the bullets and stuff, but then there's also the battle of information, you know, and whose story is going to be remembered and put forth. And so just because the war ended and the battle for information was decisively won at one point, that doesn't mean that the war is not going to restart again necessarily. But the battle over the information and the perception can restart and has restarted. And you know, this is like you said with when Russia went into Ukraine, they started the battle for information right away as well. Like they, okay, we're gonna start shooting bullets and we're gonna start trying to recast what's happening and say that they are the aggressor against us. So this stuff is kind of par for the course with it. And you know, like, we're in this situation where I'm, I'm really interested to see how this plays out because we're in a different world now now uninformed people who don't follow things, they kind of go with the wind a lot of times. So that's not really the people I'm looking at, but the, the people who I'm interested to see how this type of effort plays in modern society are the people who are reasonably knowledgeable and consider themselves informed. Because one thing that's happening now, like the way people get information with, through social media is that people aren't able to look at things in depth as easily because things aren't presented to them in any level of depth. If everything you get, if the information, if the news you get is in 15 second clips, 20 second clips, then you just aren't going to have a depth of understanding on things one and two. You probably won't have too much conviction on the things that you have because you don't have that much depth of understanding. So if you're learning about history in 1520 minute, 20 second clips, excuse me, then it may be easier to sway you. I wonder if it may be easier to do this now to rewrite history in many people's minds, particularly people who think that they're informed and think that they follow information because they don't have a, they don't even, they're not, their brains aren't even wired to get a depth of understanding. It has to be presented to them in 30 seconds and they're going to weigh that based on what they know and then that's going to be that. So I think that the people who think that truth is become self evident and self reinforcing are in for a rude awakening because the people who want to, to cover over truth are hard at work right now. And you know, the people who, who want what actually happened to be known are kind of sitting back thinking they already won. Kind of like what you just said, like, oh, I thought we already finished this, that I thought this was over. And it's like, no, no, no, actually while you thought it was over, the people who want to rewrite the history have been over here coming up with 15 second tweets or 15 second, you know, TikToks, trying to convince a bunch of people that actually here's what, here's what really happened. You know what I'm saying? So I think, yeah, what's a good point? If you want, because the real out there, if you want the real out there, basically, you better get to work.
[00:46:45] Speaker B: Well, and it's also that at least, you know, these people right now control the modes of information which, you know, some studies have shown that it's actually changing how we digest things cognitively, that you're right, maybe people aren't able to much longer and it could really make a real change because again, perception is reality. So reality and facts aren't reality. Perception is so people begin to perceive that, you know, that the totality, totalitarian regimes of the middle 20th century were not that bad. Then we could have a new reality that we enter some of the major.
[00:47:25] Speaker A: Platforms and they're either owned or run by people who would sympathize with Hitler or Mao or stuff like that.
[00:47:33] Speaker B: Yeah, it's, it's, it's, it's just interesting and I guess this is where we're at is we might have to go through that cycle again where we do have authoritarian, you know, dominated world and we start all this fighting again and having world wars just for people over two or three generations to try and feel like, oh this sucks. Let's, let's, let's, let's do something different. I mean it's, well yeah, it's a.
[00:47:57] Speaker A: Possible how it'll play out, but it definitely, it creates and I mean I think acknowledging that it creates a different world one and then two also just being cognizant of what and who you engage with, you know, like, because again, truth is not self executing. You know, what's real is it can be people perceive what's real or what people understand. What's real is to be based on their perceptions. And so this stuff is fluid and who you engage with, who you support, it all matters in terms of the, the, the way, the what the lessons that have been learned in, throughout history, whether those continue on or whether those as you point out, have to be learned again.
[00:48:38] Speaker B: Yeah, and I think that, you know, the, the, the, the unfortunate part, let me say it that way of us being further removed and people just being less educated about history. I'm thinking of someone like Kanye, like we mentioned. So here's a black American who's saying that Hitler was good because he's probably, it's the enemy of the. My enemy is my friend because he's such an anti Semite. He probably just thinking of the Nazis in terms of they don't like Jews. I don't like Jews either. So Hitler was okay, but as you joked to me before, maybe he never got taught the story of Jesse Owens.
The idea that the Nazis were sympathetic to people of African descent is an absolute joke. So that's my concern and I think we've seen that even with some, unfortunately some of my friends, like in the Jewish community where they were disturbed enough over the last year, year and a half to believe that because of things like college campus protests and all that, that there was all this antisemitism just only on the left. And that's what we're talking about. Like, well, it seems like the American right has allowed a lot of Nazi sympathizing and all that to come into their tent too. And I think it's the same thing for some of my Jewish friends in the last year and a half, which is they were so focused on what, you know, they perception of hey, these people are against Israel and all that because of what's going on in Gaza that they kind of took their eye off the other enemy, like the actual people to support Nazis. And it's just. That's what I'm saying. Like, like the, the algorithms push us all into these emotional spaces where we have a black American, you know, supporting Hitler or we have our Jewish friends telling one side of the American.
Like that. Like you pointed out the, like that kind of aren't. Aren't calling out the zig how from Mr. Musk, the same way they might call out a college protester at Colombia. And that's all I'm saying is that it's got people kind of like, yeah, one. This one isn't as bad as this one.
[00:50:32] Speaker A: It's like the richest man in the world who controls information platforms and all this other stuff. Yeah, that's. And I don't know if that's also like, well, let me. I want it. Because I want to wrap this up. But I don't know if that's fear. I don't know if the Anti Defamation League is afraid of Musk. And so therefore they wanted to kind of give cover of him. I don't know what that is, but it definitely. They were so quick to come out and be like, it was like, yo, maybe you want to let this play out and see. But why are you so sure? Like, you're not in this guy's head, you know, and it's not like he's never, he's never. That he. He has everything.
[00:51:02] Speaker B: Yeah. That he's never said anything. Yeah, yeah.
[00:51:04] Speaker A: That would be questionable. But there's one thing I wanted before we, before we close it up. There's one thing I want to mention is I don't think that people are less informed now. I think that's. That we shouldn't, like, people are. You go back 100 years, my people didn't know what was going on in the world at all. You know, for the most part, like masses of people. So what it is, though, is that the people who think they're informed. This goes to your Roger Ailes, you know, piece. But people think that they're informed who aren't informed. And that's the biggest difference because then they take their misconceptions as. And build a, you know, build an active life around that. If you go back 100 years to 150 years, somebody who wasn't informed didn't think that they had all the information. They didn't know what was going on in Washington, and they knew. They didn't know what was going on in Washington or in the Middle east or in here or there. Now what you have is a lot of people who are spoon fed things in 15 second clips. And so they think they're informed about something, but that they're not. But they act on that belief that they are informed. And so therefore it becomes, you know, and the quote I mentioned was just that people don't want to actually be informed. They just want to feel informed, which seems to be the quote of the 21st century Evil genius define everything we see. But I mean, let's wrap this up, man. Is there anything else?
[00:52:16] Speaker B: I'll say this, James, and for the audience, it's a Dunning Kruger culture now. And for the audience to look up that definition of Dunning Kruger effect, I mean, that's really what we're at.
[00:52:26] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:52:26] Speaker B: That this society is permeated with it now.
[00:52:28] Speaker A: Yeah, yeah.
You're not knowledgeable enough of your own limitations basically to really have a good enough perspective. And that's a natural human phenomenon. To your point, like that's you have this effect. So. But no, I think we can wrap this show up from there. You know, it's definitely though, you don't.
[00:52:44] Speaker B: Want to keep talking, bro. This is, hey, look around.
[00:52:47] Speaker A: We're living through history, which, you know, living through interesting history. Everybody lives through history. But we're living through some interesting history, a transition in ages and all this other stuff. So, you know, like it, it's it. But that comes with what comes with that is a lot of uncertainty. So, you know, that's what we get to live with and talk about, observe and all that. So. But we appreciate everybody for joining us on this episode of Call. Like I see it. Subscribe to the podcast, rate it, review it, tell us what you think. Send it to a friend. Till next time. I'm James Keys.
[00:53:10] Speaker B: I'm Tunde Alamana.
[00:53:11] Speaker A: All right, we'll talk.
I.
