>> hello . whenever i'm asked to >> hello. whenever i'm asked to be interviewed on the bbc, even though it's supposed to be about the mating habits of ring tailed lemurs , the first question will lemurs, the first question will be what about cancel culture? because mentioning cancel culture is the best way of getting people up, and that guarantees they won't switch channels. same with the word woke. most people have little idea what it really means, but despite that, they tend to have strong feelings about it . very

strong feelings about it. very strong. now frank luntz, my resident pollster, will tell us what people do think it means frank. john we've been polling on woke for the last six months. >> i've got the data right here on my laptop. labour supporters are more than twice as likely to identify themselves as being woke than conservatives, but one third of the british population doesn't even know what it is. the data that matters most to me, however , is that one out of me, however, is that one out of four brits have stopped talking to someone because they reject their point of view. and one out of five have had someone do it to them. and if you want to know who those people are, 18 to 29 year olds, half of our youngest population have cut someone off simply because they disagree. >> thanks, frankie . so tonight, >> thanks, frankie. so tonight, right? i want my dinosaurs to clarify a few things . so i've clarify a few things. so i've asked my friend matthew syed to give us a brief history of the

word woke . matthew, can you help us? >> i think the first document did use is in a song by a blues singer called leadbelly , who was singer called leadbelly, who was singing about the scottsboro boys, who were a group of young black americans who had gone into the south of america and been accused of rape were incorrectly accused of rape, but were sentenced to death after an all white jury found them guilty within a few seconds. and what leadbelly is saying to black americans is be awake, be aware of racial prejudice. if you go into the south, the jim crow south, and it was really a consciousness raising term. >> when was that? >> when was that? >> so this song, the >> when was that? >> so this song , the scottsboro >> so this song, the scottsboro boys, was in 1930. thank you very much . welcome. in 1938. and very much. welcome. in 1938. and but what fascinate me, john, this term becomes very prevalent in the african american community. and, you know, we

need to be aware of racial injustice. and moreover, we need to be conscious of what we need to be conscious of what we need to do to overturn it . but then to do to overturn it. but then through a process of social and linguistic osmosis , this it linguistic osmosis, this it tiptoes ever more widely into the mainstream. and then you come up to today and it's now a term of abuse that people who are woke are too sensitive to injustices in much the same way that political correctness was kind of a positive term at the beginning . yes, but now is beginning. yes, but now is a term of abuse. and linguists call call this process pejoration. how a term, a positive term slowly becomes a pejorative . pejorative. >> but it then got widened from racial discrimination to any form of discrimination at all, perceived or real perceived, and any form of injustice . any form of injustice. >> this and i think perhaps around 2017, 2018 became wrapped up with this ideological move in american universe is called critical race theory, where

injustice almost doesn't have to be observed. but is there in the power structure , institutional power structure, institutional racism institution , misogyny, racism institution, misogyny, various other kinds of institutionalised things which are very difficult to measure empirically , but are said to be empirically, but are said to be there because of the structure of the power relations. and that's when and they are there and they're bad, but they're also perceived to be there when they're justification for that perception can be tiny. i have a bit of latitude to talk about these things because i'm mixed race. so i think if you're somebody from my background who has been on the receiving end of racism, it gives me latitude to kind of satirise what has become known as woke ideology . but but known as woke ideology. but but you white, heteronormative . from you white, heteronormative. from a colonial rising nation, you imperialist, you go into exactly you go into this terrain with some severe baggage on your i kind of i mean, it's interesting to me that when i look at the

trajectory of your career, i've always seen you in your early life. you took as many great comedians do. you took aim at the power structures of religion and conservative ideology. what you characterise as closed systems of thought . yes, but systems of thought. yes, but i think you're right to turn your attention to woke because it has become a closed system for me . become a closed system for me. the fundamental achilles heel here is not to understand the global context. if you look to other parts of the world, ethnic discrimination is rife, right? tribal conflict still characterise as as much of sub—saharan africa , much of the sub—saharan africa, much of the middle east. so these are two groups that will be fighting with each other because of a different tribal identity. sometimes this has a different ethnic identity, a different linguistic identity. this has been a big problem for humanity since the agricultural revolution . you are 100% right revolution. you are 100% right to say liberal democracies have done this better than any other kind of government . it has done this better than any other kind of government. it has had an approach that tries to treat

these characteristics as arbitrary , and we should judge arbitrary, and we should judge people on the content of their character for talents they character for the talents they could is it perfect? could bring. is it perfect? unquestionably not. >> it's never going to be perfect. >> lebanon look at somalia. look at these places where they haven't got a coherent haven't even got a coherent national because people national identity because people feel still, still feel they're a member a tribe rather than member of a tribe rather than a nafion member of a tribe rather than a nation state. i would love to see the debate. just have a bit more a bit more more nuance, a bit more historical and geographical understanding way, we're understanding that way, we're more to reach an more likely to reach an interesting consensus about what we wish to do. what amazes me about woke anti—woke about the woke anti—woke argument is it's never on substantive that we can substantive issues that we can do actually make people's do to actually make people's lives yeah, a lives better. yeah, it's a distraction from what we need to do. >> i think an awful lot of it is an unattractive side of humanity, is to sort of humanity, which is to sort of want to be right. you know, even if they don't know why they want to be right , if they don't know why they want to be right, they want to be right. so you get, as i said, you get , you know, i've suffered you get, you know, i've suffered this appalling oppression in

microaggression because they've always in america mispronounced my name. well, at least cleese whoever ate cheddar cheese, you know , so i but i've survived , know, so i but i've survived, you know, and i'm going to set up an institute where i can teach people to spot microaggression , which othennise microaggression, which othennise they might never notice at all. thank you . thank you . helen. thank you. thank you. helen. i'm so, so happy to have you on this show . and the reason i'm happy show. and the reason i'm happy is that i can't get the woke people to come on and discuss it with me . we've asked over a with me. we've asked over a dozen of them and they basically refuse . so the way i want you to refuse. so the way i want you to help me, helen, is that since they won't come on to answer the question ones, i'd like to ask if i ask you those questions .

if i ask you those questions. questions will you give me the answers that they would normally give? because you've studied that and you know how they think. and why won't what they discuss this with me ? discuss this with me? >> so you are coming here from a marketplace of ideas approach the concept of debate art, of bringing ideas together, comparing them, seeing which stand up best to critique, qualifying them , having them qualifying them, having them cnfique qualifying them, having them critique each other is understood largely as a western white man gulenist tradition. >> so this is liberalism , would >> so this is liberalism, would you say? yes. >> yes. liberalism is very explicitly critiqued in what i would call critical social justice, and most people call wokeness . yes, liberalism is the wokeness. yes, liberalism is the big enemy . this this idea that big enemy. this this idea that if we get people together , we if we get people together, we can. we are then rational agents who can evaluate ideas, compare

them and replace bad ideas with better ones . or as john stuart better ones. or as john stuart mill would say , exchange error mill would say, exchange error for truth . this is to the social for truth. this is to the social justice activists, a western philosophy. it does not allow for the lived experience and the different knowledges of marginalised people as i am a straight white male and an imperialist . apparently, yes. imperialist. apparently, yes. >> apparently . is that why they >> apparently. is that why they won't speak to me? >> it certainly is a big strike against you. yes. but even more than that has have you taken effort to educate yourself, do the work and uncover your own biases and dismantle your whiteness , detoxify your whiteness, detoxify your masculinity and decolonise your concepts of knowledge ? because concepts of knowledge? because if you have not done any of this, then an you are not woke.

you are not awake to the systems of power and privilege. you are still asleep. and so there is no no point in in speaking to you. >> okay . but the whole thing >> okay. but the whole thing sounds to me really quite authoritarian , slightly like the authoritarian, slightly like the medieval church . i mean, they're medieval church. i mean, they're very much saying what you can, not just what you can say , but not just what you can say, but also really what you can think . also really what you can think. >> it certainly is an authoritarian system. but if you truly believe that these systems of oppressive power absolutely exist and permeate everything , exist and permeate everything, thing that they are perpetuating through language, they are doing harm to marginalised people every minute of every day, then the idea to control what people can say and what they can think , can say and what they can think, and also to subject them to unconscious bias training, to retrain their minds. does seem like an effective way to achieve

social justice. liberals like me and like you, presumably will argue with this and say no , we argue with this and say no, we need to argue about these bad ideas. we need to defeat these bad ideas by showing why they are bad . if this doesn't work to are bad. if this doesn't work to the critical social justice people . people. >> yeah, well, one of the women who would not come on the show said that the very fact that we're having a discussion is the problem . yeah. we're having a discussion is the problem .yeah. i mean , we're having a discussion is the problem . yeah. i mean , yeah, problem. yeah. i mean, yeah, this this is particularly strong in the postcolonial decolonial movement . movement. >> and this you want to have a debate? i don't know if you've seen the slogans . my existence seen the slogans. my existence is not up for debate . it that is not up for debate. it that comes from the trans rights movement if you want to debate so to disagree with them means that you're trying to dis empower them completely. >> that's what it comes down to. >> that's what it comes down to. >> yes. i mean, we saw linda sarsour also said criticism of

islam, for example, is a denial of her right to exist . now, of her right to exist. now, obviously, if islam didn't exist , linda still would . but the , linda still would. but the idea is that by criticising using any identity or any belief system , you are not allowing system, you are not allowing people to exist as they as they are, but they just speak of existing and even of genocide . existing and even of genocide. >> and i think an awful lot of people have no idea that that's what some aspects of woke are about because they just say, well , being woke about because they just say, well, being woke is kind of people and you know, that's great. >> this this idea that wokeness is about being nice. it is about about just being aware of racism, sexism and homophobia and being opposed to it. >> well, that's all totally sensible . yes. sensible. yes. >> but of course, this is wokeness is not the only framework from which this this can be done . liberals also have can be done. liberals also have been opposing racism for a very

long time. marxists opposed it on the grounds that it divides the working class . conservatives the working class. conservatives generally oppose this as well. religious believers that think that we are all the children of god. this is what i have argued. any kind of policy needs to allow for people to come from different frameworks in opposing racism , sexism, homophobia or racism, sexism, homophobia or other bigotries. but the critical social justice movement does not accept that that other frameworks do this . frameworks do this. >> we mentioned cancel culture earlier . do you want to >> we mentioned cancel culture earlier. do you want to add anything to that? >> cancel culture is something that i've been dealing for with quite a while because a lot of time people think of cancel culture as something that affects celebrities who are being hounded and perhaps not allowed to speak in one particular arena. and they say, but you're still speaking. you haven't been called been cancelled at all. but if you look at who is actually being

cancelled , the organisation that cancelled, the organisation that ihave cancelled, the organisation that i have worked with looks at blue and white collar workers who are being asked to undergo various kinds of training. our objecting to this training and are being fired , suffering disciplinary fired, suffering disciplinary action. trade unions are very, very wary of even addressing the issue. so cancel culture affects those who do not have a voice. >> that's very interesting . so >> that's very interesting. so it's the it's the smaller people who suffer the worst because they lose their jobs , whereas they lose their jobs, whereas people like you and me and jk rowling and so forth can speak out because they can't actually get us fired . get us fired. >> this is why i would argue from an admittedly biased left wing point of view , that this wing point of view, that this cannot really be seen as a left wing move when it arranges things. so that only the

independently wealthy can actually speak . actually speak. >> that's funny. >> that's funny. >> and when it supports corporations in putting inflicting these kind of policies on workers and then it stands with corporations against workers. yes this is very much against the whole ethos of the left in the us . it's an $8 left in the us. it's an $8 billion a year industry . sorry, billion a year industry. sorry, what is this? these kinds of trainings for employees. >> i'm fascinated by the way that corporations have no they're just frightened of an economic boycott. right? >> i am not sure how much of a boycott would would actually work. i mean, if we look at jk work. i mean, if we look atjk rowling, her books are not failing to sell, are they? even though there is such strong opinion , such a small percentage opinion, such a small percentage of people actually adhere to these these critical social justice ideas that i don't think

a boycott can really work well , a boycott can really work well, i'm hoping it doesn't because i'm hoping it doesn't because i'm thinking of the adaptation i'm thinking of the adaptation i'm doing of life of brian. i'm thinking of the adaptation i'm doing of life of brian . are i'm doing of life of brian. are you going to be problematic again , i love that word .

with eamonn and isabel monday to thursdays on gb news, britain's news channel . peter news channel. peter. bogosian philosopher , author. philosopher, author. >> that's me, acrobat . oh, no, >> that's me, acrobat. oh, no, no, no. oh no. >> oh, i was misled. no >> oh, i was misled. no >> all right, peter, you studied this . yes, i have. how did we this. yes, i have. how did we get here? >> it's a very powerful movement . nobody sort of signed up for it, and we are learning every

day about inclusion and diversity and anti racism and all that. and it's kind of arrived without anyone quite knowing where it came from. it reminds me a bit of that thing in holy grail when arthur says , in holy grail when arthur says, um, i'm the king and they say, well, we didn't vote for you. we didn't vote for this, did we? >> no, it did not come as a result of a democratic process. uh it blitzkrieg society in the last ten years. and so the words that you mentioned are one of the reasons is that it spread throughout the society . throughout the society. inclusion, equity , diversity, inclusion, equity, diversity, anti—racism . um, people thought anti—racism. um, people thought they were signing up for something different . they're something different. they're getting something that they did not sign up for. they've been hoodwinked. they've been bamboozled by these words . bamboozled by these words. >> oh, you say woke and it means

kind. and you finish up with authoritarianism , correct? authoritarianism, correct? >> it's similar in that the words have two meanings. the meanings that people sign up for and then the secondary meaning . and then the secondary meaning. so for example , inclusion . when so for example, inclusion. when normal people who are not steeped in this, they hear the word inclusion, they think, oh well, inclusion , that sounds well, inclusion, that sounds like a great thing. we want to include people in wheelchairs, we want to include people of all skin colours. we want to include people of all heights, of different ethnicities. everybody agrees to that. we every sane person will sign up for that. but what inclusion actually means. so think about it like this if we want to have an inclusive conversation, let's say we wanted to bring folks into our conversation . we wanted into our conversation. we wanted to them well, to make to include them well, to make sure that they they felt included. they have to feel welcome. so to make sure that they feel welcome , we have to

they feel welcome, we have to make sure that they don't feel offended. and oh, an inclusive space means a space where you restrict speech , a conversation restrict speech, a conversation in which speech is restricted. but people think they're getting a conversation in in which all people can sit at the table and have a conversation, a discourse as equals. that's that's just not what it means. so for example, when you see the word equity, most people confuse and it's a very simple confusion . it's a very simple confusion. >> what it means to me, it means fairness . fairness. >> yeah, that's the exact opposite of what it means . oh, opposite of what it means. oh, so. so equity used to be a finance term. you had . so much finance term. you had. so much equity in your home and that's how most people understood the term very, very recently. term until very, very recently. so and equality are so the equity and equality are not the same things in fact, they're exact exactly the opposite. >> the opposite . yeah. okay. go >> the opposite. yeah. okay. go on. okay

>> so equality means treating citizen one and citizen two equally. they get treated equally. they get treated equally. that's that's what equality means . equity means the equality means. equity means the redistribution of shares , redistribution of shares, redistributing something in society to have an equal outcome . for example, if you have so many members of a minority community in a society , you community in a society, you would want either a proportional representation, right? so let's say that you have 13% of your population in is african american. you would either want a proportion representation , a proportion representation, which is a kind of equity, but what you would really want is to look at the historical characteristics of the people . characteristics of the people. so if someone's an cestors, for example, were enslaved and you would want those individuals to be dis proportionately represented in, in

disproportionate, disproportionate, disproportionate , higher, 13, disproportionate, higher, 13, but higher , correct. so that's but higher, correct. so that's a kind of reparation . it's, it's kind of reparation. it's, it's a kind of reparation. it's, it's a kind of reparation , but it's an kind of reparation, but it's an equitable system. so you could think about it like this . ibram think about it like this. ibram x kendi the more multiple massive bestselling author. so succinctly captures equity as the only remedy to pass discrimination is present discrimination is present discrimination . the only remedy discrimination. the only remedy to the injustices that are clear and obvious injustices and people were treated horrifically on the basis of skin colour. people were treated horrifically on the basis of skin colour . and on the basis of skin colour. and nobody's denying that the only remedy to that is present discrimination and future discrimination. but that itself is not fair . discrimination. but that itself is not fair. no. right. that's equity. and so that's in other words. so that's how people have been bamboozled. they've been hoodwinked by inclusion. they've been hoodwinked by equity.

they've been hoodwinked by diversity, by anti—racism . diversity, by anti—racism. they've been hoodwinked by all these give me an example from diversity . for example, in this diversity. for example, in this conversation, we want diversity. so ideally what you would want is you would want a conversation in all voices could in which all voices could be heard , which who have heard, in which people who have different different different interests, different class different class interests, different whatever interests would come and able to freely and they'd be able to freely participate an exchange of ideas. >> incidentally, i wrote a little book on creativity, and i made that point that the most creative groups are the ones that are most, most diverse . that are most, most diverse. >> yeah, and my guess is i haven't read your book. i apologise . haven't read your book. i apologise. but haven't read your book. i apologise . but my. my guess is apologise. but my. my guess is that what you mean by that is also intellectual diversity. >> well, that's right . yes. you >> well, that's right. yes. you want diversity of ideas, correct? you don't want a lot of culture clash, which is why the guy in charge of the meeting is so important. but if you get diversity of ideas, then you get the most creative groups right? >> so you just beat me to it. so so diversity means intellectual homogeneity. it means that

people fonnard, they have the same ideas and they fonnard the same ideas and they fonnard the same ideas and they fonnard the same ideas and the ideas that that people all fonnard are basic , only one kind of basic, only one kind of a narrative of based in the ideology . so diversity doesn't ideology. so diversity doesn't mean people of different skin colours. if anything , it means colours. if anything, it means people of people whose ancestors were marginalised who have the same opinion. that's why, for example, black conservatives , if example, black conservatives, if you put black conservatives on a panel that's not diversity. you have to have the same opinion . have to have the same opinion. >> uh, diversity , inclusion, >> uh, diversity, inclusion, equity . equity. >> these words are simply not what people think. and again , on what people think. and again, on the anti—racism . anti—racism is the anti—racism. anti—racism is another one. the idea is that racism is ever present in a system . so you can have a system system. so you can have a system , um, in which there are no conspicuous racist, actual racists. but the system itself is racist . it's not. if racism

is racist. it's not. if racism occurs, racism is the default, but it's how it occurs. and you just spoke with helen, who has a lovely example of this in that a story owner of a small store is standing around and at the same time, two customers come through the door. a black customer and a white customer . well, who does white customer. well, who does the store owner help first? if she helps the white customer? she only helped him first because he's white. but if she helps the black customer, she did that because he's afraid that the customer is going to shoplift . so no matter. so the shoplift. so no matter. so the default condition is that the system itself, that that racism is always operative and you need to be trained to uncover it. >> so it's like , oh, charlie, >> so it's like, oh, charlie, you got a fur ball or oh, poor old charlie. maybe he he's having problems digesting some

of the work ideas charlie's had enough wokeism yeah . jillian enough wokeism yeah. jillian >> philip john cleese. hello >> philip john cleese. hello >> nice to have you here. thank you so much for coming. dani. >> thank you for having me. >> thank you for having me. >> now, listen, you. you used to be a pretty successful children's author and now you're not. >> no, i'm not. no, i'd worked for a company called working partners, which is a book packagen partners, which is a book packager, and i'd worked for them since about 2011, wrote quite a number of books for them in an animal fantasy series. so all went swimmingly. in an animal fantasy series. so all went swimmingly . then about all went swimmingly. then about in 2017, i started tweeting about the gender ideology issue and then j.k. rowling had that horrible campaign of abuse against her. you maybe read it

at the time. it was just it was shocking the amount of hate. i know she got for stating something that everybody believed till five minutes ago, which is that you can't change your sex. you dress how you like because she said you sleep with whoever, whoever will have you, whoever, whoever will have you, whoever however you want to. you know. but you can't, you know, don't bully people out of their jobs for saying that you can't change your biological sex. and she got so much hate for this. and i kind of felt , i want to and i kind of felt, i want to say something . you know, i kind say something. you know, i kind of was aware that it was a really difficult, very touchy issue. really difficult, very touchy issue . so i added the hashtag issue. so i added the hashtag i stand with j.k. rowling to my twitter handle and i know so that was that was kind of blood in the water and everything was kind of quiet for a couple of weeks. oh and then they kind of the sharks found me, you know , the sharks found me, you know, death threats, threats of sexual violence , that sort of thing. so violence, that sort of thing. so i kind of ignored the first few comments blocked, but it kept

coming . and it was kind of like coming. and it was kind of like a snowball rolling downhill . it a snowball rolling downhill. it got worse for 24 hours. so it started morning of the 26th. by morning of the 27th, my publisher was on, which is this. this is 2020, 2020, just not long after lockdown. say about then 27th. i got i got to sleep at five in the morning . i was at five in the morning. i was called by my agent about 9 am. and the book packagers were on the phone. working partners were on the phone. we'll have to talk to harper collins, see if it's if you can still work for us. and 2 pm, which was like nine new york time. and 2 pm, which was like nine new york time . yeah. harper new york time. yeah. harper collins said . right. she's out collins said. right. she's out surfing , so. yeah. sorry. harper surfing, so. yeah. sorry. harper collins. say you're out and you're fired. so that was it. and that was the end of my career as a children's author. i don't anyone else at all don't blame anyone else at all for not speaking up about this. however, they feel because they know . they're going to lose

know. they're going to lose their jobs. know. they're going to lose theirjobs. but know. they're going to lose their jobs. but the know. they're going to lose theirjobs. but the kind of big their jobs. but the kind of big ups that the corporations and the companies as if they would stand up it and say no, we're stand up to it and say no, we're not going to base our companies policy and hiring on like the opinions some anonymous opinions of some anonymous trolls on twitter , you know, but trolls on twitter, you know, but well , the extraordinary thing is well, the extraordinary thing is that several things here i'm fascinated by. >> it was why don't they if you put something out on twitter, why don't they identify, hello , why don't they identify, hello, hello , you. very disgusting , hello, you. very disgusting, aren't you? >> oh , don't listen to her. >> oh, don't listen to her. >> oh, don't listen to her. >> you're lovely . >> you're lovely. >> you're lovely. >> where are you going ? but if >> where are you going? but if you put something out on twitter, why don't they make people admit they're identity? why don't they say, who's the author of this tweet? because it's the anonymity that allows these nobodies us. yeah. to have a feeling of power. >> yeah , that is true. but then >> yeah, that is true. but then again, anonyma also protects people like friends of mine and writers who are who agree with me. but and, and they can have

anonymous accounts and say it but and i don't blame them. as i said, they cannot tweet their opinions under their own name because their careers would be overdue. what do you do for money now? i i learned how to drive hgv . i became money now? i i learned how to drive hgv. i became a money now? i i learned how to drive hgv . i became a truck drive hgv. i became a truck driver . complete change of driver. complete change of career . ca reer. >> career. >> what an extraordinary thing . >> what an extraordinary thing. >> what an extraordinary thing. >> my trucker's tan and dark. >> my trucker's tan and dark. >> but how did that happen ? >> but how did that happen? >> but how did that happen? >> i suddenly thought, what? they look very nice as hgvs . they look very nice as hgvs. >> well, i didn't want to be in an indoorjob. i realised i wanted to be out of doors because i'd say it was. it was the first year of lockdown and i was lucky in lockdown. and i have a garden and i'd spent a lot of my time outdoors and it really helped out. it really helped my mental health after the cancellation happened and just being outdoors working just being outdoors and working really hard, authors , the really hard, the authors, the society of authors , right, who society of authors, right, who represent authors , were they any good? >> did they help? it would be so

much better for authors if the society of authors was willing to protect their freedom of speech. >> but the i actually tweeted the society of authors about this and they denied that freedom of speech was one of their priorities or even interests . interests. >> the society of authors said, yeah , yeah, it's that's not one yeah, yeah, it's that's not one of our things that we do some authors i know who are extremely brave actually tried to bring a freedom of speech motion to their agm last year . their agm last year. >> they were called bigots and fascists and social media just for bringing a free speech motion before the agm . and the motion before the agm. and the society of authors ended up voting against free speech, which . by 593 to 161 . which. by 593 to 161. >> well, thank you for depressing me. yeah well, i'll just go and kill myself .

just go and kill myself. >> thank you. good. mine .

greg >> i'm so grateful that you came. greg lukianoff has co—written the best book on this subject that i've read. you co—wrote it with jonathan hight. wonderful author. it's called the coddling of the american mind. and it's the most interesting thing i've read on all this stuff. but what i'm fascinated by is that it all started with you having a severe depression . depression. >> yes. >> yes. >> so tell the tell well, in two thousand and seven, i got so depressed i had to be hospitalised as a danger to myself . myself. >> and in the process of recovering the next year, i studied cognitive behavioural therapy and cognitive behavioural therapy is something that teaches you to talk back to

your your own exaggerated thoughts to when you're when you hear the voices in your head, you argue with them. exactly when you're catastrophizing, you call it out. >> so catastrophizing means what? >> that you're just thinking everything is going to be a catastrophe . oh six that sounds catastrophe. oh six that sounds very much like it sounds when people are anxious and depressed, they have all of these cognitive distortions. you know, at volume 11 going on in their head and that just getting in the habit of talking back to them can relieve many of the symptoms of anxiety and depression. >> so when you discover that, what happened then? >> well , you know, it changed my >> well, you know, it changed my life . but i started seeing all life. but i started seeing all over the place ways in which we were teaching young people the habits of anxious and depressed people. it was as if both in k through 12 and in grade school and in higher education, it was like the adults were saying by the way, do catastrophize , go

the way, do catastrophize, go on, do engage in emotional reasoning, do engage in binary thinking, which i know you think a lot about as well. >> so you linked up with john, unked >> so you linked up with john, linked up with john hite. >> i told him what i thought was because i'm a constitutional lawyer, major focus . yeah know. >> i thought i liked you so . >> i thought i liked you so. >> i thought i liked you so. >> and i was defending freedom of speech on college campuses and academic freedom . and i and academic freedom. and i noficed and academic freedom. and i noticed around 2013 that that students were really clamping down both on freedom of speech, but they were also rationalising it in this kind of medicalized way . that was all way. that was all catastrophizing , all binary catastrophizing, all binary thinking, all of these cognitive distortions. so we wrote an article together in 2015 saying that the things that are threatening free speech on campus are also the kind of mental habits that will make young people anxious and depressed. essentially, it's teaching people that that

essentially they should avoid challenges, they should avoid things that cause them any pain. but of course , things that cause but of course, things that cause you pain are also what cause you growth . and so the emphasis on growth. and so the emphasis on having your children not experience either physical or emotional pain or challenges is actually a profound , unhealthy actually a profound, unhealthy way to teach kids to think about the world and to let them be kids and grow up. it's tempting as a parent because i have a five and a seven year old. i understand it. you want to protect your kids from emotional difficulty, but if you don't prepare them for a world that's difficult and you don't prepare them for challenges, you're not preparing them to be adults. and even worse, you're creating a situation where they're of course, they're going be course, they're going to be anxious because anxious and depressed because they're of the world. they're afraid of the world. they're adulthood . they're afraid of adulthood. >> having these insights >> having all these insights with you, they affect the with you, how do they affect the people who are advocating woke ideas ? ideas? >> i think that to a degree, that's terrible. advice is inherent to a lot of what we

might call woke ideology that essentially challenge challenges bad, that you should always follow your emotions and most importantly, that that life is a battle between good people and evil people. a lot of the ideology that we're seeing, particularly on campuses, is this very simple narrative of there is pure good and pure evil and you want to be on the side of pure good, are always at war with the other. >> so that if you're agree with a lot of the transgender agenda , a lot of the transgender agenda, but disagree with some of it, then you are a very bad man. you are absolutely you you're absolutely wrong. >> yeah. and this is part of the way that unfortunately, in the places where we should be learning to argue like adults, places where we should be learniteaching ue like adults, places where we should be learniteaching this ke adults, places where we should be learniteaching this very:iults, we're teaching this very childish way of arguing . it childish way of arguing. it creates this situation where you can just dismiss any person , any can just dismiss any person, any book, any thinker or any institution you disagree with. because since you can find everything is evil, anytime you don't want to listen to somebody, you just declare them

evil and you don't have to bother with you don't have bother with them. you don't have to challenge your thinking at all. >> want to ask you >> now i want to ask you a little bit more cancel little bit more about cancel culture, time culture, because every time i get the second get on television, the second question to do with question is something to do with cancel culture. all my cancel culture. and all my friends saying, you friends are saying, why are you always talking about cancel culture? is , culture? and the answer is, we're it. yeah we're obsessed with it. yeah tell me what you're thinking about it. >> so i have book coming out >> so i have a book coming out called cancelling of the american mind. >> yes >> cancelling. yes. yes >> cancelling. yes. yes >> and it's making the point that not only cancel culture that not only is cancel culture real, but it's so bad we're going to be studying it in 100 years. one thing that we've collected is the number of professors who have been punished or fired and in the united states, you have to go back to the 1950s to mccarthyism to see numbers that are anywhere near as close to the number of professors that mccarthyism . in professors that mccarthyism. in terms of numbers, absolutely . terms of numbers, absolutely. the estimates about about 100 to 150 professors were fired . and 150 professors were fired. and from 1947 to 1957. and right now, we're well , we're

now, we're well, we're approaching 200 professors getting fired . getting fired. >> and well, how does it happen ? >> and well, how does it happen? the students used to be the administered voters were the ones getting professors in trouble . trouble. >> and then it increasingly became the students and the fellow professors who were reporting mccarthyism , reporting them. so mccarthyism, it people outside it was generally people outside of higher education who were reporting professors, but now it's from within, in and it's coming from within, in and it's coming from within, in and it's devastating for the production of knowledge because if people think that if people aren't stupid, if they look at an expert and they come up with an expert and they come up with an opinion and they say to themselves , wait a second, if themselves, wait a second, if you can be cancelled for having the wrong opinion , why should the wrong opinion, why should i trust you to be objective about this anyway? >> you should. anything to do with that the fees at with the fact that the fees at universities are so high universities now are so high that the students are also kind of customers as well as students. >> that is part of the problem and they don't want to lose their customers. >> right? >> right? >> related to the fees, >> it's related to the fees, both because it creates a customer is always right situation, but also because those fees , at least in the

those fees, at least in the states, increasingly pay for armies ever growing armies and armies ever growing numbers of bureaucrats and administrators who enforce this really rigid ideological norms. they police freedom of speech and it creates an environment thatis and it creates an environment that is very chilled because the only real aim they have in life is not to get fired. careerism definitely plays a part, but there's also people who think that the key to saving the world is less and less freedom of speech. is less and less freedom of speech . yes, you would think we speech. yes, you would think we would have learned a bit from galileo . galileo. >> well, i feel better informed, but also completely confused . so but also completely confused. so i've asked helen and peter to have a final chat on the subject of what do we do? helen if we are going to address the problem of wokeism, as we've discussed , of wokeism, as we've discussed, the main problem with it is authority . authority. >> aryanism in a liberal

society, we don't want to ban any of these ideas , but we also any of these ideas, but we also don't want to have them in institutionalised. we don't want them imposed upon other people . them imposed upon other people. so i have argued that we expand the concept of secularism, as we would say now, just as we wouldn't have someone in have to affirm the apostles creed in order to get a job. we shouldn't have them having to write a diversity , equity and inclusion diversity, equity and inclusion statement, which also mirrors critical social justice. that should be something which is just off off the table as it would be with religious ian peter , i. peter, i. >> i agree. i have three. >> i agree. i have three. >> you don't have to know. >> you don't have to know. >> i do, but i have a couple of nitpicks . but i have three nitpicks. but i have three things that i think may help people trying to navigate this and figure it out. i think the first order of business is what we spoke about is they have to figure out what people mean by words. so if they're getting

emails all the time from their daughter or son schools talking about equity based learning, they need to know what that means is or the words we talked about, yeah, this is an racist curricula, so they need to have a basic rudimentary understanding of the meaning of words. this is not an academic thing. this is so that they can participate and understand what people are talking about. the second thing is they need to show up . they need to physically show up. they need to physically show up. they need to physically show up. they need to physically show up to meetings, often in school board meetings or any kind of municipality, county meetings . the people who show up meetings. the people who show up are the woke people and they're the most vocal people. and so i know it's a hard work . i know know it's a hard work. i know people would rather stay at home in pyjamas, but they have in their pyjamas, but they have to show up. the third thing, the simplest thing anybody can ever do , don't give money to your do, don't give money to your alma mater , your alma mater, the alma mater, your alma mater, the college from which you graduated is simply not the same place

today . and so you're giving to today. and so you're giving to money support an ideology . erg money support an ideology. erg we know where the ideology comes from. it's the university system. we know that they're teaching students things that are untethered to reality. stop giving money to your alma mater. i don't think that our institutions are largely salvageable at this point . i salvageable at this point. i think that. but if someone would like to salvage them, media institutions, academic institutions. et cetera, that's fine. i think that the what we should be focusing on is building new things . building new things. >> and i think in in practice, that would take a very long time . if we look at the length of time it's taken to develop universities in this country , universities in this country, that was, i think, from the 12th century. i don't think we're going to quickly produce something as good in principle as the current universe , city as the current universe, city system, where people can come together, where there are resources of all kinds, but but we don't want to have a

revolution, burn everything down. i don't want to. i think that things are more redeemable than perhaps you do . than perhaps you do. >> i, i hope you're right. >> i, i hope you're right. >> my concern is that we have people who have jobs for life with tenure. >> my concern is that the reason the ideology spread is because they've taught students who have then gone into the workforce , then gone into the workforce, gone into the administration. et cetera . if somebody wants to cetera. if somebody wants to spend their time like that, that's that's fine. that's not how i choose to spend my time. i'm going to build new things. it is when you think about it is odd when you think about it, that there is an ideology which has become a dominant value that nobody is allowed to question . when we didn't vote it in. >> right? right >> right? right >> i mean, when you think about it, it's like, really? no one's allowed to question this. you can't even ask. just asking questions. does it does it make sense you ? sense to you? >> yeah, i think that's it. >> yeah, i think that's it. >> not it doesn't make sense to me. >> but does it make sense to you

that we have all of these that that we have all of these things that literally nobody believed ten years ago men can get pregnant , like just a suite get pregnant, like just a suite of propositions that nobody believed. and now you have to believed. and now you have to believe them. and if you ask why, you're not merely mistaken , why, you're not merely mistaken, you're a bad person that i should think, shut up. >> a red flag rather than confront these people. most of us don't really enjoy confrontation . some do, but they confrontation. some do, but they have a big advantage because most of us don't. and if you want to avoid confrontation, then i think the way to put our stuff across is to ask questions because if you ask a question and they say, well, you're not allowed to ask the question and you apologise and leave , but, you apologise and leave, but, you apologise and leave, but, you know, if you ask questions, it's less confrontation . but it's less confrontation. but you're also querying what they're telling you. >> i don't know if you've heard of the just asking questions . j. of the just asking questions. j. q now , you will be accused of,

q now, you will be accused of, of , of, of what q now, you will be accused of, of, of, of what if q now, you will be accused of, of , of, of what if off q now, you will be accused of, of, of, of what if off if you ask questions . i'm just asking ask questions. i'm just asking questions . this is seen as questions. this is seen as a cynical move by a lot of activists now and you will just get dismissed . but for, for get dismissed. but for, for which is not not a phrase i really want to say three times what is this on the bbc? >> i'm afraid that's all we have time for . i'm >> i'm afraid that's all we have time for. i'm now going to make a pompous little speech because it's my show . so there you see, it's my show. so there you see, i believe in liberal democracy . i believe in liberal democracy. now! i know a lot of people say that liberalism has failed and i say no , liberalism hasn't failed say no, liberalism hasn't failed . human nature has failed . there . human nature has failed. there is no plan, no constitution, no set of rules that we human beings can't up as winston churchill said, democracy is the

worst form of government except for all the others . now, the for all the others. now, the essence of a liberal democracy is that people with different points of view discuss things and then we hope in an ideal world, some consensus emerges that can be acted on. but the woke say no , we're not prepared woke say no, we're not prepared to discuss our ideas because we're right . to discuss our ideas because we're right. and if we start discussing them, people might suspect there is another point of view. i don't think that's a very constructive attitude . it very constructive attitude. it works. i mean, at least it worked for pol pot. it is called authoritarian ism. now the woke aren't throwing people into prisons, but they are having them thrown out of their jobs . them thrown out of their jobs. it's the same all authoritarian impulse . it's the same all authoritarian impulse. sorry for it's the same all authoritarian impulse . sorry for getting impulse. sorry for getting serious music .

for next time i'm on the dinosaur. >> are you know we killed a man. >> are you know we killed a man. >> did i tell you that? no. kevin klein and i killed a man in denmark . in denmark. >> bellissima novelist sima bellissima. no bellissima bellissima . oh, belly, belly . i bellissima. oh, belly, belly. i think you can get more uptight. i think you should be offended by that. because i am. you're not a fan. i'm offended that you're offended. i'm offended that you're not offended. that i'm

>> in the united kingdom and across the world, this is mark dolan tonight. and it might take

at ten. as we remember our fallen heroes from two world wars. what would they make of the hate playing out on britain's streets? did they give their lives in vain ? as pressure their lives in vain? as pressure grows on the home secretary should suella braverman stay or go? i'll be asking tonight's newsmaker , our former home newsmaker, our former home office minister, ann widdecombe . office minister, ann widdecombe. and in the last word, prince harry pays the ultimate price and misses remembrance sunday we'll get reaction live in the studio from fearless royal journalist and harry biographer angela levin, who has harsh words for the prince. expect more than a few royal truth bombs . plus, tomorrow's bombs. plus, tomorrow's newspaper , front pages and live newspaper, front pages and live reaction in the studio from my top pundits. very excited tonight. neil hamilton . goodness tonight. neil hamilton. goodness gracious, linda jubilee and simon danczuk. gracious, linda jubilee and simon danczuk . that's what i simon danczuk. that's what i call pedigree. so a packed hour, lots to get through my take at ten is on the way and it's a very important one. so don't miss it. see you .