I, um I work for Spence Could all about which is the newspaper.

One of the the second largest with daily circulation swim.

And then I asked sometimes on Twitter and Facebook if the Sally what kind of people you think I should interview and And your name has come up a lot.

I think you've heard this before.

So, uh and then recently I wrote a piece in Ah, in quick.

Let's ah, limit freedom in in Sweden.

And you shared It's on Twitter and Facebook.

So then I That's when I mailed you.

Because then I thought that perhaps now I have Ah, perhaps now you will respond, and I can get me into you.

Yeah, Well, cool app has really turned out to be quite the quite the platform man.

Yes, you know, I mean, it's it's I'm really I did an interview with Claire Lehman.

I interviewed her, uh, which I haven't released yet, But I will in the next probably two weeks, something like that.

But she's kidding it out of the park this fall.

As far as I'm concerned, it kind of reminds me of what magazine like car Harper's used to be or at the Atlantic before or mainstream journalism collapsed virtually completely and became so politicized.

So yeah, Quill, It's been really impressive.

I just as that it's friends stuff, something that, like a mother of two, are one.

Yeah, Ray earlier And just being fed up with the political correctness of her psychology department, I think it was.

And then she starts Quill it.

And now we're all, like sharing in her project from all over the world.

Yeah, Yeah, it's amazing.

A It's really amazing.

And she she has really good editorial sense.

She must be really smart That that girl Yeah, I would say so too.

Ah, but, um, I'll try.

I don't know if you remember, I'll just begin by asking about the Sweden Sweden case on.

I don't know if you remember what the article was about, but I wrote about Ah, Eric, bring more is a professor at the political science Department.

Andi was forced to include Judit buffalo, but you did butler on this literally.

Oh, yeah, right.

Judith Butler.

Yeah, Yeah, Korea.

Great.

And the course is about more than society and its and its critics.

So it's been amazing basically about the reactionary forces and left wing extremist forces during the turn of the last century.

So in the early 20th century and blade 8/19 century And then you leave Butler, Um, actually, one of the course, not Eric, but his, um, the other, his teaching system interviewed a year with butter.

And she said that she disagreed with the method s o.

She agreed with the professors that deluded to thought that the academic freedom was more important than being forced to teach about feminist authors and gender science.

So she was actually on the other.

Gender science except Lor is by no means a scientist or even a credible academic.

As far as I'm concerned, I think she's a straight out ideologue.

And the fact that anybody would be forced while first of all, forced to include anything on their curriculum, I think, is absolutely reprehensible.

It's top down interference with academic freedom, and it's extraordinarily dangerous because once that um, president is established, then you open the door for political interference in the like like like organized political interference from outside the academy, and it'll collapse very rapidly under sir, we saw that happening in Germany and also in the Soviet Union.

It, like that, can happen so quickly that people can't can't.

It's almost impossible to believe.

Now we're in this weird situation where the same thing seems to be happening to a large degree within the academy itself.

And so and what to do about that is by no means obvious.

But But I don't think that allowing external control of any sort over the contents of the courses that professor teach professors teach is it's a very, very bad idea.

We they have a rule rule of thumb, they call it, but it's basically it's much more a rule than the ruble thumb.

But at least 40% of all the literature has to be written by women.

So if you're unbelievable, if you're holding a course, for example, about Borden Society and its create critics with a lot of primary literature from the turn of the century, then you run into a problem because women weren't s oh, uh, world.

A lot of women who were with respect them.

You have a so unbelievably I would say, resentful.

I really think that's the fundamental issue here to push a doc resentful and uninformed to push a doctrine like that.

Look, it's unbelievably widespread, so I'll give an example.

That's very that's very similar.

Our prime minister, Justin Trudeau, announced in 2015 that half the cabinet that he put together would be women, despite the fact that only approximately I think it was.

20 to 25% of the elected officials were female, and so what?

He basically admitted.

As far as I'm concerned, art was two things.

Number one.

He was incapable of judging people on their competence.

Because when you put together something like the Cabinet for a country, what you do is you find the most confident people, period.

Because it's so bizarre that it even has to be said, because it actually turns out that the Cabinet is important.

And so to me, all he did was default on his his central moral obligation to screen every single one of business members of parliament with exceeding care and to pick the most qualified people.

And his rationale was that it was 2000 and 15 you know so and we to reduce confidence, too.

Racial, ethnic, gender, identity, something like that is, and absolutely appalling move philosophically as well.

As far as I'm concerned to assume that diversity is somehow represented by group membership, there's no evidence for that.

There's absolutely no scientific evidence for that whatsoever.

In fact, the scientific evidence suggests quite the contrary, which is that there's more variability within groups than there is between groups, which is actually an antidote to the central racist claim.

Right, because the central racist claim is there's more difference between groups.

Then there is difference within them.

And so, you know, you've seen one black person.

You've seen them all and well, well, this is, um, we actually having in Sweden, it's called.

I think the translation is, uh, and gender mainstreaming in English, but it's basically you have to include gender scientific perspectives into all this is happening within old Swedish universities right now.

Ah, so you have to include the this perspective off gender, gender, scientific, gender, scientific perspective in all parts of the university.

So it's not just literature lists, of course, is it's also the Who you gonna recruit the number and we have a goal in Sweden from the government.

This is all the government's doing.

Um, we have a goal that I think it's 40% of all the professors by 2020 should be women, right?

Which means that if you're a young man who's entering academia, that probability that you're gonna get a job zero Yeah, right.

And that, Yeah, the same thing's happening here.

So, for example, this our minister of science who, um, was one of the people, let's say selected because of Trudeau's insistence upon gender equity in his cabinet.

Um, you know, he could have pit a number of women that was proportionate to the number of women elected, like even that I wouldn't have agreed with, because I think he should have gone on straight confidence and taken on the heavy moral burden of trying to figure out what confidence meant.

But just But no, it had to be 50 50 because I guess that was You know, this is a very snide thing to say, but that seems to be at the level of arithmetic intelligence that he could manifest.

No, it's and and hurt.

One of his ministers are Minister of science, as we have this program called Count the Canada Research Chairs and the Canada Research Chairs were set up so that Canadian universities would have an additional amount of money to hire the most qualified people they possibly could for senior named chair positions.

And the idea was to attract international talent like high level.

Now, what has happened?

Because it wasn't very well designed.

This program was The Canadian universities mostly ended up poaching from each other, which was, you know, relatively counterproductive because it just elevated the salaries of the professor's, which maybe they deserved, rather than bringing in a lot of international talent.

But men were radically overrepresented in Canada research chairs.

Now the minister of science is very annoyed about this and thinks that that's a consequence of systemic, you know, misogyny or some some bloody thing failing to note entirely.

See if you look at scientific, productive ity.

It's very interesting, because and gender, the median professor, male and female, publish approximately the same amount.

So the typical.

But the the exceptional professors are almost all men, even though the typical male and female can't really be distinguished in academia.

If you take that tiny subset of hyper productive professors there, almost all male now, why that is's my suspicions, arts that is pretty straightforward.

I suspect that the reason it is because to be a hyper productive in any given field means you have to be absolutely single minded and obsessed about it as well as being very intelligent, conscientious.

So it's rare, right?

You have to be intelligent, say, 99th percentile, conscientious 95th percentile.

So that's hardly anybody right there.

And then you have to have the time available to do nothing whatsoever.

But concentrate on your work.

No family, no friends, nothing like that.

If you're gonna be at the very top of your profession because obviously you'll get out competed otherwise.

Now that's a lot harder for women because well, for obvious reasons, I mean so so the mere fact that most of these people were see, the other thing people don't understand is that people can, on average, be very similar, so their distributions.

But if you go way out onto the edges of the distribution, small differences in the middle can make massive differences out the edge.

And so, and that's the kind of phenomena you see where you are selecting the highest qualified people.

It's a it's an edge of the distribution phenomenon.

So here's an example.

This is really cool one.

So if you look at the overlap between male and female aggression, it's pretty high.

So if you randomly select a man and a woman from the general population and you bet that the woman was the more aggressive of the two, you'd be right 40% of the time, which is actually pretty often so.

But if you go way the hell out to where?

Let's say you only imprisoned the one in 100 most aggressive people.

They're all men.

Yeah, even though on average, you know it's 60 40.

Go out to the 99th percentile.

It's all men, which is why almost all the people in prisoner men no eso people.

Well, it's yeah, what you're describing in Sweden.

That's the death of the university's.

It's another.

It's another sign of, like the university's air killing themselves.

They're hiring adjunct professors and not faculty members like, I think it's up to 70% in some American universities.

They have no salary, no power, no autonomy, no job security, nothing.

It's it's it's You know, some of these adjuncts teach four or five courses a year and make $25,000.

So it's read about one who lived in her car.

Yeah.

Okay, so they've jacked up tuition on recalling proletariat.

Yeah, exactly.

Well, that There you go.

You know, um, they've jacked up to issue a working gold Marxist on you.

They've jacked up tuition to the point where it's unsustainable.

They made it impossible for kids who rack up tuition debt to declare bankruptcy because they've taken that over the bankruptcy laws.

Now you can take away their driver's license if they don't pay their they're, ah, their tuition, their student loan bills.

So it's basically indentured servitude, right?

The administration has become completely top heavy.

The academy is completely infested by these terrible equity ideas that you're laying out.

I mean, it's and and the people who are in the radical leftist disciplines, which increasingly are spreading their influence out through the entire universities are tenured and won't be moved for 25 years.

So as far as I can tell, it's done, and I would I would like to ask you are you take about on gender science and all these like ethnic studies and throw theology because I was a sociology student back in 2004 and I was 22 years old.

And so a lot of these perspectives way were taught post moralism and queer queer feminism and old baldy things.

And it was I mean, I was just starting out with the student.

So But I must have been wired for me because he didn't.

I was very critical about it.

But But all those perspectives was was back then was fringe in Sweden.

So, like, um, like identity, politics or everything that's now in the mainstream was at the institution back then on the professor's.

They were They are the same.

I mean, they are now it's their their PhDs and most of students that are taking over the public discourse.

Eso, even though they lost a lot of debates back then and I still do.

But public debates, they're still teaching students Year of the year of the year.

Yeah, and when all the students I might ask you about that and we're like, oh, and also about your critique off younger, younger studies in Swedish.

It's called gender science, because we turn all this into science.

Yeah, so it's not even studies.

It's science here.

Yeah, that was a good move on on on the ideologues parts, that's for sure, Really smart.

So it's a 22 from the question, but yeah, well, I think, Well, I listed about seven things I think that are killing the university's.

I actually think that, like I've watched major institutions collapse on being privy to the manner in which that occurs, like what happens is that as the enterprise pathologize is, the good people leave the people who have other things that they could do.

They leave first, knows where the most productive and and talented people as soon as the most productive leave.

Then the bloody thing just spirals downhill.

Because what what's gonna happen?

You know, because the rule is is that within a certain discipline, whatever it happens to be, the square root of the number of people in the discipline produce half the productive work.

So if University has but say, 1000 professors, um, 30 of them produce half the publications right, which is staggering, right, it's staggering.

That's the Peredo distribution, our prices law, and so and those people are often have more opportunities than they know what to do with and so assume is, whatever they're doing becomes unstable.

It's like they go off and do other things, and then the Then the institution loses its most productive people, and that's it is done.