Best of the Program | Guests: Rory Sutherland & Dr. Gad Saad | 5/15/19

We have a great podcast for you today.

Unfortunately, it starts off in the wrong direction.

Fred from the DNC calls to relaunch Betto's campaign.

Then we talk a little bit about fetus.

We have Scott Palmer on.

If you listened to yesterday's podcast, Stu told a story about this woman bartender that is facing up to a year in jail, and she's a hero.

We talked to her attorney today.

He agrees with us.

He doesn't think it's actually going to get to court.

We also talked to a really brilliant marketing mind, Rory Sutherland, from England.

He is the author of a new book called Alchemy, where he talks about

how do you get people to drink something like Red Bull that tastes like dog crap.

I haven't eaten dog crap, but I'm guessing dog crap might even taste better than

Red Bull.

We talked to him and then right into Gad Saad, another evolutionary scientist on marketing.

And Gad, we spend an hour with, and you don't want to miss a second of it.

All on today's podcast.

You're listening to the best of the Blenbeck program.

It's that time to talk to you a little bit about home title lock.

Now,

have you secured your home?

Pat and Stu and I believe in this so much.

Each of us have done this privately.

Just we each went, really?

And have done it because we have seen how easy it is.

They did it to each of us.

And when they're standing there with your title, you're like, whoa, way,

way, hold it.

It's amazingly easy to steal your home and then borrow against it, and then you lose your home.

It's happening.

It's the fastest growing crime, they say.

It's an epidemic in New York City.

Don't let

cyber thieves steal your home.

Go to hometitalock.com.

These are the people that can protect it.

You'll get a $100 value of a report.

It's a free title scan to make sure it hasn't already happened to you.

If you have parents, I would highly recommend that you did this for your parents as well.

It's home titlelock.com.

It's pennies a day.

Home titlelock.com.

Nobody else does this.

Just this company.

No insurance, no banks, just home titlelock.com.

Do it now.

Home titlelock.com.

Why do I have to?

I'm sorry.

Hang on just a sec.

Who the hell is Fred?

Glenn?

Hello.

Hi, how are you doing?

It's Fred with Costrap.

This guy.

I'm so glad you had me out again.

No,

I'm the head of the Republican Outreach for the DNC, and I am really excited to tell you about some of our fabulous candidates.

We've got so many of them, and your audience is just going to love them.

Okay,

I don't think so.

Fred, you were on last week or earlier this week, and

you were pitching, who was it?

Elizabeth Warren.

We're talking about Elizabeth Warren.

She's fantastic, but I can understand how we've had some negative feedback from

our recommendation of Elizabeth Ward from your audience.

And I am totally with them.

I'm a lifelong Republican myself.

Just switched.

You loved her.

Well, yeah, but there were some interesting points that your audience brought up.

And I'm not here to talk about Elizabeth today.

We had

a little bit of a backlash from last time, but I want to tell you about someone who you're really going to love.

Oh, my goodness, you are going to love this candidate today.

Who is it?

His name is Robert Francis O'Rourke.

Now, this guy, first of all, a Texan.

You want to say Texan.

You look at this guy and you just say, wow.

I mean, how big is that belt buckle?

That's the first thing you think of when you think of Robert Francis O'Rourke.

No, first of all,

you're the first Democrat I've ever heard call him anything but Betto,

and he's definitely not a Texan.

I mean, he doesn't have any of the traits of Texas.

I don't understand why people think this.

He's a real misconception this would gladly.

And I'm glad you brought it up so we can talk about it because your audience is really going to love this guy.

Okay, first of all, it's not Betto.

His name is not Betto.

His name's Bob.

You can call him Robert if you want to be horrible about it.

You call him Bob.

But he's got all the things Republicans want in a candidate.

Number one, he's white.

And I know that's a huge thing your audience demands in a candidate.

You must have someone who's white.

No, we don't.

That's not true.

It's absolutely, I know what you're saying.

And wink, wink, I'm with you on this one.

So

he lost to Ted Cruz.

Here's the thing,

Ted Cruz.

I mean, you know, Cruz,

you know what I'm saying?

You could tell what he is, right?

Your audience is going to love this type of analysis, I know.

That's why I'm giving it to you.

Okay, so secondly, first of all, he's white.

So I know your audience will love him.

Number two, he's a man.

None of these emotions and periods and all this other stuff that's going on with these women.

Am I right?

Okay, so that's number two.

Number three, he's rich.

It's not one of these poor people.

He's not one of these people who middle class.

I want someone who's really super rich.

And number four, your audience is going to really appreciate this one.

He did absolutely nothing for his money.

He's inherited it.

He's getting it from his wife or whatever.

This is a guy who really is going to connect with your audience.

Have you heard his music yet?

He's a musician, a wonderful musician.

Music.

I mean, horrible.

The whitest music you can possibly imagine.

Betto?

I mean, come on.

This guy,

he is about to...

Is this part of the reintroduction of

Bob Francis?

There was a directive that went out for me to give you a call today.

This guy, I mean, his music basically makes Barry Meadow look like Jimi Hendrix.

That's basically where his music lines up.

And here's the big thing, Mr.

Beck, and I'm a huge fan, a lifelong Republican, been listening to you for years since you came on the air in 2013.

And I am a huge supporter of yours.

But the problem with Betto is people think he's Hispanic because people are calling him Betto.

Here's the backstory.

I have not told anyone this, but I'm going to tell you because I'm a lifelong fan.

Right.

Since, what was it, 2016?

No,

2000.

Betto's nickname came not from

his El Paso upbringing.

The nickname came from a country club servant.

And this country club servant could not say Robert because he was one of these people from wherever those regions are down there below that border fence that we need, right?

And I'm with you, by the way.

We really need that.

So, but when he was called Benno, Bob Franco Rourke immediately had the worker fired.

He had him deported.

He had his family dog executed.

These are the sorts of things that Benno will do for this country.

I mean, Robert will do for this country.

Why did he go with Benno for so long?

Oh, well, that was just a media.

I mean, fake news.

Am I right?

Am I right?

And he's going to be sporting not the green New Deal, but the white New Deal.

So I know your hood-wearing Neanderthals and your audience are absolutely going to love it.

Thanks so much for having me on.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

The best of the Glenn Beck program.

Like listening to this podcast?

If you're not a subscriber, become one now on iTunes.

And while you're there, do us a favor and rate the show.

You know,

I want to go to Rashida Tlaib

blaming racist idiots for criticizing her Holocaust remarks she was on with Seth, with Seth Myers.

Listen to this.

Some have criticized the use of a calming feeling.

You have said that it was taken out of context.

I want to give you a chance to provide some context.

Yeah, and you know, so for folks that don't

know, I mean, my grandmother, my living grandmother, my mom's mom, lives in the West Bank and occupied territories of Palestine.

And what's incredibly, you know, the tragedy of the Holocaust, I mean, the reason why Israel was created was to create a safe haven for Jews around the world.

And there is something like, in many ways, beautiful about that.

My ancestors, many had died or had to give up their livelihood, their human dignity, to provide a safe haven for Jews in our world.

And that is something that I wanted to recognize and kind of honor in some sort of way.

But I also think it's important because I want Palestine people also to find some sort of, you know, light in this kind of what's happening.

But also,

you know, in the end, I said, I want all of us to feel safe.

All of us deserve human dignity.

No matter our backgrounds, no matter our ethnicity, no matter even our political opinions, we all deserve that kind of equality and justice.

And, you know, for me, I wanted to uplift that and bring that to light.

And it was unfortunate.

You know, I got a text message from a friend who's like, hey, next time, you know, really clarify, maybe talk like a fourth grader because maybe the racist idiots would understand you better um

so it's just you know it's everyone else's fault again

this is the best of the glenn beck program

I have got to speak my mind on this as Stu did yesterday.

This is grave injustice as I see this.

We wanted to get Lindsey Glass's attorney, Scott Palmer, on to see if he could explain what the heck is happening with Lindsey Glass and why she's possibly going to go to jail for a year

for something that even the police say you saved lives.

Welcome to the program, Scott Palmer.

Thank you.

Nice to be on.

Thank you.

So

can can you tell me the story?

What are we missing in this story?

Why are they pursuing this?

I have no idea.

Some cases should be prosecuted, and some are just plain, should never be.

The idea that this case should be the legacy of this horrible tragedy, this is what we're talking about now, rather than the mental health and the domestic abuse and the fact that this is a premeditated

heinous crime that was going to happen regardless of where this man was drinking or not drinking.

It just just is an insult to the actual memories of these seven people that were killed.

A couple things that I wanted to make sure that we were clear on.

She did not know he was drunk.

She served him alcohol, as you said, over a four-hour period of time.

But

the idea that she understood he was intoxicated is that's the fact question.

That's the big issue.

That's something we're going to fight.

She did understand and appreciate he was acting strangely.

Right.

And she knew him in some way or another.

He was a regular there, but she served two hard liquor drinks and two beers over a four-hour period.

I mean, your body, your body will...

It must been a drink an hour is what your body works through.

Your body will work through that.

How is she even responsible at all?

Well, she's not.

And that's why, I mean, the law is, and I heard your intro in the dram shop area where you overserve somebody and they get in a wreck, an accident.

Okay, and

there's liability under the civil law.

And the bar was sued by the lawyers that represented the families.

And I do those types of cases as well.

And I got to be honest with you, if they came to me with the theory that the bar is responsible for the death of these people when you've got a massive proximate cause issue.

big i mean you got an intentional act that was

planned premeditated for probably weeks he had an armory in his apartment of thousands and thousands of rounds and guns, and he had been plotting this apparently for a while.

But to put liability on the bar or the bartender for what he did is just, I can see why you're angry and why you're doing the story and this, why the world has been attracted to the story.

It doesn't make any sense to prosecute her.

There's no justice here.

There's no justice being done on this.

No, I completely agree with you.

Is it all true that she left the bar?

First, she tried to stop him, right?

Before leaving.

Before he left, she tried to stop him.

Well, they had a conversation.

They went outside, and she's like, what's going on?

You're acting strange.

And he was very veiled in what he was saying.

And she was asking, is this about Meredith, which is his ex-soon-to-be-ex-wife?

And he's, no, it has nothing to do with her.

And so he lied, and apparently he's a master manipulator, according to his ex-mother-in-law.

And he's a very adept drunk, which means he is able to mask his intoxication and fool people into serving him, which is exactly what happened here.

So she just got a bad vibe from him, and he ends up believing,

and she just did not feel right.

So she allegedly leaves the bar.

Who leaves their work?

Nobody.

I think,

honestly, Scott, I think Lindsay is a hero.

I really do.

She did something extraordinary.

She did.

And she left the bar.

Now, I understand that the house that he went to was his ex-wife's house.

And she had moved on.

And Lindsay thought that this Spencer had moved on, too.

They had conversations.

They were friendly.

They were best friends.

But Lindsay was supposed to be at the bar.

I met at the house that night.

There was a Cowboy.

I think they were playing the Falcons.

It was the first game of the year in 17.

But she was working.

She had a bar full of people, eight to ten people with the video.

I haven't seen the video yet.

And she's paying attention to a lot of folks, including him, but not enough meaningful time to observe him, his walk, his, you know, and that's what a lot of the

problem caused after

talking about how he was walking and his mannerisms.

But

he's a bartender on a sports night.

Good heavens.

This is ridiculous.

And she does call her bar manager, and then they called the owner.

And, you know, there were some text messages that they quoted saying that, you know, she thought he was crazy or something and maybe he was crazy he was about to commit mass murder that nobody knew but she leaves the bar literally leaves the bar and has a customer man and not serve anybody's like just hold the fort i've got to go extraordinary move on her part drives down with her co-bartender who wasn't working that night came in off the off the clock and she goes to the uh the home of meredith and she sees this vehicle spencer's vehicle behind like in the alleyway we have alleyways in Texas.

And she freaks out and calls 911 immediately, just has this premonition that something bad has happened.

Why is he here?

He's not supposed to be here.

What's going on?

And she links up his bizarre behavior, calls 911, and they tell her to leave, get out of the way.

And then eight minutes later, seven people are dead.

But if she hadn't called 911, the SWAT team had not been able to be out there when they did.

More people would have been dead.

And if I'm not mistaken, Scott, the other worker that she called initially wound up flagging down an officer as well in this process.

So they tried to contact police at least twice during this situation.

That's new information.

I have not heard that one, but that doesn't make it certainly stands to reason that they were both in the moment and they were looking for help.

They're just fearing the worst, not knowing what he was going to do.

Did he even know?

Who is the prosecuting attorney?

What is he thinking?

What was she supposed to do?

She did more more than anyone else would have done.

So here's the rub on this.

The Plano Police Department, not TABC from what I understand, the Plano Police Department issued this warrant.

They typed up an affidavit, three pages, and went and saw a municipal court judge who has power to issue a warrant.

And they did this, I believe, unbeknownst and without conferring with the Collins County District Attorney's Office.

How's that happening?

Not normal.

Well, and you have to understand, there there was an officer involved shooting.

They shot and killed Spencer Haidt shortly after he murdered these people.

So whenever you have an officer involved shooting, there's an usually a grand jury is convened and then there's an inquiry.

And of course, the officer has to go to the grand jury and be to be no-billed.

And that's what happened.

So there was a whole involved, a huge involved investigation from the Plano Police Department.

Maybe the Texas Rangers were involved.

And so all of that happened in 17 and 18.

So all of this, all the evidence, everything that was presented to the grand jury was examined by multiple investigators.

And Lindsay was cooperative during this entire time.

Did the Plano police not commend her that night and say, if it wasn't for you, there would have been more dead?

That's my understanding, that they commended her.

They continued to commend her and understood that she was having massive PTSD.

I believe they referred her to a therapist that is part of a government grant that is, you know, that is touches and concerns the, you know, these victims of family violence and things of that nature.

So she's been in therapy.

They know this.

They're aware of everything.

And they do this on April 8th, the very day that the civil lawsuit was dismissed voluntarily by the Plain of Attorneys.

Last question for you, because I know you've got to run.

In reading your history,

you have a lot of really positive results for your clients,

but you are also known as

entering into plea negotiations.

You're not going to plead this, are you?

I plan on never having this case darken the courthouse door.

This case has not been filed.

I'm a trial lawyer.

I go to trial when necessary, of course.

We plead cases when it's the right thing to do.

Correct, I understand that.

So, no,

if this gets filed, which i'm we are working with the da's office to to encourage them not to file this case to not accept the case from the plano police department that's the first step if it does get accepted which i'll be surprised if they do accept it after the uproar uh that's been you know and you're you're you're the prevailing attitude across this country in the world i'm getting emails from all over the world in support of her uh is don't prosecute her so hopefully the collincounty district attorney's office is listening and i'm gonna my job and my associate's job is to to encourage them to not take the case.

If the case is taken, we will go to trial.

Scott, I tell you,

Stu and I take this one personally.

We moved to Texas because there is common sense.

There is no common sense in prosecuting this woman.

She should be viewed, I think, as a hero.

And if you will keep us up to date, anything we can do to help, we will.

This is wrong.

This is absolutely wrong.

I agree with you 100%.

We will keep you up to date and hopefully give you some good news that the case has been refused.

We'll let you know.

Great.

Thank you very much, Scott.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn.

And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast.

There is, there's a book out, new book, called Alchemy, The Dark Art and Curious Science of Creating Magic in Brands, Business, and Life.

This has,

to me, I'm going on vacation in a couple of days.

This is a book I'm going to be reading on vacation

because

it talks about how we are missing

how people are feeling.

And, I mean, how do you get somebody to drink Red Bull when it's horrible?

I mean, it's horrible.

I've had one, and Stu gave it to me, and it made me feel like crap.

It doesn't taste good.

It doesn't taste good.

It's awful.

It's almost the charm of it in some weird way.

How?

I don't know.

Because there's other competitors.

Like, the new Monster Rain stuff is really good.

It tastes delicious.

So, Rory Sutherland is

an ad man.

He writes the Spectators Wikiman column.

He also presents for the BBC Radio 4

in England.

His TED Talks have

like 7 million views, and he is the author of Alchemy, and we welcome him to the program.

Hi, Rory.

How are you?

Very good to be on.

Thank you very much.

You bet.

I'm fascinated by

what you've found and where we're headed.

Give me some of the highlights here.

First, let's start with Red Bull.

How do you get people to drink Red Bull when it tastes like garbage?

Well, this is the strange thing.

You see, if you sat down

in a room with a lot of completely rational people and you said, we want a drink to compete with Coca-Cola, the first thing they'd say is, okay, your new drink has to taste nicer than Coke.

It's got to cost less than Coke, and it should come in a really big can, so people get great value for money.

And yet, weirdly, the most successful competitor for Coke in financial terms has probably been this very expensive drink in a tiny can that tastes kind of horrible.

Not kind of.

I drink it myself.

I mean I ought to say this quite clearly.

I really quite enjoy it.

And the reason is, of course, that I think everything in human perception is affected not just by reality, but by context.

And so if your promise is that your drink has kind of medicinal or psychoactive powers, the fact that it tastes weird isn't a disadvantage.

It's actually a kind of proof point.

An interesting case, by the way, is that Diet Coke, as distinct from Coke Zero, Diet Coke is deliberately made to taste a little bit more bitter than ordinary Coke, simply because if there isn't a small mental trade-off, we don't believe it's a diet drink.

So does this,

were these things planned?

For instance,

did the people at Red Bull,

did they

instinctively know this or scientifically know this, that they had to make it taste like dog crap?

Interesting.

I think an awful lot of successes in capitalism are partly accidental.

Right.

So, you know, I've always asked the question, you probably know that candy is put next to the till in

shops because the argument is that children pester their parents to buy it.

Correct.

My hunch is that originally this didn't happen to plan.

All that happened is people noticed that if you had candy next to the till, you sold more candy.

And it's a kind of evolutionary process in capitalism, I think, which is much more of free market

capitalism than we think is a process of discovering what it is people want.

We ourselves don't fully know.

We don't have introspective access to all of our brains and all of our preferences.

And so a very large part, I think, of consumer capitalism is a process of experimentation and selection, a kind of Darwinian thing.

And I think

one example I find find fascinating is that Google, now let's be absolutely honest here, Google is a very good search engine.

I'm not claiming that it's anything other than that.

It, however, did a very clever psychological trick in the sense that at the time, everybody else was trying to be a portal.

They put sports scores, they put weather information, they put breaking news, and Google just had a search bar and two buttons.

Right.

Now, actually, psychologically, that's very astute, because there's a known thing in psychology called the jack of all trades heuristic, which is that we tend to think that something that only does one thing is going to be better at it than something that does multiple things.

You know,

I've often thought, Rory, that that page also lends Google credibility because you're not associating it with anything other than information that you're looking for.

So I never see an ad for something that I like or don't like.

I never see a news story that I like or don't like.

It seems neutral, even though it's not.

I agree with you.

I think the very simplicity of the thing is psychologically brilliant.

However, I think the reason for its simplicity isn't intentional.

It was simply that Larry Page at the time wasn't very good at coding HTML, and it was kind of the best to do.

So quite often I think what happens, Dyson is an interesting case in terms of the vacuum cleaner.

I think there that in terms of what makes a successful successful innovation, we probably pay too much credit to technology and too little to psychology.

In the case of Dyson, I think the magic comes from the fact that the thing is transparent and you can actually see the dirt that you're removing from your floor.

In the case of Uber, I think the brilliant psychological insight is simply that waiting for a cab,

waiting for a taxi, is inordinately less frustrating if you can see where it is.

And you know, I had no idea that this came from a James Bond film or somebody watching it.

Can you explain the story of how this came about?

No, so one of the co-founders of Uber, who I think was Canadian, one afternoon was watching Goldfinger.

And

in Goldfinger, if you remember it, there's this fascinating moment where Bond, I think, is tracking him through the Swiss Alps.

Goldfinger is in a Rolls-Royce, which is made of gold, in fact, which is how he's smuggling gold out of the country.

And Bond has to track him, and there's a little map, a moving map, in the face here of his Aston Martin DB6.

And on the map is a dot which enables him to follow Goldfinger's car while remaining out of sight.

And the fascinating thing there is that this guy, this Canadian guy watching this something like 10 years ago, looked at that and said, that's how it should work when you order a taxi.

Wow, that's brilliant.

A multi-billion dollar decision there.

Absolutely.

You make the case that we don't value things.

We are a society of things.

And you say we don't value things.

We value their meaning.

Yes,

I think that's absolutely true, which is that economics is a rather barren, dismal discipline because it tries to treat everything as if it's a commodity.

It assumes we know exactly what we want, how much value we attach to it.

It assumes that we're making decisions in a world of complete certainty.

Now, in truth,

in between what something is

and how we perceive it,

there is a whole lot of noise going on.

There's the context in which we perceive it.

Something can seem expensive or cheap, by the way, entirely dependent on what you compare it to.

There's a famous example that Rolls-Royce Maserati stopped exhibiting their cars so heavily at car shows because a $400,000 car looks insanely expensive at a car show.

If you exhibit those cars at yacht and aircraft shows, everything changes.

If you've been looking at Learjets all afternoon, a $400,000 car is effectively an impulse buy.

It's the candy.

It's the candy of the cash register.

On your way out, you say, I'll have a couple of those while I'm here.

And so

I will also cite Nespresso as an example of this.

It's quite an expensive coffee if you compare it to ground coffee.

It's a cheap coffee if you compare it to Starbucks.

So, Rory,

I was

against Donald Trump during the election.

And I'm a conservative

in radio here and television in America.

But I was against him and I could not understand how my audience was flocking to him until after the election.

And I started asking the question that I would have asked any of my friends who were acting, you know, erratically and saying, I believe in this, but then I'm going to go vote for this.

And I started asking the question, what's happening in your life?

Then I began to understand

how people felt.

And I know facts don't care about feelings, but feelings, especially now in politics, are playing the critical role.

It's how,

because people on both sides, and I think all over Europe and in England with Brexit, there are those people in Brexit that are racist, but there are also those who feel like they've been left behind, not listened to, they're losing their culture,

and they don't agree with what's going on, but nobody's listening to them.

And I don't care what side you're on, but that is a big motivator, I think, all around the world right now, are these people who feel nobody's listening to me.

I don't matter.

And I think actually

that that feeling of detachment,

what you might call the technocratic elites, to use the standard term, they are to blame for that happening.

Yes.

Yes.

And it's partly the problem lies not necessarily in them being technocratic or in being an elite.

It's that they're all technocratic in the same way.

And they're people who are very similar in terms of their education, quite often similar in terms of their background.

And their capacity to understand someone whose life experience is different from their own seems to me extraordinarily bad.

I mean, add to that, I think, the fact that Trump is in many ways a persuasive genius.

I think he's an instinctive...

You might expect this in the real estate industry, but he's an instinctive salesman of a remarkable kind.

If you take something like, we're going to build a wall, that's concretization.

In other words, what you say is you actually take what you're aiming for and you literally make it concrete in this case.

Now, if Hillary wanted to actually respond to people's concerns over immigration, she'd say something like, we're going to hold constructive tripartite discussions with our Mexican and Canadian allies.

Not the same thing.

So his ability, I think, to connect, ironically, for someone who's a billionaire with a private jet,

his ability to connect with a far wider tranche of people than Hillary could, I think is remarkable and fascinating.

I'm not entirely in favor of him either, although I'm probably more forgiving than most Europeans are.

I also do welcome the fact that he's from a slightly different mental mold, at least, because I do think the political caste essentially, certainly on a large number of sort of both moral and economic questions, they've come to all think the same way.

And I think you're exactly right.

And I've begun to understand him and even appreciate some of the things that he does.

I would love to have you back, Rory.

Do you ever come to the United States?

Quite frequently, as often as I can.

I would love to sit down and talk to you because I'm very concerned.

I'm a, I guess, an anti-fan in some ways of Edward Bernays.

And

we are entering a time now of

these corporations, you know, for instance, Amazon,

they are so driven on data, they say that when they can predict us at 95%, they're going to stop being really

a catalog online and more of just a delivery service.

They're just going to be delivering stuff to us before we even order it.

You look at

Amazon movements

preemptively send us things

on occasion, we'll send it back.

So we're entering this time between facebook google amazon where i'm not sure

that

who's leading who advertising is going to change dramatically

and it concerns me and i'd love to have a conversation with you would you would you come back i also think there's real scope for concern because what we tend to think of as impartial such as choosing what to buy online or for example an algorithm online because it's numerical and digital we tend to see it as being impartial and objective.

Actually, all those things carry with them the prejudices of the people who the unconscious prejudices in many cases of the people who design them.

We find it quite amusing in the UK because if you take Google navigation, it gives you an option of traveling somewhere by public transport, or you can make the same journey by car.

Now in Europe, if you live just outside London, the logical way to get to central London is you drive to a nearby railway station and and then take the train into London.

Google can't understand this because it's too Californian to understand the concept of driving somewhere and then catching a train.

Right.

So in lots and lots of cases, the way in which things are designed carry with them a lot of unconscious assumptions about what a good decision is.

And it may not be true.

Rory,

I've got to let you go, but I really thank you, and I hope that we can spend some more time together because I think you are brilliant and on the cutting edge of the future and the consequences and what's happening right now.

Rory Sutherland and the name of the book is Alchemy.

This

is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hello, doctor.

How are you?

Well, I'm pretty good.

I'm a little offended that you've never responded back to me.

How are you, doctor?

How are you, doctor?

How are you, doctor?

Thank you very much.

Gad, we just had Rory Sutherland on.

Do you know who he is?

He wrote the book.

I do.

What do you think of him?

I mean, I don't know much of his work.

I know of some friends who speak very highly of him.

I think we follow each other on social media, but I couldn't say more than that, to be honest with you.

Okay, he's got a new book out called Alchemy.

And we were kind of talking about

way that feelings are playing such a role now

in marketing and

how I didn't understand how people were voting for Donald Trump until I said, what's happening in your life?

And then

I realized

why people were so

strongly behind him.

They felt that they weren't being heard.

Nobody was listening.

The political ruling class was doing the same thing over and over.

They'll tell you one thing, do another.

He was cut from a different cloth.

They knew that he was piggish,

but

they just wanted somebody that would break up this system.

And they thought he could do it.

And he was a wise enough businessman that he wouldn't destroy the country.

That was eye-opening to me.

I mean,

I think you're right on that, of course, feelings matter when it comes to marketing products, marketing politicians.

I think the danger is when we,

people think that feelings and thinking are, if you like, antithetical to one another.

And that's not true.

We're both a thinking animal and a feeling animal.

What matters is that you apply the correct system in the proper, you know, for the proper decision.

So, for example, if I am selling perfumes, then I need to trigger your hedonic emotional system.

I mean, I don't sell you a perfume by telling you, here's what Harvard physiologists think of this chemical compound.

I need to sell you fantasy, so I show you a gorgeous girl on a horse with her hair flowing.

On the other hand, if I'm trying to sell you mutual funds, then I need to engage your cognitive system.

So, it's not so much that we are either feelers or thinkers, it's that we need to apply the right system in the right condition.

But wait a minute, if you're selling me mutual funds,

I would still contend, because I think this is why conservatives lose the battle.

I contend that the fastest way to a person's brain is through their heart.

And so you paint a picture of what

people want to be, what they want to do, what they want their life to be like, and then show them the facts that back up this is how we do it.

Fair enough.

I mean, all that you're saying is that you could never either have a strictly cognitive appeal, marketing appeal, or a strictly affective appeal.

And I certainly would concede that point.

And I think that's true.

I mean, all the way to brain surgery.

I mean,

my daughter is, we're looking at having brain surgery for her, and she's been having testing, you know, like crazy over the last year.

And

while I want a doctor to be able to explain it and really be precise on exactly what he's going to do, And

I need the facts on exactly what's happening.

I also want to feel from him that he is compassionate and understands this is my daughter.

Absolutely.

Absolutely.

Speaking of physicians, now in Quebec,

we are thinking of changing the medical school curriculum to no longer include grading because too many of the students are getting high stress.

So, I really want a physician who is handling

life or death decisions to be sufficiently weak that they can't handle an A or a B grade.

I mean, imagine how much you're infantilizing people when even physicians now or physicians to be can no longer handle the indignity of being graded.

It's insane.

I saw a report about medical school where people said that there were

too many white people and too many uh

men in it or something i can't remember and they said we have to change that and i'm like no let's let's just get the qualified people i don't care what color they are i want the most qualified person to be performing surgery

so this is what i call by the way so there's this whole movement of diversity inclusion and equity so i've taken the three letters and created the ac acronym die it's the die religion, right?

Chaird professorships are now assigned as a function of whether you adhere to the DAI theology or not.

I mean, imagine, right?

The highest level of excellence in academia is no longer determined by your accomplishments.

It's determined by your sexual orientation, whether you ovulate or not, your skin color.

It's absolutely insane.

And I truly wonder when it is that most academics are going to have the testicular fortitude to wake up and start speaking out against this.

Well, I will tell you, I think you guys in Canada are way ahead of us.

I mean, I don't, I don't, honestly, I don't know what it is in Canada.

Maybe it's because you guys have to fight every step of the way and we have this, you know, strange belief that our Constitution will protect us and our Bill of Rights, but it's not going to protect us because we're not standing up for it.

But Canada, the academics in Canada seem to be

being very vocal.

Well, certainly the few Canadian academics who are at the forefront of it, yes, you're right.

But what I would love to see is the silent majority, right?

I mean, as I've often recounted,

I get innumerable emails from fellow professors, not just Canadians, from all over the world, saying, hey, I support you.

I really support you.

Thank you for being an academic hero.

But please, please don't share publicly that I support you.

Well, therein lies the problem, right?

I mean, if you can't even have the courage to simply say that you support the guy who's fighting for your rights, then we really have sunk into an abyss of cowardice that's difficult to come out of.

I just gave a speech last night to a Jewish and Christian organization.

It was the anniversary of the establishment of Israel yesterday.

And

little did I know, a woman who survived the Holocaust was in the audience, and I was talking about how

these things happen.

And

they don't come as monsters.

They come

first, you know, kind of wrapped in goodness and justice and everything else.

And they start with political correctness.

And they train you not to feel comfortable to speak out until you are cowering behind your curtains in your front room.

And you know, if I open up those curtains, they'll kill me.

If you don't speak out when it's early,

you're not going to have the fortitude to

do anything later.

And we're in this point, we're at this flex point now where it's about to go really dark, I think.

And if we don't start standing up now, I don't think we're going to make it.

The Niemolar poem becomes true.

I completely agree with you.

I just, in preparation of our chat, since I thought that we might be talking about anti-Semitism, I pulled out some stats which I discussed in my forthcoming book.

So this is from a Pew Research Center survey.

It's an unbiased organization, nonpartisan.

They do these very exhaustive global surveys.

Opinion of Jews in select countries.

Here are the stats for unfavorable opinions of Jews.

I'll just list four or five countries.

You have some stats from around the world.

Yeah, I'll just give you two quick stats.

So one is from Pew Research Center.

here are the percentages of people polled in egypt jordan lebanon and the palestinian territory so the neighbors of israel in terms of their unfavorability scores towards the jews 95 97 98 and 97 i mean let that sink in 98 percent of people polled in my home country of Lebanon hate the Jews.

What a surprise that we had to leave Lebanon in 1975.

Wait, wait, wait.

So when you have somebody like Rashida Tlaib come out and say that her grandmother lost her land and many Palestinians lost their lives

so the Jews could have a homeland.

How do you process that?

This is what I call, I don't know if we discussed this last time, but we chatted when I came down to Dallas.

This is what I call the collective Munchausen syndrome, right?

It's where you gain power by always feigning injury, right?

Or in this case, you need to be the victim, right?

So she needs to always view the Palestinians as the victims.

And so she constructs a story now where she still remains, or her ancestors remain, the victims in the grand narrative.

And it's delusional.

It is absolutely

not anywhere close to actual history and delusional.

Well, and

I'll give you a personal anecdote.

So we were obviously forced to leave Lebanon at the start of the

1975 Lebanese civil war.

After we left, my parents kept returning to Lebanon until 1980 when they were kidnapped by Fatah, a Palestinian

terror group.

And they found out that our own home in Lebanon has now been taken over by Palestinian refugees.

I don't construct today a narrative that, you know, adheres to my

political views.

I don't hold any ill will towards all Palestinians because this happened.

Just be truthful.

But she's incapable of being truthful because she always has to create the narrative of the Palestinians are the victims and the evil Jews are the oppressors.

You're an atheist, Cad.

I am.

Do you believe in evil?

I do.

I do.

Now, I don't think that one needs to couch the language of, you know,

the existence of evil in a theological construct.

People are born with the random combination of genes that constitute originally their parents.

And sometimes people are born tall or short or with a blue dot on their face or without a blue dot on their face.

And similarly, through random mutation, some people are born.

For example, serial killers are born without the capacity to feel empathy.

That's not rooted in a theological construct.

It's just the reality of the random combination of genes.

So is that

there's a I believe there is a force of evil.

And, you know, I don't have to take it to Satan or anything like that.

I can just take it to, you know, you had these really sick people like Hitler and Goebbels and everybody else.

They were really disturbed and

their force of will

became

infectious and it spread and that evil force that they had within them

caught a lot of people up into it that weren't necessarily evil.

They just kind of were swept up in it.

Right.

I mean, some of the most classic and best known experiments in psychology, so for example, the Milgram experiment, maybe you might know it, but if let me just kind of briefly mention it.

The Yale experiment.

Exactly, the Yale experiment.

Well, that came as a result of many of the, you know, foot soldiers, the Nazi foot soldiers, simply saying, hey, I'm not an evil guy.

I was just kind of I was caught up in the moment.

And so what Milgram wanted to do was test whether you know, there was there was truth to that, whether I can take completely normal people, put them in a condition where I force them to conform, and then they would do some truly horrifying things.

And as he found out, he could get people without them knowing that this was a made-up thing, he could get people to administer voltage to fellow students that would kill them simply through his authority.

Hey, you agreed to participate in this experiment, zap them.

And so you're right.

Not every single Nazi was an evil guy, but certainly the ones who orchestrated it were.

This is, it goes back to, and you probably remember this book.

I can't remember the name of it.

I'm looking for it on my iPad here.

The book about the soldiers in

Poland that were some of the best policemen in Poland, not evil, and how the Germans turned them into just a massive killing machine.

Right.

And how you do that.

And i have to tell you with with the anti-semitism that's going on with this new poll that we've talked about earlier this week where um

about 40 percent of the population looks at the other side as not human

20 of the democrats and 13 of the republicans say that uh we'd be better off if there was some sort of a mass killing of the other side we're headed towards some really frightening stuff.

The Blaze Radio Network

on demand.