Könyvbemutató: "The Diversity Delusion" | Budapest Summit 2022.

[Music] for the third time i think good morning we're living we're living in a an age of revolution and we're not really understanding the fact as is true generally of most revolutions in which ordinary life for most people carries on sometimes for months and years before they realize that the society around them has completely changed one way we see the changes if we pay attention is of course the tearing down of statuaries of statues that's traditional in almost all changes of regime and of course it happened here in 1989 another is the way in which language becomes a battlefield and the battlefield in which words um we used to use regularly are now forbidden and words which we don't really understand and don't think make much sense become compulsory there has been an example recently in the european union but not just there it was also in some corporations in england and america in which a particular phrase became a taboo a phrase which we have used conventionally for a very long time i think it has therefore become what i would call a counter-revolutionary phrase and i'm indebted to um to rodrigo ballista here for um being the first to proclaim this as a counter-revolutionary phrase and that's why i begin i think for the fourth time this morning with the words ladies and gentlemen somebody was dismissed from as from his job as an announcer on a british railways train for using that phrase um it's now been there gathered rented taboo by the european union i don't think the phrase comrades is yet compulsory but we can see it coming in over the horizon and these things are very important now there are only one aspect the revolution that's taking place in our time and we're here to discuss that and other aspects this morning we're very fortunate in having one of the intellectual scouts of civilization on the platform and and um and that's heather mcdonald who is a distinguished american commentator and and and and author she is the author of the book which i will now hold up and some of you will have seen it which yes i'm holding it up the right way some of you will have seen it and um and read it and some of you are seeing it for the first time well i urge you to to um to go out and buy it i will say that we will be discussing about a lot about it this morning but there's always a great deal more in the book than there is in an hour and a half's discussion and i think you would all benefit greatly by the the wisdom of heather now um i will say a few words about her formal positions in uh she is a double a thomas w smith fellow at the manhattan institute a contributing editor of the city journal published by the manhattan institute and one of the three or four most important elements of the new conservative resistance she has covered the most sensitive topics and i mean also the particularly racially sensitive topics of crime and race she has done so courageously um but she has in my view nevis and she's therefore controversially but she's never put a foot wrong and that's something that's very unusual in in these cases that hasn't of course saved her from what's called being controversial um heather um i want to ask you uh a question um which is um i'm sorry oh which is um yeah uh about your book i think it would be helpful if we would begin if you would begin by giving us two of the three of the major themes of the book and and giving us an insight into your argument um but particularly when you've done that tell us whether this revolution is destined to be a universal one like the french and bolshevik revolutions or can it be successfully resisted um in countries for example this one which have so far been trying to escape it uh heather thank you so much thank you uh it's an honor and privilege again to be at the danube institute and mcc and thank you to my fellow panelists for trying to read my book i greatly i'm i'm honored to be here let me first just give a sense can you hear me is this okay of why i wrote this book it grew out of sorrow and rage sorrow to see the things that i loved the most dearly in life reduced to the inanities of somebody's gonads and melanin i was privileged to have been in college in the 1970s now that was the reign of deconstruction post-structuralism and i was sadly uh credulous enough to have absorbed it and become a a uncritical acolyte of jacques de ridan paul diman so i wasted a lot of time reading nonsensical high theory but the saving grace was identity politics had not yet hit the universities so while we read books with a very perverse point of view which was to look for those alleged uh junctures where meaning broke down and the and the book was self-referentially talking about its own impossibility and i don't expect you to understand what i'm saying because these were nonsensical ideas but nevertheless i got to read in my freshman year at yale chaucer spencer milton alexander pope william wordsworth coleridge wallace stevens without anyone thinking to complain about their race and their sex and now that seems like a prelab syrian age of innocence and and grandeur in the 1980s uh arose an obsession a narcissistic obsession with race and sex and the the idea became prevalent that one only read books in order to see one's own identity reflected and so as a female one should be reading female authors or as a black student one should be reading black authors the range of imaginative possibility was shrunk to a nullity it was all about replicating the self and the possibility of losing oneself in worlds that were far greater than anything one could possibly hope to experience in one's own petty life was eliminated uh and so i saw these student yahoos take over the university insist on replicating their own ignorance by canceling the greatest works of human imagination and civilization in favor of this petty self-aware involvement and so there was sorrow at seeing the thing that i loved the most being trashed and also rage that the faculty the people who have been given the greatest privilege that one can possibly imagine which is simply to pass on this civilization this inheritance to the next generation with gratitude and love and to to help students understand why they should be down on their knees in gratitude before these monuments of human expression they were silent they were either silent or they were complicitous they let the barbarian hordes trample the thing that it was their privilege to curate pass on and explicate so i started writing about the the destruction of the literary imagination and also the destruction of merit uh as a criterion of advance both within the university and of course outside and john mentions uh the very vexed and very taboo issue of race and this is hard to understand for a hungarian audience but and i'm not going to go into it in depth right now we can return to the topic but the the big problem in american society today i would argue is the enduring problem of racial disparities in achievement and in behavior and this has resulted in standards being torn down within academia within the law within corporations in order to achieve some semblance of racial proportionality in in faculties and whatnot and the only allowable explanation in the united states today for the fact that there are not 13 percent black engineers at google or facebook the only allowable explanation for the fact that maybe there's one or two percent at most black engineers is racism one may not talk about those behavioral and cultural disparities that result today in ongoing racial inequality the university is the primary engine of that taboo you are not allowed to offer an alternative explanation for ongoing racial disparities and what i am seeing across our culture in the united states today is every single institution is coming down because it either has a predominantly white past it comes out of europe so classical music its inheritance its tradition now is viewed as racist because bach beethoven schubert bartok kodai are white there were no blacks to speak of in europe at the time that this this monumental tradition was created and yet we now look back and hilariously we say that the most important aspect of of jose dupre of kupaha of of of schubert of schumann is their race and their gender are you kidding me i mean are you kidding me each one is unique in its voice and yet the only thing that matters is the race and gender and so the fact that the tradition is white all you have to say if you're the new york times today to cancel either an individual or an institution is to append the adjective white to that institution or individual and that's it you've made your argument so my goal in this book was to both make an argument for the value of our inheritance and the value of meritocracy to push back against the all-consuming narrative that racism is the only allowable explanation for disparities i also address the inanity the absurdity of feminism on college campuses and this ridiculous idea that there is an epidemic of campus rape on american universities i don't know how familiar you guys are but it is so insane we're supposed to believe that these college undergraduates who every weekend are trooping off to the fraternity parties who are deliberately drinking themselves into a state of almost oblivion in order to to lower their sexual inhibitions they are deliberately going to these parties they have a an uh a a campus hookup a one-night stand and then the next day they claim they've been raped and they the colleges have now set up a set set of kangaroo courts without any due process to try males it is females vengeance on a civilization deemed too white and too male they're taking males down as well beware as far as whether this can be stopped i think maybe that's for later in the discussion uh you know i would to me i'm a pacifist my nature so take that into account i think when either is inclined to look on the bright side john and i have had lovely dinners in um in new york city and he's an optimist by nature and i i i hear him and i think are you nuts like what grounds for optim we haven't won a single cultural battle since the 1960s why do you think we should start winning now he looks at me and says but look at all these seeds of hope of course we could win are you nuts so that that kind of predisposition to see the dark side of the bright side i can't overcome but i am i'm not massively hopeful as was mentioned at a panel yesterday this the incipient rebellion against the racialization of the curriculum in k-12 may give one hope also countries that don't have the american race problem uh have it a little easier although i'm told that hungary is starting to replicate our victim culture with the roma which doesn't surprise me one bit uh so i think i'm i'm gonna let that uh be batted around by my worthy fellow co-panelists thank you so much heather thank you very much indeed um i'll defend myself on the optimism point by saying that i actually uh don't agree with uh don't support the concept of optimism i would say i replace it by hope but hope has in it the fact that you have to do something in order to prevent the worst outcomes um on the other hand um yes we have been doing a great deal both you and i not just having dinner and we haven't yet managed to turn back the tide that i concede um and i like to turn uh having thanked heather to um they are three interlocutors now um peter curti um was born in england um but he's lived in australia for i think the last 30 years something nearly 30 years um he is a distinguished social critic um a legal theorist and an ordained anglican clergyman he is the director of the program of culture prosperity and civil society at the center for independent studies which is the largest and most important think tank in sydney uh the largest city in australia at least the greatest city he appears frequently as a commentator on radio television and he's the author of books like the tyranny of tolerance threats to religious liberty in australia such questions as euthanasia and the culture of death um peter um you're a fellow of the royal society of arts um you are active as a clergyman in the universe the episcopal university of um australia you are on the platform i think you're the only person who is specifically a representative of the christian churches now on the face of it the revolution described by heather is hostile directly hostile to the chur christian church um either that or it's a kind of perversion of christianity or both yet the catholic church though theoretically hostile to the wokeness revolution has actually shrunk from any direct attack on it or any direct conflict with it and i would argue from outside that the anglican church has actually gone a long way in embracing wokeness at least it has in england you will tell us about australia and i think it's done so in america too um why has christianity proved so weak against this revolution and what should the churches be doing instead uh thank you john that's a very interesting question uh and i'm gonna start with the word hope that you used because the the the political framework if one can describe it as such that undergirds the cultural chaos that heather catalogues in the book is of course the politics of identity and at the heart of politics the politics of identity is the notion of transgression the notion of secular sin and the notion of of redemption the problem with identity politics is that transgression is catalogued transgressors are denounced but the redemption and restoration to a state of innocence is almost impossible to achieve now one of the reasons some critics think that the politics of identity has taken hold is due to the decline in the belief of god and one scholar who's done some i think some very interesting work in this is the political scientist joshua mitchell uh particularly in his book american awakening and mitchell talks about the way in which belief in god has declined and the place of institutional religion has been displaced and in place has come the politics of identity which uses much of the framework of as i say transgression redemption and restoration but without any of the possibilities because of course i mean religious belief would teach that it's the god it's god's it's god or the gods who can only restore human beings from their uh from their fallen state of grace that we ourselves can't do this uh so there's a i think a great discrepancy now that you're right about the churches i think the the i mean christians don't agree about much it seems these days and so even within churches there are differences of opinion but in the anglican church to which i belong i think there's been a very worrying embrace of the politics of identity starting with the archbishop of canterbury um justin welby but and it trickles all the way down there are bastions that hold out against this but in my view rather than standing against the politics of identity and say well actually there's something really wrong here because i mean there the churches say well we understand how religion and religious belief works we understand transgression and and this is what we believe they've abandoned that and seem to find that the the politics of identity is the new gospel as it were then he provides the new framework whereby christians can express their their repentance can pray for uh redemption and and and live with a form of hope but and this brings it back to the word hope i think it's a very corrupted notion of hope that politics of identity uh offers because i don't think uh restoration is simply a is simply possible and heather catalogs this so well in her book that there's nothing you can do once you are deemed a sinner once you are deemed an oppressor once you are deemed to have harmed a victim there is nothing that you can do and the politics of identity tears down that puts nothing in its place thank you very much indeed um my next our next speaker is dr callum nicholson um callum is a fellow both at the danube institute and here at mcc he has an academic background in anthropology and in human geography he has conducted original research on how we understand the social implications of such topics as climate change notably in relation to migration and international development um i can add a lot of things about the kind of work you do but i would say that implied in all your work is a concern for the relationship between truth and power a question all the more relevant uh in the uh post-truth age so you've lived in universities through the many the period which many of the changes described by heather um have been taking place and um one important element in your work is very relevant it's what i would call perhaps you wouldn't accept this theoretical or linguistic demystification and you examine what people are saying and then you suggest what it is they really mean and and um and what the arguments are directing towards maybe something better maybe something worse but different how do you deconstruct diversity inclusion and equity what do they really mean in terms of practice well first of all uh good morning or maybe get off it's still morning i think so uh but thank you john's very generous you also made me sound almost like a post-structuralist in the description so uh um yeah that's what i was thinking but um yeah i'm not necessarily opposed to fuco but uh but i think i'd diverge on a number of issues um i mean in terms of my experience when i was an undergraduate i remember i was my uh a lot of my the older lecturers were very much the top end of the people who've been starting teaching in the 60s and but if you go back to universities now they're very very different cultures that sort of flinty old-school sense of you earn the professor's respect is gone now they are desperate for your validation because you're filling out an audit form if you're a student to tell them how well they're doing their job which is surprising because when you go to university you assume you're going there to get their validation but things seem to have changed but i have a couple questions for for heather um uh one uh sort of an analytical question with your framework and another sort of devil's advocate question um and the first one is i think a lot of this the work ideas we see are uh clearly philosophically if you root there as fuco say the genealogy it goes back through um you know a left-wing academic post 1968 academia the stuff you were talking about fuco man and so on um the and that's true but it does seem to me that the proliferation of this in the culture the last few years has been more economic than it's been uh political and it seems to be driven largely by hr departments for instance throughout different corporations and institutions and it's very interesting that if you look at the way these discussions are conducted they seem quite neoliberal in their structure because you know the challenges to old books it's almost like planned obsolescence built into the the canon people are now seeing that we need to progress these ideas they're never good enough in themselves we need a new version you know we need a new iphone you need a new book the old book won't do anymore um we also see sort of ideological consumerism every few months there's a new fad of what is the virtuous position to have is that just people engaging in a form of conspicuous ideological consumerism we also see uh in these people gaining or articulating themselves through these abstract identities and these slogans you see on twitter and so on that seems to me almost like identity entrepreneurism and and finally when you see people trying to uh um bring together very to measure their relative victimhood and to gain new identities of their how they've suffered in some way uh that almost seems like a kind of a conglomeration you know like a corporation conglomerates for more power now the more victim statuses you can claim the more power you have in the discourse so i'm wondering in this the analytical question is i underst i completely agree with you that there there's a problem in society with a lot of this uh these um identity politics and work ideas um but i wonder are those problems the symptom or are they the disease in the sense that when you have a disease the symptoms are the things that can often kill you but to secure the disease which is leading to the symptoms you need to diagnose what is the disease and i i suppose my question here is is the disease i understand and agree with you that has philosophical roots in the ideology but perhaps is the ideology rather arbitrary and the real conditions under which we are suffering these problems is more an economic system of the neoliberal uh approach where that we're no longer ends in ourselves we're always means to ends in a sense and the second question very short devil's advocate question is where you talk about people often claiming victim status of course the counter argument from the other side would be conservatives are constantly claiming a victim status and saying we haven't won a culture war in decades what would your response be to that well i'll take the the second question first uh yes i have gotten that accusation when i merely describe uh the incidents that i've been a part of in college campuses you know that the the uh blockades the walkouts the screaming fits the being escorted off campus by the police and and the right the left will come back at me and say ah you're claiming victim says i am not i'm how can one it makes it impossible to simply empirically describe what has happened i i don't think i'm a victim i'm just saying that there are people out there especially college students who are rank idiots uh they they don't understand their own privilege and they are desperate for the power that you speak about which is the power of negation these are people who cannot create anything it is very easy to destroy uh and it is it is an aphrodisiac to destroy to tear down the statutes to to tear down the cannon uh so how how can i describe what is going on and not be put in a category of saying i'm i'm claiming a victim being victimhood i'm not how can you say that we have lost every battle that's not the same thing as saying that you're a victim it is merely empirically describing what is going on uh you'd have to lie to say we have we have won to say you're you've lost means your victim doesn't no it means that you have not won that war as far as the economic analysis if i can sort of restate this is a explanation that is being advanced by some very sophisticated conservative writers that the whole woke thing is simply a way of big corporations to pay off the left and be able to continue their predatory capitalism cover that up under the the guise of being left wing by by caring so much about these trivial categories uh and especially the promotion of gays there's been a whole argument who first and i know it was patrick dineen that um they're they're anti-family and and they want deracinated consumers and the the most valuable consumer are gays because they have a lot of spending power because they don't have children that's an argument that's out there i reject that i do not think that what's going on is simply an economic uh generated superstructure falsification i think these people really believe it it is an ideological problem not an economic one and again in the american context i think the the driving force is america's ongoing discomfort about race and racial disparities if i can just throw some numbers out there uh the average black 12th grader reads at the level of the average white 8th grader 54 of black 8th graders do not possess even partial mastery of 8th grade math they they're not even they're below basic in their math skills uh those gaps never close and so we have the ludicrous idea again that the only reason that there are not black engineers is because of racism is is impossible given the academic skills gap you can only achieve proportional representation by completely wiping out meritocratic standards we are involved in the united states today in a massive unwinding of the criminal justice system there is hardly a single law that is not being deconstructed to use john's phrase we're not enforcing theft we're not enforcing shoplifting we're not enforcing resisting arrest we're not enforcing trespass why because to enforce the law in a colorblind fashion and i'm going to use colorblind with with with with a caveat to understand joshua's point yesterday which i think is very right but but let's just use it in brackets you cannot enforce the law without having a disparate impact on blacks not because the criminal justice system is racist but because the rates of criminal offending are so exponentially higher blacks in the united states die of homicide at 13 times the rate of whites why because they commit homicide at 13 times the rate of whites they're killing each other it's not police officers who are killing blacks it's not whites who are killing blacks it's other blacks something that is unthinkable to a hungarian audience in chicago somebody is shot in a drive-by shooting in less than every two hours ever less than every two hours there is a drive-by shooting that is taking down children the elderly somebody is killed in chicago every 14 hours and chicago is not our most dangerous city baton rouge louis louisville detroit is so our only explanation for this is racism we cannot talk about those disparities i think that that is what is generating this the elites are terrified that the racial achievement gaps and behavior gaps are never going to close we've been trying to close them for the last five to six decades with massive amounts of transfer payments great society programs entitlement programs it has not worked the elites are terrified that they're not going to close and so they are prophylactically they are preemptively putting out as the only allowable explanation racism uh and you cannot talk as they say about behavior or culture so as far as i'm concerned that that terror is what is driving the identity politics and the attack on meritocratic standards could i just come in on this point i'm sure callum will want to but um there is one aspect of this which is very very curious which is whenever you have um the the the results of these policies um affecting the black communities themselves so badly you get in those communities very often a strong response as in recently over defunding the police to object to the ultra liberal policies imposed by the elites why does that particular response from the black communities themselves receive so little attention from the elites you would think given the rhetoric that they would respond strongly to i know people like me and other people write on this we keep saying but black lives matter i thought black lives matter last year we saw the largest one-year increase in homicide in the united states history nearly 30 percent those of you or statisticians know that a thirty percent change in a year is off the charts nothing ever changes in thirty percent another several thousand blacks were murdered blacks are always the majority of murder victims in the united states even though they're 13 percent of the population again why because they're killing each other off in these barbaric drive-by shootings at least 50 black children one month olds one-year-olds six-year-olds black children all were gunned down last year in their beds at barbecues in their front yards in the backyards at porches the black lives matter activist said not a peep about this they have never protested a black on black killing never they've never protested the elderly blacks being being shot down i go to police community meetings in east harlem in central brooklyn and i hear these wonderful elderly black ladies in these fantastic hats stand up and burst out spontaneously apropos of nothing how lovely when we see the police they are my friends those voices never get covered by the mainstream media i i i can describe it i can only hypothesize because again it undercuts the narrative of fundamental racism which is so profoundly important to the left uh it's not to say that there are not lots of black leftist activists who keep going you know i think a safe harbor for white conservatives is that all of this is just the product of white elites it's not i mean let's be honest there's a lot of blacks who are also on board the victimization game uh but but it is absolutely the case that one is not allowed to speak about the toll of crime in black communities last year there were a total of four unarmed blacks killed by the police last year out of a population of 40 to 44 million blacks and we're supposed to believe that there's an epidemic of police shootings of unarmed blacks are you kidding me it's the same thing with campus rape so it's uh the elites are not willing to give up their ideology thank you callum i think you want to come back yeah i'm curious that the um uh i mean i take your point with the uh i don't think racism explains all problems raised from scully an issue but this notion that is the only uh lens through which to view things seems at the very least simplistic i've always felt particularly the last two years and i'm wondering what would be your diagnosis i mean one thing i've noticed in the last few years that's fallen out of the culture is a discussion of something that dominated global politics of the 20th century which was class it was class problems so one thing we're not talking about now in the uk is the class-based nature of a lot of the divisions when people talk about particular minorities i know britain better than the states in the uk when people talk about particular minorities suffering and being marginalized they're not just uh that minority they're often the underclass of that minority they're the working class but actually i grew up in a in a very remote part of england near whitehaven uh in fact when they next to this town of workington and i remember in the election in 2019 there was the idea of workington man you know working to manage you know what what does he want and that was basically my local town and it's a really destitute uh deprived former mining area i think it's 99 white and it's destitute and the problems they have are very similar to lots of the other communities uh who are the marginal communities who in the current culture uh you know black lives matter and so on has looked at these minority communities and said they are suffering and need they need some sort of recourse but actually the same problems are being experienced in poor white communities but the thing that united them was class and the working class movements used to unite these things in britain what happened to class do you think that's still a valid frame of reference do you think we've do you think it's fallen out of fashion for good reasons or do you think it's something we've lost and we've lost something in our analysis because of that well i'm just going to answer quickly because i want to hear from rodrigo you know i i uh the conservatives a conservative trope is cultural marxism that's the explanation for identity politics i reject that i actually would rather have good old-fashioned marxism than what we've got now i think it's kind of interesting it is far more interesting to talk about society in terms of railroad workers you know railroad magnates uh you know business owners mercantile the mercantile class those are interesting categories they they you're you're doing something as has been said being black or being female or being gay is not an accomplishment it's not a particularly interesting thing about myself i'm sorry so i don't think what we've got here is is related to marxism because it is not economic as you say so i think the phrase i would retire cultural marxism as a phrase um one explanation is yes you're right one problem with a working class focus is you're talking about white people and whites are now evil now i realize i'm sort of that which is the cause and which is the effect but i want to invoke the work of tony daniels uh theater dalrymple who has i think rejected an economic determinism and has brought the discussion back relentlessly to personal responsibility and yes there are economic distinctions and outcomes but i think the problem in america today with our class differences in economic inequality is a failure of personal responsibility people are making very very poor choices and it is just as specious to blame everything on racism or sexism as it is to blame uh bad economic outcomes on a a predatory capitalist system you only need to do three things in the united states to have a 75 percent chance of not being poor this is called the success sequence this was known in the 1990s nothing has changed you graduate from high school this is our secondary school pre-college you don't need to go to college you work full-time and you don't have children out of wedlock do those three things and you are not likely to be poor and nobody wants to talk about those behaviors either thank you very much indeed heather uh i'm going to move on since we have uh 44 minutes left to our final commentator rodrigo rodrigo ballista um needs very little introduction to this audience since um or indeed at the at the european union since he's head of the european studies department here and he spent a number of years in all of the as far as i can see all of the institutions of the european union and all its branches and i think it's fair to say that the eu now probably regards him as its most discriminating and well-informed critic um so um you're a lawyer rodrigo uh you're an economist and you're you speak five languages a linguist therefore um can i ask you this question um the the diversity illusion is something that's actually at the moment propagated by the european union uh officially politically and in other ways um more nervously i think by its intergovernmental institutions and by the parliament but still propagated it's presented as quote european values unquote which we all of us have a duty to observe and follow um so since most people do not follow all of the your so so to speak european values there are lots you can ask a series of questions in opinion polls and you'll find that the populations reject some all of these ideas um so how have we reached the state of affairs in which this revolution is being propagated from um the bureaucratic center of the european concept um and and um how can the rest of us how did it happen why and what can the rest of us do about it thank you john for your kind words first of all and um just before i answer this this question a little parentheses on hope and optimism i side with you i'm mother i'm rather on the hopeful side of life why for many reasons because there are signs second because there's the only valid answer if you really want to resist i mean if you don't have hope then don't even try to do that and also because uh like it or not either little books like yours and and speeches like yours give a lot of hope because the fact that you survived you know in the us that you were able to come to budapest to speak up as you did yesterday to speak for example about black black privilege which is an anathema in your country i mean you could you would have been sued there directly within five minutes uh the fact that you spoke about hablae about pentagon about algonquiar you just spoke about copra things like that like it or not give a lot of hope your book is a hope machine basically the hope factory so that's why you're you're you're you're part of the answer and part of the of the responsibility under on the european uh union john it's true that is first it is a fact it is a fact you quoted at the very beginning of this panel this guidelines on inclusive or inclusive communication and once they got caught they say enough but that was a work in progress you know those are things that will not apply anyway we need to rework them of course it was not to our standards the problem is that you can also track like all the dogmas and all the litany of the work ideology and 10 other public documents that have been really adopted in a very collegial way and here i only speak about the european commission because it will take me basically three hours to speak only about the european parliament so let's you know discard them from the discussion as a matter of time and it's through that uh this craze is real i mean i can put you some uh some official positions of the european commission for example on unconscious bias on critical race theory and the fact that our european culture is systematically racist and by the way how disconnected you need to be in order to do that because i mean how can you explain to the baltic states to central europe that they are racist when they never had a colony in their life when basically i mean today walking in the countryside a in a baltic country with a person of color i mean then do that and then you will have children getting out of their houses to have a look because it will be the very first black person they will ever see and so to it also shows like this narcissism and this this narcissism of also western europe as if in central europe they had exactly the same history and the same problems you can also find sentences as nice as this one in official commission papers for example at least the commission will boost self determination of gender without age limit does that mean testosterone on kids who are seven or eight for example on young girls i mean i sometimes wonder if they really really realize what they are writing and what they are saying uh i don't know what happened i mean i think part of this work craze is indeed the collective delirium it's i cannot explain it from a rational point of view i mean when i see that the best universities in the u.s have been totally hijacked and totally under i do hypnosis i think sometimes it's hypnosis i have the impression you know of this ideology i'm still puzzled i cannot explain why and indeed the same applies to the european uh union official discourse i still don't understand why but indeed it is definitely the case and again it's not because they got caught once on this on these guidelines that is the things that are not going on anyway um look at for example the the really infamous campaign they had on the happy hijab on the happy burka basically that was uh i created really a storm in france because at least the french are very alert to those things um let me still give you some hints more question marks but still some hints about what this is happening um and also i can i also come back to the some of the words that you said there as well is that um i have the impression that walkism is first of all intellectual laziness and bureaucracy can also contribute to intellectual laziness you know when you don't you only have time for procedures you stop having times to think about ideas and i think the problem number one of the european union today and also big corporations and also big international organization is that there is too much bureaucracy and when basically when they pay you to implement processes and not instead of having your own ideas somehow that cannot be good for your brain uh second is also something about the management of prosperity you describe this craze either also as a as a problem of spoiled brats you mentioned gratitude several times and it's true that it's very paradoxical to see that the best the luckiest generation in history the luckier generation of women for example the luckiest generation of sexual minorities are the ones that are complaining the most i don't get it and it's true that so it seems that prosperity can become a problem when you have it all when you become a spoiled brat when you become a small teenager you that's then you start being totally ungrateful does my analogy also apply to societies or to nations i think the work ideology is actually an evidence of that we are first and foremost spoiled brats and especially this i don't know how they call it now the millennials millennials are definitely a big bunch of spoiled brats and by the way just a little parenthesis for my students i see uh what peter bogason said the other day that we have to be ready to stand up to be punched and to punch back you know i think this is rather something that you will definitely you know those who are vaccinated again disgrace will have to do in the future and also referring also to what you said yesterday about you know those those riots against some professors in in yale i mean dear students don't you dare canceling me okay because i will push back as well okay so that's not going to happen in mcc certainly not uh and so and so there is it's true that i i'm still very puzzled about those things but now maybe to to to play also the the devil's advocate and to come back to you know this marxist rhythm of reality in france for example which is a country i know well it's a fact it's that's been statistically proven that if you have an arab name you have less chances to get a job for example and i still believe that part of the explanation of why you have so few black engineers it's also because maybe it's easier for the son of an engineer to become one than for the son of uh of a working black working class uh person in the bonus of detroit for example so maybe they're there can we also assume that there are somehow some disparities some structural inequalities and maybe it's also for the government to do something about it is i apologize for being a little marxist today but i still think it's you know part of the explanation what do you think about it and so one thing is the victimization oh it's racism and it's because i'm black but if you read between the lines and we get a bit more granular maybe there are some inequalities that are difficult to be overcome without a little nudge or little push from public authorities what what do you think about it i see you raising your microphone i don't want to dominate but i okay all right um obviously you know it would be blind to say that all children start out with identical circumstances and identical opportunities there are real class differences but there's two problems with our current response to that of the solutions that we've come up with don't work uh and and it is which is what i spoke about briefly yesterday the mismatch problem if you as a a solution to the fact there are not a proportional number of qualified uh blacks who can compete to get into harvard or yale or university and this is not just an elite problem like the americans like to believe that sometimes you hear oh it's just the elite universities in america have been infected no that's not the case this goes all the way down the entire system down to community colleges is infected by this poison the solution that we've had which is to say well therefore we will have racial preferences and admit you uh because you haven't had sufficient opportunities doesn't work it just perpetuates the failure and i would also say that we have been trying for decades to use government power and government resources to close those gaps to equalize opportunity and it has not worked we know as as an empirical matter that public schools in inner cities are funded on a per capita student basis at vastly higher rates than suburban schools we're pouring money into this we've had desegregation orders you know forcing busing it has not worked because what is left out of that equation is a change in culture when you have black kids raised with the culture a stigma against what's called acting white so if you're a black student and you take your textbooks home to do your homework you're acting white if you try to achieve and stay out of gangs you're acting white as long as that ethic is pervasive there is no amount of external structural change that can happen as far as the resume studies that rodrigo mentions and whether it's an arab name or a black name they are they can be questioned on their on their uh methodology but i will just stipulate for the sake of argument that there are disparities that that employers that see an obviously black name or an obviously arab name may be less willing to put that person through that is horrible on an individual basis that is discrimination i will only make the very dangerous argument that it is a those employers are working on statistical generalizations that are not without basis and the solution there is to overcome those skills and behavior gaps which i think at this point can only be done through individual effort and not to mandate racial quotas because those only perpetuate whatever remaining stereotypes there are you can talk to people in american corporations and if they're honest they will tell you about the affirmative action hires the racial preference hires that the corporation is brought in that are not competitively qualified they are then the pressures on to promote and if that affirmative action hire doesn't do well and leaves you've got a lawsuit on your hands for racial discrimination even though the problem was is that person was not competitively qualified so we can talk about these differences of opportunities i can tell you america has been trying to close them indefinitely i don't know one republican wealthy donor in new york city i don't know one hedge fund manager one private equity manager who is not doing social uplift programs up the gazoo chess programs in harlem tutoring you name it we have been trying at this point there needs to be reciprocal uh effort being made thank you very much indeed we've now come to the end of the first part of the meeting because we're rich we've reached 30 minutes to get we're now got 30 minutes to go so i'm going to throw open the discussion to questions from the floor um they ask is is there a is there a microphone around so that which will follow yes that there's the young lady with the microphone keep your eye on her and just behind you miss there's a man who wants to ask the question could you say who you are and explain yes sure hi thank you so much for the great panel my name is paul coleman i lead the organization adf international and i'm just constantly fascinated by this question of of hope and also the the patterns that you've obviously clearly articulated heather and we're talking about it all the time i was in a meeting with my team this week just projecting about what the year 2050 might look like and trying to spot where we are in this journey so i would just love to hear your predictions on where we are in this cultural moment in terms of has it bottomed out we all think probably not so we've got some way to go yet but from your perspective heather and then perhaps john from a more hopeful perspective uh what are we looking at here if there's going to be a turn around are we talking about in 10 years in 50 years in 400 years um what are the panelists think first heather and then i think we'll go from rodrigo i can only say what is if we're gonna turn it around what has to happen i i can't predict whether that happens but what has to happen is people not being scared having some balls standing up for what is the truth not apologizing not backing down and being willing to offer alternative explanations for as i say i i sound like a broken record but i do my perception of things is that the engine of things in the united states at least is these racial gaps and not not accepting racism is the only explanation if that doesn't happen things are happening very fast i was talking with joshua this morning every single day there is some new claim of racism and bigotry there is some new institution that is being dragged down we are introducing in the united states mediocrity into our fundamental institutions that's happening most concernedly on the judiciary you know we had biden famously saying he was promote promising that he would promote a black female judge that represents black females or two percent of the of the lawyers in the united states he's ruling out 98 percent of all qualified can't possibly conflict candidates possibly that two percent by some statistical aberration contains a disproportionate number of the most qualified but likely not and given what we know about the law academic achievement gaps even less likely but we are putting our juris prudence at risk by hiring possibly people who are not competitively qualified that's happening in airplanes do not feel sanguine about the fact that united airlines has announced it is going to be hiring by sex and race in the future that should not make you feel happy about flying because those are irrelevant attributes every time it is statistically inevitable every time you introduce a attribute into your hiring criterion which is not related to the job at hand you will as a statistical matter lower the caliber of the candidate pool and so if we don't stop this we are moving towards mediocrity and china is going to eat our lunch because they are fanatically obsessed with merit in stem they don't give a damn about sex and race they are promoting their top math talent in the united states we're ending gifted and talented math programs we're ending specialized high schools exam style because for the same reason disparate impact so in in 2050 if this doesn't change we are looking at a civilization that is not just in decline but it is affirmatively dangerous rodrigo yes on the forecasts i have two scenarios basically on an institutional level and more on the social level on institutional level and for example coming back to the european union i'm i can be very pessimistic because i even see the risk of a schism you know the way we had a schism between catholics and protestants 500 years ago basically it seems to me now that there is the risk of schism at the european union between those who are very progressive and those who refuse to be progressive the european union should have never been dragged into those questions because to start with they belong to the national level we forgot subsidiarity too bad it's going to be it's going to be to backfire on the european union certainly when you reach the point of conditioning 7 billion or 24 billion euro for recovery fund on questions that are more moral than actually legal which is happening now and we had the the case of the european court of justice yesterday which i still have to read so i don't want to say too much about it but still you know that can really create a divide because when you are sending the message that only you're in order to be a good european you need for example to promote gender theories in schools that can be again the beginning of a schism of a separation that will take decades at least to resolve at the social level i'm more optimistic because i still believe in common sense common sense is a powerful vaccine you have more common sense for example in central europe because in central europe they know how history how tragic history can be they know how you know pain in the neck communism can be and so they're somehow vaccinated against that but here for example for how long will women put up with the fact of being called menstruators for how long will women put up with the fact that castrated men can win all their swimming competitions you know at some point you know people will be fed up with very very basic things like that and then let me give you a precedence of counter hope i would say who would have said in france in 1960 that eight years later during the two months of a student's riot that would have triggered the cultural revolution that basically totally undermined france today i'm extremely skeptical and critical of mesos on twit of may 68 but again no one saw it coming and so basically in two months of riots basically two months it ended in may because in june they were on holidays but those two months totally changed the uh the composition and the cultural you know like a perception in france why wouldn't we be now eight years away from work type of anti-work mesoascentrate we don't know we don't see the spark now it's true but again think about the the super young people today if you are 13 or 14 years old today and you have been totally like you know like engurgitated with this new cult called walkism basically day and night day and night you can also have a hope for a counter culture for a country revolution because you're fed up of that you know it uh it's it's almost increasing it is inquisitorial absolutely inquisitorial so again those things might also uh backfire so that's why at the social level i'm rather optimistic i admit that at the institutional level when you see the level of how rotten art the basically the best universities the international organizations the the elites are to say it in one word then oh my god i'm really not hopeful about them but about the common sense yes it's maybe because this morning i was i was answering to enrique in written to some interviews from uh against uh against yeah on the justin trudeau and so i don't know when i see sometimes the common sights of some truck drivers in canada versus the total madness of the canadians elite of course it gives you hope um sure um well i was just thinking uh you mentioned uh will it take years or decades or centuries to come back to normal and this is something uh well i think it's a very interesting historical analogy for what's happening um in the 1450s the printing press was invented within a few decades you had the reformations carlos aya the princeton historian of the reformations is written how without the printing press you could not have had the reformations of course the reformations then led to 200 years of war in europe which led to then the 30 years war you led to the invention of the nation state and and and indeed the enlightenment itself i think to some extent can be argued uh to be a and i know some historians have argued this that is to be it's a it was a way of bringing some discipline to the sudden proliferation of different perspectives that came out of the invention of the printing press which we saw particularly through the reformations now by analogy you can kind of i mean we shouldn't talk about the dark ages it's analytically not very true but it's it's probably true to say the invention of the printing press took an underexposed picture and made it slightly better exposed because the more perspectives you get the clearer the picture but i think the problem we're dealing with now is that in the last few decades we've had the internet invented in social media and i think what was happening is a symmetrical thing that uh to what happened with the printed press and the reformations i say what's happening now is the deformations and and what's happening with that is instead of an underexposed picture becoming better exposed we're having a reasonably well exposed picture becoming overexposed and as any photographer knows an underexposed and an overexposed picture amounts to the same thing it's an unclear picture of what's going on so i think we're in an age of deformations and it's interesting it's happening exactly exactly 500 years on from the reformations and it's and i would argue that the reformations began the modern era and the printing press obviously had a role in that and this is ending the modern era what comes next is the big question how long it will take to refine some stability is the big question how do we deal with overexposure and i think one thing that needs to happen is to us to reconsider the role of education particularly in democracies education for centuries has been about teaching people to find knowledge hang on to it transmit it because if you if the book was burnt the knowledge was lost it's very hard to destroy information now we don't have an issue of under exposures to knowledge now well we we're not trying to cast light into the darkness we're trying to filter the light because the problem is now when you go on the internet the problem isn't you can't find the information you have so many different perspectives that it's hard to work out what's true we used to live in a world for a few centuries of authorities now that has good and bad elements but you had disciplinary authorities certain gatekeepers to knowledge now we just live in a world of authors we used to have truth and it's contested what truth means but it's certainly there was a debate about it now everyone just says they have their own truth there is no debate and that's that's very concerning it's overexposure so i think that the all these phenomena we're talking about you so eloquently talk about in the book they're there for me i think that the important thing to to recognize is i think the the technological context or the or the change in our communications technology which is allowing this to happen this proliferation of ideological contagion across the internet because so many of these these manias and they are manias they are they are spreading like diseases uh you know i i was saying this in a previous panel but the you know if the plane is can be seen as a vector for biological contagion the internet is effective for ideological contagion and it's worth remembering that you know the word epidemiology the study of disease that we're so familiar with now its real meaning was the study of what is upon the people and that doesn't just reply to apply to biology it's also ideology and uh so i think we could reflect on we need to you know if we're going to ask about what's happening in 50 years so much of it's up to us but first we need to diagnose what the problem is and one of the dangers i think of a lot of the discussions around these ideological issues um and it is a tricky issue in these debates is that there's a difference between describing a problem or indeed stating there is a problem and explaining the problem and and yes i think we can all agree that the work stuff's a problem my concern is well why has it proliferated now in the way it has it's not just because the philosophy is so convincing as rodrigo said there's actually incoherent philosophy it's not because it's a compelling philosophy there's something else happening ambiently which is driving people to these sorts of incoherences but also there's a certain technology that's allowed people to access it who couldn't before and and i think it's the uh and we see it around us so this technology so um i think we we need uh to to see where we're gonna be in a few decades i just think we need to understand the nature of the problem i don't think as a society we're very good at doing that because we're too partisan in our analysis sometimes uh uh but i think we needed more dispassion around it to be honest peter i think one can be hopeful and live with hope even if you're not quite sure how that hope is going to be realized or when so i do think hope is important i don't doubt for one moment that we are in the midst of of great possibly civilizational uh change i think technology has a very important part to play in this um you mentioned the the printing press and the reformation column interestingly enough the historian barbara tuchman would go further back than the printing press and she argued that it was the black death in europe in the 14th century that actually began the process that led to the reformation because of the changes it imposed upon communities and social structures and their relationship between um parish villages and their parish churches we have a pandemic now a hundred years after the spanish flu i don't doubt for a moment that we will see great social change there are debates about the the future of democracy about the the future of capitalism uh meritocracy which is something that has been taken for granted for the last generation is itself now being questioned so i think these things are are being questioned these ideas have been questioned and my sense is that we we are undergoing a period of change however i think it's important um i i feel we we might we're in danger of missing something if we talk about what's going on as if it was some kind of gas that's filled the room and if only we could find the windows and doors open them the gas would would disperse i don't think it's it's it's as straightforward as that there is something else going on because the people who devise and implement these policies which we've discussed at length do so because they've been taught and of course information is disseminated as callum has said through uh through new processes that are comparable to to the impact of the impact they have it's comparable to that of printing press but i think there are two things uh two really fundamental things that are going on and we i don't know that they can be changed but i think we need to come to terms with them before we can as it were move on the first is this that i think our conception of truth has changed we we have completely adjusted our view of what it means to say that something is true in days of your as it were in the past we would have agreed about the the notion of subjective truth you talked about a table in the last session we could all agree that there was a table now that's gone it's objective truth has given way to subjective truth and lived experience so my truth is not going to be your truth or heather's truth but it's no less authentic for being my truth and i can insist that you take my truth seriously and that you don't question it the second thing that is closely accompanying uh this subjective notion of truth and that is that relationships are now interpreted through the prism of power and the and through power hierarchies and we think of people uh we think of of our relationships to others in terms of the power hierarchies and our positions in those hierarchies now when we couple those two things together subjective truth and a view that the world is contaminated by power hierarchies we're going to have a very very corrupted view of of human society i say corrupted because it'll be very different from the the view that we have had but i think it's a new view a new world view i don't know that they can actually be dismantled i don't think it can be changed i don't think we can go back to the way people talk about covid um to the way things were i think we have to live with what this ghastly phrase the new normal i think this is the new normal i don't know where it's leading reading heather's book is actually quite a depressing experience because you think well where on earth is this going and where are these people going to end up because they end up running the corporations and then those corporations themselves become suffused with this ideology so i don't have an answer to that but i don't give up on hope and i think that hope we can hope uh and be i'll use the word optimistic be optimistic that in a way we we if we it's not that we come to our senses and then we sense we we go back to to um to the way things were before but that we will learn to integrate this what we are experiencing as a as a corrupted way of looking at life and viewing our relationships with other people we will we will adapt and we will adjust and we will come through this to a new form what that will look like i don't know but i can be hopeful that we will can i just come in on i'm sorry can i uh peter has raised a standard trope which is that the problem today is we're all relativists and we've given up on the idea of truth and that's certainly true when it comes to say the trans phenomena this idea of the infinite malleability of one's identity and and you know we all have subjective truths but to me that doesn't explain the left are absolute uh monas they have they believe in truth they they will not accept that the truth of america is not the 1619 project is not the fact that america was founded on slavery so i don't see this alleged nihilism or relativism as necessarily the defining characteristic of the left can i respect they will not accept that you know the the trump's little 1776 project is true they think they possess the truth i i think that's a very important point and there and this is the paradox that lies at the heart of this because on the one hand they lay claim to a subjective notion of truth but then claim that that notion of truth is objectively true and i think that is the intellectual sleight of hand that is being that is being perpetrated um and it's massively dishonest it's inconsistent i think it's it's immoral and it's corrupt but it's very real and i think the impact it's having is very real i i so i agree with you and i think that's the that is a a devastating paradox and i will also say that i'm too much a product of my deconstructive education i confess to you that i'm one of those i outside of science i actually don't believe in the truth i've i've seen too many interpretations of texts to feel confident that there is a single reading of any piece of language i i see the the hermeneutic problem so i would say and you suggested this that we have to move beyond this we have to come up with a solution that accepts uh the inevitable nature of interpretation and the fact that we may claim that there's such a thing as common sense but i would love to know somebody who says i don't believe in common sense i i i suspect the left thinks that they are engaged in common sense when they say well clearly gender identity is fluid so um well i act i on the other hand i admit to hypocrisy of course i act as if i believe in the truth of course when i write about the problem of crime and policing i believe that i am speaking the truth i i one cannot live by epistemological skepticism and yet as a philosophical matter i don't see any way around that actually can i just come in because i was going to i think come in saying some of the things you were questioning peter about heather but there's another thing too and that is the viewing all relationships as being relationships of power i think this is an extremely false idea um the most obvious case is if a boss is in love with his secretary who has the power in that relationship i mean it's very very it's not clear of course perhaps but nonetheless it's obviously not simply something that the the power accrues to the boss um if we look at society in a broad sense the power of love and i'm not being pious here at all um but sometimes very destructive love but the power of love is extremely important you cannot underst you cannot look at a family for example and say oh well the mother and has the power in this relationship she's often completely helpless before um a son uh particularly and fathers before daughters so these this kind of marxist so vulgarized cultural marxist stress on power it seems to me to be simply false anyway well except that the person who claims to be the victim then does have does exercise the power and the victimhood is a response to a perceived power structure so the you take the boss for example if if the boss makes an inappropriate move on on on the employee the the power relationship is inverted and suddenly it's the victim that was the point because but it's still it the the society is still or that set of relationships is still viewed through the prism of power it's just that the power is inverted the relationships are inverted and it depends upon the status of the victim but in fact he doesn't have the greater power there was that well the classic actual case that happened was a minister had to resign in london because a few years before he had had a boozy lunch with an attractive political correspondent and on the walking back to the house of commons he had tried to kiss her now she didn't accept the kiss he didn't persist um he didn't everybody forgot about it until me too came into the headlines and then she complained about it having happened although there was no sign he'd subsequently nor did she allege he'd subsequently behave in any way punitively towards a cutter out of briefings and things so this was an absurdity i mean he shouldn't i'm sure his wife was disapproved and other people will have differing degrees of disapproval of what he did but it certainly didn't seem to be the kind of thing in which um in which he had the power and the political correspondent didn't it was the other way around and so we well i've made the point we have five minutes to go yes the gentleman there uh yes i'd like to ask uh or raise a point and that is the the question of self-preservation um and i think human beings have an instinct towards self-preservation uh and i recall uh reading a study of gang behavior in the united states this is like several decades ago which showed that after several years of gang violence in which you know a significant number of members of a particular gang who died other young men saw this and they said you know we don't want that i'm not going to join a gang i don't want to die and i wonder if that can show us something about some of the problems that uh uh you uh heather mcdonald have talked about that uh intellectuals are are human beings and they have an instinct toward self-preservation and they can see this nonsense and then they see that it doesn't really work it doesn't work for them and the same could perhaps be applied for problems in other sectors can we can we this is obviously the last chance or each of you is going to have to say anything shall we just go beginning of rodriguez and i will answer in in 30 seconds this is actually a nice definition of what i called common sense before you know there and common sense can also be a driving of of history and let me give you also a very precise example i mean uh it's obvious that people like prefer to pay less for their energy energy build and more look at nuclear energy until four or five years ago it was a taboo in european circles it was discarded no more no more energy no more nuclear energy the minutes the bill started to raise by 50 or 100 percent it came back on the agenda and even the european commission said that now it can be accepted as a green transitional energy so this is what i meant and there again i still have the impression that we are on the right side of uh of of of common sense and it's true that this instinct for self-preservation is definitely i mean maybe a better definition of what i meant by by common sense i've talked enough well i'm still waiting i mean i think you're right one would assume that this comes into place we are living a civilizational experiment of a culture a civilization that is self-canceling that is teaching its young people to hate its legacy and apart from the chinese cultural revolution where you had the masses turning on the elites i think this is novel of the elites turning on each other and turning on their inheritance and turning on the the culture so whether that instinct for self-preservation will kick in at some point and you know one does wait for uh to be honest i don't like to use this word and it's a very dangerous word and it's a very uncomfortable world but but the left uses it the left uses it as a term of a program as i say all you need to do to discredit an institution or an individual is to call that person white so at what point are whites gonna say and i'm not for race war i'm not for necessarily uh the instantiation of of antagonic tankanistic identity politics but at some point whites have to say we're not taking this bigotry charge this automatic reflexive charge of vigory lying down and start defending the inheritance of a tradition that is defined not by whiteness but by the fact that it has contributed more to the advancement of humanity than any other culture callum well i mean i just think there's a basic value i think we all need to get back to in society regardless of what side of the spectrum people are on which is that uh you know you should judge people based on character everything else is pretty shallow and and i think there's so many the movements today they've i mean look at the mental health movement for example it was it was founded on an idea of bringing empathy and understanding but increasingly it's being weaponized the way to judge people or indeed to label oneself as an identity and i just think we've all uh there's a there's a there's a mission creep and people are losing sight sometimes of the purpose of the things that appeared in the culture usually it's just to free us up from being judged on simplistic terms and that results in something quite simple which is just we should judge people based on the experience of them as a human being everything else is nonsense to be honest with you peter thank you i think um aaron in response to your question i think that self-preservation is a very powerful human instinct how this is work will work out um i'm not sure as i thought about your question and listen to to my colleagues here it seems to me that at the moment we are in in the grip of a mania for self-preservation because the the people whom helen heather describes in her book are people who are acting like this because they've been taught to act like this because they believe they're doing so to preserve their own sense of identity self-worth safety so it seems to me that we are still in the grip of self-preservation i fear that it's not the self-preservation you have in mind um ladies and gentlemen um i i will finally in response to all of my colleagues put on the dunce cap of optimism and say i have two reasons for my hope the first is the fundamental conservative social insight all bad things come to an end the second is an anti-communist joke from the last days of communism when it was falling and a group of anti-communist dissidents are sitting in the basement and one of them is saying well it's got to come to an end of course but you know maybe it won't because they'll never announce it they they lost the politician just will never agree to concede this and one of them said no no i know that i think this is how it will be done one day we'll wake up turn on the radio and it will say good morning ladies and gentlemen uh and having said that i'd like you as ladies and gentlemen to thank our panel for a brilliant discussion [Applause] [Music] you

Channel: Mathias Corvinus Collegium

Views: 5,396

Keywords: mcc, mathias corvinus collegium, konyvbemutato, budapest summit, teach, children, neveles, oktatas, konferencia, rodrigo ballester, heather mac donald, calum t nicholson, peter kurti, john o sullivan, the diversity delusion

Id: -amvqPhz2Mw

Length: 88min 13sec (5293 seconds)

Published: Sun Apr 24 2022