Barbara Freese is an author, environmental attorney and a former Minnesota assistant attorney general. Her latest book Industrial-Strength Denial is now available: https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520296282/industrial-strength-denial
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
Hello friends, this episode, the podcast is, has brought you once again by the God. Damn mother fucking cash, the cash tap the easiest way to send money between your friends and family without having hold on to paper cash and the cash absence of the best way to try to grow your money with their investing feature and, unlike other unreliable bull, shit, ass, investing tools that force you to buy? entire shares of stock cash. App lets you in best in the market with as little, a dollar cash out, The easiest way to buy and sell Bitcoin please tell me what the fuck are you waiting for and, of course, when you download the cash app enter the referral code, Joe Rogan, all one word and you will receive ten hours the cash, apples and ten dollars to our good friend, just in Rennes fight for the forgotten charity. Building wells for the pygmies in the Congo. So do not. Forget, used a promo code, Joe Rogan, all one word: when you down
the cash app from the app store or the Google. Play store too day were also brought to you by Squares Bay Square space is the host of my website, Joe Broken, Our comments, also where my website was created. You can make your own website with square space. They have dialed in simple, easy to use, drag and drop user interface and beautiful desire templates that allow any person that knows Do normal stuff, like you, You can drag photographs around on your desktop. Can you attach a picture to an email? Can you do that kind of stuff? Can you move folders guess what you'd make a website? Yes, so simple, so easy to use and each website comes the free online store. So you, thinking about maybe starting a business online. Well, you unlock. Where spaces got it all dialed in they have powerful II com functionality that lets you sell anything online. Plus you Customize looked to feel the settings products and more with just
few clicks. Everything is demise from mobile right out of the Box if you're thinking about starting a business is the way to go, if you have a business already, you want to promote it. It's a way to go. It's great. I love it might good friend Duncan Trust. His website square space website stand. Hope Doug stand up his website to square space websites, fantastic for restaurants, ok businesses. It's great If you want to announce an upcoming event or a special project, they have built in search engine, optimization free and secure hosting nothing to patch or upgrade ever and twenty four seven award winning customer support, and they let you try for free who yeah that's right. Head on over the squares based outcomes last Joe for a free trial when you're ready to launch use the Africa Joe and you will save ten percent off your first purchase of a website or domain also brought to you by C b d m d and their superior c b. The oil products. This account
I use their products every single day, so easy for me? Do this add their c b d recover is go to for me. It's an some cream that combine CD with information, fighting compounds like arnica environment, be six and its awesome for sore muscles. I use it every day they have another, come up, in their company called CD freeze with menthol, which is an award winning product given their war, but I would give it to him its awesome, it offers instant coolly relief, muscles and joints. Convenient and easy to use roller or us, he's tube. I like the roller and the reason why I like the rulers, I'd like to emphasise my muscles with that. I dig it in gives you like a little bit a massage. Then it's got the see be de with the menthol, where its awesome there great stuff. They have CD p m that I see he d with melatonin and valerian and helps sleep there stuff Just amazing. I love it. It's just a great thing
use on a daily basis, C, B D just has a host of benefits and to make it even easier to add Cb Dd fitness routine or your lifestyle routine thereof. Jerry Listeners, twenty five percent off your next purchase when you use the code Rogan at check up so again- that C b, D, M d, dot com and use the pro while Code Rogan at check out to save twenty five percent. Are you next person of their superior c b d products at C b d m d: were also brought to you by Carol. Carol is the First, interactive, exercised by powered by artificial intelligence to make fitness personalize convenient and effective built with The person in mine Carol is scientifically proven to deliver an optimal work out and under nine minutes, with only forty seconds of hard work and the way it works is care.
Ensures that you reach Supra, maximal power and its above and beyond what you think you can produce and to do this, she customize especial resistance and then instantly applies it at the right time. You're sure stores rapidly deplete and you're oxygen needs go through the roof, because her body, not used to this. It goes into. Survival mode and adapts, so the next time. The stress appears you can better cope with it because its super maximal, you are pushed outside your comfort zone, albeit for a few seconds, but that's all All that is needed to achieve superior fitness and weight loss benefits Carol even has, meditation built into each work out to help you navigate the stresses around you and it's clinically prove it. An independent academic peer, reviewed study, funded by the American Council on exercise and conducted by, astern, University Colorado Carol, doubled the health benefits and the fitness gains compare.
To government guidelines of thirty minutes of exercise five days, bring home your own Carroll and discover the power of training with the world's only a high powered exercise, bike care is offering listeners a limited time offer go to Carol fit a I dont com and enter the code Rogan three hundred at check out and get three hundred dollars off plus free shipping and a free one year subscription my guests, day is Barbara freeze? She is the author of industrial strength, the Nile. It is a really interesting book on corporations defending the indefensible. I had a great time talking to her
hope you enjoy it. Please welcome. Barber freeze will gain experience for good show. How are you pledged major pleasure to meet you? How did you get started on this and how did you get interested in subject? I got interested in this subject through climate change, climate denials, typically, I'm an environmental attorney and back in Nineteen nineties, I worked for the state of Minnesota and we found ourselves very briefly sort of on the front lines of the scientific debate over climate change. In the way that happened was. The stated passed a law saying that utilities regulators should try to estimate. The cost environment of generating electricity. We get most of our power from coal, or we did then and
so we looked at coal emissions. We looked at the traditional pollutants that we had regulated for a long time and in my client, was the pollution control agency. So I was familiar with those. What we also looked at though, and I wasn't familiar with- was sealed to end its effect on climate change, because, while that was a big issue globally, there is already a global treaty signed, to fight climate change states had not taken a look at that and what happened? Was we struck a nerve with the coal industry and they sent to Minnesota Bunch witnesses bunch of scientists to testify that we did not have to worry about climate change, and I wasn't going to happen or, if it did it, be just just a little and we'd like it and that all
those scientists, the IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on climate change, though scientists that the rest of the world, including the? U S, government in the treaty, signed by. George W Bush, the ones that they were relying on those scientists were basically by us today, were biased because they they were in it for the money. Somehow they wanted research grants or the had some political agenda. It was kind of vague, but but it was clear I did not want as worrying about this issue at all the they told you that It would be just a little and that you would like it when all yet by that. Well, a couple of things, one, the commencing you will still here. This sometimes is that yo to is a plant fertilizer, which is true and therefore
more seo. Two makes the world happier place for plants and and therefore better for everybody else, and to the to the point where one of the coal interests who were in that who are parties had put out a video saying that the earth was deficient in seal to and by digging up the coal and burning it we were. We were correcting that yeah. So that was one of the arguments. The other was you know, it'll be mild, it'll be warm, the winters won't be cold and and hey this is Minnesota. So you know you guys are going to appreciate those warmer winters, so yeah. There was a lot of crazy stuff that that hasn't got away as many in many ways it's gotten a lot worse, but there were certainly enough to leave me shop. Was not the first time you ever where the corporations do send in people to try to defuse arguments or pollute the waters. I dont think I
quite that my eve, but I'd certainly never seen anything like this. I mean these were people under oath. You're not an end. They were saying things that were pretty extreme and and many of which would just get a lot more extreme and they were scientists. The many yes they're, the ones I cross examined were mainly the scientists they also sent in some other witnesses as well. So that didn't actually work in a coal company. They were hired by the coal industry to come to testify in these scientists, the presumably they are paid to do this? Yes, so is that I mean how do you track that both of you, if you have scientists and they come in- and they say things that you know or not, accurate or deceptive, how you find out what their motivation is did do. Did you ask them if they ve been paid? We were able to put some things in the record of regarding how much money they have gone from different fossil fuel interests over the years. So we definitely did point that argue about that.
We didn't realize some of the witnesses had a much deeper history than we understood in science denial. One of the witnesses was a pre prominent scientist named Frederick sites who has since died, but but we didn't know what I didn't know when they cross examined him. I mean this was a shoe store, operation was it. He had spent a lot of time. Actually consulting for the debate industry, so that would have been nice to to bring up than we had talked about just before the podcast, the film merchants of doubt it's our turning it into your work that that film touches on that? How people who work for the tobacco industry eventually went to work to deny the man made climate change right well. In his case, he had actually been a physicist who was very involved in cold war weapons programme, so he kind of came at it from that direction.
And it wasn't until really he had retired from his four main scientific and academic work that he was brought into work for the tobacco industry. But what happened? Was this handful of scientists profile in that movie in and in the book by the same name, they would also them work with these non profit groups. These free market groups that were strongly opposed to regulation of industries and soap and those same groups then, would address lots of different issues from tobacco. Ozone. In and now to climate change and and really a lot of other sites, big issues as well for industries facing regulation and you do a psychological profile of those people, particularly the tobacco people, because it's like such a direct correlation between tobacco cancer, like it's the climate, same thing. It's almost like boys so hard to track it so far in advance, and if you say the climate changes and real what dead,
sir Cause is directly attributable to that, like how do you you don't sound, but like cancer, and cigarettes, it's like here's a person these cigarettes. They have cancer. You said it didn't come from cigarettes. What is that feel like tea, to be that person that actively tries to the other, essentially lying lying for money there. Lying. Let me just back up one second and then talk about that just because I want to make it clear that, while the link between smoking in cancer Mason entirely obvious, there's enough of a delay that opens up the opportunity for denial. The link between putting greenhouse gases in the air and and dramatic climate change- that's actually as established well established as the links between smoking Answer is just that there is a more complicated process and in this potential
more of a delay, and it depends in large part in what humans do along the way. So so it does, it does get kind of complicated as far as it psychologically profiling the tobacco companies. I mean earth tobacco executives. I won't presume to suggest this book. Does that? But but I do right a lot about what these folks were saying, not just to the public, but to internally with that some internal documents and in certain things that may have been public utterances but were clearly just sort of part of their internal rationalization and, for example, I start the book with a quote from the head of Philip Morris Foods. Says who knows what you would do if you didn't smoke, maybe you'd be your wife. Maybe you drive cars fast, and you know that that's part of how I think the tobacco industry approach to this. They would. They would imagine the sort of counterfactual where of world without tobacco without cigarette and then they would imagine what that would be like
and of course they always imagined it was watch much much worse, motherland, zooming, right yeah. I read that part and also that the man in question wander quitting cigarettes right yeah? He had it or it wearily inhibiting right exactly that was the question and we never really did find that out. It's such a strange Wait a live your life to be deceptive, in a way that you know is gonna, I mean there's I how many people got cancer from cigarettes budgets, probably will, and it isn't just cancer, it's her heart disease, etcetera, so millions I mean I've seen an estimate that in the twentieth century smoking killed. I want to make sure I get this right. I think it was a hundred million people more than more than maybe both wars world worse, but together its seven million a year? I think, as the is the global death toll in the: U S, it's
from the four hundred and eighty thousand a year directly determinable right. They trees. They trace it too, to directly attributable now. You know it. These are extreme examples, tobaccos the most famous an extreme example. When I talk about a lot of other examples, but I think it's actually at you- no fear Lee common thing for people to go pretty far down the road of denial when they are working in an industry, and this is the process I try to explore. Little in the book there working in an industry there confronted with some accusation that they have caused harm, they check their got in there, says: no, we didn't intend to cause harm, we don't feel guilty, and so their mind starts to come up with the reasons why it must be wrong and their tribal instincts which are never more than just a millimeter below the surface. For pretty much any of us, but but certainly in this case, get trigger so
they immediately think. Well. These people, accusing me, must have an ulterior motive. They must be more money, they want power, they want attention, they ve got some sinister political objective and then there, the other part of that tribal dynamic, as they start thinking about themselves and and their truly lofty mission which isn't just to sell products, but something else it's too tat freedom or, if you're a slave trader, it's to rescue the Africans from terrible lives in Africa and bring them to the comfortable plantations. That was actually an argument. Oh yeah, that the slave trade had it complete re, skew narrative, I'm talking about the british slave trade here, because that was that was the first
really intense campaign of industrial denial. I could find the bridge the British dominated the slave trade in the seventeen hundreds and the he they faced a very powerful abolition movement at the end of that century, which was really going to the public and saying look at how brutal this is. They had witnesses, they had the torture devices they all kinds of it. And the British were really responding because they, even though they dominated the slave trade, you know they had this notion of themselves as civilised and and running freedom and being very humane, so this was starting to really affect the industry, so the traders in the planters got together. They formed a slave lobby, they had very organised campaign in response slave lobby. There was a very powerful slate lobby. I mean that the thing about the slave trade was you had people invested in it from the royal family down to the local bakers.
Too many members of parliament. I mean it was a widely accepted, fully legitimate industry so that the abolitionists really have their work cut out from for them, and they had all this evidence. Industry comes back and think they knew they couldn't you say: oh it's not so brutal. They actually came back with this complete counter, inheritor of which was. We are rescuing these people that that there, the Africans are eager to be purchased. They actually try to market themselves as how fit they are for for work. They enjoy that crossing across the Atlantic there
singing dancing, games of chance and when they get to the plantations, it is incredibly comfortable. They get comfy little houses, it's like a cradle to grave welfare state. They don't have to worry. If they get sick, we take care of them. We feed them and their doing way better than those poor peasants back there in Britain or those poor minors are those people working in the new factories, so that was that was part of it and then the next part of it was that they they said that if they had left them in Africa, if you didn't continue this trade, all of these Prisoners of war would be massacred or they would be eaten by cannibals or they would die of famine. So they were. This was a rescue narrative and here's the really clever part of this, because if you believe that you are rescuing Tamar envied persuade
other people and not suggesting the industry, believe this, but if you can persuade people that you are rescuing them, the flip side of it is that abolition would doom them. You would be shutting the gates of mercy on mankind, because, as one one trader put it that the house of bondage is really the the House of freedom to them, I may have missed spoken that little bit, but with a truly orwellian quote an end, and so that way you translate abolition into in humanity into brutality and an? U portray the continued slave trade as awaited to save these people. A one one court with great that if you were to free the slaves and by the way this point they were actually talking about freeing the existing slaves. Just stopping the flow of
new slaves, but one of the court's was that free, the slaves would be cramming liberty down the throats of people incapable of digesting wow. So this was the first example that you frown of Industry that was working too tried to distort the perceptions of reality so that they can continue with their doing right and do you know they did a lot of other things we ve seen modern industries doing bay leaf. You know mention that reference to the poor, peasants and- and they also talked about how would you like it, Britain, if, if people came in and started telling the peasants and the soldiers and sailors that they had rights in also basic, this kind of help us or you are next? Your whole structure is going to collapse that kind of an argument, and then they had an argument about basically failing to make a distinction.
Between their industry and their interests in the whole country, or rather in oak and of an early version of what's good for the country is good for GM and vice versa. They said, if you abolish this trade, it means universal bankruptcy for the kingdom, it means Britain is not powerful anymore. It means Britain becomes province of France, it means in sugar islands that the slaves will massacre the the whites exterminate, the whites and in or maybe make the white slaves, so they basically clean. Oh just created this incredible slippery slope that every that any kind of reform, or certainly abolition of this industry would would be designed just for the entire kingdom. So how well documented, as this in terms of likely influencers like who who started this and didn't? Is it was there like in discussions about how to spend
in a way that it's going to get people to think that slavery is a good thing. Well, I dont know about internal discussions within the industry. What we do have are lots and lots of books and pamphlets, because this was all done in writing. We also have some hearings and we have parliamentary debates. They were reported, not overburden, but people try to reckon and so we have some version of what was actually said in these debates. In the various hearings, there were parliamentary hearings, so this actually quite a lot of evidence of the arguments being made in their own words? So and then this, was primarily in Britain right right. This is all I'm talking about here. Obviously there was that we had our own abolition movement. He around me. That's what I asked you did those same arguments did they actually happen, scented in the United States, some of them did in the United States. It was different because, of course, you had an entire society built around slavery, and I read one one reference: when history
in saying that about half of the defences of slavery came from the clergy? It wasn't Quite the same sort of clearly here is an industry, and- and here is an audience that they're talking to so that's one of the reasons I didn't focused quite that at all really on the american type of it was from clergy. That's what this this historian said. I I didn't dig into those that did by the way, though, find one source and now I dont, remember if, if he was a plantation owner or something else who described the the child slavery, no basically away to make people as happy as can be and and called it the ideal of communism, which was funny cause you don't even think of communism of that debate as existing. This was would have been an eighteen hundred now, but the saying that the north is exploiting these workers not taken care of them, but in the south fleet we take care of them. We make them happy as slaves truce.
So this is a pattern that existed before that is this. Is there? Is there any evidence that there was something it seems like when where people start to make money doing something whenever corporation particularly corporation right, because there's diffusion of responsibility and a large group of folks- and they have this- you know this obligation to earn money for all the people that are involved in the corporation start rationalizing their decisions and then twisting things around. What is this is this something that can be traced back before then. Is this an unnatural human trade, this kind of deception? Well, I can't specifically answer whether it can be traced before then, because I didn't try to trace it and where I am, but I would not be at all surprised because I do think it's a natural human treat me night One of the issues that I I started to struggle within this book was deciding to what extent are people lying and when are they actually deceiving themselves?
I realized early on. There was just no way to write this book. If I was gonna try to parse that out- and I also decided it doesn't matter that much because I think these are really very much intertwined and they're both equally destructive in their both, I think equally responsive to these kind of external circumstances that we create in corporations when we form corporations and we put them into him into a marketplace. So I do think it's part of human nature. I do think we ve created this. System that brings this out and people and really encourages it in in so many ways. I mean you mentioned the diffusion of responsibility, and that is huge because we do know and an eye dip into the social psychology in here, not a ton of it because that science is still relatively new and in kind of you know a little bit thin compared to that
environmental science in it than I talk about, which is very, very deep but dumb. We do know that when you, when you diffuse responsibility, it makes it very easy for people not to feel responsible for the harm. That's done so if you got a corporation of course, you have division of labor. You also have a division of management from ownership, so of Europe a lower worker near told a lie about something or cost him harm. Well, you're minding your own business and you button and you let your boss take responsibility if you're the boss, ah your focused, maybe on your employees and and certainly on your shareholder. So if you're lying about something or causing harm, it doesn't necessarily feel like a personal, selfish, active
section. It probably feels like an active loyalty and responsibility, new showgirl shareholders, your shareholders aren't gonna care or no because first of all there far away. Usually they they don't really know. What's going on. They have maybe just a temporary transactional interestin. What's going on, they just bought the stock. They want to sell it quickly, mix up money. So so you don't really have anybody there who feels really responsible for this, that there is a definition of a. Of the corporation from early twentieth century in something called the cynics dictionary ass, an ingenious device for obtaining personal profit without personal responsibility and
and of course that is exactly what we intend from corporations because they are, we grant limited liability to the shareholders and that's why, with that, that protection from risk that people are willing to pool their capital and in that sort of very keen to the very idea of a cooperation and then, of course, that the focus on profits means that you are constantly focus on money- and you know it every and in the most short term way, not even long term profits, which would be a narrow enough focus, but then there's a lot of other things to add to it. You you ve, got competition by definition, certainly feel competitive markets. We want there to be competition, so that means you are already in a kind of tribal mindset and you ve got the idiotic view of them
replace, which you now we can go back to Adam Smith, the invisible hand and- and basically the notion that you can pursue your own self interest in the market. Place will automatically convert that public. Good and that doesn't work in a lot of cases and probably worked a lot better. Seventeen hundreds, but when you ve got these Farmers organisations that have incredible market power, and these very. New risky technologies. Often it is much harder to to be confident that that's going to work and then it more recently. We have seen that in that idea that you don't have to worry about the social consequences of your commercial action, just get
twenty five week we had Milton Friedman and nineteen. Seventy writing this very persuasive article saying that the only real objective, the only legitimate objective of corporation is to maximize shareholder profit and, if they're talking about protecting the environment or doing any of these other things that's socialism and and that's a legitimate in the end that really did sway alot of people that movement really move forward and then it more extreme in the nineties and and in the twenty first century, where you ve got this the strain of of intense faith in market forces. That was manifest stood by Alan Greenspan, the FED by the Coke Brothers, David Cook, has passed away so now, Charles
and the network of influence groups that he created that that think tanks that free market groups, these different academic groups. So you know one one of the things that I try to trace a little bit in the book is talking about the rise of the consumer movement in the environmental movement in the Sixtys and Seventys, and people saying wait a minute. We need corporations to to be aware of these problems and we need government to regulate corporations to make sure that our cars are safe and our rules on labour is not destroyed, but then starting a nineteen. Eighty when Reagan is elected, you suddenly see those those concerns replaced with a concern over regulation and and really a backlash that that has come and gone, but basically intensified over the years and and now of course, we have a situation where not only do we have a gun.
Meant unwilling to regulate, but we have one that is rolling back critical regulations and were put in place by previous administrations and, of course, influenced by these very corporations. To do the absolutely end it mean, gets. It gets kind of complicated here, because if you think, for example, about Charles Coke and Coke industries, it's based in oil refining. So that is very much based in the fossil fuel industry. But but the coping network is very it illogical, passionately, idiot logic, and they just happened to coincide with with being in the in the fossil fuel industry. But you have a lot of other groups that have received money from oil companies from coal industry, so it gets kind of integrated. I do tried it not treat them all the same in the book. I tried to kind of differentiation and you really do have a difference between the kind of coke perspective. The coal industry perspective, the oil industry perspective
all of these little free market groups. Actually they fit more around the coke side, but they all seem to have one thing in common that the rationalizing and justifying their actions, because they want to continue to make profits, regardless of the impact on the environment or the people. Exactly and this that's weird thing about just: the idea of a corporation self. It's almost like a diabolical vehicle for, for allowing people to do you know did did to be able to do something and say: hey we're do this as a collective and therefore, or no no individuals are responsible for the results of the collective, particularly if you're, not the one who gets to decide what gets done you just taking orders in yours. Doing your job and your job as segmented and its outcome, portmanteau eyes. So you're not you're, not dumping. Anything in the river bob you'd have to
about. But I, like you new car and as a beautiful house, you got you bought with the profits of poisoning lakes. So we that's, that's exactly it. In fact, I suggest in the book that if you were a supervillain and you wanted to cry a society that would ultimately destroy itself by imposing huge. Six on each other and on the planet. You would probably create something that looks a lot like our current corporate dominated global in the sense of these organizations that amplify yourself interests that demand
fish, your sense of responsibility that amplify all of your biases you'd have a justifying ideology to make. It all seems fine. You would have the that responsibility so diffuse that nobody would really feel too badly about it, and you give these folks incredible political power, including constitutional rights, so that they could dominate your democracy so that they could basically, corporations can do whatever is legal used to not be that way they could do whatever they were, authorized to do by their charter, and then they have to stop so they get it the permission to build a canal and then made, and they may be done and go away eventual we made them immortal and that they could do whatever they wanted as long as its legal and then we gave them huge amount of power to determine what actually is legal by influencing democracy. Can I ask about what is the birth of a limited liability corporation like when? When did all that occur,
Will they go way back I mean during the slave trade. They were. They didn't necessarily call them that They were essentially, by shareholders, and so they would in a pool their capital, so is very similar. We ve had corporate mean. Actually, corporations are centuries old. If you go back to, I think some early universities and things, but we we Didn'T- have kind of general purpose- corporate laws in this country, I think until mostly eighteen hundred so when we first form this country, you would have to go to the legislature. There were only a couple, of significant corporations around even at the time of the founders, and so that's why you really don't see. Corporations in the constitution no they're not mentioned because they weren't very powerful when they did get more powerful and you have some quotes from some
founder saying all this is. This is a little scary and then, of course, they became very powerful and in eighteen you end up with the gilded Asian, and so then you have folks like Teddy Roosevelt, who are saying wait a minute. The this is a creation of law, and so we get to determine how much power it has and he responded with the kind of trust, busting movements breaking down some of the really big old trusts and- and that was in probably the first big push back where, where the government said wait a minute, you corporations are too powerful we're going to try to reduce that power and then I think the next big phase of that would have been in the depression. Where you have the new deal coming in and saying: ok, banks, you just wreck the account we were going to regulate. You were going to give workers more rights were going to create social security. We can do all kinds of things that that diminish corporate power over the deadlock
see and then it happened again in the Sixtys and Seventys, and what I think is it is. It might be about to happen again given that there is now so much concern about corporate power citizens united influence over our democracy, people worried about concentration of wealth at the very, very tippy top, and obviously people worried that we are unable to deal with climate change and another factor will be the power of social media corporations to influence elections to influence public discourse days. Into a kind of snuck in in a way that was really unexpected and people didn't see coming right, well, that's actually the pattern, people never see it coming right. What were all of these chapters pretty much begin with some kind of a discovery and some
industry races in there and takes advantage of it. I mean even slavery. The discovery would have been new world and this enormous commercial opportunity, if you can just get the workers in their turn, to grow the tobacco in the cotton in the sugar, but but you'd have the discovery you have an industry springing up to take advantage of it in and me king, a lot of money in and changing social norms along the way then problems emerging obviously slavery. They were inherent, but problems will emerge. Other people outside the industry discover those problems and pay attention, to them draw attention and then eventually you get to a law now that's kind of an artificial ending, because you have to make sure that log its enforced, but but in almost all of these chapters, you get you some some form of government action where they say? No. You can't do that anymore. We stop this industry. We ban this product, or at least we're gonna, try to tweak your behavior, but that process. First of all, it takes a lot.
A long time and enormous damage can be done in the meantime, but that process doesn't work. You dont even get your your somewhat happy ending if the industry has become so powerful that that it determines whether it gets regulated or not blocks those regulations will that's what I was getting to it, because kind of seems whereat. Now, with corporations like Facebook, like that, have an insane amount of power and that power is actually being used to dictate. Who becomes president that's it's really strange, like there's, never been a cooperation that mean other corporations did their best influence the market and influence regulations in a way that they can continue to profit. But this is a different thing where there are literally influence in influencing dirt correctly, who he comes the person who runs the country
which is a new thing. Well it it's a new thing when they do it through information yeah, it's not a new thing. Let me do it through money. That's that's pretty well established, but yeah. I mean you know. Somebody probably not me, because I dont know this this industry well enough, but but the pattern is so clear that that its clear where we were heading right, namely the problems will get worse and worse. Other people will talk about them. The problem a very new. I think, because we are talking about problems related to information and and that you know and social media how? social media effect, social and whilst I mean this gets really complicated can be hard to figure this out in addition to happen their own denial about what harms they inadvertently unleash. They are vectors for the denial of
fire industries last night, and so that's one of the reasons. Climate denial, for example, is still going to be out there and deeply rooted for long time either. Though the oil industry, which plays a huge role in building up, has basically set up. We we accept the climate science. We know this is happening. In fact, the Exxon Mobile even says it. It accepts the Paris agreement which says that we have to warming to well below two degrees centigrade in the end that sound small, that's actually dangerous amount of warming, but that's the target of this Paris agreement, though it also says we're gonna try to limit it. To one point, five you know what that means is dramatically reducing our emissions first, over the net
Ten years I mean, if you want to limit to one point: five degrees, we're talking about cutting our emissions by fifty percent. That means pretty much in it cutting fifty percent of our of our fossil fuel, use that that's a simplification, but then you have to go for that. More aggressive target, two zero net zero emissions by twenty fifty. So we're talking essentially about this huge industry to either completely transform itself or go away within thirty years, and then, by the way, after that, you have to go into negative emissions, which means bill. Being a new industry that sucks carbon out of the air and berries it. We haven't even really begun to talk about that, but but that's assumed what we're gonna have to do, because we have now delayed for thirty years. Thanks enlarge
to fossil fuel denial. So so you got Exxon, saying yeah, we understand Paris and all that. But if you, if you look at their own projections, about what they thinks gonna happen, they put out, these formal project think of how much oil will be consumed in the whole world and what our emissions are going to be. They still project emissions going up and then serve levelling off until like twenty forty, by which time and act they need to be very, very low, so it's and, like the tobacco companies, the big tobacco companies are no longer denying the basic facts. Staked admit this product is addictive and I've got a quote in the book from one executive saying: yeah kills about half of our of our lifetime. Smoking customers are most royal customers, so, but you know, but despite having for decades, said. If we really believe this was harmful, we wouldn't sell it their obvious. By continuing to sell it quite enthusiastically in that's kind of where we are, I think, with the major oil companies
coal is still in denial or others are still denying it, but but the major oil very interesting up apps problem, but they are still planning on selling more and more of their product. End and so badly served the kernel of denial that that industry has yet to grapple with but isn't it right now, at least temporarily inseparable and turned. Of our ability to move round trip disturbing goods me tat. I have to have oil, you have to have gasoline petroleum products if you do in a moment. Read them all, but fortunately we, we do have the technology is to two in fact slash our emissions. Will you dont have as a political will, but you could emulate? it is not impossible to say in ten years we are going to have closed, certainly our gas plants in our natural gas plants will either have carbon capture or they will be close. It's not impossible to say all of our cars. Certainly Oliver
new cars are going to be electric and where we can build an infrastructure that can be done. It is a massive undertake it is me: when people talk about the green New deal sometimes that rhetoric includes World WAR two, and I think that actually appropriate, because we are talking about a massive change that is going to transform our economy and, at the same time, hopefully address some of the inequalities that we already have in place. I mean that that's going to make a trickier, but most of the deals are, for example, very aware that we're going to be hurting coal miners, we're going to be hurting oil rig workers and and trying to put in place some ways that that we can keep them from suffering, help them find other jobs, help their communities diversify and and whatnot. So you know if we are going to avoid what will be a multi sensory catastrophe
terms, climate change. This is what we have to do in the end. I it's hard for me to even say the word catastrophe, because I know how people here that I know it sounds like a crazy exaggeration. Do you really think that those of this point well, I think it does to enough people that it from loss. Is it because of propaganda? Financing gave you yeah right, then so much the level that when they give you the worst projections, things that we should avoid mean when I would, but I was getting out when I was talking about these oil executive still selling oil is the right now they have to. I mean this: I understand that there needs to be a shift in absolutely in four in favour that, but If, if there was no oil right now, they must cut it all out of the crisis We have a real issue, bright river release. I mean humanity has an issue, and then we shouldn't be thinking of it as the oil companies issuer or climate issue at the no to humanity issue. How are we going to deal with this and, unfortunately, this is
Something capitalism is set up to deal with. You know that's what about growth it isn't about. How do we take this mess of industrial enterprise, wind it down and replace this technology with something else is the solution. Finding some method of profiting off appalling carbon from the atmosphere. It seems like if, if it becomes very effective to do That could be an enormous way that these company can count should have gone well, I'm not sure These companies will shift Salazar Hood because they do have drilling technology and what not so they could end up being leaders in actually burying the carbon that they once extracted and put into the atmosphere. That would be we're one one of the things that so weird about this whole debate for decades now is that you, you ve, got folks talking about how, in credibly, terrific markets are and how they can handle all these problems and
No starting in the nineties. Herself folks were saying great. Ok, let's put a price on carbon, because otherwise the markets are totally blind. If you can pollute for Plainly for free the market has no incentive to reduce polluting or to draw carbon out of the air and bury it. But the people who seem to have the most faith in the power of markets are the ones most opposed to putting a price on carbon, so the advances we might have made and in some states actually do have a price on carbon, but the advances we might have made more nationally globally have been blocked by people who who love. Markets and in here's. Another ironic part to this. The country whose, like our main competitor and not, incidentally, huge you'd. Polluter? Is China, ostensibly communist, they believe more in market power. Then you know that right wing of the Republican Party today have put a price on carbon, and you're, using market forces to try to reduce pollution, really
so China has more progressive and in terms of trying to reduce pollution and american well, China's polluting a huge amount, yeah bottles gonna on this particular issue of will. How can the markets help us reduce pollution? They using market forces to try to produce their pollution and we're Sana. A other really divisive. Aspect of this is that it's become some sort of left versus right, ideological issue like there's a lot of on the right that I've had conversations of people. That really don't have any idea what you're talking about where they instantly deny the climate the real issue and when you press them on it and disk, that's why the benefits are having sort of long form conversations is that if you do this unseen and that's what I was talking had things where you'll have seven minutes. Industry people shouting over each other is very hard to get to the heart of. Why do you believe this when you're talking over law, podcast hours long you get to these people and
they'll, adamantly denied that it's an issue, but they dont know why do you know him saying it's like a thing. If you're right wing, pondered or right wing person, you saying right wing things, you're gonna, say climate changes on our issue. What are right now, the economy right, I'm going to do right now, support jobs and people is a lot of people have put food on the table is a lot of people that need it, and then they get this sort of, hunting raving pro economic standpoint and it becomes a denial of environmental problems that becomes, leffertses right. It's very strange. I don't understand why anyone like how can operate not be a universal issue. How Any one not want the world better for our grandchildren? How could anybody not want less pollution, but it becomes This thing where we have all these different categories that are left and right,
and once you're on one side. You automatically seem to oppose those things that are there in the other parties idea. Well, in fact, there's one survey site in here that showed that climate change was the most polarized issue in the american political landscape even more than abortion really land. More should look more than Bush out. That was a snapshot in time and I think maybe that's changing. Certainly you see with younger republicans alot more concerned about climate change, but Europe certainly right. I mean it remains very polarized and I dont think you can understand it it. You know it's not in, I dont think makes sense from an ideological standpoint. I think it makes sense from a tribal Stanley that we have divided and- and it feels good to believe the same things as the people. You are affiliated earth and its tense too, do not believe the same things and sought that's a source of of hard
and you know that the reason it's such a big problem here is that this isn't just about making the world better for a grandkids. It's about avoiding catastrophe for and and so that's why you know it is finally rise to the surface. Within the democratic party I mean it's been ignored or or downplayed for two long, and certainly in the national campaigns, it was never perceived to be important enough or winning enough an issue to get a lot of attention now we see largely driven by the youth movement in insistence that yeah it's time. It is absolutely time its thirty years, past time that we get variable some about this end, and so I dont know what happens now with with covered with George Floyd. Obviously there, other issues dominating the news right now, but I really hope we we hang onto this issue as a critical one for the election and and and don't stop there, because this is going to continue to require lots of pressure to make sure
that we make the changes, we need you. I don't think it's gonna go away. I think, but the other issues do come to the forefront. But what at what you said, is really interesting, is that it gives you comfort to agree with the other people that are in your party in your group and that something its exacerbated by social media and manipulated by social media. It's one of the weird things about it is that operation could legally create hundreds, if not thousands, of fake pages. And then use those to make, like I'm sure, your whereof, the internet research agency from Russia that has an impact on two thousand? Sixteen lectures and dumb, Rene director did some pretty fast. Meaning work on that where she did a deep dive. Into how these accounts, whether its Facebook or Instagram, or what have you have been manipulated and how the how they use them, where there in one point they had a pro Texas group meet up at the eggs,
the same time as a problem. Muslim group on the exact same block like they laid monopoly, like there was no one child's play exactly. It was like they were moving pieces on Chess Board and they D literally set up altercations and You would imagine that I mean know what these fossils? companies or or any kind of company- that's involved in any some anything that would be considered scheme she environmentally! What I don't know how many manipulating I'd run or manipulative social media accounts they run. But I would imagine that's got be part of the game plan because online course. It so easy to throw a monkey wrench into the gears of stories eat, so it to throw sand in the gas tank. It's so easy and sort of monkey with the the numbers and change the ideas that are being disgusting, change, the narratives that it's it's. It's a turn
just a way that you can sort of shift the public's interest and opinions. On things I mean if you're willing to line manipulate than you are you have it obviously huge advantage, but there is also just the basic human tendency that when we talk to people we already agree with, we tend to then become stronger in our opinions, and so we we we get power, Christ, basically, and that's even before social media. So then you, Sir weapon eyes that polarization that tendency in and you ve got an algorithm nets as well. If you like that, video, how bout this video and suddenly people are getting in total radicalized on on climate change or on other issues, and so yeah I mean it is. It is a huge problem. How Do we overcome the social divisions, the social distrust? How do we overcome the denial- and you know, I think, If, if the patterns in the book come to the fore, we will say
He will find ways to build trust again. It'll probably have a lot to do with maintaining long term accountability and not just a flash reaction to what you hear, but it could very well take decades and we will have a lot damage done in the meantime. I wonder if there is going to be a time where there are laws again. And social media manipulation like that, because right now there not and there will be its- it seems like there has to be, because if, if you I can't I'm mad. I'm not naive enough to imagine that was happening with the internet researches season, Russia's not happening here it has to be. They understand. The effectiveness of its been well documented, the idea that corporations are gonna stepped back, go on that's on our business as I will we do. I mean that's an incredibly effective tool and if you're, gonna use it to manipulate opinions on opinions on whether its climate change or anything you don't, pharmaceutical drug overdoses and whatever whatever it is. You want to manipulate people with our
Imagine that that's a gigantic issue, but it's not something that he gets discussed in terms of in legislation to prevent that an end. Hopefully it more and more discussed, because it is very scary Amira. It turns out we humans, are easily manipulated and were easily manipulated even before social media. But now there is this incredibly sufficient. Hated engine to drive us apart to drive us in the direction that those best it manipulating us want us to gas and its addictive which is even crazier, it's a compound, weekly, addictive mechanisms like millions of people are lost in their phone. And lost in their computers like when their checking their social media stuff and that's one of the more interesting things about these social media, algorithms, that it's been determined that when people are upset
things when an angry about things they post more. So it's more valuable, so the algorithms favour people being that's so they'll, send you a few of you find abortion a hot topic or environmental issues. Does sending you, though, that's what's gonna, show up on your feet, really get me. This is what you engage in and it what's fascinating is it's! It's not even really malicious in that it's just pragmatic, because I have a friend who did an experiment I front ARI. Why to find out what would happen if he just looked up puppies so he just looked up puppies on Youtube and looked up puppies everywhere in his feed was overwhelmed by puppies. So it's not like this sum vicious plot to We feed you things that you hate just human. Nature. We tend to look at things a piss off it was. We? Consequently, until and now we have a very sophisticated
machine to drive us in the direction of getting more picked up, and that's Fifty eight a machine is clearly using the same sort of deceptive deceptive tactics. To try to diminish their responsibility for what they're doing exactly- and you know when one of the things that makes these tactics I think works a well is that they really are based, in human nature. I mean, I think, that if you are an executive, Your your instinct is that you are doing fine and your instinct is that the other side is wrong in that, and that psychological reflex then becomes a foundation for corporate strategy and then that corporate strategy becomes the basis of kind of its own new industry, of of public relations, folks and advertising people and lawyers and and think tanks who will
promote that and then that becomes an ideology that certainly what we saw. The progression for climate change- and I and I think, or climate denial and that's a dangerous trend do you can't. You do covers social media and denial in this. I don't really get into it. I mean I talk a little bit about yet night. It's really factor I mean the more the most recent industry that I talk about. The two most recent industries are the fossil fuels, denying climate change and also Wall Street. Denying with their proper, x and activities and an hazards that led up to the financial crisis of two thousand eight, that's a cannibal. Comes in and of itself right. You have read matter you these work on. I have read some of his work. He says vampire squid, DIA, clamped interfaces humanity that in war immortal line. So his description of Goldman Sachs yeah his work,
is fascinating and terrifying Jesse, you and not a guy with a financial background, so had to do a deep dive into all that stuff for years sort of grip on how they do things and what they're doing and that the idea that is the backbone of our civilization terms or economic civilization is really crazy. What a goofy system! of course, our industries become in so much bigger, as at present gdp in so much power more powerful without any evidence, social benefits. As far as I can see, and in I am also not a person with a financial background. I came to this. You know as an environment lawyer and not as a particularly naive person, but I have to say I was really astonished at at the depth of the exploitation. I mean just added should it wasn't even like where we think we're trying to do the right thing for our clients or we think we're trying to do the right thing for society it was. It was just
this full on, take the money and run and and Flotation me there's that they have this cute little code on Wall Street at was prominent before the crisis. I dont hope it's not so prominent. Now some, I b t. Why be g which stands for I'll be gone, you'll be gone, which was answer when somebody said wait a minute. What were pumping all this risk into the system that this investment projects going to fail as all gonna hit the fan this is gonna call, Perhaps I may do I b g M bonuses for selling these crazy risky products were all front loading, so yourself, somebody a multi year product and you get the bonus right up front. So you don't care with the long term. Risk is, and the attitude toward their clients. I mean that there is an author and in Britain who interviewed? All kinds of people and promised them anonymity
from the british it at that. The british financial industry, but it overlaps very much with the U S one and that the culture was rip ukrainian space off. You know, eat lunch or you be lunch, and I mean a lot. Out of really really vicious stuff going on and risks that were work so obvious that You can't believe that they were denying them. I mean when there's a housing bubble, it will burst, and There was an obvious housing bubble, it was done, for a long long time and that ultimately became the basis of all of this really toxic debt that got magically transformed into AAA investments, and it wasn't. I think that the industry was denying that it was going to burst. They just felt they were gonna get in and out before it burst that they can pass the risk after the next party before it happened. So I dont know do hold. That rationalization is it I mean it's, I put it all under the very broad,
category of denial, but but it s actually the of J P Morgan later would testify to the financial crisis Korea, commission, Somehow you know each us miss the fact that housing prices don't go up forever. I dont think they really did miss that they really so that were that's what the dreamy diamond said. Yeah I may have murdered, threw off, but that's actually what he said. I suspect he regretted phrasing it that way, because that's pretty astonishing and wonder how many arbed your budget or to the world If it's good questions, probably a lot right disturbed. I think there's probably lot you know. There's one actually went anecdote in the book night than I re told from a book that MIKE Hudson wrote called the monster and he's talking about. First, while the debate we had this new breed of mortgage lenders, the folks who actually went out to sell the subprime subprime mortgage is too
low income, people who often defrauded Anne and certainly not the most sophisticated financial consumers and this one particularly bad company, was without their end, Layman brothers sent a vice president to visit with this company because heat they want to know how they were doing. This was, I think, of them in the nineties, and he writes back and says that this is a sweat shop. It is high pressure sales for people in a weak state and it is a check, your ethics at the door kind of business. And leaving brothers rights back. We enthusiastically welcome the opportunity to partner in your future growth and ended up then in fact bring with them in financing these these mortgages and then buying them back packaging them up selling them to investors, and then eventually becoming the biggest bankruptcy in history and getting builder. Well, not Lehman brothers, although other ones do that's
the creation of a thing that is certain laid out like that. Well yeah, bits of internal stuff that that came out, but he added the fact tat they were you know so happy too to partner with and unethical business, and in fact There is also a lot of evidence that Wall Street, which is continuing to get the mortgage lenders to reduce their stand even lower, because you know started out with these very, very aggressive new companies weren't banks, these lending companies and they were new and they wanted to get huge, very quick and they were super aggressive, but they made so much money The more traditional banks started following an doing what they had been doing, and so all street gets involved in the and basically there saying you don't need documentation of income, and you know that the banker would say
the lender would say. Well, how do I know they're going to pay it back in Wall Street would take you dont need to worry about that and in fact they didn't, because Wall Street would buy it that the point wasn't, will this ever be paid back? The point was: is the is the interest rate on the surface of the mortgage high enough that we can packaged into what looks like a lucrative investment and, of course they would package lots of these together in an slice and Dyson stack them and keep rearranging them in and essentially then threatened and corrupted. The the and manipulated the ratings agencies, so that they would give AAA ratings so that your pension fund could buy it I was one of the things were so disturbing about matter even works. Is it so sophisticated that it takes so long to understand how they're doing it, what they're doing that the average person doesn't have a background of finance as you, you get it What or economics, if you get into it it's yours,
from scratch several times and go to wonder what are you doing this and by this legal and how is this legal in and when you're dead. Doing with just numbers to that's? What's disturbing to me, there's something up environmental impact that at least it seems somewhat tangible, like it's a thing right, it's count. Carbon in the atmosphere has an impact the temperature rises, the sea level rises. The you know, I'm saying like there's physical things, whereas numbers are these weird things: where is your home, Business model is predicated on increasing the amount of numbers. Are you earn you can find, ways, especially the people are willing to go along with that. You can find ways to screw with those things, and that's that's the most disturbing thing about finances to me like that, when he made off situation, for example, how many people I had to know, there's something wrong with the amount of money there earning how many b
had no, that coming evil had to how many people, and how did you like, listen to just numbers, Getting these numbers were putting numbers and we're getting numbers back money, more mum numbers back. Then we get in so we're good. Well and I think any industry like finance that is incredibly complicated and abstract, and in that way, that doesn't feel quite right. But but who really knows is one that is absolutely right. Four denial, because the complexity means nobody really knows the risk. It also means the industry can, and it did go Congress and say you don't get this, which was true. And so ok we're selling these derivatives and yeah. Maybe they're super complicated. Nobody knows what they are, but you regulators hands off we, the market. We are self disciplined. We, the industry, can will not take crazy risk. And by the way you should get rid of those depression era laws. So we can do some other stuff and then eventually, of course, you have the financial crisis, but the abstract nature
of all these numbers also means that would ever little bill. Michael often somebody's head saying this is gonna, hurt somebody it's gonna, be muted gonna be ignored because it just feels so abstract mean ok, you sell a buy. You know you sell the security chew. A pen fond and maybe way down the line. It'll will fail and may be, some people won't get to retire, but you don't know who they are I am happy that won't happen. It mean that more abstract it is, and, of course, the more globalized our economy becomes. More distant, the impacts, the harder to imagine they are in the easier to ignore and deny then the ad in the fact that they are able to manipulate politicians exactly the fund, the campaigns they really creepy ones when they give them money
speak like enormous sums of money after they get out of office like that, can be a little corrupting her, but it says so gross an obvious when you're giving a former president or a former secretary state a court, of a million dollars to talk for an hour like why? What What does that person saying so fascinating? That's a very high rate of return for order. I have half an hour work. Well, when Bernie Sanders was upset, Hillary Clinton is like released the transcripts. Let me hear what you said: chance in Hell, she's got a tooth Do they say during those things that warrants a quarter of a million dollars or more it? Sir? it's a shady system and there's no motivation to shift it change, well, there's there's no more motivation for those who are benefiting from
certainly those who have the most money in and are able to manipulate it. I do think there's I mean if you were a politician and you were constantly raising money, I mean, I think many them hate that and would love a system that didn't require them to be constantly doing, that at an end, it isn't like those pilot. The politicians were raising money for the campaigns they get to walk away with it, the they're using that for their campaign, so so There is motivation among the elected people not to have to keep doing this, but in the mean I'm those who are benefiting from this and who can manipulate the system are gonna just any efforts to try to change it. So that's a huge problem is it might be motivation, but there's no tangible alternative is nothing like where you didn't they work will get a clear path. You don't have to raise money anymore. Well, there is there ways to whittle away at this end- and you know, didn't used to be quite that's bad and then certainly you can provide some additional public funding or or require require networks to give
politicians time on the air things that allow how them to speak to the to the public, which is, of course, what this money is supposed to give them a chance to do without having to go to other people who have money to give them the money so that they can get access to the public a minute. I think there are ways to do this. I wouldn't We tend to be an expert at all and campaign finance reform, but I think it is a field, and I think that the reforms of the past have been Blocked or undone, and we can- we can try to put some of those back in place. What You're doing with this book is essentially of a magnifying glass and some of the worst aspects of human behaviour. Is it depressing kind of its? You know it's kind of depressing. I have also had people tell me. The book is inferior with some you know, I really didn't intend that I I kind of thought. Well, let me tell you when I first imagined this book, I imagined that we were going
through climate denial. We were gonna snap out of it because it was so obviously suicidal and then You were gonna, look around and go home. How did that happen and how do we make sure that never happens again and I would be able to say look here, some factors that have contributed throughout history and an years. You know maybe will lead to some reforms and obviously didn't work out. That way. This book has come out when we have a climate denier running. The country is only Iliad climate tonight will he he has called it a hoax several times now. I think maybe he's been talked out of using that term lately, but he still pushing back the regulations are really trying to climate change as a whole. I think he's. I said that several times and ended. I know at least in one one tweet, maybe more, on a chinese hopes that China was trader to perpetrate on us so in any event, you know I I and infuriating book I didn't mean to. I meant to write a kind of let's all stepped back and look at this sort of book. But
just turns out. You cannot write about infuriating topics without writing kind of infuriating book. I do try to keep some perspective here and an you know, look at look at the good parts of this history, which is to say in each case you have members of the public you have signed. Yes, you have journalists, you have movement stepping up in confronting that denial and eventually, in most cases overcoming it, and you know we do have others elements of our society that are designed to try to not just pursue profit but to seek truth, scientists and journalists, and then doesn't mean there not also trying to two per soup profit, sometimes or at least get paid for for their work. But you know we do have systems in place that have successfully confronted this, and so it's not like we're starting from scratch. We are just in a very big hole right,
now, and particularly about climate change, and particularly with so much corporate power over congressmen and, frankly, the states as well. What what subjects were Were you see there is actually progress been made? Well, you know people, I'm in fighting climate change on the state level, and we have done Some things also federally for a long time. Over the years I mean many, many states have put in place climate targets to reduce their greenhouse Submissions many have put in place when you will energy standards which have been enormously successful in building up the wind. Industry, the solar industry and those technologies as they deploy and improve, have gotten so much cheaper. I mean it's really much much he's your now to imagine getting rid of fossil fuels than it was a forty ago, when the industry first confronted this or win society first really started looking at this,
In it and the federal level late, they ve made major improvements in they required efficiency standards, which have been really helpful for, like major appliances, we had auto efficiency standards, now Obama put some strong winds in place. Trump has ruled those back again. So that's going to limit that the progress exactly when needs to be accelerated. So that's that's, maybe not one of the good but pieces amuse news you were asking about, we have well, I mean, I think, that's good the larger the focus and at an even though we have the trumpets and we're not going to be part of the Paris agreement anymore, which, by the way, every the country in the world is a part of there's a handful that have ratified it, but everybody else is part of it. Even though he said that you have many states and in many cities stepping forward and saying what we are still part of it and we are going to be working to reduce our emissions. So that's all very good news,
the technology that we do have a deep bench of of policy experience. We know a lot of good things that we can do that will work and we have the rising concern that youth movement in all, on the world, really that you who are who are really stepping up and say enough. We have got to deal with this and we ve got to do with it now and because you grown ups of wasted. Thirty years we ve got to deal with a particularly aggressively. Now you cover how many different subjects in sport I cover. Eight different campaigns of denial is seems like for you in particular. Climate change is the most disturbing or that's. Well, that's the one the future of human civilization and the one that I got started on yeah but term, but yeah cover. I cover seven other industries, including slavery, radium, radium, radium. What's industrial strength, denial taken
Radium Radium Radium is a crazy, crazy story. Radio, MRS Insane, Lee Radioactive element that was discovered not run to write red one. Nineteen hundred by the curious in France and it of mystery. I mean it was way more radioactive than uranium and people didn't even know what radio activity really meant, but there was a sort of aura of wizardry around it and and when they SK it, they didn't well, the first thing they discovered and they discovered this. The hard way was that it burned your flesh. It didn't burnt right away, but carry some around and then in a few days you would have a burn there because it was sending off all of this energy They thought. Okay, we have this flesh killing cell killing element. What can we do it and they thought well. Let's try to kill cancer tumors, which was
actually very good idea, and they experimented with that. That was the the medical use for radium. We're gonna put this radium next to a tumor. Now we'll take it away and little shrink and we can use the same radium for the next tumor and so is the various what form of radium they would put it. It will at least some. How would we find it and still it into twenty times little amount and then they would put it in a needle or put it in a vile or something you just position it in your tumor start out his oar and they had a refinement, refinement down down down down down and so the governments at the time in Europe and and also in the U S, thought great, here's this weird crazy, valuable stuff. Maybe we should control this or so we'd make sure gets used to actually cure cancer and and in Europe, that's pretty much with did in the. U S we try to do that, but the industry was a brand new industry that was just forming and they step forward that the first company was called standard. Chemical. They stepped forward and said no, no, no! No, if, if the governments-
are taking over radium because its radioactive radium or well everything the little radioactive. Where will this stop classic sort of slippery slope argument and somehow it it succeeded? So well happened was this mysterious important element became a another commercial project that commercial product to be exploited by this. This company standard chemical. There were some others that later popped up standard chemical was founded by this guy named Joe Flannery, and he was he had background. Is his family or mortician and then he went into it, street and then he was kind of a snake oil say some salesmen any kind of failed, but he wanted with radium. He told Congress to cure cancer. You ve had a good motive, but he also one big market right cancer. You know just one disease and if you re use the radium, that's not a market, so he was determined to expand that market. He actually opened what what was called the first free Radium clinic
in the world in nineteen thirteen Pittsburgh and he invited patients in and higher doctors and thousands of them were injected with radium or they drank radium so, if you can somehow prove that consuming radium is healthy, then you have a market right in many of these people did have cancer, but it turns out injecting them with radium would actually kill them a lot faster than that answer would have and that one of the clinic doctors was was questioned before Congress in and he explained well the way. Here looked at it, he was just shoving them over a little more quickly, so he was worried about the fact that it was. It was killing the cancer patients and they weren't a street, cancer patients are retreating anybody they were treating arthritis. They were treating joint pain, they end, so they work.
You know giving this very toxic substance to people with low level chronic problems, and then he would. He actually formed his own medical journal and he would have his doctors right up the results of this and put it in there and send it out all the doctors. So yeah I mean it. Was really pretty crazy, but he did succeed in launching this health fad where suddenly, there were lots of products that contain radium now some of them said they did With didn't, but but many of them really did and you could buy your radium, get your radium in all kinds of different ways. If you wanted a radio after the fact of drink, you could drink it, you couldn't still get injected. You could take pills, you could
want to soak in radium. You could buy bath salts ointments. There was radio, there was radium, toothpaste, yeah and Anne, oh and and one of them the more interesting ones there were. Radio active rectal surpassed tories- and these were marketed basically for male sexual dysfunction- that's not what they called it they. They said this was for, as I recall, weak stir discouraged men who wanted to perform the duties of a real man? so yeah, and that was you know, I think what happens if you, if you're going to sell a quack product, you try to identify problems, that people are kind, embarrassed about so they're less likely to go to the doctor. That will buy it out of the back of a magazine and then, if it doesn't work, they're not going to complain about it or not, going to sue you
but these were not just market for that. There were marketed for colds. They were marketed for Obi City for constipation for insanity. That was a big one. Trying to cure insanity, so yeah becomes a health fad along the scorn for well profit. It pretty much fizzle, out in the thirties, largely because one particularly prominent and wealthy individual could afford to poison himself very thoroughly by drinking these radium drinks, everyday and ultimately, his his facial bone started solve aloud. He had like holes between his sinuses and is now. This is what happened as well to a group of workers who were painting radium paint onto watch dials, which is actually a more well known part of this history, A lot of young women were hired to paint radium to watch Giles not just watch Del
they put them on alcohol products. These images o rigid, Cedar, Picotte, radium jaw John MIKE Us, when I look at TAT, one guy with lower jaws, is gone on the second row. So this, oh, my god,. Yeah, so radium this went on for twenty years Yes, I mean that the industry got going in the mid nineteen teens this this one man, I was just talking about died in the early thirties, got lots of press and that help the health fad part of a good way. The the work exposure. The young women, usually who were there, figured and died from from this that part of the industry of radioactive paint lasted a bit longer into the thirties. They did when they began
taught these women and young women. They might have been fifteen when they got hired. They taught them to make a nice sharp point on their paintbrush with their lips and tongue, and because there was this health fat around radium, they told them that this would would put a gun when their cheeks and you ve seen these pictures that they really had some some change in there. Six, but it wasn't a glow. They ended, they told them. It was good for them and So a lot of them not all of them. I mean so you know not. Everybody died, which made it easier for the industry to actually blame them an end later. Three would say that these people, with these horrendous disfiguring diseases that they were suffering from a pre existing condition that this was somehow not. The fault of radium that they had hired, cripples and and other people who works strong, because this was easy work and when they got sick
Betty blame them and they were being punished for their generosity, of hiring spokesman, place and in it, and by the way these women had radioactive breath point I mean so it was not like there is any doubt that they hadn't radium lodged in there, what is radioactive breath, it means there exhaling radon soldiers measurable yeah even by the standards of the time. Not now one thing about the radium industries in denials like that: blaming the victim are appalling, but one of the things did see. Is that the leaders of that industry, including the guy who invented that radioactive paint and including Joseph Flannery, ah, died, and- and so neither the right direction. The inventor of the paint died because of radium exposure, his teeth and fallen out. Corny time magazine, his fingers had been removed and nobody else,
for that particularly gruesome detail, but it then he died of anemia. These are all radium induced ailments, Joseph Flannery, the guy who launch standard chemical. Well, he had this guy the idea that he had radioactive waste right, so he hired a botanist to find out if it could be a fertilizer and then they published a report that you should yeah spread radioactive waste on your food crops because its great he actually had him. Bread waste on his own garden and then six years later, Flannery died and The industry didn't mention this, but his birth certificate, which I managed to dig up, mentioned, that he had a contributing factor. His death of anemia, which is something that radium exposure causes you mean certificate is eligible. I'm sorry yes, dosage starts. Did I mean that's right and his death? Certainly, thank you so tat. He. Had anemia an end if he believed his own clinic his own, his own sales pitch, he probably dry,
more radium to treat is renewing silk, so he did die so so in these two characters at least we have people believing what they said enough actually kill themselves as well as other people. So it seems again that this is theirs. Is human characteristic that this this tendency? We start making money used or justify. You want to keep that money. Coming answer, you start justifying your actions, manipulating the facts and continuing to push out whatever it is that you're doing that's allowing you to earn this profit! Well, You know. One of the reasons I talk about Joe Flannery is that he's he's a a really good example of a certain kind if a person that we celebrate, because they then and things and they make things happen and they build businesses, the founders of industry and We know from the psychological studies that the network Show me blow me back up. There's a model when you think
about how the mind works, that that governs of this research that we ve got it s a going system in stopping system, an approach system and an inhibition system. One of the things that activates the approach system is power and if you have an approach and active approach system, you are focused on your goal. Your focused on reward. Meanwhile, the powerless, our focus, the inhibition part of the mind, is more triggered by powerlessness in your more focused on risk. So if you're focused on reward you're, not focused so much on risk you're not so focused too much on consequence for other people and and so of course, that make gets you hailed as a visionary and Joseph Flannery was hailed as a visionary, and he did you know he was bold. He was invented. We worked hard, he built a business, he just didn't ask in ocean should we actually feed this cell
killing radioactive substances fuses into people's bones permanently to people without any evidence of safety or should we just go for it and see how it works, and so you know that that think is, is troubling in the sense that you ve got industry leaders who fit a certain psychological profile who rise to the tops. Their industries, precisely because they are reward, focused but if they are not balanced out by other people whose job it is to say what about the risks? What about the consequences? What could go wrong here? You have a rest. For disaster and also ignorance at the time we ve been no one- really understood that car stuff in terms of what we need
An old proverb, Provident really know what radiation ready, the general public and didn't know it all and in fact, radio activity. You know there was this incredible aura around it. I mean it was energy with stimulations. That's one, the reasons it got used for sexual dysfunction and treatments. Yet we don't have an That's the problem, without with the case of a lot yeah me too, with the case of a whole lot of these folks, the consumers of these products. We really don't know much about what happened. We know more about the radium girls, who were the ones who use this paint tat so disturbing its yeah. Very disturbing you just whenever I hear stories about that from you know, my early nineteen hundred zero is wonder how much is something like that happening right now, they can look back on in the year
twenty three hundred go, what were they waited the outcome? Twenty Twond, it may well be social media. You now that we have unlocked some really powerful potent force in its addictive and people love it and so exciting and racing forward in it. So new that nobody fully understands the risks yet, but I think that might be one what, when people look back there, they will think how did these people? let this happen. How did they lead it rip them to pieces like that? How did it? How did they let it destroy all of their time, stand each other in their government in their experts in their academia, so that nobody really could tell- or at least a big chunk, of your population could not tell what was true and what was just somebody pandering to their tribal biases, while also, what's it doing nor children, we in Without it, you grow up without it. What is it? happening to eleven year olds right now that a facebook account in twitter account and into
I'm accounts and they're going back and forth with people all day long had been mean to each other. I know personally, people that get involved I didn't like these online beefs with people and their sick. They get sick thing it ill like they can't leave. There they can't get out of bed there their survival. Early disturbed for days on end. They have to get on medication. That's really comment and I dont read that stuff and I'm a fifty two year old man with a fairly healthy brain and an understanding of my own shortcomings. I'd stay the hell away from here, but I know a lot of people who are addicted and they you know you'll see them some days and their sweating their faces pale. What's going on, I am involved in this twitter saying you know somebody got mad at me about this, then I went back and forth about that. Next thing. You know my my boss found out about it? And it's right: yeah yeah, it's it there's a definite ugliness to it.
And if you think about the anonymous comments in out one of the things that I at once the surprise me. You know how it when you ve got a european company. It might have S a over at the end of its name. Instead of ink, that's common that as stands like an French, First Societe and name. It stands for anonymous society, anonymity with such a central feature of the corporation that they actually appended to the names are, why should you don't know whose owning these things, and so that's another reason that the people do on it don't feel. Responsible and anonymity. We know from all kinds of research and from you know, the internet brings out a kind of so it's not just era where I'm, yes and and just a kind of casual brutality and certainly not social risk. Its so yeah I mean, I think, that it
gonna be a huge issue, and I think people certainly smarter than me who understand this industry better, are going to have to pick it apart and try to think about how we really do directly address these prob We obviously didn't evolve with social media in mind and our brains in beings, highly social creatures, huge portions of our brains, are about looking around at our place within our tribe, looking at other tribes in and just dealing with, all of the status issues in the comparison issues and social media, of course expands that dramatically and end. It's just, I think, you're right really hard for people to deal with. What we are seeing is so clearly right now cause it's being exacerbated by social distancing,
there were not around each other and with theirs less communication person to person, particularly with strangers or particular people. You have issues with people are getting together and communicating face to face hadn't thought it at their summit and then children how many children are doing, like my kids, are all doing zoom school which is horrible minutes it's so ineffective, their barely paying attention strategies to commute the nature and to shut her camera from pretend they're out there laptop broken it's kind of hilarious, but these kids. Are engaging even more in social media? and less in hang out with each other, it's really like a perfect recipe for the distorted in confused society scary. It is and again it's a new thing, so The regulations that are in place there just there's really nothing to prove that people from using it to manipulate things right. It's not illegal and it was
take a long time before we get those in place jumbo and also of what might be too late before you. Recognize a repercussions mean Facebook is talked about, making their own money you're talking about making their own bitcoin type crypto currency? than to expose majority, manipulating things in some really weird ways if they start having their own money. On top of that and then they can manipulate their own individual economy like what? What does that look like meant no one. Even considered known, considered, cryptic twenty years ago, no one consider the impact of social media ten years. What are we gonna be looking at thirty years from now? That's really. Question I mean equal. Our failure of imagination goes both ways. We we don't tend to imagine the problems there are going to result from the technologies and the new industries. We also hardly ever Imagine how we will solve those problems we hardly ever. If you look at any kind of speculative fiction or movies or comic books mean you'd
Don't see progress, you don't see. People getting together figuring out a problem hammering out a solution putting in place. That sort I mean, because of course it's boring, now is not an amount yet merits our deeply disturbing and terminator. It's kind of interesting. If you compare that too much older science fiction, that that has a much more positive perspective, often not always, but at least they words, often something that was positive. Although I have to say a lot of that is stuff that was actually put together by corporations who were showing you the home of the future and on their marvelous appliances, and while those who were hopeful they are released. Where have they and we want to encourage hope. We just wanted to be realistic and focused and driven home. Most certainly the ozone layer is an interesting subject cover, because that doesn't get this. Anymore, but in Australia and you assign you burst into flames, there's everywhere you go trillion their disease. Billboards that for skin cancer
is really it was released. It was last time I was there, which is over ten years ago, but it's really strange. There is easy billboards everywhere that show tumors and show in our people that have skin cancer and talk to you about the damages and the dangers of sun yeah. Not really. I am a giant hole Australia, there there close enough to the ozone hole or partially PS, I suppose they got our hairspray and get our big exactly gutter. Yeah I mean it's. It amazing how that story. It does seem too, forgotten threat and the fact of of the six ass. I mean we caused this huge problem. We discovered this huge problem which we need, and I mean that was kind of serendipitous and you the industry denied it and in this kind of came into chapters first, it was aerosol industry saying this is an attack on
free enterprise- probably the KGB, is behind it. I mean what else cellular they saw. There was one aerosol company President Yahoo suspected it was a KGB, but but many industry leaders were talking about this being as an anti capitalist crusade in and partly because this was the early seventy, so they had already faced all of these, in demanding environmentalist saying take the lead on the gasoline and do all kinds of other things, and so they were starting to feel like act on all sides and and eventually. So there were some denial, they mostly political event. Surely that got handled. I shouldn't eventually have a relatively quickly because actually only nineteen, seventy six ex when they said. Ok, we're getting the stuff out of spray out of any order. We need this break hands. What was it that was in the spring chlorofluorocarbons Cfcs, which were invented? Ironically, the same guy, who invented leaded gasoline at GM. Oh boy invented both of these,
Secondly, a hidden in his name is Thomas mutually yeah and he left quite a mark on the world, but but here's the thing I mean. I blame him for putting leaden gasoline that was terrible, but inventing cfcs he's was actually done because it was replacing the poisonous gases that were then in refrigerators and would sometimes leak and kill people. So people were just transitioning, now from ice boxes, to fridges and and so they needed a non toxic gas to put in their. So he came up with this and was nontoxic, and so on, with the time. Nobody really knew much about the ozone layer and they certainly didn't know Cfcs, we're gonna racket, so much much less obvious risk and then it wasn't in until the seventies, then scientists who, who just sort of we must put this altogether and realized. We are wrecking the ozone layer and by seventy six, I think it was seventy six, the fort ministration said: ok, we're getting it the Cannes. You got a couple years and this interest
Three, the aerosol industry who had been screaming and yelling about Anti capitalists said ok, maybe it wasn't, was not that big deal was easy for them to do and then then I guess we're in the car administration. They were going to start looking at the harder problem of how'd, you replace cfcs in refrigerators and air conditioners, and they were for putting up a plan for that, but then raking got elected and then in the concerns of the Sixtys and Seventys about how do we protect? The environment were replaced by concerns about. How do we at voyage environmental regulations, because they they were, they felt it was hurting Disney and so they basically dropped the ball on this completely. In the end, the corporations likes you Pont, which was the top sea of sea maker. They had been were on substitutes, but once the the pressure of regulation went away, they just dropped at they. Didn't looking for substitutes, even though they had the same size
and telling them that there was a risk here, but they decided weren't. We're not gonna have to worry about it. And eventually the ozone hole is discovered and scientists are shocked because the models had predicted. You know gradual reduction, no zone and suddenly you ve got this deeper. Action in ozone in it covers like, in this huge space over Antarctica, One of the reasons NASA had not discovered this with their satellites was that they were expect so much less that they had apparently programme to the computers to read huge readings like this as instrument error, why. So it was actually the British who discovered this date. They didn't feel national aid going down to Antarctica like measuring things, anyway, they announced at the NASA, looked back and said: whoops you're right, huge ozone hole. Then everything kind of accelerated and end by eighty seven. We had the Montreal Protocol and even though Reagan had run on this anti regulatory platform he signed,
the Montreal Protocol Senate, ratified it I'll think therein. Dissenting votes. So that was a big success story and by the way, by the time things really were winding down. Even Dupont said: ok that there's enough scientific, we're, gonna, stop making our product, and so It's sort of the one example I can point to where science in evidence overcame denial, but it's an example where the product wasn't there court, In fact, it was a little sliver of revenue that wasn't that lucrative they could replace it with something that they could sell. And they going to clearly get regulated anyway. So so clearly that, in the benefits of continued denial, had sort of disappeared, and so you can count on evidence leading to the end of corporate denial. More typically, you have a situation like tobacco and fossil fuels where, even if it does lead to denial it doesn't they don't stop selling the product right? So,
and again. Obviously, oil companies can't just stop selling their product, but they can be part of a process for us all to figure out how we're going to replace it as quickly as possible. What what efforts were done if any, to regenerate ozone to cut the emissions are not aware of any thing. I don't know that yeah its money, I have not heard, but he talk about that, but it we ve always known that the sea of seas take decades to get up to the atmosphere. So stopping emissions meant that the old stuff was still going, there was a total decades to fix it. We do see They have signs of healing now of the ozone layer, so it does seem like we have solved well solve this. We have, we have stopped the harm and it's going to get better through natural circumstances. But will you know what I was talking about? How people dont. Let us celebrate that as humanity at its best. You know why cause we, We did something very harder in in the sense of figuring out the science getting the nations of the world together and getting rid of a product that had been
Please useful invaluable to us, but what happened immediately after that was this political backlash even when you had the chemical into three saying yep. Weird storing the ozone layer, we're gonna, stop doing that. You had these right wing groups freds are actually was one of the witnesses who was also in in merchants of doubt who goes in and he gets to testify. Congress is a scientist and he saying that the main stream, science, on which you have just based all of these decisions, being bamboozled and they have an anti capitalist agenda and you had then I think it was time to lay saying he doesn't listen to the ozone trends pan all of those hundreds of scientists who have hammered out the data on these issues. He listens to fret singer and that was sort of the beginning, while not the beginning, because that you could take it back to the eighties, but that was the next step in the right
eyes of these science deniers, who said we had this all purpose agenda that looked at lots of different industries and the funny thing What's here you know, you had the industry sang no we're we're fine with this, accelerating the phase outward we're gonna go ahead and do it so you know the way I think about it. Is that industry for a long time fuels doubt and to some extent they also been funded groups with an idiot logical agenda who continue to push that doubt and then someone. Those industries stopped denying the science, maybe because we're gonna get sued or maybe because it was just time, but the groups that they have funded now, sort of outflank them. On the issue and, for example, Exxon used to fund Exxon Mobile used to fund this little crazy little group called the heartland did you and they they stop doing that quite a long time ago, this institute kept just getting me
more and more extreme. On this issue, and recently they add a dispute between X on mobile in the Heartland instituting Heartlands leader called Exxon Mobile part of the ty, energy, global warming, movement- that's where so, you know, their things are, are weird right now that super weird, cohesive, Berwick, Exxon part of an anti energy global warming move movement. Now, it's possible that this was all kind of stage to make Exxon look good, but I think they have just created a monster in that monsters. Gonna keep going around out there and it keeps getting a lot of money. The progress it doesn't. We know necessarily know whose funding these groups any more fairly long time, Exxon funded a lot of climate denier groups. They got a lot of public push back and pressure. They stopped funding most extreme ones, not all of them. Then the Coke brother started funding their foundation started funding a lot of these groups. They got a lot of it.
Engine. Then we saw a lot of the funding of these groups going underground into these dark money. Organizations like donors, trust that promise anonymity, so that if you want to fund a play, highly sensitive issue. Nobody knows you ve done it so these the more extreme groups get a lot of money from these dark money. Innovations and and therefore there's even deeper anonymity and end no accountability that some four digit of x. I was doing the first sitting there gone look. I know we can hear someone to call us a bunch of hippies yeah. I suspect that it, it wasn't that, and I think they really have just created a monster here really would be brilliant if it was true. Well, I think that some of this It is true that you, I mean here's the thing, if you Exxon and you don't actually want to do anything. You use, been off the denial and other groups that will actually stop things? I mean this little group heartland, meaning that that this extra
edge of these advocacy groups. They are deeply involved in the Trump administration. I mean they. It's not like they're just out their howling in the wilderness. They have had enormous influence. So, if you can back off like like exit specially Exxon Mobile, especially if you're being sued and you ve got angry shareholders and you ve got the Essie, see you again of recent and an you, have angry european countries that are taking this more seriously in your multinational, You have a lot, a reason to kind of keep your mouth shut and, and maybe say the right things, but you can indeed still benefit. From the denial you have spun off into the world, that is in fact say rolling back the fuel efficiency standards. I dont know what Exxon Mobile has said about that, but clearly the more inefficient our cars. The more oil gets burned, are their tactics and is there a?
who would have thought that goes along with the set these strategies, like is taught in universities as places where they learn this time, because you would think that its very valuable it's often very sophisticated mean how to actually manipulated and tonight is something that gets taught once they get into this corporation is internal thing or is it? Is it just a natural factor in, the way human beings, reactive profitability and denial of responsibility. I think it certainly starts there within with it being a natural reaction, but I think than what happens is industries learn from the previous industry. Tobacco taught everybody how to do this, certainly everybody in the modern era, and then, of course, you do have this, this industry of groups that serve multiple industries. So if you can be a group that sets up front groups
And I quote one here: the man named Rick Berman, who has a company that sets up front groups for industries that are facing regulation and he promises them completely amity, and the irony is that he was he was talking to a Group of oil and gas executives in saying hey. We can give you complete anonymity and some are saying things like well, you know your tail, yes, we should really be attacking people's character and reducing the credibility, and I'm not so sure I like that, and he says you can either party phrase it lose prettier, win ugly said, I will give you complete anonymity. People have no idea who's paying me and then but in the audience anonymously leaked the whole tape to the New York Times and so you can see the all of the texts and- and he you know he was talking about the various strategies in one of the things that he explicitly said of those pretty obvious already from the tobacco history was that
You do not need to convince people. You are right when it comes to science denial. All you need to do is raised out, because, in order to do something, we need to reach a certain level of certainty? Need momentum- and it is actually really easy to commit to diminish that by raising doubt that certainly something the fossil fuel industry He has done with respect to climate and and what he said was doubt paralyzes people they think I dont know whose right they think I'll just wait and then Basically, you have sort of a tie in their minds, but you win every tie because you have preserved the status quo so that kind of a strategy. That's you know it's pretty sophist decade, in the sense that it was an insight that that really lots of industries with science denial, but it was all a pretty obvious lesson from watching the tobacco industry.
But but really nobody's put it to use the weight of fossil fuel industry has done around climate change. So there isn't a sense of playbook, there's buccaneers, an industry that will help you run those play, and also keep you hidden while you're running those place. So you don't have to be visible two year shareholders to EU consumers to follow If this was an operating system, we would abandon it and bring a new one right like if this was windows. Ninety five or something we might be better able to predict how it will crash us. It seems like the operating system of, whether its economics or politics never really gets updated, just sort of gets patched, Surely this is not operating system that takes on a life of its own and has its own desire to perpetuate itself. Maybe this is where
You know the future of our operating system. I mean you know if you think about soup again back to the comic books back to the novels, back Frankenstein our creations tend to want to live, I tend to want to turn on us and corporations are our creation. Yours How did you choose which ones to cover and were there any subjects that you left out? They didn't. He will he I was. I was pretty conscious about eventually I mean I stumbled around a long time and looked a lot of industries, but I wanted first of all in it. The streets where there was a lot of evidence, so it was clear that this isn't just reasonable doubt. This isn't just people trying to figure it out this there. There was something going on here that I could call denial. I also ended up with industry
that had an enormous impact because there were just so many of them and in fact, all of the chapters deal with hurting millions of people or threat being catastrophic global harm like ozone depletion or climate change, with, in fact the exception radium, which think we can probably say only hurt thousands of people so with first two factors and and because I was looking at this as a social phenomenon. I didn't want cases where company, was just keeping a secret and got discovered. I wanted cases where there was a sustained camp pain of denial over time, which of course gave me lots of source,
material to look at, but also because that changes the way people think about things. Not just the primary question of like does do cigarettes, cause cancer but larger questions of. Can I trust my government. Can I trust science who should decide these things? How certain do I have to be so? It was that kind of social influence, and I was really interested in and social norms and social change. So I looked at those now as far as industries, I didn't look at I I didn't write about lead paint. Because I already had they did gas, but lead pain has its own long history and end. You know it's just so tragic. You look at these old ads in their turn. King about in a paint your babies nursery with this. Let me in- and the thing is this like lead us into contaminant of lead paint. Lead, is like the main gradient mean it was. They were basically spreading, a known poison,
for all of our living surfaces, knowing that it would eventually crumble. Knowing that it accumulate slowly and poisons people and hear something I read: I'm not a hundred percent sure, that's true, but his heart breaking that lead is sweet. You hear about children, eating led ships, you think why would they eat let ships? I guess, because it's kind of sweet So I could benefit of pudding. Leaden things are made good paint, I mean it. You know it was strong and and now, of course, with we think of it as these old old building and so we think it is crumbling, but it it did a pretty good job ass, a paint. If you didn't count the human impact would did you get any push back, or did you ever get caught targeted by these different industries that your covering we concerned at all about that. Why you're writing these same kind of exposing I'm kind of exposing bet Actually you know funny? I thought about: should I be trying to interview people for all of these and I really didn't
I tried I called Ethel Corporation, which still exists. The company that may little painting I mean not, lend me let a gas. They ended up, moving on the products they while they sold it overseas for a long time, but they may also made a lot of other things, so they still exist even though there product was banned there only product at the time that they were started was banned in this country, and I called them up and said John putting this book about corporate denial and just wondering you know if you'd like shocked me about letting gestures, silence, on the other side of foreign, and then they were transfer me to somebody else, and I will try it again and get silence and then that we get disconnected- and it became pretty clear to me at the beginning that I really it wasn't gonna. Be all that helpful for me to say to ask people so tell me about what you're in denial of, because that that I didn't think I was going, work very well and and also because my focus was the public debate, and how did it affects society? That's it when I ended up focusing on the most so
You know I wasn't worried about the industries, as I was writing this little worried now, but we really I'm just quoting them. So at this point I don't feel like. I met their particular risk. Well, no I mean not even risk, but that work Has there been a reaction by these from any of these interests, because the whole thing is about denial right, so I would imagine you book put out a book about in dust, draw strength. Denial you'd, get some denial about there that no denying that may be, but did you know I've picks such big industries in these campaigns are so old that there's nothing taking early newsworthy about saying that the tobacco companies used either that smoking causes cancer or that the fossil fuel industry raised all kinds of doubt. Some denied climate change, Was there any controversy about the subject matter and that the topics like were there any ones eat considered? Not adding? Oh sure I mean I, I was very nervous about slavery because it is just
such an emotionally searing topic, and because I didn't you know I'm these are all examples of denial. They're all very destructive, but I I don't want to draw a direct moral equipped and say between selling human beings worthy huh. So immediate, immediately obvious and selling these other products, It is a different sort of situations. That was an issue for me, but the denied elsewhere. So fascinating and appalling, and revealing that I ended up adding to include it. I was nervous about doing the financial chapter just because they took me out my comfort zone in and forced me, to learn about collateralized debt obligations and things like that. But again that turned out to be such a fascinating topic that I am very glad I ended up researching in writing about well listen! I'm glad you wrote this book and, like I said this is a subject. That's always been buzz,
early, fascinating and compelling to me since merchants of doubt- and I just think it is. It is such a weird. The aspect of human beings, the just the power of a corporation, the deniability, what with what they are able to do? and how they able to continue doing it very strange, some very happily Roth's book anchorages and is going to great to you. It's great, haven't you I do have social media anything you'd like to help now prove it a letter damage. I have a website, Barbara Freeze, cause. I don't know, I don't like you they're gonna, do that's good, yeah right about this, but you don't you don't need to go to my website. You can you can just google the title and, if you're interested in the book, you will find it. Thank you, Barbara appreciated, thank you very
Thank you. Friends and take your sponsors, thank you to Carol, bring home your own Carroll and discover the power of training with the world's only a high powered exercise. Bike Carol is offering listeners a limited time offer go to Carol sit? that see a r l ef. I t a dot com and enter the code Rogan three hundred a check up and get three hundred dollars off, plus free shipping in a free one year subscription Thank you also to c b d empty and their fantastic c b d oil products go to who see beady, M d, dot com and used a promo code, Rogan a check out, and you will save twenty five percent off your neck purchase of their amazing c b d products. I lovers from there see beady freeze of menthol to their tinctures to the CD recover. This stuff is amazing. So what
again at sea VD, empty dotcom used a promo code, Rogan at check out new will save twenty five percent of your next purchase of their superior c b, the oil products. Thank you too, where's based the host of Joe Rogan dot com and the place where you are going to make your next website you're gonna. Do it yourself, you can do it in its day Then they have an amazing way to do it. Go to square space. Dot com, Slash Joe, and they let you try it for free there easier whose drag and drop user interface and gorgeous designer templates make it a breeze, go two squares. Is dotcom, Slash Joe for that free trial than when you're ready to launch use the offer code Joe, and you will save ten percent of your first purchase website or domain, We also brought to you by the mother fucking cash, the cash download, the cat. I am from the app store for the Google place, doors, day and when you do downloaded make sure you use a referral code, Joe Rogan, all one word:
you will receive ten dollars and the cash I will also send ten dollars to our good friend just in Rennes fight for the forgotten charity, building wells for the pig meat in the Congo. Thank you, my four and thanks for tuna to show much love, tee law,
Transcript generated on 2020-07-23.