Account Menu

IP Address: 195.154.151.123

Episode 789 – David Rubin

Wednesday August 9th 2017

In this edition we welcome David Rubin, the former Mayor of Shiloh, Israel. Rubin tells us about the drive home when his car was attacked by terrorists; going into detail about what he learned from that attack, where God is leading him now and more.

Guest Media

David Rubin

Tracks

Water of Love – Dire Straits

Related Links: Shiloh Israel Children Fund | David Rubin

Please Login or Subscribe to view the media content.

Buy the individual episode here.

, ,

29 Responses to Episode 789 – David Rubin

  1. eric maas August 13, 2017 at 6:59 pm #

    David Rubin…YO Midland Park!
    Are you familiar with the Khazar theory?
    Also Palestine was under the Ottoman Empire and the Pasha. They used the ottomans currency.
    Before that it was the Romans and Roman coins.
    Khazar are supposed to have little or no Semitic blood in then.
    What do I know ….Please put some light on that.
    Also when are the Muslims, Christians and Jews are going to recognize The Bahai Faith claims of who BahaUllah says He is. The return of the Promised One! Yikes Stripes!!! can we all feel the spikes!
    Glad you and your son survived…Thanks GOD

  2. jolenemariek56 August 12, 2017 at 1:27 am #

    Thoroughly kick ass interview. God protect Israel 🇮🇱 . God Bless (former) mayor Rubin.

    • Roger Ice August 13, 2017 at 8:19 pm #

      why?

    • Roger Ice August 13, 2017 at 8:50 pm #

      And why post the same comment twice ? Hasbara Phd ?

  3. William Glaser August 11, 2017 at 10:58 pm #

    John B,

    The Little Boy Atomic Bomb was not tested prior to being dropped on Hiroshima Japan on 8/6/1945. It was such a simple design that the scientists knew it would work. The Fat Man design was tested once the month before it was dropped on Nagasaki, as it was a much more complex design.

    Caveroy

  4. Don McKinney August 11, 2017 at 12:37 am #

    David Irving is the true historian on the german jewish citizens thriving in germany in ww1 , then stabbed germans in the back with the cunniving balfour declaration enslaving their own fellow citizens .To the victor go the spoils and the propaganda is the hollywood and news and print media telling the same fake news , history , wars and false flag events and crisis actors .
    David Irving spent 400 days in austria jail for his true accounts of history .Possession of a nazi flag is three years in jail .The jews have been thrown out of every country they enslaved the population with interest debt , debauchery , etc. Examine the talmuds
    description of goyim , non jews .It is hidden so they will not feel threatened or killed for their evil thoughts toward others.When their messiah comes they will each have 2800 goyim slaves .That is YOU John B. You missed these topics .As a christian I ask WHY? See Mark Passio on ‘NATURAL LAW ” …PLEASE for a balanced presentation of historical facts and situational awareness .Also see the ” DANCING ISRAELIS ” on 9-11 , there to witness the event with a mural on their truck of a plane flying into a twin tower , and they were mossad agents renting the 91 st floor with fuse boxes to the roof. Connected to halleburton through corporate lineage .I have jewish friends , some do not believe in israel’s dominance or need for a homeland other than those of new york , so.florida , hollywood and l.a. and palm springs , cal. , aka tijuana norte , our just us jewdicial system , federal reserve , the u.s. military goyim mercenaries for israel only , and extreme sects of the scottish rites of free masonry , and the fake moon landing fraud/thefts , six times .Willful ignorance stands in the way of correcting the ills and chaos that are perpetuated to gain power and money enslavement through these types of repeated lies .Confront them to correct them .

  5. Don McKinney August 11, 2017 at 12:01 am #

    “The greatest story never told ” explains the ” balfour declaration “, England and france gave palestinian co-living to the rothschild jews . Not their land to give . For , bringing America into ww1 and putting the germans into slavery . 60 percent of israel is owned by the pope , catholic church . But does not allow immigration by true owners of the land .Israel is not a democracy.It is stolen land and is called that by the U.N. They are Kazar Mafia , from kazakstan .The bolshevic jews murdered 100 million russians .The talmud is a racist bible saying that non jews are like dogs .See all middle east war is as mersenaries for israel . 9-11 was aided by israel , see who larry silvrerstein paid for the twin towers when he collected 5.5 billion from insurance on the worst investment ever . He said ‘pull it ” for bldg 7 ,that contained cia ,fbi ,dea , security and exchange , etc. Remember U.S.S. Liberty and 60 years of arab bashing by hollywood . If your wife says you slapped her , your house and family are taken and you must pat ridiculous child support until the kids are 34 , etc . No evidence of king david or solomon , or archeological connection of these particular jews with israel . Why not examine the talmud or the
    seven laws of noah that are our public law 104 , mar.5,1991 that calls for beheading idol worshipers,christians ,now our law .Against church separation from state .The talmud says jesus is in boiling semen for eternity. Examine the talmud is as bad as the qoran or worse and is hidden .In 1972 the zionists , hollywood commercialized the holocaust , only 1 million jews died , but killed 100 million russians and the czar and family . No jews were gassed .Samples of the camps walls show no residue except the small clothes de-licing building .The main buildings were built after the war .the treatment of german prisoners of war was more evil than the mythical stories of the exaggerated holocaust.The irish were treated worse and are not the ” whiners “.

  6. Barbara Nichter August 10, 2017 at 3:05 pm #

    Awesome discussion with David Rubin….I enjoyed it immensely! Thank you!!

    • Don McKinney August 11, 2017 at 11:37 pm #

      If you enjoyed this , see ” DAVID IRVING ” on this subject .He is a true historian with with evidence .He has authored many books and has lectured extensively . His factual accounts are incredible . The “ring of truth “, and true patriotism to natural law . A man of PRINCIPLES is rarely found . Principles , as in morals , is the priority in a persons life , or should be rather than the ” I am the most important thing to me ” . Which is satan’s first tenet . The heart should be considered a vital part of the left and right brain as it pumps the life giving blood through the brain. Compassion and CARE come from a persons heart and right brain , which is lost in “order followers “.

  7. Dottie Harrington August 10, 2017 at 2:45 pm #

    I find it SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO interesting that my computer is so BRILLIANT that it has taken over the position of deciding what I need to hear on this program. I have had this program “silenced” several times before JBW even finished his monologue. This happens when my ears are rendered to be too “delicate” to be exposed to the truth!

  8. Andrew August 10, 2017 at 11:11 am #

    So, Vlad Putin vs Barry Obama, I put my money on Putin and give the match 5 seconds, no more 10. Putin’s a black belt in Judo.

  9. Original Larry August 10, 2017 at 11:06 am #

    As Mr.Wells is fond of saying, “No matter how thin you slice it, every piece of bread has two sides.”
    Period.

  10. Thomas Cool August 10, 2017 at 7:41 am #

    John, simply put, the Palestinians in the Middle East are like the American Indians. The Jews are like the Europeans moving to America and taking over.
    The only difference is that in America, some of the American-Indians intermixed with the European- Americans. Jews are not allowed to marry Arabs.
    I say, “Diversity for Israel”. If Jews push diversity so much for us European types over here in their mainstream media and Hollywood films, then how about pushing diversity in Israel? If they interbred with the Arabs, eventually things will work its way out.
    What? It is OK to push race-mixing propaganda in our media 24/7 to the Gentiles but Jews get to stay pure thus keeping their racial loyalty?
    If it is good for the geese then it is good for the ducks also.

    • Sally Trimble August 10, 2017 at 10:04 pm #

      @Thomas Coo

      Re: “The Palestinians in the Middle East are like the American Indians.” – Agreed.

      This has been documented by others e.g.

      “The Israeli Holocaust Against the Palestinians” by Michael Hoffman and Moshe Lieberman
      https://www.amazon.com/Israeli-Holocaust-Against-Palestinians/dp/0970378424/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1502419767&sr=8-1&keywords=The+Israeli+Holocaust+Against+the+Palestinians

      “The Plight of the Palestinians: A Long History of Destruction” by W. Cook
      https://www.amazon.com/Plight-Palestinians-Long-History-Destruction/dp/0230100376/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1502419767&sr=8-3&keywords=The+Israeli+Holocaust+Against+the+Palestinians

      And “The Holocaust” has been thoroughly discredited by dozens of very able researchers AND at the trials of Ernst Zundel, Raul Hilberg, under oath, could provide NO evidence of The Holocaust.”

      I am willing to listen to people like Rubin but I wish John B. would ask them to comment on so much evidence that is contradictory to their stories. Maybe he has an agenda?

      Unfortunately there are a couple commenters here who seem to have bought this propaganda.

    • Roger Ice August 13, 2017 at 11:09 pm #

      Agreed, israel is THE model of a racist society but media misdirection and disinformation hide the real truth about these liars.

      I feel bad for this man and his son if this story is accurate and true.

      However, he states that his car was disabled from gunshots… he tries to restart it several times to no avail … like magic it eventually restarts and he’s able to drive 100mph to the next gated town (walls built thanks to Israeli aggression and land theft).

      Hmmm…well the odds of a bullet, or multiple bullets temporarily disabling anything electrical or mechanical on a modern car as the guest described, are slim to impossible. Damage from a bullet(s) causing an engine to quit running would most likely be a catastrophic failure and would not heal itself instantly.

      That was as far as I could listen the first time and shut the show off.

      Second try, because I always try to give all points of view a chance, I listened to the entire show.

      It is obvious this guest is full of hasbara.

      He states that Palestine was never a real modern state and the land was barren and unproductive…bullshit. People lived there for hundreds of years in relative peace…until these religious fanatics arrived. If they lost the land or were kicked out hundreds or thousands of years ago tough luck. But according to this guy, Jewish religion says it’s acceptable that israel grants itself the authority to steal property by displacing or murdering people already living there. That’s not enough…they want to steal and conquer more land to achieve greater israel.

      The founders of israel invented terrorism and they have bragged about it. It’s used as a tool to trick and manipulate the sheeple.

      What about the USS Liberty?

      Why no questions about the dancing israelis and the hundreds of spys rounded up and deported after 911?

      These pricks had the audacity to introduce a bill in OUR country that would put me in jail for these comments ! Somehow they pushed that crap though several European countries while no one was looking.

      Been a CTM member from day one and most shows have been enlightening with a few exceptions. This is one.

      Unfortunately, canceling my membership (as in BDS) may be in the near future.

  11. ROLAND EDGAR August 10, 2017 at 12:20 am #

    Exclusive: Here’s The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google [Updated]
    Kate Conger • Yesterday 4:30pm

    Google’s new Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance Danielle Brown has issued her own memo to Google employees in response to the now-viral memo, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.” Brown’s statement, obtained by Motherboard, can be found in full at the end of this article.

    A software engineer’s 10-page screed against Google’s diversity initiatives is going viral inside the company, being shared on an internal meme network and Google+. The document’s existence was first reported by Motherboard, and Gizmodo has obtained it in full.

    In the memo, which is the personal opinion of a male Google employee and is titled “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber,” the author argues that women are underrepresented in tech not because they face bias and discrimination in the workplace, but because of inherent psychological differences between men and women. “We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism,” he writes, going on to argue that Google’s educational programs for young women may be misguided.

    The post comes as Google battles a wage discrimination investigation by the US Department of Labor, which has found that Google routinely pays women less than men in comparable roles.

    Gizmodo has reached out to Google for comment on the memo and how the company is addressing employee concerns regarding its content. We will update this article if we hear back.

    The text of the post is reproduced in full below, with some minor formatting modifications. Two charts and several hyperlinks are also omitted.

    Reply to public response and misrepresentation

    I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. Despite what the public response seems to have been, I’ve gotten many personal messages from fellow Googlers expressing their gratitude for bringing up these very important issues which they agree with but would never have the courage to say or defend because of our shaming culture and the possibility of being fired. This needs to change.

    TL:DR

    • Google’s political bias has equated the freedom from offense with psychological safety, but shaming into silence is the antithesis of psychological safety.
    • This silencing has created an ideological echo chamber where some ideas are too sacred to be honestly discussed.
    • The lack of discussion fosters the most extreme and authoritarian elements of this ideology.
    • Extreme: all disparities in representation are due to oppression
    • Authoritarian: we should discriminate to correct for this oppression
    • Differences in distributions of traits between men and women may in part explain why we don’t have 50% representation of women in tech and leadership.

    Discrimination to reach equal representation is unfair, divisive, and bad for business.

    Background [1]

    People generally have good intentions, but we all have biases which are invisible to us. Thankfully, open and honest discussion with those who disagree can highlight our blind spots and help us grow, which is why I wrote this document.[2] Google has several biases and honest discussion about these biases is being silenced by the dominant ideology. What follows is by no means the complete story, but it’s a perspective that desperately needs to be told at Google.

    Google’s biases

    At Google, we talk so much about unconscious bias as it applies to race and gender, but we rarely discuss our moral biases. Political orientation is actually a result of deep moral preferences and thus biases. Considering that the overwhelming majority of the social sciences, media, and Google lean left, we should critically examine these prejudices.

    Left Biases

    • Compassion for the weak
    • Disparities are due to injustices
    • Humans are inherently cooperative
    • Change is good (unstable)
    • Open
    • Idealist

    Right Biases

    • Respect for the strong/authority
    • Disparities are natural and just
    • Humans are inherently competitive
    • Change is dangerous (stable)
    • Closed
    • Pragmatic

    Neither side is 100% correct and both viewpoints are necessary for a functioning society or, in this case, company. A company too far to the right may be slow to react, overly hierarchical, and untrusting of others. In contrast, a company too far to the left will constantly be changing (deprecating much loved services), over diversify its interests (ignoring or being ashamed of its core business), and overly trust its employees and competitors.

    Only facts and reason can shed light on these biases, but when it comes to diversity and inclusion, Google’s left bias has created a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence. This silence removes any checks against encroaching extremist and authoritarian policies. For the rest of this document, I’ll concentrate on the extreme stance that all differences in outcome are due to differential treatment and the authoritarian element that’s required to actually discriminate to create equal representation.

    Possible non-bias causes of the gender gap in tech [3]

    At Google, we’re regularly told that implicit (unconscious) and explicit biases are holding women back in tech and leadership. Of course, men and women experience bias, tech, and the workplace differently and we should be cognizant of this, but it’s far from the whole story.

    On average, men and women biologically differ in many ways. These differences aren’t just socially constructed because:

    • They’re universal across human cultures
    • They often have clear biological causes and links to prenatal testosterone
    • Biological males that were castrated at birth and raised as females often still identify and act like males
    • The underlying traits are highly heritable
    • They’re exactly what we would predict from an evolutionary psychology perspective

    Note, I’m not saying that all men differ from women in the following ways or that these differences are “just.” I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions.

    Personality differences

    Women, on average, have more:

    • Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men (also interpreted as empathizing vs. systemizing).
    • These two differences in part explain why women relatively prefer jobs in social or artistic areas. More men may like coding because it requires systemizing and even within SWEs, comparatively more women work on front end, which deals with both people and aesthetics.
    • Extraversion expressed as gregariousness rather than assertiveness. Also, higher agreeableness.
    • This leads to women generally having a harder time negotiating salary, asking for raises, speaking up, and leading. Note that these are just average differences and there’s overlap between men and women, but this is seen solely as a women’s issue. This leads to exclusory programs like Stretch and swaths of men without support.
    • Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance).This may contribute to the higher levels of anxiety women report on Googlegeist and to the lower number of women in high stress jobs.

    Note that contrary to what a social constructionist would argue, research suggests that “greater nation-level gender equality leads to psychological dissimilarity in men’s and women’s personality traits.” Because as “society becomes more prosperous and more egalitarian, innate dispositional differences between men and women have more space to develop and the gap that exists between men and women in their personality becomes wider.” We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism.

    Men’s higher drive for status

    We always ask why we don’t see women in top leadership positions, but we never ask why we see so many men in these jobs. These positions often require long, stressful hours that may not be worth it if you want a balanced and fulfilling life.

    Status is the primary metric that men are judged on[4], pushing many men into these higher paying, less satisfying jobs for the status that they entail. Note, the same forces that lead men into high pay/high stress jobs in tech and leadership cause men to take undesirable and dangerous jobs like coal mining, garbage collection, and firefighting, and suffer 93% of work-related deaths.

    Non-discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap

    Below I’ll go over some of the differences in distribution of traits between men and women that I outlined in the previous section and suggest ways to address them to increase women’s representation in tech and without resorting to discrimination. Google is already making strides in many of these areas, but I think it’s still instructive to list them:

    • Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things
    • We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration. Unfortunately, there may be limits to how people-oriented certain roles and Google can be and we shouldn’t deceive ourselves or students into thinking otherwise (some of our programs to get female students into coding might be doing this).
    • Women on average are more cooperative
    • Allow those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive. Recent updates to Perf may be doing this to an extent, but maybe there’s more we can do. This doesn’t mean that we should remove all competitiveness from Google. Competitiveness and self reliance can be valuable traits and we shouldn’t necessarily disadvantage those that have them, like what’s been done in education. Women on average are more prone to anxiety. Make tech and leadership less stressful. Google already partly does this with its many stress reduction courses and benefits.
    • Women on average look for more work-life balance while men have a higher drive for status on average
    • Unfortunately, as long as tech and leadership remain high status, lucrative careers, men may disproportionately want to be in them. Allowing and truly endorsing (as part of our culture) part time work though can keep more women in tech.
    • The male gender role is currently inflexible
    • Feminism has made great progress in freeing women from the female gender role, but men are still very much tied to the male gender role. If we, as a society, allow men to be more “feminine,” then the gender gap will shrink, although probably because men will leave tech and leadership for traditionally feminine roles.

    Philosophically, I don’t think we should do arbitrary social engineering of tech just to make it appealing to equal portions of both men and women. For each of these changes, we need principles reasons for why it helps Google; that is, we should be optimizing for Google—with Google’s diversity being a component of that. For example currently those trying to work extra hours or take extra stress will inevitably get ahead and if we try to change that too much, it may have disastrous consequences. Also, when considering the costs and benefits, we should keep in mind that Google’s funding is finite so its allocation is more zero-sum than is generally acknowledged.

    The Harm of Google’s biases

    I strongly believe in gender and racial diversity, and I think we should strive for more. However, to achieve a more equal gender and race representation, Google has created several discriminatory practices:

    • Programs, mentoring, and classes only for people with a certain gender or race [5]
    • A high priority queue and special treatment for “diversity” candidates
    • Hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for “diversity” candidates by decreasing the false negative rate
    • Reconsidering any set of people if it’s not “diverse” enough, but not showing that same scrutiny in the reverse direction (clear confirmation bias)
    • Setting org level OKRs for increased representation which can incentivize illegal discrimination [6]

    These practices are based on false assumptions generated by our biases and can actually increase race and gender tensions. We’re told by senior leadership that what we’re doing is both the morally and economically correct thing to do, but without evidence this is just veiled left ideology[7] that can irreparably harm Google.

    Why we’re blind

    We all have biases and use motivated reasoning to dismiss ideas that run counter to our internal values. Just as some on the Right deny science that runs counter to the “God > humans > environment” hierarchy (e.g., evolution and climate change) the Left tends to deny science concerning biological differences between people (e.g., IQ[8] and sex differences). Thankfully, climate scientists and evolutionary biologists generally aren’t on the right. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of humanities and social scientists learn left (about 95%), which creates enormous confirmation bias, changes what’s being studied, and maintains myths like social constructionism and the gender wage gap[9]. Google’s left leaning makes us blind to this bias and uncritical of its results, which we’re using to justify highly politicized programs.

    In addition to the Left’s affinity for those it sees as weak, humans are generally biased towards protecting females. As mentioned before, this likely evolved because males are biologically disposable and because women are generally more cooperative and agreeable than men. We have extensive government and Google programs, fields of study, and legal and social norms to protect women, but when a man complains about a gender issue issue [sic] affecting men, he’s labelled as a misogynist and whiner[10]. Nearly every difference between men and women is interpreted as a form of women’s oppression. As with many things in life, gender differences are often a case of “grass being greener on the other side”; unfortunately, taxpayer and Google money is spent to water only one side of the lawn.

    The same compassion for those seen as weak creates political correctness[11], which constrains discourse and is complacent to the extremely sensitive PC-authoritarians that use violence and shaming to advance their cause. While Google hasn’t harbored the violent leftists protests that we’re seeing at universities, the frequent shaming in TGIF and in our culture has created the same silence, psychologically unsafe environment.

    Suggestions

    I hope it’s clear that I’m not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn’t try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority. My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don’t fit a certain ideology. I’m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I’m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism).

    My concrete suggestions are to:

    De-moralize diversity.

    • As soon as we start to moralize an issue, we stop thinking about it in terms of costs and benefits, dismiss anyone that disagrees as immoral, and harshly punish those we see as villains to protect the “victims.”

    Stop alienating conservatives.

    • Viewpoint diversity is arguably the most important type of diversity and political orientation is one of the most fundamental and significant ways in which people view things differently.
    • In highly progressive environments, conservatives are a minority that feel like they need to stay in the closet to avoid open hostility. We should empower those with different ideologies to be able to express themselves.
    • Alienating conservatives is both non-inclusive and generally bad business because conservatives tend to be higher in conscientiousness, which is require for much of the drudgery and maintenance work characteristic of a mature company.

    Confront Google’s biases.

    • I’ve mostly concentrated on how our biases cloud our thinking about diversity and inclusion, but our moral biases are farther reaching than that.
    • I would start by breaking down Googlegeist scores by political orientation and personality to give a fuller picture into how our biases are affecting our culture.
    Stop restricting programs and classes to certain genders or races.
    • These discriminatory practices are both unfair and divisive. Instead focus on some of the non-discriminatory practices I outlined.

    Have an open and honest discussion about the costs and benefits of our diversity programs.

    • Discriminating just to increase the representation of women in tech is as misguided and biased as mandating increases for women’s representation in the homeless, work-related and violent deaths, prisons, and school dropouts.
    • There’s currently very little transparency into the extend of our diversity programs which keeps it immune to criticism from those outside its ideological echo chamber.
    • These programs are highly politicized which further alienates non-progressives.
    • I realize that some of our programs may be precautions against government accusations of discrimination, but that can easily backfire since they incentivize illegal discrimination.

    Focus on psychological safety, not just race/gender diversity.

    • We should focus on psychological safety, which has shown positive effects and should (hopefully) not lead to unfair discrimination.
    • We need psychological safety and shared values to gain the benefits of diversity
    • Having representative viewpoints is important for those designing and testing our products, but the benefits are less clear for those more removed from UX.

    De-emphasize empathy.

    • I’ve heard several calls for increased empathy on diversity issues. While I strongly support trying to understand how and why people think the way they do, relying on affective empathy—feeling another’s pain—causes us to focus on anecdotes, favor individuals similar to us, and harbor other irrational and dangerous biases. Being emotionally unengaged helps us better reason about the facts.

    Prioritize intention.

    • Our focus on microaggressions and other unintentional transgressions increases our sensitivity, which is not universally positive: sensitivity increases both our tendency to take offense and our self censorship, leading to authoritarian policies. Speaking up without the fear of being harshly judged is central to psychological safety, but these practices can remove that safety by judging unintentional transgressions.
    • Microaggression training incorrectly and dangerously equates speech with violence and isn’t backed by evidence.
    Be open about the science of human nature.
    • Once we acknowledge that not all differences are socially constructed or due to discrimination, we open our eyes to a more accurate view of the human condition which is necessary if we actually want to solve problems.

    Reconsider making Unconscious Bias training mandatory for promo committees.

    • We haven’t been able to measure any effect of our Unconscious Bias training and it has the potential for overcorrecting or backlash, especially if made mandatory.
    • Some of the suggested methods of the current training (v2.3) are likely useful, but the political bias of the presentation is clear from the factual inaccuracies and the examples shown.
    • Spend more time on the many other types of biases besides stereotypes. Stereotypes are much more accurate and responsive to new information than the training suggests (I’m not advocating for using stereotypes, I [sic] just pointing out the factual inaccuracy of what’s said in the training).

    [1] This document is mostly written from the perspective of Google’s Mountain View campus, I can’t speak about other offices or countries.

    [2] Of course, I may be biased and only see evidence that supports my viewpoint. In terms of political biases, I consider myself a classical liberal and strongly value individualism and reason. I’d be very happy to discuss any of the document further and provide more citations.

    [3] Throughout the document, by “tech”, I mostly mean software engineering.

    [4] For heterosexual romantic relationships, men are more strongly judged by status and women by beauty. Again, this has biological origins and is culturally universal.

    [5] Stretch, BOLD, CSSI, Engineering Practicum (to an extent), and several other Google funded internal and external programs are for people with a certain gender or race.

    [6] Instead set Googlegeist OKRs, potentially for certain demographics. We can increase representation at an org level by either making it a better environment for certain groups (which would be seen in survey scores) or discriminating based on a protected status (which is illegal and I’ve seen it done). Increased representation OKRs can incentivize the latter and create zero-sum struggles between orgs.

    [7] Communism promised to be both morally and economically superior to capitalism, but every attempt became morally corrupt and an economic failure. As it became clear that the working class of the liberal democracies wasn’t going to overthrow their “capitalist oppressors,” the Marxist intellectuals transitioned from class warfare to gender and race politics. The core oppressor-oppressed dynamics remained, but now the oppressor is the “white, straight, cis-gendered patriarchy.”

    [8] Ironically, IQ tests were initially championed by the Left when meritocracy meant helping the victims of the aristocracy.

    [9] Yes, in a national aggregate, women have lower salaries than men for a variety of reasons. For the same work though, women get paid just as much as men. Considering women spend more money than men and that salary represents how much the employees sacrifices (e.g. more hours, stress, and danger), we really need to rethink our stereotypes around power.

    [10] “The traditionalist system of gender does not deal well with the idea of men needing support. Men are expected to be strong, to not complain, and to deal with problems on their own. Men’s problems are more often seen as personal failings rather than victimhood, due to our gendered idea of agency. This discourages men from bringing attention to their issues (whether individual or group-wide issues), for fear of being seen as whiners, complainers, or weak.”

    [11] Political correctness is defined as “the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against,” which makes it clear why it’s a phenomenon of the Left and a tool of authoritarians.

    Update 7:25pm ET: Google’s new Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance, Danielle Brown, issued the following statement in response to the internal employee memo:

    Googlers,

    I’m Danielle, Google’s brand new VP of Diversity, Integrity & Governance. I started just a couple of weeks ago, and I had hoped to take another week or so to get the lay of the land before introducing myself to you all. But given the heated debate we’ve seen over the past few days, I feel compelled to say a few words.

    Many of you have read an internal document shared by someone in our engineering organization, expressing views on the natural abilities and characteristics of different genders, as well as whether one can speak freely of these things at Google. And like many of you, I found that it advanced incorrect assumptions about gender. I’m not going to link to it here as it’s not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages.

    Diversity and inclusion are a fundamental part of our values and the culture we continue to cultivate. We are unequivocal in our belief that diversity and inclusion are critical to our success as a company, and we’ll continue to stand for that and be committed to it for the long haul. As Ari Balogh said in his internal G+ post, “Building an open, inclusive environment is core to who we are, and the right thing to do. ‘Nuff said.'”

    Google has taken a strong stand on this issue, by releasing its demographic data and creating a company wide OKR on diversity and inclusion. Strong stands elicit strong reactions. Changing a culture is hard, and it’s often uncomfortable. But I firmly believe Google is doing the right thing, and that’s why I took this job.

    Part of building an open, inclusive environment means fostering a culture in which those with alternative views, including different political views, feel safe sharing their opinions. But that discourse needs to work alongside the principles of equal employment found in our Code of Conduct, policies, and anti-discrimination laws.

    I’ve been in the industry for a long time, and I can tell you that I’ve never worked at a company that has so many platforms for employees to express themselves—TGIF, Memegen, internal G+, thousands of discussion groups. I know this conversation doesn’t end with my email today. I look forward to continuing to hear your thoughts as I settle in and meet with Googlers across the company.

    Thanks,
    Danielle
    Kate Congerkate.conger@gizmodo.com@kateconger
    Kate Conger is a senior reporter at Gizmodo.

    • Roger Ice August 13, 2017 at 8:14 pm #

      Sir, I know you mean well, but this is a comment section not an open forum to publish a novel.

  12. eduardo Rivera August 9, 2017 at 11:55 pm #

    Where is the video volume button?

  13. ROLAND EDGAR August 9, 2017 at 11:45 pm #

    I could take up my Jewish heritage tomorrow and live in Israel. After GAZA in July 2014 when ALL of the orthodox community of NCY protested in Times square I will not. Palestine was created by the Brits.

    • ROLAND EDGAR August 10, 2017 at 12:00 am #

      Moving on here is Jim Marrs who passed away this past week. This is a humdinger of an interview about one hour long:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lx2nSzz4-HA

    • ROLAND EDGAR August 10, 2017 at 12:03 am #

      ——————————————————————————–
      From: DERGROSSEN@aol.com
      To: federica.mogherini@ec.europa.eu
      Sent: 8/8/2017 5:58:43 P.M. GMT Daylight Time
      Subj: Comment on Nato

      Ma’am

      This of course is inevitable.

      https://sputniknews.com/politics/201708081056288932-us-georgia-russia-war/

      Unfortunately for NATO all of us now know that THEY CANNOT BE TRUSTED.

      Moreover we know that the WHTE HELMETS IN SYRIA are a FRAUD.

      We now know that THE OBAMA ADMIN CREATED AND SUPPORTED ISIS

      The “INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY” = INTERNATIONAL CRIMINALITY

      Faithfully Roland Edgar Dent GBR DL13 3PR

  14. tgspanne August 9, 2017 at 11:37 pm #

    Bring Father Kramer on the show to refute this Zionist propagandist Reuben. Christ rebuked the Jews and Moslems. Christianity is the one true Faith. The Jews destroyed the WTC and Lebanon! They want Syria’s water and will not rest until Assad is dead. The Jews hate Christianity. Their Rabbis are pedophiles and racists. The Talmud teaches ALL non Jews are animals!

  15. talmidim 3 August 9, 2017 at 11:06 pm #

    John B.
    Thank you for the show.
    It was touching and informative.
    Really really enjoyed it.
    G-d Bless you, your staff , and Mr. Rubin.
    Talmidim 3

  16. Bomar August 9, 2017 at 11:01 pm #

    Dudes and Dudettes,…

    One thing no one mentioned as an anniversary for today…

    In 1974 Nixon resigned from the Presidency…

    Just thought someone should mention this fact…

    Rest in Peace “Tricky Dickie”…

    Bomar

  17. Kenneth August 9, 2017 at 8:30 pm #

    Is Andersen a Swedish name?(as opposed to Anderson, a Norwegian name).

    • John B. August 9, 2017 at 11:05 pm #

      Andersen is Norwegian and Danish. Anderson is Swedish.

    • Bomar August 9, 2017 at 11:09 pm #

      Kenneth,…

      Actually, “Andersen” is a Danish-Norwegian patronymic surname meaning “son of Anders” …

      “Anderson”, is of English and Scottish origin, and is a patronymic of the surname Andrew…

      If you really needed to know…

      Bomar

    • Andrew August 10, 2017 at 11:09 am #

      I’m Swedish Norwegian and believe you are correct.

    • jolenemariek56 August 12, 2017 at 1:29 am #

      Thoroughly kick ass interview. God protect Israel 🇮🇱 . God Bless (former) mayor Rubin.

      I adored President Nixon and always will.

Leave a Reply