#1500 - Barbara Freese

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Hello, friends this episode. The podcast is brought to you once again by the got damn motherfucking cash the cash, APP the easiest way to send money between your friends and family without having to hold onto paper cash and the cash APPs, also the best way to try to grow your money with their investing feature, and unlike other unreliable bullshit ass, investing tools that force you to buy entire shares of stock cash APP. You invest in the market with as little as a dollar. Cash is also the easiest way to buy and sell Bitcoin so please tell me what. The fuck you waiting for, and of course when you download the cash APP entered the referral code, Joe Rogan all one word, and you'll receive ten dollars. The cash apple send ten dollars to our good friend Justin Rennes fight for the forgotten charity building wells for the pygmies in the Congo, so do not forget. Use the Promo Code Joe Rogan all one word when you download the cash APP from the APP store or the Google play store to day were also brought to you by squarespace where space is the host of my website. Joe Rogan DOT COM. It's also where my website was created. You can make your own website. Website with squarespace they have it dialed in simple easy to use drag and drop user, interface and beautiful designer templates that allow any person that knows how to do normal stuff like if you can drag photographs around on your desktop, can you attach picture to an email? Can you do that kind of stuff? Can you move folders? Guess what you can make a website. Yes, so simple so easy to use and each website comes to the free online store, so if you're thinking about maybe starting a business online well, you're in luck. squarespace has got it all dialed in. They have powerful ECOMMERCE functionality. Lets you sell anything online? Plus you can customize the look the feel the settings, products and more with just a few clicks. Everything is optimized for 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 WANNA, promote it. It's the way to go. It's great. I love it my good friend. Duncan trussell his websites squarespace website Stanhope Doug Stanhope his website. squarespace websites fantastic for restaurants, all kinds of businesses. It's great if you want to announce an. Event or a special project they have built in search engine, optimization, free insecure, hosting nothing to patch or upgrade ever and twenty four seven award winning customer support, and they'll let you try it for Free Ooh yeah, that's right head on over to squarespace dot com slash joe for a free trial then when you're ready to launch us the offer Code Joe, and you'll save ten percent off your first purchase of a website or domain. We're also brought to you by CBD MD and their superior CBD oil products. This is a company. I use their products every single day. So, easy for me to do this ad there CBD, recover is a to for me. It's an awesome cream that combined CBD with inflammation fighting compounds like. In Vitamin, B. Six, and it's awesome for Sore Muscles I. Use it every day. They have another. Product or company called CBD freeze with Menthol, which is an award winning product I don't know who gave him the award, but I would give it to him. It's awesome. It offers instant cooling relief for muscles and joints, and it convenient and easy to use roller or a squeeze tube I like the roller and the reason why I like the rulers. I like to massage my muscles with I. Dig it in the so it gives a little bit massage. Then it's got the CBD with the Menthol. It's awesome. They have great stuff. They've CBD PM. That a C. D. with Melatonin and Valerian root and helps you sleep. Their stuff is just amazing. I love it. It's just a great thing to use on a daily basis CB DJ has a host of benefits, and to make it even easier to see bdo fitness, routine or your lifestyle routine. They're offering. Jerry listeners twenty five percent off your next purchase when you use the Code Rogin at checkout so once again, that CB D, MD, dot, com, and use the Promo Code Rogan at checkout to save twenty five percent off your next purchase of their superior CBD products at C. B. D.. D. M. D. were also brought to you by Carol Carol is the first interactive exercise bike powered by artificial intelligence to make fitness personalise, convenient and effective built with a busy person in mind, Carol is scientifically proven to deliver an optimal workout in under nine minutes with only forty seconds of hard work, and the way it works is Carol ensures that you reach supra maximal power, and that's above, and beyond what you think you can produce and to do this. She customizes. customizes special resistance, and then instantly applies it at the right time. Your sugar stores rapidly deplete. Your oxygen needs. Go through the roof because your body's 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 it's supra maximal. You're pushed outside your comfort zone albeit for a few seconds, but that's all that's needed to achieve superior fitness and weight loss benefits. Carol even has meditation built into each workout. Workout to help you navigate the stresses around you, and it's clinically proven an independent academic peer reviewed study funded by the American Council on exercise and conducted by Western University at Colorado. Carol doubled the health benefits and the fitness gains compared to government guidelines of thirty minutes of exercise five days a week. Bring home your own carol and discover the power of training with the world's. Only a I powered exercise bike. Carol is offering listeners a limited time offer go to Carol. FIT, A. Dot Com and enter the code rogan three hundred at checkout and get three hundred dollars off plus free shipping and a free one year subscription. My guest today is Barbara Freeze. She is the author of Industrial Strength Nile. It is a really interesting book on corporations defending the indefensible. I had a great time talking to her and I hope you enjoy it. Please welcome Barbara Freeze. The Joe Rogan experience. PODCAST. It's happening. Good, Joe, how are you pleasure to meet you pleasure to meet you? How did you get started on this? And how did how did you get interested in the subject? I got interested in this subject through climate change climate denial specifically I'm an environmental attorney. And back in the 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 state had passed a law, saying that utilities regulators should try to estimate the cost to the environment of generating electricity. We get most of our power from coal, or we did then and so we looked at coal missions. We looked at the traditional pollutants that we 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. Co Two in its effect on climate change because while that was a big issue globally, there was 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 a bunch of witnesses bunch of scientists. To testify that we did not have to worry about climate change and wasn't going to happen, or if it did be just just a little, and we'd like it, and that all of those scientists the IPC intergovernmental panel on Climate Change though scientists that the rest of the world including the US government in the treaty signed by George H W Bush the ones that they were relying on those scientists were. Basically biased, they were biased because. They were in it for the money. Somehow they wanted research grants, or they had some. Political agenda it was kind of vague but but it was clear they did not want US worrying about this issue at all. The the told you it would be just a little and that you would like it would. Well a couple of things one of the arguments and you'll still hear this sometimes. Is that co two is a plant fertilizer which is true and therefore more co two makes the world a happier place for plants, and therefore better for everybody else and to the to the point where one of the coal interests who were in that who were parties had put out a video, saying that the earth was deficient in seal to and by digging up the coal, 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 as 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 that that hasn't gone away. In fact, many in many ways. It's gotten a lot worse, but there were certainly enough to leave me shocked. Was that the first time you ever wear? The corporations do send in people to try to defuse arguments or Pollute the waters. I don't think I was quite that naive, but I'd certainly never seen anything like this. I mean these were people under oath you know and and they were saying things that were. Pretty Extreme and and many of which would just get a lot more extreme, and there were scientists the many. Yes, they're the ones I cross examined where mainly the scientists. They also sent some other witnesses as well so they didn't. They didn't actually work in a coal company. They were hired by the coal industry to come in testify and these scientists. Presumably, they are paid to do this. Yes, so, is that I mean? How do you track that like if you if you have scientists and they come in, and they say things that you know are not accurate or deceptive. How'd you find out what their motivation is? do do. Did you ask them if they've been paid? We were able to put some things in the record regarding how much money they gotten from different fossil fuel interests over the years. Years so we definitely did point to 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 pretty prominent scientist. named Frederick sites who has since died but but we didn't know what I didn't know. When I cross examined him, I mean. This was a shoestring operation was that he had spent a lot of time actually consulting for the tobacco industry. so that would have been nice to to bring up talked about just before the PODCAST, the film merchants of doubt, and that's how I kind of got into your work right that film touches on that. How people who worked for the tobacco industry eventually went to work to deny the manmade climate change right well. In his case, he had actually been a physicist to as a very involved in cold. War weapons program, so he kind of came at it from that direction, and it wasn't until really he had retired from his remains, scientific and academic work that he was brought in to work for the the tobacco industry, but what happened was this handful of scientists Profiled in that movie, and and in the book by the same name they would also them work with these nonprofit groups, these free market groups that were strongly post regulation of industries, and so in those same groups than would address lots of different issues from tobacco ozone, and now to climate change, and and really a lot of other. Scientific issues as well for industries facing regulation. That someone should do a psychological profile of those people, particularly the tobacco people because it's like such a direct correlation between tobacco and cancer early it's the climate change thing. It's almost like boy. It's so hard to track it so far in advance, and if you say the climate change isn't real, what deaths are caused is directly attributable to that like how do you? Know what I'm saying, but like cancer cigarettes. It's like here's a person. They smoke cigarettes. They have cancer. You said it didn't come from cigarettes. What does that feel like to you to to be that person that? Actively tries to. Being, they're lying for money. They're lying. Let let me just back up one second and then talk about that just because I. WanNa make it clear that while the link between. Smoking and cancer may seem entirely obvious. There's enough of a delay that up. They 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 and cancer is just that there it is a more complicated process and potentially more of a delay, and it depends in large part on what humans do along the way, so so it does. It does get kind of complicated as far as psychologically profiling the. Tobacco companies I, mean the tobacco executives. I won't presume to suggest this book does that, but but I do write a lot about what the these folks were saying not just to the public, but to you know internally we've got some internal documents, and and certain things that may have been public utterances, but we're clearly just sort of part of their internal rationalization, and for example I started the book with a quote from the head of Philip Morris who says. Says who knows what you would do if you didn't smoke. Maybe it'd be your wife. Maybe you drive cars fast, and you know that that's part of how I think. The tobacco industry approached this they would. They would imagine this sort of counterfactual where you know a world without tobacco without cigarettes, and then they would imagine what that would be like. And of course they always imagined. It was much much worse mother. Right. A read that part, and also the the man in question wind up quitting cigarettes so right. Yeah, he had to try. and. Do Right exactly. Yeah, that was the question and and we never really did find that out. It's such a strange. Way To live your life to to be deceptive in a way that you know is going to. I mean the there's. I? Don't know how many people have gotten cancer from cigarettes, but it's probably millions, and it isn't just cancer. Heart, disease, etc, so millions I mean I 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 hundred million people. More than more than. Maybe, both wars World War, put together. It's seven million a year I. Think is the is the global. Death toll in the US, it's for four hundred eighty thousand a year. Yeah! Directly attributable right they they trace it to to directly attributable. Now you know it. These are extreme examples. Tobacco's the most famous and extreme example, and I talk about a lot of other examples, but I think it's actually. You know a fairly common thing for people to go pretty far down the road of denial when they are working in an industry, and and this is sort of the process. I tried to explore a little bit in the book. They're working in an industry. They're confronted with some accusation that they have caused harm. They check their gut and their gut says No. We didn't intend to cause harm. We don't feel guilty, and so their mind starts to come up with 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 triggered. So they immediately think well. These people accusing me must have an ulterior motive. They must be the money they want power on attention. They've got some sinister political objective and then the the other part of that tribal dynamic. They start thinking about themselves, and they're truly lofty mission, which isn't just to sell a product, but something else it's to. Protect 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, the slave trade had a complete rescue 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 BRI 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 torture devices. They had all kinds of evidence. and the British were really responding because they even though they dominated the slave trade, you know they had this notion of themselves as civilized and promoting freedom and being very humane, so this was starting to really affect the industry, so the traders and the planters got together formed a slave lobby they had a very organized campaign in response was a slave lobby. There was a very powerful slate lobby I mean the thing about the slave trade was you? Had people invested in it? From the royal family down to the the local bakers too many members of parliament I mean it was widely accepted fully legitimate industry, so the abolitionists really had their work cut out from for them. And they had all this evidence. The industry comes back and they. They knew they couldn't say oh. It's not so brutal. Came back with this complete counter narrative, which was we are rescuing these people that that they're 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 is 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 they're doing way better than those poor peasants back there in Britain, those poor miners or those people working in the in the new factories, so that was that was part of it and 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 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 them and persuade other people, I'm not suggesting the industry. Believe this, but if you can persuade people that you are rescuing them. The, flip side is that abolition would doom them. You would be shutting the gates of mercy on mankind because as one trader put it. The House of Bondage is really the the house of freedom to them I may have missed spoken that a little bit, but it was a truly orwellian quote, and and so that way you translate. into inhumanity and brutality, and and you portray the continued slave trade as a way to to save these people one one quote with great that if you were freed the slaves. And by the way this point, they weren't actually talking about freeing the existing slaves just stopping the flow of new slaves. But one of the quotes was that freeing the slaves would be cramming liberty down the throats of people incapable of digesting it. Wow Yeah. So this was the first example that you found of industry that was working to try to distort the perceptions of reality so that they can continue what they're doing, right? And you know they did a lot of other things that. We've seen modern industries doing they they you know I mentioned the reference to the. Poor, peasants and they also talked about you know. How would you like it? Britain if if people came in and started telling the peasants in the soldiers and sailors that they had rights. You know so basically this kind of. You know. Help us or you are next to 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, and the whole country, or rather in kind 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 a province of France it means in the sugar islands that the slaves will massacre the the whites exterminate the whites, and or maybe make the white slaves so they basically just created this incredible slippery slope that every that any kind of reform or certainly abolition of this industry would be disastrous for the entire kingdom. So how well documented is this in terms of the? The influencers like who who started this and is it was the they're like open discussions about how to spin this in a way that it's going to get people to think that slavery is a good thing well. I don't know about internal discussions within the industry. What we do have our lots and lots of books and pamphlets because this was all. All done in writing. We also have some hearings and we have a parliamentary debates. They were recorded not verbatim, but people try to write them down, and so we have some version of what was actually said. In these debates in various hearings, they were parliamentary hearings, so there's 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 well. That's what I'm talking about here. Obviously there was we had our own abolition movement here Ryan Debate. That's what I was. GonNa ask you did those same arguments of. Did they actually presented in the United States? Some of them did I in the United States it was different, because of course you had an entire society a- built around slavery, and I read one one reference when historian, saying that about half of the defenses of slavery came from clergy. It wasn't quite the same sort of clearly. Here's an industry and here's an audience that they're talking to So that's one of the reasons I didn't focus quite at all. Really on the on the American. Clergy, that's what this this historian said I. I didn't dig into those they did by the way they'll find one. Source and now I don't remember if he was a plantation owner or something else who described? the called slavery. You know basically a way to make people as happy as can be, and and call it the ideal of communism, which was funny because you don't even think of communism. Of that debate is existing, this would have been in the eighteen hundreds now but he was saying that the North is exploiting. These workers not taken care of them, but in the south. We we take care of them. We make them happy as slaves twos. So. Is this a pattern that existed before that. Like is this is there? Is there any evidence that there was something I mean? It seems like whenever people start to make money doing something whenever a corporation particular corporation right because diffusion of responsibility in 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, so they start rationalizing their decisions, and then twisting things around, but is this. Is this something that can be traced back before then. Is this an a natural human trait? 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, but but I would not be at all surprised because I. DO think it's natural human trait I mean I one of the issues that I. I started to struggle with on this book was deciding to what extent people lying in winner. They actually deceiving themselves. And I realized early on. There was just no way to write this book. If I was going to 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, and they're 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 into 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 really encourages it in in so many ways I. You mentioned the diffusion of responsibility, and that is huge because we do know and I dip into the social psychology and here not a ton of because that science is still relatively new and kind of you know a little bit thin compared to the environmental science that I that I talk about which is very very deep, but. We do know that when you when you defuse responsibility, it makes it very easy for people not to feel responsible for the harm that's done, so if you've got a corporation, of course, you have division of Labor. You also have division of management from ownership, so if you're a lower worker and you're told to lie about something or cause some harm well, you're minding your own business. And you and you let the your boss take responsibility. If you're the boss you're focused maybe on. Your employees, and certainly on your shareholder, so if you're lying about something or causing harm, it doesn't necessarily feel like a personal selfish act of deception. It probably feels like an active loyalty and responsibility to your. Shareholders your shareholders aren't going to care or no because. First of all, they're far away. They they don't really know what's going on. They have maybe just temporary transactional interest in what's going on just bought the stock. They want to sell it quickly. Make some money so so you don't really have anybody there. Who feels really responsible for this? There was a definition of. Of The corporation from the twentieth century in something called the synnex dictionary. As an ingenious device for obtaining personal profit without personal responsibility, and of course that is exactly what we intend from corporations, because they are, we grant limited liability to the shareholders, and and that's why it's that it's that protection from risk that people are willing to pool their capital, and that sort of very key to the very idea of of a corporation, and then of course, the the focus on prophets means that you're constantly focused on on money, and you know every 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, if you're an competitive markets, we want there to be competition, and so that means you are already in a kind of tribal mindset. and you've got the ideology of the marketplace which. You know we can go back to Adam. Smith be invisible hand, and basically the notion that if you can pursue your own self, interest in the marketplace will automatically convert that to public good, and that does work in a lot of cases and probably worked a lot better in the seventeen hundreds, but when you've got these enormous. Organizations 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 more recently. We've seen that that idea that you don't have to worry about the social consequences of your commercial action. just get intensified. We we had you know Milton Friedman in Nineteen, seventy, writing this very persuasive article saying that the. The only real objective, the only legitimate objective of a corporation is to maximize shareholder profit, and if they're talking about protecting the environment, doing any of these other things that's socialism, and that's a legitimate, and that really did a lot of people that movement really move forward, and then it got more extreme in the nineties and and twenty first century where you've got this this strain of. Intense faith in market forces that was manifested by Alan Greenspan at the Fed by the coke brothers. David Coca passed away. So it's a not Charles Coke and the network of influence groups that he created the the think tanks, the free market groups, these different academic groups. So you know when 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 Sixties and seventies 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 in our ozone layer's not destroyed but then starting in nineteen eighty. When Reagan is elected, you suddenly see those. Those concerns replaced with a concern overregulation, and really a backlash that that you know has 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 government unwilling to regulate, but we have one that is rolling back critical regulations that were put in place by. Previous administrations. Of course influenced by these very corporations to do that. Absolutely and I mean it gets. It gets kind of complicated here because. You think for example about Charles. Coke Industries. It's based on oil refining, so that is very much based in the fossil fuel industry, but but the coke network is very ideological, passionately ideological 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 the coal industry, so it gets kind of integrated I do try to not treat them all this. In the book I tried to kind of differentiate and really do have a difference between the kind of COQ perspective. The coal industry perspective the oil industry perspective, and then all of these little free market groups actually fit. Fit more around coke side, but they all seem to have one thing in common that they're rationalizing justifying their actions because they WANNA continue to make profits regardless of the impact on the environment or the people exactly and this. That's a weird thing, about just the idea of a corporation itself. It's almost like a diabolical vehicle for for allowing people to do things you know to to to be able to do something and say hey, we're going to do this as a collective and therefore 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're just taking orders in yours. Doing your job and your job is segmented. Compartmentalized so you're not. You're not dumping anything in the river bomb. You don't have to worry about that, but I like your new car as a beautiful house that you got. You bought the profits of poisoning lakes. Well, that's exactly it in fact I suggest in the book that if you were a super villain, and you wanted to create a society that would ultimately destroy itself by imposing huge risks on each other and on the planet. You would probably create something that looks a lot like our current corporate dominated global economy in the sense of these organizations that amplify yourself interest that diminish your sense of responsibility that amplify all of your biases. You'd have justifying ideology to make it all seem fine. You would have the responsibility so diffuse that nobody would really feel too badly about it. and you give these. These folks in credible 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 can do whatever they were authorized to do by their charter, and then they'd have to stop smoking. Get the permission to build a canal, and then they'd and they'd be done and go away. Eventually, we made them immortal and they could do whatever they wanted as long as it's legal. And then we gave them huge amount of power to determine what actually is legal by influence, our democracy going to ask you about the what is the birth of a limited liability corporation? Like when when did all that occur? Well? They go way back. I mean during the slave trade they were. They didn't necessarily call them that, but they were essentially owned by shareholders, and so they would you know pool their capital, so it's very similar we've had corporate 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 in the eighteen hundreds so when we first formed this country. You would have to go to the legislature. There were only a couple of 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. They're not mentioned because they weren't very powerful when they did get more powerful. You have some quotes from some of the founders. Saying Oh, this is this is a little scary and then of course they became very powerful in in the eighteen hundreds. You end up with gilded age, and so then you have folks like Teddy. Roosevelt are saying. Wait a minute. The you know this is a creation of law, and so we get to determine how much power has and he. Responded with the kind of trust busting movements, breaking down some of the really big old trusts. And and that was probably the first big pushback where where the government said, wait a minute, you corporations are too powerful. We're going to try to produce that power and then I. Think the next big phase of that would have been in the depression where you have the the new deal coming in and saying okay banks, you just wreck the economy. We're going to regulate you going to give workers more rights. We're going to create social security. We're GONNA. Do all kinds of things that that diminish corporate power over the democracy? And then it happened again in the sixties and seventies, and what I think is is that it might be about to happen again. Given that there is now so much concern about corporate power. citizens United Influence over democracy. people worried about concentration of wealth at the very very tippy top, and obviously people were that we are unable to deal with climate, change and Another factor would be the power of social media corporations to influence elections to influence public discourse They seem to have kinda snuck in in a way. That was really unexpected and people didn't see it coming right well. I mean that's actually the pattern. People never see it coming. 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 the new world and this enormous commercial opportunity, if you can just get the workers in there to to grow the tobacco in the cotton and sugar But but sued have the discovery you have an industry springing up to take advantage of it, and and making a lot of money and changing social norms along the way. Then problems are emerging obviously with 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 law gets enforced, but but in almost all of these chapters you get to some form of government action where they say. No, you can't do that anymore. We we stopped 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 long long time and enormous damage can be done in the meantime. but that process doesn't work. You don't even get your your somewhat happy ending. If the industry has become so powerful that that it determines. Whether it gets regulated or not in it blocks those regulations well. That's what I was getting, too. Because that kind of seems we're we're at now with. Corporations like facebook. Like they have an insane amount of power, and that power is actually being used to dictate who becomes president and that's what's really strange. It's like there's never been a corporation that. mean. Other corporations did their best to influence the market and influence regulations in a way that they can continue to profit, but this is a different thing where they're literally influence in influencing directly who becomes the person who runs the country, which is a new thing, well it. It's a new thing when they do it through information It's not a new thing where the do it through money. Right That's that's pretty well established, but but yeah. I mean you know Ah Somebody Probably not me because I don't know this. This industry well enough, but but the pattern is so clear that that it's clear where we're we're. We're heading right I mean the problems will get worse and worse. Other people talk about them. The problems are very new I think because we are talking about problems related to information and that you know and social media. How to social media affect social animals I mean this gets really complicated. It's going to be hard to figure this out But in addition to. Having their own denial about what harm they inadvertently unleash. They are vectors for the denial of other industries night, and so that's one of the reasons climate denial for example is still going to be out there and deeply rooted for longtime, even though the oil industry which played a huge role in in building it up has basically set up. We accept the climate science. We know this is happening. In fact, the Exxon Mobil even says it accepts the Paris Agreement, which says that we have to limit warming to well below two degrees. Centigrade and that sounds small. That's actually a pretty dangerous amount of warming, but that's the target of this Paris agreement although it also says. We're GONNA. Try to limit it to one point five degrees now what that means is dramatically reducing our emissions. I over the next ten years. I mean if you WANNA limit to one point five degrees. We're talking about cutting our emissions by fifty percent. That means pretty much. 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, having 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 building a new industry that sucks carbon out of the air and buries it. We haven't even really begun to talk about that, but but that's assumed what we're going to have to do. Because we have now delayed for thirty years, thanks in large part to fossil. Fossil fuel denial, so so you got Exxon saying yeah, we. We understand Paris and all that, but if you if you look at their own projections about what they think's going to happen, they put out these formal projections 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 sort of leveling off until twenty forty, by which time in fact they need to be very very low, so it's kind of like the tobacco companies. The Big Tobacco companies are no longer denying the basic facts, they admit. This product is addictive and a quote in the book from one executive saying. Yeah kills about half of our of our lifetime. Smoking customers are most loyal customers. So. But despite having four decades, said if we really believed this was harmful, we wouldn't sell it They're obviously continuing to sell it quite enthusiastically, and that's kind of where we are I. Think with the major oil companies, coal is still in denial at are still denying it, but but. The major oil company interesting yeah. The problem but they are still planning on selling more and more of their product, and and so that is sort of the kernel of denial that industry has yet to grapple with, but it right now at least temporarily inseparable in terms of our ability to move around disturbing goods meet kind of have to have oil to have to have gasoline petroleum products. You, you do a moment. Right them all, but you know. Fortunately we really do have the technologies to to. In fact, slash our emissions will don't have as political will, but you could I mean I. It is not impossible to say in ten years. We are going to have closed Certainly, all of our gas plants in our natural gas plants will either have carbon capture, or they will be closed. It's not impossible to say all of our cars. Certainly, all new cars are going to be electric and we're going. We can build an infrastructure that can be done. It is a massive undertaking. It is I mean when people talk about the green new deal. sometimes that rhetoric includes World War Two and I. think that's 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 qualities that we already have in place I mean that that's going. Make a trickier but most of the deals. Are for. Example very aware that we're GONNA be hurting coal miners. We're going to be hurting oil rig workers 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 whatnot. So you know if if we are going to avoid what will be a multi century catastrophe in terms of climate change? This is what we have to do and and 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 those of this point? Well? I think it does to enough people that it was. Is it because of propaganda because it seems. Yeah, right. Hit Ten people that when they give you the worst projections the things that we should avoid. When I was talking about these oil executives still selling oil. Is that right now? They have to I. Mean I understand that there? There needs to be a shift and I'm absolutely in favor of that. But if there was no oil right now, they must cut it off crisis. Yeah, we have a real issue, right? We have a real issue I mean. Humanity has an issue and we shouldn't be thinking of it. As the oil companies issue or or the climate issue. It's you know it's a humanity issue. How are we going to deal with this and unfortunately? You know this isn't something capitalism. Is set up to deal with. That's about growth. It isn't about. How do we take this massive industrial enterprise wind it down and replace. This technology was something else. Is the solution finding some method of profiting off pulling carbon from the atmosphere? It seems like if if it becomes very effective to do that, that could be an enormous way that these companies can kind of shift. Yeah, well I'm not sure that these companies will shift. Someone could because they do have drilling, technology and whatnot, so they could end up being. Leaders in actually bearing the carbon that they once extracted and put into the atmosphere. That would be weird. One one of the things that's so weird about this whole debate for decades now is that. You, you've got folks talking about how incredibly terrific markets are and how they can handle all these problems and you know starting in the ninety s or so folks were saying great. Okay, let's put a price on carbon. Because otherwise the markets are totally blind. If you can pollute completely for free, the market has no incentive to reduce polluting or to draw carbon out of the air and bury. 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 and some states actually do have a price on carbon, but the advances we might have made more nationalist globally have been blocked by people who who love markets an here's. Another is part of this. Country! Who's like our main competitor and not incidentally huge huge polluters China extensively Communist. They believe more in market power than. You know the the right wing of the Republican Party they have put a price on carbon. And they are using market forces to try to reduce pollution. Really, so China's more progressive in in terms of trying to reduce pollution than Americans. Well China's polluting a huge amount. Was GonNA. Say on this particular issue of how can the markets help us reduce pollution? They're using market forces to try to produce their pollution, and we're still not another really divisive aspect of this is that it's become some sort of a left versus right ideological issue like there's a lot of people on the right that I've had conversations with people that really don't have any idea what they're talking about where they instantly deny that climate change is a real issue, and when you press them on it, and just it's one of the benefits of having. Sort of long form conversations is that if you're doing this on CNN and it's one of those talking head things where you only have seven minutes industry people shouting over each other very hard to get to the heart of. Why do you believe this? Yeah, but when you're talking over long? PODCASTS hours long. You get to these people and. They'll adamantly deny that. It's an issue. But they don't know why. Do you know what I'm saying. It's like a thing. If you're a right wing, pundit or right wing, person you saying right-wing things. You're going to say climate change on our issue. What are you right now? IS THE ECONOMY AIN'T? GonNa, do right now is support jobs and people. There's a lot of people need put food on the table. There's a lot of people that need, and then they get this sort of a ranting, raving pro economic standpoint and it becomes. A denial of environmental problems that's becomes left versus right. It's very strange. I don't understand why anyone like how can that not be a universal issue? How could anyone not want? The world would be better for our grandchildren. How how could anybody not want less pollution? But it 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 in the other parties idea well in fact. There's one Survey I site in here. That showed that. Climate Change was the most polarized issue in the American political landscape, even more than abortion, really More than worship now that was a snapshot in time, and I think maybe that's changing. Certainly you see with younger Republicans. A lot more concern about climate change, but. You're absolutely right. I mean it remains very polarized, and I don't think you can understand it. You know it's not in I I don't think it makes sense from ideological standpoint I think it makes sense from a tribal stand my we have divided, and and it feels good to believe the same things as the people you are affiliated, and it's tense to to not believe the same things and you saw. That's a source of hardship, and you know the reason. It's such A. A big problem here is that this isn't just about making the world better for our grandkids. It's about avoiding catastrophes for our grandkids and so that's why you know. Eight is finally rising to the surface within the Democratic Party. I mean it's been ignored or downplayed for too long, and certainly in the national campaigns it was never perceived to be important, enough or winning enough issue to get a lot of attention now we see largely driven by the Youth Movement Insistence that yeah, it's. It's time absolutely time. It's thirty years pastime that we get very aggressive about this, and and so I don't know what happens now with with covert with George Floyd. Obviously there are other issues dominating the news right now, but I really hope we hang onto this issue as critical one for the election, and and don't stop there because this is going to continue to require lots of pressure to make sure that we. We make the changes we need. Yeah I don't think it's going to go away I. Think, but the other issues do come to the forefront, but what what you said I think is really interesting is that it gives you comfort to agree with other people that are in your party and your group, and that's something that is exacerbated by social media and manipulated by social media, and it's one of the weird things about it is. A Corporation could legally. Create hundreds, if not thousands of fake pages and then use those to make. Sure, you're wherever the Internet research agency from Russia that had an impact on two thousand sixteen elections and. Rene Duress to did some pretty fascinating work on that where she did a deep dive into how these accounts whether it's facebook or Instagram, or what have you been manipulated and how the how they use them? Where the in one point? They had a pro Texas group meet up. At the exact same time as a pro Muslim group on the exact same block like they manipulated it like there was no child's play. Exactly it was like they were moving pieces on a chessboard and they they'd literally set up altercations and you would imagine that. I mean I. Don't know what these fossil fuel companies or or any kind of company that's involved in any some anything that would be. Considered sketchy environmentally. I don't know how many manipulating sites they run or manipulative social media accounts. They run, but I would imagine that's got to be part of the game plan. Because online discourse, it's so easy to throw monkey wrenches into the gears, his three thro- sand into the gas tank. It's so easy to sorta monkey with the the numbers and change the ideas that are being discussed and change the narratives that it's. It's A. It's just a way that you can sort of shift the public's interests and opinions on things I mean if you're willing to lie and manipulate you act, you have a obviously a huge advantage, but there's also just the basic human tendency that when we talked people, we already agree with. We tend to then become stronger in our opinions, and so we we get polarized basically, and that's even before social media. Media, so then you sort of weaponize that polarization that tendency and you've got an algorithm that says well. If you like that video, how about this video and suddenly people are getting. You know totally radicalized. You know 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 in the book come to the fore we will, society 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 of damage done in the meantime. Wonder if there's going to be a time where there are laws against social media manipulation like that because right now they're not and there will be yeah. It seems like there has to be because if you see. I can't imagine I'm not naive enough to imagine that. What's happening with the Internet research agencies and that's not happening here. It has to be and they. They understand the effectiveness of it. It's been well documented. The idea that corporations are going to step back and go well. That's on our business assigned what we do. I mean that's an incredibly effective tool, and if you're GONNA use it to manipulate opinions on whether it's climate, change or anything, you don't pharmaceutical drug overdoses, whatever whatever it is that you want to manipulate people with. I would imagine that that's a gigantic issue, but. It's not something that really gets discussed in terms of in terms of passing legislation to prevent that stuff. Yeah, and hopefully it gets more and more disgust because it is very scary, it turns out we humans are easily manipulated and were easily manipulated even before social media, but now there is this incredibly sophisticated engine to drive us apart to drive us in the direction that those best at manipulating us want us to yes, and it's addictive, which is even crazier? It's a completely addictive mechanism. Really is people are lost in their phones and lost in their computers when they're checking their social media stuff, and that's one of the war, interesting things about these social media algorithms that it's been determined that when people are upset about things when they're angry about things, they post more, so it's more valuable, so the algorithms favor people being upset, so they'll send you if you if you find abortion, hot topic or environmental issues. They'll start sending you those. That's what's GonNa. Show up on your feet. You're GONNA get more. The is what you engaging. And it'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, my friend. Ari wanted 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 overwhelmed by puppies, so it's not like this some vicious plot to only feed you things that you hate just human nature. We tend to look things that piss off. It was joey. And so now we have a very sophisticated machine to drive us in the direction of getting more pissed up, and that's a fisted machine is clearly using the same sort of deceptive deceptive tactics to try to diminish their responsibility for what they're doing. Yeah, exactly and you know when one of the things that makes these tactics I think work so well is that they really are based. In human nature I think that if you are an executive. you know 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 than you know, become a foundation for a 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 in lawyers, and and think tanks who will promote that, and then that becomes an ideology. That's 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 co- you do covers social media, and in this I don't really get into it. I mean I talk a little bit about Yeah, no, it's really not a 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 the the The. Products and activities and and hazards that led up to the financial crisis of two thousand eight. That's A. Can of worms in and of itself right? You Read Mattei. Read some of his work. Yeah, he's vampire squid. Clamp to the face of humanity. Yeah, that's immortal lines, so his description of Goldman Sachs his work is fascinating and terrifying on. You and he's not a guy with a financial background, so he had to do a deep dive into the all that stuff for years. It's sort of get a grip on how they do things what they're doing. And the the idea that that is the backbone of our civilization can terms. Our economic civilization is. CRAZY WHAT A goofy system! Yeah, and and of course that industry has become. so much bigger as a percentage of GDP and so much more powerful without any evidence, social benefits as far as I can see and. I'm also not a person with a financial background came to this. You know as an environmental 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 the attitude. It wasn't even like where we think we're trying to do the right thing for our clients or are. We think we're trying to do the? The right thing for you know society it was. It was just this full-on. Take the money and run and and exploitation. I mean there's they have this cute little code on Wall Street that was prominent before the crisis I hope it's not so prominent now it's I. B G Y B G which stands for I'll be gone. You'll be gone. which was the answer when somebody said? Wait a minute were pumping all this risk into the system. This investment products going to fail. This is all gonna hit the fan. This is all going to collapse. I B G Y BG and ends bonuses for selling these crazy risky products We're all frontloaded, so you sell somebody a 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. In there, there's A. An author in Britain. Who Interviewed? All kinds of people in promise them anonymity from the British. The British financial industry, but it overlaps very much with the US one and the the culture was hey, rip your Clinton's face off. You know you eat lunch or you? be lunch, and I mean a lot of really really vicious stuff going on and. Risks, that? Y- were were so obvious that you can't believe that. They were denying them I mean obviously. When there's a housing bubble, it will burst and there was an obvious housing bubble. It was denied for long long time, and that ultimately became the basis of all of this really toxic debt 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 going to get in and out before it bursts that they get past the risk off to the next party before it happened so I don't know. Do we call that? rationalization is that I mean it's I put it all under the very broad category of denial but It actually the head of J. P.. Morgan later would testify to the financial crisis inquiry. Commission somehow you know. We just missed the fact that housing prices don't go up forever. I don't think they really did miss. That really said that were that what? Said, yeah I. I may have order to off but That's actually what he said I suspect. He regretted. Phrasing it that way because. That's pretty astonishing. How many IB G. Y. BG tattoos are out there. It's a good question. Is probably a lot right disturbing? There's probably a lot. You know. There's one actually one anecdote. In the book that I retold from a book that Mike Hudson wrote called the monster, and he's talking about first of all they we had this new breed of mortgage lenders, the folks who actually went out to sell the subprime subprime mortgages to the low income people who were often defrauded and certainly not the most sophisticated financial consumers, and this one particularly bad company. was without their. Lehman Brothers sent a vice president to visit with this company because he wanted to know how they were doing this was I think in in the Ninety S, and he writes back and says. That this is a sweatshop. 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 Lehman Brothers writes back, and says we enthusiastically welcomed the opportunity to partner in your future growth, and ended up in fact, partnering with them and financing these these mortgages, and then buying them packaging them up selling them to investors, and then of course, eventually becoming the biggest bankruptcy in history. And getting bailed out well, not Lehman. Brothers three other ones didn't right. That's what it crazy. Just sorta laid it out like that. Well. Yeah, this is a internal stuff that that came out, but yeah the the fact that they they were. So happy to to partner with an unethical business, and in fact there's also a lot of evidence. That Wall Street was just continuing to get the mortgage lenders to reduce their standards even lower because you know you start out with these very very aggressive new companies. These weren't banks were 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 that the more traditional banks started following and doing what they had been doing, and so all street gets involved in, and basically they're saying. You don't need tation of income and you know the the banker would say the lender would say well. How do I know they're going to pay it back and Wall Street would say you don't need to worry about that and in fact, they didn't because Wall Street would buy it The the point wasn't will ever be paid back. The point was is the is the interest rate on the surface of the mortgage high enough that we can package it into what looks like a lucrative investment and of course package, lots and lots of these together and then slice dyson and stack them and. Keep rearranging them and and essentially then. Threatened and corrupted the and manipulated the ratings agencies so that they would give them aaa ratings so that your pension fund could buy it. That was one of the things that was so disturbing about Mattei is work. It's so sophisticated. That takes so long to understand how they're doing it and what they're doing that. The average person doesn't have a background in finance as you get into it or economics. If you get into it, it's like. You have to start from scratch several times and go okay. What? What? How? and. Why is this legal in house? This legal and and When you're dealing with just numbers to that's what's disturbing to me. There's something about environmental impact that at least it seems somewhat tangible like it's a thing, right? It's carbon in the atmosphere. There's an impact to the temperature rises. The sea level rises. The you know what I'm saying like. There's physical things whereas numbers are these weird things where if your whole business model is predicated on increasing the amount of numbers that you earn. You can find ways especially. If other 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 the Bernie made off situation for example. Like how many people? Had to know that there's something wrong with the amount of money they're earning. How many people had to know that? How many people had how many people and how many people like listen these are just numbers, which is getting these numbers we're putting numbers in. We're getting numbers back. Numbers back than get in, so we're good. Yeah, yeah, well I think any industry like finance that is incredibly complicated and abstract in that way, that doesn't feel quite right, but but who really knows is one that is absolutely right for denial, because the complexity means, nobody really knows the risk, it also means the industry can, and it did go to Congress and say you don't get this. which was true? And so okay, we're selling these derivatives and yeah. Maybe they're super complicated, and 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 risks, 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 Bell Mike. Go off in somebody's head. Saying this is going to hurt somebody. It's going to be muted. It's going to be ignored because it just feels so abstract. Okay Sell Selah by now you sell the security. A pension fund and maybe weighed on the line. It'll. It'll fail, and maybe some people won't get to retire, but you don't know who they are. And maybe that won't happen I mean the more abstracted is, and of course, the more globalized our economy becomes. The more distant, the impacts, the harder to imagine they are and the easier to ignore and deny. And then the add in the fact that they're able to manipulate politicians exactly the fund their campaigns, they the the really creepy ones, when they give the money to speak like enormous sums of money after they get out of office like that can be a little corrupting ha, but it's just so gross obvious when you giving a former president or a former secretary of state, a quarter 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. Half an hour work well when Bernie Sanders was upset at Hillary. Clinton released transcripts. Let me hear what you said then. This is not a chance in hell she's going to. Me What do they say? During those things that warrants a quarter of a million dollars or more, it's a it's a shady system and there's no. Motivation to shift it change well. There's there's no motivation for those who are benefiting from it. 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 of them hate that and would love system. That didn't require them to be constantly doing that. and. It isn't like those. The politicians were raising money for the campaigns. They don't get to walk away with it, they. They're using that for their campaign. So so I think there is motivation among the elected people not to have to keep doing this, but. In the meantime, those who are benefiting from this and who can manipulate the system are gonNA. Resist any efforts to try to change it, so that's a huge problem is there might be motivation? But there's no tangible turn it. There's nothing like where you can say look. We've got a clear path. You don't have to raise money more well there is there ways. Ways to whittle away at this, and you know didn't use to be quite this 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 them to speak to the to the public, which 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. I mean I think there are ways to do this I. I wouldn't pretend 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 you know, 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. You have a magnifying glass on some of the worst aspects of human behavior. Is it depressing. kind of it's. It's kind of depressing. I've also had people tell me the book is infuriating. Which you know I really didn't intend that I. I kind of thought well. Let me tell you when I imagine. This book I imagined. That was going to go through climate denial. We're GONNA snap out of it because it was so obviously suicidal, and then we were gonNA look around and go. How did that happen? And how do we make sure that never happens again and I would be able to say look. Here's some factors that have contributed to this throughout history, and and here's you know. Maybe this 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. Climate tonight. 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 and really trying to. Change a hoax I, he's said that several times and I know at least in one one tweet, maybe more eight Chinese hoax that China was trying to to perpetrate on us, so so in any event you know. I I wrote an infuriating book I didn't mean to. I meant to write a kind of. Let's all step back and look at this book. But it just turns out. You cannot write about infuriating topics without writing kind of infuriating book I do try to keep some perspective here and and 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 scientists who have journalists you have movement stepping up and confronting that denial, and eventually, in most cases overcoming it and you know we do have other segments of our society that are designed to try to. Not just pursue profit, but to seek truth that scientists and journalists and that doesn't mean they're not also trying to sue profit sometimes or at least get paid for for their work, but. We do have systems in place that have successfully. This and so it's not like we're starting from scratch. We are just in a very big hole right now. An particularly about climate change, and particularly with so much corporate power over Congress and and frankly the states as well what? What subjects were have? Were you see there's actually progress been made? Well you know people have been 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 gas emissions. 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 improve have gotten so much cheaper. I mean. It's really much much easier now to imagine getting rid of fossil fuels than it was. You know forty years ago when? The industry. I confronted this or win society. I, really started looking at this. And the federal level. They've made major improvements in They've 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 the the progress exactly when it needs to be accelerated, so that's that's maybe not one of the good good pieces of news. You were asking about We have. Well I mean I think that's going to be largely focus, and and and even though we have trump is said we're not going to be part of the Paris agreement anymore, which by the way every other country in the world is a part of there's a handful that hadn't 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 well, we are still part of it, and we are going to be working to reduce our mission, so you know that's all very good news. The technology that we do have a deep bench 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. You know all around the world really that who are who are really stepping up and say. Enough! We have got to deal with this and we've got to deal with it now, and because you grownups of wasted thirty years. We've got to deal with it particularly aggressively. No you cover how many different subjects in this book I cover eight different campaigns of denial. It seems like for you. In particular climate change is the most disturbing, or that's well. That's the one that threatened the future of human civilization. And the one that I got started on. Yeah, but but yeah cover cover seven other industries including slavery radium radium radium was. Industrial Strength. Denial take on radium radium radium is a crazy crazy story. radium is insanely radioactive element. That was discovered. You know around. Just, a right right one, thousand, nine, hundred by the curies and France. And it was a mystery I mean it was way more radioactive than uranium and people didn't even know what radioactivity really meant, but there was a sort of aura of wizardry around it, and and when they discovered 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 hit right away, but you carry some around and then in a few days you would have burn there. Because it was sending off all of this energy, so they thought okay. We have this flesh killing cell killing element. What can we do with it? And they thought well. Let's try to kill. Cancer Tumors, which was actually a very good idea and they experimented with that. That was the the medical use for radium. We're going to put this radium next to a tumor. Then we'll take it away and it'll shrink, and we can use the same radium for the next tumor, and so it was a very efficient what form radioman! They would put it that well, if somehow would refine it and distill it into tiny tiny little amounts, and then they would put it in a needle, or put it in a vial or something, and just position it. Near a tumor it started out as or and they had to refine it refined it down down down down down. and so the the government's at the time in Europe, and and also in the US thought great. Here's this weird crazy valuable stuff. Maybe we should control this or so we make sure it gets used to actually cure cancer and and in Europe. That's pretty much what they did in the US. We try to do that, but. The industry there was a brand new industry that was just forming. And they step forward. The the first company was called Standard Chemical. They stepped forward, and said no, no, no, no, no I, if if the government starts taking over radium, because it's radioactive, radium or well, everything's a little radioactive. Where will this stop was classic? Sort of slippery slope argument. Somehow it it succeeded, and so what happened was this mysterious and potent element became a another commercial project 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 as. His family were morticians. Then he went into industry, and then he was kind of a snake oil salesman, and he kinda failed, but he wanted with radium. He told Congress to cure cancer. You've had a good motive. But he also wanted to big market. Right Cancer. You know just when disease and if you 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 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 that that injecting them with radium would actually kill them. Than the cancer would have and. One of the clinic doctors was was questioned before Congress and he explained well. The way he looked at it. He was just shoving them over a little more quickly. So? He wasn't worried about the fact that he was killing the cancer patients. And they weren't just treating cancer patients. They were treating anybody. They were treating arthritis. They were treating. Joint pain the and so they were. Giving this very toxic substance to people with low level, chronic problems, and then he would he 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 to 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 they did, but didn't, but but many of them really did and you could buy your radium. Get your rate in all kinds of different ways. If you wanted to radio after active drink, you could drink it. You could still get injected. You could take pills. You could. If you want to soak in radium, you could buy bath salts appointments. There was radio. There was radium toothpaste. Oh yeah, and and and and one of the more interesting ones. There were a radioactive rectal suppositories. And these were marketed basically for male sexual dysfunction. That's not what they called it. They. They said this was four as I recall week, dister 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're if you're going Selah quack product, you try to identify problems that people are kind of embarrassed about so they're less likely to go to their doctor by it out of the back of a magazine, and then if it doesn't work, they're not gonNA complain about it. They're not going to sue you. so and but these were not just marketed. Marketed for that, they were marketed for colds. They were marketed for obesity for constipation for insanity. That was a big one trying to cure insanity, so yeah, it becomes a health fad How long does go on for well? It pretty much fizzled out in the thirty s largely, because one particularly prominent and wealthy individual could afford to poison himself very thoroughly by drinking these radium drinks every day and ultimately his. His facial bones started to dissolve. Aloud, he had like holes between the sinuses and his mouth. This is actually 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. Lot of young women were hired to paint radium onto watch dials, not just watched AL's. They put them. All kinds of. These images Oh. You could see it up called radium jaw. John. This. Look at that. One Guy was lower jaws is gone on the second row. So this. Oh my God. Yes old radium! This went on for twenty years. Well yes, I mean the the industry got going in the mid nineteen teens. This this one man I was just talking about died in early thirties got lots of press and that help the health fad part of a go away. The the worker exposure of the young women usually who were. Disfigured and died from from this that part of the industry of of radioactive paint lasted a bit longer into the thirty s they the when they began, they taught these women young women. They might have been fifteen when they got hired. They taught them to make a nice sharp point on their paintbrush with lips and tongue. And because there was this health fat around freedom, they told them that this would would put a glow in their cheeks, and you've seen these pictures that they really. Had some some change in their cheeks, but it wasn't a glow and it. 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 and later industry would say that these people with these horrendous disfiguring diseases. That they were suffering from pre existing condition that this was somehow not the fault of radium that they had hired. Cripples and other people who who weren't strong, because this was easy work. And when they got sick, everybody blamed them, and they were being punished for their generosity of hiring this folks in the first place, and by the way these women had radioactive breath at this point. I mean so. It's not like there was any doubt that they had rating lodged in there. What is radioactive breath? Exhaling Radon. So, this was measurable. Oh Cleveland, even by the standards of the time. Oh! My God now now one thing about the radium industries denials like that blaming the victim are appalling, but one of the things that we did see is that the leaders of that industry including the guy who invented that radioactive paint and including Joseph Flannery? died and and certainly the the direct. The inventor of the paint died because of radium exposure. His teeth had fallen out. According to Time magazine, his fingers had been removed, and nobody else covered that particularly gruesome detail, but then he died of anemia. These are all radium induced ailments, Joseph Flannery, the guy who launched standard chemical well, he had this great idea that he had all this 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 it's great. he actually had him spread 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 mention that he had a contributing factor in his death of anemia. is something that radium exposure causes death certificate, which I'm sorry, yes. Right his deaths are thank you so yeah. He had a anemia and if he believed his own clinic, own his own sales pitch, he probably drank more radium to treat his rene me. So? He did die so so in these two characters. At least we have people believing what they said enough to actually kill themselves as well as other people, so it seems again this is there's human characteristic that this tendency. We start making money. Start justifying. You want to keep that money coming in, so you start justifying your actions manipulating the facts and just continuing to push out whatever it is that you're doing. That's allowing you to earn this profit. Yeah, well, and you know one of the reasons I talk about Joe Flannery is that he's he's A. I think a really good example of a certain kind of person that we celebrate. because they invent things, and they make things happen, and they build businesses the founders of industry. and We we know from psychological studies that. The well, let me let me back up. There's a model. When you think about how the mind works that that governs. got a going system in a stopping system and approach system and an inhibition system. One of the things that activates the approach system is power, and if you have an approach, an active approach system, you're focused on your goal. You're focused on reward. Meanwhile the powerless are focused the ambition part of the mind is more triggered by powerlessness, and you're more focused on risk. So if you're focused on reward, you're not focused so much on your focus so much on consequence for other people and so of course that gets you hailed as a visionary and Joseph Flannery was hailed as a visionary and he did you know he was bowled? He was inventive worked hard. He built a business. He just didn't ask you know. Should we actually feed this? Cell killing radioactive substance that fuses into people's bones permanently to people without any evidence of safety, or should we just go for it and and see how it works and so you know that? that. I think is is troubling in the sense that you've got industry leaders who fit a certain. Psychological profile who rise to the top of 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 recipe for disaster. And also ignorance at the time we'd been no one really understood that kind of stuff. In terms of what the general public probably didn't really know what radiation! The general public know at all, and in fact radioactivity. Incredible Aura around it I mean it was energy with stimulation. That's one of the reasons it got used for sexual dysfunction and and. Treatments Yeah. We don't know and that's the problem with the case of a lot yet me to with the case of a whole lot of these folks, 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. So disturbing. It's yeah, it's very disturbed. You just whenever I hear stories about that. From the early nineteen hundreds I always wonder. How much is something like that happening right now that they're going to look back on, and you know the year twenty, three, hundred zero. What would they say twenty twenty? It may well be social media. You know we've unlocked some really powerful potent force in it's addictive and people love it. It's so exciting it's racing forward and it's so new that nobody fully understands the risks yet. But I think that might be what what when people look back. They'll. They will think. How did these people let this happen? How did they let it rip them to pieces like that? How did it? How did they let it destroy all of their trust in each other in government and their experts and they're academia so that nobody really could tell, or at least 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 your children I mean I grew up without it. You grew up without it. What is happening to eleven year? Olds right now that have facebook accounts, twitter accounts and. INSTAGRAM accounts and they're going back and forth with people all day long being mean to each other I know personally people that get involved in like these online beefs with people and they're sick. They get sick. They get ill like they can't leave their house. They can't get out of bed they're. They're severely disturbed for days on end. They have to get on medication. It's really common. And you know look. I don't read that stuff and I'm a fifty two year old man with a fairly healthy brain, an understanding of my own shortcomings I stay the hell away from but I know a lot of people who are addicted and they. You know you'll see them some days, and they're sweating. Their faces Pale me like what's going on Almond volved in this twitter thing. Somebody got mad at me about this. And I went back and forth about that and next thing you know my my boss found out about it and it's. Great Yeah, it's there's a definite. Tuition and if you think about the anonymous comments. You know one of the things that I want the surprised me. You Know How when you've got a European. Company might have s a over F F, the end of its name instead of ink. That's common that stands like infringe first day and a name for anonymous society. Anonymity was such a central feature of the corporation that they actually appended to the name so. you don't know who's owning these things and so that's another reason that the people who do own it. Don't feel responsible and anonymity we know from. Research and from you know the Internet brings out kind of. Not just Iraq I'm yes, and and just a can of casual brutality, and and certainly not social responsibility so Yeah, I mean I think that. It's going to be a huge issue and I. Think People Certainly Smarter Than me who understand the industry better are going to have to pick it apart and try to think about how. We, really do directly address these problems. We obviously didn't evolve with social media in mind and. Our brains. You know being highly social creatures. Huge portions of our brains are about. Looking around at our place within our tribe, looking at other tribes, and and just dealing with all of the status issues in the comparison, issues and social media of course, expands that dramatically, and and it's just I think you're right, really hard for people to deal with what we're seeing it so clearly right now because it's being exacerbated by social distancing. The fact that we're not around each other, and there's less communication person to person particularly with strangers or particular people you have issues with people are getting together and communicating face to face. I hadn't thought of that. And then children how many children are doing like? My kids are all doing zoom school, which is horrible minutes so ineffective there. Barely paying attention defined find strategies to to mute the teacher and to Shudder camera off and 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 distorted in confused aside and scary, it is and again it's a new thing so the regulations that are in place. They're just. There's really nothing to prevent people from using it to manipulate things right. It's not illegal, and it will take a long time before we get those in place. And also BEF- might be too late. You know before recognize the repercussions. FACEBOOK's talked about making their own money. They're talking about making their own bitcoin type crypto currency I mean that takes place mean they're already 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 does that look like? No one even considered known considered crypto currency twenty years ago, no one considered the impact of social media ten years ago. What are we going to be looking at thirty years from now? Yeah, that's a really good question. I mean you know our failure of imagination goes both ways we we don't tend to imagine the problems that 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 movies or or comic books. I mean you. You don't see progress. You don't see people getting together figuring out a problem hammering out of solution putting it in place that sort I mean, because, of course it's boring. Cinematic, yeah, just. It's all deeply disturbed and terminator. It's kind of interesting. If you compare that to much older science fiction that that has a much more positive perspective off, not always, but at least there was often something that was positive, although I have to say, a lot of that is is stuff that was actually put together by corporations who are showing you the home of the future, and all their marvelous appliances, and those fools were hopeful they were they were up and we want to encourage hope. We just wanted to be realistic and focused and driven home most certainly. The ozone layer's interesting subject. You cover because that doesn't get discussed anymore, but I've been Australia, and you go outside and burst into flames There's everywhere you go Australia. There's these billboards for skin cancer. It's really it was re released. It was last year which was over ten years ago, but it's really strange. There's these billboards everywhere that show tumors and show you know people that have skin cancer and talk to you about the damages, the dangers of Sun. William giant hole. Like Australia, yeah, they're. They're close enough to the ozone hole or. Partially under. The. hairspray! Exactly. Yeah. I mean it's. It is amazing how that story does seem to have been forgotten threat and the fact. Of of the success I mean we caused this huge problem We discovered this huge problem which we need I mean that was kind of serendipitous. And yes, the industry denied it and just kind of came in two chapters I. It was all industry saying. This is an attack on free enterprise. Probably the KGB is behind it. I mean what else. Is. There was one Aerosol company president who suspected it was the KGB but but many industry leaders were talking about this being as an anti-capitalist crusade, and partly because this was the seventies, so they already faced. All, of these demanding environmentalists, saying take the lead out of the gasoline, and do all kinds of other things, and so they were starting to feel like attacked on all sides and and eventually you know so. There was some denial. They're mostly political. Eventually, that got handled well, I shouldn't say eventually. It got handled relatively quickly, because actually not only ninety seventy six when they said okay. We're getting this stuff out of the hairspray out of the. We don't need this inspiration hands. That was in the spring dot. Chlorofluorocarbons CFC's which were invented. Ironically by the same guy who invented leaded gasoline at GM, boy invented both of these documents name. His name is Thomas Midgely Yeah, and he left quite a mark. On the world, but but here's the thing I mean I blame him for putting leading gasoline that was terrible, but inventing CFC's was actually done because it was replacing a poisonous gases that were been in refrigerators. And they would sometimes leak and kill people, so people were just transitioning now from iceboxes, two fridges, and and so they needed a non toxic gas to put in there, so he came up with this, and it was nontoxic, and so you know at the time. Nobody really even knew much about the ozone layer, and they certainly didn't know. See if we're GONNA wreck it so much much less obvious risk and then it wasn't in until the seventies then scientists who who were just sort of curious. Put this altogether and realized. Oh, we are wrecking the Ozone Layer and by seventy six I think it was seventy six. the Ford Administration, said okay. We're getting it out of the CAN. You got a couple of years and this industry aerosol industry who had been screaming and yelling about? anti-capitalists! Said Okay I mean it wasn't was not that big a deal. It was easy for them to do and then then I. Guess we were in the Carter Administration. They were going to start looking at the harder problem of. How do you replace CFC's in refrigerators and air conditioners, and they were putting up a plan for that, but then Reagan got elected, and then in the concerns of the sixties and seventies about. How we protect the environment. Were replaced by concerns about how do we? Avoid environmental regulations because they they were. They felt it was hurting business, and so they basically dropped the ball on this completely and the corporations like Pont, which was the top CFC maker. They had been working on substitutes, but once the the pressure of regulation went away. They just dropped it. They didn't keep looking for substitutes. Even though they had the the same science telling them that there was a risk here, but they decided. We're not going to have to worry about it. Ben Eventually the ozone holes discovered and scientists are shocked because the models had predicted. A gradual reduction ozone, and suddenly you've got this deep reduction in ozone covers like. This huge space over Antarctica. One of the reasons NASA had not discovered this with their satellites. Was that they? Were expecting so much less that they had apparently programmed computers to read huge readings like this as instrument error. It was actually the British. Who discovered this? They they did it. The old fashioned way going down to Antarctica like measuring things, so anyway announced it the NASA looked back and said whoops, right, huge ozone hole, then everything kind of accelerated, and and by eighty seven we had the Montreal Protocol and even though Reagan had run on this anti-regulatory platform. He signed the Montreal Protocol. Protocol Senate ratified it I. Don't think there are any dissenting votes So you know that was a big success story? And by the way by the time things really were winding down. Even Dupont said okay. Yeah, that there's enough science here. We're GONNA stop making our product. And so it's sort of the one example. I can point to where science and evidence overcame denial. But. It's an example where the product wasn't their core product, a little sliver of revenue. That wasn't that lucrative. They could replace it with something that they could sell and they were gonNA clearly regulated anyway so so clearly the you know. The benefits of continued denial had sort of disappeared and. So, you can't 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, doesn't. 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 efforts were done if any to regenerate ozone? just cut the emissions. Of Anything I, don't know that. Yeah, it's funny I I've not heard anybody talk about that, but we always known that the CFC's take decades to get up to the atmosphere so stopping emissions. Meant that the old stuff was still going up there, and it was going to take decades to fix it. We do seem to 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 harm and it's going to get better through natural circumstances, but you know. I was talking about how. People don't let us celebrate that as humanity at its best, you know because we really did something very hard 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 really useful and valuable to us, but what happened immediately after that was this political backlash even when you had the chemical industry saying Yep, we're destroying the ozone layer. We're going to stop doing that. You had these right wing groups. Fred Singer actually was one of the witnesses was also in merchants of doubt. who goes and he gets to testify before Congress, he's a scientist and he's saying that the mainstream science on which you have just based all of these decisions. You're being bamboozled, and they have an anti-capitalist agenda, and you had then I think it. Was Tom delay saying he doesn't listen to the ozone trends panel. All of those you know hundreds of scientists who've hammered out the data on these issues. He listens to Fritz Singer and that was sort of the beginning well, not the beginning because you could take back to the eighties, but that was the next step. In the rise of these science, deniers who sort of had this all purpose agenda looked at lots of different industries and the funny thing was here. You know you the, industry? Saying. No we we're, we're fine with this accelerating the phase hour. We're going to go ahead and do it so. The way I think about it. Is that industry for a long time? fueled doubt and to some extent, they also then funded groups with an ideological agenda who continue to push that doubt. And some of those industries stopped denying the science, maybe because they were going to get sued, or maybe because it was just time. But the groups that they have funded. Now outflanked them on the issue and for example Exxon. Used to fund Exxon Mobil used to fund this little. Crazy, little group called the heartland institute. and. They stopped doing that. Quite long time ago, this institute kept just getting more and more extreme on this issue, and recently they had a dispute between Exxon Mobil Hartland Institute. Leader called Exxon Mobil part of the anti energy global warming movement. That's hilarious. Yeah, so you know there things are. Weird. Right out of super weird called Super Exxon part of an anti energy global warming 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, and that monster is going to keep going around out there and it keeps getting a lot of money. The problem is it, doesn't we don't necessarily know who's funding these groups. Groups anymore for longtime Exxon funded a lot of climate denier groups. They got a lot of public pushback and pressure. They stopped funding the most extreme ones, not all of them. Then the coke brothers started funding. Their Foundation started funding a lot of these groups. They got a lot of attention. Then we saw a lot of the funding of these groups going underground into these dark money organizations like. That promise anonymity so that if you want to fund a politically sensitive issue, nobody knows you've done it so these. The more extreme groups get a lot of money from. These dark money organizations, and therefore there's even deeper anonymity, and and no accountability that some four D. of Exxon was doing the. They're sitting there. Going look I know what we. Got Someone to call us a bunch of hippies. I I suspect that it wasn't that. 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 is true that you I mean. Here's the thing if you're Exxon and you don't actually want to do anything. You Spin off the denial into other groups that will actually stop things. I mean this little group heartland I mean the the this extreme edge of these advocacy groups they are. Deeply involved in the trump administration I mean they. It's not like they're just out there. Howling, the Wilderness have had enormous influence so if you can back off like like Exxon especially Exxon especially if you're being sued and you've got angry shareholders, and you've got the SEC you have a lot of reasons. An have angry European countries that are taking this more seriously in your. Your multinational you have a lot of reason to kind of keep your mouth shut, 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 don't know what Exxon. Mobil has said about that, but clearly the more inefficient cars. The more oil gets burned. Are Their tactics and is. Is there like a school of thought that goes along with this? These strategies like is this taught in universities is their places where they learn this stuff because you would think that it's very valuable, and it's often very sophisticated to actually manipulate tonight. Is this something that gets taught once they get into this corporation as internal thing or is it? Is it just a natural factor in the way? Human beings react to profitability and. Responsibility I think it certainly starts there with with it being a natural reaction, but I think then what happens. Industries learned 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 if you can be a group that sets up front groups. And I quote one here. Man named Rick Berman. WHO has a company that sets up front groups for industries that are facing regulation, and he promises them complete anonymity, and the irony here is that he was, he was talking to a group of oil and gas executives, and saying hey, we can give you complete anonymity in some saying things like well. You know you're telling us. We should really be attacking people's character and reducing the credibility, and I'm not so sure I like that, and he says hey, you can either howdy phrase it. lose prettier. Win Ugly and said I will give you complete anonymity. People have no idea paying me and then somebody in the audience anonymously leaked the whole tape to the New York Times, and so you can see the all of the text. And and he you know he was talking about the various strategies and one of the things that he explicitly said although it was 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 raise doubt because in order to do something we need to reach a certain level of. Certainty. We need momentum. And, it is actually really easy to two minute to diminish that by raising doubt that certainly something. The fossil fuel industry has done with respect to climate and and what he said was. Doubt Paralyzes People. They think I don't know who's right. They think I'll just wait and then basically you have sort of tie in their minds, but you win every tie because you have preserved the status quo so that kind of strategy. That's you know it's pretty sophisticated in the sense that. It was an insight that that really helps lots of industries with science denial, but it was also a pretty obvious lesson from one of the tobacco industry, but but really nobody's put it to use the way. The fossil fuel industry has done around climate change, so there isn't a sense of playbook. There's playbook and there's an industry that will help you. Run those plays and also keep you hidden while you're running those plays, so you don't have to be visible to your. Shareholders to your. Consumers to politicians. If this was an operating system, we would abandon it and bring new right like this was. Windows, ninety, five or something we might be bitter able to predict how it will crash us. Yes, yeah, but it seems like the operating system of whether it's economics or politics never really gets updated. Just sort of get patched. Unfortunately, this is an operating system that takes on a life of its own, and has its own desire to perpetuate itself. Maybe this is where the you know the future of all operating system. I mean you know if you think about sort of again back to the comic books back to the novel's back to Frankenstein, our creations tend to want live, and they tend to want to turn on us and corporations are are creation. Yes, yeah. How did you choose which wants to? And were there any subjects that you left out? They didn't. Yeah, well, yeah. I was I was pretty. Conscious about it eventually, I mean I stumbled around a long time and looked at a lot of industries, but I wanted. First of all in industries 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 there. There was something going on here that I could call denial. I also ended up with industries that had an enormous impact because there were just so many of them. In fact, all of the chapters deal with hurting millions of people or threatening catastrophic global harm like ozone, depletion or climate change with in fact, the exception of radium which I think we can probably say only hurt thousands of people. so the first two factors, and and because I was looking at this as a social phenomenon I didn't want cases where a company was keeping a secret and got discovered I wanted cases where there was a sustained campaign 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 that 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 that had gas but lead paint has its own long history, and and you know it's just so tragic. You'd look at these old ads and they're talking about you know. Paint your baby's nursery with this weapon, and the thing is this leads into contaminant of lead paint lettuce us like the main ingredient I mean it was basically spreading a known poison. Surfaces knowing that it would eventually crumble. Knowing that accumulate slowly and poisons, people, and here's something I. Read I'm not one hundred percent. Sure this is true, but it's heartbreaking. That lettuce sweet. So you? Hear about children. And you think why would they eat? Let ships I guess. Because it's Kinda sweet. I did benefit of putting in. Things made good paint. I mean it. You know it was strong, and now of course we, we think of it as these old old buildings, and so we think of it is crumbling, but it. It did a pretty good job as a paint. If, you didn't count the human impact. did you get any pushback, or did you ever get contacted by any of these different industries that you're covering and we concerned at all about that while you're writing these things, you kind of exposing kind of exposing, but I actually you know it's funny I thought about. Should I beat trying to interview people? For All of these and I really didn't I tried. I called F Corporation, which still exists the company that made leaded paint. I, mean not let me let a gas. They ended up moving onto other products they while they sold overseas for a long time, but then they also made a lot of other things, so they still exist, even though their product was banned their only product at the time that they were started was banned in this country, and I called them up, and said so I'm reading this book about corporate denial, and just wondering. You know if you'd like shocked me about later games. and. Just, your silence on the other side of Thorn, and then they were transfer me to somebody else. I would try it again and get silence and. You know then we get disconnected and it became pretty clear to me the beginning that. I! Really it wasn't going to 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 that was going to work very well, and and also because my focus was the public debate in. How did it affect society? That's what I ended up focusing on the most. So you know I I wasn't worried about the industry's as I was reading this. I'm a little worried now, but I mean really I'm just quoting them so this point. I don't feel like I'm. Particular risk well just. I mean not even risk but that. W- has there been a reaction by these these interests because their whole thing is about denial right so I would imagine you book. Put out a book about Industrial Strength Denial. You'd get some denial about about. Denying. That may be, but the you know I've picked such big industries in these campaigns are so old that there's nothing particularly newsworthy about saying that you know tobacco companies use. That smoking caused cancer or that. The fossil fuel industry raised all kinds of doubts and denied climate change. was there any controversy about the subject matter in the the topics? Were there any ones that you 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? These are all? Examples of denial. They're all very destructive, but I. I don't want to draw a direct moral equivalency between selling human beings were the the harm so immediate and obvious and selling these other products. I mean it is a different sort of situation. So that was an issue for me, but the denials were so. Fascinating and appalling and revealing that I ended up deciding to include it I was nervous about doing the financial chapter just because that took me out of my comfort zone, and 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 I'm very glad I ended up researching and writing about it. Well listen I'm glad you wrote this book and like I said. This is a subject that's always been bizarrely fascinating and compelling to me since merchants of doubt. And I just think it's just it is such a weird aspect of human beings, just the power of corporation, the deniability. What what what they're able to do, and how they're able to continue doing it. It's very strange so I'm very happy that you wrote this book. Thank you and it was great. Talk to you. It's great talking to you. do you have social media or anything that you'd like? Oh? Yeah Pruitt a lead. I am I have a website. BARBARA FREEZE DOT COM so. I know my kids are GonNa. That's good good. 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'll, you'll find it. Thank you, Barbara! Appreciate you, thank you. Thank you friends and thank you to our sponsors. Thank you, Carol, bring home your own Carol, and discover the power of training with the world's only a power exercise bike. Carol is offering listeners a limited time. Offer go to Carol. Fit A are that C.. A. R. O., L. Fit A. I dot, com, and enter the code, Rogan, three hundred checkout and get three hundred dollars off plus free shipping and a free one year subscription. Thank you also to see be MD and they're fantastic CBD oil products. GO TO CBD MD. DOT COM, and use the Promo Code Rogan checkout, and you will save twenty five percent off your next purchase of their amazing CBD products. I love their stuff from their CBD fruits menthol to their tinctures. The CD recover. Their stuff is amazing so once again. That's CB. Dot Com use the Promo Code Rogan at checkout, and you'll save twenty five percent off your next purchase of their superior CBD oil products. Thank you to squarespace the host of Joe Rogan Dot Com, and the place where you are. Make your next website. You're going to do it yourself. You can do it. It's dialed in. They have an amazing way to do it. Go to squarespace dot com slash Joe and they'll let you try it for free. They're easy to use drag and drop user interface in gorgeous designer templates. Templates make it at Burris. Go to squarespace dot com slash Joe for that free trial then when you're ready to launch us, the offer Code Joe and you'll save ten percent off your first purchase of a website or domain, and we're also brought to you by the motherfucking fucking cash have the cash cap download the cash APP from the APP store for the Google play store today and when you do downloaded, make sure you use the referral. Code Joe Rogan all one word, you will receive ten dollars and the cash apple also send ten dollars to our good friend. Justin, Rennes fight for the forgotten charity building wells for the pygmies in the Congo. Thank you my friends. Thanks tune into the show much love to all by.

Coming up next