October 17, 2024 • 57 mins
Can one thrive as a conservative in a sea of liberal ideology? Embark on a journey with us, Rachel and Jason Wagner, as we unravel our personal narratives of embracing conservative beliefs while living in the predominantly Democratic state of Illinois. We'll peel back the layers of our political evolution, shaped by our unique backgrounds—Rachel's intriguing childhood conversations with her grandfather, a Democratic mayor, and Jason's eye-opening political awakening post college.
Our final segment explores the crucial role of education in shaping political perspectives. We'll recount personal experiences of navigating political discussions within family settings, emphasizing the necessity of fostering critical thinking and exposing children to diverse viewpoints. From the challenges of racial discussions in educational institutions to the impact of diversity and inclusion initiatives in the workplace, we tackle these sensitive topics head-on. Our episode concludes with a candid discussion on the evolving understanding of gender and societal norms, inviting parents to actively engage with their children in complex conversations, ensuring a balanced and comprehensive worldview for the next generation.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome back to another episode of the Real Life
Investing Podcast with Jasonand Rachel Wagner.
Today we are going into how webecame conservative in our
politics.
Does that sound like a funtopic to talk about?
(00:22):
Sure, sure, why, why just sure?
Sure, why not like?
Speaker 2 (00:27):
yeah, that sounds amazing well, I mean, I think I
obviously already know whereours roots, but it would be an
interesting conversation to havewith other people and where the
root of their yeah, you kind ofwonder like uh, how, how did we
get to the mindset that we have?
Speaker 1 (00:44):
Considering we currently live in Illinois very
democratic state.
We're no longer in the city ofChicago, which is very, very
democratic.
As you get outside of the cityof Chicago into the suburbs, it
becomes more Republican.
If you were to look at a map oflike how the state votes,
majority of the state is red butChicago is very blue blue and
(01:05):
so over it illinois always fallsleft yeah, I wouldn't say it's
more republican out here, butbut yeah, there's a presence
yeah, yeah, there's, there's,there's.
Certainly, as you go into morerural areas, you know, you just
have a little bit moreconservatism, yeah, which makes
sense, all right.
So so, rachel, but you grew upin in iowa.
(01:27):
Tell me a little bit about like.
I mean, I'll just put it thisway you knew, you knew politics
way before I ever did.
I was in college and I didn'tknow the difference between a
democrat and a republican um butyou had a very different
upbringing, and why don't youlike talk about that?
Speaker 2 (01:46):
I'm just laughing because that's very true.
Jason did not know thedifference between a democrat
and a republican no, nobody toldme, nobody taught me isn't it
kind of interesting that?
I mean, I met you I guess itwas your sophomore year, but
this conversation probably cameabout my senior or your junior
year and you still didn't knowthat.
So your junior year and youstill didn't know that.
So third year of college andyou still don't know the
(02:07):
difference.
Isn't that kind of interesting?
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Oh, I was over 20 years old.
I mean, I might have been 21and I didn't know.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (02:15):
That's interesting.
But to answer your question, Imean I don't feel like I grew up
in an overly politicizedhousehold or family or anything
like that.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
But I did grow up, I mean your.
Your grandfather was the mayorof leclerc, so you had politics
in your family that's true.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
That's true, he's democrat, though which is very
interesting yeah, yeah, so mygrandpa was mayor of leclerc, I
think, for a total of 18 years.
But split, split 10 years, Ibelieve in the 80s, and then
another eight years later onlike in my early, early
(02:54):
adulthood years.
So yeah, that's a good point.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Yeah, okay.
Well, even though you had aDemocrat in your family, you do
not identify as a Democrat.
And why is that?
Speaker 2 (03:08):
I mean.
My answer to this for so manyyears was just you know, I am
more conservative on the economy, on foreign policy, but I think
I'm also more moderate on onsome social programs not
certainly not all of them, butgive me an example of why what
you mean when you'reconservative on the economy and
(03:29):
foreign policy.
Speaker 1 (03:30):
What does that mean?
Speaker 2 (03:32):
so I am smaller government, meaning less
government spending, looserrestrictions on corporate
america, because I believe whatcreates jobs is not the
government, but actuallycapitalism and companies.
I think when you loosen the taxrestrictions on companies, they
(03:54):
are incentivized to create morejobs, and that is what creates
a thriving economy.
I think when you have biggergovernment so more government
oversight, more governmentspending companies tighten their
belt, they cut jobs becausethey have stricter things to
adhere to and, as a result,unemployment goes up, wages
(04:14):
remain flat or don't grow either.
So yeah, does that make sense?
Speaker 1 (04:19):
yeah, yeah, that was a better answer than I thought
you were going to give.
Honestly, if you were to ask me, like you know, those types of
questions, I probably would beable to dance around it.
But that was a better answerthan I thought you were going to
give.
Honestly, if you were to ask methose types of questions, I
probably would be able to dancearound it, but that was actually
pretty well delivered.
Like okay, that makes sense,but on the foreign policy part,
what does that mean?
That was the economic standfront.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Yeah, so I have always, up until more recently I
think, my views on this Imentioned this in a previous
podcast my views on this arebecoming a little bit more
(04:58):
unsure.
I think we need to protect thatabove all else, because without
having a strong, safe, secure,thriving American country,
nothing else matters, and soI've always put that above.
So, foreign policy wise, youknow, ensuring this country is
safe, this country isn't underattack, things aren't unstable
(05:20):
or insecure in other areas ofthe world, because that just
weakens the world's economy and,in essence, america.
Now I would say, people whotalk like that, I think, in my
head start to ring a little bittoo pro-war, like I used to,
kind of like, really like NikkiHaley and I think this last
election cycle, every time shetalked I just kept hearing war,
(05:40):
war, war, war, war.
And I'm not a war hungry person, I don't believe or support
that but I do believe americashould be first, or the last
remaining true, true, remainingfree democracy in the world.
And without protecting that,those freedoms, that
constitution, once it's gone,it's gone.
You're not getting it back sookay, all right.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
So then your view on the war in Ukraine.
Just curious.
I mean, we actually need to goback to how we got to this point
, but now, I'm just diving intoa little bit into the mindset of
Rachel here.
So the viewpoint on the war inUkraine obviously hot topic.
Do you support US troops goingto Ukraine?
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Yeah, that's a complex answer.
I think, Historically, in myhistorical viewpoint, being
conservative, strong on foreignpolicy my answer would 100% be
yes, that it's the obligation ofAmerica to protect the
Ukrainian people and thatcountry's sovereignty and to not
let communism rule in othernations because it weakens the
(06:44):
rest of the world and America.
I will say more recently, Iguess it's not that I'm
questioning America's response,so to say, but more so how those
things are actually starting.
I think I am very muchquestioning who the puppet
master is to this stuff.
I don't believe these thingsare occurring naturally, of just
(07:07):
Putin making a decision andinvading Ukraine.
I think there's a lot morecomplexity to the issue and I
think there's a lot that the UScould have done to prevent those
tensions from worsening, KamalaHarris being one of them.
You know, talking about Ukrainebeing a part of NATO is
probably one of the dumbestthings that she could have done.
So that just goes to show herignorance in foreign policy.
(07:29):
But do I think that that wasprobably a bit purposeful?
I do.
I think the difference betweenhow I used to think, you know, a
few years back, than how Ithink now is that war is so
profitable, and I think that theleaders in Washington have
their hands in these defensecompanies and in these overseas
(07:53):
affairs, that it is actuallyprofitable for them to get
themselves into, or to get theUS into these conflicts.
So to support that.
When you ask me if I supportthe war in Ukraine, I think it's
very complicated to give myanswer right On the surface yes.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
Yeah, so like okay, right.
So when you start kind ofdiving into well, that's a
money-driven thing, but how dopoliticians get paid to get us
into these conflicts or to wantto support a war in which you're
saying could be a financialbenefit, like, can you walk
through that whole web?
Speaker 2 (08:31):
no, I mean, I think it's way more complex than
anybody can really comprehend,and I don't think of the person
to explain it, but from a Iguess.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
For one thing, politicians are allowed to trade
stocks.
This is very like n like NancyPelosi does this all the time,
but her husband is a day trader,or you know.
I don't know if he's a daytrader, but he's a trader and
runs a big portfolio.
And when you are in power andyou make legislation or you
(08:59):
steer some type of event tooccur and you are have ownership
of companies that might benefitfrom that type of event to
occur and you are have ownershipof companies that might benefit
from that type of event, theirstocks could rise, right.
So Lockheed Martin is a defensecontractor, publicly traded
company, right?
So unusual whales is uh, it'san Instagram, it's a Twitter,
(09:20):
but they do a lot of interestinganalysis on all of the people
in politics and what they own,because you have to publicly
display your ownership in anypublicly traded company and you
can see that a lot of people ownthese defense contractors.
Speaker 2 (09:39):
Yeah, the people voting, so that just seems like
a conflict of interest, doesn'tit?
The people voting on whether ornot we invade certain areas,
they send military support tosuit.
Yeah, so, that's so.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
That's one way, that's one way that they could
benefit, right, okay, what elseyou think that there's actually
like ties to contractors, likethey have agreements with these
contractors that well, hey, nowwe're going into war and now
you're going to increase all ofyour, or we're increasing the
defense budget, now, all of asudden, you know, are there
kickbacks?
(10:09):
Do you think that that kind ofhappens?
Speaker 2 (10:10):
or yes, I think kickbacks occur.
Speaker 1 (10:18):
Yeah for sure people to vote a certain way in which
those special interest lobbyistsare the ones that are
responsible for potentially bigdonations for somebody's
candidacy.
So just all ways that peoplecould be manipulated to, even if
they don't want to support awar, but they do because there's
(10:41):
financial interest.
I love your faces every timethat we talk about this stuff.
I just don't understand whyyou're like so.
It's like you're skating on iceright now, like you're
terrified of what I just said.
Speaker 2 (10:53):
I'm not terrified.
I just don't expect sometimesthe level of in-depth question
of me, so I need to get betterat asking you questions.
By all means.
This means an open dialogue,otherwise it's just like me on
the spot, yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
Yeah, all right.
Well, okay, cool.
Well, I mean sometimes, whenyou say things like that, where
it's like oh, I'm conservativeon my foreign policy, well, what
does that actually mean?
Speaker 2 (11:17):
So that's why I'm asking.
Yeah, that was a fair question.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
That's all I'm asking is like, go into that.
If I supported the war inukraine, well, right, because
that's a very that's a very bigtopic that is literally on the
ballot right now.
Right, and you have therepublicans that that don't want
a war.
Trump wants to end the war.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
He doesn't want it to go on, he wants to end yeah,
and that, and that's what's beenso interesting, I think, to see
such a shift.
Speaker 1 (11:41):
So, like we were talking earlier about, I'm sure,
sure, democrats wanted to endtoo, but they want to do it in a
different way.
They want to do it in a waywhere they want to go to war
with Russia.
Exactly, and they want to giveUkraine all of the weapons and
potentially I mean who knowsMaybe they want to move troops
into Ukraine and actually go towar with Russia.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
Yeah, trump's the opposite way, ukraine and
actually go to war with russia.
Yeah, trump's the opposite way.
Yeah, I mean, I don't thinkanybody is saying that directly,
but I think that the steps andthe moves that they take
indirectly create that.
And then they're like oh, look,see, now we have to like that.
That's what's what biden didleading up to this entire
conflict.
Is there?
There were so many times, Ithink, that he could have put an
end to it, and he didn't.
Instead, just they p he pokedthe bear and then like oh well,
(12:26):
now we've got to stop.
We've got to stop.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Putin?
Yeah Well, they've always justpainted him as the villain right
and I mean at the end of theday, he did invade.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
But, as we've kind of learned, there's a long, long
history that this wasn't anunprovoked war.
That the media and theDemocrats have always told us is
that there have been years andyears and years of the United
States doing some things thatthey shouldn't have been doing,
that was pressing the line, andso there's a lot of times where
(12:58):
like this is a they call it aproxy war.
It's because we're not actuallythe ones fighting Russia, but
we've been manhandling Ukraine.
We've been involved in Ukrainefor a very long time and Russia
is responding to that.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
Yeah, because they feel threatened yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
And so it's once you start to kind of dissect, like,
well, where did this all comefrom?
Is it just this mean villainthat's out there who's like, oh,
I've got to conquer the wholeworld?
Well, that's what they want youto believe, but it's a lot more
complex than that.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
Yeah, and I think that that whole concept is
something that's why I say likemy thoughts have kind of changed
is like historically, yeah, Ijust thought Russia, china, bad
communists, you know, enemies ofAmerica.
That's just how it is right.
We're the good guys or the badguys, and I think you know
there's been plenty of I don'twant to say evidence, but
content that has come out thatraises those questions a little
(13:53):
bit more deeply right.
Like is Putin really unprovokedbad guy coming after Ukraine?
Maybe he's a bad guy comingafter Ukraine.
Was he unprovoked?
I don't think so.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
Yeah, ukraine.
Maybe he's a bad guy comingafter ukraine.
Was he unprovoked?
I don't think so.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And so the republicans justwant to end the war.
They want to just protect.
They don't believe that theyshould be protecting other
countries like that, not allrepublicans right, well, yeah,
so, and this is where, like,nato is talking earlier.
Speaker 2 (14:21):
It's like the, the party has shifted right big time
and it's split.
Speaker 1 (14:24):
Yeah, it's split and trump wanted to get out of nato,
and this is where we weretalking earlier.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
It's like the party has shifted right Big time and
it's split.
Yeah, it's split.
Speaker 1 (14:28):
And Trump wanted to get out of NATO, right At one
point.
He wanted to get out of NATObecause nobody was paying their
fair share, right?
And that's what it kind ofalways comes down to.
At least for him is like herewas the agreement and nobody is
doing what they agreed to, right.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
America's carrying all the weight.
Speaker 1 (14:45):
Right, and so is that ?
Is that appropriate?
No, so he's.
So he's a guy that just wantsto make sure that the deal is
actually being upheld and ifit's not, well then he's
renegotiating things, and that'sjust the way Trump is, is that
he renegotiates things?
Okay, he also has a Americafirst mindset.
Well, we're going to build thestrongest military and be able
(15:12):
to defend ourselves, but we'renot going to be defending other
people's wars, especially ifyou're not meeting your
agreement.
So it's, it's a differentmindset, for sure.
So, anyways, well, that's, thatwas a fun discussion.
So, anyways, well, that's, thatwas a fun discussion.
But how did you get to all this?
You did you grow up liketalking politics in your house
yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
So yeah, that was kind of like your original
question.
I would say by like middleschool, we talked politics in my
house and specifics, because Imean, basically, after what was
it seventh grade for me when9-11 happened?
You know that was a hugelyhistoric day to be at school and
watching this happen and likebe old enough to you know, know
(15:56):
what was occurring, but notreally old enough to like
decipher how and why and how wecame about that.
So we went home with a ton ofquestions and even at school
there's a ton of questions beinghappened.
So that, I think, was probablythe start of the conversation.
But from there it led into justso much American history, world
history.
I think I came home one timeand I made some kind of comment
(16:19):
about George Bush and my stepdadwas like wait, wait, stop right
there, we need to have aconversation.
Then we had conversation andthen from there we were always
talking politics.
We still talk politics to thisday yeah, so it was.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
It was very openly discussed in your household yeah
, it wasn't forceful eitherthere was a lot of like well,
what do you think this?
Speaker 2 (16:42):
or what do you think about this?
You know you choose and then Ichoose, and then he'd be like
okay, well then, that isreflective of this party's views
, not this party's views so thatand that is how.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
So basically, you came home from school learning
some of these things.
You tell him what you learn andthen he would give like, okay,
yeah, no accurate, or well, youalso don't know about this side
of the thing yeah it.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
It'd be like well, have you considered this thought
?
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Why did?
Speaker 2 (17:05):
this happen.
Why this?
Came about and what each partythought about it and then yeah.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
I mean, that certainly shapes your mindset a
little bit.
And also, if you think about itfrom the parent's perspective,
it's kind of like hey, I don'tknow exactly what they're being
taught in school, but we cancome home and we can discuss it
in almost a way of him givingmaking sure that you know his
side of things.
And I think this is where Iwanted this conversation to go
(17:39):
is that if you don't have thosekind of counter discussions with
children about what they couldbe learning in school, you're
leaving their whole mind andtheir whole shape of how they
view the world up to theeducator and you're not having
the chance to help them thinkabout ways.
That maybe you think aboutthings, whether your ways are
(18:02):
right or wrong, but at least youhave a chance to help them
think about things.
Whether your ways are right orwrong, but at least you have a
chance to help them think aboutthings from your perspective.
And if your perspective is theway that they teach it in school
, then you know, then chancesare that child is probably going
to learn the same exact thingand you're going to be okay with
it and that's going to continueto flourish and you're going to
be like all right, johnny knowsexactly what happened in the
(18:22):
world, but we all know thatthere's two sides of every story
and if one side of the story isalways being told and the other
side of the story is not, thenthose people are always going to
think that one side of thestory was accurate.
And what have we learned kindof recently is that the
education field, especially asyou go into colleges and
(18:43):
universities, is dominated bydemocratic professors.
So it was Elon Musk that justshared this big chart that
literally showed you thepercentage of college education
or college professors, and wherethey lean politically.
Speaker 2 (19:01):
Yeah, and so, and we have talked about this so much
from our own personal experiencein college right.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
We went to augustana college, which is a very liberal
, if they say liberal artsuniversity or university uh,
sorry, it's not a university Idon't know why I said that it's
a liberal arts college.
They classify themselves as aliberal arts college.
Again me choosing a college.
I didn't even know what liberalarts mean.
I just thought it meant like oh, I'm well-rounded, that's the
(19:30):
way that they presented it.
It was like oh, you're going toget a well-rounded education
here.
Well, well-rounded wouldcertainly make you believe that
you are getting a very centristor like middle of the road.
You're going to know what theDemocrats the road.
You're going to know what thedemocrats think.
You're going to know what therepublicans think and we're
going to, in our teachings, aregoing to be along the middle of
(19:52):
the road.
Because you're well-rounded,you get to view from both sides
we're not even just both sides,but varying sides.
Right, it's not that there'sjust two, but and probably some
people are like not everyconversation is a political
conversation, right?
Well, when the Democrats startsaying that math is racist, well
(20:13):
now, literally everything youdo is a political conversation,
right?
You never thought that mathcould be labeled that whatsoever
, or roads could be racist, orschool buses right?
We never, ever thought that wasa thing.
But now we've heard that before.
Okay, so this is kind of whereI'm going.
(20:34):
Down is like we send our kidsto the schools, we have to have
conversations with them aboutwhat they're learning, because,
as parents and the empoweringpart of this is that parents
need to be able to give theother side, because if they're
only being fed one side, arethey really well-rounded?
No, they're totally biased.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
Well, yeah, and it's really a disservice to them
because it's just telling themwhat to think and believe, as
opposed to creating thatcritical thinking skill and
identifying.
Well, okay, both sides havegood points and both sides have
things I don't agree with, butwhere do I most align what makes
the most sense?
Speaker 1 (21:12):
right, yeah yeah, right, and that is kind of the
theme of what we've really seenlately is you are not taught how
to critically think, you aretaught what to think, and there
is somebody else that's creatingthat narrative and that's
regurgitated throughuniversities, through the
education system.
(21:33):
And so how did I get to thisviewpoint?
Because I grew up in ahousehold that didn't talk about
politics whatsoever.
Maybe if I were to ask my dadwhat a Democrat or Republican
was, he would probably give mean answer I think he's more
willing to talk about it but itwasn't a common thing.
It certainly was never a commonconversation and it's still not
(21:55):
.
So that leaves me as a goingoff on the world, my own, going
into a liberal arts college.
So really, this liberal artscollege has a prime opportunity
to shape the way, I think bygiving me the education.
And so what was the very firstfew classes that we had to take?
(22:16):
Well, we talked about.
Speaker 2 (22:18):
The very first book was Yours was the Obama book,
wasn't?
Speaker 1 (22:22):
it.
No, mine was Warriors, don'tCry.
Oh, so it must have been theclass after you.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
I don't think I read warriors.
Don't cry.
No, we had the sunflower.
That was that book warriorsdon't cry.
Speaker 1 (22:31):
I think I'm pretty sure it was about when slavery
was over.
There were black students thatwould go to schools and just the
experiences that they had goingto these schools and whatnot.
So instantly talking about racelike instantly, and those
weren't the only racialdiscussions that we had oh, yeah
(22:52):
, no, no race was a common themethroughout the entire august an
instant theme.
Yeah, and these were not likehistory classes, these were.
They called them lY I don'tknow what that stands for, but
you had a 101, a 102, and a 103.
And you were required to takethese.
But race was the topic ofconversation in a lot of these
(23:14):
classes and white privilegebecame something that I was
taught about.
Okay, so, as you kind of godown this road of well here's,
as soon as they enter thisuniversity, we're going to start
talking about these type oftopics.
Those are all good subjects tobe aware of, but it's such
(23:36):
left-leaning ideology.
Do you agree with that?
Speaker 2 (23:40):
yeah, yeah, I did.
Yeah, I mean you and I'vetalked before, I think I I'm
bothered by some of theinteractions that I had with
professors at augustana and whydoes that need to be like again?
Speaker 1 (23:55):
why?
Why does that need to be thefirst class?
Those types of?
Why does race when race wasn'tproblem wasn't talked about in
high school?
I went to a high school thatwas predominantly white, but I
hung out with the black peopleall the time Like because I
played sports and like it didn'tbother me.
(24:16):
It never did.
And then all of a sudden, itbecomes a thing as you get into
higher education, right.
All of a sudden it becomes athing as you get into higher
education, right.
And so that thing has evolvedover time, because that was back
in 2008.
We were talking about whiteprivilege.
Now, all of a sudden, that is avery big topic.
That happened when george floydwas going on, right?
(24:39):
so 12 years later, even before,before that but yeah, right, but
it really became mainstreamwhen George Floyd happened and
then race divided everybody.
From that moment, race dividedeverybody Because that was what
the narrative was that this wasa racial issue.
(24:59):
Systematic racism is everywhere, and of course you don't want
to be called a racist ever, soyou go with these points and you
racism is everywhere, and ofcourse you don't want to be
called a racist ever.
So you go with these points andyou agree with it.
Everybody that shared thatlittle black screen on Instagram
I did it.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
You did.
Speaker 1 (25:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
You shared a black screen.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
Yeah, Remember it was flooding that one day I did it.
Speaker 2 (25:20):
Oh, I did not.
Speaker 1 (25:22):
Well, yeah, because at the time, I didn't want to be
called a racist, even by notdoing something.
But now we have this fear ofbeing called a racist in
literally everything that we canpossibly do, and that is not
right whatsoever.
And so how do we undo all ofthis race discussion?
(25:43):
Because I don't want to becalled a racist, but it's.
The problem was is that I neversaw race prior to being told
that race is a thing.
yeah, so that goes down to theeducation that was given to me,
that was forced into my mind,that I was forced to write
(26:05):
papers about saying it was athing.
When, in the world that I wasliving in, race wasn't a thing.
I interacted with all kinds ofpeople.
It didn't matter.
I never saw anybody by theirskin color or where they came
from.
It was always about who theywere.
But now, all of a sudden, I goto college and now race is thing
(26:26):
and you should know about it.
Speaker 2 (26:28):
Yeah, and the professor is going to tell you
the reason it was never a thingfor you is because you are the
white privileged man.
Who's the oppressor?
Exactly Well, of course it wasnever noticeable to you.
Speaker 1 (26:40):
You should feel like shit because you're the white
privileged man who never had tothink about it.
Yeah, exactly, you should feellike shit because you're the
white privileged man who neverhad to think about it.
Yeah, exactly, and that is howthey, that's how they've beaten
everybody down.
Oh, because what do you?
How do you combat that?
How do you combat that?
You can't, you can't.
Yeah, oh, I guess I wasn'tawake.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
Yeah, the whole, the whole conversation concept
around this really is annoyingto me for a couple of reasons.
One I think every single adult,no matter your color, your
gender, where you're from, nomatter what, I think everybody's
got and I think everyone agreeswith this everybody's got an
underlying bias to something orsomeone or something right Just
(27:23):
from your own experiences.
That's how you grow up andlearn to someone or something
right Just be from your ownexperiences.
That's how you grow up andlearn to view the world.
Right Is from your own personalexperiences.
And somebody asked that justthe other day they're like so
who are you bias against?
When she was saying everybodyhas an internal bias and
everybody has internal likeracism, and it was like well,
who are you racist against?
Did you see that?
Speaker 1 (27:45):
I don't know what you're talking about it was.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
Anyways, I digress, but was that?
Speaker 1 (27:48):
was that like something on instagram you saw,
or?
Yeah, it was just a video of acongressional hearing oh okay,
so just saying that everybodyhas internal biases and like,
who are you have to, you have towork and discover who are your
internal biases and who are youracist against, just naturally
because of the systematic thingsthat are in place yeah all
right now.
(28:09):
Doesn't that just make yourbrain hurt?
Speaker 2 (28:10):
well, yeah, because if it exists for everybody, then
it's not like a systemicproblem, right it's.
It's just how you end upgrowing up and viewing the world
, right?
Yeah, and it annoys me becausewhen all of that was happening,
with, like, george floyd andeverything was, you know, being
responded to or whatever Iremember just reflecting so much
(28:31):
on Scarlett at that age becauseshe was so young and she was
just like moving into toddlerages, and I just remember
looking at her and being likedude, this girl doesn't see
color whatsoever, right?
I mean, she would go to daycareand she had friends of all
different races and she wouldplay with the baby dolls of all
different colors and there sheplayed with the darker colored
(28:52):
baby doll majority of the time,like that was her doll that she
played with.
And I just remember thinkinglike she doesn't see color, like
people are taught to see color,and I think the teaching to see
it is is the problem, right?
and it's the teaching to see it,yeah and that's why I've got
such an issue with like why doyou, why do you have to teach?
Speaker 1 (29:10):
yeah, right, and so that if you're teaching a kid
that the color of their skinmatters, then they are going to
grow up believing that the colorof their skin and everybody
else's skin matters, and if youteach them, if you teach them to
hate the country that they livein and that it is oppressive
and systematically racist andtotally rigged against you, they
(29:34):
are all going to be saying thatit's if you teach that because
kids are malleable.
Me, even as a 20 year old, ismalleableable because, again, I
didn't come from a family thattalked about politics.
I had this whole potential waythat I could lean left or right
(29:54):
and it wasn't discussed, itwasn't molded upon.
When I was younger, collegeshifted me to the left because I
was immersed in these types ofdiscussions, and then I went in
to get my first job and I thinkwhat I discovered on my first
(30:14):
job was that I went to a smallercompany still publicly traded
but smaller company located inIowa, and they seemed to have a
little bit more.
It seemed like it was a littlebit more conservative and I
stayed there for a few years andreally enjoyed my experience
but realized that I wanted to gointo, I want to be in a big
(30:35):
company, right?
I want to experience that andactually have a lot of upward
trajectory type thing orflexibility, have a lot of
upward trajectory type thing orflexibility.
And so I found AllstateInsurance and that was out here
in Northbrook and I did notrealize until kind of recently.
That is a very diverse company.
(30:56):
It's huge, very diverse, andthey would always press.
Diversity is great.
Diversity allows businesses tothrive.
Diversity allows so many ideasto form and then we can pick out
the best ideas and that was ahuge message that they pushed
all the time.
(31:16):
And so, as you start talkingabout, like the DEI stuff, how
all of that has worked into thecorporations and it took a
little bit, for I don't thinkDEI was there when I was there.
That's kind of like a recentthing, but it all started,
probably, from some of this.
Diversity is good, and I'm notsaying that it's not good, but
(31:38):
I'm also saying that like, well,look where DEI has kind of
landed.
It's gone down a trajectorythat has.
Well, now we're not doing.
We want so much diversity andwe want to make sure that it's
such a level playing field thatwe're not taking into merit and
ability into account, becausewe'd rather care more about
(31:59):
diversity.
And so do the best ideas alwayscome to the table if we're not
actually hiring people based offof their talents, but rather
the way that they look.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
I'm remembering my time in HR, the last few years
that I was still working.
I worked in the HR departmentand I was in a position that was
doing a lot of hiring, and so Iwas the hiring manager for
several positions, and I'm justhaving flashbacks to all these
conversations that I had withthe EEO department.
It's like you publiclyadvertise a position, you get a
(32:33):
huge pool of candidates right,you narrow it down based on
qualifications, you interviewthese people and you get to the
end and EEO is looking it overand they're like well, how come
you didn't consider any peopleof of this nationality or
background?
And I'm like well, look at thepool of people applied.
I didn't have any of thosepeople.
(32:54):
Well, why not?
Do you think that you weren'toutreaching enough to those
areas?
I'm like I don't know.
It was on the fricking website.
It was posted in this, you know, hr publication.
It was posted here, it wasposted there.
It's on LinkedIn, you know, andI would get all this pressure
of like, well, you probably needto go back out and you need to
canvas and see if you can getother candidates.
I lost two people I wanted tohire because they forced me to
(33:14):
go back out on the street andadvertise the position so I
could get a greater pool.
And then what was funny is inHR predominantly we had a lot of
women.
I think there were two, maybethree men in a department of
over 40.
And so then I get to this otherposition and I selected the
(33:35):
best candidate who I thoughtshould be hired, and it happened
to be a white male.
Well, why are you hiring awhite male?
I'm like dude, he's the onlywhite male who applied.
Like it's not, like he actuallywas the minority of the pool
that I was selecting from.
And then I'm getting questionedon hiring him because,
predominantly over the entireorganization?
Speaker 1 (33:52):
Well, because he's a white male.
I know he was the bestqualified and if you think of
the hierarchy of diversity,white men are on the lowest of
the totem pole.
Speaker 2 (34:04):
I know, but departmentally he was actually
the minority because we had avery diverse HR department.
Minus the female, it was veryfemale-driven, but across races
it was very diverse.
He's the only white person thatI hired.
The whole time I was there andI got just ransacked with
questions.
I was just like this is justinsane.
You can't actually hire theright person.
(34:24):
There's no choice, right, itwas just crazy.
It was just crazy, right and so.
But obviously he was I hadpromoted three minority women
that I, since I was there, and Ihired two other minority women
while I was there.
And then I just get attacked.
For you know, well, you know, Ilost two good candidates
because you know I didn't have adiverse enough pool.
(34:46):
And then I get, you know,accused of I don't know.
I digress, but it just kills mebecause I'm like dude, like I
went through this process and Iselected each time the person
that I thought was bestqualified for the position.
Speaker 1 (35:01):
And then I'm getting questioned well, why?
Speaker 2 (35:02):
aren't you looking at people based on their skin?
Speaker 1 (35:04):
Yeah, so you?
At the end of the day, you hada track record of not being
racist, promoting minorities.
Speaker 2 (35:10):
Yes, yes.
Speaker 1 (35:11):
And you decide that our best candidate here is this
white male.
And now you get flack on that.
I mean, just think about thecraziness of why that even is a
thing, but that type ofmentality has flooded the
corporate world.
Speaker 2 (35:33):
And not in a good way either, like I remember one of
the positions that I was inprior to working in HR, you know
the hiring manager specificallysaid I want a young female in
this position.
Now let's think about that fora minute, like how is that not
discriminatory, right?
Yeah, very much so it is, yeah,it's like I don't want anybody
older and I don't want any menright, it's, it's a it's 100
(35:57):
discriminatory but it wasallowed because you know, women
are minorities, so okay.
Speaker 1 (36:02):
so if the corporations have recently been
flooded with all of this, butback in college, that's where
race became a thing.
And then, well, what happens toall the students once they
graduate college?
Well, they might go on and getan mba, to get a doctorate, and
those types of teachings areprobably still pushed or they go
on and they go into thecorporate world.
Well, a lot of the corporateworld comes from colleges and
(36:25):
universities, so this liberal,left-leaning mindset is all of a
sudden being absorbed in thecorporations.
And that's where it's kind oftroubling to me, because at the
end of the day, business shouldbe about merit and who's the
best person for the job?
Who is the best person for thejob and does that person help us
(36:48):
accomplish our goals as abusiness?
It doesn't matter where theycome from, what they look like,
I don't know.
That just seems like a veryobvious thing.
Speaker 2 (36:57):
Yeah, I totally agree .
So I guess I want to ask you,since you asked me, since you
didn't talk about politics inyour household.
Speaker 1 (37:09):
Where did my conservatism come from?
Yeah, because you went toliberal school.
Yeah, right, we haven't gottento that far yet, because my
conservatism one it was shapedin college, left leaning.
Then I got steered to the rightbecause I went to a corporation
that was actually moreconservative in rural Iowa.
And then I went back to a largecorporation in an urban area in
(37:30):
a left-leaning state, but thenI did not like the experience
there and I didn't like thepeople that I was surrounded by
and I didn't like particularlythe boss I was working for and I
said this is miserable.
And then I found real estate andI made a jump into
entrepreneurship.
And entrepreneurship allowed meto really think for myself,
(37:52):
which was I am going to doeverything possible so that my
business can grow and can obtainthe goals that it wants to
obtain, that I can continue toget the customers that I want to
influence and attract.
And everything just becameabout blocking and tackling.
There was no HR department.
If you look at the people thatwe have hired here as our
(38:14):
brokers black, white, female,male I mean I don't have a DEI
program, I just hire peoplebecause I think that they're a
good fit.
Speaker 2 (38:27):
Yeah, I think a lot of what further shaped you I
don't feel like you left collegebeing a liberal, but maybe a
little bit.
But I think what helped furthershaped you was experiences with
policy in your work.
I think there were so manyexamples of like I think about
the one client you had trying tothink of the right term who had
(38:48):
that property in her family forseveral years but was
struggling to sell it because ofa zoning restriction.
It was a zoning restrictionthat was trying to limit some
gentrification.
Speaker 1 (38:59):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (38:59):
You know what I'm talking about.
Yes, yeah, exactly yeah, and sowe don't need to go into the
insecurities of that.
But unless you want to, yeah,that's a great example.
Speaker 1 (39:07):
It was a family house .
We were trying to sell it as itwas currently a single family
home.
We were trying to sell it to adeveloper because it was really
run down Like family house.
Never really kept up.
Super small, didn't have themoney yeah, yep, and we're just
trying to unload it for them sothat they can get out of it, and
and get whatever with equity.
(39:29):
Yeah walk away with equity, andso we got a developer to give us
like basically full price, andthe developer, uh, went under
contract.
And then he ended up realizingthat, oh no, because of the
zoning restriction laws thatthey have recently put into
place in Humboldt Park this iswhere this was you can't
(39:49):
demolish a single family homeand build another single family
home, which makes no sense.
It's literally the exact samething.
We're just going to make anicer one.
Speaker 2 (39:58):
They wanted multifamily.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
They said that because there were the block
wasn't all single family homes,the block had to be well, you
can't put another single familyhome on there.
We want multi-family becausethere's a housing shortage and
so if you're going to tear itdown, you have to build a two
flat at least.
Well, that didn't work for thisdeveloper.
(40:22):
He doesn't build two flats,build single family homes.
So essentially we couldn't sellit to somebody who was really
going to pay full price.
Instead, we had to take a hugecut in the actual price that we
ended up getting, which camefrom somebody who's going to
keep that same house and nowhe's just renting it out.
But the price difference wasprobably like fifty thousand
(40:44):
dollars.
I mean, it was significant,significant for a family that
didn't have anything else, right, and that was all because of
politics, gentrification.
We don't want this area to havehome values increase,
essentially what that was yes,it doesn't make any sense why?
(41:05):
because now you still have thissame rundown house being rented
out and it doesn't improve.
It could really improve theneighborhood by having a nicer
home there, but now it's stillthis older rundown one.
So yeah, yeah, I think, asyou've had more and more
experiences with people's realestate stories and hurdles that
(41:27):
they've been real estate ingeneral, real estate in general,
like real estate developers,real estate investors, they are
all more conservative, right,because it just it's the natural
.
Well, especially when it goesto like leasing and stuff, like
you know, that's wherediscriminatory issues could come
into play.
But if you take the whole playof I don't care what I mean we,
(41:49):
all of our tenants, if you wereto look at our tenant mix that
we have, we have Hispanics, wehave blacks, we have whites, we
have literally everybody, andthese are all people that we've
leased to Asians.
Yeah, these are all people thatwe have leased to.
(42:10):
We decided that we were goingto lease to them because they
all met the same merit standard,which was they have credit
scores above our threshold andthey have three times the rent
amount and they don't have anycriminal, like violent criminal
issues on their background.
There you go, that's thestandard Try everybody Right,
try everybody Right.
And so that is.
The thing is that when you allof a sudden start saying, well,
I only want to lease all of myapartments to white males, like
(42:35):
hello, I can't do that, youcan't, you absolutely cannot do
that Right, it needs to be basedoff of merit, and so if the
merit is all of a sudden beinglowered because that's what's
been happening is that you haveBoeing big on DEI.
All of a sudden, there's a lotof failures that are happening,
(43:00):
that is putting their customersat risk, where doors are flying
off, and it's because thatthey're missing.
They're hiring the wrong peoplebecause they don't have the
merit, because what hasbasically happened?
Well, in order to get the sametype of, in order to get
somebody in the job, but we wantto.
(43:20):
But maybe the best performingperson happens to be a white
male.
Well, we don't want the whitemale, but the next best
performing person has a lowerstandard, happens to be a black
person, and so they've loweredthe standard so that they can
hire the black person, and sostandards are being lowered.
Now, is that to say that theblack person couldn't, that they
(43:41):
couldn't continue to wait andfind a black person that could
hit the old standard?
They probably could, but in theessence of well, maybe we need
to hit these hiring metrics bythis time frame and we can't
continue to wait around.
Well, let's just hire this one,because that's the best that we
have and that checks the box,doesn't it?
(44:01):
So that's what's happening, andso, long story short, my
conservatism came from nothaving any type of ruling over
me.
There was no authority.
It allowed me to freely think,and what's interesting is that I
recently came across this isthat people that have the
freedom to think, the freedom tobe creative, they're the ones
(44:25):
that are able to have the mosthappiness in their world and
life.
It's when you start putting intothese bureaucratic requirements
is that people really start tobe unhappy and they get angry.
Maybe that's where a lot ofdivision comes from, because you
have some of these requirementsthat are being pushed, and so I
think, as you get into anentrepreneurial space, you're
(44:47):
probably going to end up being alot more conservative, because
you don't have anyone tellingyou what to think.
You go based off of commonsense.
Nobody's forcing you to believeone way or the other.
You make that decision foryourself, and it seems to be
defaulting for me into what'sthe common sense argument here?
And I don't think that theDemocrats still have common
sense anymore.
(45:08):
I think they've lost it.
You look really bored.
Speaker 2 (45:11):
No, that's not the right word.
Speaker 1 (45:13):
You look tired, are you done?
Okay, did we get to the wholeanswer on that?
Speaker 2 (45:22):
Where your conservatism came from.
Yeah, yeah, okay, yeah, I thinkso.
Speaker 1 (45:26):
Also at the same time .
I think here's an issue as youstart seeing that the LGBTQ plus
side stuff is being pushed ontokids.
Republicans are very muchagainst that, because I think
what we've started to recognizeis that the universities are
flooded.
The Republicans have allowedthe education system to be
(45:50):
completely controlled by theleft and now they want the left
to be able to control themindset of the youngest little
kids.
And if the youngest little kids, who are so vulnerable, who
don't even know what to think,are being told that it is okay
and being very much educated onall of the possibilities and all
(46:14):
the things that are availableto them, is that if they want to
get surgeries done to changewho they are, well we're going
to make sure that they know thatat a very young age and that's
the education part of that's notappropriate whatsoever, because
people's minds can bemanipulated to believe certain
(46:35):
things when they expose them to.
That in which is what ishappening in colleges, Because
we're being exposed to certaintopics that they believe is
essential, which is shaping themindset of those people going
through those universities.
Speaker 2 (46:49):
Yeah, I was telling you earlier about in college.
This was the first I had reallyever heard of the concept of
like gender.
Heard of the concept of likegender?
I probably not, but the thefirst, the first memory I have
of it really ever beingdiscussed.
You know, I don't people havingdifferent genders growing up
was like, not really a thing Ican think of.
(47:12):
There was one person who wastwo years older than me at my
high school who allegedly, like,started transitioning from a
man to a woman their senior year.
That was the only person Icould think of all growing up.
But then I get to college and Ihave this professor and he
gives us this assignment calledbaby X and it was the first time
(47:33):
I've ever really talked aboutgender like this and the whole
assignment was okay.
This happy couple has a new babyand they've decided that
they're not going to tellanybody whether it's a boy or a
girl.
Is kind of like a socialexperiment and the whole class
and the article was talkingabout how uncomfortable this
(47:54):
made people.
You know their baby was baby X.
They're not telling you if itwas a boy or a girl, they're not
giving you any indicationthrough name of its gender and
how uncomfortable people wouldget by that.
Because, like, the firstquestion they ask you when you
have a new baby is oh my gosh,did you have a boy or a girl?
And the whole conversationaround this was like making that
seem weird.
Like, isn't it so weird thatgrownups are asking you what
(48:16):
kind of genitalia your baby has?
And I remember just thinkinghow outlandish that thought was.
You know, people are justtrying to create an identity for
your new baby.
You know, is your baby a boy ora girl?
Not what the hell kind ofgenitalia they have.
I just thought that was likethe most outlandish thing that I
had ever heard.
(48:36):
But you know, this was aassignment I had in college and
it's so interesting to me howfar we have come now with this
whole conversation around gender.
Speaker 1 (48:46):
Because now you're forced to believe that, oh right
.
Well, why do people freak outabout the genitalia?
Or why must they know?
Or, hmm, is that you justintroduced a whole new topic and
idea that, in my opinion, hasnot gone the way that we want it
(49:10):
to go.
It's causing people to reallyquestion everything about
themselves, and once you.
Let's take this, for examplerecently the haitians are being
accused of.
The recent haitians that havebeen immigrated into, that have
immigrated into ohio, have beenaccused by the republicans as
(49:32):
eating cats and dogs, stealingthe cats, the pets and eating
the dogs.
That's a cultural thing that wehave no idea about.
That is not something that goeson in the West.
It's illegal to do that.
I'm pretty sure you cannot eata cat or a dog.
I'm pretty sure that's illegal.
(49:52):
But if people do it in Haiti,well, couldn't it just be
introduced in a college settingthat?
Well, other cultures eat catsand dogs and here's why they
think that and now this is atopic that is being introduced
in the education system as wellthey believe that they have
(50:13):
special powers when they eat thecats and dogs.
It's more of a ritual thing,and as you start talking about
that more and more and more.
Oh, okay, so we have some Haitipeople that live in our
neighborhood and back home.
That's part of their culture isthat they eat cats and dogs as
we continue to have thatconversation.
(50:34):
Well, now it becomes a lot moreimmune.
And maybe you see your neighborwho is a Haitian, who all of a
sudden is cooking up a cat anddog and you're like well, I
learned about that in collegeand it's okay.
It's because the idea has beenplanted in your head to be okay
(50:54):
and that's all it takes is theintroduction of any type of idea
to be planted into your head.
That goes against the laws thathave been put in place to rid
those ideas.
You see what I mean.
So is it the same thing withthe transgender stuff and how?
Now the Democrats think thatit's so important that we need
(51:19):
to have these conversations atthe youngest age possible, so
that we plant these ideas intheir head, super, super young,
so that they know about all theresources that are available to
them, so that if they're nineyears old and they want to
transition and their parents sayno, well, you know what they're
still going to be able to getthe help that they need and you
(51:41):
know what?
If those parents still refuse,we're going to take those kids
away and let them go ahead anddo these life-changing surgeries
that you can't take backbecause that child knows.
Does that child really know ordid you plan an idea in their
head?
I don't know.
That's the question, and Ithink, from the Republican
standpoint, none of thoseconversations should ever be
(52:05):
happening prior to adulthood.
Speaker 2 (52:07):
No, I think the conversation shouldn't be
happening without the parents,not necessarily prior to
adulthood, but Okay, sure,without the parents.
Yeah, it shouldn't be in aschool setting.
Yeah, went down some roadstoday.
What was your biggest takeawayfrom this conversation.
Speaker 1 (52:27):
Don't get Jason on a rant Was that really ranting A
couple times In a bad way.
Speaker 2 (52:35):
No, not yet.
Let's listen to the replay.
Speaker 1 (52:37):
Oh man Okay.
No, not yet.
Let's listen to the replay.
Oh man Okay.
Speaker 2 (52:41):
No biggest takeaway.
I think the biggest thing isyou know you want to be, as
parents, the one initiatingconversations with your kids,
the one planting seeds first.
It's not to say that you knowyou need to force opinions on
them.
Like I said, that wasn't thecase for me.
Say that you need to forceopinions on them, Like I said,
that wasn't the case for me.
You don't need to forceopinions on them, you don't need
(53:02):
to dictate their thoughtprocess.
But I do think that there'ssome importance in being the
first to converse in an ideabefore somebody else does.
Speaker 1 (53:13):
It's who can get to them first sometimes, and I
think that is a terribleapproach because, again, people
are so malleable, especially ata young age, especially when
your brain is still expandingOur brains are still expanding
into our 20s, right, ourcapacity to learn and it makes
(53:33):
you very impressionable and Ithink that is like something
that is just I think we'retalking about it this morning.
If I were to go back now to gointo an MBA program, I think I
would have a very, verydifferent view about that type
of education that I'm about toreceive, right, because I've
already made up my mind that Istand for conservative values.
(53:56):
But the problem is that I knowthat the universities are
flooded with liberal values.
It would be very challengingfor me potentially to go and try
and get an MBA if there's justa lot of left-leaning bias
that's going to be thrown at me,right, and they call that
(54:17):
higher education.
That's a big challenge and itmakes me kind of fearful for our
kids.
Is that, if none of this changes, if none of this changes and
the universities and highereducation continue to have major
left-wing biases and we've seenhow far the left has really
gone, where all of these very,very progressive ideas used to
(54:41):
sound so crazy, but now they'renot anymore and now they become
a lot more mainstream.
It makes me very fearful forwhat could be taught to our kids
, right, and that's just thething that parents now have to
really consider is what are theteachings, not just at a young
age, but what are the teachingsas they go off into higher
(55:04):
education.
So we got a long road before weget there, but I think those
are just like serious thoughtsthat you know, challenges
today's world, and that I don'tthink that our parents had these
discussions.
Do you think that they did?
In terms of like, oh, I'm like,oh, they're going off to
college, they're going to get sosmart, they're going to be, you
know, get a major and they'regoing to go off into their field
(55:27):
.
There was never, probably, adiscussion about what if they
come out like super liberal andor super Republican, and now,
all of a sudden, I don't knowwho they are.
Speaker 2 (55:45):
No, I think the awareness around the
partisanship that exists ineducation has only recently
become known Right, yeah, yeah,and I really think that it was.
Speaker 1 (55:52):
Oh, I heard this recently too.
It was on Tucker's last show.
If we can divide the familybased off of politics, the
family still remains divisibleand a lot of times when you
think about division, it'sbecause you have broken families
, and the family is really thebedrock for stability, and what
(56:13):
we just see is that the divorcerates are really high, people
are having children.
You have broken families.
I'm sorry'm sorry.
You look here about to pass out.
I am a little bit.
Speaker 2 (56:23):
Oh, my god, okay it's not because you're boring, it's
just because I'm pregnant.
Okay, it's just.
This is the time of day that Itake a nap okay, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (56:36):
Okay, just like.
Okay, I right, we're gonna,we're gonna have to cut it there
.
I this isn't gonna work, allright.
Thanks for listening to today'sshow.
If you had any interest in whatwe shared and you want to have
a deeper conversation with it,you can reach out to us anytime.
We're happy to talk with you,and thanks again for listening
(56:57):
and we'll see you on the nextone.
Welcome back to another episode of the Real Life
Investing Podcast with Jasonand Rachel Wagner.
Today we are going into how webecame conservative in our
politics.
Does that sound like a funtopic to talk about?
(00:22):
Sure, sure, why, why just sure?
Sure, why not like?
Speaker 2 (00:27):
yeah, that sounds amazing well, I mean, I think I
obviously already know whereours roots, but it would be an
interesting conversation to havewith other people and where the
root of their yeah, you kind ofwonder like uh, how, how did we
get to the mindset that we have?
Speaker 1 (00:44):
Considering we currently live in Illinois very
democratic state.
We're no longer in the city ofChicago, which is very, very
democratic.
As you get outside of the cityof Chicago into the suburbs, it
becomes more Republican.
If you were to look at a map oflike how the state votes,
majority of the state is red butChicago is very blue blue and
(01:05):
so over it illinois always fallsleft yeah, I wouldn't say it's
more republican out here, butbut yeah, there's a presence
yeah, yeah, there's, there's,there's.
Certainly, as you go into morerural areas, you know, you just
have a little bit moreconservatism, yeah, which makes
sense, all right.
So so, rachel, but you grew upin in iowa.
(01:27):
Tell me a little bit about like.
I mean, I'll just put it thisway you knew, you knew politics
way before I ever did.
I was in college and I didn'tknow the difference between a
democrat and a republican um butyou had a very different
upbringing, and why don't youlike talk about that?
Speaker 2 (01:46):
I'm just laughing because that's very true.
Jason did not know thedifference between a democrat
and a republican no, nobody toldme, nobody taught me isn't it
kind of interesting that?
I mean, I met you I guess itwas your sophomore year, but
this conversation probably cameabout my senior or your junior
year and you still didn't knowthat.
So your junior year and youstill didn't know that.
So third year of college andyou still don't know the
(02:07):
difference.
Isn't that kind of interesting?
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Oh, I was over 20 years old.
I mean, I might have been 21and I didn't know.
Speaker 2 (02:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (02:15):
That's interesting.
But to answer your question, Imean I don't feel like I grew up
in an overly politicizedhousehold or family or anything
like that.
Speaker 1 (02:25):
But I did grow up, I mean your.
Your grandfather was the mayorof leclerc, so you had politics
in your family that's true.
Speaker 2 (02:30):
That's true, he's democrat, though which is very
interesting yeah, yeah, so mygrandpa was mayor of leclerc, I
think, for a total of 18 years.
But split, split 10 years, Ibelieve in the 80s, and then
another eight years later onlike in my early, early
(02:54):
adulthood years.
So yeah, that's a good point.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Yeah, okay.
Well, even though you had aDemocrat in your family, you do
not identify as a Democrat.
And why is that?
Speaker 2 (03:08):
I mean.
My answer to this for so manyyears was just you know, I am
more conservative on the economy, on foreign policy, but I think
I'm also more moderate on onsome social programs not
certainly not all of them, butgive me an example of why what
you mean when you'reconservative on the economy and
(03:29):
foreign policy.
Speaker 1 (03:30):
What does that mean?
Speaker 2 (03:32):
so I am smaller government, meaning less
government spending, looserrestrictions on corporate
america, because I believe whatcreates jobs is not the
government, but actuallycapitalism and companies.
I think when you loosen the taxrestrictions on companies, they
(03:54):
are incentivized to create morejobs, and that is what creates
a thriving economy.
I think when you have biggergovernment so more government
oversight, more governmentspending companies tighten their
belt, they cut jobs becausethey have stricter things to
adhere to and, as a result,unemployment goes up, wages
(04:14):
remain flat or don't grow either.
So yeah, does that make sense?
Speaker 1 (04:19):
yeah, yeah, that was a better answer than I thought
you were going to give.
Honestly, if you were to ask me, like you know, those types of
questions, I probably would beable to dance around it.
But that was a better answerthan I thought you were going to
give.
Honestly, if you were to ask methose types of questions, I
probably would be able to dancearound it, but that was actually
pretty well delivered.
Like okay, that makes sense,but on the foreign policy part,
what does that mean?
That was the economic standfront.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
Yeah, so I have always, up until more recently I
think, my views on this Imentioned this in a previous
podcast my views on this arebecoming a little bit more
(04:58):
unsure.
I think we need to protect thatabove all else, because without
having a strong, safe, secure,thriving American country,
nothing else matters, and soI've always put that above.
So, foreign policy wise, youknow, ensuring this country is
safe, this country isn't underattack, things aren't unstable
(05:20):
or insecure in other areas ofthe world, because that just
weakens the world's economy and,in essence, america.
Now I would say, people whotalk like that, I think, in my
head start to ring a little bittoo pro-war, like I used to,
kind of like, really like NikkiHaley and I think this last
election cycle, every time shetalked I just kept hearing war,
(05:40):
war, war, war, war.
And I'm not a war hungry person, I don't believe or support
that but I do believe americashould be first, or the last
remaining true, true, remainingfree democracy in the world.
And without protecting that,those freedoms, that
constitution, once it's gone,it's gone.
You're not getting it back sookay, all right.
Speaker 1 (06:01):
So then your view on the war in Ukraine.
Just curious.
I mean, we actually need to goback to how we got to this point
, but now, I'm just diving intoa little bit into the mindset of
Rachel here.
So the viewpoint on the war inUkraine obviously hot topic.
Do you support US troops goingto Ukraine?
Speaker 2 (06:23):
Yeah, that's a complex answer.
I think, Historically, in myhistorical viewpoint, being
conservative, strong on foreignpolicy my answer would 100% be
yes, that it's the obligation ofAmerica to protect the
Ukrainian people and thatcountry's sovereignty and to not
let communism rule in othernations because it weakens the
(06:44):
rest of the world and America.
I will say more recently, Iguess it's not that I'm
questioning America's response,so to say, but more so how those
things are actually starting.
I think I am very muchquestioning who the puppet
master is to this stuff.
I don't believe these thingsare occurring naturally, of just
(07:07):
Putin making a decision andinvading Ukraine.
I think there's a lot morecomplexity to the issue and I
think there's a lot that the UScould have done to prevent those
tensions from worsening, KamalaHarris being one of them.
You know, talking about Ukrainebeing a part of NATO is
probably one of the dumbestthings that she could have done.
So that just goes to show herignorance in foreign policy.
(07:29):
But do I think that that wasprobably a bit purposeful?
I do.
I think the difference betweenhow I used to think, you know, a
few years back, than how Ithink now is that war is so
profitable, and I think that theleaders in Washington have
their hands in these defensecompanies and in these overseas
(07:53):
affairs, that it is actuallyprofitable for them to get
themselves into, or to get theUS into these conflicts.
So to support that.
When you ask me if I supportthe war in Ukraine, I think it's
very complicated to give myanswer right On the surface yes.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
Yeah, so like okay, right.
So when you start kind ofdiving into well, that's a
money-driven thing, but how dopoliticians get paid to get us
into these conflicts or to wantto support a war in which you're
saying could be a financialbenefit, like, can you walk
through that whole web?
Speaker 2 (08:31):
no, I mean, I think it's way more complex than
anybody can really comprehend,and I don't think of the person
to explain it, but from a Iguess.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
For one thing, politicians are allowed to trade
stocks.
This is very like n like NancyPelosi does this all the time,
but her husband is a day trader,or you know.
I don't know if he's a daytrader, but he's a trader and
runs a big portfolio.
And when you are in power andyou make legislation or you
(08:59):
steer some type of event tooccur and you are have ownership
of companies that might benefitfrom that type of event to
occur and you are have ownershipof companies that might benefit
from that type of event, theirstocks could rise, right.
So Lockheed Martin is a defensecontractor, publicly traded
company, right?
So unusual whales is uh, it'san Instagram, it's a Twitter,
(09:20):
but they do a lot of interestinganalysis on all of the people
in politics and what they own,because you have to publicly
display your ownership in anypublicly traded company and you
can see that a lot of people ownthese defense contractors.
Speaker 2 (09:39):
Yeah, the people voting, so that just seems like
a conflict of interest, doesn'tit?
The people voting on whether ornot we invade certain areas,
they send military support tosuit.
Yeah, so, that's so.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
That's one way, that's one way that they could
benefit, right, okay, what elseyou think that there's actually
like ties to contractors, likethey have agreements with these
contractors that well, hey, nowwe're going into war and now
you're going to increase all ofyour, or we're increasing the
defense budget, now, all of asudden, you know, are there
kickbacks?
(10:09):
Do you think that that kind ofhappens?
Speaker 2 (10:10):
or yes, I think kickbacks occur.
Speaker 1 (10:18):
Yeah for sure people to vote a certain way in which
those special interest lobbyistsare the ones that are
responsible for potentially bigdonations for somebody's
candidacy.
So just all ways that peoplecould be manipulated to, even if
they don't want to support awar, but they do because there's
(10:41):
financial interest.
I love your faces every timethat we talk about this stuff.
I just don't understand whyyou're like so.
It's like you're skating on iceright now, like you're
terrified of what I just said.
Speaker 2 (10:53):
I'm not terrified.
I just don't expect sometimesthe level of in-depth question
of me, so I need to get betterat asking you questions.
By all means.
This means an open dialogue,otherwise it's just like me on
the spot, yeah.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
Yeah, all right.
Well, okay, cool.
Well, I mean sometimes, whenyou say things like that, where
it's like oh, I'm conservativeon my foreign policy, well, what
does that actually mean?
Speaker 2 (11:17):
So that's why I'm asking.
Yeah, that was a fair question.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
That's all I'm asking is like, go into that.
If I supported the war inukraine, well, right, because
that's a very that's a very bigtopic that is literally on the
ballot right now.
Right, and you have therepublicans that that don't want
a war.
Trump wants to end the war.
Speaker 2 (11:34):
He doesn't want it to go on, he wants to end yeah,
and that, and that's what's beenso interesting, I think, to see
such a shift.
Speaker 1 (11:41):
So, like we were talking earlier about, I'm sure,
sure, democrats wanted to endtoo, but they want to do it in a
different way.
They want to do it in a waywhere they want to go to war
with Russia.
Exactly, and they want to giveUkraine all of the weapons and
potentially I mean who knowsMaybe they want to move troops
into Ukraine and actually go towar with Russia.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
Yeah, trump's the opposite way, ukraine and
actually go to war with russia.
Yeah, trump's the opposite way.
Yeah, I mean, I don't thinkanybody is saying that directly,
but I think that the steps andthe moves that they take
indirectly create that.
And then they're like oh, look,see, now we have to like that.
That's what's what biden didleading up to this entire
conflict.
Is there?
There were so many times, Ithink, that he could have put an
end to it, and he didn't.
Instead, just they p he pokedthe bear and then like oh well,
(12:26):
now we've got to stop.
We've got to stop.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
Putin?
Yeah Well, they've always justpainted him as the villain right
and I mean at the end of theday, he did invade.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
But, as we've kind of learned, there's a long, long
history that this wasn't anunprovoked war.
That the media and theDemocrats have always told us is
that there have been years andyears and years of the United
States doing some things thatthey shouldn't have been doing,
that was pressing the line, andso there's a lot of times where
(12:58):
like this is a they call it aproxy war.
It's because we're not actuallythe ones fighting Russia, but
we've been manhandling Ukraine.
We've been involved in Ukrainefor a very long time and Russia
is responding to that.
Speaker 2 (13:12):
Yeah, because they feel threatened yeah.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
And so it's once you start to kind of dissect, like,
well, where did this all comefrom?
Is it just this mean villainthat's out there who's like, oh,
I've got to conquer the wholeworld?
Well, that's what they want youto believe, but it's a lot more
complex than that.
Speaker 2 (13:29):
Yeah, and I think that that whole concept is
something that's why I say likemy thoughts have kind of changed
is like historically, yeah, Ijust thought Russia, china, bad
communists, you know, enemies ofAmerica.
That's just how it is right.
We're the good guys or the badguys, and I think you know
there's been plenty of I don'twant to say evidence, but
content that has come out thatraises those questions a little
(13:53):
bit more deeply right.
Like is Putin really unprovokedbad guy coming after Ukraine?
Maybe he's a bad guy comingafter Ukraine.
Was he unprovoked?
I don't think so.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (14:04):
Yeah, ukraine.
Maybe he's a bad guy comingafter ukraine.
Was he unprovoked?
I don't think so.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And so the republicans justwant to end the war.
They want to just protect.
They don't believe that theyshould be protecting other
countries like that, not allrepublicans right, well, yeah,
so, and this is where, like,nato is talking earlier.
Speaker 2 (14:21):
It's like the, the party has shifted right big time
and it's split.
Speaker 1 (14:24):
Yeah, it's split and trump wanted to get out of nato,
and this is where we weretalking earlier.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
It's like the party has shifted right Big time and
it's split.
Yeah, it's split.
Speaker 1 (14:28):
And Trump wanted to get out of NATO, right At one
point.
He wanted to get out of NATObecause nobody was paying their
fair share, right?
And that's what it kind ofalways comes down to.
At least for him is like herewas the agreement and nobody is
doing what they agreed to, right.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
America's carrying all the weight.
Speaker 1 (14:45):
Right, and so is that ?
Is that appropriate?
No, so he's.
So he's a guy that just wantsto make sure that the deal is
actually being upheld and ifit's not, well then he's
renegotiating things, and that'sjust the way Trump is, is that
he renegotiates things?
Okay, he also has a Americafirst mindset.
Well, we're going to build thestrongest military and be able
(15:12):
to defend ourselves, but we'renot going to be defending other
people's wars, especially ifyou're not meeting your
agreement.
So it's, it's a differentmindset, for sure.
So, anyways, well, that's, thatwas a fun discussion.
So, anyways, well, that's, thatwas a fun discussion.
But how did you get to all this?
You did you grow up liketalking politics in your house
yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
So yeah, that was kind of like your original
question.
I would say by like middleschool, we talked politics in my
house and specifics, because Imean, basically, after what was
it seventh grade for me when9-11 happened?
You know that was a hugelyhistoric day to be at school and
watching this happen and likebe old enough to you know, know
(15:56):
what was occurring, but notreally old enough to like
decipher how and why and how wecame about that.
So we went home with a ton ofquestions and even at school
there's a ton of questions beinghappened.
So that, I think, was probablythe start of the conversation.
But from there it led into justso much American history, world
history.
I think I came home one timeand I made some kind of comment
(16:19):
about George Bush and my stepdadwas like wait, wait, stop right
there, we need to have aconversation.
Then we had conversation andthen from there we were always
talking politics.
We still talk politics to thisday yeah, so it was.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
It was very openly discussed in your household yeah
, it wasn't forceful eitherthere was a lot of like well,
what do you think this?
Speaker 2 (16:42):
or what do you think about this?
You know you choose and then Ichoose, and then he'd be like
okay, well then, that isreflective of this party's views
, not this party's views so thatand that is how.
Speaker 1 (16:51):
So basically, you came home from school learning
some of these things.
You tell him what you learn andthen he would give like, okay,
yeah, no accurate, or well, youalso don't know about this side
of the thing yeah it.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
It'd be like well, have you considered this thought
?
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Why did?
Speaker 2 (17:05):
this happen.
Why this?
Came about and what each partythought about it and then yeah.
Speaker 1 (17:12):
I mean, that certainly shapes your mindset a
little bit.
And also, if you think about itfrom the parent's perspective,
it's kind of like hey, I don'tknow exactly what they're being
taught in school, but we cancome home and we can discuss it
in almost a way of him givingmaking sure that you know his
side of things.
And I think this is where Iwanted this conversation to go
(17:39):
is that if you don't have thosekind of counter discussions with
children about what they couldbe learning in school, you're
leaving their whole mind andtheir whole shape of how they
view the world up to theeducator and you're not having
the chance to help them thinkabout ways.
That maybe you think aboutthings, whether your ways are
(18:02):
right or wrong, but at least youhave a chance to help them
think about things.
Whether your ways are right orwrong, but at least you have a
chance to help them think aboutthings from your perspective.
And if your perspective is theway that they teach it in school
, then you know, then chancesare that child is probably going
to learn the same exact thingand you're going to be okay with
it and that's going to continueto flourish and you're going to
be like all right, johnny knowsexactly what happened in the
(18:22):
world, but we all know thatthere's two sides of every story
and if one side of the story isalways being told and the other
side of the story is not, thenthose people are always going to
think that one side of thestory was accurate.
And what have we learned kindof recently is that the
education field, especially asyou go into colleges and
(18:43):
universities, is dominated bydemocratic professors.
So it was Elon Musk that justshared this big chart that
literally showed you thepercentage of college education
or college professors, and wherethey lean politically.
Speaker 2 (19:01):
Yeah, and so, and we have talked about this so much
from our own personal experiencein college right.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
We went to augustana college, which is a very liberal
, if they say liberal artsuniversity or university uh,
sorry, it's not a university Idon't know why I said that it's
a liberal arts college.
They classify themselves as aliberal arts college.
Again me choosing a college.
I didn't even know what liberalarts mean.
I just thought it meant like oh, I'm well-rounded, that's the
(19:30):
way that they presented it.
It was like oh, you're going toget a well-rounded education
here.
Well, well-rounded wouldcertainly make you believe that
you are getting a very centristor like middle of the road.
You're going to know what theDemocrats the road.
You're going to know what thedemocrats think.
You're going to know what therepublicans think and we're
going to, in our teachings, aregoing to be along the middle of
(19:52):
the road.
Because you're well-rounded,you get to view from both sides
we're not even just both sides,but varying sides.
Right, it's not that there'sjust two, but and probably some
people are like not everyconversation is a political
conversation, right?
Well, when the Democrats startsaying that math is racist, well
(20:13):
now, literally everything youdo is a political conversation,
right?
You never thought that mathcould be labeled that whatsoever
, or roads could be racist, orschool buses right?
We never, ever thought that wasa thing.
But now we've heard that before.
Okay, so this is kind of whereI'm going.
(20:34):
Down is like we send our kidsto the schools, we have to have
conversations with them aboutwhat they're learning, because,
as parents and the empoweringpart of this is that parents
need to be able to give theother side, because if they're
only being fed one side, arethey really well-rounded?
No, they're totally biased.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
Well, yeah, and it's really a disservice to them
because it's just telling themwhat to think and believe, as
opposed to creating thatcritical thinking skill and
identifying.
Well, okay, both sides havegood points and both sides have
things I don't agree with, butwhere do I most align what makes
the most sense?
Speaker 1 (21:12):
right, yeah yeah, right, and that is kind of the
theme of what we've really seenlately is you are not taught how
to critically think, you aretaught what to think, and there
is somebody else that's creatingthat narrative and that's
regurgitated throughuniversities, through the
education system.
(21:33):
And so how did I get to thisviewpoint?
Because I grew up in ahousehold that didn't talk about
politics whatsoever.
Maybe if I were to ask my dadwhat a Democrat or Republican
was, he would probably give mean answer I think he's more
willing to talk about it but itwasn't a common thing.
It certainly was never a commonconversation and it's still not
(21:55):
.
So that leaves me as a goingoff on the world, my own, going
into a liberal arts college.
So really, this liberal artscollege has a prime opportunity
to shape the way, I think bygiving me the education.
And so what was the very firstfew classes that we had to take?
(22:16):
Well, we talked about.
Speaker 2 (22:18):
The very first book was Yours was the Obama book,
wasn't?
Speaker 1 (22:22):
it.
No, mine was Warriors, don'tCry.
Oh, so it must have been theclass after you.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
I don't think I read warriors.
Don't cry.
No, we had the sunflower.
That was that book warriorsdon't cry.
Speaker 1 (22:31):
I think I'm pretty sure it was about when slavery
was over.
There were black students thatwould go to schools and just the
experiences that they had goingto these schools and whatnot.
So instantly talking about racelike instantly, and those
weren't the only racialdiscussions that we had oh, yeah
(22:52):
, no, no race was a common themethroughout the entire august an
instant theme.
Yeah, and these were not likehistory classes, these were.
They called them lY I don'tknow what that stands for, but
you had a 101, a 102, and a 103.
And you were required to takethese.
But race was the topic ofconversation in a lot of these
(23:14):
classes and white privilegebecame something that I was
taught about.
Okay, so, as you kind of godown this road of well here's,
as soon as they enter thisuniversity, we're going to start
talking about these type oftopics.
Those are all good subjects tobe aware of, but it's such
(23:36):
left-leaning ideology.
Do you agree with that?
Speaker 2 (23:40):
yeah, yeah, I did.
Yeah, I mean you and I'vetalked before, I think I I'm
bothered by some of theinteractions that I had with
professors at augustana and whydoes that need to be like again?
Speaker 1 (23:55):
why?
Why does that need to be thefirst class?
Those types of?
Why does race when race wasn'tproblem wasn't talked about in
high school?
I went to a high school thatwas predominantly white, but I
hung out with the black peopleall the time Like because I
played sports and like it didn'tbother me.
(24:16):
It never did.
And then all of a sudden, itbecomes a thing as you get into
higher education, right.
All of a sudden it becomes athing as you get into higher
education, right.
And so that thing has evolvedover time, because that was back
in 2008.
We were talking about whiteprivilege.
Now, all of a sudden, that is avery big topic.
That happened when george floydwas going on, right?
(24:39):
so 12 years later, even before,before that but yeah, right, but
it really became mainstreamwhen George Floyd happened and
then race divided everybody.
From that moment, race dividedeverybody Because that was what
the narrative was that this wasa racial issue.
(24:59):
Systematic racism is everywhere, and of course you don't want
to be called a racist ever, soyou go with these points and you
racism is everywhere, and ofcourse you don't want to be
called a racist ever.
So you go with these points andyou agree with it.
Everybody that shared thatlittle black screen on Instagram
I did it.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
You did.
Speaker 1 (25:14):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (25:14):
You shared a black screen.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
Yeah, Remember it was flooding that one day I did it.
Speaker 2 (25:20):
Oh, I did not.
Speaker 1 (25:22):
Well, yeah, because at the time, I didn't want to be
called a racist, even by notdoing something.
But now we have this fear ofbeing called a racist in
literally everything that we canpossibly do, and that is not
right whatsoever.
And so how do we undo all ofthis race discussion?
(25:43):
Because I don't want to becalled a racist, but it's.
The problem was is that I neversaw race prior to being told
that race is a thing.
yeah, so that goes down to theeducation that was given to me,
that was forced into my mind,that I was forced to write
(26:05):
papers about saying it was athing.
When, in the world that I wasliving in, race wasn't a thing.
I interacted with all kinds ofpeople.
It didn't matter.
I never saw anybody by theirskin color or where they came
from.
It was always about who theywere.
But now, all of a sudden, I goto college and now race is thing
(26:26):
and you should know about it.
Speaker 2 (26:28):
Yeah, and the professor is going to tell you
the reason it was never a thingfor you is because you are the
white privileged man.
Who's the oppressor?
Exactly Well, of course it wasnever noticeable to you.
Speaker 1 (26:40):
You should feel like shit because you're the white
privileged man who never had tothink about it.
Yeah, exactly, you should feellike shit because you're the
white privileged man who neverhad to think about it.
Yeah, exactly, and that is howthey, that's how they've beaten
everybody down.
Oh, because what do you?
How do you combat that?
How do you combat that?
You can't, you can't.
Yeah, oh, I guess I wasn'tawake.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
Yeah, the whole, the whole conversation concept
around this really is annoyingto me for a couple of reasons.
One I think every single adult,no matter your color, your
gender, where you're from, nomatter what, I think everybody's
got and I think everyone agreeswith this everybody's got an
underlying bias to something orsomeone or something right Just
(27:23):
from your own experiences.
That's how you grow up andlearn to someone or something
right Just be from your ownexperiences.
That's how you grow up andlearn to view the world.
Right Is from your own personalexperiences.
And somebody asked that justthe other day they're like so
who are you bias against?
When she was saying everybodyhas an internal bias and
everybody has internal likeracism, and it was like well,
who are you racist against?
Did you see that?
Speaker 1 (27:45):
I don't know what you're talking about it was.
Speaker 2 (27:47):
Anyways, I digress, but was that?
Speaker 1 (27:48):
was that like something on instagram you saw,
or?
Yeah, it was just a video of acongressional hearing oh okay,
so just saying that everybodyhas internal biases and like,
who are you have to, you have towork and discover who are your
internal biases and who are youracist against, just naturally
because of the systematic thingsthat are in place yeah all
right now.
(28:09):
Doesn't that just make yourbrain hurt?
Speaker 2 (28:10):
well, yeah, because if it exists for everybody, then
it's not like a systemicproblem, right it's.
It's just how you end upgrowing up and viewing the world
, right?
Yeah, and it annoys me becausewhen all of that was happening,
with, like, george floyd andeverything was, you know, being
responded to or whatever Iremember just reflecting so much
(28:31):
on Scarlett at that age becauseshe was so young and she was
just like moving into toddlerages, and I just remember
looking at her and being likedude, this girl doesn't see
color whatsoever, right?
I mean, she would go to daycareand she had friends of all
different races and she wouldplay with the baby dolls of all
different colors and there sheplayed with the darker colored
(28:52):
baby doll majority of the time,like that was her doll that she
played with.
And I just remember thinkinglike she doesn't see color, like
people are taught to see color,and I think the teaching to see
it is is the problem, right?
and it's the teaching to see it,yeah and that's why I've got
such an issue with like why doyou, why do you have to teach?
Speaker 1 (29:10):
yeah, right, and so that if you're teaching a kid
that the color of their skinmatters, then they are going to
grow up believing that the colorof their skin and everybody
else's skin matters, and if youteach them, if you teach them to
hate the country that they livein and that it is oppressive
and systematically racist andtotally rigged against you, they
(29:34):
are all going to be saying thatit's if you teach that because
kids are malleable.
Me, even as a 20 year old, ismalleableable because, again, I
didn't come from a family thattalked about politics.
I had this whole potential waythat I could lean left or right
(29:54):
and it wasn't discussed, itwasn't molded upon.
When I was younger, collegeshifted me to the left because I
was immersed in these types ofdiscussions, and then I went in
to get my first job and I thinkwhat I discovered on my first
(30:14):
job was that I went to a smallercompany still publicly traded
but smaller company located inIowa, and they seemed to have a
little bit more.
It seemed like it was a littlebit more conservative and I
stayed there for a few years andreally enjoyed my experience
but realized that I wanted to gointo, I want to be in a big
(30:35):
company, right?
I want to experience that andactually have a lot of upward
trajectory type thing orflexibility, have a lot of
upward trajectory type thing orflexibility.
And so I found AllstateInsurance and that was out here
in Northbrook and I did notrealize until kind of recently.
That is a very diverse company.
(30:56):
It's huge, very diverse, andthey would always press.
Diversity is great.
Diversity allows businesses tothrive.
Diversity allows so many ideasto form and then we can pick out
the best ideas and that was ahuge message that they pushed
all the time.
(31:16):
And so, as you start talkingabout, like the DEI stuff, how
all of that has worked into thecorporations and it took a
little bit, for I don't thinkDEI was there when I was there.
That's kind of like a recentthing, but it all started,
probably, from some of this.
Diversity is good, and I'm notsaying that it's not good, but
(31:38):
I'm also saying that like, well,look where DEI has kind of
landed.
It's gone down a trajectorythat has.
Well, now we're not doing.
We want so much diversity andwe want to make sure that it's
such a level playing field thatwe're not taking into merit and
ability into account, becausewe'd rather care more about
(31:59):
diversity.
And so do the best ideas alwayscome to the table if we're not
actually hiring people based offof their talents, but rather
the way that they look.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
I'm remembering my time in HR, the last few years
that I was still working.
I worked in the HR departmentand I was in a position that was
doing a lot of hiring, and so Iwas the hiring manager for
several positions, and I'm justhaving flashbacks to all these
conversations that I had withthe EEO department.
It's like you publiclyadvertise a position, you get a
(32:33):
huge pool of candidates right,you narrow it down based on
qualifications, you interviewthese people and you get to the
end and EEO is looking it overand they're like well, how come
you didn't consider any peopleof of this nationality or
background?
And I'm like well, look at thepool of people applied.
I didn't have any of thosepeople.
(32:54):
Well, why not?
Do you think that you weren'toutreaching enough to those
areas?
I'm like I don't know.
It was on the fricking website.
It was posted in this, you know, hr publication.
It was posted here, it wasposted there.
It's on LinkedIn, you know, andI would get all this pressure
of like, well, you probably needto go back out and you need to
canvas and see if you can getother candidates.
I lost two people I wanted tohire because they forced me to
(33:14):
go back out on the street andadvertise the position so I
could get a greater pool.
And then what was funny is inHR predominantly we had a lot of
women.
I think there were two, maybethree men in a department of
over 40.
And so then I get to this otherposition and I selected the
(33:35):
best candidate who I thoughtshould be hired, and it happened
to be a white male.
Well, why are you hiring awhite male?
I'm like dude, he's the onlywhite male who applied.
Like it's not, like he actuallywas the minority of the pool
that I was selecting from.
And then I'm getting questionedon hiring him because,
predominantly over the entireorganization?
Speaker 1 (33:52):
Well, because he's a white male.
I know he was the bestqualified and if you think of
the hierarchy of diversity,white men are on the lowest of
the totem pole.
Speaker 2 (34:04):
I know, but departmentally he was actually
the minority because we had avery diverse HR department.
Minus the female, it was veryfemale-driven, but across races
it was very diverse.
He's the only white person thatI hired.
The whole time I was there andI got just ransacked with
questions.
I was just like this is justinsane.
You can't actually hire theright person.
(34:24):
There's no choice, right, itwas just crazy.
It was just crazy, right and so.
But obviously he was I hadpromoted three minority women
that I, since I was there, and Ihired two other minority women
while I was there.
And then I just get attacked.
For you know, well, you know, Ilost two good candidates
because you know I didn't have adiverse enough pool.
(34:46):
And then I get, you know,accused of I don't know.
I digress, but it just kills mebecause I'm like dude, like I
went through this process and Iselected each time the person
that I thought was bestqualified for the position.
Speaker 1 (35:01):
And then I'm getting questioned well, why?
Speaker 2 (35:02):
aren't you looking at people based on their skin?
Speaker 1 (35:04):
Yeah, so you?
At the end of the day, you hada track record of not being
racist, promoting minorities.
Speaker 2 (35:10):
Yes, yes.
Speaker 1 (35:11):
And you decide that our best candidate here is this
white male.
And now you get flack on that.
I mean, just think about thecraziness of why that even is a
thing, but that type ofmentality has flooded the
corporate world.
Speaker 2 (35:33):
And not in a good way either, like I remember one of
the positions that I was inprior to working in HR, you know
the hiring manager specificallysaid I want a young female in
this position.
Now let's think about that fora minute, like how is that not
discriminatory, right?
Yeah, very much so it is, yeah,it's like I don't want anybody
older and I don't want any menright, it's, it's a it's 100
(35:57):
discriminatory but it wasallowed because you know, women
are minorities, so okay.
Speaker 1 (36:02):
so if the corporations have recently been
flooded with all of this, butback in college, that's where
race became a thing.
And then, well, what happens toall the students once they
graduate college?
Well, they might go on and getan mba, to get a doctorate, and
those types of teachings areprobably still pushed or they go
on and they go into thecorporate world.
Well, a lot of the corporateworld comes from colleges and
(36:25):
universities, so this liberal,left-leaning mindset is all of a
sudden being absorbed in thecorporations.
And that's where it's kind oftroubling to me, because at the
end of the day, business shouldbe about merit and who's the
best person for the job?
Who is the best person for thejob and does that person help us
(36:48):
accomplish our goals as abusiness?
It doesn't matter where theycome from, what they look like,
I don't know.
That just seems like a veryobvious thing.
Speaker 2 (36:57):
Yeah, I totally agree .
So I guess I want to ask you,since you asked me, since you
didn't talk about politics inyour household.
Speaker 1 (37:09):
Where did my conservatism come from?
Yeah, because you went toliberal school.
Yeah, right, we haven't gottento that far yet, because my
conservatism one it was shapedin college, left leaning.
Then I got steered to the rightbecause I went to a corporation
that was actually moreconservative in rural Iowa.
And then I went back to a largecorporation in an urban area in
(37:30):
a left-leaning state, but thenI did not like the experience
there and I didn't like thepeople that I was surrounded by
and I didn't like particularlythe boss I was working for and I
said this is miserable.
And then I found real estate andI made a jump into
entrepreneurship.
And entrepreneurship allowed meto really think for myself,
(37:52):
which was I am going to doeverything possible so that my
business can grow and can obtainthe goals that it wants to
obtain, that I can continue toget the customers that I want to
influence and attract.
And everything just becameabout blocking and tackling.
There was no HR department.
If you look at the people thatwe have hired here as our
(38:14):
brokers black, white, female,male I mean I don't have a DEI
program, I just hire peoplebecause I think that they're a
good fit.
Speaker 2 (38:27):
Yeah, I think a lot of what further shaped you I
don't feel like you left collegebeing a liberal, but maybe a
little bit.
But I think what helped furthershaped you was experiences with
policy in your work.
I think there were so manyexamples of like I think about
the one client you had trying tothink of the right term who had
(38:48):
that property in her family forseveral years but was
struggling to sell it because ofa zoning restriction.
It was a zoning restrictionthat was trying to limit some
gentrification.
Speaker 1 (38:59):
Yes.
Speaker 2 (38:59):
You know what I'm talking about.
Yes, yeah, exactly yeah, and sowe don't need to go into the
insecurities of that.
But unless you want to, yeah,that's a great example.
Speaker 1 (39:07):
It was a family house .
We were trying to sell it as itwas currently a single family
home.
We were trying to sell it to adeveloper because it was really
run down Like family house.
Never really kept up.
Super small, didn't have themoney yeah, yep, and we're just
trying to unload it for them sothat they can get out of it, and
and get whatever with equity.
(39:29):
Yeah walk away with equity, andso we got a developer to give us
like basically full price, andthe developer, uh, went under
contract.
And then he ended up realizingthat, oh no, because of the
zoning restriction laws thatthey have recently put into
place in Humboldt Park this iswhere this was you can't
(39:49):
demolish a single family homeand build another single family
home, which makes no sense.
It's literally the exact samething.
We're just going to make anicer one.
Speaker 2 (39:58):
They wanted multifamily.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
They said that because there were the block
wasn't all single family homes,the block had to be well, you
can't put another single familyhome on there.
We want multi-family becausethere's a housing shortage and
so if you're going to tear itdown, you have to build a two
flat at least.
Well, that didn't work for thisdeveloper.
(40:22):
He doesn't build two flats,build single family homes.
So essentially we couldn't sellit to somebody who was really
going to pay full price.
Instead, we had to take a hugecut in the actual price that we
ended up getting, which camefrom somebody who's going to
keep that same house and nowhe's just renting it out.
But the price difference wasprobably like fifty thousand
(40:44):
dollars.
I mean, it was significant,significant for a family that
didn't have anything else, right, and that was all because of
politics, gentrification.
We don't want this area to havehome values increase,
essentially what that was yes,it doesn't make any sense why?
(41:05):
because now you still have thissame rundown house being rented
out and it doesn't improve.
It could really improve theneighborhood by having a nicer
home there, but now it's stillthis older rundown one.
So yeah, yeah, I think, asyou've had more and more
experiences with people's realestate stories and hurdles that
(41:27):
they've been real estate ingeneral, real estate in general,
like real estate developers,real estate investors, they are
all more conservative, right,because it just it's the natural
.
Well, especially when it goesto like leasing and stuff, like
you know, that's wherediscriminatory issues could come
into play.
But if you take the whole playof I don't care what I mean we,
(41:49):
all of our tenants, if you wereto look at our tenant mix that
we have, we have Hispanics, wehave blacks, we have whites, we
have literally everybody, andthese are all people that we've
leased to Asians.
Yeah, these are all people thatwe have leased to.
(42:10):
We decided that we were goingto lease to them because they
all met the same merit standard,which was they have credit
scores above our threshold andthey have three times the rent
amount and they don't have anycriminal, like violent criminal
issues on their background.
There you go, that's thestandard Try everybody Right,
try everybody Right.
And so that is.
The thing is that when you allof a sudden start saying, well,
I only want to lease all of myapartments to white males, like
(42:35):
hello, I can't do that, youcan't, you absolutely cannot do
that Right, it needs to be basedoff of merit, and so if the
merit is all of a sudden beinglowered because that's what's
been happening is that you haveBoeing big on DEI.
All of a sudden, there's a lotof failures that are happening,
(43:00):
that is putting their customersat risk, where doors are flying
off, and it's because thatthey're missing.
They're hiring the wrong peoplebecause they don't have the
merit, because what hasbasically happened?
Well, in order to get the sametype of, in order to get
somebody in the job, but we wantto.
(43:20):
But maybe the best performingperson happens to be a white
male.
Well, we don't want the whitemale, but the next best
performing person has a lowerstandard, happens to be a black
person, and so they've loweredthe standard so that they can
hire the black person, and sostandards are being lowered.
Now, is that to say that theblack person couldn't, that they
(43:41):
couldn't continue to wait andfind a black person that could
hit the old standard?
They probably could, but in theessence of well, maybe we need
to hit these hiring metrics bythis time frame and we can't
continue to wait around.
Well, let's just hire this one,because that's the best that we
have and that checks the box,doesn't it?
(44:01):
So that's what's happening, andso, long story short, my
conservatism came from nothaving any type of ruling over
me.
There was no authority.
It allowed me to freely think,and what's interesting is that I
recently came across this isthat people that have the
freedom to think, the freedom tobe creative, they're the ones
(44:25):
that are able to have the mosthappiness in their world and
life.
It's when you start putting intothese bureaucratic requirements
is that people really start tobe unhappy and they get angry.
Maybe that's where a lot ofdivision comes from, because you
have some of these requirementsthat are being pushed, and so I
think, as you get into anentrepreneurial space, you're
(44:47):
probably going to end up being alot more conservative, because
you don't have anyone tellingyou what to think.
You go based off of commonsense.
Nobody's forcing you to believeone way or the other.
You make that decision foryourself, and it seems to be
defaulting for me into what'sthe common sense argument here?
And I don't think that theDemocrats still have common
sense anymore.
(45:08):
I think they've lost it.
You look really bored.
Speaker 2 (45:11):
No, that's not the right word.
Speaker 1 (45:13):
You look tired, are you done?
Okay, did we get to the wholeanswer on that?
Speaker 2 (45:22):
Where your conservatism came from.
Yeah, yeah, okay, yeah, I thinkso.
Speaker 1 (45:26):
Also at the same time .
I think here's an issue as youstart seeing that the LGBTQ plus
side stuff is being pushed ontokids.
Republicans are very muchagainst that, because I think
what we've started to recognizeis that the universities are
flooded.
The Republicans have allowedthe education system to be
(45:50):
completely controlled by theleft and now they want the left
to be able to control themindset of the youngest little
kids.
And if the youngest little kids, who are so vulnerable, who
don't even know what to think,are being told that it is okay
and being very much educated onall of the possibilities and all
(46:14):
the things that are availableto them, is that if they want to
get surgeries done to changewho they are, well we're going
to make sure that they know thatat a very young age and that's
the education part of that's notappropriate whatsoever, because
people's minds can bemanipulated to believe certain
(46:35):
things when they expose them to.
That in which is what ishappening in colleges, Because
we're being exposed to certaintopics that they believe is
essential, which is shaping themindset of those people going
through those universities.
Speaker 2 (46:49):
Yeah, I was telling you earlier about in college.
This was the first I had reallyever heard of the concept of
like gender.
Heard of the concept of likegender?
I probably not, but the thefirst, the first memory I have
of it really ever beingdiscussed.
You know, I don't people havingdifferent genders growing up
was like, not really a thing Ican think of.
(47:12):
There was one person who wastwo years older than me at my
high school who allegedly, like,started transitioning from a
man to a woman their senior year.
That was the only person Icould think of all growing up.
But then I get to college and Ihave this professor and he
gives us this assignment calledbaby X and it was the first time
(47:33):
I've ever really talked aboutgender like this and the whole
assignment was okay.
This happy couple has a new babyand they've decided that
they're not going to tellanybody whether it's a boy or a
girl.
Is kind of like a socialexperiment and the whole class
and the article was talkingabout how uncomfortable this
(47:54):
made people.
You know their baby was baby X.
They're not telling you if itwas a boy or a girl, they're not
giving you any indicationthrough name of its gender and
how uncomfortable people wouldget by that.
Because, like, the firstquestion they ask you when you
have a new baby is oh my gosh,did you have a boy or a girl?
And the whole conversationaround this was like making that
seem weird.
Like, isn't it so weird thatgrownups are asking you what
(48:16):
kind of genitalia your baby has?
And I remember just thinkinghow outlandish that thought was.
You know, people are justtrying to create an identity for
your new baby.
You know, is your baby a boy ora girl?
Not what the hell kind ofgenitalia they have.
I just thought that was likethe most outlandish thing that I
had ever heard.
(48:36):
But you know, this was aassignment I had in college and
it's so interesting to me howfar we have come now with this
whole conversation around gender.
Speaker 1 (48:46):
Because now you're forced to believe that, oh right
.
Well, why do people freak outabout the genitalia?
Or why must they know?
Or, hmm, is that you justintroduced a whole new topic and
idea that, in my opinion, hasnot gone the way that we want it
(49:10):
to go.
It's causing people to reallyquestion everything about
themselves, and once you.
Let's take this, for examplerecently the haitians are being
accused of.
The recent haitians that havebeen immigrated into, that have
immigrated into ohio, have beenaccused by the republicans as
(49:32):
eating cats and dogs, stealingthe cats, the pets and eating
the dogs.
That's a cultural thing that wehave no idea about.
That is not something that goeson in the West.
It's illegal to do that.
I'm pretty sure you cannot eata cat or a dog.
I'm pretty sure that's illegal.
(49:52):
But if people do it in Haiti,well, couldn't it just be
introduced in a college settingthat?
Well, other cultures eat catsand dogs and here's why they
think that and now this is atopic that is being introduced
in the education system as wellthey believe that they have
(50:13):
special powers when they eat thecats and dogs.
It's more of a ritual thing,and as you start talking about
that more and more and more.
Oh, okay, so we have some Haitipeople that live in our
neighborhood and back home.
That's part of their culture isthat they eat cats and dogs as
we continue to have thatconversation.
(50:34):
Well, now it becomes a lot moreimmune.
And maybe you see your neighborwho is a Haitian, who all of a
sudden is cooking up a cat anddog and you're like well, I
learned about that in collegeand it's okay.
It's because the idea has beenplanted in your head to be okay
(50:54):
and that's all it takes is theintroduction of any type of idea
to be planted into your head.
That goes against the laws thathave been put in place to rid
those ideas.
You see what I mean.
So is it the same thing withthe transgender stuff and how?
Now the Democrats think thatit's so important that we need
(51:19):
to have these conversations atthe youngest age possible, so
that we plant these ideas intheir head, super, super young,
so that they know about all theresources that are available to
them, so that if they're nineyears old and they want to
transition and their parents sayno, well, you know what they're
still going to be able to getthe help that they need and you
(51:41):
know what?
If those parents still refuse,we're going to take those kids
away and let them go ahead anddo these life-changing surgeries
that you can't take backbecause that child knows.
Does that child really know ordid you plan an idea in their
head?
I don't know.
That's the question, and Ithink, from the Republican
standpoint, none of thoseconversations should ever be
(52:05):
happening prior to adulthood.
Speaker 2 (52:07):
No, I think the conversation shouldn't be
happening without the parents,not necessarily prior to
adulthood, but Okay, sure,without the parents.
Yeah, it shouldn't be in aschool setting.
Yeah, went down some roadstoday.
What was your biggest takeawayfrom this conversation.
Speaker 1 (52:27):
Don't get Jason on a rant Was that really ranting A
couple times In a bad way.
Speaker 2 (52:35):
No, not yet.
Let's listen to the replay.
Speaker 1 (52:37):
Oh man Okay.
No, not yet.
Let's listen to the replay.
Oh man Okay.
Speaker 2 (52:41):
No biggest takeaway.
I think the biggest thing isyou know you want to be, as
parents, the one initiatingconversations with your kids,
the one planting seeds first.
It's not to say that you knowyou need to force opinions on
them.
Like I said, that wasn't thecase for me.
Say that you need to forceopinions on them, Like I said,
that wasn't the case for me.
You don't need to forceopinions on them, you don't need
(53:02):
to dictate their thoughtprocess.
But I do think that there'ssome importance in being the
first to converse in an ideabefore somebody else does.
Speaker 1 (53:13):
It's who can get to them first sometimes, and I
think that is a terribleapproach because, again, people
are so malleable, especially ata young age, especially when
your brain is still expandingOur brains are still expanding
into our 20s, right, ourcapacity to learn and it makes
(53:33):
you very impressionable and Ithink that is like something
that is just I think we'retalking about it this morning.
If I were to go back now to gointo an MBA program, I think I
would have a very, verydifferent view about that type
of education that I'm about toreceive, right, because I've
already made up my mind that Istand for conservative values.
(53:56):
But the problem is that I knowthat the universities are
flooded with liberal values.
It would be very challengingfor me potentially to go and try
and get an MBA if there's justa lot of left-leaning bias
that's going to be thrown at me,right, and they call that
(54:17):
higher education.
That's a big challenge and itmakes me kind of fearful for our
kids.
Is that, if none of this changes, if none of this changes and
the universities and highereducation continue to have major
left-wing biases and we've seenhow far the left has really
gone, where all of these very,very progressive ideas used to
(54:41):
sound so crazy, but now they'renot anymore and now they become
a lot more mainstream.
It makes me very fearful forwhat could be taught to our kids
, right, and that's just thething that parents now have to
really consider is what are theteachings, not just at a young
age, but what are the teachingsas they go off into higher
(55:04):
education.
So we got a long road before weget there, but I think those
are just like serious thoughtsthat you know, challenges
today's world, and that I don'tthink that our parents had these
discussions.
Do you think that they did?
In terms of like, oh, I'm like,oh, they're going off to
college, they're going to get sosmart, they're going to be, you
know, get a major and they'regoing to go off into their field
(55:27):
.
There was never, probably, adiscussion about what if they
come out like super liberal andor super Republican, and now,
all of a sudden, I don't knowwho they are.
Speaker 2 (55:45):
No, I think the awareness around the
partisanship that exists ineducation has only recently
become known Right, yeah, yeah,and I really think that it was.
Speaker 1 (55:52):
Oh, I heard this recently too.
It was on Tucker's last show.
If we can divide the familybased off of politics, the
family still remains divisibleand a lot of times when you
think about division, it'sbecause you have broken families
, and the family is really thebedrock for stability, and what
(56:13):
we just see is that the divorcerates are really high, people
are having children.
You have broken families.
I'm sorry'm sorry.
You look here about to pass out.
I am a little bit.
Speaker 2 (56:23):
Oh, my god, okay it's not because you're boring, it's
just because I'm pregnant.
Okay, it's just.
This is the time of day that Itake a nap okay, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1 (56:36):
Okay, just like.
Okay, I right, we're gonna,we're gonna have to cut it there
.
I this isn't gonna work, allright.
Thanks for listening to today'sshow.
If you had any interest in whatwe shared and you want to have
a deeper conversation with it,you can reach out to us anytime.
We're happy to talk with you,and thanks again for listening
(56:57):
and we'll see you on the nextone.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.