September 17, 2025 • 26 mins
This is a rebroadcast of ep. 194
In this episode of Libertarians Talk Psychology, Julie and Mike take a deep dive into the film Darkest Hour, starring Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill, set in the tense days before the Nazi invasion of the United Kingdom during World War II. We explore how Churchill’s leadership illustrates the value of cognitive diversity—bringing different perspectives, problem-solving styles, and viewpoints together to navigate crisis situations.
Our conversation connects the lessons of the past to today’s challenges, showing how cognitive diversity applies not only to wartime leadership but also to modern political decision-making, organizational strategies, and personal growth. We touch on related themes such as Rand Paul’s independent thinking, the impact of masking requirements on public debate, and the role of YouTube in shaping political and cultural discourse.
If you’re interested in psychology, politics, history, and how diverse minds can solve complex problems, this episode offers a unique libertarian perspective on one of the most powerful historical dramas of recent years.
Follow Us:
YouTube
Twitter
Facebook
Bluesky
All audio & videos edited by: Jay Prescott Videography
In this episode of Libertarians Talk Psychology, Julie and Mike take a deep dive into the film Darkest Hour, starring Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill, set in the tense days before the Nazi invasion of the United Kingdom during World War II. We explore how Churchill’s leadership illustrates the value of cognitive diversity—bringing different perspectives, problem-solving styles, and viewpoints together to navigate crisis situations.
Our conversation connects the lessons of the past to today’s challenges, showing how cognitive diversity applies not only to wartime leadership but also to modern political decision-making, organizational strategies, and personal growth. We touch on related themes such as Rand Paul’s independent thinking, the impact of masking requirements on public debate, and the role of YouTube in shaping political and cultural discourse.
If you’re interested in psychology, politics, history, and how diverse minds can solve complex problems, this episode offers a unique libertarian perspective on one of the most powerful historical dramas of recent years.
Follow Us:
YouTube
Bluesky
All audio & videos edited by: Jay Prescott Videography
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is a rebroadcast of an earlier episode.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
You're listening to the podcast Coffee with Mike and Julie
Libertarians Talk Psychology. This is current commentary from an NBA
businessman and a PhD psychologist.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
So today's topic has to do with that great movie
we just watched again. I think you've watched it how
many times?
Speaker 4 (00:25):
Probably that was my third time.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
That was your third time. I've probably watched it six
or seven times. Darkest Hour. Don't look it up under
the Darkest Hour because that's a sci fi film, so
you have to look it up under Darkest Hour. This
is a story and Gary Olman plays Winston Churchill right
in the year. I think the year is nineteen forty
(00:48):
as Hitlerd's invading Europe and it's the crisis of management
leadership in London, England, United Kingdom, where Neville Chamberlain is
being criticized as too weak to lead the country in wartime.
It's a wonderful film and everybody needs to see it
(01:09):
over and over.
Speaker 4 (01:10):
Really, it's phenomenal.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
It's phenomenal, it's beautifully done.
Speaker 4 (01:15):
And it's amazing that this really did happen in the
real world. This stuff happened.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
I'm going to take it as being true to form
historically accurate. In other words, I do believe much of
it is historically accurate, and I'm going to take it
on face value that it it's historically accurate. Certainly, Winston
Churchill looked like that.
Speaker 4 (01:37):
At job.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
The costuming was fantastic, and his mannerisms, you know, Gary Olmok,
he got the Best Actor Academy Award. You know, he
studied churches.
Speaker 4 (01:49):
There's no way that his typist was as good looking
as the typist on that movie. Though. That's the best
looking damn girl ever. So there's no way the real
life typist was.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
In the typist was Apparently there was a typist and
she was significant thing. And you know in the movie
her brother dies in the Retreat of Calais.
Speaker 4 (02:09):
Wow, they don't make.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
That super clear, but it is clear in the write
up that I read. So what does this have to
do with today? Now? Of course, we just had before
we got started, we were discussing. The interesting change is
that I thought, watching the movie, without reading the description
that Churchill was a liberal, I thought he and Neville.
(02:31):
I thought Neville Chamberlain was clearly a liberal. But that's
the Conservative Party. Now this is nineteen forty. They are
on the Conservative Party and the Labor Party. The Liberal
I'm gonna call them the liberal I'm gonna call them.
What they were called them was the Labor Party. They
were upset. The crisis came about when they wanted Neville
(02:51):
Chamberlain to resign and felt that he was too weak
to lead the country in wartime, which was clear in
the story. Apparently the only one of the Conservative Party
they'd accept was Winston Churchill, who had changed parties a
couple of times, or at least once. So that's a
little confusing because in today's world, the Conservative Party or
(03:14):
the Hawks, yeah and usually yeah, Well, it's hard to
make exact comparisons today. And I made the point that today,
this very time in history, twenty twenty three, in the
United States, it's the Conservative Party protecting free speech and
the Liberal Party censoring. You know, the big tech are liberal.
Speaker 4 (03:36):
And both parties seem to be gung hold war except
for certain individuals.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
That's the party to tell Okay, So that's the uniparty
that's gung ho war because they're influenced by the lobbyist
of the military industrial complex. So we're in a different
situation now in twenty twenty three. I mean we're heading
into World War II, being one hundred years ago. I
mean we're getting closer closer to that, pretty close, pretty close,
(04:02):
not totally close with nineteen forty in nineteen twenty three.
And you know, this is something as we age that
we've experienced, which is World War II happened right before
we were born, but it seemed like for most of
our lives that it happened decades before we were born.
But our parents were in World War Two. They lived it,
(04:24):
and my father was in the worl War two. And
in fact, in the Psychology Times, this was our only
feature you know, the only first place in a feature
article that we've won was that article by Susy and
John and me on our World War two fathers. It
was good, well, it was really really good. It was
really long because John wrote a lot.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
But The Psychology Times is your online newspaper that kind
of concentrates on psychologists in the state of Louisiana. But
it gets more readership than just Louisiana.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
It gets more readership, and in fact, to boast, I'm
in the glow of a win we had. Yesterday when
the twenty twenty three awards were announced, we got another place.
We got a second place in the General Excellence from
the Louisia Very Prestigious award from the Louisiana Press Louisiana
(05:19):
Press Association. But it was judged by Maryland and DC.
Speaker 4 (05:23):
That's what.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
Yeah, So every now and then we get this is
the third General Excellence, which makes me feel really good
because we're not really a commercially successful newspaper.
Speaker 4 (05:37):
You claim to be getting rich off.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
This is not getting rich. I'm getting poorer off this newspaper.
It is still a newspaper, and it's still a newspaper
that every now is recognized as generally excellent.
Speaker 4 (05:50):
They're going to have to change. The word paper needs
to be out of the definition of what it is.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
You do. Oh, I'm not leaving newspaper. That word is
nearing to my heart. People say, oh, that's your newsletter.
Fuck you, f you. It is not a newsletter. Now
you know the difference between a newsletter and a newspaper.
Of course nowadays the younger people don't know the difference.
(06:16):
But a newsletter is happy talk. A newspaper is factual
reporting that empowers.
Speaker 4 (06:23):
The citizen free speech, but a news publication wouldn't work.
Cordano' they're gonna.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Giving up newspaper. I'm calling it a newspaper for the
rest of my life, which is probably not all that
many years. But I'm not giving up. Is that a
squirrel or a rat? Oh my god, that's a squirrel. Okay,
it's way out there on the fence, but for a minute,
it looked like a rat. You know, my physical therapist
in they live in golf Breeze. They have a rat infestation.
(06:53):
She keeps talking to me about the rats got into
their dog food and they're trapping them, and they're trapping
every time she comes to help me, like we trap
two more. I said, you're going to be trapping on
a long time because when you feed them, they multiply.
Speaker 4 (07:09):
When you find out that you have a rap problem,
you find out that you have a lot of rats.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
You're kidding. If you see one, you're looking at the
tip of an iceberg. That's right, yeah, because they hide.
Everybody has them and nobody knows they have them. But
if you're feeding them, you're in big trouble. Okay, So
today the concept is today that Winston Churchill. And this
has to do with political diversity, and it does relate
(07:35):
to things we've talked about in the past, which is
we're tribal now, which means that we've established subgroups rather
than a parental group. We've got these two subgroups and
they have hardened boundaries, so they're not open to new
information from each other.
Speaker 4 (07:52):
Okay, so let me restate that. Okay, you have a
parent group, which is like the president, and you have subgroups,
which is.
Speaker 3 (08:00):
No, it's not like the president. The president is not
the parent group, but go ahead, but it could be
the president who else supposedly which he doesn't. He supposedly
promotes the parent group boundary.
Speaker 4 (08:14):
Okay, and then you have subgroups might be liberal and
conservative group.
Speaker 3 (08:19):
Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (08:20):
And what you're pointing out is when the parent group
is not strong enough, then the subgroups.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Become over boundaries, become overly rigid and strong.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
Rigid, and they fight each other.
Speaker 3 (08:33):
Yes, so we've talked about that over and over, but
that's a really important concept for people to keep in mind.
The psychologists can't keep it in mind worth a crap
because they are now The psychologists in Louisiana are now
have been taken over and captured by the liberal group.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
Well, they've attached themselves to one of the subgroups, which
is what happens.
Speaker 3 (08:56):
Which is what happens, and it creates a very bad
problem solving dynamic. But it's important. I'm like, let me
just show you. Actually, I got a second place on
this editorial. I'm really boasting today about our awards. We
didn't get a whole bunch when we got seven awards
and they were we didn't get a single first place.
(09:17):
But it doesn't matter. We got good awards. I got
two awards for my editorials. But I wanted to give
this statistics for psychologists. Now I'm giving the statistics to
show you that when you have an over boundaried subgroup
and it doesn't have any if it's too strong, that
the boundary is too strong, it doesn't have any ability
(09:39):
to process new information from the outside, and you get
bad decisions. You get bad decisions. So psychology, Oh, in
their article faculty voter registration in Economics, History, journalism, law
in psychology. This was an article a econ journal watch.
Some economists got together and figured out that the faculty
(10:00):
raiow of Democrats to Republicans in psychology is seventeen point
four to one.
Speaker 4 (10:06):
Wow.
Speaker 3 (10:07):
So we have conservatives, and I'm putting the libertarians in
conservatives because that's where we go because nobody knows how
to think about us. But we tend to go in
that because of our economic conservatism one to seventeen wow.
You know, if you had that in an industry, if
you were working in organizational development and you had that
in a team, oh man, you would go to the
(10:29):
manager and talk about you got one type in your team.
You got no alternative intelligence. Like David Kurzy says in
his book Please Understand Me one and two, this is intelligence.
This is world view cognition. It gives you the ability
the four types of intelligence give you the ability to
(10:52):
see the world differently. And you need those four types
of intelligence in any problem solving effort.
Speaker 4 (10:58):
Do you remember those four tooks?
Speaker 3 (11:00):
Remember them?
Speaker 4 (11:01):
Okay?
Speaker 3 (11:01):
But so you want to talk about those right now?
You may?
Speaker 4 (11:04):
Well, I just think this is the core issue. Yeah,
And this is the core issue of diversity. And this
is with diversity you can get the full range of
different types of intelligence. But if you don't have diversity,
then you know it limits. Yeah, the intelligence, it enters
into your decision.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Maybe, yeah, And especially if you don't know that you're
only one type of intelligence.
Speaker 4 (11:29):
Yeah, especially if you think.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
If you think that your type is the only type,
and that you're.
Speaker 4 (11:35):
Doing which is what people tend to do, which.
Speaker 3 (11:37):
Is what the psychologists in Louisiana just did. They took
a stand on this gender affirming care ban. And I
tried to communicate that Louisiana, being a conservative state with
lots of Bible Belt and lots of Catholics and all that.
You know, seventy five percent of the state is like
not getting that they think the gender affirming care is
(11:59):
bad and wrong and an era. But I found out
that the people in favor of the gender and care,
they're out of touch with reality. By the way I
found that out. This is such an interesting thing for
me to be in the place I'm at with the psychologists.
I mean, I am learning more and more on a
daily basis. But okay, so the four types of intelligence,
(12:21):
let's go through them. Now. There's the artisan, which is
the sp and that makes up the sensing perceptor, the
flexible problem solving artisan. Donald Trump is an artisan. They're
good at immediate here and now problem solving. Okay. Then
there's the Guardian. This is all from Curzy's books. He's brilliant,
(12:45):
He's amazingly brilliant. The SJ is the guardian. They are
the traditionalists and like to follow the rules of society. Now,
those two make up the predominant types because those make
a higher percentage, about thirty.
Speaker 4 (13:03):
Between those two. That's over half of the populace.
Speaker 3 (13:05):
Yeah, well over half. Then the two lesser frequencies, which
is the NF, which are the idealists, and they tend
to make up the people in the liberals group that
are humanitarians and they consider care to be the most
important thing, caring for others. And then there's the NT
(13:27):
like you and me and most libertarians. We're the ones
that are the strategists and see the design of things
easier than the here and now.
Speaker 4 (13:37):
And NT means intuitive thinking.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
Intuitive thinking. So these are complicated, and you know, I
have it in my mind, Mike, to make these available someday.
You know, people should know their type. Now you get
the psychologists poo pooing the Myers Briggs type indicator, but
I think it's one of the very best useful. It's
so useful, and it doesn't give you the same thing
(14:01):
that Kurzy gives you. He says, these are four intelligences.
And I'm a fan of his, and I believe that
these four intelligence are involved perceptions, kind of talents, intellectual
talents that you're evolved with that may or may not
come to the four given your environment, but that some
of them are effective in some environments and others are
(14:26):
effective in other environments. Okay, back to our original.
Speaker 4 (14:30):
And that's a heavy observation, by the way.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
But it's the one in darkest hour Churchill emerged. Can
you imagine anyone else leading the United Kingdom through World
War Two? The Nazis were on their damn doorstep and
overwhelming power of.
Speaker 4 (14:50):
Just smashed friends, well complete surprised smash smashed them.
Speaker 3 (14:55):
I mean a machine, a military machine. I mean that's
the thing about the movie. You see Churchill, And I
want to make this point about courage versus fear. You
see in psychology. You see this in the movie The Alien,
and it's a horror movie, the horror I fi movie.
Everybody's running from the alien most of the movie, and
(15:17):
you're scared to death for everybody. And there's a child involved,
of course, and then it at like three quarters through
the movie, Sigonya Weaver turns her psychology into it, fuck
this shit, I'm gonna get this mother or die trying.
So she turns her own psychology from running to fighting.
(15:40):
And when you do that, you conjure courage.
Speaker 5 (15:44):
So you see in this movie, this brilliant movie, you
see Churchill make that he's already prone to fight, but
he wavers because people are dying right and left and
there's nothing you United States says we're not coming.
Speaker 3 (16:01):
Do you rescue? And he deals with that, and then
he deals with his army is stuck on Dunkirk. I mean,
he deals with some major major setbacks to his own
philosophy and waivers. But then he goes out and he
talks to the people and they're like, they don't have
the same information he has, but they have something very clear.
(16:21):
They're like, hell no, I'm not giving up freedom, even
if I have to die for it. And he is
strengthened by King George's similar cinema, even if I have
to die for it. So they make this a go
in you Weaver turn It's like, I don't give a shit,
I'm going to die on this hill. For this, This
is worth dying for presto digito courage. But of course
(16:44):
Churchill emerged as a wartime president because his system allowed
him to emerge. And he's probably the only person. You
can't even think of anyone doing as well as Churchill.
Speaker 4 (16:57):
And what's interesting is as much as we in this
country admire Churchill, the British they got him in power
when they needed him for war, and as soon as
war was over with they voted him back out.
Speaker 3 (17:09):
Well, they voted him back in. I saw this, you
know that's what the movie ends. Well, oh, okay, here's
where Hollywood gets it hit. He got voted in his
Prime minister again in fifty one to fifty five, so
they didn't vote him out. But yeah, it's like, when
you're finished with war, would Churchill make a good peacetime
prime minister? Not as well as a wartime But then
(17:32):
that was clear from the movie. The people the Labor
Party knew quite well that Neville Chamberlain was not going
to was too weak to make a good wartime president.
And apparently, as they say in the movie, you know,
he was the only one in the Conservative Party they'd accept.
In the opposition party, would only accept Churchill. So obviously
(17:52):
the Labor Party knew his style. Yeah, you know, knew
about him, and he was unlikable.
Speaker 4 (17:58):
He said it a good job communicating.
Speaker 3 (18:03):
So nobody likes me. And then the King says, what
does the king say when he says I'm unliked? I
think he does? He say unwanted? At one point the
dialogue is I'm unwanted and he says, well, I want you.
The King comes to there's several interactions with the King.
King does not starts out does not like Churchill. It's
(18:24):
King George the sixth I guess Elizabeth's father, but he
does not like Churchill. And he basically says to Neville,
can't you find somebody but Churchill? But the Labor Party
won't accept anybody but Churchill in the other party. So
there's some political dynamics that I don't understand, but they're
depicted in the movie. So then he meets with k
(18:48):
he meets Churchill, meets with King George. He says teen.
George says, do you drink all? How do you drink
this much every day? And Churchill says practice. Apparently Churchill
smokes a cigar and drinks Scotch in the morning and
then he drinks champagne at lunch, two bottles of champagne,
and then he drinks sherryt for.
Speaker 4 (19:09):
Do you have any observation as a psychologist about that
much drinking?
Speaker 3 (19:13):
And well, you adapt? He's right, practice helps deliver adapts
to that moment alcohol. You know, I don't know how
Churchill was at this time, and they had him walking
with a cane, but he's quite spry in the movie.
I mean, he's you know, they've always got this depiction
of him kind of stooped over a little bit, walking
(19:34):
intensely forward. He died of heart disease. I believe he
had a stroke.
Speaker 4 (19:40):
I just wonder about people who habitually drink. What are
they hiding in their personal life? What are they hiding
from in order to have that altered mental state that
so that they can handle the world better.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
Well that I wouldn't know. I mean, Churchill, we have
a comment on our wall. You have enemies. Good. That
means you stood up for something sometime in your life.
Winston Churchill nineteen sixty five. Believe to me he's iconic figure.
My father mentioned Churchill all the time. You can't go
through World War two like our parents did and not
(20:16):
have developed an appreciation for Winston Churchill, I mean, a
heroic figure in that time period. And they make that
point in the movie. They make that point. That's a
very well done movie.
Speaker 4 (20:28):
Man, that's a great movie.
Speaker 3 (20:29):
Okay, so we're probably ready to about wrap up. I
have a couple of things to mention. So diversity to
me has more to do with cognitive diversity rather and
I said this over and over, but I want to
say it again, has more to do with cognitive diversity
than superficial diversity. Like what sexual orientation you are and
what skin color you have, what sex you are, those
(20:52):
are superficial diversity elements, and anyone that discriminates on that
basis doesn't know what they're doing. Discriminate on the basis
of cognitive cognitive diversity. Now, when you discriminate on the
basis of cognitive diversity, you're hopefully aware that you're trying
to match the job to the person. That some people
(21:13):
are going to excel at jobs that other people will
fail at, not because they're not smart, but because it's
not their style. The second point is that if you
have any understanding of real diversity, you understand that a
team that and I saw teams change when I was
in an organizational development actively. When you promoted this in
(21:35):
a team, it was an aha across the board. All
kinds of guys went aha.
Speaker 4 (21:41):
And you helped us in our company, our small engineering company.
You helped us select employees with a decent diversity of
cognitive ability. Am I right about that? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (21:55):
Well, I made that a factor in what your management
staff was looking.
Speaker 4 (22:00):
At, right, And I want to say, from a business standpoint,
what we got from that is the diversity is an
important issue. But what we got as a team was
recognizing something that's subtle, but the strengths and weaknesses of
every person could be recognized. It was no longer this
(22:22):
guy is the smartest guy in the room, he leads everything,
and you just do whatever he says. You got away
from that and you got into recognizing each person's different
strengths and weaknesses, including that smart guy who's the leader.
You recognized his strengths and weaknesses. Oh it's so important, Yeah,
related to what the overall product was. And that was
(22:47):
the completion of the diversity cycle of not I don't
know if I'm saying this right, but not only getting
the benefit of the four types of intelligence, but having
the team members start recognizing drinks and weaknesses between them
so that they could work together to turn out the
best profit.
Speaker 3 (23:05):
You saw that in operation. Yeah, I saw that in operation,
but only as a trainer, you know. I saw someone
like my friend that headed up Honeywell China, David, he
got it. I mean he's a Asian, so he got
everything in like Nane a second, but he got it.
I saw him.
Speaker 4 (23:22):
Use that's another kind of diversity, another kind of diversity, Yeah,
Asian diversity asient.
Speaker 3 (23:29):
Yeah, the Supreme Court just decided that we don't think
Harvard should be discriminating against Asians just because they smoke.
Speaker 4 (23:38):
Because they're so much smarter than everybody else.
Speaker 3 (23:41):
By the way, if you use the I mean this
is the whole point. If you use one kind of test,
the Asians will smoke it everything. Like if you use
a math test, the Asians are going to smoke that well.
Speaker 4 (23:53):
And that's something else about you. You used several different
types of tests.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
Yeah, you're trying to look at from different lenses.
Speaker 4 (24:01):
But we learned from practice. We learned from what actually
happened in our company. You don't just depend on that
one intelligence test because it's enticing.
Speaker 3 (24:12):
You have a number.
Speaker 4 (24:13):
You had a number, and that guy is really smart.
You can tell he's really smart, and you want to
hire that guy. Even though the rest of the testing
didn't support that guy. You wanted to hire him because
his intelligence number was so high. And man, we learned
you could get burned by doing that.
Speaker 3 (24:30):
Yeah. Well, it's like we were watching the movie on
Alan Turing imitation Game, and so he's like smokes everything
because he's autistic. He's autistic and he's like a math
a machine and of course he developed a machine, but
socially he was like couldn't do anything but alienate everybody
(24:50):
around him. So in that movie, you know the woman
who's also I mean, I don't know that her character
is real because she's supposed to be a math math wiz,
but also with social skills, well, you don't really get
those in combination. You get people like you know, the
old saying in the chemical industry is like the chemical
(25:11):
engineers were above the civil engineers and the chemical engineers
were below the electrical engineers, but the electrical engineers couldn't
find their way from their car to the building and
brain you know, in other words, you just get these
intelligences and they function, and like Mencomb says people are
(25:33):
good at one thing, that that essay is hilarious about
people being good at one thing. Hl Malkin Mencon has
a I've noticed. Okay, so we're going to that wraps up.
But I have had two housekeeping things. One is to
remind our listeners that they should speed us up because
we have a southern drawl. And the fact that our
daughter corrected me and they wanted to make sure that
(25:56):
plastics can be eliminated from the body. They're actually eliminated
in a lot of ways pretty easily. So I wanted
to file those.
Speaker 4 (26:05):
Two correct corruptions from our from our.
Speaker 3 (26:09):
Some of our previous emails.
Speaker 1 (26:12):
Okay, this has been a rebroadcast of an earlier episode.
This is a rebroadcast of an earlier episode.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
You're listening to the podcast Coffee with Mike and Julie
Libertarians Talk Psychology. This is current commentary from an NBA
businessman and a PhD psychologist.
Speaker 3 (00:18):
So today's topic has to do with that great movie
we just watched again. I think you've watched it how
many times?
Speaker 4 (00:25):
Probably that was my third time.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
That was your third time. I've probably watched it six
or seven times. Darkest Hour. Don't look it up under
the Darkest Hour because that's a sci fi film, so
you have to look it up under Darkest Hour. This
is a story and Gary Olman plays Winston Churchill right
in the year. I think the year is nineteen forty
(00:48):
as Hitlerd's invading Europe and it's the crisis of management
leadership in London, England, United Kingdom, where Neville Chamberlain is
being criticized as too weak to lead the country in wartime.
It's a wonderful film and everybody needs to see it
(01:09):
over and over.
Speaker 4 (01:10):
Really, it's phenomenal.
Speaker 3 (01:12):
It's phenomenal, it's beautifully done.
Speaker 4 (01:15):
And it's amazing that this really did happen in the
real world. This stuff happened.
Speaker 3 (01:20):
I'm going to take it as being true to form
historically accurate. In other words, I do believe much of
it is historically accurate, and I'm going to take it
on face value that it it's historically accurate. Certainly, Winston
Churchill looked like that.
Speaker 4 (01:37):
At job.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
The costuming was fantastic, and his mannerisms, you know, Gary Olmok,
he got the Best Actor Academy Award. You know, he
studied churches.
Speaker 4 (01:49):
There's no way that his typist was as good looking
as the typist on that movie. Though. That's the best
looking damn girl ever. So there's no way the real
life typist was.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
In the typist was Apparently there was a typist and
she was significant thing. And you know in the movie
her brother dies in the Retreat of Calais.
Speaker 4 (02:09):
Wow, they don't make.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
That super clear, but it is clear in the write
up that I read. So what does this have to
do with today? Now? Of course, we just had before
we got started, we were discussing. The interesting change is
that I thought, watching the movie, without reading the description
that Churchill was a liberal, I thought he and Neville.
(02:31):
I thought Neville Chamberlain was clearly a liberal. But that's
the Conservative Party. Now this is nineteen forty. They are
on the Conservative Party and the Labor Party. The Liberal
I'm gonna call them the liberal I'm gonna call them.
What they were called them was the Labor Party. They
were upset. The crisis came about when they wanted Neville
(02:51):
Chamberlain to resign and felt that he was too weak
to lead the country in wartime, which was clear in
the story. Apparently the only one of the Conservative Party
they'd accept was Winston Churchill, who had changed parties a
couple of times, or at least once. So that's a
little confusing because in today's world, the Conservative Party or
(03:14):
the Hawks, yeah and usually yeah, Well, it's hard to
make exact comparisons today. And I made the point that today,
this very time in history, twenty twenty three, in the
United States, it's the Conservative Party protecting free speech and
the Liberal Party censoring. You know, the big tech are liberal.
Speaker 4 (03:36):
And both parties seem to be gung hold war except
for certain individuals.
Speaker 3 (03:41):
That's the party to tell Okay, So that's the uniparty
that's gung ho war because they're influenced by the lobbyist
of the military industrial complex. So we're in a different
situation now in twenty twenty three. I mean we're heading
into World War II, being one hundred years ago. I
mean we're getting closer closer to that, pretty close, pretty close,
(04:02):
not totally close with nineteen forty in nineteen twenty three.
And you know, this is something as we age that
we've experienced, which is World War II happened right before
we were born, but it seemed like for most of
our lives that it happened decades before we were born.
But our parents were in World War Two. They lived it,
(04:24):
and my father was in the worl War two. And
in fact, in the Psychology Times, this was our only
feature you know, the only first place in a feature
article that we've won was that article by Susy and
John and me on our World War two fathers. It
was good, well, it was really really good. It was
really long because John wrote a lot.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
But The Psychology Times is your online newspaper that kind
of concentrates on psychologists in the state of Louisiana. But
it gets more readership than just Louisiana.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
It gets more readership, and in fact, to boast, I'm
in the glow of a win we had. Yesterday when
the twenty twenty three awards were announced, we got another place.
We got a second place in the General Excellence from
the Louisia Very Prestigious award from the Louisiana Press Louisiana
(05:19):
Press Association. But it was judged by Maryland and DC.
Speaker 4 (05:23):
That's what.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
Yeah, So every now and then we get this is
the third General Excellence, which makes me feel really good
because we're not really a commercially successful newspaper.
Speaker 4 (05:37):
You claim to be getting rich off.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
This is not getting rich. I'm getting poorer off this newspaper.
It is still a newspaper, and it's still a newspaper
that every now is recognized as generally excellent.
Speaker 4 (05:50):
They're going to have to change. The word paper needs
to be out of the definition of what it is.
Speaker 3 (05:55):
You do. Oh, I'm not leaving newspaper. That word is
nearing to my heart. People say, oh, that's your newsletter.
Fuck you, f you. It is not a newsletter. Now
you know the difference between a newsletter and a newspaper.
Of course nowadays the younger people don't know the difference.
(06:16):
But a newsletter is happy talk. A newspaper is factual
reporting that empowers.
Speaker 4 (06:23):
The citizen free speech, but a news publication wouldn't work.
Cordano' they're gonna.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Giving up newspaper. I'm calling it a newspaper for the
rest of my life, which is probably not all that
many years. But I'm not giving up. Is that a
squirrel or a rat? Oh my god, that's a squirrel. Okay,
it's way out there on the fence, but for a minute,
it looked like a rat. You know, my physical therapist
in they live in golf Breeze. They have a rat infestation.
(06:53):
She keeps talking to me about the rats got into
their dog food and they're trapping them, and they're trapping
every time she comes to help me, like we trap
two more. I said, you're going to be trapping on
a long time because when you feed them, they multiply.
Speaker 4 (07:09):
When you find out that you have a rap problem,
you find out that you have a lot of rats.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
You're kidding. If you see one, you're looking at the
tip of an iceberg. That's right, yeah, because they hide.
Everybody has them and nobody knows they have them. But
if you're feeding them, you're in big trouble. Okay, So
today the concept is today that Winston Churchill. And this
has to do with political diversity, and it does relate
(07:35):
to things we've talked about in the past, which is
we're tribal now, which means that we've established subgroups rather
than a parental group. We've got these two subgroups and
they have hardened boundaries, so they're not open to new
information from each other.
Speaker 4 (07:52):
Okay, so let me restate that. Okay, you have a
parent group, which is like the president, and you have subgroups,
which is.
Speaker 3 (08:00):
No, it's not like the president. The president is not
the parent group, but go ahead, but it could be
the president who else supposedly which he doesn't. He supposedly
promotes the parent group boundary.
Speaker 4 (08:14):
Okay, and then you have subgroups might be liberal and
conservative group.
Speaker 3 (08:19):
Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (08:20):
And what you're pointing out is when the parent group
is not strong enough, then the subgroups.
Speaker 3 (08:27):
Become over boundaries, become overly rigid and strong.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
Rigid, and they fight each other.
Speaker 3 (08:33):
Yes, so we've talked about that over and over, but
that's a really important concept for people to keep in mind.
The psychologists can't keep it in mind worth a crap
because they are now The psychologists in Louisiana are now
have been taken over and captured by the liberal group.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
Well, they've attached themselves to one of the subgroups, which
is what happens.
Speaker 3 (08:56):
Which is what happens, and it creates a very bad
problem solving dynamic. But it's important. I'm like, let me
just show you. Actually, I got a second place on
this editorial. I'm really boasting today about our awards. We
didn't get a whole bunch when we got seven awards
and they were we didn't get a single first place.
(09:17):
But it doesn't matter. We got good awards. I got
two awards for my editorials. But I wanted to give
this statistics for psychologists. Now I'm giving the statistics to
show you that when you have an over boundaried subgroup
and it doesn't have any if it's too strong, that
the boundary is too strong, it doesn't have any ability
(09:39):
to process new information from the outside, and you get
bad decisions. You get bad decisions. So psychology, Oh, in
their article faculty voter registration in Economics, History, journalism, law
in psychology. This was an article a econ journal watch.
Some economists got together and figured out that the faculty
(10:00):
raiow of Democrats to Republicans in psychology is seventeen point
four to one.
Speaker 4 (10:06):
Wow.
Speaker 3 (10:07):
So we have conservatives, and I'm putting the libertarians in
conservatives because that's where we go because nobody knows how
to think about us. But we tend to go in
that because of our economic conservatism one to seventeen wow.
You know, if you had that in an industry, if
you were working in organizational development and you had that
in a team, oh man, you would go to the
(10:29):
manager and talk about you got one type in your team.
You got no alternative intelligence. Like David Kurzy says in
his book Please Understand Me one and two, this is intelligence.
This is world view cognition. It gives you the ability
the four types of intelligence give you the ability to
(10:52):
see the world differently. And you need those four types
of intelligence in any problem solving effort.
Speaker 4 (10:58):
Do you remember those four tooks?
Speaker 3 (11:00):
Remember them?
Speaker 4 (11:01):
Okay?
Speaker 3 (11:01):
But so you want to talk about those right now?
You may?
Speaker 4 (11:04):
Well, I just think this is the core issue. Yeah,
And this is the core issue of diversity. And this
is with diversity you can get the full range of
different types of intelligence. But if you don't have diversity,
then you know it limits. Yeah, the intelligence, it enters
into your decision.
Speaker 3 (11:25):
Maybe, yeah, And especially if you don't know that you're
only one type of intelligence.
Speaker 4 (11:29):
Yeah, especially if you think.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
If you think that your type is the only type,
and that you're.
Speaker 4 (11:35):
Doing which is what people tend to do, which.
Speaker 3 (11:37):
Is what the psychologists in Louisiana just did. They took
a stand on this gender affirming care ban. And I
tried to communicate that Louisiana, being a conservative state with
lots of Bible Belt and lots of Catholics and all that.
You know, seventy five percent of the state is like
not getting that they think the gender affirming care is
(11:59):
bad and wrong and an era. But I found out
that the people in favor of the gender and care,
they're out of touch with reality. By the way I
found that out. This is such an interesting thing for
me to be in the place I'm at with the psychologists.
I mean, I am learning more and more on a
daily basis. But okay, so the four types of intelligence,
(12:21):
let's go through them. Now. There's the artisan, which is
the sp and that makes up the sensing perceptor, the
flexible problem solving artisan. Donald Trump is an artisan. They're
good at immediate here and now problem solving. Okay. Then
there's the Guardian. This is all from Curzy's books. He's brilliant,
(12:45):
He's amazingly brilliant. The SJ is the guardian. They are
the traditionalists and like to follow the rules of society. Now,
those two make up the predominant types because those make
a higher percentage, about thirty.
Speaker 4 (13:03):
Between those two. That's over half of the populace.
Speaker 3 (13:05):
Yeah, well over half. Then the two lesser frequencies, which
is the NF, which are the idealists, and they tend
to make up the people in the liberals group that
are humanitarians and they consider care to be the most
important thing, caring for others. And then there's the NT
(13:27):
like you and me and most libertarians. We're the ones
that are the strategists and see the design of things
easier than the here and now.
Speaker 4 (13:37):
And NT means intuitive thinking.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
Intuitive thinking. So these are complicated, and you know, I
have it in my mind, Mike, to make these available someday.
You know, people should know their type. Now you get
the psychologists poo pooing the Myers Briggs type indicator, but
I think it's one of the very best useful. It's
so useful, and it doesn't give you the same thing
(14:01):
that Kurzy gives you. He says, these are four intelligences.
And I'm a fan of his, and I believe that
these four intelligence are involved perceptions, kind of talents, intellectual
talents that you're evolved with that may or may not
come to the four given your environment, but that some
of them are effective in some environments and others are
(14:26):
effective in other environments. Okay, back to our original.
Speaker 4 (14:30):
And that's a heavy observation, by the way.
Speaker 3 (14:32):
But it's the one in darkest hour Churchill emerged. Can
you imagine anyone else leading the United Kingdom through World
War Two? The Nazis were on their damn doorstep and
overwhelming power of.
Speaker 4 (14:50):
Just smashed friends, well complete surprised smash smashed them.
Speaker 3 (14:55):
I mean a machine, a military machine. I mean that's
the thing about the movie. You see Churchill, And I
want to make this point about courage versus fear. You
see in psychology. You see this in the movie The Alien,
and it's a horror movie, the horror I fi movie.
Everybody's running from the alien most of the movie, and
(15:17):
you're scared to death for everybody. And there's a child involved,
of course, and then it at like three quarters through
the movie, Sigonya Weaver turns her psychology into it, fuck
this shit, I'm gonna get this mother or die trying.
So she turns her own psychology from running to fighting.
(15:40):
And when you do that, you conjure courage.
Speaker 5 (15:44):
So you see in this movie, this brilliant movie, you
see Churchill make that he's already prone to fight, but
he wavers because people are dying right and left and
there's nothing you United States says we're not coming.
Speaker 3 (16:01):
Do you rescue? And he deals with that, and then
he deals with his army is stuck on Dunkirk. I mean,
he deals with some major major setbacks to his own
philosophy and waivers. But then he goes out and he
talks to the people and they're like, they don't have
the same information he has, but they have something very clear.
(16:21):
They're like, hell no, I'm not giving up freedom, even
if I have to die for it. And he is
strengthened by King George's similar cinema, even if I have
to die for it. So they make this a go
in you Weaver turn It's like, I don't give a shit,
I'm going to die on this hill. For this, This
is worth dying for presto digito courage. But of course
(16:44):
Churchill emerged as a wartime president because his system allowed
him to emerge. And he's probably the only person. You
can't even think of anyone doing as well as Churchill.
Speaker 4 (16:57):
And what's interesting is as much as we in this
country admire Churchill, the British they got him in power
when they needed him for war, and as soon as
war was over with they voted him back out.
Speaker 3 (17:09):
Well, they voted him back in. I saw this, you
know that's what the movie ends. Well, oh, okay, here's
where Hollywood gets it hit. He got voted in his
Prime minister again in fifty one to fifty five, so
they didn't vote him out. But yeah, it's like, when
you're finished with war, would Churchill make a good peacetime
prime minister? Not as well as a wartime But then
(17:32):
that was clear from the movie. The people the Labor
Party knew quite well that Neville Chamberlain was not going
to was too weak to make a good wartime president.
And apparently, as they say in the movie, you know,
he was the only one in the Conservative Party they'd accept.
In the opposition party, would only accept Churchill. So obviously
(17:52):
the Labor Party knew his style. Yeah, you know, knew
about him, and he was unlikable.
Speaker 4 (17:58):
He said it a good job communicating.
Speaker 3 (18:03):
So nobody likes me. And then the King says, what
does the king say when he says I'm unliked? I
think he does? He say unwanted? At one point the
dialogue is I'm unwanted and he says, well, I want you.
The King comes to there's several interactions with the King.
King does not starts out does not like Churchill. It's
(18:24):
King George the sixth I guess Elizabeth's father, but he
does not like Churchill. And he basically says to Neville,
can't you find somebody but Churchill? But the Labor Party
won't accept anybody but Churchill in the other party. So
there's some political dynamics that I don't understand, but they're
depicted in the movie. So then he meets with k
(18:48):
he meets Churchill, meets with King George. He says teen.
George says, do you drink all? How do you drink
this much every day? And Churchill says practice. Apparently Churchill
smokes a cigar and drinks Scotch in the morning and
then he drinks champagne at lunch, two bottles of champagne,
and then he drinks sherryt for.
Speaker 4 (19:09):
Do you have any observation as a psychologist about that
much drinking?
Speaker 3 (19:13):
And well, you adapt? He's right, practice helps deliver adapts
to that moment alcohol. You know, I don't know how
Churchill was at this time, and they had him walking
with a cane, but he's quite spry in the movie.
I mean, he's you know, they've always got this depiction
of him kind of stooped over a little bit, walking
(19:34):
intensely forward. He died of heart disease. I believe he
had a stroke.
Speaker 4 (19:40):
I just wonder about people who habitually drink. What are
they hiding in their personal life? What are they hiding
from in order to have that altered mental state that
so that they can handle the world better.
Speaker 3 (19:53):
Well that I wouldn't know. I mean, Churchill, we have
a comment on our wall. You have enemies. Good. That
means you stood up for something sometime in your life.
Winston Churchill nineteen sixty five. Believe to me he's iconic figure.
My father mentioned Churchill all the time. You can't go
through World War two like our parents did and not
(20:16):
have developed an appreciation for Winston Churchill, I mean, a
heroic figure in that time period. And they make that
point in the movie. They make that point. That's a
very well done movie.
Speaker 4 (20:28):
Man, that's a great movie.
Speaker 3 (20:29):
Okay, so we're probably ready to about wrap up. I
have a couple of things to mention. So diversity to
me has more to do with cognitive diversity rather and
I said this over and over, but I want to
say it again, has more to do with cognitive diversity
than superficial diversity. Like what sexual orientation you are and
what skin color you have, what sex you are, those
(20:52):
are superficial diversity elements, and anyone that discriminates on that
basis doesn't know what they're doing. Discriminate on the basis
of cognitive cognitive diversity. Now, when you discriminate on the
basis of cognitive diversity, you're hopefully aware that you're trying
to match the job to the person. That some people
(21:13):
are going to excel at jobs that other people will
fail at, not because they're not smart, but because it's
not their style. The second point is that if you
have any understanding of real diversity, you understand that a
team that and I saw teams change when I was
in an organizational development actively. When you promoted this in
(21:35):
a team, it was an aha across the board. All
kinds of guys went aha.
Speaker 4 (21:41):
And you helped us in our company, our small engineering company.
You helped us select employees with a decent diversity of
cognitive ability. Am I right about that? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (21:55):
Well, I made that a factor in what your management
staff was looking.
Speaker 4 (22:00):
At, right, And I want to say, from a business standpoint,
what we got from that is the diversity is an
important issue. But what we got as a team was
recognizing something that's subtle, but the strengths and weaknesses of
every person could be recognized. It was no longer this
(22:22):
guy is the smartest guy in the room, he leads everything,
and you just do whatever he says. You got away
from that and you got into recognizing each person's different
strengths and weaknesses, including that smart guy who's the leader.
You recognized his strengths and weaknesses. Oh it's so important, Yeah,
related to what the overall product was. And that was
(22:47):
the completion of the diversity cycle of not I don't
know if I'm saying this right, but not only getting
the benefit of the four types of intelligence, but having
the team members start recognizing drinks and weaknesses between them
so that they could work together to turn out the
best profit.
Speaker 3 (23:05):
You saw that in operation. Yeah, I saw that in operation,
but only as a trainer, you know. I saw someone
like my friend that headed up Honeywell China, David, he
got it. I mean he's a Asian, so he got
everything in like Nane a second, but he got it.
I saw him.
Speaker 4 (23:22):
Use that's another kind of diversity, another kind of diversity, Yeah,
Asian diversity asient.
Speaker 3 (23:29):
Yeah, the Supreme Court just decided that we don't think
Harvard should be discriminating against Asians just because they smoke.
Speaker 4 (23:38):
Because they're so much smarter than everybody else.
Speaker 3 (23:41):
By the way, if you use the I mean this
is the whole point. If you use one kind of test,
the Asians will smoke it everything. Like if you use
a math test, the Asians are going to smoke that well.
Speaker 4 (23:53):
And that's something else about you. You used several different
types of tests.
Speaker 3 (23:58):
Yeah, you're trying to look at from different lenses.
Speaker 4 (24:01):
But we learned from practice. We learned from what actually
happened in our company. You don't just depend on that
one intelligence test because it's enticing.
Speaker 3 (24:12):
You have a number.
Speaker 4 (24:13):
You had a number, and that guy is really smart.
You can tell he's really smart, and you want to
hire that guy. Even though the rest of the testing
didn't support that guy. You wanted to hire him because
his intelligence number was so high. And man, we learned
you could get burned by doing that.
Speaker 3 (24:30):
Yeah. Well, it's like we were watching the movie on
Alan Turing imitation Game, and so he's like smokes everything
because he's autistic. He's autistic and he's like a math
a machine and of course he developed a machine, but
socially he was like couldn't do anything but alienate everybody
(24:50):
around him. So in that movie, you know the woman
who's also I mean, I don't know that her character
is real because she's supposed to be a math math wiz,
but also with social skills, well, you don't really get
those in combination. You get people like you know, the
old saying in the chemical industry is like the chemical
(25:11):
engineers were above the civil engineers and the chemical engineers
were below the electrical engineers, but the electrical engineers couldn't
find their way from their car to the building and
brain you know, in other words, you just get these
intelligences and they function, and like Mencomb says people are
(25:33):
good at one thing, that that essay is hilarious about
people being good at one thing. Hl Malkin Mencon has
a I've noticed. Okay, so we're going to that wraps up.
But I have had two housekeeping things. One is to
remind our listeners that they should speed us up because
we have a southern drawl. And the fact that our
daughter corrected me and they wanted to make sure that
(25:56):
plastics can be eliminated from the body. They're actually eliminated
in a lot of ways pretty easily. So I wanted
to file those.
Speaker 4 (26:05):
Two correct corruptions from our from our.
Speaker 3 (26:09):
Some of our previous emails.
Speaker 1 (26:12):
Okay, this has been a rebroadcast of an earlier episode.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com