Kaizen Asiedu

So they harbor those ideas and they go secretly go follow that person. So no matter how heinous or odious the idea is, the point of a culture of free speech is that free speech is a counter to bad ideas. But instead we seem to have forgotten that and we want to shame people for even talking to people who disagree with them.

So they harbor those ideas and they go secretly go follow that person. So no matter how heinous or odious the idea is, the point of a culture of free speech is that free speech is a counter to bad ideas. But instead we seem to have forgotten that and we want to shame people for even talking to people who disagree with them.

So they harbor those ideas and they go secretly go follow that person. So no matter how heinous or odious the idea is, the point of a culture of free speech is that free speech is a counter to bad ideas. But instead we seem to have forgotten that and we want to shame people for even talking to people who disagree with them.

Or we want to label people as a conspiracy theorist or anti this, racist that, misogynist, whatever the term is. And it doesn't actually kill the ideas. It actually just gives them more power, just it gives them power in a place that we don't see. And then when massive hateful movements start to rise, we wonder where the hell did this come from?

Or we want to label people as a conspiracy theorist or anti this, racist that, misogynist, whatever the term is. And it doesn't actually kill the ideas. It actually just gives them more power, just it gives them power in a place that we don't see. And then when massive hateful movements start to rise, we wonder where the hell did this come from?

Or we want to label people as a conspiracy theorist or anti this, racist that, misogynist, whatever the term is. And it doesn't actually kill the ideas. It actually just gives them more power, just it gives them power in a place that we don't see. And then when massive hateful movements start to rise, we wonder where the hell did this come from?

Well, because we shoved it out of the town square, it festered elsewhere, and that's overwhelming the town square. So, yeah, when we go back to RFK, for example, you know, originally what they tried to do is silence him, right? The Democratic Party, they engage in lawfare.

Well, because we shoved it out of the town square, it festered elsewhere, and that's overwhelming the town square. So, yeah, when we go back to RFK, for example, you know, originally what they tried to do is silence him, right? The Democratic Party, they engage in lawfare.

Well, because we shoved it out of the town square, it festered elsewhere, and that's overwhelming the town square. So, yeah, when we go back to RFK, for example, you know, originally what they tried to do is silence him, right? The Democratic Party, they engage in lawfare.

They basically tried to shut him down in a bunch of states so that he literally could not win the presidency, take him off the ballot. The news media tried to cancel him, deem him a conspiracy theorist, bring up stuff about bears in Central Park and all this stuff.

They basically tried to shut him down in a bunch of states so that he literally could not win the presidency, take him off the ballot. The news media tried to cancel him, deem him a conspiracy theorist, bring up stuff about bears in Central Park and all this stuff.

They basically tried to shut him down in a bunch of states so that he literally could not win the presidency, take him off the ballot. The news media tried to cancel him, deem him a conspiracy theorist, bring up stuff about bears in Central Park and all this stuff.

And fortunately, that didn't work because I personally believe that he's actually providing a really healthy counteraction to what's been going on in the country. But there's many people who agreed with RFK. And what happens is when people agree with him and they see him being mistreated in the public, they don't stop believing what they believe. They actually double down on their position.

And fortunately, that didn't work because I personally believe that he's actually providing a really healthy counteraction to what's been going on in the country. But there's many people who agreed with RFK. And what happens is when people agree with him and they see him being mistreated in the public, they don't stop believing what they believe. They actually double down on their position.

And fortunately, that didn't work because I personally believe that he's actually providing a really healthy counteraction to what's been going on in the country. But there's many people who agreed with RFK. And what happens is when people agree with him and they see him being mistreated in the public, they don't stop believing what they believe. They actually double down on their position.

And they're like, you know what? Screw these people. We're just going to dogmatically believe what we believe now because you guys weren't even willing to talk to us about it. And as a result, you get dogmatism on both sides and both sides stop thinking clearly. And that's how you get tribalism and conflict. So no matter how much we disagree, we have to have dialogue.

And they're like, you know what? Screw these people. We're just going to dogmatically believe what we believe now because you guys weren't even willing to talk to us about it. And as a result, you get dogmatism on both sides and both sides stop thinking clearly. And that's how you get tribalism and conflict. So no matter how much we disagree, we have to have dialogue.

And they're like, you know what? Screw these people. We're just going to dogmatically believe what we believe now because you guys weren't even willing to talk to us about it. And as a result, you get dogmatism on both sides and both sides stop thinking clearly. And that's how you get tribalism and conflict. So no matter how much we disagree, we have to have dialogue.

That's the only way that we can actually mutually arrive at the truth. But I think many people have forgotten that and we've become so... Unaccustomed to difficult conversations that we would rather label the other side as bad people and hateful and crazy than engage with them and see, okay, what is there that they're saying that actually is a useful contribution to the discussion?

That's the only way that we can actually mutually arrive at the truth. But I think many people have forgotten that and we've become so... Unaccustomed to difficult conversations that we would rather label the other side as bad people and hateful and crazy than engage with them and see, okay, what is there that they're saying that actually is a useful contribution to the discussion?