Speaker 1: From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
Speaker 1: riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
Speaker 1: learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
Speaker 1: production of I Heart Radio. Hello, welcome back to the show.
Speaker 1: My name is Matt. Our colleague Nol is off on
Speaker 1: an adventure that I'm sure you'll hear about soon. They
Speaker 1: call me Ben. You're joined as always with our super
Speaker 1: producer Paul Mission Controlled deconds. Most importantly, you are you,
Speaker 1: You are here, and that makes this stuff they don't
Speaker 1: want you to know. This is a bit of a
Speaker 1: grab bag episode. Let's say, let's see, Matt um, are
Speaker 1: we hearing this in one? Are you and I recording
Speaker 1: in for an episode that comes out next year? Gee?
Speaker 1: Let me think, yes, yes, this comes out. This is
Speaker 1: an early episode. Congratulations everyone listening to this. You've made
Speaker 1: it what what strange horizons a weight? Yeah? You made
Speaker 1: it past that arbitrary line in the sand that we
Speaker 1: drew between years. I think about that all the time.
Speaker 1: Either way, that calendars evolved, you know historically, like there
Speaker 1: have always been New Year's celebrations, but uh in in
Speaker 1: many ancient civilizations, the New Year was something closer to
Speaker 1: what we in the modern day would call March. And
Speaker 1: there was this just this intense, cartoonish series of events
Speaker 1: that led to January first becoming the day. So shout
Speaker 1: out to uh oh. I can't remember which pope it was,
Speaker 1: but shout out to them. I'm just the Gregorian calendars
Speaker 1: were referring to. But it is not man named Gregory.
Speaker 1: It is cartoonish that we wouldn't start the new year
Speaker 1: in the spring, when life begins again. Why not? Why
Speaker 1: why do we know, okay in the middle of winter. Okay,
Speaker 1: cool that, let's do that. Let's do that at least again.
Speaker 1: That's my that's my North American centric mind. When when
Speaker 1: I'm talking about seasons, well, you and I have talked
Speaker 1: off air before about how arbitrary the current calendar is.
Speaker 1: And we've also talked before. I can't remember whether this
Speaker 1: made it on air, but we we had some pretty
Speaker 1: great conversations about different calendars around the world. You know,
Speaker 1: it's it's it is literally a different year and a
Speaker 1: different era in various regions, various countries across this planet.
Speaker 1: We are still going to celebrate, though, who doesn't you
Speaker 1: know what I think at this point, everybody is thankful
Speaker 1: for a win. So let's all let's all moderately congratulate
Speaker 1: ourselves and let's stick together. Yeah, and it doesn't matter
Speaker 1: if you're not going to celebrate. If you live anywhere
Speaker 1: near a major city, you will hear the new year
Speaker 1: rung in by the sound of your dog whimpering somewhere
Speaker 1: in your house because all the boom booms um. Then
Speaker 1: before we jump in, yes, we've I've been listening to
Speaker 1: a lot of voicemails lately, and a lot of people
Speaker 1: reached out to us in early December, late November asking
Speaker 1: about a particular book that we mentioned on an episode
Speaker 1: past about behavioral not manipulation, weaponized psychology. Uh do we do?
Speaker 1: You remember it all? The title of that that book
Speaker 1: that we were referring to. I couldn't. I couldn't recall it.
Speaker 1: I do, I was looking at it earlier this weekend,
Speaker 1: in fact, and I hate to be the party pooper here,
Speaker 1: but I will not recommend that book on air, nor
Speaker 1: will I propagate its title. I will propose an alternative
Speaker 1: book that can give you a lot of the same
Speaker 1: information or a good primer, a good intro. It's called
Speaker 1: you say more than you Think This is a book
Speaker 1: by Janine Driver and its studies. Well, it's somewhat of
Speaker 1: a of an applied approach two using body language and
Speaker 1: a mindful way force to accomplish certain desires, goals and
Speaker 1: so on. The book you say more than you think.
Speaker 1: It centers around a seven day plan for inculcating yourself
Speaker 1: with new habits body language wise, and then sticking with them,
Speaker 1: maintaining them, and growing them. For instance, if you are
Speaker 1: listening to today's podcast and you are sitting down, do
Speaker 1: us a favor, do yourself a favor. Don't move, don't
Speaker 1: move your body, but think of your feet. Be aware
Speaker 1: of your feet. Where are they? Are they splayed out?
Speaker 1: Are they crossed maybe slightly beneath your chair? Which foot
Speaker 1: is the closest to the back of the chair, Or
Speaker 1: if they're not crossed, which direction are your feet pointing in?
Speaker 1: And what's in that direction? Things like that. They're very
Speaker 1: small things. There There are things that we don't often
Speaker 1: notice consciously unless we are trained to do so, such
Speaker 1: as you know, like if you are an FBI agent,
Speaker 1: or you're someone who conducts various types of interviews or interrogations,
Speaker 1: or your perhaps a trial lawyer, right, So that that's
Speaker 1: the book I would recommend in lieu of this. Again,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry to be a hardie pooper, but just I
Speaker 1: think you say more than you think is uh is
Speaker 1: a great and uh and a more wholesome way to
Speaker 1: to get involved with the analysis of body language. But
Speaker 1: do keep in mind, segue that many wholesome things have
Speaker 1: disturbing origins, and that's what today's show is about. It's
Speaker 1: often said that a great crime is that the origin
Speaker 1: of every great fortune, and to a degree this cliche
Speaker 1: rings true. So in this episode today, towards the very
Speaker 1: end of a very arbitrary calendar, we are diving into
Speaker 1: skeletons of some beloved or at least accepted and lauded
Speaker 1: institutions to uncover their strange, often troubled, very disturbing beginnings.
Speaker 1: UH spoiler alert conspiracy realist, this does get crazy very
Speaker 1: very quickly. Matt, how would you what would you say
Speaker 1: on a on a one to nine? Where are we
Speaker 1: at with that segue? Let's see one to nine? Hold on,
Speaker 1: let me check my okay, my legs are crisscross apple
Speaker 1: sauce looking at my screen. UM, I would say that
Speaker 1: was a pretty good segue there, Ben, let's give it
Speaker 1: a seven two kinds too kind? Uh so, oh wait,
Speaker 1: this is the seven good or okay? Yeah, all right?
Speaker 1: So uh so, let's let's segue even harder here into
Speaker 1: something that I know nothing about outside of the experience
Speaker 1: of the um people around me. Uh, gynecology. Uh, it's
Speaker 1: not even something that I really have any right to
Speaker 1: talk about. But I'm just gonna tell you, and you
Speaker 1: probably already know this, hopefully, that the origins of gynecology
Speaker 1: are pretty horrific. Here are the facts, and the first
Speaker 1: thing you need to know, if you don't already, is
Speaker 1: that the origins of gynecology begin with slavery. Yes. Uh,
Speaker 1: there is a man, a man who is considered to
Speaker 1: be the father of gynecology. He is hailed in this way,
Speaker 1: and his name is James Maryon Sims. There are statues
Speaker 1: erected in this man's honor. And you know, in in
Speaker 1: overall concept, at least in the modern day, kinnecology is
Speaker 1: a tremendously helpful and fantastic thing. Overall, it, you know,
Speaker 1: enhances the health of women across the globe. However, this man, James,
Speaker 1: he practiced medicine when treating women was considered um perhaps distasteful,
Speaker 1: which is a terrible thing to even think, but it
Speaker 1: was also rarely done. He invented something called the vaginal speculum,
Speaker 1: which is a tool used for examination, a very helpful tool. Yes,
Speaker 1: Sims also pioneered surgical techniques. One one technique was to
Speaker 1: repair what's known as a vesco vaginal fistula. This was
Speaker 1: a common complication of childbirth in the nineteen century. It's
Speaker 1: when a tear occurs between the uterus and the bladder
Speaker 1: and it causes constant pain, uh, causes problems with urination. Uh.
Speaker 1: It is overall a good thing in the world that
Speaker 1: techniques exist to address this issue. But while Simms was
Speaker 1: doing this, he was conducting, as he said, Matt, he
Speaker 1: was conducting all of his experimentation. That's really what it was.
Speaker 1: It was human experimentation, was conducting it on enslaved women,
Speaker 1: and some of these people went on to be his assistance.
Speaker 1: And doubtlessly, even in this, even in this horrific, unclean origin,
Speaker 1: uh it I would say it is doubtless that his
Speaker 1: assistance probably pioneered some of the techniques that are credited
Speaker 1: to him today. Because, as you said, at the at
Speaker 1: the top of this discussion. We're dudes, so we only
Speaker 1: we're dudes. We're not O, B, G Y N. So
Speaker 1: we know this from an outsider or an intellectual rather
Speaker 1: than experiential perspective. It's incredibly misleading to characterize his experiments,
Speaker 1: these acts of cruelty as research. This. This experimentation was
Speaker 1: done without anesthesia, and he didn't like the idea of
Speaker 1: informed consent or the idea of therapeutic treatment is not
Speaker 1: something that occurs to Sims. He caused untold suffering of
Speaker 1: a great magnitude by operating under a racist notion that
Speaker 1: still persists in Western medicine today, the idea that someone
Speaker 1: based on their skin color may have a different experience
Speaker 1: with pain. Sims believed, or Sims seemed to believe, that
Speaker 1: black people did not feel pain, which which is ridiculous.
Speaker 1: And you have to look at the you have to
Speaker 1: look at the studies of modern medicine right and in
Speaker 1: in Western Europe as well as in the United States. Uh,
Speaker 1: you will see medical professionals who do not believe their
Speaker 1: patients when they're saying I have this condition, I am
Speaker 1: in tremendous pain. It echoes today. There is there is
Speaker 1: a terrible ripple effect. I just want to I want
Speaker 1: to add to that. My my wife is Cuban and
Speaker 1: very recently she has gone to the doctor on numerous
Speaker 1: occasions requesting assistance in the form of either medication or
Speaker 1: further you know, studies on her just to see what
Speaker 1: is wrong, and she has been met with essentially, take
Speaker 1: some tail and all you'll be fine, or you just
Speaker 1: need more sleep, take some melotone in you'll be fine. Um.
Speaker 1: And like, just hearing it from her and knowing what
Speaker 1: she's going through and how she's feeling, it's it's baffling
Speaker 1: to me that that is the way she is being treated.
Speaker 1: And it took several attempts basically for her to actually
Speaker 1: get help from a medical professional, and it's just very
Speaker 1: very disturbing that it continues. Yeah, you know, the worst part,
Speaker 1: Matt is this is going to be familiar to a
Speaker 1: lot of our fellow listeners today right listening to this, Uh,
Speaker 1: you may have experienced this firsthand. And I've always I've
Speaker 1: always had a problem with the the stereotype when they say, oh,
Speaker 1: you know, uh, certain people don't trust doctors, because I
Speaker 1: think that's an incorrect way to frame it. The more
Speaker 1: accurate way to frame that idea is that doctors don't
Speaker 1: trust certain people statistically. And this is not a ding
Speaker 1: on the excellent medical professionals we have listening to the
Speaker 1: show today. This is based on some fairly robust studies
Speaker 1: over time. Maybe it's an episode in the future, but
Speaker 1: we we wanted to use guidecology as just one example
Speaker 1: of something that has saved lives, undeniably saved millions of lives,
Speaker 1: but has its origins in a terrible, unforgivable thing. And
Speaker 1: this is only the beginning, right. We know German and
Speaker 1: you s companies helped the Nazis during World War Two,
Speaker 1: for example, and you can read these corporations various public
Speaker 1: statements about this, which we've talked about in the past,
Speaker 1: and there are all something along the lines of, uh,
Speaker 1: we didn't know, it was a different time, it was
Speaker 1: a subsidiary we acquired later, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. But save it,
Speaker 1: miss me with that. Guidecology is one of the most
Speaker 1: well known examples of a horrifying origin story, but it
Speaker 1: is by no means the only story of this kind.
Speaker 1: Many many great institutions that do good things for the
Speaker 1: world around us have at their hearts great crimes in
Speaker 1: their origin, and they remain active and they remain profitable
Speaker 1: in the modern day. What are we talking about, We'll
Speaker 1: tell you after a word from our sponsor. Here's where
Speaker 1: it gets crazy. Well, let's let's start with something we
Speaker 1: can all agree on, Shelley. Yes, the environment. You know,
Speaker 1: the air we breathe, the water we drink, the flora
Speaker 1: and fauna, all the things that make up lay environment. Well,
Speaker 1: it's a good thing, I think, right, It's a good
Speaker 1: thing to have around probably, Yeah, And it seems as
Speaker 1: though we humans the ones with the capacity to fully
Speaker 1: alter our surroundings and the environment, we should probably take
Speaker 1: care of it as best we can. Right. The world
Speaker 1: is our responsibility in no small part, and uh, you know,
Speaker 1: we owe it to future generations. You owe it to
Speaker 1: my son, So listen up. I'm just joking. I'm just
Speaker 1: I owe it to your daughter and your son to
Speaker 1: we all. We all owe it to each other to
Speaker 1: take care of it as as best that we can.
Speaker 1: And there are many countless groups out there, organizations and
Speaker 1: g os uh, small companies that have this as their aim.
Speaker 1: How do we best take care of the environment? And
Speaker 1: one of those groups is known as the Sierra Club.
Speaker 1: You may have heard of it, absolutely, and you know,
Speaker 1: it's so it's so weird that caring about the world
Speaker 1: around you somehow became a topic that was up for debate.
Speaker 1: It's true that that nefarious things have been conducted under
Speaker 1: the banner of environmentalism, but actually caring about the environment
Speaker 1: should not There's not a political thing about it. We
Speaker 1: need the world more than the world needs us. If
Speaker 1: every human being on the planet, We're like, what twenty
Speaker 1: something minutes into this podcast, if every human being on
Speaker 1: the planet vanished twenty five minutes into this show, the
Speaker 1: rest of the world would be fine, you know what
Speaker 1: I mean. We're really just like, we're just we should
Speaker 1: just clean up after after ourselves. If a micro cosmic
Speaker 1: example is helpful here, and don't don't worry about the
Speaker 1: politicization of all this stuff. Think about the last time
Speaker 1: you had a roommate who didn't clean up after they
Speaker 1: you know, we're in the restroom or in the kitchen.
Speaker 1: Screw them, right, that's fisticuffs about the dishes. Come on
Speaker 1: and uh. And we looked into several of these groups
Speaker 1: numerous times in the past, and we found we found various, uh,
Speaker 1: noble things. We found various unethical things because people are
Speaker 1: still people right for the most part. Uh. We learned
Speaker 1: some weird stuff about the Sierra Club. As you said, Matt,
Speaker 1: it's one of the best known environmental groups in the
Speaker 1: United States. It's very old, it's a storied institution, was
Speaker 1: founded back in eight nine two, and today it has
Speaker 1: around two million members. It has this innocent, ambitious motto
Speaker 1: that people of all creeds, nations, socio economic status, etcetera.
Speaker 1: Can get behind. It's simply this and I love it. Explore, enjoy,
Speaker 1: and protect the planet. That's cool. Captain Planet unite rings.
Speaker 1: I hate, I hate jewelry, but I would wear a
Speaker 1: ring free Captain Planet. Sure. Absolutely, Um, that's that sounds amazing. Yes,
Speaker 1: like you said, we can all get behind that. But
Speaker 1: there's there's some there's some issues, like we said, with
Speaker 1: its origins. Now, when we're talking about these groups, UM,
Speaker 1: generally we don't mean every member, right we we certainly
Speaker 1: don't mean every member of this Yerra Club. When we're
Speaker 1: talking about this, we're talking about the foundations. So very
Speaker 1: key players who were involved in any of these organizations
Speaker 1: that those are the folks were focusing on. So here's
Speaker 1: the issue with this here club. A couple of key
Speaker 1: members of this thing were known racists, is the best
Speaker 1: way to put it, I suppose. Um. And you know,
Speaker 1: when they were talking about saving the world, they aren't
Speaker 1: necessarily talking about saving it for everyone. Uh, they were
Speaker 1: talking about saving it for a very specific group of people,
Speaker 1: generally the more pasty ones. Uh, which which you can say,
Speaker 1: which I can say as the like you know, as
Speaker 1: the yeah you're right, you're right. Uh. One of the
Speaker 1: best phrases would be like virulent avowed racist. Okay. I
Speaker 1: thought you're gonna say very virulent lee white or something. Okay, cool,
Speaker 1: maybe that I mean, there's there's nothing wrong with being
Speaker 1: who you are, and you can't change the circumstances of
Speaker 1: your birth or your d NA yet. But I say
Speaker 1: that's to myself in the mirror every morning. Continue. But
Speaker 1: but some of these key members, some of these founders,
Speaker 1: were hyper racist, like beyond beyond prejudice, you know, like
Speaker 1: racist to the point where other people would say, well,
Speaker 1: I you know, I agree with racism, but we could
Speaker 1: talk about other stuff like what do you what do
Speaker 1: you think of oatmeal? And they're like, no, no, no,
Speaker 1: we're sticking with a racist thing. So she I know,
Speaker 1: I know that's unfair, but it's somewhat true. So the
Speaker 1: Sierra Club's founder, one John Muir often talked in explicit,
Speaker 1: documented terms about non white people, words that frankly we
Speaker 1: decided we're we're not going to give space to on air.
Speaker 1: In nineteen o one, he said that white people shouldn't
Speaker 1: be afraid to visit national parks because as the while,
Speaker 1: we're gonna have to paraphrase here, uh, the native population
Speaker 1: are going to be mostly dead or civilized into useless innocence. Wow,
Speaker 1: we're we're choosing not to say these words. I do
Speaker 1: want to point out one of one of his phrase,
Speaker 1: one of the phrases that he used, or terms that
Speaker 1: he used, was up until very recently, the name of
Speaker 1: a extremely large restaurant chain that you can look up
Speaker 1: if you're interested, which has since changed its name, by
Speaker 1: the way, And of course this we see a similar
Speaker 1: pattern in the world of sports right major League teams
Speaker 1: have are changing or will change their names. So this
Speaker 1: line of thinking from mure is is it unfair to
Speaker 1: hold the current the the current leaders of the Sierra
Speaker 1: Club responsible for things that happened before they were born
Speaker 1: that they could not in any way control. No, it's
Speaker 1: it's not fair in that regard. You know, you have
Speaker 1: to acknowledge that and be transparent about the institution. But
Speaker 1: the thing is, this line of thinking didn't stop with
Speaker 1: John Muir. It appeared to carry on into recent years.
Speaker 1: As recently as nineteen John Tanton, who was a WHO
Speaker 1: formerly the National Population Committee chairman of the Sierra Club asked,
Speaker 1: and this is on record, quote, what will happen when
Speaker 1: the white population goes into minority status and the groups
Speaker 1: that comprise the new coalition majorities don't share the same
Speaker 1: environmental values? I just wonder where even gets that um
Speaker 1: thinking whender where it comes from. It's very us versus them,
Speaker 1: which seems strange because of the enormous amount of cooperation
Speaker 1: inherent in saying like saving, preserving, or repairing the environment.
Speaker 1: These conservational values were often tied up. You know, we're
Speaker 1: dunking on the Sierra clip here, which it's an organization
Speaker 1: that does good work. That's the weird thing about this episode.
Speaker 1: All the organizations we're talking about, they do good stuff.
Speaker 1: But the environmentalist conservational values were often tied up in prejudicial,
Speaker 1: discriminatory beliefs that would be astounding in the modern day.
Speaker 1: And they were like, so there's environmentalism, right, uh, make
Speaker 1: national parks, try to preserve wildlife and ecosystems. But another
Speaker 1: illution that was very popular was this idea of limiting
Speaker 1: the quote unquote wrong kind of immigration. Yeah, the wrong
Speaker 1: kind of immigration. Okay, So let's unpack this a little bit.
Speaker 1: Back in the nineteen sixties, there was a popular theory
Speaker 1: amongst the Sierra Club that immigration to a large extent
Speaker 1: drives unsustainable population growth. So in one area, more humans
Speaker 1: in equals too many humans. I mean that to a
Speaker 1: rational mind. Maybe. Okay, well that does make sense. You're
Speaker 1: adding to the population. There's population growth. Sure. Um, the
Speaker 1: unsustainable part is is a bit arguable depending on the place.
Speaker 1: But you can see where the logic existed, right. Um.
Speaker 1: The problem is that the perspective shifted to a hardline
Speaker 1: against immigration pretty much at all in the nineteen eighties. Yeah. Um,
Speaker 1: And and again, like that means they're more insular, right
Speaker 1: they are. They are taking a very hard stance on
Speaker 1: population growth. Right. In general, we're going to be talking
Speaker 1: a lot about population growth in this episode, but luckily,
Speaker 1: as you know, the Sierra Club continued to mature after
Speaker 1: you know, a hundred and twelve years or something, since
Speaker 1: John Muir was in there. Um, they did seem to
Speaker 1: very much write the course here. Yeah, you're right. Yeah.
Speaker 1: In the Sierra Club announced its support for some immigration policies.
Speaker 1: It was a unanimous decision amid the group's board of directors,
Speaker 1: and it does mark a definitive break with their troubled,
Speaker 1: complicated history on immigration. However, not everyone and took it well.
Speaker 1: One response from a Sierra Club member said the following quote,
Speaker 1: This divisive present stance has no place in the purpose
Speaker 1: of the Club. To state that those voluntarily violating our
Speaker 1: laws should be rewarded with citizenship because they voluntarily came
Speaker 1: to our polluted country and must be protected as such
Speaker 1: is illogical in the scheme of environmentalism in the United States.
Speaker 1: The Club has lost my support. So in there we
Speaker 1: see in just that snapshot, in that response, we see, uh,
Speaker 1: we see the perspective of someone who prioritizes protecting the environment,
Speaker 1: does not want more people around. Right to you to
Speaker 1: your earlier statement about just the sheer math of it, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: But ultimately they're taking issue with the illegal way in
Speaker 1: which a person entered the country. Right, that's what they're
Speaker 1: saying exactly. They're not. It's kind of like how Oregon
Speaker 1: was founded as a white supremacist utopia, which is true.
Speaker 1: I hate to say it, but it's true. Uh. The
Speaker 1: thing is, the logic is not consistent across this kind
Speaker 1: of viewpoint. It's not uh, it's not keep everybody out,
Speaker 1: it's keeps some people out. Another response is even um
Speaker 1: even more explicit. Yeah, here's another quote. Like most environmental groups,
Speaker 1: the Sierra Club continues to ignore all the problems stemming
Speaker 1: from overpopulation in the United States and many other countries.
Speaker 1: This is nothing more than a call for amnesty for
Speaker 1: millions of welfare dependent, overbreeding, illegal aliens who can't speak
Speaker 1: English and don't know what condoms are. Jesus, tell us
Speaker 1: how you really feel, you know. Let here are these
Speaker 1: promi members or is this like a YouTube comments section
Speaker 1: for kind of like a YouTube comments section. Okay, I'll
Speaker 1: be honest, I I picked the hot takes. Okay, Okay,
Speaker 1: So so we just need to point out there this
Speaker 1: does not mean that these statements represent this year Club,
Speaker 1: not at all. That supporters certain supporters of this year
Speaker 1: club feel this way. Picture Smokey the Bear. Everybody from
Speaker 1: the US knows Smoky, I think everybody not in the US.
Speaker 1: We have a mascot that is dedicated to like convincing
Speaker 1: people not to set the forest on fire. That's his
Speaker 1: whole job. So picture this guy. He's great. His name
Speaker 1: is Smokey the Bear. I think in the UK it's
Speaker 1: a frog or something. But uh, pictures Smoky the Bear
Speaker 1: in the distance, just shaking his head in slow, painful disapproval. Yeah, yeah, um.
Speaker 1: And again, like the just to continue here, the comments
Speaker 1: of a member, someone who pays member status rather than
Speaker 1: a founder or you know, a board member or something
Speaker 1: like that. It's very it's very different. It's a very
Speaker 1: different thing. Um, And it doesn't hold as much weight.
Speaker 1: But it is struggling still to read that though. I
Speaker 1: think you could probably find the organization to treat people
Speaker 1: nicely and not murder. Anyone would also have comments similar
Speaker 1: to this. Oh sure, yeah, you know, I've got a
Speaker 1: great comparison here. Well, I've got let's see what you think.
Speaker 1: Tell me whether this comparison is on the level I
Speaker 1: was thinking about any large organization of people, right the
Speaker 1: leaders and the civilians, or the members of the constituents,
Speaker 1: or whatever you want to call them. I think one
Speaker 1: of the best examples of this would be senators or
Speaker 1: congress people, because some person may vote for a senator,
Speaker 1: right or a congress person, and then they may have
Speaker 1: views that this member of Congress completely disagrees with. You
Speaker 1: know what I mean. They're like, I voted for you
Speaker 1: because I like your policy on snow plows. Also, I
Speaker 1: think you should consider eugenics. The senators like, thanks for
Speaker 1: voting for me. I guess nah, No, we're good. Have
Speaker 1: a good one. The snowplow was on the way. The
Speaker 1: snowplow was on the way. So that's so. Now we've
Speaker 1: got one example from the world of medicine. We've got
Speaker 1: another example from the world of nonprofits. Right, and again
Speaker 1: both in both of these examples, there are genuinely good things,
Speaker 1: like objectively good things. Let's make it safer to be alive.
Speaker 1: That's what both of those things ultimately equate to. Right.
Speaker 1: But let's go, let's let's shift a little, or, as
Speaker 1: they say in corporate America, let's pivot to the world
Speaker 1: of academia. Out Ah, We're gonna find some more synergies here. Yes, yes, yes,
Speaker 1: it's it's our wheelhouse. Oh gosh, uh people, we probably
Speaker 1: mentioned it before, but for for years, um, Matt and
Speaker 1: I have been like compiling and collecting these various corporate
Speaker 1: corporate terms. Uh, what were some of your favorites if
Speaker 1: we just stopped for a second and just talk about this.
Speaker 1: I love cad I love when people say cadence. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, I've actually that comes up a lot with
Speaker 1: us because we talked about episode count and when it
Speaker 1: comes out all the time. So we talked about, you know,
Speaker 1: it feels like a good cadence, Uh, to have Tuesday
Speaker 1: and Thursday or whatever. Oh, and signal signal is a
Speaker 1: relatively newer one. It's like we have signaled that blah
Speaker 1: blah blah. Oh god, I've been using that a lot too.
Speaker 1: It goes around, man, it goes around. Don't beat yourself up.
Speaker 1: The other one, the one that still mist advised me, though,
Speaker 1: is some wear along the line. In the past few years,
Speaker 1: a specific kind of question just became an ask. Mmm,
Speaker 1: that's a big ask, a big big ask. Yeah, gez,
Speaker 1: well let's yeah, well, speaking of let's get into academia,
Speaker 1: because my vocabulary certainly stems in the beginning from stem
Speaker 1: but from my my education, that's where it begins. And
Speaker 1: it was further when I went to college. College is
Speaker 1: a fantastic thing in my opinion, and it should be
Speaker 1: available to every human being on the planet, if you know,
Speaker 1: however possible, especially if you live in the United States,
Speaker 1: it should be. It should be paid for by the government.
Speaker 1: I think, oh, oh man, hot take sorry, don't get
Speaker 1: mad at me. I think that would be smart if
Speaker 1: we pulled our money and sent all of our you know,
Speaker 1: younger kids to college. I think they'll be smart. I
Speaker 1: would say, you know, I'm with you there. I would
Speaker 1: take it a little further. I would say a higher
Speaker 1: education in general is a good thing because you know,
Speaker 1: look for the past decade or so, more than the
Speaker 1: past decade, there there has been this um narrative perpetrated
Speaker 1: on the American people which says that one must attend
Speaker 1: a university, one must attend to college, and that that
Speaker 1: is simply not true. We have a great need for
Speaker 1: the trades we have in that and that is absolutely
Speaker 1: higher education. You know what I think we're I think
Speaker 1: we're thinking about it incorrectly. I think the trades should
Speaker 1: be college is a part of a college, like it
Speaker 1: should be seen as an equal pursuit um because if
Speaker 1: you could become a master of you can become a
Speaker 1: master of really anything. And like you said, those trades
Speaker 1: are highly necessary and needed right now, Um, we just
Speaker 1: need to think about them as though it is truly
Speaker 1: higher education and something to be lauded. Yeah, absolutely agreed.
Speaker 1: And with that being said, let's visit the Ivory Tower.
Speaker 1: Let's travel, you know what, Let's go to Georgetown University
Speaker 1: specifically is one of the country's most um well known,
Speaker 1: prestigious centers of higher learning. This is a place where
Speaker 1: if you if you attend there, you have massive advantages
Speaker 1: after your education, simply because of the name, the networking,
Speaker 1: the association with this institution, the family members that probably
Speaker 1: went there, perhaps yeah, perhaps probably. Well, I mean they're
Speaker 1: definitely legacy hires. And and it's a difficult school to
Speaker 1: get into. It has very high standards. Not for nothing
Speaker 1: is it considered a world class institution today. It's no
Speaker 1: for churning out students, shooting them straight from the lecture
Speaker 1: hall to some of the highest positions in the world
Speaker 1: of nonprofits and Wall Street private industries. The US government.
Speaker 1: If it were a business, then we could say that
Speaker 1: business is booming. And and you're right, Matt. Many of
Speaker 1: these alumni go on to send their kids to Georgetown,
Speaker 1: or they participate in the feedback loop and they keep
Speaker 1: the money in the influence spinning in a circular fashion.
Speaker 1: They donate large amounts of money, or they assist with
Speaker 1: construction for the school. Things are looking pretty great for Georgetown.
Speaker 1: You oh, yeah, they are. I'm just gonna put forward
Speaker 1: here that you know, all those donations we're talking about
Speaker 1: probably have a lot to do with why the kids
Speaker 1: get in. That's my opinion. Anyway, moving on, Um, the
Speaker 1: thing is Georgetown University. This thing wasn't always an organization
Speaker 1: of this high esteem. It was built. Had to be created.
Speaker 1: It had to um do good and and have students
Speaker 1: who were successful to have that reputation to build the reputation.
Speaker 1: Here's the deal. The school didn't have a bunch of money,
Speaker 1: and it didn't have it was lacking a lot of things,
Speaker 1: and it almost got shut down in eighteen thirty eight.
Speaker 1: Like we said, it's been around for a long time.
Speaker 1: And you know, let's say you're a university in college,
Speaker 1: what do you do to get extra funds, have some
Speaker 1: kind of fundraiser, you know, call up those alumni and say, hey,
Speaker 1: I know you're you're in Congress now, would be great
Speaker 1: to get a little something something from the university for
Speaker 1: the generations next. Um. Well, what Georgetown University unfortunately did
Speaker 1: in eighteen thirty eight when they were in trouble is
Speaker 1: they sold human beings to stay afloat. So Georgetown was
Speaker 1: founded in January of seventeen eighty nine, and thin the
Speaker 1: road to success was rocky for the institution. They did
Speaker 1: participate in the slave trade, and they did it more
Speaker 1: than once. It wasn't just eighteen thirty eight. We're on
Speaker 1: such a here's where it gets worse mission today. Man.
Speaker 1: Uh So, they had conducted individual slave trade transactions before.
Speaker 1: And it turns out that more than a dozen universities,
Speaker 1: including Ivy League players like Harvard and Columbia, have publicly
Speaker 1: recognized their ties to slavery and to the slave trade.
Speaker 1: But the eight transaction from the people who are running Georgetown,
Speaker 1: it stands out due to the sheer number of human
Speaker 1: beings involved. Ben, did did you mention already that the
Speaker 1: the group the Jesuits helped out in this pursuit. Oh no, yes,
Speaker 1: very good point, speaking of another institution with some skeleton
Speaker 1: in the closet. Yes, Uh, the the Jesuit Order ran
Speaker 1: Georgetown at the time of this transaction or this crime,
Speaker 1: and uh, they were instrumental in in the in the
Speaker 1: a series of events. And just so you know, we
Speaker 1: have a whole episode on this group the Jesuits called
Speaker 1: the Jesuits Fact and fiction. You can find it, I
Speaker 1: believe in many places. It came out a long time
Speaker 1: ago in Oh goodness. So so you may have to, uh,
Speaker 1: you may have to wait for the classic to come
Speaker 1: out if you're an Apple podcast only listener, but otherwise
Speaker 1: you can find it on other podcast outlets like I
Speaker 1: Heart Radios app. Okay, all right, it didn't mean to
Speaker 1: derailists there, no, no, no, it was perfect. I have
Speaker 1: just that I have been awe. I think you win
Speaker 1: this the if if I did if I did a
Speaker 1: seven on a segue, you, my friend just did an
Speaker 1: eight point five on the on the mentions on the callouts. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so so we are you know, we do want to
Speaker 1: be honest with you, folks. We're working to inject a
Speaker 1: little bit of levity in in this episode because these
Speaker 1: are truly, um, these are unclean things. So here's what
Speaker 1: happens in uh desperate bid to survive and become the
Speaker 1: amazing institution it is today. Georgetown sold off two hundred
Speaker 1: and seventy two people in eighteen thirty eight. They shipped
Speaker 1: these people to the Deep South. They can signed them
Speaker 1: to a life of horror on plantations in Cotton Country.
Speaker 1: And the thing is that George out in this time,
Speaker 1: slavery and scholarship were inextricably linked. Yeah it was. It
Speaker 1: wasn't just selling the slaves, it was then using slaves
Speaker 1: to make money, um, and then using that money to
Speaker 1: make the institute just function on a regular basis. Were
Speaker 1: they relied on these Jesuit plantations, and most a lot
Speaker 1: of them were in Maryland. They these things would finance
Speaker 1: everything in the operations. It's so weird. There were even
Speaker 1: people at Georgetown who were working with Georgetown who quote
Speaker 1: unquote donated slaves to this pursuit. And this eight transaction
Speaker 1: netted the college more than a little more than three
Speaker 1: million dollars in today's time. So this was massively profitable.
Speaker 1: You know what you're thinking. The people doing this are
Speaker 1: members of a spiritual order one that believes in good
Speaker 1: and noble things. So surely some priests objected, right, that's correct. Fortunately, yes,
Speaker 1: some priests did object vocally, vociferous lee, and they tried
Speaker 1: their best to prevent the sale of human beings. That
Speaker 1: sounds good to hear until you understand why they had
Speaker 1: a problem with it. Exactly, it's not quite what you think. Yeah,
Speaker 1: please join me in throwing up in your mouth a
Speaker 1: little bit as we go through this. They weren't objecting
Speaker 1: to the physical dangers they were putting these people in
Speaker 1: by you know, trading them to force them to go
Speaker 1: and work. They weren't even objecting to the concept of
Speaker 1: selling human beings at all. What they were worried about
Speaker 1: was religion. They were worried about the Southern owners of
Speaker 1: these plantations forcing the slaves, the people that they were selling,
Speaker 1: to practice Protestantism instead of Catholicism, because that would have
Speaker 1: been really, really bad. Yeah, that was the line. You know.
Speaker 1: One thing, one fantastic thing that Georgetown has done, however,
Speaker 1: is to acknowledge and address this and study this and
Speaker 1: learn from it. There's in a story at Georgetown named
Speaker 1: Adam Rothman who noted, quote the university itself owes its
Speaker 1: existence to this history, and Georgetown has been taking steps
Speaker 1: to evolved. In just last year, two years ago now,
Speaker 1: the college announced it would launch a new fundraising effort
Speaker 1: to assist the living descendants of the two hundred and
Speaker 1: seventy two enslaved people who were sold by the school's founders,
Speaker 1: which I think is you know, um, I think that
Speaker 1: speaks highly to the institution. Yeah, it really does it
Speaker 1: some of them. It is so counterintuitive when you think
Speaker 1: about it, because you hear fundraising effort. Oh, they're going
Speaker 1: to raise other people's money to pay for their thing
Speaker 1: that they did. But you know, it is a it
Speaker 1: is a college, and it does cost a lot of
Speaker 1: money for for one of these things to functions. So
Speaker 1: you can't just pull all of the money out unless
Speaker 1: you're going to risk closing the school down or forcing
Speaker 1: it to shut down for a bit. But goodness, it's
Speaker 1: something like that just gives me mixed feelings, I suppose.
Speaker 1: But the here's the great thing. It Georgetown changed its
Speaker 1: tune and a lot of this was occurring because of
Speaker 1: internal pressure from students they are educating, which is actually
Speaker 1: a great It's a fantastic sign right, that the organization itself,
Speaker 1: uh maybe is evolving alongside its students. Yeah, the the
Speaker 1: students George Sound voted six six months before that announcement.
Speaker 1: In twenty nineteen, the students Georgetown voted to institute a
Speaker 1: twenty seven dollar and twenty cents student fee that would
Speaker 1: go entirely to supporting the descendants of the victims of
Speaker 1: this crime. And honestly, it is it is an amazing step.
Speaker 1: I I know it's there's no way you can change
Speaker 1: the past, but this is an important step in the
Speaker 1: right direction. So we have some light at the end
Speaker 1: of the tunnel with Georgetown. Right, We've explored medicine, we've
Speaker 1: explored the environment, we've explored academia. Now we're gonna pause
Speaker 1: for word from our sponsor and we'll return with one
Speaker 1: more And it is a doozy and we're back. Hey.
Speaker 1: Remember at the top of this episode when I mentioned
Speaker 1: we're going to talk about populo control again. Well we're here.
Speaker 1: Let's let's introduce a little organization called Planned Parenthood. You
Speaker 1: know what you've heard of it. Regardless of your personal values,
Speaker 1: your personal beliefs, you are familiar in some way with
Speaker 1: this organization. It was founded by Margaret Sanger, who opened
Speaker 1: her first birth control clinic in nineteen sixteen. Then she
Speaker 1: went on to form the American Birth Control League in
Speaker 1: nineteen twenty one. In ninety two, the name was changed
Speaker 1: to Planned Parenthood. Today, the organization is active in some
Speaker 1: capacity in multiple countries. It operates over six hundred health
Speaker 1: clinics through its affiliate network in the US alone. It's
Speaker 1: best known, of course, for reproductive health services for sex
Speaker 1: ed sexual education. It is the largest single provider of
Speaker 1: these services in the US, and it also works to
Speaker 1: prevent the spread of disease. It also offers cancer screens.
Speaker 1: It is for many people, a life saving institution. Make
Speaker 1: no mistake, this organization has done so much good in
Speaker 1: the world. It truly has. And if you cannot acknowledge
Speaker 1: that or see that, there's you you. I urge you
Speaker 1: to re examine or rethink the good parts, because there
Speaker 1: truly has been great things that this this organization has done.
Speaker 1: Pretty cool. Not to have cancer, that's one, well, yeah,
Speaker 1: And and just reproductive health in general, for for women
Speaker 1: and to be able to take control of their lives
Speaker 1: and their bodies. This, I mean, this is this institution
Speaker 1: is instrumental in just empowering women. Yeah, that's objectively true.
Speaker 1: But the thing about this life saving institution is that
Speaker 1: the fact wounder I didn't want to save everybody's life. Uh,
Speaker 1: Sanger wanted to save the right kind of lives as
Speaker 1: she saw it, because she was a eugenicist. Yes, eugenics
Speaker 1: was this discipline, I would say, from back in the day,
Speaker 1: but unfortunately it still exists in um. It was championed
Speaker 1: by a lot of people, prominent people, scientists who existed
Speaker 1: in the world, who were at the tops of their fields. Um.
Speaker 1: It is now widely debunked. But it promoted good breeding.
Speaker 1: This is in quotes good breeding and aimed to prevent
Speaker 1: poor breeding. Now good and poor breeding. That sounds a
Speaker 1: little subjective. That's because it is. Yeah, that's the thing.
Speaker 1: It's not. It's not a good scientific basis for eugenics
Speaker 1: as described desire and practiced by h by people in
Speaker 1: Singer's time. Singer like, the basic idea is that the
Speaker 1: overall human species can be improved through encouraging reproduction in
Speaker 1: people with traits like well, to their to their mind,
Speaker 1: it was stuff like intelligence, hard work, and cleanliness. They
Speaker 1: we don't have a full scientific understanding of intelligence and
Speaker 1: hard work and cleanliness are pretty much opinions, pretty much opinions.
Speaker 1: So the the most terrifying example of eugenics motivated crimes
Speaker 1: our acts of genocide, that that is, that is one
Speaker 1: ultimate destination for that line of thinking. Saner thought that
Speaker 1: poverty and what she described as unwanted nous where the
Speaker 1: main reasons children might grow up to be in some
Speaker 1: way there, her opinion, morally or physically defective. And so
Speaker 1: Singer came up with a solution. There was an idea
Speaker 1: where if someone exhibited birth defects of one kind or another,
Speaker 1: Singer would advocate that they be sent away literally sent
Speaker 1: away to a farm somewhere very very far away and
Speaker 1: segregating from the rest of the population to make sure
Speaker 1: that they are unable to even physically have relations with someone.
Speaker 1: And therefore children, um, and if they were going to
Speaker 1: mingle within all the other people in society, they would
Speaker 1: need to be sterilized. Right, Yeah, So what what is
Speaker 1: a defect? To Singer? A defect, it could be anything, uh,
Speaker 1: a physical deformity, even if it's one that is not
Speaker 1: genetically reproducible, right, a physical deformity or a perceived lack
Speaker 1: of moral fiber, whatever the hell that is. So there
Speaker 1: was huge potential for people to be carded off just
Speaker 1: because their behavior did not fit into social norms of
Speaker 1: the time. This bit of history had a dubious moment
Speaker 1: in the spotlight when the politician Ben Carson claimed that
Speaker 1: Singer was racist in part of a larger attack on
Speaker 1: planned parenthood to support Carson's aim of making abortion illegal
Speaker 1: in the United States. So, if you check with primary sources,
Speaker 1: by which we mean things written by Singer herself about
Speaker 1: her views, her attitudes on race are doubtlessly problematic and
Speaker 1: paternalistic today, but at the time they might have been
Speaker 1: seen as somewhat progressive. For example, in n she wrote
Speaker 1: that all women, regardless of their ostensible race, should have
Speaker 1: a voice in how many children they have. I feel
Speaker 1: like there's a very reasonable thing, right Like, if you're
Speaker 1: if you're if you're listening, and you have or you
Speaker 1: plan to have children, then doesn't it feel like the
Speaker 1: number of children you have should be kind of up
Speaker 1: to you. Yeah? Absolutely, uh, yeah, we're mentioning some things
Speaker 1: that Margaret Singer said. There are lots of places you
Speaker 1: can go online to do further research. I would recommend
Speaker 1: a an opinion piece from USA Today. It is called
Speaker 1: removed statuses of Margaret Singer, Planned Parenthood founder tied to
Speaker 1: eugenics and racism. Again, this is an opinion piece on
Speaker 1: USA Today, so keep that in mind if you do
Speaker 1: choose to read it. What I would recommend is look
Speaker 1: at the supporting links that are in the article, because
Speaker 1: that is the kind of thing that Ben is referring
Speaker 1: to here. These are actual words that you can find
Speaker 1: that we're spoken by Margaret Singer. Yeah, and this with this,
Speaker 1: we're drawing our episode to a close. We have just
Speaker 1: scratched the tip of the iceberg here. And again there's
Speaker 1: a dilemma. The conundrum is this the following the institutions,
Speaker 1: Every institution that we have mentioned in today's show has
Speaker 1: inarguably objectively done awesome, amazing things for the world and
Speaker 1: the people within it today, and we can't we cannot
Speaker 1: discount this work. Uh This, this tremendously good work for
Speaker 1: the world. But we also cannot be blind to the
Speaker 1: to the origins of some of these movements, and we
Speaker 1: know that there are many many more out there. We
Speaker 1: would like to hear from you, uh in in our
Speaker 1: examples today the institutions have all made or attempted to
Speaker 1: make amends for their past. But what other stories are
Speaker 1: out there? What are what are some more strange, disturbing
Speaker 1: origin stories that you're aware of. What would you like
Speaker 1: to share with our fellow listeners? Let us know. You
Speaker 1: can find us on the internet where on Facebook, We're
Speaker 1: on Instagram, We're on Twitter. We like to recommend here's
Speaker 1: where it gets crazy, where you can hang out, see
Speaker 1: some very weird stuff, see some news. It's been rated
Speaker 1: uh the best page on the internet. Uh, five times
Speaker 1: in a row by us arbitrarily at the end of
Speaker 1: some of our shows. Yeah, definitely not Forbes magazine. They
Speaker 1: had nothing to do with it. Um I Before you do,
Speaker 1: I want to recommend one more, one more piece to read.
Speaker 1: Just I'm so sorry we didn't get to spend a
Speaker 1: lot of time on Margaret Sanger. I want to recommend
Speaker 1: a piece from the Atlantic called Abortions of Racial Gap.
Speaker 1: This is another just important piece of information that you
Speaker 1: could add into the puzzle that is your mind when
Speaker 1: thinking about all of this stuff. It's worth it. Check
Speaker 1: it out. If you don't want to find us on
Speaker 1: social media, because that's not your thing. You can always
Speaker 1: give us a call. Our number is one eight three
Speaker 1: three st d w y t K. Leave a message.
Speaker 1: It may go into one of our listener mail episodes.
Speaker 1: Please let us know what you'd like to be called,
Speaker 1: as well as if you give us permission to use
Speaker 1: your voice on the show, that would be fantastic. And
Speaker 1: do know and be aware if you call in, the
Speaker 1: number from which you call gets logged, so I can
Speaker 1: see it, Ben can see it. We can see you're
Speaker 1: the number that you call in from. If you wish
Speaker 1: to obfuskate that you can, you know, use a different number,
Speaker 1: like a Google Voice number or something like that. Otherwise
Speaker 1: you might get a call back on yourself from me.
Speaker 1: So good luck to you somewhat ominous there. Man. Well,
Speaker 1: if you get a call for me, it's like it's
Speaker 1: a game over. Man, we're gonna talk. So, if you
Speaker 1: don't care for social media, if you don't care for telephones,
Speaker 1: but you have a story you need to share, or
Speaker 1: even better, a suggestion for a topic we can cover
Speaker 1: in the future, there's always one other way to contact us.
Speaker 1: It is our good old fashioned email address where we
Speaker 1: are conspiracy at I heart radio dot com. Stuff they
Speaker 1: don't Want You to Know is a production of I
Speaker 1: heart Radio. For more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit
Speaker 1: the i heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
Speaker 1: listen to your favorite shows.