Video summary
Ben Shapiro critiques *Scientific American*'s decision to endorse Kamala Harris, arguing that while their stated goals of supporting science and health are noble, the endorsement ultimately undermines the publication's credibility rather than enhancing it. He contends that political endorsements do not significantly shift voter opinions but instead cause a loss of public trust in scientific institutions like *Nature*, which previously endorsed Joe Biden without changing views on candidates yet damaging its reputation among scientists. Shapiro highlights specific instances where he believes science has been politicized to dangerous ends, such as the lack of data supporting transgender surgery for minors and contradictory health guidelines issued during the pandemic regarding Black Lives Matter protests versus grocery shopping safety. He asserts that these political maneuvers have created a "dam" against public skepticism that is easily breached; once an institution makes reactionary claims on controversial topics like food or medicine, their entire body of work becomes suspect to the public. Shapiro introduces the concept of *ultracrepidarianism*—speaking beyond one's area of expertise—to describe how editors stepping into political commentary overstep their bounds as scientists. He draws a parallel between this behavior and celebrities entering unrelated fields, noting that just as Taylor Swift is not expected to be an expert on nuclear physics, scientific journals should remain neutral rather than acting as partisan armaments in the election cycle. The transcript describes the current 2024 election season as chaotic and poorly written by "God," comparing it to a rushed eighth season of *Game of Thrones* where plotlines shift erratically between assassination attempts and political drama without logical consistency. This rapid, unpredictable nature of modern politics makes it difficult for institutions or individuals to maintain stable positions or credibility when they attempt to influence the outcome directly through endorsements. To help audiences survive the intense final weeks of the election with their sanity intact, Shapiro advises against treating every news event as a definitive turning point that will decide the entire race. He points out how public sentiment often swings wildly after debates, such as following Donald Trump's poor performance or Kamala Harris's coherent responses, only to eventually settle back into a "dead heat" status quo unless a major structural change occurs. Furthermore, he strongly warns against adopting cataclysmic rhetoric that suggests the world will end if one political candidate is elected, labeling this narrative as a lie told by both sides for cheap political gain and pandering. He argues that such extreme language not only escalates tensions but also implies that half of the country consists of evil people who wish to destroy it, thereby giving up on future elections in 2028 or beyond simply because one does not win this specific cycle. Shapiro identifies two primary toxic elements currently plaguing American politics: the "last election" crisis mentality and *emotivism*. The former involves politicians like Joe Biden wearing MAGA hats to charm crowds while simultaneously telling voters that their opponent is an existential threat, revealing a disconnect between public performance and genuine belief; Shapiro notes this hypocrisy suggests leaders do not actually believe they are fighting for survival. The second element, derived from Alastair McIntyre's philosophy of emotivism, involves attributing malicious motives—such as hatred or desire to kill—to political opponents rather than engaging with legitimate policy disagreements like foreign tax or trade issues. While acknowledging that some cases involve genuine malice, Shapiro argues this approach is not the underlying motive for most voters who simply choose between candidates they trust without deep ideological analysis of every opponent's character. The discussion concludes by emphasizing that these inflammatory tactics are counterproductive and patronizing, similar to how extreme climate activists exaggerate timelines to motivate action despite scientific reality being more nuanced. Shapiro asserts that there will be future elections in 2028 regardless of the outcome this year, urging people not to despair if their preferred candidate loses or if they feel compelled to vote against a deeply flawed opponent due to fear-mongering rhetoric. He criticizes the practice of telling voters that missing an election means giving up on hope entirely, stating instead that political classes routinely lie about the stakes being so high that only one outcome is survivable. Ultimately, he calls for a return to rational discourse where disagreements are treated as policy differences rather than existential battles between good and evil, ensuring that citizens remain engaged in democracy without succumbing to manufactured crises or emotional manipulation designed solely for electoral advantage.
Read the full video transcript
a Scientific American article said vote
for CA Harris to support science health
and the environment camela Harris has
plans to improve health boosts the
economy and mitigate climate change
Donald Trump has threats and a dangerous
record what do you think about the
editors of Scientific American endorsing
a candidate for the second time on on
the 179 years well I mean I would say
that they're not actually adding to
their own credibility I mean the data
that I've seen suggests that not a lot
of Voters are going to shift their
Viewpoint based on the grand input of
Scientific American but a lot of people
are going to shift what they think of
Scientific American because of that
input and science overall yes the the
politicization of science has been one
of the worst developments of my adult
lifetime the the attempt to turn science
into a tool on behalf of certain
political interests has been truly bad
and here's where I'll give a couple
examples right because I don't want to
just throw a big allegation out there
the the attempt to say transm medicine
is medicine uh that that that the that
there are vast studies suggesting that
transgender surgery is going to
alleviate mental health conditions among
wide spectrums of the population a
proposition supported by virtually no
data and that it should be applied to
minors like that that that is a
political move the the attempt to
suggest during covid that black lives
matter what if you went out and rioted
for black lives matter that you could be
out there like there there were full-on
Public Health statements that you being
in a giant crowd in the middle of the
street for for George Floyd apparently
it was a woke virus didn't affect you
but if you went to the grocery store
obviously you had to gear up like you
were walking into you know postnuclear
Fukushima that sort of the
politicization of Science in those sorts
of directions has been horrifying and
what it's done is it's undermined
everything scientific so again
everything being reactionary the
reaction isn't wow that's crazy that
they would say that but you know what
what they're saying about you what they
say about you know this particular food
and its effect on health that might
still be true it was like well [ __ ]
those guys like they if they said that
this is wrong then everything they say
is wrong blanket coverage exactly and
and you see that again in a wide variety
of of sort of arena in in public life
that institutions it's it's very hard to
earn credibility for an institution and
it's incredibly easy to blow it up it
really is like all it takes a couple of
a couple of giant cracks in your in the
in the dam that holds back to public
skepticism and Bam it's gone the uh
study that you were referring to in 2020
nature endorsed Joe Biden in the US
presidential election a survey found
that viewing the endorsement did not
change people's views of the candidates
but caused some to lose confidence in
nature and in US scientists generally
and that was published in nature right
right and then they did it again and and
scientific Americans did it again it's
like what what what are you doing what
are you doing and it's it that that
Temptation the word for it that I like
to it's it's not my word it's just a
great word that I wish would drop into
common usage is ultracrepidarianism
which is speaking well outside your
purview of of expertise right so I'm not
a nuclear physicist and so everything I
say about nuclear physics should be
taken with a giant Iceberg chunk of salt
uh and whenever the editors of
Scientific American decide to speak
about about politics that is like case
in point of ultracrepidarianism them
speaking well outside their their view
their their perview well you've got on
one end Taylor Swift and on the other
end Scientific American is this the
period now of the election where all of
the armaments are going to be sort of
rallied in an attempt to try and push
for whichever uh candidate the side
wants it's going to be insane the the
next the next 50 days are going to be
totally out out there I mean I I can't
even like 70 days ago we had a different
nominee what the hell man I mean like
this thing is Shifting so fast that if
you think that we've seen the last event
in this election cycle what I've said is
that God's writing this year is just
awful I mean it's like it's like season
8 of Game of Thrones like like they
spend all this time building up and like
developing characters and it takes you
like a year to get from King's Landing
to the wall and then season 8 they're
like you know what [ __ ] it the timeline
all after yeah exactly you're getting on
that dragon and you're up there in five
minutes and you're just zooming back and
forth and none of the plotting makes
sense and it's like if if it's on the
board then I mean God's going back to
his old story lines now I mean like
we've had two assassination attempts in
the last eight weeks like we're now
getting like repeats in the story line
yeah so I don't know he's he's the the
wrong people are in charge of the
writer's room this is this is a badly
written season of Trump trump season 8
is not good what would you uh say to
people who want to try and survive with
their sanity intact the next month and a
half um don't take every bump in the
road as though it's the grade of the the
grade of the road uh you know a bump is
not a great you know like just like
weather is not climate a bump is not a
great if if there if something happen
happens the tendency is going to be for
things to settle back into status quo
anti unless it's a major me so don't
follow every single thing that happens
as though this is going to be the make
or break point of the election this is
the turning point this is where
everything falls apart so there's a
tendency to do that after the debate
where Trump really didn't perform well
and commo was able to Spring to string
sentences together in somewhat coherent
fashion um and the and everyone's oh my
God the election's over oh it's over and
it's like well no it'll settle back into
what it was which is pretty much a dead
heat um yeah so take a breath uh and and
then also yeah spend some time not
watching politics and I say this is
somebody who benefits from you watching
politics like watch half of my show or
the whole show and then and then go
outside and do something else don't get
drawn into the idea that that you know
if you miss a day then it's it's the end
of the world and and also I I've said
this to both sides believe it or not
this is not the the last election please
stop with this [ __ ] it's not true and
anybody who says that to is lying
cataclysmic language it's it's it's just
not true and it's worse it makes the
country a worst place it makes the
country a very very bad place when you
keep saying over and over and over that
if your political opponent is elected
the world will end then first of all
you're ramping up the rhetoric such that
assassination attempts do become more
common but more importantly you're
basically saying that half the country
is so evil that they want the country to
end and that there will be no more
elections so if you don't actually do
something in this election then you may
as well give up hope you may as well
Despair and it's not true the political
class who are telling you this are lying
to you they are lying and there are
people in my industry who do this
routinely and it's gross this is not the
last election 2020 was not the the last
election 2016 was not the last election
there will be another election in 2028
it may not go the way we want in 2024 I
really really hope that it does and then
you know what you're going to get back
on the horse and you're going to go try
because if you don't then you will lose
like it's it's just it's so it's so
obnoxious and it's and it's this sort of
kind of charged this sort of charged
language which is done for cheap
political gain yeah it's very it's very
um it's sort of pandering in a strange
way and it it's uh it reminds me of the
rhetoric that climate activist the most
extreme sort of totally annoying climate
activists use where they say we have
this tiny amount of time or else the
world's going to end and everything and
you go well I know that that's not the
case and I know that the reason that
you're using this inflammatory language
is because you think it's so important
it and people are listening so little
that if you overcompensate by driving
the car unbelievably quickly people go
oh I maybe need to listen to this and
it's kind of the same if we overg what's
actually happening it will motivate
people in order to go out vote against
or for whoever it is that we're talking
about but it's just patronizing it it
comes across as being very patronizing
the two worst elements of our politics
right now are that the idea that like oh
my God it's the last election if we
don't vote right now it's by the way
they're all lying they're all lying
right and left when they say this
they're lying Hey Joe Biden the other
day he goes to an event in Pennsylvania
and at this event he puts on a Maga hat
right it's kind of a joke right there's
like a bunch of firefighters there
they're big Trump fans and he has kind
of a Charming joke puts on the magga hat
and I thought that's Charming that's
nice and then I thought you know what's
kind of crazy about that is that like
he's going to go on TV tomorrow and he's
going to say that Donald Trump is a deep
and abiding threat to the soul of the
country he obviously doesn't believe
that because if he actually believed
that he wouldn't put on that hat anym
than he put on a swas hat exactly so he
doesn't believe that he's totally full
of [ __ ] and and the same thing is true
when people are like oh my God it's the
the last election so that's one tendency
that I hate is the last election crisis
point the other thing that I hate is
again emotivism which is a term that's
used by Alistair McIntyre uh not coined
by him but used by him which is
basically the the attribution of motive
to people in lie of attempting to
explain their logic so what you will do
is you will say the real reason that
they're doing X the real reason they say
this is because they hate you and they
want you to die right the real reason
they're doing this is because they
despise you they despise you and they
desp and so I have a right to despise
them because they despise you it's not
just a legit disagreement about foreign
policy or about tax policy it's they
hate you and they want you to die and
and everything about you is is terrible
to them and so you you should hate them
right back like that is not good it's
not good for the country now are there
cases where that's true sure there are
cases where that's true but do I think
that that's like the underlying motive
of the vast majority of the American
population voting the way that's
different than you no I actually don't
think that that's I don't think people
put that much thought into how they vote
is the truth I think they get into the B
they get into the voting booth and
they're like okay I got this schmuck and
I got this person I got this other
schmuck and like okay fine so I'll vote
for one the Schmucks like okay I have to
trust really is everything when it comes
to supplements a lot of Brands may say
that they're top quality but few can
actually prove it which is why I
partnered with momentus they make the
highest quality supplements on the
planet they're literally unparalleled
when it comes to rigorous third party
testing what you read on the label is
what's in the product and absolutely
nothing else three of the products that
I use to support my brain body and sleep
are Omega-3 tonat Al and magnesium l38
to support cognitive performance optimal
hormone function and better sleep and Dr
Andrew hman is the scientific adviser
for momenta so if you've ever wondered
what supplements he would create what he
really uses himself this is the answer
best of all they ship internationally
and offer a 30-day money back guarantee
so if you're not sure you can buy them
try them for 29 days and if you do not
like them they will give you your money
back right now you can head to the link
in the description below or go to live
mous.com wisdom use the code modern
wisdom checkout to get 20% of everything
sitewide that's L IV M ENT us.com wisdom
and modern
wisdom a check out thank you thank you
very much for tuning in if you enjoyed
that clip with Ben you love the full
length 2hour long podcast which you can
watch right
here go on tap it