Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Election 2024

Vivek Ramaswamy Thinks 'Wokeness Is a Cultural Cancer'

Why the businessman launched a long shot campaign for the presidency.

John Stossel | 5.17.2023 12:30 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
John Stossel is seen next to books written by Vivek Ramaswamy | Stossel TV
(Stossel TV)

Entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy is obviously a long shot presidential candidate, but he's refreshing. Unlike most politicians, he speaks clearly and seems smart.

He probably is smart. He went to Harvard and Yale and then founded a biotech firm that creates drugs that treat prostate cancer, endometriosis, fibroids, and more.

That made me ask him, since he clearly helped people as a medical entrepreneur, why go into politics when most politicians are useless or destructive?

"I am in this race to speak truth," Ramaswamy says in my new video. "To revive our missing national identity." Most Americans, he says, don't know "we're a nation built on the rule of law, free speech and open debate, that we embrace meritocracy over grievance, that we embrace the unapologetic pursuit of excellence."

In other words, Ramaswamy is running as the "anti-woke" candidate. "Wokeness," he says, "is a cultural cancer."

I ask him about the border crisis.

"A nation built on the rule of law," he answers, "cannot tolerate somebody breaking the law as their first act of entering this country."

His parents came here legally from India. But our rules are tougher today.

"An Indian computer engineer who applied legally," I point out, "would take 20, 50, 100 years to get in."

Ramaswamy answers that there should be "'merit-based' immigration." Skilled migrants should get preference.

What would he do about Social Security and Medicare going broke?

"Democrats say we need to increase taxes. Republicans say we have to make cuts. There's a third way: restoring GDP growth…. We will grow our way out of our problems."

He'd speed growth by "abandoning the climate cult, drilling more, fracking more, burning coal unapologetically."

"Coal is really polluting," I point out.

"I don't think it's nearly as pollutive as the public narrative makes it out to be, especially with modern methods," he replies.

He embraces nuclear power. "The very people opposed to fossil fuels are mysteriously hostile to the best-known form of carbon-free energy production, which tells you what's going on." The "climate cult" rejects nuclear power, he says, because it might be "too good at addressing their made-up climate crisis."

Promoting free and open speech is one of Ramaswamy's favorite issues. After George Floyd was killed, many company CEOs issued statements supporting Black Lives Matter (BLM). Ramaswamy refused because BLM criticized what it called the "Western-prescribed nuclear family." A nuclear family is something Ramaswamy (and I) consider a good thing.

Ramaswamy's refusal to endorse BLM brought pushback from some employees. Workers who agreed with him would only tell him privately. "This culture of fear had spread across the country. It prevented people from expressing themselves in public."

Ramaswamy wants all ideas expressed, even those considered "misinformation" or "hateful." "That's part of what preserves peace in a diverse democracy."

Suppression of speech, he says, leads to more hatred and outbreaks like the riot at the Capitol.

"I don't think Jan. 6 happened because we had too much free speech," he says. "It happened because we didn't have enough."

When people don't feel they can freely say what they think, "people are left to just sort it out with sticks and stones."

Ramaswamy's new book, Capitalist Punishment, criticizes big Wall Street firms for investing your retirement funds in companies that claim to promote the environment or social justice.

I push back. "That sounds good! Americans agree that we should have a clean environment and be 'socially kind.'"

Today's Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) asset managers don't do that, says Ramaswamy. Most just advance "progressive political agendas."

Ramaswamy created his own investment firm, Strive Asset Management, which invests money in firms that simply maximize profits without promising ESG magic.

"Your fund has higher expense fees," I say, because a Forbes article claimed that.

"Drivel!" he replies. He says they write that because political insiders don't like him. "It's an ideological cartel. Defect from that orthodoxy, they will punish the defector. I refuse to stand by silently."

I'm glad Ramaswamy refuses to be silent. America needs candidates who speak freely.

COPYRIGHT 2023 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Trump’s Disregard for the Rule of Law Is at Least As Bad As Biden’s

John Stossel is the host and creator of Stossel TV.

Election 2024Vivek RamaswamyCampaigns/ElectionsElectionsPresidential CandidatesPoliticsHealth CareDrugsBiotechnologyMedicineCancerEntrepreneurshipRule of lawFree SpeechCulture WarImmigrationBorder CrossingsIndiaSocial SecurityMedicareEconomic GrowthTaxesRepublican PartyDemocratic PartyEnergy & EnvironmentFrackingCoalPollutionClimate ChangeNuclear PowerFossil FuelsCarbonGeorge FloydBlack Lives MatterFamilyMisinformationCapitol RiotWall StreetRetirementSocial JusticeProgressivesInvestmentInvestingIdeology
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (114)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

    They sharpened their teeth on Trump. Wait ‘till they a hold on this guy.

    1. Megan White   2 years ago (edited)

      I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
      🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)

      Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM

      1. LorraineMonna   2 years ago (edited)

        Google is by and by paying $27485 to $29658 consistently for taking a shot at the web from home. I have joined this action 2 months back and I have earned $31547 in my first month from this action. I can say my life is improved completely! Take a gander at it what I do.....
        For more detail visit the given link..........>>> http://Www.jobsrevenue.com

        1. LaraFrayne   2 years ago (edited)

          Easily start receiving more than $600 every single day from home in your part time. i made $18781 from this job in my spare time afte my college. easy to do job and its regular income are awesome. no skills needed to do this job all you need to know is how to copy and paste stuff online. join this today by follow details on this page.
          .
          .
          Apply Now Here———————————————->>> http://Www.Coins71.Com

    2. Anastasia Beaverhausen   2 years ago

      Because this guy is even more wrong than Dump.

      1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

        More wrong than literal hitler?

  2. Unicorn Abattoir   2 years ago

    "I am in this race to speak truth,"

    Said every politician ever.

    1. perlmonger   2 years ago

      At least he seems to recognize what the problems are, for the most part.

      1. Brandybuck   2 years ago

        But his solution remains "moar politics". Sigh.

        1. Truthfulness   2 years ago

          If it takes "moar politics" to stop a threatening ideology, so be it. We shouldn't have a society that promotes oversensitivity and pseudoscientific nonsense.

          1. Wizard4169   2 years ago

            That's... kinda dumb. What we need is a lot less politics. As long as everything is political, endless ideology wars are inevitable.

  3. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

    America needs candidates who speak freely.

    You know what other American candidate speaks freely?

    1. JohnZ   2 years ago

      John Fetterman

    2. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

      Joe Biden?

  4. MWAocdoc   2 years ago

    Although I certainly don't want to suppress free speech and I prefer the truth whenever I can convince myself that I know what the truth might be, this particular candidate is not particularly "refreshing," John. I don't find it refreshing, for example, that a smart man repeats the idea that government would be good if we can just find good officials; or that we should only let people into the country that are meritorious according to his personal opinions of merit - i.e. people who are like him. I don't find the fantasy of growing our way out of debt refreshing or the assertion that the Republicans want to make cuts to be truthful. I also doubt that Ramaswamy would be able to make any of the changes he claims or that he would find bipartisan support in either Congress or the general population for them. So - NOT "refreshing!"

    1. Jefferson's Ghost   2 years ago

      ‘”So – NOT “refreshing!”’

      I am a big fan of John Stossel, and agree with him, at least in broad strokes, far more often than not, but not in this case. Refreshing? Nope. It seems rather familiar, actually. Like most politicians, Ramaswamy would like us to believe that only he can save us.

    2. mad.casual   2 years ago

      Do you want lifelong/career politicians? Because this is how you get lifelong/career politicians!

      1. Nardz   2 years ago

        If you've read their comments before, that is precisely what eunuchs like MWAocdoc and Jefferson's Ghost want.
        They perfectly demonstrate the blind "bOtH SiDeZ" faithful that value nothing more than the status quo so they can sit on the sidelines and bitch about being "above" it all.

        1. Jefferson's Ghost   2 years ago

          mad.casual: "Do you want lifelong/career politicians? Because this is how you get lifelong/career politicians!"

          Nardz: "If you’ve read their comments before, that is precisely what eunuchs like MWAocdoc and Jefferson’s Ghost want."

          Total bullshit, Nardz. I supported term limits when I lived in CA, and would also support an amendment to apply such to Congress. Yeah, BOTH SIDES

        2. Wizard4169   2 years ago

          Yeah, the country elected an "outsider" with zero political experience. How'd that work out? Oh, right, he dismally failed to deliver on most of his promises and handed the federal government to the other side on a silver platter. I'm no fan of people who spend their entire life in politics, but I really don't think POTUS should be an entry-level job, either.

    3. JohnStossel   2 years ago

      Fair criticism!

  5. TJJ2000   2 years ago

    Yes. The cancer is a nation without a definition. Championing unrestricted [WE] identity-affiliation gangs RULE "democracy" that has the baseline goal of conquering the US Constitution for [Na]tional So[zi]al[ism].

    This guy knows what he's talking about.

  6. Jefferson's Ghost   2 years ago (edited)
  7. ricden   2 years ago

    Just because someone is "smart" at some things doesn't mean they have all of the answers. What is so "refreshing" about him? None of his ideas are new. And he talks out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to climate change. He wants to burn coal unapologetically. I may not agree with governments restrictions and plans, but I'm not dismissing the science. Move forward, alternative energy has made leaps and bounds, and no one is talking about that.

    1. Longtobefree   2 years ago

      What science are you not dismissing?
      I have yet to find any global climate warming change model that turned out to be correct.
      Can you cite one?

      1. ricden   2 years ago

        After thousands of studies, there's a consensus among top scientists in the world that humans have greatly contributed to climate change.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          You have no idea how actual science works.

          1. ricden   2 years ago

            That's right, I don't, so I believe the consensus of top scientists in the world.

            1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

              Humorously your so called "top scientists" aren't scientists at all.

              "Science is a systematic endeavor that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of ***testable*** explanations"

              Propaganda Religious con-artists is what your worshiping.

              1. ricden   2 years ago

                You're so off the mark. That's your pleasure.

                1. Truthfulness   2 years ago

                  You failed to provide a rebuttal. Your loss.

                  1. ricden   2 years ago

                    What rebuttal do I need? I am not a scientist so I choose to believe the large consensus of scientists that have determined that humans have contributed to global warming/climate change. The original deniers of global warming have moved their target. First, you said there was no global warming or climate change, and then you acknowledged (because of the accepted science) that there's warming and change, but it's not man-made. Now, you agree it's man-made (because of accepted science), but have determined that warming and climate change have benefits, and it's not as bad as reported.

                    I don't care that models have changed, the general idea is the same. These same scientists were right about the ozone layer.

                    1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

                      Or maybe the weather just changes.............. As it has F'En done for as long as anyone knows about. It doesn't get much more stupid than believing Gov-Guns against people can change the weather.

                      How about you believe what-every the F you want too; but just don't lobby for Gov-Guns to do dictating/steal for your religious faith that has ZERO substance what-so-ever.

        2. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

          You didn’t answer the question, just more ball gargling “experts”.

          1. ricden   2 years ago

            I did answer your question. I believe the consensus of the top scientists in this world. If I were to talk about religion, you'd tell me that there is no God because science can't prove that there is, but if I believe that the top scientists are saying that humans greatly contributed to climate change, then I'm dumb for believing their findings. You are demeaning me because I'm relying on the studies and consensus of others because I'm not a scientist or even smart.

            1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

              No one cares what your 'religion' is until it starts packing Gov-Guns against the people.

            2. Unicorn Abattoir   2 years ago

              I believe the consensus of the top scientists in this world.

              In other words, scientists with name recognition.

        3. JohnZ   2 years ago

          And there are just as many scientists who call it rubbish.

          1. Brandybuck   2 years ago

            Not even close. There are not "just as many scientists". A tiny fraction, sure, all outside the field of climatology, but it's a tiny fraction. Not an equal number. Get real.

            1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

              I find it hilarious you think climatology is a science.
              How about you go ask you weatherman about the end of the world?

          2. ricden   2 years ago

            Well, Vivek himself has accepted the established science that burning fossil fuels causes warming of the planet, which is not mentioned in this article.

            1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

              Established religious faith.
              That ironically has proven itself FALSE more times than predictions of the second coming of Jesus.

              1. ricden   2 years ago

                Maybe you should tell your Vivek, your candidate that.

                1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

                  Be glad too as well as any other Republican who totes the Democrats BS.

    2. perlmonger   2 years ago

      Oooooh, climate fifty center! I don't think we've seen those before.

      1. mad.casual   2 years ago

        Sub-par fifty-center no less. "By taking one side he's talking out of both sides of his mouth" *and* "Nobody is talking about alternative energy advancements"? It's like a bad ChatGPT trip.

        1. ricden   2 years ago

          No, I'm not as witty, sarcastic and "smart" as the usual crowd here, but that doesn't mean I can't form a good opinion. You, on the other hand, offer nothing but insults.

          1. Nardz   2 years ago

            https://twitter.com/ComfortablySmug/status/1658515838742167554?t=m5YY8-dV4N6EEZNDiZRyaw&s=19

            Half the country believes if you give up your stove, your car, and eat bugs, because people who take private jets to Davos told you to, it will make the weather better

            1. ricden   2 years ago

              None of that matters to me. I'm not all in on government restrictions, which I already said. There have been major advances in alternative energies, and we need to encourage that. Because of the political climate, no one talks about it.

              1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

                Funny how all these "major advances" center around using Gov-Guns against the people.

                1. ricden   2 years ago

                  Didn't say that.

                  1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

                    How do you propose to "encourage that". Lie, lie, and lie some more and when no-one buys the BS pull out the Gov-Guns against them?

                    1. ricden   2 years ago

                      Free market capitalism.

                    2. TJJ2000   2 years ago

                      Let me know when you find any in "Green Energy" 🙂

              2. mad.casual   2 years ago

                None of that matters to me.
                ...
                Because of the political climate, no one talks about it.

                See, here's where the issue goes from being "You are mistaken." to "You are mistaken, you dimwit." through no fault of anyone else's except your own.

                You say no one is talking about it. Nardz provides evidence that the statement is flatly incorrect, whether innocent mistake or actual stupidity. Rather than acknowledging the evidence, you flatly state "It doesn't matter. My unsupported opinion is correct." to which pretty much everyone except sarcasmic will recognize you're a moron if you persist, regardless of whether Nardz or myself or anyone else actually calls you a moron or not.

                1. ricden   2 years ago

                  No, there are no mainstream conversations about the success of various alternative energy projects and products. There is much talk about restrictions and the usual political rhetoric, but you really don't hear about the successes. You can parse my comments to analyze and demean me until your heart desires, but it doesn't make you look any better.

                  1. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

                    You can parse my comments to analyze and demean me until your heart desires, but it doesn’t make you look any better.

                    I’m not and don’t have to. Tesla (e.g.) simply selling cars makes your assertions of “no one talks about the advancements” self-evidently farcical no matter how I parse them.

                    1. ricden   2 years ago

                      I'm not talking about cars. I'm talking about advances in solar energy for one.

          2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

            Don't you know anything about these comments? Arguments are directed at the person, not what the person says.

            1. ricden   2 years ago

              Yeah, especially yours.

          3. mad.casual   2 years ago

            No, I’m not as witty, sarcastic and “smart” as the usual crowd here, but that doesn’t mean I can’t form a good opinion.

            It doesn't mean you can't, it just means you generally don't. In that vein, it's only an insult if your arguments are inherently personal, that is, your existence centers around Vivek talking out of both sides of his mouth. Otherwise, you were wrong or it was a bad argument or you don't understand English are all perfectly adequate explanations that aren't personal insults.

            You saying "1+1=3" is incorrect, but it's not a personal failure unless you refuse to correct it now and forever or otherwise conditionalize the statement, pointing out that 1+1 is not 3 is not an insult unless you consider 1+1=3 to be some sort of personally identifiable characteristic or behavioral axiom.

            1. ricden   2 years ago

              Aren't you a lovely human. The reason I said that he speaks from both sides of his mouth is because he says (not referenced in the above article) that he accepts the established science that the burning fossil fuels is warming the planet.

              1. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)
              2. mad.casual   2 years ago

                That's still not from both sides of his mouth. If he thinks warming is a good thing or is ambivalent about it and thinks we should burn more coal, he's speaking directly.

                Germany saying "We need more carbon free power. Nothing is more important to our future." and then saying, "We need to shut down our nuclear plants." is talking out of both sides of their mouth. Shutting down nuclear power is the exact opposite of increasing the amount of carbon-free power.

                Similarly, if Vivek says, "We should be emitting less carbon." *and* "We should burn more coal/fossil fuels." he's talking out of both sides of his mouth... assuming he's doesn't otherwise conditionalize it (e.g. burn more *and* capture more).

                1. ricden   2 years ago

                  I never heard Vivek say or have seen it written that he thought warming was good for the environment. He has said that he accepts established science that burning fossil fuels contributes to climate change. Maybe you can cite the former, and if that is true, I will retract my both sides of the mouth statement. Most of the people here jumped all over me because I believe when scientists say that humans have contributed climate change. All of you are in the minority because you don't believe the top scientists in the world. I don't need to cite anything in particular as this information is everywhere, not only on epa sites, but just about every academic institution in this country. Check Cornell for one. Again I'm against the government forcing corporations and people to change. I am 100% for free market capitalism to take care of this problem, but we need to be better educated about how we can do it. You people are all in insult mode, and you only want to listen to yourselves.

    3. Nardz   2 years ago

      The science says warmer is better for life and that carbon dioxide accounts for 0.04% of the atmosphere

      1. ricden   2 years ago

        There are some benefits to warming, but weeds, invasive plant species, and insect pests will also thrive in a warmer world. Water availability will be impacted in drier agricultural areas that need irrigation. Later on, the benefits to crops of increased carbon dioxide will be overwhelmed by the negative impacts of heat issues and drought. Another benefit might be a decrease in deaths from cold waves, but an increase in deaths attributable to climate change.

        1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

          Where will all the water go if it gets warmer?

          1. Moderation4ever   2 years ago

            It will go into the oceans, which are salt water and so much less useful to humans. Good for salt water creatures, bad for humans. Only 2.5% of water is fresh water and that water is critical to human survival.

            1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

              Banning CO2 (what plants need) is totes-cool plant positive?????
              Do you people even pay attention to the BS you follow?

            2. TryLogic   2 years ago

              I wonder, when the sun shines on the ocean, all salty like, does any unsalty water evaporate and land on parts of the world that are not ocean? I'm no scientist, but I bet that happens.

              1. Moderation4ever   2 years ago

                It does, but also is happening less. We have seen drought and reduced snow pack. This is not a zero sum game, but a problem of a shift equilibrium that results in less available fresh water.

                1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

                  Funny. Our local ski resort got record setting snow pack this last winter. I do believe your info needs to broaden it's cherry-pickings a little more. And something about record setting cold temperatures not seen since the 60s last winter. And something about the fastest global drop in temperatures being during WWII when more CO2 was being dumped than ever before.

                  Oh yeah; that's right.. Can't use those realities; got-to only use the one's that fit a pre-conceived narrative that went from global cooling, to global warming, to "well, just changing"... OMG! The weather might change!

          2. ricden   2 years ago

            I don't know, why don't you do some research.

            1. TJJ2000   2 years ago

              research --- 50 F'En years ago the research said we'd be in a dust bowl.......... Still waiting. "The research" conclusion.. Prediction is FALSE. Some *REAL* science for you *ss.

            2. mad.casual   2 years ago

              I have. The research says you literally don't know what you're talking about.

              1. ricden   2 years ago

                I'm not talking about anything. I leave it up to the experts.

                1. Ersatz   2 years ago

                  so you're making faith based arguments?

                  1. ricden   2 years ago

                    Stop playing with your food. I believe what I read. I guess you don't believe what you read.

                    1. Truthfulness   2 years ago

                      Why were the "experts" wrong with their predictions, then? What do you have to say about it?

        2. Nardz   2 years ago

          You demonstrate neurotic, poorly rationalized fantasies.

          1. ricden   2 years ago

            I don't demonstrate anything. Are you a scientist? If not, you state your OPINION of the other scientists that have differing findings from the consensus. Which scientists are the right ones to believe?????You demean my response to you, which is not a complete scientific analysis because I am not a scientist. I only offered that because you started talking about the benefits of warming. Instead of providing a counterpoint to what I said, you must feel so good about calling out my lack of intelligence.

            1. Think It Through   2 years ago

              Your fundamental, orientational flaw is that "experts" have the answers. Maybe in some areas they do -- cars keep running and planes keep flying because engineers learn from past expertise of others, and apply their brainpower and knowledge to future expertise.

              Where has this been demonstrated ever in "climate science"? Like, at all? Model after model after after model after model after prediction after prediction after prediction after prediction after prediction has been wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Consistently.

              The real expert opinion is that there is no such thing as an "expert" in climate science. Because you think there is, all of your opinions after that are meritless, in this area.

              1. ricden   2 years ago

                The experts are the top scientists in the world. Maybe, I'll stop believing the consensus of scientists after thousands and thousands of studies just because people on the Reason board (who are not scientists) don't want to believe ANYTHING that the government reports. But yet they believe a minority of scientists offering differing opinions because they deem that those scientists are the right ones to believe.
                https://www.epa.gov/climatechange-science/causes-climate-change

                1. Think It Through   2 years ago

                  None of those studies accurately predict anything tangible. I don't care if there are 1 or 1 million. WAKE UP.

                  1. ricden   2 years ago

                    Okay, "smart" guy. Your words are so convincing.

                    1. Think It Through   2 years ago

                      You have been asked several times to cite any "climate science" studies that have accurately predicted the future. If the experts are so expert, you would be able to do so. Got one?

                    2. ricden   2 years ago

                      I have replied to everyone. You have more to prove than I do because studies on climate change are available everywhere from the government to academic institutions.

                    3. Truthfulness   2 years ago

                      @ricden

                      Why were these "top scientists" wrong with their predictions, then? What do you have to say about it?

    4. Use the Schwartz   2 years ago

      I'm pretty sure that ricden is a parody account.

      1. ricden   2 years ago

        Aren't you all?

    5. JohnZ   2 years ago

      Indeed. Alternative "green energy" is good at murdering whales, dolphins and eagles.
      It provides jobs for 6 year olds in Africa in mining cobalt for your "green car"

    6. Wizard4169   2 years ago

      He seems to be a classic example of the fact that knowledge isn't fungible. If I wanted to know about biotech pharmaceuticals, he'd be high on my list of people to talk to. But that doesn't mean he knows much about politics, the environment, etc. The worst part is, when you've spent most of your life knowing you're the smartest guy in the room, it's easy to forget just how much you don't know.

  8. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/genX_75/status/1658712794710306816?t=Wh6HqbKQ49cymGE0V9cOGA&s=19

    You need to understand that Neo-marxism is a global administrative state that is drowning the world in propaganda while simultaneously rewriting history and influencing (directly/indirectly) laws to bury us under more and more "woke" beurocracy.

    This much stimulation in society causes you to tune out of society and avoid the noise or just keep quiet to avoid the negative attention ( keeping head down).

    It has the fabulous side effect of making disinterested/disenfranchised people move aside, allowing for the infestation of the ideology (entryism).

    Then comes the enforcement of the new
    "normalization".

    This is top down Neo-communism for regular people & Fascism (stakeholder capitalism) at the elite level. It uses any authoritarian tactic/technique/strategy to win. And so far, they are.

    Learn about: ESG, SDG's, DEI, global citizenship, WEF WHO & U.N., Marxism, postmodernism, long march to the institutions, Freires generative themes in childhood education, queer theory, black liberation, teachers colleges, education pedagogy, BLMorg, social justice, etc.
    They're all using identical logic.

  9. Moderation4ever   2 years ago

    While it is refreshing to have a candidate speaking freely it is also important to challenge their ideas.

    While the idea of merit based immigration makes sense, it fails to see that we need workers at a variety of levels in this country. While computer companies may have a hard time finding enough workers so do restaurants.

    The January 6th insurrection was not caused because we did not listen to people, we all heard about their complaints about the election. The rioters and insurrectionists did not want us to listen but rather to do as they wanted and set aside a fair and validated election.

    The question I have for candidate Ramaswamy is have you started with an opinion looked at the facts and changed your mind? Because he like many others seems to frame his logic to fit his opinion.

    1. Ersatz   2 years ago

      there was no insurrection on Jan 6 - you betray your true motives by continuing the gaslighting

      1. mtrueman   2 years ago

        It was a failed insurrection. Pence remained unhanged and the election remained stolen.

        1. Truthfulness   2 years ago (edited)

          On the contrary, a mostly peaceful protest (by a more true definition than CNN defines it) is not an “insurrection”, especially when an unarmed Ashli Babbit is the only person killed.

          You have been gaslighted. Repent of your erroneous views.

          1. mtrueman   2 years ago

            "a mostly peaceful protest "

            That's exactly why it failed. A mob breaks into the capital to peacefully hang Pence and stop the steal? Give me a break.

      2. Wizard4169   2 years ago

        It was a mostly peaceful riot.

  10. mtrueman   2 years ago

    The guy says he's against 'wokeness' but makes trucking in identity politics the sine qua non of his platform. In the interview he claims that reviving the national identity is his primary goal and that everything good will flow from that.

    1. Ersatz   2 years ago

      national\cultural identity is not personal identity

      1. mtrueman   2 years ago

        It's a kind of collectivism, you mean. Keep digging.

        1. Truthfulness   2 years ago

          Your flaw is assuming that collectivism and wokeness are synonymous. That's a lie coming from you. Look up Nardz's post above as to what wokeness really is.

          1. mtrueman   2 years ago

            Your flaw is assuming the nation has an identity. It's the same error that racial and gender identitarians make. You're a lot closer to wokeness than you think.

          2. Wizard4169   2 years ago

            Not a big fan of collectivism, no matter the flavor.

  11. JohnZ   2 years ago

    In short, everything "woke" turns to shite. Whether its education, or business, once wokeness infects it, the process and outcome is destroyed.Public education is a mess. No one is learning anything except that Johnny can become Joan and Diane can become Donnie. The current condition of public education has become the best salesman for private and home schooling.
    Woke has infected business just ask the people who own Inbev about their Budweiser products as they continue to lose market share.
    Climate change is the greatest hoax ever played on the human race. It has nothing to do with saving the planet, it has everything to do with eliminating YOU and the WEF is in favor of doing just that: eliminating YOU!

  12. Roberta   2 years ago

    BLM criticized what it called the "Western-prescribed nuclear family." A nuclear family is something Ramaswamy (and I) consider a good thing.

    Am I the only one who remembers people lamenting the prevalence of the nuclear family as having replaced the extended family? "Nuclear family" was a recently made-up term to describe what was believed to be a sad state of affairs.

    https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=nuclear+family%2Cextended+family&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3

    1. JohnZ   2 years ago

      BLM only recognizes deys baby mommas an baby daddies so's deys can git deys Section 8 an EBT.
      The fact that 75% of all black children grow up in a single parent household with no father figure present, cause deys be in jail an shit, seems to have been missed by the neo- Marxist BLM. And they wonder why the murder rate among young black males is so high.

  13. Derpifer   2 years ago

    You mean their first act in coming here was to break a "law" with zero constitutional basis, which SCOTUS admitted, but then upheld it anyway because FDR was going to pack the court. "Illegal" immigrants have more respect for this country than this guy does.

    1. yape   2 years ago (edited)

      I AM Making a Good Salary from Home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing, under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it's my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone. go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart ......

      SITE. ——>>> bitecoin.com

    2. Truthfulness   2 years ago

      Do you call that civil disobedience?

  14. BlueCollarCritic   2 years ago

    Not just woekism but all the toxic ideologies that are under the umbrella term of woke. Feminism was engaged in societal cancer long before the woke movement kicked in. Any ideological belief that seeks to disrupt healthy hetrosexaul relationships is societal cancer and I've been saying that for several years,

  15. JohnZ   2 years ago

    At least people are beginning to wake up to woke and declared their opposition to it much to the dismay of the wokists as it makes their heads explode.
    InBev is now desperately attempting to undo the damage caused by some stupid little brat who thought she was creating a great marketing scheme..... and the damage continues. LOL!
    The tyranny of woke: Obey or lose your job. Obey or get canceled.Obey or receive threats. Obey or get doxxed.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How Making GLP-1s Available Over the Counter Can Unlock Their Full Potential

Jeffrey A. Singer | From the June 2025 issue

Bob Menendez Does Not Deserve a Pardon

Billy Binion | 5.30.2025 5:25 PM

12-Year-Old Tennessee Boy Arrested for Instagram Post Says He Was Trying To Warn Students of a School Shooting

Autumn Billings | 5.30.2025 5:12 PM

Texas Ten Commandments Bill Is the Latest Example of Forcing Religious Texts In Public Schools

Emma Camp | 5.30.2025 3:46 PM

DOGE's Newly Listed 'Regulatory Savings' for Businesses Have Nothing to Do With Cutting Federal Spending

Jacob Sullum | 5.30.2025 3:30 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!