Difficult Conversations with Empathy | Full Interview

Well, it's been a while. Last time, my last time I worked with you, I think you were based up in New York.

You had some different people on your team. We had a lot of fun. So people have been connecting deeply with our guests.

Bring yourself into the room a little bit here. What's Simon been working on? Where you. I hear, are you living in LA now? You've got. Your life has changed a little bit.

My life has changed a lot, actually.

So my sister and her family live in Los Angeles. And so when Covid struck, I thought, you know what? I'll go to LA for a couple months while Covid blows over. That'll be nice. Weather's nice, and I'm still here, so I guess I live in Los Angeles now.

I'm a great believer that the world is made up of balance. And for anything good that happens to us, it comes at a cost, always. And I like to consider what that cost is. But when something bad happens to us, there's also opportunity or lessons or something. And I'm very. I sort of made a practice out of always trying to keep the balance. So I don't take good for granted and bad. I always try and get something out of it. And Covid was such a shock to the system.

The opportunity was.

Was huge.

I mean, total reinvention if you wanted it. And for our business, it was total reinvention. But for me, it gave him an opportunity to sit and breathe.

I. And I think many people in this room can relate that we're on a hamster wheel for our careers, and we think that we're setting the speed of the hamster wheel by how fast we're running. And the hard lesson that I. That I learned is I'm just running to keep up. And for a period of time, Covid stopped the wheel, and I got off. And then I got to look around and say, do I want to get back on that wheel, or is there something else I want to do? And so there was a ton of introspection. I've grown up a lot, to be honest.

And I worked hard. I had that time to do it.

And I also decided how I want to spend the rest of my life. I'm very, very, very proud of the work that I have done and the work that I do and spreading a message and challenging traditional notions of how business works and how we can change that. You know, my nemesis, Jack Welch.

But the question is, I'm proud of that, and it has its own momentum, and I'm a great believer in measuring Success not by hitting absolutes, but by counting momentum. And that's for us individually as well as businesses.

And then it's much easier to maintain momentum.

So when I first started hearing about, people are like, you gotta, as we're getting into this purpose thing and why, you've got to meet Simon, he's incredible, blah, blah, blah. And it was, you know, you'd written these books. My favorite was Leaders Eat Last. That just the concept alone is so true. Starting with why there was this meteoric rise where Everybody watched a 15 minute video.

Yeah.

You know, just a simple. Was it a TED Talk somewhere?

Yeah.

Yeah. And did you know that? I mean, did you sense that was going to happen or were you just kind of out riffing on your thoughts and something took hold?

I'd been giving that talk for a little Inside Baseball now. Okay. So I've been giving, I'd been giving that talk for three years and the shortest I ever did it was an hour. And when they invited me to do the TEDx.

I was like, yeah, fine. They're like, do you want to do A Hustle? I'm like, no, it's the same content I've been doing for three years. Like I know it. And like the night before I was like, I've never done it in 18 minutes. And like then the panic, wow.

But I figured I'll just leave some stuff out.

And you just had a, you just had a piece of paper and a couple of circles.

So it was funny because right before I was supposed to speak, and it was only like 50 people in the room, right before I was supposed to speak, I realized that my old introduction for an hour long talk was like eight minutes. I'm like, I can't use up eight minutes on an introduction. So I like went for a walk around the block to try and come up with a new introduction that was just like 30 seconds. But yeah, I didn't expect it to do what it did. Of course not. I mean, it's like winning the lottery. You know, I never expected it to do what it did, but it makes sense to me. It's a deeply human message. I knew from the three years that I'd been giving that talk that people related to it. So I understand it, but I also think it was timing. You know, I came out at a time where TEDx was a relatively new thing and there weren't that many of them. Now there's thousands and thousands of them a year. I don't know if it would pop the same way today as it did.

All those years, I think I got.

Lucky with the timing.

Leaders eat last, start with why.

And then that sort of created this whole thing. And I've always felt like on the one hand you kind of access revolutionary thoughts and I think you believe that America is a great place, but it needs to change corporate America. Capitalism is a great thing, but it's not going to make it in its current if it keeps going. The Jack Welch kind of, kind of mentality that win at all costs. And so since then you've been working on a new body of work, the infinite game. And more recently, how do you summarize sort of where your thinking has evolved from purpose to more than that?

Yeah, I mean my work is all. It's all a journey. So it all builds upon the last thing. Like they stand alone as separate ideas. But it all builds upon the last thing, of course. And the infinite game. I'm obsessed with it, to be honest. The original definition was proposed by a theologian and.

Philosopher by the name of Dr. James Kars back in the mid-80s. And I'd known about Kars work for years and had read his original book, Finite and Infinite Games. And it's a kooky little philosophy book, but I realize it's starting to impact the way I thought. And for those who don't know, I'll give you the quick synopsis. So there are two types of games. There are finite games and there are infinite games. A finite game is defined as known players, fixed rules, and an agreed upon objective. Football, baseball. There is always a beginning, middle and an end. And if there's a winner necessarily, they have to be losers, right? Then you have infinite games. Infinite games are defined as known and unknown players, which means anyone can join at any time and you don't necessarily know who all the other players are. The rules are changeable, which means every player can play however they want. And the objective is to perpetuate the game, to stay in the game as long as possible. We're players in infinite games every day of our lives, whether we know it or not. Like you're not going to win your marriage, right? You can't be number one in your marriage. Number two for sure, but never number one.

Nobody wins education. You can come in first for the finite amount of time you're at school where we agreed upon the time frame and we agreed upon the metrics called grades. But nobody wins education, nobody wins health care, nobody wins career. And definitely no company is declared the winner of business, right? But if you listen to the language of so many Leaders, it becomes abundantly clear that they don't know the game they're playing in. They talk about being number one, being the best, or beating their competition. Based on what, based upon what agreed upon metrics, objectives or timeframes. And this is a problem because when we play with a finite mindset in an infinite game, when you play to win in a game that has no finish line, there are predictable and consistent outcomes. The big ones being the decline of trust, the decline of cooperation and the decline of innovation. Like when Circuit City went bankrupt, Best Buy didn't win anything, right? All that happened is they lost one of the players. Other players fill the gap and they have to learn to reinvent because now Amazon's a new competitor and now they have to completely change the way they want to play, otherwise they'll fall out of the game as well. And so this was profound for me because when I started to apply that definition to my work and the business world, it became abundantly clear that starting in the late 70s, early 80s, our nation was the way we distorted capitalism. Like Adam Smith. Capitalism that made this country great and made it as wealthy as it is and gave it such remarkable influence. And we're the most innovative nation in the world. Almost every great invention that has affected the planet Earth came from us, right? Which is astonishing. Modern inventions, clearly mathematics wasn't ours.

But you start to see the dismantling of that infinite mindset that Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson and all these folks embraced. Thomas Jefferson was a huge fan of Adam Smith. And you start to see this more finite mindedness, the rise of shareholder supremacy, where a disinterested external constituency becomes more important than a customer or an employee, which is like a coach of a team trying to make a great team by taking advice from fair weathered fans and ignoring the needs of players. I mean, that's kind of what that is. You see the rise of things like using mass layoffs on a regular basis to balance the books. We were profitable, just not as profitable as we had promised. So all of you lose your jobs. Oh no, you've been great. It's not a meritocracy, you know. And you start to see the steady drumbeat over the course of the past 30, 40 years where we have actually been dismantling the awesomeness of American capitalism. A die hard capitalist, just not the form that we've created. And it's very, very recent, it's very, very modern. And Jack Welch is the poster child for that form of capitalism. You know, Gordon Gekko, but he's a Fictional character.

And we've seen the result, which we've seen massive backlash. We've seen the decline in the life of a lifespan of companies, right? It went from 60 years to now, which is 17 years, the average lifespan of a company.

We've seen declines in innovation. We've seen disengagement from employees, we've seen lack of loyalty from employees. We complain about young people that they're not loyal and they bounce. Well, think how they grew up. They watched their parents get laid off through no fault of their own because of this insane system. So why should they be loyal? I don't blame them. And we see the results. We see increases in stress and disengagement and malaise and depression and anxiety. These are all related. The great resignation which if we want to go down that rabbit hole, all related. So I think there's a massive opportunity for forward thinking companies because GE and those companies had massive influence in the direction of capitalism. Because they were so wealthy, others just copied them, right? Not because they were good but because they had short term success. Others went, it's working for them. And because the whole system's an upheaval, there's massive opportunity for new come for a new company. There is no heir apparent to redirect what the future of American business will look like. In addition, GE was the leadership factory for that model. If you had GE on your resume, you could go anywhere and you are a senior executive, you can be our CEO, right? The number of CEOs that came from GE was disproportionate.

There has been no heir apparent for the modern leadership factory for the, the, the, the what capitalism should be for infinite minded capitalism. So I think the opportunity is available to this company.

I like to think that it's, it's in this room. Something a lot of people don't know is Jack Welch put on a full court press to buy this company.

He put on his A game and.

My grandmother, her sister didn't want to and they didn't really know why. It just didn't quite feel right. It was a ton of money. Everything daddy did, so to speak, was coming to fruition and man, what are we going to do in this new world? But they, there's this picture where Jack Welch is like giving a big thumbs up like with my grandmother. And she had a look about her and she was looking at him sideways and it was a very prophetic because I think he thought everything was done. But she was like, eh, this isn't.

I would love a copy of that picture.

I'll get it for you. It's a great picture. And her facial expression reflects what you're saying about that mindset. But it was this, you know, I think what she said was in her mind. And she may have told me this, Daddy wouldn't have liked this. You know, it was never about money. It was about employees and it was about thanking people that got us here. And it was about a relationship between, you know, yes, we own this thing, but we're, we owe something to, you know, the folks we started it with and.

You know, and that's always been the mindset. And so we're here, we are now in this thing. And I'm just kind of thinking out loud here, but some of the things that are frustrating all of us, frustrating me is like the sense of control and facts and what we know to be true is like challenge. And it's so weird to think that facts are not facts or what is a fact. I actually got into this conversation, unfortunately over Thanksgiving with my mother in law. She'd had a couple glasses of wine, but she. I said, you have to admit that you can't. You know, you have to, you have to admit that a fact exists. And she said, you'll have to prove that to me. I'm like, okay, we can't. I can't do this. This is beyond my pay grade. But, you know, so vaccines. Yeah, you know, you know, this horrible thing is happening. We're all out of the office. We can't come back to the office without vaccines. I mean, you can't have like some people that are mysteriously not vaccinated, some people that are, and you wear like a bracelet and I'm good and they're not. You just can't. It's kind of like smoking. If you're walking around secondhand smoking, you're getting other people sick. It's just not fair. Yes, it's your right to do so, I guess, as a human, but it's not your right, like sort of in the workplace. So we have to do this thing. So are we all agreed? Sure. Now you start to tell employees, there's a large group of people that are like, I'll be damned, you know, how dare you. This company is all about empowerment. It's all about telling me it's my choice. You're giving me the power to do what I want. Now you're telling me I have to do this or I'm fired. Yeah, you're not fired. It's just, we hope you agree that the world will never get back to normal unless all of us jump in and be safe. And more importantly, it's not about you, it's about spreading it to others. And you have to stop it. You have to stop it with your body. And there's no reason to believe it's dangerous, all that. Yeah, but what about Vaers? Have you read Vaers? I went on there and there's somebody who said they took it and they died the next day. And I'm like, well, if they died the next day, how would they put that on Vaers? Bears is an open mic. There's no, there's no scientific validity to it. But everybody has their version. Yeah, everybody's arguing. There's no way to win the argument.

Yeah.

So who's in control? Are we able to tell employees to come to work? Are we asking them? You know, it's a frustrating time and every person in this room has been through the frustration.

Yeah. There was a cartoon in, I think it was a New Yorker cartoon, and a flight attendant on the plane said, is there a doctor or anyone who's done their own research aboard, please?

Maybe it's just me.

So, okay, let's jump into this.

There's a lot to unpack there. Obviously.

There are two thoughts that come to mind. One is about control and one is about. And it goes back to finite mindedness, which is our nation over indexed on finite mindedness for 30, 40 years. And it affected everything. It affected business, affected politics, it affected military, it affected every aspect of life.

Did it change with Vietnam? You mentioned that a long time ago, before you wrote the book. It was like we invaded. We were going to win and beat them.

We had completely the right mindset.

They weren't trying to beat us, they just wanted to live past us. And there was no city to take over. You couldn't go to Berlin and have this all over. The Ho Chi Minh City was empty.

So, so what Alex is referring to in, in the book, I have this opening story to make the case, which is in Vietnam, over the course of that ten year war.

We won almost every major battle we fought. And most people don't know that we actually won most modest, most of the battles we fought most major battles over the course of those 10 years, we lost 58,000 soldiers and marines. They lost.

Over 3 million.

And so it raises the very interesting question, if you win the battles and you decimate your enemy, how do you lose the war? And so that's one of the things that got me interested in this definition of the infinite game, which is clearly there's more than one definition of winning and losing.

And in this case, America was fighting with a finite mindset in an infinite game. They were fighting to win and the Vietnamese were fighting to survive. And they would fight to the very last person if necessary. And a finite player who's playing with a finite mindset in infinite game where the other players are playing with the right mindset will always find themselves in quagmire. Always. And the resource, the currency of an infinite game is will and resources. Resource is obvious. And business, it's money. War. It's money too, but there's will of the people. Remember, we left Vietnam because of the will of the people back home.

And will is one of those things that's very often forgotten. Companies think they're strong when they're rich. Enron was rich, GE was rich. GE is a shadow of its former self, you know, but what was the will of the people? You know, when the foundation shook, did they abandon ship for themselves or did they hunker down and come together? And our nation, because of this obsession with finite mindedness for the past 30 or 40 years, which means a couple of generations were raised with that mentality and they were told that you will excel at work and in your career if you do this. And now they're the senior executives.

Operating.

Under that, operating under that mentality. So our nation double. We over indexed rugged individualism and we forgot cooperation. You know, there's an entire section of the bookshop called self help. An industry, by the way, that was invented in the 1970s. There's an entire industry, there's an entire section of the bookshop called self help. And there's no section of the bookshop called Help Others. You know, in politics, compromise has become a dirty word. And the reality, if you, if you have been, if you are married or if you have a relationship, good luck with trying to always be right. Like compromises, listening, give and take, that's part of the game for success.

And business is a community, a company is a tribe. And sometimes things will go exactly your way and sometimes they don't. But there has to be this general feeling that the company cares about me as a human being, that I'm seen, that I'm heard, that I'm understood, that I believe in the vision, that I want to advance the culture. And I believe and I fit the value set and the value set fits me. And I feel like this is part of my personal identity working here. Like when I say the company's name and I say my name they feel, it feels right.

And we all know that within those relationships that there's give and take from management all the way on down. And this goes back into control, which is we are happy to give up control when we feel that there is trust first. And I'll give you an extreme example.

So I had a conversation with a Marine, a Marine officer, and he was talking about, because the Marines are pretty amazing as a culture, they're pretty dynamic. They believe in Semper Gumby, always flexible. We got a Marine in the audience. So they believe in Semper Gumby and they encourage creativity, they encourage decision making at the front lines.

They and they're very good at building trust. And it's a values based organization. Right. They instill the values in their Marines and all of that trust and all of that flexibility builds to something which is in a high stress situation, combat, it is all command and control. The officer says you do that and the Marine just does it. There is no question to ask and there's no pushback. This is not the time for. Well, I'd like to share my ideas about what you propose. I think I'm laying low right now. Right. It doesn't work that way. And the reason is, is because in high stress we need command and control. It's actually very, very important. But it's done so with the absolute undying belief that you're making decisions with what you believe is the best interest of the organization, the mission, whatever it is. And I accept that sometimes you'll make mistakes and that in the case of combat could cost people's lives. And I accept that because I believe that you still have the best interests of this organization more than yourself. You're not sending me to harm's way. You're not leveraging the trust and the command for personal gain. You're doing it for the gain of us.

And that is exactly the same in a well run organization, which is you. In good times.

We share the wealth. We don't hoard the wealth. In good times we save money. It's amazing to me how many companies give away all the money in good times, save that because not all times are good. Huge amounts of savings as well. Reinvestment, ignoring shareholders, short term desires. I have no desire to make a 27 year old analyst rich and meet his financial goals. We have ours first. I don't know if you know Gary Ridge, the CEO of WD40. He had an uncomfortable analyst call not for him, but for his analysts.

One of his reporting, one of his quarterly calls, the Analyst said to him, you've missed your numbers. And Gary responded, no, I missed your numbers. My numbers are fine.

But in a company, especially in a high stress situation, of which Covid is one of them, and keeping the. There is an element of, I'm gonna do this. And you can't maintain command and control for long periods of time because then you break trust. It's episodic and it's usually under high stress because that's the system and you've spent years building up the trust. And if people don't trust, then it just raises questions. Did they not fit our values? Maybe we accidentally hired people that don't belong here. So, okay, that's good to know. Or maybe I need some more leadership training at my middle management levels because it's breaking whatever it is. Or maybe senior management needs to take a look at have we been good at communicating or et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Is it circumstantial? Is it situational? Complicated? It's messy. And the best companies are not perfect. They're constantly improving. Everything they're doing is constant. Proven like the best people aren't perfect, but they're in constant growth mode. It's exactly the same thing.

And then the elements of control also, which you touched upon. And I'm fascinated by this element of control.

Can I just sort of talk a little bit?

One of the ways I'm like a wind up toy. I'll just keep going.

Yeah. One of the ways I think about control is so we used to have. You'd have a job description and somebody would show up and say, I like that role. Here's my resume. It fits together and we say, okay, we'll pay you X and hopefully you'll do these, you know, these things and.

Love to have a great career and all that. And you know, you come into the office, you know, we see you. Yeah, you kind of do you play, you do these things. It's an expectation. So now you've said, yes, Covid happens and now we're on the other side of that and we've told you to leave. We sort of expected that one day this would end. I mean, I remember putting out a video. So this might last till the end of the month.

Right.

I think it was March, April. You know, this might last.

This could go through the summer.

This could go to Labor Day, could go to December. You know, we might go into this.

I was the outlier, by the way. I predicted the end of the summer.

Really? Yeah, yeah, that was the, that was the outlier. And then it just kept going and now it's gone on so long that we don't really know what lies on the other side. And so I had this extraordinary conversation. It was just. It was the first one I had. It wasn't that extraordinary. It was just the first time I experienced it. But I was, you know, I used to do lunch. You know, I'd go down to the cafeteria when we see people, and I'd sit down with somebody at lunch and just chat and, you know, how are you? And all that. So I was missing that. I was recreating it on Zoom. So, you know, just pick so and so in the IT department or so and so and sales and just have a Zoom call. It's not quite the same, but, you know, I was like, so, how are you doing? You know, I'm so excited. It looks like with the vaccines and everything, we'll be coming back. And without. Without thinking that he was saying anything that was, like, concerning to me, he was like, well, you know, I've moved down to St. Pete. And I was like, St. Pete? Like St. Petersburg, Florida. And he works in the building with me. I mean, I see him all the time and.

Not in St. Petersburg.

No. Yeah. I mean, up in Dunwoody. And I was like, so that's amazing. So are you. Do you live there now or are you gonna be. Are you coming back here? He said, oh, yeah. I mean, I'll manage my time, of course. But we have. We have never been happy. We just took the plunge, my whole family. And he was just like, so thrilled with his life. And I'm like, I'm so happy for you. But I'm like, at scale, I don't know what this means.

You know, we have a campus with like 8,000 people on it.

We've never, you know, when we did. When we did dress coat. You used to dress in suits. I mean, come into work in a suit. And then it was business casual. What does business casual mean? Can you wear jeans? What if they're ripped? What if they're frayed? You know, what if you could see your underwear underneath? And there was all these like, what if, what if, what if? And I think Goldman Sachs had a long book, or as Morgan Stanley had a long book, it was like 70 pages long. Of all the exceptions, you know, flesh colored tights. And it was like, got really weird. JP Morgan said, dress appropriately, right? And I was like, I feel kind of like dressed appropriately. Just. I mean, if you look weird, your boss should just tell you. And it shouldn't be like, we're going to get sued moment. I feel like this is the same thing. It's like work appropriately. But I hope we can all agree that life is a live event.

There's nothing like being here with our colleagues. There's nothing like.

You know, a game, a live, you know, basketball or something is not the same on Nintendo. I mean, it's cool, but it's not. It's not. You just don't get that same thing. So we want people to come back together. We want them to use their best judgment, but we don't know if they will. And it all. It all just gets to control. At some point, you're like, listen, you got to be in more than half your time. It has to be the exception, not the right, the rule, not the exception kind of thing. But you can't really do that because we're in a weird place. And that translates to lots of different parts of our life.

Company Barry Wehmiller calls it responsible freedom. You know, companies that we love to give our people freedom, and they say we give our people responsible freedom. And I love the word that they add. I love the way that they add responsible before freedom. It doesn't mean you can do whatever you want. It means that, you know, you can't just blow a budget for someone's birthday. You know, I mean, you do. We act responsibly. I mean, and you know, what's responsible? I mean, like, I think most people know what that line is. And sometimes there's block and tackles and corrections, as you said.

But I think one of the things we're seeing.

Is there's been a general feeling in the United States of lack of control. And control. And the feeling of control is a remarkable thing in how it affects human beings.

There were these studies done in the 1970s in the UK called the Whitehall studies. And they wanted, these social scientists wanted to understand this thing that they labeled executive Stress syndrome, which the assumption was the more senior you get, the more responsibility you have, the more impact your decisions can make, the more stress that puts upon you. So they did the study in government, in Whitehall, because they could control for variances in health care, because everybody got the same.

And here's what they discovered. The more senior you get, your stress goes down. Yes, you have more responsibility. Yes, the stakes are higher, but you also have more agency. You get to decide how to spend your day. You get to have more control over how you solve a problem. And when you're in the most junior position, you have the Least amount of agency because somebody tells you what to do, and you're going to do it this way. And there is no creativity and there is no variability. And it's the lack of control that actually increases diabetes, heart disease, and some cancers.

Right. I always think it's amazing when you ask for a meeting with somebody, their immediate assumption, if they don't know you and they're further down in the organization, is they're getting fired. Yeah. You know, it's like, no, I'm giving you a bonus. I mean, I just want to. You know, they're like, oh, God, thank God. I thought you were gonna fire me. Why would I fire you? That's. But you're raising that feeling of a lack of control. But you.

And you're touching upon, I think, a phenomenon that has happened. Again, I blame the past 30, 40 years where, you know, people would give their entire lives to a company and then get the proverbial gold watch to. There's an entire generation that when we talk about the gold watch, they don't know what we're talking about because it just doesn't exist anymore. And if you think about it. And again, because of the commonality, the frequency of the use of layoffs.

As a tool, for those who saw the better dot com video. I don't know if you saw it. It was embarrassing. The CEO made a video that he played to employees over Zoom.

So What? He fired 900 people.

900 people with a video saying, if you're unlucky enough to be seeing this.

Video, effective immediately, you're terminated.

Effective immediately. You know, two weeks before Christmas. And when the CFO was interviewed about it, he said, well, we need to. And I love this terminology, we need to fortress the balance sheet. Like, this is why we should not let CFOs, like, talk to the public early.

Our CFO is a wonderful man. Give it up for Perley.

We love you, baby. It's very rare. It must be great here, because CFOs never get that kind of applause. It's really wonderful.

But the point is.

What he amplified is that if you have your own business, if you're a small business owner, you know you're going to go out of business months before. Like, no small business owner goes to work one day thinking everything's fine, and the next day there's nothing. It just doesn't exist. But we now live in a society where having a stable job with benefits could end tomorrow. Effective immediately is what they were told. Not a meritocracy. No fault of my Own the company's doing well. And so if you think about how twisted that is, that a quote unquote stable job is actually not stable at all. And that stress sits with every single employee. You said we need to have a meeting and fear is the first reaction. Says something not necessarily about the company, but it says something about business and the way business and corporate America is viewed. And when we don't feel like we have control, it manifests in crazy ways. Our health is one of them. But when we don't feel like we have control, we look to exert it in strange ways. So companies that have an excessive amount of office politics. So I'll give you a real life example. This is a true story. There was a entry, the person was either an intern or entry level, I can't remember, but it was beginning of their career.

And they had 11 interviews. Why an intern needs 11 interviews. There's a different conversation, but they had 11 interviews, including many senior management. And this is a big company, this is thousands of employees. And then finally they all loved the person, they all loved the candidate. And then the CEO interviewed them and the CEO decided I don't like him and the kid didn't get the job. That means 11 people were told, your opinion actually doesn't matter. And so this company was fraught with politics. Because when I can't even decide as a senior executive to hire a frickin intern, I'm gonna look to exert control any stupid little way I can. Cause I gotta feel like I have control. January 6th is a, you know, is a lot of people who felt out of control.

And I read an article that a disproportionately high percentage of that population who invaded the capital that were either currently struggling with or have dealt with significant financial trouble, whether it's debt or personal bankruptcy, disproportionately high.

Right.

And coming from a population that felt disenfranchised by politics for the past 20 years. And so there's looking to exert control.

This is one of those ones that I, you know, is uncomfortable. But you know, power, control has got a new word in the last two years, 18 months that I had not heard prior to that. But it's not control, it's privilege. Yep. So you have come. You know, I, I'm among the most privileged people ever that lived on earth. And I know that. And I, you know, it's made me think about that very differently. But you know, you've seen this event of privilege happen. You know, I've sat there, we did this on zoom. It was so weird that we couldn't do this in person, but, you know, the social media events were happening and we realized we need to listen, we need to talk. There's something going on here, and it's not something going on. It's just there's been a lot that has not been said that's always been there.

Yep.

And I'm gonna hear it now. And there's this discontent with I don't like the fact or it's unfair that you're in control. It's not just me. I mean, it's all of it. Basically everyone in this room is privileged above the average person in the world.

Yep.

What does privilege? What does that whole thing mean to you and how do we deal with it? I mean, you kind of can't help it. You're in the role. You can't just, like, not be in the role anymore and do your job.

But so what? It goes back to feelings of control, of course.

And what it requires is empathy. The correct response is empathy. Right.

And the sort of excessive apologizing, like to apologize for how you were born is a strange reaction. But the most important thing, I think, is empathy to try to understand, to try and relate. And we saw this happen. It didn't happen, unfortunately, because we don't teach the skills. We don't teach active listening. We don't teach executives or any employee in our company how to make someone else feel heard, feel understood, feel seen, which is where it starts. And if that can happen, then all kinds of trust builds and all the other things start to break away. So, for example, after the murder of George Floyd, I was astonished at the number of people in a leadership position, regardless of mid ranking on up.

Did nothing.

You mean in the police force or just in rank?

No, no. In companies, people who lead teams that after the murder of George Floyd, they didn't talk to their teams. They just did nothing. And it's not because they're bad people. It's because they didn't have the skills. They didn't know how to have an uncomfortable or difficult conversation, so they chose nothing, which makes things worse.

And. And this is just a skill we can teach people. And here's how to have a difficult conversation. You bring your team together and say, we need to have an uncomfortable conversation about race and our company.

And.

I'm nervous to have this conversation because I'm afraid that I'm going to bumble something. I'm afraid that I'm going to say something that will trigger somebody and I'M afraid I'm going to say something or someone will say something that may agitate and make this worse. But I think it's more important that we have this conversation than we. Than my fear of doing this perfectly. And that's how you start a difficult conversation. And it is difficult, but it is necessary. And those conversations are not happening. And again, not because of bad people. It's because people are afraid and they don't have the skills to start those conversations. And it is the responsibility of leaders, because that's what we call you, leader. We call you leader because you go first. Not because you're in charge, but because you go first. First to the unknown, first to the difficult, first to the dangerous. And it is our responsibility.

As a corporation to empower and educate our leaders to do the things that they need to do with their teams. And of course, up on high, same thing.

So I think that's where it begins. There's a tremendous lack of listening in our nation.

And a lot of talking, a lot of yelling, very little listening.

And hopefully get past the Omicron wave, which I heard this morning in Europe is horrible. And hopefully it will be.

Less symptomatic than before and we'll be able to get physically back together, which will make that better. But if we could possibly bring the lights up just a smidge, and if there's. We've got 15 or so minutes, but we'll take as much time as we want. There's a hand here in the middle.

Possibly bring the lights up just a smidge, and if there's. We've got 15 or so minutes, but we'll take as much time as we want. There's a hand here in the middle.

Good morning. Thank you so much for being here today. Thank you. Thank you for bringing Mr. Sinek Simon Simic. Sorry, I'm just.

Good morning.

Thank you so much for being here today. Thank you for bringing Mr. Sinek.

Simon.

Simon.

Sorry.

I'm struck by this last exchange, compared to the earlier discussion of command and control.

Yep.

And Alex's point, struck by this last exchange, compared to the earlier discussion of command and control.

Yep.

And Alex's point about people getting vaccinated. About people getting vaccinated. Right. That seems like an opportunity for command and control, but there's the need for empathy and listening.

100%.

How do you balance that?

So the decisions we make are not disconnected from our need to be human. Right, Right.

That seems like an opportunity for command and control, but there's the need for.

Empathy and listen, which Is it is amazing. So listening is a trust building exercise, right? If you're in a take it down to a personal relationship, if you've been in, if you've ever had a romantic relationship, a loved one. Right.

Making someone feel 100%, how do you balance that? So the decisions we make are not disconnected from our need to be human. Right. Which is. It is amazing. So listening is a trust building exercise, right. If you've, if you're in a take it down to earth doesn't mean you're wrong. Saying sorry doesn't mean you're wrong. It just means you take accountability for your, for your actions. And I think it is important that when somebody objects to vaccination that we don't demonize or villainize their personal relationship. If you've been in, if you've ever had romantic relationships, a loved one, right.

Making someone feel heard doesn't mean you're wrong. Saying sorry doesn't mean you're wrong. It just means you take accountability for your actions. But we attempt to hear them, make them feel heard doesn't mean we have to agree. And I think it is important that when somebody object to vaccines but they have to feel heard and you know, listening that we don't demonize or villainize them but we attempt to hear them, make thems not hearing the words, you know, it's making feel heard doesn't mean we have to agree the other person feel that they were heard.

We don't get to decide when hearing has happened. When listening has happened, they do. And by the way, it's not 100% successful either because some people are just hell bent on but that's a minority. But they have to feel heard. And.

Listening is not hearing the words, it's making ready. And so I think the exercise is sitting down with people and saying the other person feel that they were heard.

We don't get to decide the when hearing has happened. When listening they do. Tell me what you're going through. Tell me what you're afraid of. I want to understand because we're trying to make everyone safe. I want to hear what your thing is and let them tell their story. We have no answers. We're not there to object, we're not there to react. We're not there to fix or tell them that they're wrong. Women are better than this than men. And by the way, it's not 100% successful either, you know, because some people are just hell bent on but that's a minority. And so I think the exercise is sitting down with people and saying.

And.

I think that has to happen and it can happen simultaneously. Tell me, tell me what's. What you're going through. Tell me what you're afraid of. I want to understand because we're trying to make everyone, they are not mutually exclusive, safe. I want to hear what your thing is and let them tell their story. I'll give you one example, which is I have a friend who.

Refused to get vaccinated.

And I sat down with her and I said.

Tell me your reasoning.

Right.

She goes, well, this new technology, I don't want to.

We don't know.

It hasn't been out long enough. Like we don't. We have no answers. We're not there to object. We're not there to react. We're not there to fix or tell them that they're wrong. Women are better than this, than men. No. So what I hear is fear of the unknown. Okay, I go, go on. And she, I let her talk and say her thing and explain all the things and I, and then, and I simply said, so you're afraid of the MRNA technology, right? Yes. I don't want.

To.

And I think that has to happen and it can happen simultaneously. I'm screwing with my DNA. I said, well, just so you know, it's 20 year old technology. But then I found something I could agree with her. But, but you're right, it is the first time it's been commercialized. You're absolutely. They are not mutually exclusive. I'll give you one example which is I have a friend who, who right. This is the first time we've put it in the market. So I affirmed her fear. And then I said, do you get flu shots every year? She goes, I do refuse to get vaccinated.

And I sat down with her and I said.

Tell me your reasoning. I said, okay, Johnson and Johnson is a good old fashioned flu shot. It's a different technology. It's not MRNA. So you're 100% right. If you're afraid of the new technology, don't get Moderna or Pfizer. Right. She goes, well, this new technology, like I don't want to. We don't know. It hasn't been out long enough. Like we don't. Johnson and Johnson is. It's just like a flu shot. It's the same old tech. And she went, it is, it is. She went and got a Moderna shot.

No.

So what I hear is fear of the unknown. Okay, I go, go on. And I let her talk and say her thing and explain all the things. And I. And then.

Because she just wanted to be heard because most of her friends, when she said I'm not getting vaccinated, yelled at her, told her she was stupid, told her she's. And I simply said, so you're afraid of the MRNA technology, right?

Yes.

I don't want them screwing with my DNA. I said, well, just so you know, it's 20 year old technology. But then I found something I could agree with her. But you're right, it is the first time it's been commercialized. You're absolutely right. This is the first time we've put it in the market. So I affirmed her fear. An idiot. Told her she's letting her friends down, told her she's making other people sick, told her she's a risk to society that doesn't make some. And then I said, do you get flu shots every year? She goes, I do his mind open up. All I did was let her feel heard. I think we do. We can't. We have to do that.

We have to do that. We did a interview recently with the doctor head of epidemiology at Emory that we're I think sending out today.

I said, okay, Johnson and Johnson is a good old fashioned flu shot. It's a different technology. It's not MRNA, so you're 100% here tomorrow.

But he said calling it a mandate has a much different effect on an organization than calling it a requirement, an office requirement. And it's just how it is taken and it can be taken offensively.

Right. If you're afraid of the new technology, don't get Moderna or Pfizer. But Johnson Johnson is just like a flu shot. It's the same old questions.

Percy got one here, got one back there.

And she went, it is, it is. She went and got a Moderna shot.

First of all, shout out to all of our leaders in this room who did an incredible job managing through.

And are doing an incredible job managing through the mandate. You guys are amazing.

But Simon, you're so much of what you said.

Because she just wanted to be heard because most of her friends.

Had really resonated with me. As somebody who pretty much previously worked at a company where at one point we.

She said I'm not getting vaccinated. Yelled at her, told her she was stupid, told her she's.

They implemented a GE performance forced ranking system that was very destructive in the end.

Told her she's letting her friends down, told her she's making other people sick, told her she's a risk to society. That doesn't make some.

What are your thoughts on income inequality and how to address.

Made his mind open up. All I did was let her feel heard. I think we do. We can't. We have to do that.

We have to do that. We did a interview recently with a doctor, head of epidemiology at Emory that we're, I think, sending out today.

You know, the gap in pay that we see that has just exploded between CEOs and media tomorrow.

But he said calling it a mandate has a much different effect on an organization.

Yeah, because I think that is part of this finite world.

Yeah, you're 100% right. And I've forgotten the exact numbers, but I'm not far off. But over the past, whatever it is, 30, 40 years, the average CEO pay has increased something like 700.

Calling it a requirement, an office requirement. And it's just how it is taken. And it can be taken offensively.

150% and the average employee has increased.

About questions, Percy. Got one here, got one back there.

First of all, shout out to all of our leaders in this room who did an incredible job managing through 11%.

I mean, so it's disproportionate and nobody minds that senior executives will be better compensated, but they want to share in the wealth that they're helping to generate. And income inequality is one of those things that makes people feel out of control because they don't get to determine.

And are doing an incredible job managing, managing through the mandate. You guys are amazing.

Income, you know.

And so again.

It'S not that somebody makes.

But Simon, you're so much of what.

You said, it's more. That's the issue. It's the. Are you letting me join in. In the success that I am helping to produce?

It really resonated with me as somebody who previously worked at a company where at one point they implemented a GE performance forced ranking system that was very destructive.

In the end.

Do I have opportunities to increase my own.

Wealth like you do? You know, you hit certain numbers, for example.

So I think income inequality in this country, I think it's only the tip of the iceberg. And I think it's a. And I think it is one of those things that has caused a group of people to feel what are your.

Thoughts on income inequality and how to address, you know, the gap in pay that we see that has just exploded.

Between CEOs and median disenfranchised in the nation. And they've largely. Their voices have largely been ignored for 30 years. And it's coming to roost. And by the way, you can come.

Because I think that is part of this finite world.

Yeah, you're 100% right. And I've forgotten the exact numbers, but I look through history. Whenever the delta between the haves and the have nots, I'm not far off. But over the past, whatever it is, 30, 40 years, the average CEO pay has increased something like 750% and the average employee has increased about 11%. I mean, so it's disproportionate and nobody minds that senior executives will be better compensated. Grows too big. Usually there's a revolution.

I don't know if anybody or I don't know if you've ever. You're a storyteller. Have you listened to any of hardcore history? DAN CARLIN it's this podcast. It is unbelievable. But he gets in.

But they want to share in the wealth that they're helping to generate. And income inequality is one of the.

He does a lot of series on the Romans and the lessons learned and the Gauls and the Celts and all that stuff.

Those things that makes people feel out of control because they don't get to determine that hierarchy.

Yeah, it brings down empires.

It does. And unfortunately there's a lot of similarities between what America's going through right now and the Roman Empire, but that's a different company.

PERCY Simon.

Their own income, you know.

And so again.

It'S not that somebody makes.

Thanks for being with us today.

So I love the comment about balance. So how do we fix the political landscape? It's more. That's the issue. It's the. Are you letting me join in, in this.

Success that I am helping to produce?

Thank you.

You know.

Do I have opportunities to increase my own.

Wealth like you do? You know.

Change starts at home.

Saying that the politicians have to change. Like everybody know you hit certain numbers, for example.

So I think income inequality in this country, I think it's only the tip of the iceberg and I think it owes that. But they're not going to because they have become more finite minded, which is an election is a finite game. There's a beginner, there's a beginning, middle and end, and there's a winner and there's a loser. And I think it is one of those things that has caused a group of people to feel the minute you win your election. Now, governance is an infinite game, but the problem is they don't make that conversion. And it used to be a disenfranchised in the nation. And I talked to some Congressmen about this, some old timers, and they were explaining to me, like, back in the day, 80% of the negotiations, they've largely. Their voices have largely been ignored for 30 years. And it's coming to roost. And by the way, you can look through history, whenever the delta between the haves and the have nots be done behind closed doors. And the last 20% was for the cameras, and now it's 100% for the cameras. And back in the day, the goal was that each party could go back to their constituents and say we won, and they could go both go back and say we got what we wanted and appease their constituents. Now it grows too big. Usually there's a revolution.

I don't know if anybody or I don't know if you've ever.

It's not enough to say we won. We also have to demonstrate that the other side lost, which is a finite mindset in an infinite game, which decreases trust, cooperation. And.

Your storyteller, have you listened to any of hardcore history? Dan Carlin. It's this podcast. It is unbelievable. But he gets in and.

But if we want to go backwards.

And look to the root, he does a lot of series on the Romans and the lessons learned and the Gauls and the Celts and all this stuff.

And I think that contract for America back in the day, one of the.

That hierarchy, it brings down empires.

It does. And one of the components of that, and this is not political. I don't care about the politics of it, but there was a component of it that said to congressmen, no longer don't move your family to Washington. When you get elected, stay home in your constituency. So now what happens is you have congressmen come to work for. Unfortunately, there's a lot of similarities between what America's going through right now and the Roman Empire, but that's a different conversation. Percy Simon, thanks for being with us today. So I love the comment about balance. So how do we fix the political landscape? Three days in Washington, then fly home, and they're not meeting their constituents, they're fundraising, fly for five days a week. But the problem is, back in the day, they fought and they disagreed and they hated each other, but they sat in the bleachers together to watch their kids play baseball, and they went to the same PTA meetings and they were friends and they socialized, and it's really easy to compromise with a friend. And you could sit back and be like, I can't do.

Simple stuff. Thank you.

You know.

Do that. You know, I can't do that, you know, but now there's no friendships. They don't know each other. They sleep on their couches at work and they only know the people they hang out with, which is their own party.

Change starts at home.

You know, saying that the politicians have to change, like everybody knows that, but they're not going to because they have become more finite minded, which is an election is a finite game. There's a beginner, there's a beginning, middle and end. And there's a winner and there's a loser. We don't want to go into gerrymandering as well. You know, we used to live in a world where, you know, we picked our electors, now our electors pick us. And so they don't the minute you win your election. Now governance is an infinite game. But the problem is they don't make that conversion work. They don't have blended districts anymore where they have to have a point of view that appeals to both sides. They've. They've both sides. And it used to be, it used to be. And I talked to some congressmen about this, some old timers and they were explaining to me like back in the day gerrymandered the point that you only have to appeal to your own. So they've both gone more extremist. But to answer your question directly.

80% of the negotiations. I'm sorry I had to go on a little diatribe, but to answer your question more directly, I think our politics done behind closed doors and the last 20% was for the cameras and now it's 100% for the cameras are a reflection of us. I think we get what we deserve. And in the back in the nerve. And this is, none of this is a surprise and none of this is an anomaly. It's all day. The goal was that each party could go back to their constituents and say we won and they could go both go back all been a steady drum beat. If we just go back 40 years and say we got what we wanted and appease their constituents. Now you can see the steady drumbeat, Republican and Democrat, the steady drumbeat towards more and more finite. And it's just come to a head these days. It's not enough to say we won. We also have to demonstrate that the other side lost, which is a finite mindset in an infinite game which decreases. It's been getting worse for decades, since basically the fall of the Berlin Wall. You can go back to about 1989.

Where it started, and we are the ones who are complaining. They need to compromise, trust Cooperation.

But if we want to go backwards and look to the root minds, they need to listen. They need to work across the aisle. They need to stop being less judgmental. Well, hello. We need to compromise. We need to listen. We need to work across. I think that Contract for America back in the day.

One of the components of that, and this is not polityphile. We need to be less judgmental. It's us. And I think change always starts at home.

I've recently, we have a pack, and we try to find moderate, nice people that are willing to have conversations on both sides. And Senator Masto.

Chair of the Senate.

Campbell, I don't care about the politics of it, but there was a component of it that said to congressmen, no longer don't move your family to Washington. When you get elected, stay home in your constituency. So now what happens is you have congressmen come to work for bipain.

Committee was with us in our office, and I said, I asked this question, and she said.

There'S. What you, what you don't see is that we actually do have a lot of bipartisan work going on. We, I mean, to get anything done, we get into the room, we get both sides of the committee, we talk, we see if we can go find some agree, some agreeing votes. We come back together and say the.

Problem, three days in Washington, then fly home.

And that's what we're facing. But the goal is to do the thing.

They're not meeting their constituents. They're fundraising for five days a week. Right. But the problem is, back in the.

Day, they fought to accomplish something. There's these big, iconic votes on voting or reconciliating or whatever that come hell or high water, we won't. But those are just things you hear about. The things you don't hear about are just hundreds of laws that get passed all the time that we, we work on together.

And they disagreed and they hated each other, but they sat in the bleachers together to watch their kids.

But when we go back to our constituencies, you say, I'm. I, I said no. And you tell your constituencies how divisive.

You were and play baseball. And they went to the same PTA meetings and they.

You don't buy that?

That's all bullshit. I mean, that's, that's the same to me. That's the same party line as, well, we're friends and they socialize, and it's really easy to compromise with a friend. And you could sit back and be like, I can't do that. You know, I can't do that, you know, but now there's no friendships. They don't know each other. Close cops are good cops. You know, it's like, yeah, I know that, but you have a problem. It's like, yeah, sure, you're very good at getting the mundane stuff done. Kudos. That sounds like table stakes to me. You know, it's like, it's the difficult stuff that. The stuff that sleep on their couches at work and they only know the people they hang out with, which is their own party has to get done. Like, the fact that we even came to another brink where that government could get shut down is. We don't want to go into gerrymandering as well. You know, we used to live in a world where, you know, we picked our electors, now our electors pick us. And so they don't work. They don't have blended districts anymore where they have to have a point of view that just an embarrassment. So I, you know, you know, to me, it's, it's, it's, it's a moral equivalency. You know, it's. That kind of thing was like, well, you know, like you're looking at all the bad things. Like, well, but we do a lot of good things. It's like, you know.

Yeah. You know, last time we'll give to her.

Yeah. Appeals to both sides. They've, they've. Both sides have gerrymandered the point. They only have to appeal to your own. So they've both gone more extremist. But to answer your question directly, without, you know, I'm sorry I had to go on a little diatribe, but the. To answer your question more directly, I think our politics. So.

I don't know.

I hear what you're saying. Her point was, though, that it's.

Politicians are a reflection of us. I think we get what we deserve.

It's like you said, you're being. You get what you deserve. They don't want to tell, they don't want to say. We're playing along publicly because their voters won't vote for them. Because we are a divided nation and we come from different places and we don't trust the other side.

And none of this is a surprise, and none of this is an anomaly. It's all been a steady drumbeat. If we just go back 40 years, you can see the steady drumbeat, Republican and Democrat, the steady drumbeat towards.

And so we're fighting, and we like people.

That fight for us.

When did compromise become dirty? Like, you cannot have a successful marriage without Compromise. You cannot be a successful person unless your views change as you get older and wiser. Right. It's only in politics where you have to believe the same thing for 30 years, otherwise you're a bad person. It's only more and more finite. And it's just come to a head these days. It's been getting worse for decades, since basically the fall of the Berlin Wall. You can go back to about 1989.

Where it started, and we are the ones who are complaining. They need to come politics where talking to the side and trying to find common ground is considered the devil's work. And.

I just, I call Bullen. And I've worked with both sides because I preach bipartisanship. I won't compromise. They need to listen. They need to work across the aisle. They need to stop being less judged. I won't work with the candidate, but I'll work with parties. And I've worked with both parties and I can tell you some funny stories.

Mental.

Well, hello. We need to compromise. We need to listen. We need to work across. And I've had private conversations, and I'll tell you one of them. So I sat down with a congressman, just me and the congressman, no staffers around us.

And I had the uncomfortable conversation, which I wouldn't have publicly with them because it's just inappropriate. And I said, you know what your problem is, is you're not willing to sacrifice for this country. I said, we need to be less judgmental. It's us. And I think change always starts at home.

I recently, we have, we have a pack, and we try to find moderate, nice people that are willing to have conversations on both sides. And Senator Mino, men and women who.

Wear a uniform, who would lay down their lives for this country. And you won't even give up your job for this country. Oh, and by the way, if you lost your election, you're going to become a lobbyist or some consultant and you'll make more money than you've ever dreamed of. So my question is, what exactly are you losing? Whether you keep your job or lose your job, the answer is nothing.

Power and asto.

Chair of the Senate camp. Right.

But the point is that they're in a win win situation.

Paying committee was with us in our office, and I asked this question, and.

She said.

I'm either powerful or I got cash. Like, that's your choice.

And there's. What you don't see is that we actually do have a lot of bipartisan work going on.

We.

I mean, he looked at me and said, you're right.

None of us are. None of us are willing to. And this is not what our founding fathers intended. Our founding fathers intended to that you would leave your law practice, you would.

Leave your farm to get anything done. We get into the room, we get both sides of the committee, we talk, we see if we can go find some agreeing votes. We come back together and say the problem.

Come and serve your nation for a few.

Cycles, and then you go back to your career. We have professional politicians now, people who've been in office for 30 years. They actually don't know how to do anything else.

Take anybody, as we're facing, but the goal is to do the thing, to accomplish something. There's these big iconic votes on voting or reconciliation or whatever that come hell or high water, we won't. But those are just things you hear about. The things you don't hear about are.

Who'S been doing something for 30 years and say you're going to stop doing it. And fear is the motivation as well. Our founding fathers never wanted a class of professional politician that was never in. In the design of this nation.

So I think there's my.

There's hundreds of laws that get passed all the time that we work on together.

This is a horrible thought, but it's a thought that I've struggled with for years.

But when we go back to our constituencies, you say, I said no, and you tell your constituencies how divisive you were.

And now, and I cannot reconcile it, which is.

We lost something when the Berlin Wall came down, which is, we lost an. You don't mind that bullshit external existential threat.

I mean, that's the same to me. That's the same party line as well. We always fought, we always disagreed. But at the end of the day, we could come together and say, ugh, that's not that. That threatens all of us. And so we could come together in defense of our beliefs in our nation. And when the Berlin Wall came down and we lost a perception, most cops are good cops. You know, it's like, yeah, I know that, but you have a problem. It's like, yeah, sure, you're very good at getting the mundane stuff done. Kudos. That sounds like table stakes to me. You know, it's like, it's the difficult stuff that. The stuff that has to get done, like the fact that we even came to another brink where that government could get shut down is just an embarrassment. So I, you know, you know, to me, it's a moral equivalency. You know, it's that kind of thing it was like, well, you know, like you're looking at all the bad things like, well, but we do a lot of good things. It's like, you know, it still exists. We just lost the perception of the external existential threat. What happens. It's a weird quirk of humanity which is vision and positive stuff and all this stuff is all ethereal, but negative stuff is usually tangible. And so it's a weird quirk of humanity that it's that it's that I can more easily define what I stand for when I can see what I stand against.

Oh yeah, you know, last time we'll give to her.

Yeah. But if that thing that I stand against doesn't exist, then it's very hard for me to articulate what I stand for. And so I look for some. So.

I don't know.

I hear what you're saying. Her point was though, that it's like you said, you're being you get what you deserve. They don't want to tell the thing.

That I'm a gets to help me understand what I stand for. And so if it doesn't exist outside our borders, I'm going to look inside our borders and we start to see a massive.

They don't want to say we're playing along publicly because their voters won't vote for them because we are an increase.

Of infighting inside our nation because we.

Don'T divided nation and we come from different places and we don't trust the other side.

Don't have any sense that there's something threatening us as a tribe.

So you've got this conundrum. I don't know if there's others. And so we're fighting and we like people that. That fight for us.

You know, when did compromise become dirty? Like you cannot have a successful marriage without compromise. You know, you cannot be a successful person unless the view your views changes. That by the way, was also part of the Roman Empire after Carly.