Yeah, I do think that that does point to, and this is speaking of the New York Times only,

you know, loving to cover like the smallest possible sliver of the population.

I think that, and I, plenty of people have made this observation before, all of these trends and

experiences tend to attenuate the further away you get from elite institutions, you know? Like,

I think that probably the experience of going to like, you know, ASU or Alabama actually probably

is less different in any case, less politically fraught than certainly going to Harvard,

and probably not much more politically fraught than it was to go there in, you know, 1985,

in part because, as you alluded to Matt, I think, you know, most of those places have basically

just been converted into technical colleges, and we don't call them such, but they're, it's all

vocational training. So, you know, I think it's the attempt to sort of graft that Athenian idol

onto the modern hedge fund with a college attached that constitutes Princeton or Harvard or Yale

that, that like produces the most maximal version of that kind of derangement.

How about we abolish the Ivy League? What if we just get rid of these stupid schools?

Yeah, no other teams are good anyway. Is that a possibility? Would that not be a bipartisan

solution, and it would make us stop having to read these goddamn articles? Well, they can,

the answer to the question, not like turn them public or any of that bullshit,

raise them to the ground, solve the earth, and just get rid of them. We do not need them.

They're only annoying. They only exist to produce annoying people and to produce annoying

discourse. I can't help but think that if we got the troops together, we could come up with a

with a plant-based league of educational institutions that would lead up to dance off of the Ivy League.

Yeah, cut Zoolie. How about that?

The monster league.

...