Chief Justice John Roberts plays legal games to strike down another pro-life law, Corporations pull back from social media to avoid political blowback, and COVID continues to spike. This is the Ben Shapiro Show, and it is sponsored by Express VPN. Protect your online privacy today at ExpressVPN.org/ProtectYourOnline Privacy. Ben Shapiro is a writer, speaker, and podcast host. His latest novel Other Words For Smoke is out now, and he is available for pre-order on Amazon Prime and Vimeo worldwide. Please take a few minutes to fill out this brief survey. Have a question or suggestion? Call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255. During the months of June and July, when you open an IRA in precious metals, you get a signed copy of my new book, The Right Side of History, for free. No obligation. Protect your family by protecting your savings the way I did by investing in gold with Birch Gold Group. You ll get 5 star reviews, a plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, and a FREE information kit on diversifying into gold by Birch Gold. Text Ben to 474747. To find a list of my sponsors and show your support, go to bit.ly/support-the-benchrischandler. I ll be looking out for you! Thank you so much for your support! - Ben Shapiro - The Benny Shapiro Show and much more! "The Benny Shapiro Podcast" - Subscribe to my insta-seriously? "Ben Shapiro Show" Subscribe to Ben Shapiro's on Insta- & "The Ben Shapiro Podcast . " in the , is or ? # @ ) (featuring a podcast on : ... :) And so a AND out ! etc , and can be reached by to v any at I < + right link ~ c ;) this has cause he et else th b that an n y s also
00:00:58.000When you purchase on or before July 31st, you get a free signed copy of my book, The Right Side of History, from my friends over at Birch Gold.
00:01:36.000During the months of June or July, when you open an IRA in precious metals, you get a signed copy of my book, The Right Side of History, for free.
00:01:43.000We're going to get to a little bit later on in the program.
00:01:48.000The Elizabeth Warren claim that it is time for all of us to become anti-racist.
00:01:51.000I'm going to explain the difference between being a not racist and being an anti-racist in the view of people who are on the left and why it is that they have perverted the definition of racism in order to basically suggest that anyone who doesn't like favored leftist policies is in fact a racist.
00:02:05.000We'll also get to COVID where, again, the gap continues to increase between The number of identified cases and the number of deaths in the United States on a day-on-day level, the number of deaths by COVID in the United States continues to decline or at least remain steady.
00:02:18.000The idea that we are seeing this massive increase in death so far is just not true.
00:02:22.000It is possible that that death increase will happen.
00:02:24.000But one of the reasons for this, the vast proportion of people who are getting COVID at this point are people who are young and those people are not dying of COVID.
00:02:32.000They're not rising so dramatically that they have overwhelmed the system.
00:02:35.000You would have expected, given the positivity rates that we've been seeing in states like California, Texas, Florida, Arizona, the systems already would have been swamped.
00:02:42.000That, in fact, is not what is happening.
00:02:44.000What is happening instead is that a huge number of people are asymptomatic.
00:02:47.000It is also possible a lot of people who are coming in for hospitalizations for other reasons are being identified with COVID.
00:02:53.000Meaning that they're not coming in necessarily for COVID, but you're being identified as somebody with COVID because you came in for another reason.
00:02:59.000And so you're hospitalized with COVID, even if you're not ICU.
00:03:01.000The real question is not really hospitalizations so much as it is ICUs.
00:03:05.000We are not at the state where we believe that the ICUs are going to be overwhelmed in any of the states thus far.
00:03:09.000So we'll get to that in just a little bit.
00:03:11.000First, we begin with Chief Justice John Roberts.
00:03:14.000You know, I hate saying I told you so, except that I love saying I told you so.
00:03:17.000I only hate saying I told you so when the thing that I told you so turns out to be bad for the country.
00:03:23.000That thing I told you so about Chief Justice John Roberts.
00:03:25.000So all the way back, all the way back, long ago in the hazy memory of yesteryear, back in 2005.
00:03:32.000When John Roberts was elected to the Supreme Court, I, and perhaps only I, said Chief Justice John Roberts would not be a good justice.
00:03:38.000There was no evidence he was going to be a good justice.
00:03:40.000He had no record of textualist or originalist jurisprudence.
00:04:21.000And if we ask those questions, then maybe Democrats will get mad.
00:04:24.000Well, I mean, that does show the bad faith of Democrats, because the simple fact of the matter is that people like Ruth Bader Ginsburg fly through the Senate, even though it is perfectly obvious she's going to be a wild leftist judge.
00:04:33.000Same thing with Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
00:05:19.000We've seen A serious number of justices, who's the one I'm thinking of, who was appointed by, it was Stevens and Souter, Justice David Souter, appointed by George H.W.
00:05:46.000And the reason for that is the institutional pressures are very much for justices to be the people who reshape the country from the top down.
00:05:54.000So unless you are somebody like Clarence Thomas, who's already been through the wars, there's a good shot that you're going to move.
00:05:58.000Well, that's what has happened to Chief Justice John Roberts.
00:06:01.000So yesterday, Chief Justice John Roberts, in an almost unthinkably stupid decision, voted with the left of the court to rule that a law requiring the doctors who perform abortions must have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals violates abortion rights.
00:06:13.000Okay, now, there was a case just four years ago that was basically on the same topic, right, back in 2016.
00:06:20.000There is a case in which Texas had a law.
00:06:22.000The law was that if you're an abortion clinic, you have to have admitting privileges at a hospital.
00:06:25.000The reason for that is you're doing an abortion, something goes wrong.
00:06:28.000If you don't have admitting privileges at a hospital, it really gums up the works.
00:06:31.000If you have some sort of emergency and you have to rush the person to a hospital.
00:06:34.000So the rule in Texas was that within a certain radius, you had to have admitting privileges at that hospital.
00:06:39.000People who are anti the law said, well, this hurts abortion clinics because abortion clinics very often can't get admitting privileges at hospitals nearby, and therefore the abortion clinic would be put out of business.
00:06:50.000In Louisiana, there's basically apparently one major abortion clinic, and the one major abortion clinic did not have admitting privileges at any of the hospitals in a 30-mile radius, and so they challenged the law.
00:07:02.000Every surgery center in Louisiana, every surgery center in Texas, has to have admitting privileges at the local hospital.
00:07:07.000So this would exempt abortion, basically, from a rule that applies to all other surgery centers.
00:07:11.000And let's be real about this, a DNC, which is an early to mid-stage abortion, as opposed to an extraction and dilation, which is a late-stage abortion.
00:07:19.000Those sorts of surgeries are surgeries.
00:07:22.000And so having admitting privileges is a good thing.
00:07:25.000The notion that this law is patently on its face a violation of the state's ability to restrict how medical procedures are done is, of course, very, very silly.
00:07:34.000Okay, so, you know who used to feel this way?
00:07:47.000He sided with the dissenters in that case.
00:07:49.000He said, no, no, no, that law from Texas, that's perfectly legal.
00:07:52.000Four years later, the exact same law comes up, and Chief Justice John Roberts decides, you know what?
00:07:57.000On behalf of stare decisis, I'm just going to go along with this thing.
00:08:01.000Now, stare decisis is the idea that a case has been settled.
00:08:05.000That we have sort of a bizarre system in the United States, where we have a common law system in the judiciary, where the judiciary develops basically its own set of codes and its own set of laws, and it develops over time.
00:08:15.000The most famous common law system is of course the British system, because the British don't really have a constitution per se, and so it really is a body of law made by judges.
00:08:25.000The United States has a constitution, but then it also has a common law system derived from that constitution via the justices of the Supreme Court who have created their own corpus of law.
00:08:33.000Okay, so the idea there is that stare decisis, the idea that a case has been decided, that's what stare decisis means, it has been decided.
00:08:40.000That you don't re-litigate cases that have already been litigated.
00:08:43.000Now, the problem, of course, is that nobody actually holds by stare decisis.
00:08:47.000A stare decisis is basically just an excuse to hold how you want to hold.
00:09:52.000Every justice sort of has a guiding theme.
00:09:53.000The guiding theme to Justice Roberts is, I don't want controversy, but I'm going to create it accidentally because I don't want controversy.
00:09:58.000That is nearly every Justice Roberts decision.
00:10:03.000I don't want controversy over striking down Obamacare.
00:10:05.000I don't want to be responsible for striking down what is clearly an unconstitutional law.
00:10:08.000So instead, I'm just going to say that it is kind of unconstitutional, but I'll rewrite the law.
00:10:13.000So now it's magically constitutional to avoid controversy.
00:10:15.000And of course, now he's plunged face first into controversy.
00:10:18.000He did the same thing yesterday on a Consumer Finance Protection Bureau case where he could have struck down the entire Consumer Finance Protection Bureau as an unconstitutional scheme, which it is.
00:10:40.000He voted the wrong way on the Civil Rights Act case, suggesting that transgender identity and sexual orientation are protected by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when clearly they are not.
00:10:49.000He voted with the majority in that case.
00:10:51.000The only time he ever votes With his supposed principles is when he's in the minority.
00:10:54.000I've yet to see Justice Roberts side with a controversial majority decision.
00:10:58.000It really does not happen where he's the swing vote.
00:11:00.000The guiding light is he will always take the side of the left in order to create institutional stability.
00:11:06.000But institutional stability inherently means cave to the left.
00:11:09.000When four of the members of the court are on the left, and he votes with the left.
00:11:12.000And we're gonna get to more of this in just a second.
00:11:26.000It really is incredible how dumb this particular decision is from Justice Roberts.
00:11:30.000So as Dan McLaughlin properly writes in National Review, Chief Justice John Roberts' lack of courage is damaging the Supreme Court.
00:11:38.000He says, there are times when it is hard to stand up for your principles, to stand against your own party, or both.
00:11:42.000From judges, we are told, the important thing is to follow, not lead, to have the ascetic self-discipline to apply the constitution and laws as written, not to put your own policy preferences above the letter of the law.
00:11:51.000The right ideas and the right priorities matter more than character.
00:11:55.000The conservative legal establishment has long been particularly enamored of this ideal, the umpire calling balls and strikes, which is important, but this is not the first virtue.
00:12:03.000An umpire who can be cowed by the crowd will not call the same strike zone for both teams.
00:12:07.000And that is exactly what Chief Justice John Roberts did.
00:12:09.000There were two decisions that came down yesterday.
00:12:11.000One is in a case called June Medical, and the other...
00:12:16.000The June medical case is the abortion case.
00:12:18.000And again, this is unthinkably stupid, what he did here.
00:12:21.000He voted the other way on the same case four years ago, and now he is saying that because this case was decided four years ago, it has become part and parcel of the American jurisprudence and cannot be overturned.
00:12:32.000Now, the basic rule, by the way, on stare decisis is the longer it's been in place, the more you don't want to overturn it because there's so many institutions then built on the decision.
00:12:39.000Now, that does not stop the court from stepping in and overturning hundreds of years of precedence in America when they have felt the necessity to do so.
00:12:45.000I mean, you'll recall that just a few years ago, the Supreme Court decided on the basis of no history whatsoever that same-sex marriage was mandated by the Constitution, right?
00:12:52.000I mean, overturning literally not just centuries of law, but millennia of Western canon.
00:12:57.000You know, stare decisis only matters when the Supreme Court says it matters.
00:13:01.000As Dan McLaughlin says, in June, Medical Services LLC versus Rousseau, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch would have upheld that Louisiana law.
00:13:10.000Chief Justice Roberts sided with the court's four liberals, claiming his hands were tied by precedent.
00:13:14.000In the 2016 case, Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt, the court ruled 5-3 against a Texas abortion law that required abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles.
00:13:24.000States routinely impose such requirements on the practice of medicine, especially invasive or surgical procedures.
00:13:29.000As Justice Gorsuch observed in that case, the Louisiana law, or in this case, tracks long-standing state laws governing physicians who perform relatively low-risk procedures like colonoscopies, LASIK eye surgeries, and steroid injections at ambulatory surgical centers.
00:13:42.000The court in both of these cases, the 2016 case on the Texas law and the case yesterday on Louisiana law ruled, quote, an unnecessary health regulations that have the purpose or effect of presenting a substantial obstacle to a woman seeking an abortion impose an undue burden on the right to an abortion.
00:13:58.000But what the court defines is an unnecessary requirement would be uncontroversially legal for any other medical procedure under the sun.
00:14:05.000And of course, there is no constitutional right to abortion.
00:14:08.000Now normally, if you vote one case four years ago, one way, you don't switch and vote the other way in the exact same case four years later.
00:14:15.000But Justice Roberts gave the liberals the deference they would not apply themselves.
00:14:20.000Writing, I joined the dissent in Whole Women's Health and continue to believe the case was wrongly decided.
00:14:25.000The question today is not whether Whole Women's Health was right or wrong, but whether to adhere to it.
00:14:29.000The legal doctrine of stare decisis requires us, absent special circumstances, to treat like cases alike.
00:14:36.000Except for the fact that the Whole Women's Health decision overturned a prior decision that had already said the opposite.
00:14:43.000The four liberals allowed a do-over in the Whole Woman's Health case.
00:14:46.000Justice Alito pointed out that the Whole Woman's Health decision disregarded basic rules that apply in all other cases.
00:14:52.000Stare decisis is supposed to promote stability in law by adhering to consistent and predictable rules, but the opinion striking down the Louisiana law didn't do any of that stuff.
00:15:00.000Roberts didn't join the majority opinion, which was written by Justice Breyer, but by joining its outcome, he prevented the court's conservatives from doing anything to keep the court from constantly rewriting its own rules.
00:15:09.000This is the point that is being made here.
00:15:13.000Abortion law is governed by a 1992 decision called Planned Parenthood versus Casey, one of the worst cases in Supreme Court history in which the court declared that people have a right to define the world and the universe for themselves.
00:15:25.000That's actually the language of the decision.
00:15:26.000As Roberts noted, Casey asked whether an abortion law imposed an undue burden, but the court in Whole Woman's Health and the plurality today changed the rule to make it a balancing test that reviews the pros and cons of the law.
00:15:38.000Roberts reiterated that Whole Woman's Health therefore departs from Casey and asks the court to apply a test they are not competent to administer.
00:15:46.000In this context, courts applying a balancing test would be asked, in essence, to weigh the state's interests in protecting the potentiality of human life and the health of the woman on one hand, against the woman's liberty interest in defining her own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life on the other.
00:16:00.000That quote is from Planned Parenthood versus Casey.
00:16:03.000That's what I was referring to, which is just idiotic.
00:16:05.000There's no plausible sense in which anyone, let alone this court, could objectively assign weight to such imponderable values and no meaningful way to compare them, if there were.
00:16:13.000Attempting to do so would be like judging whether a particular line is longer than a particular rock is heavy.
00:16:18.000That's what Justice Antonin Scalia said in Planned Parenthood versus Casey.
00:16:22.000Pretending we could pull that off would require us to act as legislators, not judges.
00:16:27.000We have explained the traditional rule that state and federal legislatures have wide discretion to pass legislation in areas where there is medical and scientific uncertainty is consistent with Casey, right?
00:16:50.000Okay, that is one thing that Robert said yesterday.
00:16:52.000He ruled in a second case in which he saved the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
00:16:55.000So for those who don't know, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was a piece of government machinery created independent of the executive branch of the government.
00:17:02.000The head of the CFPB could not be fired.
00:17:04.000Their basic idea, they were empowered with overwhelming powers, incredible powers.
00:17:07.000I've talked about it on the program before.
00:17:09.000Incredible powers to oversee business in the United States and find businesses and investigate businesses.
00:17:14.000And the head of it was not answerable to the executive branch.
00:17:17.000Which means that it violates the separation of powers, because you either work for the legislature, or you work for the executive, or you work for the judiciary.
00:17:23.000There is no unaccountable fourth branch of government.
00:17:26.000The CFPB set up the head of the CFPB so the person could not be fired.
00:17:29.000Okay, so, this comes up before the court, and what does the court do?
00:17:35.000They uphold the presence of the CFPB by basically saying, okay, you know what, we understand that the head can't be fired, but just because the head can't be fired doesn't mean that we can't make him fireable by the president, so we're just gonna rewrite the law wholesale.
00:17:46.000So basically the same thing that Roberts did in Obamacare, where he declared that a fee was actually a tax.
00:17:54.000He just rewrote the law in order to save the law.
00:17:56.000So he did the exact same thing yesterday, joining a 5-4 majority.
00:18:00.000As Dan McLaughlin says, in the second case, Celia Law versus Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Chief Justice wrote the court's opinion, declaring that Congress in the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act had violated the separation of powers by placing the CFPB's head beyond the reach of presidents to remove at will.
00:18:14.000It's an epic embarrassment for Elizabeth Warren, who designed the CFPB, and for President Obama.
00:18:18.000But Roberts pulled up short of concluding that an agency created in violation of the Constitution lacked the power to compel the citizenry, so they could go ahead and continue operating as normal.
00:18:27.000We're just going to make the person fireable by the President.
00:18:30.000If Congress passes an unconstitutional statute, generally, you strike it down unless there's a severability provision, right?
00:18:35.000Severability provision is a provision in the law that says, you can carve off this portion of the law and you can declare it invalid, and if you do that, then here's our backup plan.
00:18:47.000We're just gonna make this person fireable by the president, and then we'll just preserve the law.
00:18:51.000So Roberts is just doing the work of the left at this point.
00:18:56.000Now Dan McLaughlin is more charitable.
00:18:58.000He says it's a mistake to compare Roberts to past Republican appointees because unlike William Brennan or John Paul Stevens or Souter or Earl Warren Burger or O'Connor, he actually is good at his job, he's just weak.
00:19:15.000If you vote with the left, you're with the left, okay?
00:19:17.000There is no kind of halfway point here.
00:19:20.000So once again, what this demonstrates is that if you are relying on the Republican Party to save you by appointing Supreme Court justices who are on the right, Supreme Court justices can help a little bit, but can they overwhelmingly preserve your rights?
00:19:33.000And Republicans are simply not willing to appoint the kind of people who will preserve your rights by asking them the honest and open questions they need to be asked before they are appointed to the Supreme Court.
00:19:40.000We'll get to more of this in just one second.
00:19:43.000First, Let's talk about the fact that the Second Amendment, pretty important right now, so we've got an entire class of people in the United States who have decided that it's time to defund the police, and then they've also decided that it's time for you not to have a gun, only the police should have guns.
00:19:55.000Well, that seems like a very, very terrible idea.
00:19:57.000There's a reason that shootings are spiking in major cities around the United States, and that's a pretty damned good reason for you to be armed.
00:20:05.000Bravo Company Manufacturing builds a professional-grade product built to combat standards.
00:20:09.000That's because BCM believes the same level of protection should be provided to every American, regardless if they're a private citizen or a professional.
00:20:16.000The people of BCM assume that when a rifle leaves their shop, it will be used in a life-or-death situation by a responsible citizen, law enforcement officer, or a soldier overseas.
00:20:24.000And with that in mind, every component of a BCM rifle is hand-assembled and tested by Americans.
00:20:29.000The people at BCM feel it is their moral responsibility as Americans to provide the tools that will not fail the end-user when it's not just a paper target, but somebody coming to do them harm.
00:20:38.000BCM also knows that making reliable, life-saving tools is only half the story.
00:20:41.000The company also works with leading instructors of marksmanship from top levels of America's Special Ops Forces, from Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance to U.S.
00:20:48.000Army Special Operation Forces, connecting them with other Americans.
00:20:52.000These top instructors will teach you the skills necessary to defend yourself, your family, or others.
00:20:56.000If you're trying to protect yourself, having a gun that works is definitely a really important, important thing protecting your rights.
00:21:02.000Learn more about Bravo Company Manufacturing today.
00:21:04.000Head on over to my friends at BravoCompanyMFG.com.
00:21:06.000You can discover more about their products, special offers, and upcoming news.
00:21:24.000Okay, so, bottom line is, with Justice Roberts, like so much of the rest of the court, if you're unwilling to stand up for the right principles, then those principles will be pulled away right in front of you.
00:22:07.000We have to have enough respect for our neighbors that we allow our neighbors to do things that are within their rights, even if we disagree with them.
00:22:12.000And that is something that is falling away incredibly quickly in the United States.
00:22:17.000The Supreme Court and the law tend to follow the culture.
00:22:19.000So, if the culture becomes incredibly censorious, if the culture decides that certain types of speech are no longer allowed, it is only a matter of time before there are justices on the Supreme Court appointed presumably by a Democrat or a weak-kneed Republican.
00:22:31.000And those justices start maintaining that, for example, hate speech regulations don't violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
00:22:38.000It's only a matter of time until that happens.
00:22:40.000And it's going to be called wild and crazy to say such things, but the reality is we've had such laws promulgated in states across the United States on college campuses.
00:22:49.000There are all sorts of regulations on college campuses that patently offend the First Amendment and that have been at the very least sort of overlooked by court systems.
00:22:58.000In foreign countries like the UK or Canada, there are hate speech regulations on the books.
00:23:02.000And you are seeing increasingly a push for such sort of regulations in the United States.
00:23:06.000Now that will follow a cultural push to cast out everybody who disagrees with you.
00:23:12.000Now, the entire model of free speech, of liberal free speech, I mean classical liberal free speech, is the idea that a marketplace of ideas is a good thing.
00:23:20.000That typically, you want people to be able to speak their minds even if what they are saying offends you, even if what they are saying is wrong or incorrect.
00:23:26.000Better too much speech than too little speech.
00:23:28.000That is the culture of rights I'm talking about.
00:23:30.000The recognition, the ACLU's old recognition, that I hate what you're saying, but I will fight and die for your right to say it.
00:23:37.000Is there anybody who believes that members of the Democratic Party would do that today?
00:23:40.000Is there anybody who believes that members of today's culture, today's censorious culture, would fight and die for the right of somebody else to say something with which they disagree?
00:23:47.000More likely, they would kill somebody who is disagreeing, at least figuratively speaking.
00:23:53.000At least they would excise them from the American body politic.
00:23:56.000The culture of rights is falling away.
00:23:58.000And it's falling away in a variety of ways.
00:23:59.000It's falling away particularly when it comes to the consumption of products.
00:24:02.000It's really interesting to see which avenues the fight against a culture of free speech rights is moving.
00:24:08.000So, they're going at the most vulnerable targets.
00:24:11.000The hard left that is seeking to restrict the ability to perform free speech in America is going after the most vulnerable targets.
00:24:16.000You wonder why they go after college campuses.
00:24:18.000Where, by the way, there is less offensive speech on college campuses than anywhere else in American life, at least if you're on the American left.
00:24:23.000If you're on the American left, These are safe spaces for you.
00:24:26.000The idea that you're experiencing massive, overwhelming discrimination, racism, brutal right-wing bigotry on college campuses is insane.
00:24:33.000But those are always ground zero for these sorts of controversies.
00:24:45.000It manifests first on college campuses.
00:24:47.000Where hate speech regulations are promulgated and where you see college administrators bowing to the whims of a mob and declaring that people who say perfectly inoffensive things ought to be cast out of their jobs.
00:24:56.000This is how you get Brett Weinstein getting tossed out of his job over at Evergreen State College for the great crime of saying, I'm not going to stop teaching today just because of the color of my skin.
00:25:03.000That's literally a thing that happened at Evergreen State College.
00:25:07.000It then moves into the media because all of these college graduates then go work at the New York Times.
00:25:11.000And then they get the op-ed editor of the New York Times thrown out of his job for the grave sin of running an editorial from a sitting United States senator suggesting that perhaps federal troops might have to be used if ongoing rights in American cities are not quelled, which is a majority proposition in the United States.
00:25:26.000But the idea is that's threatening and it's bad.
00:25:29.000So all of the, and the media, because the media are left and apologetic about America's culture of rights, because America's culture of rights, according to the American left, rests on a fundamental basis of bigotry and evil.
00:25:39.000Because of all of that, that culture of rights has to be done away with.
00:25:42.000The only way we can achieve true equality is by quashing the culture of rights and replacing it with a culture of mandatory tolerance and acceptance of one type of point of view.
00:25:51.000A repressive tolerance, as Herbert Marcuse suggested in the 1960s.
00:25:54.000A tolerance of only certain points of view that forward the left-wing perspective on what utopia should look like.
00:26:00.000So it starts on college campuses, and then it moves over to the media.
00:26:02.000And now it's moving into the corporate world.
00:26:04.000I'm gonna explain that in just one second.
00:26:06.000First, let us talk about the simple fact that if you run a business, if you own a business, you gotta know your numbers.
00:26:12.000I mean, right now, with the economy as volatile as it is with the economy all over the place, it is incredibly important that you know in granular detail every aspect of your business.
00:26:25.000That integrated business solution, NetSuite by Oracle.
00:26:27.000It's the world's number one cloud business system.
00:26:29.000Finance, HR, inventory, e-commerce, everything you need, all in one place, so you save time, you save money, you save headaches.
00:26:35.000Whether you're doing a million or hundreds of millions in sales, NetSuite will give you visibility and control, so you can manage every penny with precision.
00:26:41.000Join over 20,000 companies who trust NetSuite to go faster with confidence.
00:26:44.000NetSuite surveyed hundreds of business leaders and assembled a playbook of the top strategies they are using as America reopens for business.
00:26:51.000Receive your free guide, seven actions businesses need to take right now.
00:26:54.000Schedule your free product tour at netsuite.com slash Shapiro.
00:27:07.000Make sure that you're on top of everything you need to know about your business to keep it running and functioning at full force.
00:27:12.000Netsuite.com slash Shapiro for that free guide and the free product tour right now.
00:27:17.000So, the left's push against our cultural rights, not just the push against legal rights, which will come later, the push against the culture of rights, turning institutions into batons to wield against political opponents, and casting out political opponents who are well within their rights in speaking out.
00:27:36.000Okay, the idea that the only things that matter... You hear this from the left very often.
00:27:39.000Why are you conservatives complaining so much about private institutions doing what they're doing?
00:27:43.000Okay, number one, they have a right to do it, and number two, they could be very wrong, and it can be very dangerous when all the institutions start to mirror an anti-freedom point of view.
00:27:57.000But you can also be contributing to the decline of a certain level of understanding that there will be differing points of view in American public life, and that's horrible for the culture.
00:28:26.000They're attempting to change hearts and minds on a particular issue.
00:28:29.000Well, when you have entire systems in America, institutions in America, that are now dedicated to the proposition that certain types of speech should not be allowed, well, that's going to have a pretty predictable impact on how Americans see the institution of free speech on a legal level, and also just on a general level.
00:28:43.000Because if you can't tolerate your neighbor saying something you disagree with, we can't be friends anymore.
00:28:46.000This is what the left is pushing, by the way.
00:28:48.000You can't speak to your parents unless they mouth the words, Black Lives Matter, with just the precise amount of authenticity.
00:28:55.000Well then, that's a culture war that actually has dramatic impact for how people live.
00:28:59.000It's not just the law, it's the culture that matters in the United States.
00:29:02.000I mean, this is why I talk about, again, three things in America that you actually need to be unified and how to destroy America in three easy steps.
00:29:07.000Philosophy, and history, a shared history, and a shared culture.
00:29:11.000And all three are under attack right now.
00:29:32.000And that results in an anti-freedom culture.
00:29:34.000That is what the left is pushing right now, all in the name of tolerance and acceptance.
00:29:39.000That is what the left is pushing very hard right now.
00:29:42.000And so they started off, as I've said, they started off on college campuses.
00:29:45.000Pushing the administrations on college campuses to shut down people's ability to speak freely, and declaring that we'd have free speech zones, and that we would ensure that everybody was ensured their safe space where they were free from microaggressions, and we'll teach all the white students about the fact that they're not allowed to say things like, I am colorblind, because that in and of itself is racist.
00:30:02.000You're not allowed to ask where somebody is from because that could be microaggressive.
00:30:07.000Then it moved into the halls of the media because the media is a very left institution and the heads of the media are just ashamed enough of America.
00:30:15.000They're more ashamed of America and America's history and America's philosophy.
00:30:19.000They're more ashamed of that than they are attached to the notion of everybody should be speaking freely and more speech is better speech.
00:30:26.000They're more attached to certain principles than other principles.
00:30:28.000And now it has moved on to corporate America.
00:30:30.000And the reason it's moved on to corporate America is because, again, corporate America is a soft target.
00:30:58.000Well, let's say that you're getting a pretty solid return on investment by advertising, for example, on Facebook.
00:31:03.000And then let's say that there are a loud coterie of people who say, we are going to launch a campaign against you, Coca-Cola, for the crime of, for the great evil of having advertised on Facebook.
00:31:15.000And we're going to launch a boycott against Coca-Cola now.
00:31:22.000Because it turns out the benefit we get from advertising on Facebook outweighs the downside of you guys being angry at us for advertising on Facebook.
00:32:05.000We're advertising on a social media platform with billions of people on it.
00:32:08.000That's literally all we're doing, but it doesn't matter.
00:32:10.000Because the idea is, I can find other alternative ways of advertising that appeal to the woke base inside our own company, and don't offend the media, and don't give us $10 million with bad media coverage.
00:32:22.000It makes my job easier, makes my days easier.
00:32:24.000All I have to do is click this button.
00:32:26.000If I click this button right here, and I temporarily suspend ads from Facebook, how much coke are we really selling off of Facebook anyway?
00:32:33.000Maybe we can find other ways of doing this.
00:32:35.000Maybe we can find other ways of doing this that adhere to the anti-rights culture that is being promulgated by the left.
00:32:41.000Because remember, when people advertise on Facebook, this is actually what's happening right now.
00:32:44.000When people advertise on Facebook, or Twitter, or any of the other social media platforms, they are not endorsing the messages that are there.
00:32:54.000When people advertise on Fox News, they're not endorsing everything on Fox News any more than if they advertise on MSNBC, they're endorsing everything on MSNBC.
00:33:02.000When products advertise themselves, typically they're advertising because they wish to reach the audience, not because they subsidized Tucker Carlson's script that day.
00:33:11.000None of them are privy to Tucker Carlson's script that day.
00:33:14.000What the left is attempting to do right now is basically remove all profit incentive for corporations to back free speech.
00:33:21.000And therefore to remove the profit incentive for an entire free speech industry that exists to provide opposing points of view.
00:33:28.000And then the only points of view that will be left are the points of view that preceded this brand new era of internet freedom.
00:33:34.000Because what the internet really did is it decentralized the power mechanisms for dissemination of information.
00:33:39.000And Matt Drudge was very instrumental in this.
00:33:41.000When Matt Drudge created Drudge Report, and suddenly people were flocking to Drudge Report to get reporting from an institution outside the mainstream media, it broke the media's monopoly on this.
00:33:50.000So many members of the media, people at the New York Times, will cheer on the demonetization of free speech content over on Facebook.
00:33:58.000They will cheer on Facebook as Facebook restricts material or his Twitter restricts material.
00:34:03.000Facebook's been better than the others, by the way.
00:34:04.000Facebook's been way better than the others because at least Zuckerberg has a baseline adherence to the levels of belief in free speech, according to his own speeches at Georgetown.
00:34:10.000But there are lots of other places that are saying, okay, well, we'll just go.
00:34:14.000Listen, we can still put out the New York Times.
00:34:17.000The New York Times, the Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS, all the mainstream media outlets used to have a monopoly.
00:34:23.000The monopoly was broken by the internet.
00:34:24.000And advertisers recognized that there were big audiences that cropped up for these alternative mechanisms.
00:34:29.000And so they started advertising on those mechanisms.
00:34:31.000And so the media, the old world media, the mainstream media, in combination with a censorious left, decided they were going to re-establish the monopoly by basically taking all these social media mechanisms and having those social media mechanisms become merely loudspeakers for the mainstream media while banning everybody else.
00:34:56.000Remove the profit margin for all of these smaller publishers.
00:34:59.000All they have to do is make sure that views they don't like are taken out of the realm of commerce.
00:35:05.000And corporations think to themselves, okay, do I really want this fight?
00:35:09.000If you're a corporate middle manager in marketing, do you really want to spend your day being inundated with emails from supposedly angry people who are on a listserv?
00:35:16.000Is that something that you want to do?
00:35:18.000Do you want to find yourself cancelled tomorrow?
00:35:20.000Because remember, all of these corporations are made up of individuals.
00:35:23.000And you're the middle manager who's approving the Facebook ad buy.
00:35:25.000And suddenly, somebody is resurfacing a tweet that you wrote 25 years ago.
00:35:30.000Or on Facebook, some post on social media, your high school yearbook is coming out.
00:35:33.000You don't want to be on the front lines of that thing.
00:35:35.000You'd prefer to have an easy life where you can be left alone.
00:35:37.000The left knows this, and so the left is attacking the culture of rights by going after the corporations.
00:35:41.000So it went colleges, then it went media, and now it's going corporations.
00:35:45.000And so what this means is that you are seeing, for example, Starbucks being the latest company to posit advertising across social media platforms, across all of them.
00:35:53.000Coke said it would pause advertising on all social media platforms globally.
00:35:57.000Unilever is halting advertising on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter in the United States through December 31st.
00:36:03.000According to Starbucks, we believe in bringing communities together, both in person and online, and we stand against hate speech.
00:36:08.000Now, nobody suggested that Starbucks stood in favor of hate speech.
00:36:11.000But who the hell is Starbucks to determine what a social media platform should be?
00:36:16.000They're not advertising on any of the hate speech stuff.
00:36:19.000And if they found out they were, they would pull their advertising from that stuff.
00:36:21.000But instead of saying, okay, YouTube or Facebook, you know, there's some bad stuff there and we don't want to be associated with that bad stuff.
00:36:27.000They say, we're just not going to be involved in free speech at all.
00:36:30.000And until Facebook only has content that we feel comfortable advertising on, Then we are not going to be on Facebook.
00:36:37.000In other words, we, who are run by the woke, so the woke now run the Outlook on Rights at the corporations, and then the Outlook on Rights at the corporations dictates their spending, which dictates their attempting, dictates the rules at these social media companies.
00:36:50.000That is the chain of logic here, and it's really, really dangerous.
00:36:53.000The company said, we believe in bringing communities online.
00:36:56.000We believe more must be done to create welcoming and inclusive online communities.
00:36:59.000We believe both business leaders and policymakers need to come together to effect real change.
00:37:04.000Okay, so the reason that all of these places are doing this, and again, it is Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, it's basically all of them, they said they're not going to include YouTube.
00:37:19.000Starbucks decided that, sure, we're against all this hate speech stuff, and yeah, but, and sure, there's a lot of bad videos on YouTube, but, you know what, I mean, really, we still make more money on YouTube, so we're just gonna, we're gonna stick with this whole YouTube thing.
00:37:30.000Starbucks said, though, is pausing advertising.
00:37:32.000It isn't joining the Stop Hate for Profit boycott campaign, which kicked off earlier this month.
00:37:36.000After a group of organizations called on Facebook advertisers to pause their ad spend during July, more than 100 marketers, including Levi's Patagonia, REI, Lending Club, and North Face have announced their intentions to join.
00:37:46.000According to a running list from Sleeping Giants, which is one of the worst groups on the internet, Sleeping Giants is basically just a boycott group directed against the right.
00:38:00.000The group of organizations includes Anti-Defamation League, the NAACP, Sleeping Giants, Color of Change, which is like almost a radical socialist group, Free Press, and Common Sense.
00:38:11.000Again, the idea here is they're going to create a lot of ad press for corporations.
00:38:14.000So corporations cave, and then social media companies cave.
00:38:17.000And then when social media companies cave, and they start banning people left and right in order to get the money back, then what happens is when you have institutional capture, when corporations are captured by the woke left, The impact is going to be social media companies end up being captured by the woke left.
00:38:31.000When the social media companies are captured by the woke left, then presumably, there will be basically no method for dissemination of information that counters the prevailing left-wing narrative in the culture.
00:39:54.000Yeah, they are not going to cost you $20 at the local retail outlet store, because the stuff you get for $20 at the local retail outlet store sucks.
00:40:08.000The cotton carries the highest organic certification, which is why it's so soft.
00:40:12.000Because they work with family-owned mills all over the world to expertly weave every set of Boleyn brand sheets, with the highest level of craftsmanship, it is quality you can feel the moment you open the box.
00:40:21.000And you're spending hours every day on those sheets, and they are just, you want them to be great.
00:40:24.000Boleyn brand sheets, again, they're so good, I literally cannot sleep on non-Boleyn brand sheets.
00:41:07.000First, if you're not already a DailyWire member, you should consider getting a reader's pass to dailywire.com.
00:41:11.000It is a great value for only three bucks a month.
00:41:12.000When you sign up, you get that first month for only 99 cents.
00:41:15.000You also get access to our mobile app, articles ad free, access to exclusive editorials, like a really important one I've got out right now, Over at DailyWire, 11 leftist myths about American history.
00:41:24.000You can go check that out, but only if you're a subscriber.
00:41:27.000If you haven't checked out the Reader's Pass already, head on over to dailywire.com.
00:42:17.000And then, just to make it fair, they're also banning Chapo Trap House.
00:42:20.000Which is the socialist kind of mud bros over there.
00:42:23.000I mean, they're really, they get in the mud and they're really gross and they're really ugly.
00:42:26.000But, you know, they have a right to free speech too.
00:42:28.000Something they would never say about me.
00:42:29.000But, Chapo Trap House has a right to basically say what they want.
00:42:32.000But apparently, their threat has been shut down too.
00:42:34.000They shut down 2,000 communities today after updating their content policy to more explicitly ban hate speech.
00:42:40.000The policy update came three weeks after Black Lives Matter protests led several popular Reddit forums to go dark temporarily in protest of what they called the company's lax policies around hosting and promoting racist content.
00:42:50.000So now Reddit has decided that they are going to continue to crack down on the ability of others to speak.
00:42:55.000I mean, Reddit CEO Steve Huffman said, quote, I have to admit, I've struggled about balancing my values as an American and around free speech and free expression with my values and the company's values around common human decency.
00:43:06.000So this is where the rubber meets the road.
00:43:12.000These corporations are not the government.
00:43:14.000They are allowed to have certain limits as to what they will allow.
00:43:17.000But if your belief in common decency is basically you just agree with the policy preferences of the left, if common decency means you agree with the left, and that is what is coming into conflict with free speech and free expression, then free speech and free expression are no longer existent.
00:43:32.000Again, the rule should be, unless it is something that violates... I mean, if I were running a corporation here, like a free speech corporation, not an ideologically driven one that is purely mine, like Daily Wire.
00:43:42.000If I were running a platform like Reddit, my rule would be, unless you are violative of law, unless you are violative of open, straight abuse, Then you get to stay on.
00:43:55.000And you can say ugly things, you can say terrible things.
00:44:27.000So the question, of course, is how do you define your common human decency?
00:44:31.000And for the left, common human decency means agree with us.
00:44:33.000So if it's agree with us and we have to balance agree with us and free speech, agree with us inherently says no free speech.
00:44:41.000Agree with us and you must agree with us is exactly the repressive tolerance.
00:44:44.000I've mentioned it earlier on the show.
00:44:47.000philosophy professor from the so-called Frankfurt School of Philosophy, sort of a Marxist school of belief named Herbert Marcuse, who's most famous for coining the phrase, make love, not war, back in the 1960s.
00:44:57.000But he was also very famous for an essay that he wrote called Repressive Tolerance, in which he suggested that true tolerance can only be achieved by preventing the full flowering of rights.
00:45:05.000That if there are too many rights, all that means that you're reinforcing hierarchies of power, because all you're doing is allowing people who are bad to speak.
00:45:12.000Those people who are bad are in charge of the system, and therefore you have to stop them from speaking in order that the system can be overturned.
00:45:18.000So you actually need is repressive tolerance, that is to say, tolerance of opinions from the left, but no tolerance of opinions from the right.
00:45:24.000And this is what's happening on social media platforms right now.
00:45:26.000And they're starting with people who are, who are by all rules bad.
00:45:31.000They're starting with people at YouTube, by the way.
00:45:34.000They just banned, for example, Richard Spencer.
00:45:36.000They're starting with people who everybody agrees are garbage.
00:45:39.000And then they're moving very quickly into the realm of people who are edgy, but not Richard Spencer.
00:47:30.000Because the idea is if you uphold the system of rights that allows for people to speak in ways you don't want, you're reinforcing hierarchies of power and therefore the rights have to be shut down.
00:47:40.000In a rather sophisticated way, Senator Elizabeth Warren from Massachusetts.
00:47:43.000So, yesterday, Warren went to the well of the Senate, and she explained it was not enough to be not racist, you have to be anti-racist.
00:47:50.000I'm going to explain what she means by this, and why this sort of language is deliberately vague, and also, the meaning that it does carry is just wrong.
00:48:11.000Removing the names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia that honor or commemorate the Confederacy and anyone who voluntarily served it from military property is, in the broader scheme, only one step toward addressing systemic racism in our society.
00:48:33.000Okay, so, what does she mean by anti-racist?
00:48:36.000Okay, this is a new language that we haven't heard until the past few years, right?
00:48:38.000It used to be that there was racist and there was not racist, because racist was a discrimination, was a point of view on human beings that was, you were either it or you were not, right?
00:48:48.000The idea was that you were racist if you believed that people were inherently inferior on the basis of race.
00:49:22.000You could be not racist, in which case you don't believe in racism, you think that it is wrong.
00:49:26.000And then you could be quote-unquote anti-racist, and presumably that would be like professional activist.
00:49:30.000What members of the left have now done is they've collapsed the two categories.
00:49:33.000So instead of three, you now have two categories.
00:49:35.000The categories are you're either racist or you're anti-racist.
00:49:37.000There's no such thing as not racist, right?
00:49:38.000This is what Elizabeth Warren is saying.
00:49:41.000This comes really courtesy of an Imran Kendi.
00:49:43.000He's a very, very radical writer on these issues.
00:49:46.000He's redefined the term racism to really mean that if you believe that individual human action is not a reflection of systems, then you are a racist.
00:49:56.000And so you have to tear down the systems in order to affect the individual human action.
00:50:00.000And he actually says, I mean, he has made the contention effectively.
00:50:05.000The author of the crappy book, White Fragility, she says that Kendi has argued that if we truly believe that all humans are equal, disparity in condition can only be the result of systemic discrimination.
00:50:15.000So in other words, if there is one group of people and they are poorer than another group of people, the only possible reason that could happen, the only possible reason that could happen is because of discrimination.
00:50:24.000And in fact, if you see two individuals and one of those individuals makes a bad decision and does something wrong and has a worse life, and another person doesn't do that, It is not that they made individual bad decisions.
00:50:33.000They are both the products of the system.
00:50:34.000The system itself has been discriminatory in subtle and evil ways, and that is why they are not ending with equality of outcome.
00:50:41.000And Abraham Kennedy basically says this out loud, right?
00:50:43.000He says in his book, How to Be an Antiracist, which is basically the textbook from which Warren is quoting.
00:50:47.000He says, Now notice the false binary there.
00:50:57.000Problems are located in the individual, but individuals don't necessarily measure out equally across all various racial groups.
00:51:04.000Because if you took literally any group of people in a room and you drew a line down the middle of the group of people, forget about race, just statistically speaking, they would not be equal in outcome in any way.
00:51:13.000Any room in the world, you take a line, draw it randomly down the middle of the line, it will not be equal to people on the other sides of the room.
00:51:19.000Because again, when you aggregate individuals, there are always differences.
00:51:32.000And if you don't fight the system, you are not an anti-racist.
00:51:34.000So he says that either you believe that problems are rooted in individual behavior, which could be disproportionately affecting a group of people because of a culture that exists in a particular community.
00:51:47.000Culture does not exist in this view of the world.
00:51:50.000Either it's groups of people, and so you're a racist because you believe groups of people are inferior, not the culture, not the people in a particular group disproportionately acting in a certain way because that happens statistically no matter which group you look at, as Thomas Sowell has pointed out, right?
00:52:03.000It's either the groups or it's the system, and there is no third option.
00:52:06.000So you're either racist or you're anti-racist.
00:52:08.000And if you're anti-racist, you have to tear down the system from the inside.
00:52:10.000And if you have to tear down the system from the inside to be an anti-racist, that means shutting down all of the system's hallmarks.
00:52:16.000The culture of rights, free speech, free expression.
00:52:18.000These all must be torn down in the name of building a new, tolerant, better world.
00:52:51.000That is what Elizabeth Warren is talking about.
00:52:52.000That is why the quote-unquote anti-racist movement driven by people like Robin DiAngelo and Ibram Kendi, that is why they're pushing for the destruction of the system, and it's why you are seeing the push for that movement existing at the same time as the push for more censorship.
00:53:09.000They don't have to be linked, but that is why they are linked.
00:53:11.000Okay, we'll be back here later today with two additional hours of content, including all the COVID stuff that I didn't get to and plenty of more material.
00:53:17.000Go check us out over at dailywire.com and go get a copy of my book, How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps at dailywire.com slash Ben.
00:53:24.000Otherwise, we'll see you here tomorrow.
00:53:31.000The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Colton Haas, executive producer Jeremy Boring, supervising producer Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling, assistant director Pavel Lydowsky, technical producer Austin Stevens, playback and media operated by Nick Sheehan, associate producer Katie Swinnerton, edited by Adam Sajovic, audio is mixed by Mike Koromina, hair and makeup is by Nika Geneva.
00:53:51.000The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020.
00:53:56.000Public health experts lock us down again, a wealthy couple brandishes guns against rioters, and the Supreme Court burns conservatives yet again.