On this episode of The Daily Wire, we discuss the latest in the culture war, including Elon Musk's plan to take over the company, a Saudi prince's rejection of a buyout offer, and the controversy surrounding abortion. We also hear from Smokey Mike and The God King about their new book, How Will We Ever Top It? by Michael Sparks.
00:00:03.000Elon Musk has just, I don't know how you describe this, nuked the culture war, and it's really exposed some rather shady dealings, which I find particularly interesting.
00:00:13.000Notably, a Saudi prince is rejecting the buyout offer, because they're one of the biggest investors, saying, no, no, Twitter is worth more, even though most reporting shows that Twitter is failing stagnant growth, and it was failing years ago.
00:00:26.000Trump is the only reason, as far as I know, that it started to come back.
00:00:29.000So why are these companies so interested on retaining this power?
00:00:34.000Elon Musk is no longer the largest shareholder.
00:00:36.000Vanguard just bought more shares, and it seems like they're not going to go for the buyout either.
00:00:44.000Twitter is more valuable than $54.20 per share.
00:00:47.000It's the political influence you wield when you silence those who disagree with you.
00:00:51.000We've talked about this before, and I think this may play a role.
00:00:55.000Naturally, you have many Twitter employees freaking out, the media's freaking out, but Elon Musk ain't backing down.
00:01:00.000He's actually put them in a difficult position, because if they go against the will of the majority of the shareholders, they're violating their fiduciary responsibility, and it opens them up to liability.
00:01:09.000So this may be one of the most epic and craziest moments in the culture war.
00:01:15.000And I gotta tell you, man, almost... there's just too much to go through, because this is huge.
00:01:18.000But we do have the RNC pulling out of the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is also equally massive, and a bunch of stories about abortion being banned, which is seemingly just escalating, and of course, many on the left are freaking out.
00:02:10.000I mean, the way I pay the bills is with my acoustic guitar and my psychedelic cool licks.
00:02:16.000In all seriousness, maybe people don't know, you were on, I don't know if it was last time, but you actually played a song about your book.
00:02:24.000Hey, you know, I really have to thank you guys because, seriously, I go on Tim's show, I come on the podcast, and all of a sudden everyone in the Super Chats starts plugging my book.
00:02:34.000And I think one of the main reasons that book hit number one nationally is because your listeners, Tim, were so relentless about promoting this book, which is why I'm so happy to say paperbacks out in June, baby.
00:02:51.000It is true they were promoting it, but actually I think they were trolling me because what they would do is they would start the super chat and I would get into reading it and then it would devolve into promoting Michael Sparks.
00:03:00.000They got me, but it helped so, you know.
00:06:28.000Even though $54.20 is above market rate, it's a premium on the value of the shares.
00:06:35.000And even though Elon Musk is saying if he can't affect positive change, he might actually sell off his shares, which would be detrimental to the company.
00:06:42.000These powerful interests don't want to sell.
00:07:50.000You know, he called the Babylon Bee when they got suspended, and the story apparently is, he said, did you guys really get suspended over this joke?
00:07:56.000They said yes, and he goes, I might have to buy Twitter.
00:08:00.000I mean- Sorry, just, Elon Musk has got- I'll put it this way.
00:08:04.000He's got 280 billion dollars towards his net worth.
00:08:08.000If you had 280 bucks, and someone was like, hey, this really important thing is 50 bucks, You know, you might be like, eh, it's $50, it's a lot, but, you know, for him... Well, it's even better than that, because it's not as though it has no value.
00:08:23.000So he buys it for $50, which he's not going to have to do.
00:08:25.000I think his actual plan is, offer them $50, they're going to say no, he sells off his 9.2%, he crashes the price of their stocks, now he comes in and buys it for $20.
00:09:05.000Yeah, just completely destroying any value within their own company.
00:09:08.000My understanding is that before 2016, Twitter was losing users.
00:09:13.000They had changed their metric for how they calculated users from, like, something like daily active to monthly active, so that, you know, because the average person was using the platform less, they said, okay, well, if they use it once in the month, then... But it's been a while, so you gotta fact check that one, because I haven't been tracking that as much.
00:09:30.000But when I see this idea that Twitter would self-immolate, I'm like, Yeah, because I think the real issue for these investors is power.
00:10:13.000In a republic, you govern yourself with speech.
00:10:16.000You engage in speech in the public square.
00:10:19.000If some bozo in Silicon Valley is controlling all the speech in the republic and censoring very important people in that republic, you don't have free speech, you don't have a republic.
00:10:29.000It's the most important thing for our form of government in years.
00:10:32.000Yeah, there's an important, you know, this term fiduciary duty may be not common to everyone who's listening.
00:10:38.000Essentially what it means is if you are in a position of responsibility for someone else's investment, then you have a legal obligation, not just a moral, but a legal obligation to put their interests ahead of your own interests.
00:10:52.000And in publicly traded companies, this typically means the executives and it means the board of directors.
00:10:57.000these are people who because they represent in a sort of lowercase r republican sense they
00:11:03.000represent the average investor the retail investor they have obligations the our friend vivek
00:11:10.000ramaswamy i think is so good about this he talks about these companies you know part of the story
00:11:14.000is that today vanguard took an outsized stake in twitter so that they would actually be the
00:11:20.000biggest shareholder and elon would no longer be the number one shareholder vanguard along with
00:11:25.000blackrock and one other state street yes imagine they own 22 trillion dollars worth of the s&p 500
00:11:34.000worth of the top 500 companies that are traded on the on the stock exchange what they are essentially
00:11:41.000is using your money Money from your 401k, from your Roth IRA, money from your pension account.
00:11:48.000They're using your money to amass power for themselves to act against your interests.
00:11:55.000And I think Vivek rightly points out, it's actually probably the greatest abuse of fiduciary responsibility in all of human history.
00:12:03.000And I think that's part of what Elon is, I mean, very clearly up against.
00:12:07.000He's up against the, you say, these deeply entrenched powers that be, or these deeply entrenched powers against free speech.
00:13:02.000It's never occurred to any of them that they could be held responsible.
00:13:04.000I think what this is, of all the tweets that Elon Musk has put out in the last several weeks about Twitter, this is the most interesting one, because he's essentially saying, I am one of the people they have a fiduciary duty to.
00:13:16.000By not joining the board, Elon did not place himself in a position of fiduciary responsibility, which leaves him with the actual legal right Wow.
00:13:25.000to act against the financial interests of Twitter.
00:13:29.000And I think what he's telling them is, I will personally sue them out of existence if they
00:13:33.000violate their fiduciary responsibilities.
00:14:08.000Maybe the irreverence and the absurdity is something worth following.
00:14:12.000But my view is, I used to use this platform as a utility for journalism.
00:14:17.000And now, because of how radioactive the platform has become, how awful it is, it's effectively worthless.
00:14:25.000I think maybe Twitter realized, or I should say assumed, what a lot of media companies did, that culture war is money.
00:14:32.000As much as the left likes to accuse any one of us of being grifters, the left has been doing what's called mission-driven storytelling long before any conservative right-wing or libertarian person figured out what was going on.
00:14:42.000All of these digital media companies in the early 2010s realized if we get political, we make money, and then they have the nerve to call everybody else grifters.
00:15:15.000Instead, they owned and marshaled newspapers to actually be their political instruments.
00:15:22.000That's always been the history of journalism in this country until the post-war consensus, and then we came up with this absurd notion of objective journalism, which which is a paradoxical kind of concept in and of itself.
00:15:35.000I think it's very good that the New York Times is so far left.
00:15:39.000It's very bad that the New York Times won't just admit and own their biases.
00:15:43.000If they would just tell us, yes, we're on the left, and that gives you a series of expectations
00:15:50.000when you read our content, doesn't mean that it's okay to be completely polemical
00:17:23.000State Street is the largest individual shareholder of, or let's get this right, Vanguard is the largest individual State Street shared holder with 34.26 million shares.
00:17:32.000So Vanguard owns 9.36% of State Street.
00:17:40.000Let's pull up some of this weirdity this this this absurdity oddity shady dealings weirdity.
00:17:45.000So we have this tweet from Alwaleed Talal.
00:17:48.000He says, I don't believe that the proposed offer by Elon Musk, $54.20, comes close to the intrinsic value of Twitter given its growth prospects.
00:17:56.000Being one of the largest and long-term shareholders of Twitter, KingdomKHC and I reject this offer.
00:18:03.000Elon Musk responded to this in a very powerful way.
00:18:06.000But the first thing I want to do is give you some context.
00:18:08.000In a story from Reuters, published by Yahoo Finance, they say something very simple.
00:18:18.000Twitter's lower-than-expected user additions in recent months have raised doubts about its growth prospects, even as it pursues big projects such as audio chat rooms and newsletters.
00:18:28.000Yes, anybody who knows anything knows that Twitter has constantly struggled That's right.
00:18:33.000So what about Elon Musk's premium offer as a bad deal?
00:18:37.000Well, for the prince in Saudi Arabia, maybe it is a bad deal.
00:18:53.000Elon Musk is a brave man in going after some of the biggest companies and political leaders in the world.
00:19:01.000But he makes a really good point, and I'll throw it back to the point I made earlier.
00:19:04.000I believe the Prince Alwaleed is correct.
00:19:08.000$54.20 doesn't come close to the true value of Twitter, which is controlling the American news cycle.
00:19:12.000Especially if you're dependent upon the United States for weapons, and you like a lot of the US foreign interests when it comes to destabilizing the region.
00:19:20.000And so people talk about the fact that Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post, and it's definitely very funny.
00:19:24.000There's a lot of great memes that have come out of that.
00:19:26.000But Elon Musk owning Twitter would obviously make him significantly more powerful than any billionaire who happens to own a single publication.
00:19:33.000Well, this is also how Elon Musk, I think, makes almost all of his decisions.
00:20:53.000The way that this has become a very hostile takeover kind of situation, what I love about it is every time Elon does something new and he is rebuffed, whether it's by the Saudis or whether it's by the board or Parag Agrawal, they say, OK, they got Elon now.
00:24:29.000What is so weird about him is that politically he's got generally the right ideas, because all these guys, look, I don't care about cars, I really don't care about electric cars, I don't care about going to space, I never watched Star Wars, not Star Trek, I just don't Shame on you.
00:25:34.000Well, and I'll say this, I haven't really paid close attention to him, not enough attention to say I am a huge fan, but stuff like this really makes me like him.
00:25:42.000What I really appreciate is the fact that he is countering the overpopulation narrative.
00:25:47.000We were discussing this before the show a little bit.
00:25:50.000That we're not going to have enough people, that underpopulation is going to be a serious problem.
00:25:55.000And how unbelievably refreshing it is to have an elite who isn't misanthropic, who doesn't say human life is fundamentally bad, or at the very least needs to be mitigated in some way.
00:26:34.000Maybe the dude's got a big play to make a bunch of money, and he's just... It's still flipping the bird to the system, which I can respect, but is the end goal like you mentioned.
00:26:49.000Elon Musk doesn't need money. He's the richest person not only in the world
00:26:53.000But in the history of the world, even when we talk about the 280 some billion dollars of net worth that he has
00:26:59.000You have to keep in mind SpaceX hasn't had a public offering
00:27:04.000So we're not we're not really contemplating any of the value that exists in the only access that the United States
00:27:10.000has to space Neuralink is probably only just getting started hasn't gone
00:27:15.000public We've never seen in our life, not since Rockefeller, have we seen a figure like Elon Musk.
00:27:21.000The guy very likely could be the first trillionaire to walk the earth.
00:27:24.000So we can't even really contemplate the amount of money that Elon Musk represents.
00:27:29.000So, listen, everybody likes to make a quick billion, but Elon Musk isn't, there's just no way that he's motivated in this by that.
00:27:37.000More what I'm saying is that the positive aspect of economic incentive is that it allows you to do good and do well.
00:27:44.000And so I think that Elon Musk is doing a good thing missionally with what he's doing with Twitter, and he will also likely make a lot of money.
00:27:52.000I don't see those two things being in opposition.
00:27:54.000So the fear is, with the metaverse and with Neuralink, is someone like Zuckerberg being in charge and letting him get access to your brain.
00:28:01.000Would you go into the metaverse via a Neuralink if it was Elon Musk who was the, you know, god-king of the metaverse?
00:28:09.000He's saying he's going to open source the code of Twitter, the algorithm, which is the first step to trusting the device or the software you're using.
00:28:15.000If you can reference the algorithm, see if it's spying on you or not.
00:28:18.000If you have a device that lets you enter the metaverse and it's not spying on you, that's the only way to go.
00:28:22.000Yeah, and so you mentioned some statements that he ostensibly made about China.
00:28:27.000This is also part of why I'm sort of withholding a little bit.
00:28:30.000I don't know a huge amount about the guy, but part of the reason I was making the point that I made is because it is really disturbing that the fact that he is against the overpopulation narrative, it's very disturbing that that sets him apart from virtually everyone else in power.
00:28:45.000But I also think that speaks to what you're discussing, which is this idea of being optimistic and having a plan for the future.
00:28:52.000I think misanthropy is the greatest indicator that, hey, a person doesn't have a plan for the future and they're just a horrifically jaded pessimist.
00:28:59.000Listen, the other aspect of this is that he's probably wrong about China, and maybe he isn't a great dad.
00:29:07.000I'm only saying Elon Musk is a human being, and all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and it's not what is common about us that is noteworthy, definitionally.
00:29:17.000It's what's noteworthy about us that's noteworthy.
00:29:19.000And so I think about like George Washington, right?
00:29:21.000And everybody's like, oh, George Washington owned slaves.
00:29:23.000I'm like, yeah, he was a planter in Virginia in the 18th century.
00:30:58.000Most notably, there was this book, The Population Bomb, in 1970-71.
00:31:02.000It said that within 10 years, even if we now coerce abortions, which the book called for, coerce sterility, even if we do that right now, we're screwed.
00:31:11.000There's going to be, in 10 years, mass famine everywhere.
00:31:26.000Birth rate could threaten human civilization.
00:31:28.000And I think what people don't realize is that the only reason we have the level of technology we do is due to the specialties of human career, human jobs.
00:31:43.000It was possible for a human being to have the summation of human knowledge in their brain.
00:31:48.000It was possible, because we knew so little.
00:31:50.000As time went on, we began to learn more and more, and it came to the point where, you know, way back when, you could be a jack-of-all-trades, master of all, because the only jobs were hunter and gatherer.
00:33:14.000It's not a real pizza, but... The idea is that all of the elements of a pizza come from so many different places.
00:33:19.000That's why we have a conquest, a big part of it.
00:33:21.000Right, I started thinking about this in terms of, to simplify the whole discussion, think about a meal like a Pad Thai.
00:33:29.000The amount on American Pad Thai, sugars, fats, oils, the rice noodles, the meats, if you're gonna put squid in it, how all of these things come from all over the world, or maybe even chicken tikka masala.
00:33:38.000To us, it's like you go to the store and you're like 15 bucks and they hand you the bowl, but all these ingredients come from regions all around the planet, especially in winter, where the chickens might come from the north, the tomatoes come from the south.
00:33:48.000The more people we have, the more unique things we can create, like spaceships.
00:33:53.000I think about this a lot when people try to tell, like hippie dippies in L.A.
00:33:56.000would always try to tell you about the natural diet that they're on.
00:33:59.000And you're like, yeah, what's the natural diet?
00:34:01.000Whatever it was, they were describing a way of eating to you that no human being who lived in nature could have ever accomplished.
00:35:33.000Uh, you know, the reason that we have more people now, and we can eat, unlike what they predicted in the 70s, is because we innovated.
00:35:41.000Because now there was a need for something that didn't need to exist before that.
00:35:46.000So, yes, the more people you add to the world, The more complexity is added to the world, the more problems are added to the world, and the more potential solutions are added to the world.
00:36:14.000we did an interview with Ben Shapiro and Ian really shined in his moment because
00:36:19.000Ben mentioned on a lecture that these these Charts and predictions about climate change never consider
00:36:25.000mitigation factors to which Ian enlightened Ben on carbon capture graphene production
00:36:30.000I've been adaptive technology that will eventually what you can do is you deposit carbon dioxide onto a palladium
00:36:35.000copper alloy And then at at some point we're gonna be withdrawing so
00:36:39.000much carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and producing graphene this new building material
00:36:42.000that will actually be competing with trees.
00:36:44.000And if we don't do it right and start now and start organizing, we're going to overcompensate and start starving the trees of carbon dioxide.
00:36:50.000So we're going to eventually work together.
00:36:51.000Ian's view of it is more of a global cooling perspective, because people don't consider the new technology that comes out that could actually threaten the inverse, which is Graphene is this wonder technology that Ian never shuts up about.
00:37:34.000In ten years, the conversation on climate change may be totally inverted to, these graphene companies are cooling the planet!
00:37:42.000Well, we've seen it before, because the narrative was initially that the planet was cooling, and then it was that the planet was getting hotter, and then it's just that we have climate change, and so it can go in either direction.
00:37:53.000Didn't they tell people to drive their cars as much as they could back in the day, like in the 70s?
00:37:56.000You know what they'll say now, too, the libs and the alarmists will say, oh, the global cooling thing, that was just a brief media phenomenon.
00:38:06.000I have half a chapter of my book just devoted to outlining every major scientific institute that was pushing this stuff.
00:38:13.000They pushed it for years, and now they've completely memory-hulled it because it's inconvenient.
00:38:17.000So of course it's going to happen again, of course they're going to go on the other Conservatives love post-apocalyptic stories like we love The Walking Dead, and I say we because I count myself among the people who loves things like The Walking Dead, but the truth is my worldview informs me that it isn't possible.
00:38:34.000Not only that the zombie aspect of the zombie apocalypse isn't possible, but the entire idea of the complete collapse of human civilization is impossible.
00:38:42.000Because we are humans and we innovate because if there really was a zombie apocalypse
00:38:47.000I would be the god-king of zombie extermination and I would be looking up to Elon Musk who would be killing trillions
00:38:53.000of zombies somehow Like we we are a highly highly adaptive species and when a
00:38:58.000need presents itself We find ways to meet that need Elon did make a flamethrower.
00:39:16.000Of course Jeremy Boring was going to use the boring flamethrower in his video.
00:39:21.000Yeah, so I, look, you know, my view on climate change is I have no problem when, you know, the establishment or mainstream narrative is that we're burning lots of fuels, it's resulting in a lot of carbon, it's warming the planet.
00:39:33.000I say, okay, all of that follows as far as I can tell with logic, but I think Ben is right about mitigation factors.
00:39:39.000And also, if you want to talk more about the heating up of the planet, it looks like there's evidence that we're still in an ice age, and that what happened 13,000 years ago was a comet shattered over North America and peppered the glacial continent, caused a global flood.
00:39:50.000But we're still in the ice age, we just prematurely melted a bunch of the ice off.
00:39:54.000So we're going to continue to melt the rest of the ice and warm.
00:39:59.000I think it's interesting because when people talk about overpopulation, it's almost as if at the societal level, what we are in the West is that unbelievably wealthy couple with no children and who happen to be debating whether or not they can afford one.
00:40:13.000It's just an unbelievable failure of optimism, ultimately.
00:40:19.000It's funny, I was at a bar after I graduated college with my father and he was going around asking young people, are you optimistic?
00:40:32.000And that stuck with me because people like to conceive of themselves as optimistic.
00:40:36.000They like to say, I have an imagination, but then they're not interested in investing in the future that way.
00:40:41.000And not only that, but they will actually, because it's okay, you know, if you're not married, if you're not in that position yet, but they will shame other people for having children and being optimistic and wanting to bring life into the world.
00:40:52.000So my question is, If, you know, Elon Musk is the one guy on the other side of this, what's the motivation of people like... If Bill Gates is wrong, if all of these billionaires are wrong, why do they want less people?
00:41:03.000You know, there was a great comment that Charlie Kirk made the other day, and everyone made fun of him for it, and it was so smart.
00:41:09.000He said that tall buildings turn people into libs, and Media Matters made fun of him, and he said we need to develop horizontally more than we develop vertically.
00:41:21.000And everyone made fun of him, except he's completely right.
00:41:24.000Going back to the Tower of Babel into the present, there was a line that Chesterton observed.
00:41:28.000He said, When you're in the heights of a building, of a really tall building, people look like insects.
00:41:38.000When you're down in the valleys looking up at great things, when you're on your knees praying, looking up, only then can you raise your eyes to heaven.
00:41:46.000Only then can you raise your eyes to hope.
00:41:47.000But when you're at the top of that building, you just feel like God and you're gonna act like God or what you think God is.
00:41:54.000I think that's what happened to Gates and to all these other lunatics who are so anti-human.
00:41:59.000Well, and it's funny because the left has this hyper-fixation on media critique, and I think it's good to critique media, but they'll take the most insignificant elements of a property and argue that it's influencing human behaviors in ways far more profound than I think a reasonable person would acknowledge.
00:42:15.000But then when you look at architecture, which surrounds us at all times, they act as if it's ridiculous to even insinuate more beautiful architecture creates a more beautiful culture or results in better attitudes.
00:42:25.000I hear what you're saying, Michael, but I guess my question would still be, even if they think they're God, why less people?
00:42:32.000I mean, certainly if you were God, you'd want more.
00:42:34.000Because they actually do see people as an impediment to nature, and they see nature as being supreme.
00:42:41.000So you'll actually read these people say things like, Elon Musk is gonna go to Mars and he'll just pollute it the way we polluted the Earth.
00:42:52.000He's gonna go mine an asteroid, the beautiful, natural, pristine asteroid, that the asteroid has zero value if there are no people observing it.
00:43:00.000How dare you say that people, you're saying that people are supreme!
00:43:03.000I'm actually saying that God is supreme, and that God made people, and yes, people are supreme today.
00:43:07.000Real quick, real quick, just because I don't want to lose this point, have you guys ever seen or read Watchmen?
00:43:20.000The graphic novel is considered the better form, but there's an element to the story where Dr. Manhattan, who is the one being with godlike powers, but he's like, I am not a god, I can only see my own past and future.
00:44:48.000But I thought about that and I'm just like, humanity is, each individual human is so insanely unique in the billions of years it took to create one person.
00:44:57.000That person will never exist again, no matter how similar or, you know, they may be to another person.
00:46:31.000The various forms of life effectively form a foundation for what humanity is creating.
00:46:37.000That doesn't mean to say that I think humans are the superior, in this context, better than any other form of life, just that we're the most adaptable and smartest and more prone to survival, which from a secular perspective, the strongest survive and everything else functions as sort of support.
00:46:51.000Even from a secular perspective, you'd have to say we're the only being on the planet that has a moral code of any kind.
00:46:57.000So, in some sense, you could say, well, we're the most evil because we violate our moral code, and that's true.
00:47:02.000A lion eating a gazelle isn't evil, it's just a lion.
00:47:05.000So we both conceive of the concept of good and of the concept of evil.
00:47:22.000Well, they'll pray before a meal, but it also stems back to after killing, giving thanks to what they have taken away.
00:47:29.000A sort of acknowledging that they're receiving something else's life.
00:47:35.000I mean, maybe there's a case I haven't heard of, of animals recognizing the suffering and the pain of some other animal that they have claimed their energy to themselves.
00:48:27.000Well, and it's a great responsibility, too, because if we abuse our stewardship of the planet and of all the creatures, Then that's, I think, intrinsically wrong, and that would also be very bad for us.
00:48:37.000So it entails a lot of responsibility.
00:48:39.000But to this point here of, really, humans are kind of what it's all about on Earth, we don't prosecute the lion when the lion eats the gazelle.
00:48:47.000It would be absurd to do that, and that's why they're not open to this transcendent moral order.
00:48:54.000If someone owned a gazelle and a lion jumped in and ate the gazelle and then fled, would we go after that lion, track it down, and kill it?
00:49:07.000I actually think that if someone had a ranch in, you know, the Savannah, and they had gazelle and a lion broke in, ate the gazelle and left, they'd be like... I'd go kill that lion.
00:49:20.000When you look at ranchers, for example, in Montana, who have a problem where, you know, wolves, you know, who've been reintroduced in the population, start eating their livestock, They have to defend their livestock.
00:49:34.000They defend their livestock because of the word live.
00:49:38.000The more important life isn't the life of the stock, it's the life of the stockholder.
00:49:43.000We get mad when Westerners go over and kill lions in Africa, but the local tribes are pretty happy about it because they have to live with those lions.
00:49:53.000My question is, do we hunt down those wolves, or do we create preventative measures, or do we seek retribution?
00:50:01.000Right, I'm not trying to get vengeance on the wolf, but I am trying to solve the problem.
00:50:08.000Well, the reason I bring this up is because in the instance where a human kills a human, we hunt that person to the ends of the earth to lock them up or, in many circumstances, depending on the severity of the crime, put them to death.
00:50:18.000I'm not convinced we do that to the same degree with animals.
00:50:22.000I would kill the last panda bear on Earth to save the most reprehensible human on Earth, even though there are 7 billion other humans on Earth.
00:50:33.000Because the life of any human is superior to the life of the entire species of panda.
00:50:38.000Now, does that mean that I don't think we have a moral obligation to be good stewards of the Earth, or that I think we don't have a moral obligation to look after the panda?
00:50:50.000But I am saying that, you know, Dennis Prager has been asking this question literally for 30 years now.
00:50:55.000Every year, he asks, if your pet dog were drowning, In the same river current where a total stranger is drowning, which one would you save?
00:51:07.000And he says, 30 years ago, everyone said the stranger.
00:51:11.000And today, the majority of everyone says their pet dog.
00:51:48.000I would, but I don't think that these are related.
00:51:51.000They're not unrelated questions, but they're not the same question.
00:51:56.000Killing a human to stop them from committing a barbarous act against you, as a proxy, your pet is a proxy for you in that situation, is different.
00:52:06.000Would I kill someone who was starving to keep them from killing and eating my cow?
00:52:35.000I agree too, and I think the instance here with this question also implies that, you know, my view of this question is not that you're like, I want to kill this person, it's they're seeking to cause harm to me, my life, perhaps your pet is more than, maybe it's your dog you need for your farm.
00:52:50.000The point is, it's not that you want to kill the person.
00:52:53.000It's that you're put in a situation where they're attacking you.
00:52:56.000And it's that people exist in a moral framework that animals don't, and he is in violation of the moral framework.
00:53:01.000This is, I think, an incredibly important question generally about human beings, is at what point is someone outside of the law, right?
00:53:10.000That's what outlaw actually meant historically, that you're no longer subject to the protection of the law, you've forfeited the protections of law because you've acted in contravention of them.
00:53:20.000But again, if someone broke into my house and my house caught fire, and I had to make a distinction a decision of
00:53:25.000who will I go in and save The man who was committing a bad act or my dog
00:53:31.000I would have an obligation probably to save the man But if the same man were trying to kill my dog, I would
00:53:35.000have the right to kill the man Yeah, well, this is just real quick is to say that it's a
00:53:39.000fascinating point because I Hope everybody really thinks down deep about the love they
00:53:44.000have for their pet their dog their cat turtle, whatever And then imagine seeing a stranger in a current screaming for help and you being like, I ain't saving that person.
00:54:11.000Yeah, but Jeremy is correct when he says it is not the same question.
00:54:13.000I answered that yes I would because someone who is willing to kill a small, in my instance it is a cat who loves me very much like a dog, if someone were willing to kill an animal then you have to ask what else are they willing to do?
00:54:25.000Which would inevitably, I would think, extend to humans, which is something that I think would be better without, the world would be better without.
00:54:32.000But again, too, I think the main issue and the nuance of the question is Typically, in any circumstance of defense, you don't want to kill someone.
00:55:56.000In almost all modern sci-fi, If humans go to another planet- Earth dies, the last spaceship full of humans goes out into outer space, we land on a planet, and we bring some sort of disease or something to the planet, and now there's a battle between us and the native people on the planet.
00:56:14.000The morality of every modern piece of fiction says, in the end, we have to lose.
00:56:19.000We have to lay down our lives because we didn't belong here, this wasn't our place.
00:56:22.000But that's actually not the correct moral answer.
00:56:24.000The correct moral answer is, if I take my family to another planet, and I'm an existential threat to the people of that planet, they're an existential threat to me.
00:56:32.000I have a right to defend my life and the life of my family.
00:56:35.000I am not asked to subordinate that impulse, not only impulse, but that right, simply because my existence is a threat to somebody.
00:57:05.000And it's an important example, because Cortes is one of the most incredible, great men to ever walk the earth, who took down a demonic empire called the Aztec Empire that slaughtered 80,000 people Women little babies children in the span of four days by
00:57:19.000ripping they're still beating hearts out of their chest and kicking down a pyramid
00:57:23.000so, you know the particulars matter there and you can actually judge the the
00:57:27.000moral question on These the particular people in the particular time and what
00:57:32.000they're doing. Why do you think Jesus didn't rouse his followers to fight back?
00:57:36.000Well, he does say at one point. He says sell your cloak and go purchase a sword
00:57:42.000We've discussed this on the show before.
00:57:44.000Do you think it's just propaganda that he never really let himself get caught and killed?
00:57:47.000No, that Jesus isn't, Jesus is not a political figure.
00:57:51.000He's almost the only figure in human history who didn't, who isn't political in the sense that the work that he was here to do Well, he's the king.
00:58:04.000But he was primarily challenging the authority of man over the soul and the authority of death over man.
00:58:16.000The battle that Christ was here to fight was a battle against sin and death.
00:58:20.000Well, that's a great point, Jeremy, because actually, that is, in this ultimate sense, the political battle, because the only political power that anyone has is the fear of death, and Christ conquers it on the cross.
00:58:32.000Is there anything you would sacrifice yourself for, or your family for, if God called it, or whatever?
00:58:48.000They laid down their lives for their ideals, for their family, for their country.
00:58:52.000There is a noble place for all of that.
00:58:55.000It doesn't, though, mean that you have an obligation not to defend yourself.
00:58:59.000I would go so far as to say those Aztec, who were horrible, evil, demonic, I'll grant you all of that language, they also had a right to defend themselves against Cortes.
00:59:07.000So in an ultimate moral sense, I agree that Cortez was in the more moral position.
00:59:11.000They should have just laid down their arms.
00:59:51.000I was somewhat outraged at the time, but now I realize it's just an impossible question.
00:59:55.000Just the point real quick is when Ian asked, what would you sacrifice your family for, you would sacrifice your family to save the life of a child, or a member of your family.
01:00:02.000I also, I don't know, you don't know what would happen in a situation, but I have mentally attempted to prepare myself to lay down my life for a stranger.
01:00:10.000Like if I were in a 7-11 and someone came in and started robbing people, would I put myself between the gun and an old woman who I don't know?
01:00:20.000I don't know, I don't want to claim virtue that I don't possess, but I've tried mentally to prepare myself for the fact that it would be my, I believe, moral obligation to lay down my life for a stranger.
01:00:31.000What concerns me is that some people, and this is maybe... This is an interesting thing for me to say, but that some people are evil, and some people are good, and some people are... If you would sacrifice your good wife for some evil child that you don't know, it turns out... We're all evil, aren't we?
01:03:35.000And probably the premise in all of these cases is absurd and won't pan out that way.
01:03:39.000So if it's, do I save the human person, or the dog, that maybe the dog will magically lead me to cure cancer, you always have to pick the human, even if the dog actually will lead you to cure cancer.
01:03:53.000I suppose if you knew, you're the scientist, you've been part of the team, you have the cure for cancer, you put it in the bag so the dog could guard it, somehow both things are now in the river, that in that situation you've taken ambiguity out.
01:04:08.000You're not saving the dog, you're saving the cure to cancer.
01:04:11.000In other words, you're allowing the person you love to die because of a belief about the lives of thousands or millions of humans.
01:04:19.000That is a different That's a different moral.
01:04:21.000You think ideas or technologies are more valuable than human life?
01:04:23.000I want to address what you said. Choosing to save one or the other are both moral acts.
01:04:27.000It's just a difficult one. In your analogy, you have a choice between an immoral act for
01:04:33.000a positive end. You know what I mean? I suppose so, except I don't know.
01:04:38.000I mean, in the act itself, so not merely, you're not saying the act here is, I am going to cure cancer, but, you know, and obviously we're in a slightly absurd scenario, but if you're saying, I'm saving the dog that does have this real 100% cure for cancer, or you're saving the child, I'm not convinced that those acts are of equal moral weight.
01:05:23.000But then, to take it even further, then we're really saying, okay, would you save your child or a million people who aren't your child, right?
01:05:54.000It's actually a very good point, Jeremy, but I still don't think in that case, if I am the head of my household, am I supposed to sacrifice my son?
01:06:22.000And then clone your kid with all the money you make.
01:06:24.000You're like, I've got enough money, I cured cancer.
01:06:26.000You want to take the cure and say, I'll destroy it if Big Pharma writes me a check every year.
01:06:30.000As a Richie Rich, let me just tell you that if I had the kind of money that came from curing cancer, I would probably just drown kids for sports.
01:06:39.000It is Ecclesiastes, like, nothing can satisfy, nothing brings me joy.
01:06:49.000It seems like there is a utilitarian aspect to this because if you're willing to save information or technology and let people die as a result, then it's like, where does the line draw there?
01:11:00.000If Roberts joins the court's libs, and it's 5-4, Clarence Thomas writes the decision.
01:11:05.000And man, that decision is going to be good.
01:11:08.000So I think Roberts, to preserve the integrity and legitimacy of the court, and actually to water down, as much as he can, the way that they would overrule Roe, I think he has to join the Conservatives.
01:12:37.000So, to push it back to the states is an enormous victory.
01:12:40.000In fact, the Democrats are saying right now that while they still control the House and the Senate and the presidency, they should ensconce abortion in federal law.
01:12:49.000So that even if Roe is overturned by the court in June, you still won't be able to do anything about abortion.
01:12:54.000Unfortunately, I don't think they have the votes in the Senate to accomplish that.
01:12:59.000And on this point of the back alley abortions, this is one of the biggest lies from the abortion movement.
01:13:05.000I mean, so one of the guys who came up with the lie, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, one of the founders of NARAL, he came out and he said 5,000 women a year, or at least some people say 20-30,000 women a year, died from back alley abortions before Roe.
01:13:17.000He admitted they just made up the number.
01:13:31.000And what's even crazier is, when you look at the breakdown of states where abortion was legal versus illegal, your likelihood of dying in an abortion was basically the same, whether it was legal or illegal.
01:13:44.000Yeah, so we actually did an educational breakdown of this on a Freedom Tunes video a couple years ago, but basically in the 1930s you had something like a bit over 2,000 women who had died and been counted statistically as deaths from abortions and miscarriages, but that number decreased significantly after the advent of the widespread availability of penicillin.
01:14:07.000It was an issue of women not getting antibiotics.
01:15:14.000They recognize 31 different genders, but by law they recognize any possible gender, and gender identity is defined as essentially self-expression.
01:15:22.000So when the arguments first come for gender identity protections, everybody says, we know what this means and what the intent is.
01:15:31.000There's a famous story about, um, when they outlawed public drinking in New York, that one of the, you know, city council members or whatever said, let this law never be construed to say a construction worker can't enjoy a beer with his lunch.
01:15:44.000So in New York, when they say we want to protect trans people, we all say, we totally understand that we don't want people to be discriminated against.
01:15:50.000And then what happens is the law is tested and someone will say, it says self-expression.
01:15:55.000I hereby challenge this and say, my self-expression is that I can wear a clown costume into work or, or a first You know, there's an abortion tie-in here, too.
01:16:04.000One of the main drivers of transgenderism in the culture is that second abortion case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in which the romantic poet of the court, Anthony Kennedy, said that at the heart of liberty is the ability to define our own concept of existence, of the mystery of life.
01:16:22.000Scalia mocked it as the sweet mystery of life passage.
01:16:52.000Capital K. But in all seriousness, I mean, if you're extremely wealthy, you know, Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos can go to their company and say, from now on, you must address me as this, and I suppose if you're powerful enough, you can make people do what you want them to do.
01:18:20.000That you could be a biological male, 6'3", 220 pounds, you know, muscular, and identify as a woman, put on a dress, go to a court, and the judge is not allowed to mock you.
01:18:33.000The judge must accept you under the law.
01:18:35.000But if you put on a fursuit, Under the same exact provisions in the law, you are protected.
01:18:40.000That the clothing you wear cannot be discriminated, the name you choose.
01:18:44.000So, I am Volciferon, Herald of the Winter Mists.
01:18:54.000The argument is that in modern culture, we recognize transgenderism as a legitimate issue, and we mock furries.
01:19:02.000But I reject the premise because eventually what we see is people will test the limits of the law, and eventually, in one generation or two, a judge will say, it does say that!
01:19:21.000Not everyone has to agree with me on a daily basis, and if I stray too far from reality's observation of what I am, they're gonna think I'm a psychopath and put me in, like, a psych ward.
01:19:29.000So you can self-identify however you want, but you cannot bend reality.
01:19:33.000I don't know if there's an objective reality, but this is... But how do you do it, then, in practice?
01:19:36.000Because this seems to be the middle ground that people try to find is, Look, I don't care how you self-identify in your own mind, but just don't make me participate in it.
01:19:45.000But the whole point of identity is so that you can be identified.
01:19:50.000We live in a society, we live in a political community.
01:19:53.000How on earth can you, unless you're just doing it in your basement at night, yelling to nobody, how can you have that right to a delusional identity and not infringe on my right to reality?
01:21:35.000That's a name. He's saying I am being itself. And your identity must be in me for you to make any
01:21:42.000sense. I am the divine logic of the universe. I am being.
01:21:46.000When you find your identity in I am, things make sense. When you ignore that and turn away from
01:21:55.000I am at all times throughout every society in all of human history, things start to go pretty
01:22:00.000kooky and you're left with a pathetic question which is, who am I? Changes by the day.
01:22:05.000I want to go back to abortion real quick because I'm thinking about this here I am, you know surrounded by more religious individuals who are much more staunchly pro-life and And so be careful.
01:22:15.000Well, I've always said I was pro-choice, and I think one of the issues is that when you actually break down the absolute nuance of the argument, well, then it's like, what does pro-choice and pro-life really mean?
01:22:26.000And I think the pro-choice people typically do not understand, or there's not enough complexity in the argument.
01:22:31.000So, for instance, we were talking with Matt Walsh.
01:22:33.000He argued that abortion is the intentional act of killing a child.
01:22:37.000And I'm like, right, I think that's wrong.
01:22:39.000But I think there are circumstances where a medical procedure would be done that would remove a baby from a mother, and that's where the nuance comes in.
01:22:45.000So ultimately the conclusion was, if you have to do something for the sake of the mother that would result in the child being removed, you just don't try to kill the child.
01:22:56.000I don't think the pro-choice left understands the right's position on that.
01:23:01.000I think, first of all, there's a real problem with the left's argument on pro-choice in that it is a scientific fact that life begins at conception, and any argument otherwise is illogical.
01:24:17.000And then I had a conversation with a woman bioethicist, and I made all these stupid utilitarian arguments as to, well, you know, all the freakonomics arguments.
01:24:26.000Well, abortion, it stops overpopulation, and it lowers all these sorts of social pathologies.
01:24:32.000And she said, oh, okay, Michael, so which one of your arguments For, you know, lowering crime and welfare dependency.
01:24:38.000Which one of your arguments is not an argument for killing young black men in inner cities?
01:24:47.000And I thought about it more deeply and I realized, oh, they're not just evil people trying to control women's bodies.
01:24:54.000Maybe there's actually something to this idea that a baby's a baby and we shouldn't kill it.
01:25:00.000You know, I said it's a scientific fact that life begins at conception, and I just have never understood any logic, in any circumstance, even when I wasn't listening to more pro-life, nuanced arguments, that, you know, I think, I think, was it Vosch who said, when he was asked by Charlie Kirk, when does life begin, he says, I don't know, sometime after birth?
01:26:18.000That's where we have to actually make our decision.
01:26:20.000And to the extent that those things are knowable and that we do know them, in my view, therefore, we're left with no other conclusion but to protect that life.
01:26:29.000You know, that's a good point, Jeremy, and it raises the question of, all right, so how certain are you?
01:26:37.000But there's also, sometimes you'll hear the pro-choice, pro-abortion people say, well, in the Christian tradition, they actually had carve-outs for some abortions.
01:26:47.000Thomas Aquinas, who's a very important doctor of the church.
01:26:51.000And Thomas Aquinas, it seems, at least at first glance, to be a little unclear on this question.
01:26:56.000Between what he considers to be, you know, the first step of the baby being made, there's some period of time before the baby is ensouled.
01:27:03.000But it's based on really ignorance of Thomas Aquinas, because Aquinas is using Aristotle's physics, he's using Aristotle's understanding of biology.
01:27:13.000Not his fault, not Aristotle's fault, they didn't have modern sonograms, and so what they believed was that the sperm acted on the blood and produced a vegetative soul, but there wasn't really anything even resembling life until the quickening, and you had this distinct human being, and we just know now That isn't true.
01:27:30.000We know that the sperm and the egg come together, they cease to be what they were, and they become a unique human life, and they're growing.
01:27:34.000And so, it's no knock on Aquinas or Aristotle, but by their own logic, life starts pretty much just right at conception.
01:27:42.000And also, if I'm not mistaken, the official position of the Catholic Church is that the person is in soul, that fertilization.
01:27:51.000I think it's the heartbeat, personally, because that's when the magnetic field begins to become produced.
01:27:57.000I think Jeremy hit the nail on the head.
01:28:02.000And every argument I've ever heard, and I welcome any more pro-abortion, pro-left, pro-choice, whatever they want to say, to have this discussion, because I do feel it's like, here's a pro-choice onslaught, essentially.
01:28:54.000If you look up the human magnetic field, Taurus, you see this, that the heartbeat itself is producing on a magnetic field around the human body.
01:29:00.000I think that that magnetic field's interaction with the Earth's magnetic field, and maybe the solar magnetic field, and even the galactic, is producing this God consciousness.
01:29:11.000Meaning, so magnetic forces are acting on the physical world, but isn't the soul, in order for it to be the soul and not to be the body, doesn't it have to not be physical?
01:29:20.000It has to be—I say of the soul that it's the intersection of the transcendent and the material.
01:29:27.000So to the extent that you're describing the material, perhaps, expression of the soul, that might very well be true.
01:29:33.000I'd be curious if the proto-heartbeat produces a magnetic field, which to our current question would be a really important one.
01:29:40.000because you know the cells begin pulsating as a heartbeat before the heart is actually formed
01:29:44.000in utero which is part of the part of the whole kind of conflict about heartbeat laws right is
01:29:49.000what is actually the heartbeat but I think your magnetic field thing is actually really fascinating
01:29:55.000and we should look and see if there's if the proto heartbeat produces the field as well okay
01:29:58.000there's no I I really don't feel like pro-choice exists anymore
01:30:02.000And I think it's become a shield for what is overtly pro-abortion.
01:30:05.000The reason is, I grew up with a family that said abortion was wrong.
01:30:11.000But there are circumstances where it's not the position of the government to intervene in a private medical practice and it becomes scary in certain circumstances.
01:30:43.000And you get an abortion and you get one.
01:30:45.000And Lena Dunham said she wished she had one.
01:30:47.000And she was like, you know, I do all this advocacy and I just feel bad because I didn't and I'm just like, Did you see this tweet the other day?
01:31:45.000I want to focus back on the legal, though, just for a minute.
01:31:48.000Because a lot of people listening now know that the court is going to make a decision in June, and they may not know exactly where they are on some of these philosophical questions.
01:31:55.000They may be, you know, persuaded by the Catholic view, they may be persuaded by the pro-choice view, or the magnetic view.
01:32:05.000But the legal question is what's before us, and what the left likes to do in these moments is to get people to hyperventilate with all these hyperbolic kind of statements about what's going to occur.
01:32:17.000So just, I think the key things I would want people to leave with are overturning Roe v. Wade
01:34:16.000But they won't say the same thing of a human being.
01:34:19.000I accept the scientific reality of a unique set of DNA.
01:34:21.000The problem is, as I mentioned with my family growing up, the left's stance now is, if you are pro-choice, you are on board with unfettered access at any point to some of the most disgusting procedures of killing babies.
01:34:35.000And I'm not talking about the right-wing perspective of You know, on day two of, you know, a fertilized egg, you're killing a baby.
01:34:42.000I'm saying, imagine that you are a Democrat and the baby is... or a gazelle.
01:34:50.000He would deliver the babies and then kill them.
01:34:53.000There's a guy right now, Cesare Santangelo.
01:35:19.000And the other thing is... and Michael alluded to this...
01:35:22.000Technology is part of this conversation.
01:35:25.000Because the age of viability gets younger and younger and younger as we get better and better and better at medicine, at medical procedures.
01:35:32.000It's very conceivable that one day you'll be able to extract a zygote out from a woman and put it in some sort of pod and raise it up until it's able to breathe on its own and get a driver's license.
01:35:45.000So the question is, like, even if viability is your standard, what does viability mean?
01:35:49.000And they'll say, well, viability means when it can survive on its own.
01:35:53.000Two-year-olds can't survive on their own.
01:36:22.000We just know now, because of medical advancements and technology, we know that fertilization and conception, and the sperm and the egg going away, and the new life beginning, that they are the same act.
01:36:55.000I'm not comfortable saying yes at this point.
01:36:57.000When people say, you know, I hate the sophistry on this one, when they say, oh, well, sometimes, you know, it won't stick and it'll be washed away or it'll be removed from the body or whatever, and I'm like, yeah, no one killed the life on purpose.
01:38:43.000No, one view of my politics is I'm not merely looking at the text on the page, whether to interpret it in the Wacky, kooky, modern leftist way, or even in the supposed originalist way, because there are different versions of originalism.
01:38:57.000There's original intent, there's original public meaning, which is what Scalia was a big proponent of.
01:39:03.000I take into account the American tradition.
01:39:07.000I think the way these laws have been understood over time matter, and so I've never seen the right to keeping a nuclear arm privately recognized, so I'm fine to let that one go.
01:39:58.000I think, as I stated on the episode when we talked about this, where the left took it out of context to try and claim I believe, to try and claim I said they should have nukes.
01:40:07.000I said, I think we could all come together on this one and actually amend the Constitution to say, except nukes and biological weapons, I think most people would be like, yeah, we're cool with that.
01:40:15.000But it is worth pointing out, when we talk about the Constitution, there's two separate things we're talking about.
01:40:20.000There's Capital C Constitution, which is that piece of paper, and then there's the lowercase c Constitution, which is how the government actually works.
01:40:27.000And so, I love the sheet of paper, I'm all for the Constitution, I'll defend my constitutional rights, tooth and nail.
01:40:33.000But we also have to accept that the way our government works is not merely dictated by a piece of paper, but the way we live it, and we've lived it for centuries.
01:40:40.000And if we deny that reality, we're not going to get very far in politics.
01:40:45.000My point was that right now, individuals under the Constitution do have a right to keep and bear any arm.
01:41:20.000I think that we are supposed to be governed by the Constitution with a capital C, and that if there are things about the capital C Constitution we don't like, we're supposed to amend the Constitution, and that the real problem is that we've moved away from the entire concept of enumerated rights.
01:41:34.000So even the fact that we're talking about the Second Amendment As though that's the guarantor of our right to bear arms.
01:41:41.000Even that is a misrepresentation of the founding intent, which was that Congress didn't have any right enumerated to them to deal with this issue in the first place.
01:41:59.000He said he was a soft originalist, that he wasn't this hardline originalist.
01:42:02.000And the fact is, I got to meet the guy when I was a student, and we were all asking him about the Bill of Rights, and he said, who cares about the Bill of Rights?
01:42:11.000What protects your rights is not the Bill of Rights.
01:42:13.000What protects it are the institutions that the real guts of the Constitution set up, which have been changed and, I think, decayed over time.
01:42:23.000And so, when I'm talking about the lowercase c Constitution, I just mean, as a practical matter, the way that we're actually going to maintain our rights and our liberties and our traditions is by the way that we live, by the way that we're actually governed.
01:42:36.000The very fact that administrative agencies make all of our actual laws now is something that we have to grapple with.
01:42:42.000That's the way our Constitution works.
01:42:44.000It's not just a bill up on Capitol Hill.
01:43:02.000I've not heard of one second after, but we're making lots of movies and TV shows and kids
01:43:06.000content and as Michael has shamelessly promoted his book, I will shamelessly promote the work
01:43:12.000of The Daily Wire and say that we're busy building alternatives, cultural alternatives,
01:43:16.000because not only are we not ultimately governed by the capital C Constitution, more's the
01:43:21.000pity, we're not really even governed by the lower case C Constitution.
01:43:25.000We're governed more than anything by the lower case C culture.
01:43:28.000And more than that, even the technology that we have that allows us to formulate the culture.
01:43:32.000Like, if someone can shut you out of the town square, you're not able to influence the culture.
01:43:40.000Well, speaking of shameless promotions, Freedom Tunes is still not to 800,000 subscribers, and we released one of the best videos we've ever released.
01:44:48.000Yeah, and you've heard of Occam's razor.
01:44:51.000The razor company's doing great since I was last with you guys.
01:44:53.000We've sold 30,000 more razors, and I think people are amused by the fact that we're having a good time actually building these alternatives and challenging the sort of leftist homogeny in our economy and in our culture.
01:45:31.000And there are more, I'm sure, on the horizon who we don't even know yet.
01:45:33.000Who see all these opportunities being created and are going to seize them.
01:45:36.000And I genuinely believe over the next decade we're going to create economic incentive for the left to actually not be able to take us for granted anymore.
01:46:37.000Chicken City is truly greater than CNN Plus.
01:46:42.000Well, the funny thing is, CNN, with 10,000 daily active users, and with their 50% off price of $3 a month, Chicken City is on track to gross more than CNN Plus per month.
01:46:56.000Well, the first thing I posted when it went live was, a person who watches nothing but Chicken City is better informed than a person who watches CNN.
01:48:49.000So do you own any stock or business investments in graphing?
01:48:53.000I actually went down to South America to start a graphing company in Santiago, Chile.
01:48:58.000We had an investor, but it didn't feel right doing it in South America.
01:49:02.000I want to do it here if we're going to do it.
01:49:03.000When Ian started ranting about this, I found a company that produces graphene and I bought like 60 shares.
01:49:08.000Nothing crazy, but I was like, alright.
01:49:10.000There's this stuff called turbostatic graphene where you can hit it with lasers and create these wafers of it.
01:49:15.000And then if you can somehow bend them 1.1 degrees and you can start to get this incredibly superconductive, you start to layer it at like 1.1 degrees, 1.56 degrees.
01:49:26.000I think it's starting to make a 64 tetrahedron, like a two-dimensional tetrahedron shape, and we'll be able to conduct lightning through it and stuff.
01:51:28.000There's the Family Guy joke where all the rich people are hanging out with Peter, and they're like in a plane or something, and then he's like, wow, look at the people down there.
01:51:41.000NYBSFP says, I'm confused why Jeremy would hunt down the last panda to save the life of the most reprehensible human, but two minutes later says he'd kill a person to save his dog because some people are bad, huh?
01:51:53.000Yeah, because it's two separate questions.
01:51:57.000Would I kill someone who is in the act of committing evil to preserve the thing that I ascribe value to, perhaps?
01:52:05.000That's a separate, distinct question from, is panda life or dog life intrinsically more valuable than human life?
01:52:14.000So it's just using, it's using examples to try to articulate two separate points.
01:52:18.000You're killing a burglar in the dog example.
01:52:22.000I'm gonna take credit for this idea here.
01:52:24.000Preston Witherspoon, thank you for writing it, but I'm just gonna take credit.
01:52:28.000He says, Tim, please let Jeremy know if Daily Wire creates a platform like Netflix that streams regular movies and TV shows, millions of us would leave Netflix and stop giving them money.
01:52:51.000Your statement is humbling, A, because we have.
01:52:54.000We've released four feature films and we're releasing two documentaries next month.
01:52:59.000We have two series in development right now and five kids series.
01:53:02.000It's humbling because, A, despite our best efforts to market this idea, I think there
01:53:07.000are a lot of people who don't know about it.
01:53:09.000And B, even to the extent that you do know about it, and perhaps you do, what you're saying is we haven't reached a point of viability yet where this is worth your money.
01:53:28.000I mean, essentially, for ten bucks, you can come to the Daily Wire and watch four movies, or for that same ten bucks, you can go to Netflix and watch every movie and television show ever made.
01:53:37.000We're aware of that distinction, but what we're basically saying is that the mission is part of the value that we're giving to our subscribers as well, and that the more people subscribe, the faster we'll get to that ultimate value proposition, where we have enough content, where it is well and truly Uh, worth your money.
01:53:55.000I think it's worth it now because you also, in addition to that content I mentioned, you still get the Ben Shapiro show, the Candace Owen show, the Andrew Klaven show, the Matt Walsh show.
01:54:04.000We throw Michael on there just for charity.
01:54:08.000So you do get a lot of value from the platform, but I certainly recognize that we got a lot of work to do.
01:54:13.000It's interesting if you start buying content that's going off contract at Netflix and Hulu, because on your platform, they're going to get a lot more attention being first in.
01:54:34.000But anyway, let me just say, I have an LG TV.
01:54:38.000There's no OTT app for some of these smart TVs for Daily Wire and I wasn't able to watch it.
01:54:43.000And then on our Sony TV I wasn't, I don't know if I'm just doing something wrong or if you guys are, you know, moving, are you gonna get the OTTs?
01:54:49.000We're building OTTs actively right now.
01:54:52.000The couple that we have, Roku and Apple TV, are getting improved because they, they're not at the level that we think they should be.
01:54:59.000But yes, that's a place we're making very active investment right now.
01:55:01.000And just because of the jargon, it means over-the-top.
01:55:04.000So it's a reference to TV, smart TVs, Roku, Apple TV, so that on your TV you can just have the app.
01:55:10.000So you can currently on Roku and Apple TV.
01:55:15.000Samsung, Vizio, those are all in development right now.
01:55:19.000I think you're a victim of your own success in that everyone is so eager and excited for the prospect of real content and good content that they expect you to have it instantly.
01:56:09.000Macaulay Culkin and Elijah Wood played the kids.
01:56:11.000I think I saw that when I was real young.
01:56:13.000And isn't like one is a bad kid and one's a good kid or something?
01:56:17.000Like just a genuinely evil child, yeah.
01:56:18.000And there's a whole debate between whether it's psychopathy and mental illness or just true evil.
01:56:24.000Like you've got, you know, two kids that are in a river going down full speed and one's just a really nice, good kid who wants to help everybody, but the evil kid is holding the cure for cancer.
01:56:33.000I would kill Macaulay Culkin, I think.
01:56:36.000And of course the evil kid has the cure for cancer, right?
01:56:43.000He's not going to give it to us anyway, don't save him!
01:56:45.000Hold on, hold on, hold on, let me fix the scenario.
01:56:49.000The evil kid and the good kid are both in the river, the evil kid has the cure for cancer, and you have a very powerful net gun that just so happens to fire two nets at the same time, tethered to a rope that will save them both.
01:58:11.000I just want to point out that I just think the idea that there is some greater power that created everything, that there's some kind of purpose to all this and that there are signs for us to see is completely absurd.
01:58:22.000What makes more sense is that an advanced species created all of this for some purpose and that we're here for a reason and there are signs in the system.
01:58:41.000Because it's such an important question, and I always like to point out that if you read
01:58:44.000the narrative of the Gospels, Christ went through the Galilee and drove out all disease.
01:58:49.000It says that he went from village to village and healed everyone.
01:58:52.000And this was his ministry for several years.
01:58:54.000It culminates in the events that precede Palm Sunday last week with the raising of Lazarus from the dead.
01:59:01.000He literally speaks into the tomb and calls forth Lazarus, who's been dead four days, in the presence of people who believe in him and people who don't believe in him.
01:59:14.000In fact, it says that the high priest, I referenced this line earlier but without context, that the high priest himself said after that, essentially,
01:59:21.000it's better that one man should die for the nation, that, in other words, they began to plot to kill Jesus,
01:59:26.000not because they didn't believe in the miracles, but because they did.
01:59:29.000I say all of that to say, even people who literally heard God speak,
01:59:34.000people who literally stood in the presence of God's Son, and watched Him call forth the dead to life, didn't believe.
01:59:43.000And so I understand the desperation of non-belief, and I understand the longing that is in the human heart to hear God directly, that you might believe in Him, but it is a mistaken view.
01:59:55.000If you did hear from God, There is absolutely no certainty that you would believe.
02:00:00.000And so, the better thing to realize, I think, is that what God values most highly is faith.
02:00:06.000And faith is the substance of things not seen, things not heard, things hoped for.
02:00:11.000And so, in many ways, it's a great gift from God that we don't see and hear from Him, and that, instead, we're left with the opportunity to put faith in Him, which is an even more unsatisfying answer than read the Bible and go to church.
02:00:39.000Our strike says, Tim, when I asked if you'd change your mind on possible fraud of Republicans, if Republicans lost midterms, you dismissed it and I felt disrespected.
02:01:05.000If in November the Republicans lose, I'm going to assume it's because I'm wrong.
02:01:11.000If evidence emerges of direct actions, I will consider all evidence.
02:01:16.000So the challenge I have, especially with like 2020, is We get stories about the campaigns run by Democrat politicians, the deals they cut with Republicans, Voter in the Park, the universal mail-in ballots that was recently ruled unconstitutional in Pennsylvania, and I say, all of that is just actual politics that resulted in a shadow campaign that saved the elections.
02:01:40.000I've not seen evidence of watermarked ballots or overt fraud to a degree where I'm convinced that's the issue at hand.
02:01:50.000So even though I really do believe Republicans are on track to win, especially considering every poll and every outcry from Democrats, for one, there are many variables from now until today which I can't predict, and two, it's possible I'm not omniscient.
02:02:27.000Voter, like we mentioned, the media literally suppressed stories that would be harmful to their preferred candidate right in that way it's like the referees were
02:02:35.000only calling strikes on one side it would be like if if Jonathan and Isaac
02:02:41.000Jonathan Isaac and I played a game of one-on-one that is a rigged game right I
02:02:46.000am at a I'm at a pronounced disadvantage going into it that you can say that
02:02:50.000it is unfair but it isn't cheating at that point that he makes all the
02:02:54.000points it this is an There was a piece published in RealClearPolitics not too long ago from a very serious guy who had worked with the Department of Justice on election issues, and he believes that there is evidence, hard evidence, of actual stolen ballots in certain states.
02:03:10.000He leaves the conclusion vague as to what this means for the overall election, but that would be, say, one piece of evidence.
02:04:00.000They locked people in their homes and told you it was Trump's fault.
02:04:03.000And I saw people that never got political in my life, with nothing else to do getting political, It's also when people say, you believe that more people turned out to vote for Joe Biden than Barack Obama?
02:04:12.000mail-in voting unconstitutional. I'm like, dude, it all happened above board. I think
02:04:15.000you just don't want to accept it that for a year Republicans actually were working against
02:04:21.000It's also when people say, you believe that more people turned out to vote for Joe Biden
02:04:26.000than Barack Obama? And it's like, no, they didn't have to turn out.
02:04:31.000They legally, they lawfully changed the nature of the election to, instead of having to go stand in a line, you had to check your mail.
02:04:40.000So of course, when you make it that easy, there are going to be more votes.
02:04:44.000That's why they wanted it, and it makes it harder for, it's an advantage for Democrats because of urban density compared to the disparate nature of rural Can I point out the problem of tallying votes with a corporation behind the scenes and people that people aren't transparently allowed to witness is a code red problem with our elections.
02:05:06.000We need to see every vote on some sort of public database so we can verify our systems.
02:05:13.000With that, my friends, if you haven't already, smash that like button, subscribe to this channel, share the show with your friends, and head over to TimCast.com because we're gonna have that members-only segment going up at about 11 p.m.