Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - January 13, 2021


Ep 351 | The Fall of Free Speech & the Rise of Tyranny


Episode Stats


Length

57 minutes

Words per minute

179.99196

Word count

10,298

Sentence count

589

Harmful content

Misogyny

2

sentences flagged

Hate speech

12

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

In this episode of Relatable, Allie talks about tech censorship and why a culture of free speech is so important. She also talks about the recent ban on Trump's personal account, TikTok, and more.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Wednesday. Hope everyone has had a great week so far.
00:00:15.000 Today we are finally going to get to the subject that I have said that we were going to talk about
00:00:19.820 since Monday, and that is big tech censorship. You guys have probably been hearing that
00:00:25.140 censorship is not that big of a deal. It's not a First Amendment issue. It's just private
00:00:30.060 companies doing what they want to do. I thought you conservatives, you know, you allowed freedom
00:00:35.320 when it comes to companies making their own choices. I thought y'all were fine with the free
00:00:39.780 market and all of that good stuff. Well, we're going to break down some of the misunderstandings
00:00:44.780 with a claim like that. We're going to talk about what happened as far as censorship goes and why
00:00:50.200 actually a culture of free speech is really important. I do want to ask you guys a favor.
00:00:57.820 If you love this podcast, if you could leave me a five-star review on Apple Podcasts or wherever
00:01:03.820 you listen, you don't even have to say, you know, why you like the podcast if you don't have time to
00:01:09.120 do that. But that would really mean a lot to me. It really does help, especially with what we're
00:01:13.500 talking about today and with everything that's going on. It helps out the show a lot. Also,
00:01:19.040 if you can subscribe to Blaze TV. So they do have this really good deal going on because they
00:01:25.040 understand people are worried about censorship and their favorite shows and content getting kicked
00:01:29.700 off. So they're offering a $30 discount on annual subscriptions for a limited time. So you can go to
00:01:36.940 blazetv.com slash Allie or blazetv.com. You can subscribe year-long subscription, $30 discount,
00:01:45.080 which is a really big deal. I think you can probably use promo code Allie, but I don't even
00:01:49.500 know if that's necessary. They do have this discount going on for a limited time, blazetv.com. So if
00:01:55.560 you're worried, a lot of you have asked me, okay, are you going to be able to stay on Instagram? Are
00:01:59.520 you going to be able to, you know, am I going to still be able to listen to your podcast? Well,
00:02:04.140 there would have been one time when I would have said, oh, you don't need to worry about that.
00:02:07.760 Um, and hopefully we don't have to worry about that, but you just never know the idea or the,
00:02:13.220 the things that have gone on for the past week have kind of, uh, kind of made us, um,
00:02:19.660 realize that things can happen very quickly. So make sure you subscribe to blaze TV, $30 off.
00:02:25.920 It's a really good time to do that. If you love this podcast, leaving a five-star review would mean
00:02:31.600 a lot to me. Okay. Let's go ahead and get started. If you don't know what's been going on over the past
00:02:37.100 week, hopefully you've listened to the other episodes this week where we've talked about,
00:02:41.080 you know, the storm into the Capitol and all the craziness and all of the illegality,
00:02:46.180 the criminality that went on last week and kind of how we've been wrestling through that. There
00:02:51.200 has been a backlash, not just in the reaction of people, not just a political backlash, but there's
00:02:57.960 also been a big tech backlash. So after all of this happened, Trump's personal Twitter account
00:03:03.980 got suspended. Twitter deleted tweets written by Trump from the POTUS account. So the POTUS account
00:03:08.940 is used by every president. It, uh, so they didn't take down the POTUS account, but he can't access it
00:03:15.400 anymore. And all of the tweets that he did send from that official POTUS account, president of the
00:03:20.680 United States, if you didn't know, uh, were taken down Facebook permanently banned Trump. Uh, so Reddit,
00:03:28.260 Twitch, Shopify, Twitter, Google, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, I don't know if it would be
00:03:33.660 hilarious if Snapchat didn't ban Donald Trump. And that was how he was communicating with the
00:03:40.080 American people and used all the filters and all that great stuff. That would have been 0.62
00:03:44.000 really 2021, but that's not what happened. He was also banned from TikTok. That would have also been
00:03:49.840 a hilarious way for the president to continue to communicate with the American people. If he was
00:03:55.760 like doing the dances and, and popping up and trying to send his messages through TikTok dances again,
00:04:00.960 unfortunately we do not, uh, we don't get to enjoy that. Banned from Apple, banned from discord,
00:04:07.480 Pinterest, Stripe, Amazon cloud hosting. Um, now you would think that everyone on the left is
00:04:12.580 applauding this. And a lot of people on the left are applauding this. Even, uh, the so-called champions
00:04:17.080 of free speech and the media class are applauding this saying that this is a great and wonderful thing.
00:04:21.780 Even some people on the right are saying this is a good thing. Now, uh, the ACLU actually came out
00:04:27.960 against banning Trump from Twitter, which is surprising because the ACLU has been on the liberal
00:04:35.320 side of most issues for the past, at least 30 years. Now, not every single issue. I'm not saying
00:04:42.060 they have been wrong in my opinion on everything, but they are a liberal organization who stands for
00:04:47.740 liberal values and who promote liberal causes, even at the expense of civil liberties, in my
00:04:53.860 opinion. But in this case, here's what they said. The civil rights organization, which often fights
00:04:59.480 against conservative, uh, this is actually the blaze reporting this, the civil rights organization,
00:05:04.260 uh, which often fights against conservative causes released a statement Friday expressing concern that
00:05:09.120 the movement to de-platform Trump could be a slippery slope with eventual unintended consequences,
00:05:13.860 especially for minority groups. ACLU senior legislative council, Kate Ruane said in a
00:05:19.880 statement for months, president Trump has been using social media platforms to see doubt about
00:05:24.040 the results of the election and to undermine the will of the voters. We understand the desire to
00:05:28.520 permanently suspend him now, but it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter
00:05:33.500 wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech
00:05:39.520 of billions, especially when political realities make those decisions easier. President Trump can
00:05:45.440 turn to his press team or Fox news to communicate with the public, but others like the many black, 1.00
00:05:50.680 brown and LGBTQ activists who have been censored by social media companies will not have that luxury.
00:05:56.740 It is our hope that these companies will apply their rules transparently to everyone. And that's really
00:06:01.900 all conservatives have been asking for. It's not that we don't think that Twitter should be able to
00:06:07.220 have enforceable rules or Facebook or or YouTube, but that they apply the rules evenly and that they don't
00:06:13.480 use political bias to make those rules, as we've talked about, or to enforce those rules. And as we've talked
00:06:20.200 about for the past week or so, there have been Democratic politicians, people on the left who have said
00:06:25.800 things equivalent to what Donald Trump has said that you could argue have incited violence. And that's where the
00:06:32.860 slippery slope comes in. That's what you worry about. That if we say that any political rhetoric that we
00:06:38.200 don't like, even the kind that may or may not rile people up is inciting violence and therefore can be
00:06:43.780 censored. You're looking at at least a culture of repression, even if the First Amendment is still
00:06:51.080 intact. If you have these what are truly corporate oligarchies making the rules for people and silencing
00:06:58.860 their voices based on political bias and politically tense situations, you could see how that power could
00:07:05.700 be wielded towards the other side, too. And that's what I want people on the left to realize. Do you
00:07:09.980 not see how this also could possibly, depending on where the power lies in a few years, could negatively
00:07:17.740 affect the voices that you think are important? Now, I have been a steady critic against Donald Trump's
00:07:23.760 rhetoric in some cases, especially his rhetoric on Twitter. And a lot of people disagree with me on this.
00:07:28.420 I think that if he would have showed more restraint, especially in his social media behavior,
00:07:35.060 that he could have won in a landslide. I think people wanted stability. People wanted normalcy.
00:07:40.540 People did want decency and decorum, especially with the craziness of the past year. A lot of good
00:07:45.980 policies by by Donald Trump. But I think that his lack of decorum, his lack of restraint, his bombastic
00:07:53.860 and dogmatic nature, especially on social media, really hurt him. So I have been a big critic of
00:07:59.220 Donald Trump's tweets. And I agree that some of his rhetoric has been very irresponsible. I think
00:08:03.880 some of the rhetoric at the Capitol was very irresponsible. But I think that we just have to
00:08:08.740 be fair in applying that standard to everyone and to not take the leap of saying, yes, this speech
00:08:14.580 definitely incited violence if it didn't explicitly do that, because then you're looking at the justified
00:08:20.500 censorship of all kinds of different voices on the right or the left. And then we don't have a
00:08:26.260 society of free speech anymore. Again, even if the First Amendment is technically intact. Even
00:08:32.120 Germany's Angela Merkel has spoken out against Twitter's ban on Trump. And she is not a fan of
00:08:38.340 Trump. I would say that she might not even be a fan of the United States. But she is actually coming
00:08:44.100 out and saying free speech is important. And this is a place where I wouldn't say free speech really
00:08:48.680 thrives. So Angela Merkel says German or this is what this is the the statement that her
00:08:55.660 spokesperson said the chancellor sees the complete closing down of the account of an elected president
00:09:01.760 as problematic. He said at a news conference in Berlin, rights like the freedom of speech
00:09:08.240 can be interfered with, but by law and within the framework defined by the legislature, not according
00:09:15.200 to a corporate decision. So I disagree with that, obviously. And that's what I'm talking about is
00:09:20.060 that Germany is not some is not some bulwark of free speech that we should be looking to. Like he
00:09:25.940 thinks that free speech should be limited and it should be limited by law. His real contention with
00:09:30.700 it is that a corporation did it. And I don't think that's right. But they are speaking out against it.
00:09:36.340 They do think that it's problematic because they at least can see and the ACL at least can see how
00:09:41.580 this could negatively affect them as well. And that's all I'm asking for. Just see what this
00:09:47.460 precedent sets for other people. And, you know, I hear people say, well, I'm never going to spread
00:09:51.240 fascist propaganda. I'm never going to incite violence. I'm always going to follow the rules.
00:09:55.220 So it's not going to affect me. That's very naive as extremely naive. Like, don't you see how the
00:10:00.140 standards are so subjective and it depends on the people who are in charge and if someone who disagrees
00:10:05.520 with you and might even find your leftist or progressive ideology dangerous as propaganda
00:10:12.300 that they could censor you, would you think that's fair? No, I don't think that you would.
00:10:16.720 So that's not all. They also these big tech companies, Google, Apple, Amazon band together
00:10:23.060 to take down Parler, which was a Twitter like company. And I'll get into that story and how
00:10:30.200 scary and problematic that is in just one second. All right, let's talk about Parler. So Google took
00:10:41.980 Parler off of its app store. Apple took Parler off of its app store. Amazon cut Parler off of its web
00:10:49.300 hosting service, forcing it to find a new host or to shut down. And right now it's not available.
00:10:55.340 And so what we hear so often is, oh, you don't like Twitter? Just go to a different platform or
00:11:00.720 you don't like this social media site and how they run their site. Well, you should just
00:11:04.460 build your own. Okay. Well, that's exactly what, that's exactly what Parler did. But now like a
00:11:10.080 cartel, these, these huge big tech companies, they come together and they basically say, sorry,
00:11:16.440 like you can't play on our court. You're going to have to build yourself another court. And oh,
00:11:20.940 by the way, that's going to be very difficult and expensive to do. And we understand that. And so
00:11:25.800 what they're saying, the reason why these companies say that they're taking them down is because of
00:11:30.640 course, they're spreading disinformation, they're spreading misinformation, they're spreading
00:11:35.740 dangerous rhetoric that is leading to violence and things like, and things like that. Parler is a
00:11:41.620 small company. And so even though they have rules against illegal conduct or illegal,
00:11:47.180 illegal content being spread on their platform, even though they have rules against incitement of
00:11:53.800 violence, they do not have the manpower yet to moderate all of this content. And so Apple is
00:12:00.600 saying, look, you got to moderate all this content. You got to take this content down on a regular basis
00:12:05.860 or else we're not going to host you on our Apple or on our app store. Google said the same thing.
00:12:11.820 Amazon basically said the same thing. And Parler even said, look, we've got a team of volunteers.
00:12:18.000 We'll do it. We'll figure it out. We can't afford to pay these people right now, but we'll get
00:12:22.780 volunteers to moderate. And they said, oh, no, sorry. We just don't think that's going to be
00:12:27.580 enough. So yeah, we're basically going to shut you down. See the hypocrisy in this, you might be
00:12:33.240 listening and say, well, you know, that's whatever Google and Amazon and Apple want to do. They're just
00:12:38.240 they're just a private company working in their best interest and the interest of the people and
00:12:42.420 public safety. No, no, no. That's hypocrisy. Because if they really cared about public safety,
00:12:48.760 like if they really cared about abiding by those rules and having regular and consistent moderation
00:12:55.120 of, you know, what's illegal content or dangerous content, then they would also be threatening Facebook
00:13:02.260 and Twitter in the same way. But they're not. There's loads of misinformation and disinformation
00:13:07.160 on Facebook. You think there aren't violent threats on Facebook. You think people haven't
00:13:11.100 been doxxed on Facebook. You think people aren't sharing criminal activity and pornography on
00:13:16.060 Facebook. Of course they are. Same goes with Twitter. All of that content can be found on
00:13:20.460 Twitter. All of that content can be found on YouTube and Instagram as well. And a lot of that
00:13:26.980 content is never moderated. It's reported, but it's never blocked. It's never taken down. And so the
00:13:32.920 real reason why these companies are coming after Parler is because they don't want the competition.
00:13:38.460 They don't want the competition. And that is when they start, they seem to be acting like some kind
00:13:42.920 of cartel or acting like some kind of monopoly against the little guy. So you can't simultaneously
00:13:48.300 say that, oh, this is fine. This is just the free market. Why don't you create some competition?
00:13:53.440 Oh, by the way, these big giants that you can't possibly win against because they have so much of
00:13:58.860 the market share. Google has 90% of the market share. They're going to come and they're going
00:14:03.420 to take down the competition. That's not the free market. The market is no longer free. And look,
00:14:08.660 I used to be, I used to be very recently a conservative who said, you know what? I might
00:14:15.040 not like the censorship that happens in these companies. I might not like a lot of things that
00:14:19.280 they do, but they are private companies. They can de-platform the people that they want to
00:14:23.620 de-platform, not realizing the very basic principle that a culture of free speech is also important,
00:14:30.820 not just the first amendment, because you can have the first amendment, which I do think is so
00:14:34.840 important. It's so important for the government not to stifle speech. It's so important for us to
00:14:38.960 have that protection. But if you don't have a culture of free speech, and if you have these
00:14:42.940 corporations that have so much unprecedented, that is such an overused buzzword right now, but it truly
00:14:48.760 is in history, unprecedented power. We have this corporate oligarchy who makes a lot of decisions
00:14:54.500 for our lives, who really influences how freely we can move. Like if you're talking about what
00:15:01.420 airlines allow you to do, how freely we can speak and share information, the things that we can
00:15:06.260 know and say, they're basically an oligarchy. And when they are making the rules that are actually
00:15:14.200 against the first amendment and do not promote a culture of free speech, when they are trying to
00:15:20.340 drown out competition in a way that is not fairly applied to, to other companies like Twitter and
00:15:29.200 Facebook, then you're no longer really living in a free society. A culture of free speech is just as
00:15:36.700 important as having legal free speech is having the first amendment because laws actually follow
00:15:43.060 culture. So if our culture starts to believe that all political opposition and all unpopular opinions
00:15:50.640 is inciting violence, even if it's not explicitly inciting violence, if you see all forms of dissent or
00:15:59.540 disagreement as dangerous misinformation, as harmful rhetoric that could lead to bad things, then you're
00:16:08.480 only going to allow for a very small minority of voices. And then you do have a culture of tyranny.
00:16:16.180 You do. So people are saying that this is not a free speech issue. Don't understand that it's a lot
00:16:21.180 more complex than just saying, well, the first amendment still exists. And so you don't, you don't even need
00:16:28.200 to make a constitutional argument. First of all, I am not taking constitutional lessons from people
00:16:34.220 who think that the first amendment doesn't matter when it comes to a Christian cake baker. Like these
00:16:40.820 are the same people who think that a Christian cake baker in Colorado should be forced to bake a cake
00:16:46.340 for a gay wedding or a florist should be forced to provide her services for a gay wedding. These are 0.92
00:16:51.200 the same people who believe that nuns should be forced to provide insurance for birth control,
00:16:56.640 no matter what the first amendment says. So I'm not going to be taking lessons on the constitution
00:17:00.620 from people who think that the second amendment only includes muskets. So spare me. Now, for those 1.00
00:17:06.600 of you who are conservatives, who actually care about the first amendment, and not just conservatives,
00:17:11.780 there are people on the other side who care about the first amendment. But if you're someone who truly
00:17:15.700 does care about free speech, if you truly do care about our first amendment rights, and you were all,
00:17:20.720 you're on the side that I was, that genuinely just believe this is not a first amendment issue. This is
00:17:24.680 not a free speech issue. This might be, you know, a corporate policy issue. This might be an unfairness
00:17:31.780 issue, but this has nothing to do with free speech. If you're on the side that I was, let me explain why
00:17:36.700 I think this is a little, it's just more complicated. I already explained the whole culture of free speech
00:17:42.340 thing, but there's also a legal part of this. This is not just private companies. These are not just
00:17:48.720 cultural issues. There's also a political and legal part of this, and it has to do with Section 230. So
00:17:56.440 Rachel Bovard, she's a policy expert out of DC. I've had her on the podcast before. Go back and listen
00:18:03.320 to the episode I did with her a few weeks ago. She talks a lot about big tech, and she talks a lot
00:18:08.640 about big corporations, and how much power they have, and how this does have political freedom
00:18:14.380 issue or implications on our lives. So she wrote in USA Today about Section 230, which kind of outlines
00:18:24.260 the rules for these internet platforms. Let me read you some quotes from her article. Quote,
00:18:32.220 internet platforms would receive a liability shield so they could voluntarily screen out harmful content
00:18:37.960 accessible to children, and in return, they would provide a forum for true diversity of political
00:18:42.360 discourse and myriad avenues for intellectual activity. So that is why Section 230 was originally
00:18:48.180 set up. So they could kind of function as both a platform and a publisher. So that means that they
00:18:55.020 could be a platform in the sense that people could share their opinions and that these platforms were
00:18:59.800 not liable for the content that was shared. So I would be able to post on some internet forum. I'd be
00:19:06.640 able to post on Yelp. I'd be able to post on Twitter, and Twitter would not be liable for something that I
00:19:11.280 said. They couldn't be sued for something that I said. But it also gave them the ability to be a publisher
00:19:16.520 in that they could have rules and take down the content that they wanted to take down. But the exchange
00:19:23.440 was supposed to be, okay, we're going to give you these protections in Section 230, but these companies
00:19:29.320 are supposed to provide a forum for, quote, true diversity of political discourse and myriad avenues for
00:19:35.240 intellectual activity. And that's where we are now. It is very questionable and arguable whether
00:19:40.740 or not these companies are holding up their end of the bargain. She goes on to say, but what was
00:19:46.560 originally understood to be a privilege granted for reasonable content moderation has become
00:19:51.120 judicially contorted, stretched into a bulletproof immunity that protects these companies from all manner
00:19:56.720 of misdeeds. Critically, in protecting these companies from costly damages and lawsuits, Section 230 has
00:20:02.860 also fueled the growth of the big tech platforms, which now engage in viewpoint discrimination at an
00:20:08.080 unprecedented scale and scope. International megacorporations determining what news information
00:20:14.180 and perspectives Americans are allowed to read here in Access. A handful of big tech companies are now
00:20:20.240 controlling the flow of most information in a free society, and they are doing so aided and abetted by
00:20:26.520 government policy. See, so it's not as simple as just these companies, private companies doing what they
00:20:31.260 want to do. That these are merely private companies exercising their First Amendment rights is a
00:20:37.040 reductive framing, which ignores that they do so in a manner that is privileged. They are immune to the
00:20:43.120 liabilities to which other First Amendment actors like newspapers are subject. And also that these content
00:20:48.600 moderation decisions occur at an extraordinary and unparalleled scale. When Google decides to suppress or
00:20:55.400 amplify content, it does so for 90% of the global marketplace, Rachel Bovard says. Twitter's choices
00:21:02.320 to cut off circulation of certain content, as they did when they banned circulation of a story critical
00:21:07.120 to the Biden family a month before the November election, do you remember that, very much shapes the
00:21:14.520 national news narrative. Facebook, by its own omission, has the power to swing elections, which is troubling as
00:21:20.340 some of the platform's fact checkers are partially bankrolled by a Chinese company. I think it is
00:21:26.540 ByteDance. The downstream impact these companies have on shaping independent thought, market access,
00:21:34.980 consumer behavior, election integrity, and speech are undeniable. In a very real way, these platforms are
00:21:40.740 transforming the nature of what it means to be free in a free society. That policymakers have a role here
00:21:47.520 is obvious. While private companies have the right to set the rules for their own platforms and online
00:21:52.200 communities, they do not have a right to do it with the privilege of Section 230 protections. And the more
00:21:57.380 these companies engage in behavior that ranges away from the original goal of ensuring a true diversity
00:22:02.580 of political discourse and toward gatekeeping independent thought in America, the more they prove
00:22:08.080 themselves undeserving of special government treatment. And so she makes a really good point about that,
00:22:14.180 is that there is a legal aspect to it. There is a part of this that also has to do with the law,
00:22:22.960 that really does have to do with the First Amendment. Now, I'm going to talk to you also about the other side
00:22:27.360 of this, about the benefits to Section 230. A lot of conservatives, Trump himself, Josh Hawley has talked
00:22:32.580 about repealing Section 230 and how important that is. Now, why there was really no meaningful legislation
00:22:37.880 when Republicans were in control is the perpetual question that conservatives and Republicans have
00:22:43.760 been asking our lawmakers for years and years and years. They use these big issues like defunding
00:22:50.680 Planned Parenthood and, you know, border security and all of this stuff to win elections and they get in
00:22:55.980 power and then it doesn't happen. And then the cycle just goes over and over again. But conservatives
00:23:01.620 talk about repealing Section 230. I think it's a little bit more complicated than that. And David French
00:23:07.280 makes a pretty good argument for keeping Section 230 that I'll read to you in just one second.
00:23:16.540 All right. So people say we should just repeal Section 230, but I don't, I really don't think
00:23:21.940 it's that simple. I have really tried to look at both sides of the argument here. And there are people
00:23:26.240 on the left and the right, by the way, who want to repeal Section 230 for different, for different
00:23:30.480 reasons. I think that the right wants it to be to where these companies basically can't discriminate
00:23:37.360 at all against, against content. That's, I would say, a crude way to describe what a lot of people
00:23:44.340 on the right would say that they want. The left wants them to be more like a publisher so that they
00:23:49.000 have more regulation. So the government can impose more of what they want these big tech companies
00:23:55.740 to do. And Section 230 could theoretically accomplish either one of those things. But David French,
00:24:03.700 he argues that Section 230 actually prevents censorship, like political censorship, by giving
00:24:09.560 social media companies the benefits of being both a platform and a publisher. So again, they're a
00:24:14.400 platform in the sense that they're not liable for what you say, but they're a publisher in the sense that
00:24:17.700 they can remove bad content like porn or threats or doxing. He argues in Time Magazine that if you take this
00:24:25.420 away, then the websites, then the websites, these sites become publishers, then they're liable for
00:24:31.840 everything that you put on their site, which means that they are going to go wild on censorship because
00:24:36.520 they're certainly not going to allow anything on their site that they cannot personally verify or
00:24:41.680 vouch for, which will actually give even more power to these big tech companies because they're the only
00:24:47.500 ones with their resources to moderate and filter out a lot of that content that they don't want to be
00:24:53.060 liable for. So a company like Parler couldn't exist if it had to become a publisher if it didn't have
00:25:00.560 230 protection. Now, of course, like the irony here is that the 230 protection is supposed to also protect
00:25:07.320 them from the rules that are being slapped on them by these companies like Amazon and Google and Apple.
00:25:15.220 I'll say if you don't follow our rules, if you don't moderate all this content, we're going to take you off.
00:25:19.080 Section 230 is actually supposed to protect companies like Parler by saying, you know,
00:25:24.480 you're not liable for all of the content that is on your site. So that, again, is where we have
00:25:32.760 these companies acting with more power than the government is kind of subverting the rules of
00:25:38.920 Section 230 by saying we're a private company and we can do what we want to do and applying those rules
00:25:44.180 arbitrarily. So my question is to someone out there who knows more about this than I do,
00:25:49.820 who has done more research, who is an expert in all of this, like what is the answer? Because
00:25:54.260 I don't think it can keep going how it's going. Like we can't have Twitter and Facebook who control so
00:26:00.420 much of our information and who really can sway elections, who do a terrible job of moderating the
00:26:05.460 content on their site to make sure that there's no doxing and no abuse and no threats and no illicit
00:26:12.620 content and also are, for example, stopping the circulation of a New York Post article about the
00:26:21.900 Biden family that is just as legitimate as any story that the New York Times has written about
00:26:26.580 Donald Trump. Like we can't keep going like that. There has to be some kind of harness. At the same
00:26:32.120 time, I see the importance of Section 230 that they have to be able to have enforceable rules
00:26:37.680 without being liable for everything that is on its website or else these competitors like Parler,
00:26:45.060 even though it doesn't exist right now, it wouldn't be able to exist because it wouldn't have
00:26:49.480 the protection that's needed to be able to not be, again, liable for the content that is on its site.
00:26:58.960 And so I think it's a complicated issue, but that's really my point. My point isn't that I have all the
00:27:05.300 answers. My point is that it's much more complex than saying, well, this has nothing to do with
00:27:10.200 the First Amendment. This has nothing to do with free speech. This has nothing to do with anything
00:27:14.520 like that. It's just private companies doing what they want to do. No, this does have, it has legal
00:27:19.020 implications, but more importantly and mainly right now at least, it also has cultural implications and
00:27:26.680 the law does follow culture. And if you do not have a culture of free speech, then it doesn't really
00:27:32.960 matter that much if you have the First Amendment. This is the analogy that I came up with the other
00:27:36.700 day. If you are, and I hate when people pick apart analogies and metaphors to say, so like,
00:27:42.560 are you calling me a child? Who are you calling a child in this situation? It's a metaphor.
00:27:48.020 So please take it as that. So if you are a little kid, if you've got a little kid who wants a cookie,
00:27:53.860 asks his mom, who is the government in our metaphor, that asks his mom if he can have a cookie.
00:28:00.140 The mom says, yes, you can have a cookie. But Big Brother, pun intended, comes along and says and
00:28:06.860 takes away the cookie jar and makes sure that he doesn't have access to cookies. Make sure he doesn't
00:28:11.080 have access to the oven so he can't make his own cookies. Make sure that he doesn't have access to
00:28:14.580 the ingredients or is able to go to the store for his own cookies. If Big Brother, who in our metaphor
00:28:20.840 are these big corporations, takes away the little brother's ability to get his own cookies,
00:28:29.040 it really doesn't matter if mom says yes. Technically, he is free to have a cookie. But is
00:28:34.100 he really free to have a cookie? No, he still lives in this repressive environment where Big Brother
00:28:39.080 comes along and makes sure that he can't have the cookie that he wants. So you can't just stand there
00:28:43.580 as a bystander to this family situation and say, well, yeah, that little kid is totally free to have
00:28:48.960 a cookie. Well, not really. Is he really free to have a cookie if Big Brother is making sure that he
00:28:54.000 can't have a cookie? And cookie in this case is free speech, saying the things that you want to
00:28:57.920 say. So it's a lot more complicated than what people are saying, that this is not a First Amendment
00:29:02.780 issue. And once again, do not take constitutional lessons from people who don't actually believe in
00:29:09.920 free speech and religious liberty, who want to limit it at every turn, and who do not value the
00:29:14.860 Second Amendment either. And you really see the Constitution as a hindrance to their progressive
00:29:18.300 values. They have no leg to stand on when it comes to schooling us on what the Constitution means
00:29:24.780 and its importance. Now, here's something that I think is interesting in all of this. So as these
00:29:30.740 companies are cracking down on the president, they're cracking down on, it seems like, conservative
00:29:37.060 voices in general, or at least we see that is on the horizon, if not right in front of us. We've got
00:29:45.000 Biden filling his White House staff with people who have worked in Facebook. So this is according
00:29:51.380 to the New York Post, or worked in Facebook and Twitter and all of these places. And by the way,
00:29:55.960 it's so funny because the left and Democrats always say, oh, we're against big corporate power. We're for
00:30:00.580 the little guy. They're very for big corporate power. And by the way, Republicans have also given tax
00:30:06.300 breaks to these companies at the expense of the working class. And so neither party is really innocent 0.61
00:30:12.560 in all of this. But Democrats have always said that they're not for a big business, that they're not
00:30:17.580 for these big corporations. But at every turn, they also give them breaks. And they also contribute
00:30:24.780 to the elitism and oligarchy that exists in corporate America. It's at the expense of the little
00:30:31.400 guy. Whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, you need to realize that most of the people in Washington
00:30:36.260 are not for you. They're not. And Democrats, I think, especially get won over by this social
00:30:44.220 justice rhetoric that Democrats use to win them over and to win elections, not realizing these
00:30:50.800 Democrats are not fighting for you. They're not. They're feeding into these big corporate power
00:30:57.420 structures that then turn around and control your life. And this is especially true for conservatives
00:31:03.300 because Republicans, by giving tax breaks to these big corporations, by giving immunity in some cases
00:31:08.980 to these corporations, along with a lot of the Democrats in Washington, are giving more power to
00:31:14.680 these corporations who not only control our lives, but also hate our values as conservatives.
00:31:20.600 And so, you know, I'm not a populist. I wouldn't consider myself a populist. But there's an argument
00:31:27.520 to be made for there's an argument to be made for not giving so much power and so many cuts and so many
00:31:37.400 shortcuts and so many breaks to these big corporations and using that political capital and using that
00:31:44.900 and using whatever power and funding you have to help the people who actually who help the people who
00:31:53.440 actually need it. Now, speaking of all of that, that I went on a tangent because I was talking about
00:32:02.500 how Democrats always say that they're for the little guy. They really are for big tech. They really are
00:32:07.500 for these major corporations and the people that Biden is putting in positions of power in the White
00:32:13.060 House reveal that. So we've got from The New York Post, Jessica Hertz. She'll serve as Biden's White
00:32:19.260 House staff secretary, vetting correspondent. She was a former Facebook lawyer. We've got Emily
00:32:24.000 Horn. She worked at Twitter from 2017 to 2018. She will broker the White House National Security
00:32:29.120 Council's communications with the media. Mark Schwartz, formerly worked at Amazon Web Services,
00:32:35.000 now helping vet appointments to the White House Office of Management and Budget. Dionne Scott,
00:32:41.100 Google Global Program Manager, is reviewing applicants to the Department of Homeland Security.
00:32:46.380 Zaid Zaid. Is that really this person's name? Facebook's strategic response aide is on the
00:32:54.100 Biden vetting team for State Department jobs. Christopher Upperman, Facebook Associate General
00:33:00.020 Counsel, is working on the Small Business Administration. Rachel Lieber, Facebook Director
00:33:04.980 of Strategic Responses, vetting spy agency staff Tom Sullivan. Amazon International Tax Director is
00:33:10.700 vetting State Department appointments. Cynthia Hogan led Apple's lobbying as Vice President for Public
00:33:16.240 for Public Policy and Government Affairs, previously helped with Biden's VP selection vetting. So Biden
00:33:23.780 loves big tech. Big tech embed in so many ways with the Chinese Communist Party. If D.C. is the swamp,
00:33:32.360 then Silicon Valley is the swamp number two. And these swamps colliding on the coast of our country are
00:33:39.380 going to envelop the rest of the country in their swampiness. That is what we will get from a Biden
00:33:45.240 presidency. We will see more corporate power. We will see more big tech power. And they will be
00:33:51.040 aided and abetted by now, the Democratic controlled company. And it's going to be at the expense of all
00:33:56.260 of us, Republican or Democrat. OK, it's not going to be, oh, this is going to help the little guy. This
00:34:02.460 is going to help the least of these. It's it's going to definitely wreck the working class. But this is 0.99
00:34:07.860 what it is. I mean, this is how it is now. We are run by a lot of elites who know how to win
00:34:12.060 elections and do not care about our lives and for conservatives completely run counter
00:34:17.600 to the things that we believe in and the things that we hold dear. Also, according to CNBC,
00:34:24.400 there's Austin Lynn, a former program manager at Facebook. He's on an agency review team for the
00:34:28.880 executive office of the president, Erskine Bowles. A former Facebook board member is advising the
00:34:34.940 transition team. Jeff Zients, a former Facebook board member, picked to become Biden's COVID-19
00:34:42.240 czar, which what a weird word to talk to, like associate with COVID-19. You know, it's just funny 1.00
00:34:50.320 that Biden on his transition team and his White House staff have all these people from Facebook,
00:34:56.060 from Google, from Amazon. These happen to be the companies that are silencing voices the most,
00:35:03.700 certainly deplatforming the president. So don't tell me this has nothing to do, that big tech has
00:35:08.880 nothing to do with the government. Yes, they're in bed with the government. They're also in some ways
00:35:14.540 catering to foreign regimes that hate us. Don't you understand that so many in Washington, D.C.,
00:35:20.400 I would say Republicans and Democrats, but especially on the Democratic side, truly hate you.
00:35:25.680 They hate you and they hate your way of life and they don't care about you. And the government
00:35:30.460 can't save you, left or right. That's what I want you to know. It's the title of John MacArthur's
00:35:35.420 book a long time ago. And even though I don't agree with everything in the book, like the
00:35:39.140 Revolutionary War was a sin and all of that, I still agree with the premise. The government can't
00:35:45.700 save you. It's not going to save you. It doesn't love you. It doesn't know you. It doesn't know your
00:35:49.960 name. It doesn't know your kid's name. It doesn't know your kid's favorite food. People who allow the
00:35:54.380 government to educate their children, to take care of their children. People who are convinced that the
00:35:58.700 government actually cares about poor people, that actually cares about the disenfranchised, they 1.00
00:36:03.660 don't. They don't. They don't. Okay. That's why it's up to you, church. It's up to you, Christian.
00:36:09.520 It's up to you, individual. It's up to you, mom, dad, employee. If you want to make change, if you want
00:36:15.480 to take care of people, do it yourself. Do it yourself. Do not trust a bureaucrat to take care of the
00:36:21.640 things that cannot be taken care of. There is a function of the government. I'm not a libertarian. Okay.
00:36:25.700 I am not some, I'm certainly not an anarchist. I think there is a role of the government. I think
00:36:31.280 the military is important. I think that we are to pay taxes. That's a biblical idea. I'm also not
00:36:37.440 a theocrat. There is no biblical precedent for imposing a theocracy on people who don't hold
00:36:44.040 to that belief. Certainly not in the New Testament. There is no biblical precedent for a theocracy.
00:36:48.900 Of course, I do believe that the government should be a moral institution looking to the Judeo-Christian 0.97
00:36:57.180 ethic of right and wrong and good and bad and lawmaking. And I know some people don't like
00:37:03.200 that, but there is a depiction of Moses at our state's capital for that reason. He's the first
00:37:07.980 human lawgiver that those are the values that America was founded upon. But I'm not for theocracy.
00:37:14.760 I'm not a libertarian. I'm not an anarchist. I do think there's an important role of the government
00:37:20.060 to protect us and to protect our freedoms. But don't put your hope there. My goodness. And especially
00:37:26.780 anyone who claims that they are going to do things for you to advance your life and to make your life
00:37:33.940 better. The best thing that the government can do for you is leave you the heck alone. Leave you
00:37:39.700 alone. Protect your freedoms. Protect your safety from enemies, foreign and domestic, and allow you
00:37:47.240 to pursue your happiness and your life and your liberty. That's what the government is good at.
00:37:55.400 And that is why its power is so important to be reined in. But we're going to see the government
00:37:59.920 grow. Its power grow exponentially over the next few years, right alongside the growth of the power of
00:38:07.240 big corporations and big tech. I also think that there is probably not a coincidence that Josh
00:38:14.940 Hawley and Ted Cruz are being attacked so viciously, not just for saying, hey, we're going to push back
00:38:23.100 against the electoral outcome of the election, but also because these have been the two guys that have
00:38:29.820 actually tried to push back against big tech. I don't think it's a coincidence that, for example,
00:38:34.380 people are talking about putting them on the no-fly list. You can disagree with what they were
00:38:38.420 going to do, like I do, by the way. I didn't think that what they were going to do was right
00:38:43.540 on January 6th. However, them being on the no-fly list and being told to resign because they were going
00:38:51.840 to peacefully and rhetorically lay out their case of election front, that's crazy. Again, you're setting
00:38:56.600 up such a slippery slope that I think it's so important for you to see how it could affect the other
00:39:02.560 side as well. Also, there is this whole, I mean, there's this whole virtue signaling aspect to all
00:39:08.240 of this, the Apple, Google, and Amazon pretending that they're virtuous for taking down Trump,
00:39:12.760 pretending that they're virtuous for shutting down Parler when they are catering to the CCP,
00:39:21.120 the most racist, xenophobic, oppressive, repressive regime that exists, colonizing Africa, 0.91
00:39:29.140 this regime, the CCP, colonizing Africa, colonizing South America, preying upon the poor and the
00:39:36.160 oppressed. And so these companies cater to them at every corner. They're pretending like they're
00:39:43.580 virtuous for shutting down speech here. Remember, Twitter still allows the dictators of Iran and
00:39:49.600 Saudi Arabia and the propagandists in China to have Twitter accounts and to spread their propaganda
00:39:54.740 freely. But they think they're virtuous for taking the account down of the president of the United
00:39:59.360 States. I mean, it's just crazy. It's the same thing that they do as they, you know, support social
00:40:05.380 justice here. They support Black Lives Matter here. And yet, just like the NF or the NBA, they turn
00:40:12.280 around and they also support the most racist and repressive and suppressive and oppressive regime
00:40:17.960 that exists, the CCP. It's all a big virtue signal. These are not virtuous companies. The motto of Google,
00:40:24.680 used to be, don't be evil. Apparently, they've dropped the first word of that motto. Frederick
00:40:34.640 Douglass says something that I think applies here. He says, liberty is meaningless where the right to
00:40:39.460 utter one's thought and opinions has ceased to exist. That of all rights is the dread of tyrants. Let me
00:40:45.820 read you that again from Frederick Douglass. Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one's thought
00:40:52.040 and opinions has ceased to exist. That of all rights is the dread of tyrants. Frederick Douglass
00:40:59.660 is a must-read American. Last year, you probably remember Fourth of July, there were leftists like
00:41:05.760 Kaepernick who were putting out videos with Frederick Douglass' What to the Slave is the Fourth of July,
00:41:14.120 which, by the way, is a really good work that everyone should read. But the fact of the matter is,
00:41:18.860 is that most of the left doesn't align politically at all with Frederick Douglass, who said that the
00:41:23.800 Constitution is a glorious liberty document. That's a quote. He was very much in favor of the Republic.
00:41:30.020 He understood that the Constitution planted a seed of liberty that was meant to grow. It wasn't meant to be
00:41:35.860 perfect from the start. And so the fact that the founders didn't live up to their ideals by saying that
00:41:42.680 all men were created equal and doubted certain inalienable rights because they still owned and allowed
00:41:47.380 slaves in slavery. That doesn't mean that the Constitution is a moot document, that it's not a
00:41:52.820 good document. Frederick Douglass understood that. Leftists today don't understand that. So they quote
00:41:56.920 what to a slave is the Fourth of July. They forget his defense of free speech, his defense of the
00:42:03.040 Constitution. Thomas Sowell, another great American, says, in a sense, the political left's attempts to
00:42:08.820 silence ideas they cannot or will not debate are a confession of intellectual bankruptcy. And that's
00:42:15.060 absolutely true. You see a lot of people on social media say, you know, they're going after people's
00:42:20.900 sponsors. Any conservative commentator, they can say, oh, it's just the ones that spread conspiracy
00:42:25.220 theories or it's just the it's just the ones who support violence. No, no, no. You honestly think
00:42:31.120 they're going to be discerning and distinguished between just a regular conservative like me and the
00:42:35.160 people who spread conspiracy theories? No, of course they're not. So they're going after people's
00:42:39.420 sponsors. They're doxing people online and they're saying this is not cancel culture. This is just
00:42:43.740 holding people accountable. That really sounds like something a fascist would say. It really,
00:42:48.620 really does. And speaking of speaking of fascism, I just want to play you this clip from Portland. So
00:42:54.940 Antifa, which stands apparently for anti-fascist in the irony of all ironies, is outside of a bookstore
00:43:02.660 trying to get the bookstore named Powell's to take to stop distributing Andy Ngo's book called
00:43:12.000 Unmasked. So Andy Ngo is a reporter. He reports on Antifa uprising and riots, Black Lives Matter
00:43:18.400 riots throughout the country. He posts footage from those things and he writes about them and talks
00:43:23.380 about them. And he wrote a book called Unmasked. And they're really mad that this bookstore in
00:43:28.880 Portland is distributing it. And so here's Antifa telling them to stop distributing Andy Ngo's book.
00:43:36.420 Stop selling Andy Ngo's book. So if you're on the side, if you're on the side of silencing your
00:43:58.320 opponents, if you're on the side of basically burning books, taking books out. And by the way,
00:44:03.940 this bookstore said, okay, we'll take it off our shelves. We're still going to keep it online,
00:44:08.600 but we'll take it off our shelves. Cowards. Like what I want corporations, businesses to just stop
00:44:15.220 doing is kowtowing to people who have no real power. They have no real power. Corporations,
00:44:21.920 churches, organizations start saying, no, no, no. Stop giving into the toddler temper tantrums.
00:44:29.760 You know what happens if you always give in to your toddler? If you do everything that your toddler
00:44:34.640 wants you to do and you kowtow to every single temper tantrum, they grow up to be brats and they 0.99
00:44:39.820 grow up to be really powerful brats. And then they rule over you. Is that really what you want 0.99
00:44:46.120 with these grown toddlers? Start to say, no, this is ridiculous. You do not have to agree with the book
00:44:52.560 to distribute it. You don't have to like its content. You don't have to like the author. You don't have to
00:44:57.000 agree with everything the author has said, but in a society that actually values diversity of thought,
00:45:02.320 which leftists, true leftists do not, by the way. It's what James and I talked about yesterday,
00:45:07.220 this idea of repressive tolerance and trying to hold back what they see as intolerant in the name
00:45:14.080 of tolerance. It's just this very, it's this form of cognitive dissonance that they have justified in
00:45:21.240 themselves. If you are on the side of banning books, if you are on the side of silencing voices
00:45:28.620 that you don't like, if you are on the side of calling everything that you disagree with harmful
00:45:35.140 or inciting violence or something that should be taken down, you are the fascist. You are the fascist. 0.92
00:45:42.800 And a lot of leftists, again, they say that they're for the little guy. They're against these
00:45:47.380 big corporations. They're against Amazon. That's not true because they're really for all of these
00:45:53.240 companies, these big companies, when they virtue signal, when they say their social justice lines
00:45:59.040 and when they silence the voices that these leftists don't like. Benito Mussolini, the famous
00:46:07.500 fascist, said this. Fascism should more properly be called corporatism since it is the merger of state
00:46:14.620 and corporate power. It's so funny that leftists think that it's actually conservatives who want
00:46:20.100 this. When if you look at Biden's cabinet, I'm not even calling Biden a fascist, but if you look at
00:46:25.020 the people that Biden are putting in place and you look at which side these corporations are on
00:46:30.620 and who they're coming down upon, and you realize as a leftist, you are also on the side of these
00:46:36.460 corporations and you're on the side of banning books and censoring voices that you don't like,
00:46:40.700 maybe you should look in the mirror and realize that you are the fascist. Not everything that you
00:46:47.900 don't like is hate speech, and by the way, the First Amendment does cover what you consider hate
00:46:53.640 speech, what I would consider hate speech too. Guess what? I, as a conservative Christian,
00:46:59.040 think you, as some far-left progressive, I think that your ideology is dangerous. Like, I think it's
00:47:05.040 really harmful. I think some things that you say could be labeled as hate speech. I think a lot of what you
00:47:10.120 say is misinformation and is complete propaganda is totally untrue. I think most things that
00:47:16.840 critical race theories say are conspiracy theories, basically. They're not reality when it comes to
00:47:22.040 history, and I do think that that kind of stuff can gin up violence. And guess what? I don't want
00:47:26.860 to silence you. I don't want you to be deplatformed. I don't want you to be taken off Twitter. I don't
00:47:31.480 want you to be cracked down upon. I don't want you to not feel like you can't protest peacefully or that
00:47:38.000 you can't speak out about what you believe in. I don't want to silence you. I don't want you to go
00:47:43.540 off into obscurity. I want you to feel like you are totally free to write the books you want to
00:47:47.280 write, to believe the things that you want to believe, to worship or not worship, how you want
00:47:50.940 to worship or not worship, to say the things that you want to say. But I understand the feeling is not
00:47:55.020 mutual. You don't feel that way about me because you think, well, you're really harmful. And so it's so
00:48:00.780 funny how you become this moral absolutist, and you become this person who believes in absolute and
00:48:05.880 dogmatic and autocratic truth, even though you believe that you're on the side of tolerance.
00:48:09.900 Again, you might be the fascist. Now, I want to end with some encouragement, as I like to do,
00:48:19.500 because I know that you listen to this and you get worked up because there's a lot going on and it
00:48:25.620 worries you. And there's reason for concern. I'm not going to pretend like there's not. I'm not going
00:48:29.900 to pretend like there's nothing scary going on and we don't have a reason to be worried. I am worried
00:48:35.120 about conservative and Christian voices being drowned out. I am very worried about that, even
00:48:39.780 though I know God doesn't need the First Amendment to advance his kingdom and advance his gospel,
00:48:43.700 that he doesn't need American freedom for those things. These are also gifts of grace that I think
00:48:47.940 that we should steward well and that we should fight for. And we should realize that people of all
00:48:51.860 faiths and all backgrounds, all socioeconomic classes, have found refuge in these unique,
00:48:57.700 exceptional American freedoms that are recognized in the Constitution and given to us,
00:49:04.440 we believe, by God. And so I do want to leave you with just a bit of encouragement. So I talked
00:49:13.560 about yesterday in my interview with James Lindsay, definitely go listen to that if you have not.
00:49:19.520 It's relevant no matter, you know, it's not strictly news. We're analyzing things that are going on. So
00:49:25.060 even if, you know, you already know what happened in the news yesterday, it's still a relevant interview
00:49:30.600 to listen to. And I talked about, I paraphrased something that I read in C.S. Lewis's Abolition
00:49:35.880 of Man. And that's really what I want to end on. And I want to end with this question is,
00:49:41.760 are we creating an environment for the society that we want to exist? Are we creating a society
00:49:48.820 for the virtues that we want to exist? And so there's a lot of people who say that we want
00:49:54.180 tolerance, that we want love, that we want unity, that we want healing, that we want within the church
00:50:00.460 racial reconciliation. There's a lot of evangelicals that use that terminology. We want progress. We want
00:50:07.740 things to get better. We want people to, you know, be enlightened and love each other and all of these
00:50:13.500 things. Are we actually, are we providing young people, are we providing each other with the tools
00:50:20.180 to make those things happen? Are we really doing that? Or are we just repressing the voices that
00:50:26.760 we don't like? Are we actually creating a very intolerant society? And that's, that's what I
00:50:31.860 argue is that racial reconciliation will never be accomplished through critical race theory because
00:50:36.520 critical race theory as an ideology admittedly divides, it splits people up. We are never going
00:50:43.000 to become a tolerant, more loving and accepting society through repressive, what is called repressive
00:50:49.200 tolerance, what we talked about yesterday. We're never going to become a more forgiving and gracious
00:50:54.360 society through doxing and cancellation, what you're using in very dystopian terms, accountability.
00:51:00.980 Like that is not going, you're not going to punish people into being more loving. You're not going to
00:51:06.280 chastise people and wag your finger in the face of people and make them your version of accepting or
00:51:13.780 tolerant. It's just not going to happen. The only way those things are going to happen is if we create an
00:51:18.460 environment where people are free to debate and to discuss ideas, where people are not afraid to be
00:51:24.400 honest, where people are not afraid to say what they believe and for us to go into the public square
00:51:28.980 and for us to figure out which idea is actually better. And we have to be able to detach disagreement
00:51:35.940 from hate in order to do that. That is the only way that we can make us make a society that actually
00:51:42.120 achieves these virtues that we all say that we want. Love, intolerance, and some kind of
00:51:47.800 togetherness. And we're going to have to have those debates so that we can have a foundation
00:51:54.000 that we actually agree upon. We're not, we're never going to agree on everything as Americans,
00:51:58.800 but can we have some foundational things that we agree on? I'm afraid that we don't. And I don't,
00:52:04.480 I honestly don't know how or when we're going to get there because I don't, it's hard to see a way
00:52:10.520 forward with people who don't believe in the same definition of truth that I do, who don't believe
00:52:15.300 that America is a good country at all, who don't believe that the constitution is a worthy document,
00:52:19.580 who don't actually believe in free speech or freedom of religion, who don't actually believe
00:52:23.760 that I should be able to have the freedom to say what I want to say, who don't believe that a man
00:52:28.740 is a man and a woman is a woman, that the family actually matters at all, or that parental rights
00:52:33.380 are even a legitimate thing, who don't believe in the freedom to homeschool or private school your
00:52:37.800 children. I mean, there are people on the left who are against everything I believe in foundationally,
00:52:44.380 not just these policy issues. Like we can disagree on immigration policy and welfare policy,
00:52:49.780 but unless we have these basic truths that we can all come together on, then I, it's hard for me to
00:52:56.180 see how we can achieve the virtues that we say that we want to virtue or the, the, the virtues that we
00:53:01.320 say that we want to preserve and have. Um, and so I think that the only path to that is through debate
00:53:07.100 is through discourse. But if we have one side who actually thinks the discourse and debate is
00:53:11.200 dangerous and that you should just oppress opposing voices, we're never going to get there. And you're
00:53:15.700 not going to create an environment, a society of love and tolerance by being hateful and intolerant.
00:53:21.980 Like you're just, you're just not going to, it's not going to be accomplished. And so let me read you.
00:53:27.120 I mean, C.S. Lewis felt that he had this same problem, um, in his era, in his country, in a
00:53:33.500 different way. And here's what, here's how he describes this issue. Uh, we continue to clamor
00:53:39.520 for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. You can hardly open a periodical without coming
00:53:45.140 across the statement that what our civilization needs is more drive or dynamism or self-sacrifice or
00:53:52.560 creativity. In a sort of ghastly simplicity, we remove the organ and demand the function.
00:53:58.400 We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh and honor and are
00:54:04.540 shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful. And it seems like 0.88
00:54:11.160 that's what we're doing today. We are supplying tools to our kids of hatefulness and inability to
00:54:19.140 disagree intellectually, inability to tolerate opposing views, inability to actually have some
00:54:25.440 kind of thoughtful discussion, inability to be able to critically think about things. And then we
00:54:31.860 are saying, Oh, be independent thinkers that love people that can reconcile and unite and heal. It's
00:54:38.780 just, it's not going to happen. And so what does this look like in our own lives? What does this look
00:54:44.020 like as Christians to create the society that upholds the virtues that we actually want? Well, one, it is
00:54:51.100 living out those virtues for ourselves. And of course, I don't believe that tolerance means compromising
00:54:57.300 on the truth. I think that you can tolerate people who have other views, while still standing up for
00:55:02.580 what you for what you believe in. And I do think that that is the responsibility that we have right now
00:55:08.900 that in our private and public life, that we once again, as I've said so many times that we live not
00:55:14.540 by lies, it means refusing to tell lies, it means refusing to accept lies, and to believe lies
00:55:20.660 ourselves. It means refusing as far as we can to not allow lies to flourish. And so that means if you've
00:55:27.360 got a child that is in school, and they are being shoved critical race theory nonsense about how America is
00:55:34.520 this awful and oppressive place without condition, that you know, isn't true, they're learning virtues,
00:55:40.640 they're learning about biology, that in a way that is not true, it's time for you to stand up to the
00:55:45.660 school board, or to the teacher in a kind way. If you know that your pastor is preaching something
00:55:49.940 that is not in accordance with scripture, whether it comes to justice or any other issue, then it is
00:55:56.780 your responsibility along with your spouse, if you're married to set up a meeting and have that
00:56:00.780 conversation that is based on scripture, if you see some kind of training going on in your work
00:56:05.820 that you know is actually going to just create more implicit bias and division and hate, it is your
00:56:12.400 responsibility to be equipped to have the conversation of why this particular kind of training is actually
00:56:17.580 going to be counterproductive rather than productive. If you are sitting in your class and
00:56:21.460 your professor is teaching something about history that you know isn't true, or morality or virtue that
00:56:26.460 you know isn't true, that it is your responsibility to raise your hand or to set up a meeting and to
00:56:32.840 say something. These things are vital at this point. I don't think we have time to be quiet anymore. We have
00:56:40.000 to fight for the virtues that we actually want society to exist. That is not going to happen unless you
00:56:45.820 speak up and you are willing to represent your views in a way that is thoughtful and intelligent. And I have a list of
00:56:52.100 resources on my website, allibethstucky.com slash blog slash recommended dash resources. You can, it's a
00:57:00.960 highlight bubble on my Instagram too. I think reading all those books that I have on those lists will, on that
00:57:06.000 list will be very helpful to you. Okay. I hope that was helpful. We will be back here tomorrow. Happy Wednesday.
00:57:12.640 day.