The Auron MacIntyre Show - NYT Claims the Constitution Is Dangerous ｜ 9⧸4⧸24

00:00:00.000 We hope you're enjoying your Air Canada flight.

00:00:02.320 Rocky's Vacation, here we come.

00:00:05.060 Whoa, is this economy?

00:00:07.180 Free beer, wine, and snacks.

00:00:09.620 Sweet! 0.95

00:00:10.720 Fast-free Wi-Fi means I can make dinner reservations before we land.

00:00:14.760 And with live TV, I'm not missing the game.

00:00:17.800 It's kind of like, I'm already on vacation.

00:00:20.980 Nice! 0.94

00:00:22.240 On behalf of Air Canada, nice travels.

00:00:25.260 Wi-Fi available to Airplane members on Equipped Flight.

00:00:27.200 Sponsored by Bell. Conditions apply.

00:00:28.720 CRCanada.com.

00:00:30.320 Hey everybody, how's it going?

00:00:31.900 Thanks for joining me this afternoon.

00:00:33.760 I am Oren McIntyre.

00:00:36.660 So the New York Times has continued its incredible run of absurd articles.

00:00:42.680 It started with, of course, voting is dangerous to democracy.

00:00:47.980 Had quite the series of those.

00:00:50.800 And now it's arrived at its inevitable conclusion,

00:00:53.040 which is the Constitution is dangerous to democracy as well.

00:00:58.260 It turns out that all democracy needs to do is obliterate everything about the United States

00:01:03.420 that you know and love and care about to finally be secure,

00:01:07.180 which really makes you wonder what the value of democracy is and what that actually means to these people.

00:01:12.860 We'll dive into this article.

00:01:14.840 I always think it's valuable to read into these because it makes some points that I think are important,

00:01:20.180 not in the way that it hopes to.

00:01:22.820 But I think by examining this, we can get a better understanding about what our current elite thinks about democracy,

00:01:29.380 about rule of law, about the Constitution, about the way that things should be going forward.

00:01:35.900 Before we get into all that, guys, let me tell you a little bit about today's sponsor.

00:01:39.960 Universities today aren't just neglecting real education.

00:01:42.800 They're actively undermining it.

00:01:44.160 And we can't let them get away with it.

00:01:45.820 America was made for an educated and engaged citizenry.

00:01:49.340 The Intercollegiate Studies Institute is here to help.

00:01:51.800 ISI offers programs and opportunities for conservative students across the country.

00:01:57.400 ISI understands that conservatives and right-of-center students feel isolated on college campuses

00:02:02.460 and that you're often fighting for your own reputation, dignity, and future.

00:02:07.340 Through ISI, you can learn about what Russell Kirk called the permanent things,

00:02:11.540 the philosophical and political teachings that shaped and made Western civilization great.

00:02:16.460 ISI offers many opportunities to jumpstart your career.

00:02:19.220 They have fellowships at some of the nation's top conservative publications like National Review,

00:02:23.920 the American Conservative, and the College Thinker.

00:02:26.660 If you're a graduate student, ISI offers funding opportunities to sponsor the next great generation of college professors.

00:02:32.680 Through ISI, you can work with conservative thinkers who are making a difference.

00:02:36.580 Thinkers like Chris Ruffo, who currently has an ISI researcher helping him with his book.

00:02:41.600 But perhaps most importantly, ISI offers college students a community of people that can help them grow.

00:02:46.620 If you're a college student, ISI can help you start a student organization or a student newspaper

00:02:51.800 or meet other like-minded students at their various conferences and events.

00:02:56.520 ISI is here to educate the next generation of great Americans.

00:03:00.020 To learn more, go to ISI.org.

00:03:02.980 That's ISI.org.

00:03:04.740 All right, let's dive right into our article today.

00:03:10.040 It's the New York Times.

00:03:11.620 The Constitution is sacred.

00:03:13.160 Is it also dangerous?

00:03:14.700 One of the biggest threats to America's politics might be the country's founding document.

00:03:21.280 We're really just putting it all out there, huh, guys?

00:03:23.840 We're just saying the quiet part out loud, screaming it really as much as we can.

00:03:29.200 And let's see, begin with the article here.

00:03:33.540 The United States Constitution is in trouble.

00:03:36.420 After Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, he called for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles,

00:03:42.060 even those found in the Constitution.

00:03:43.740 So this is just a lie, actually.

00:03:46.520 Just straight up first sentence or second sentence here is a complete lie.

00:03:51.980 What Donald Trump said was that if you have electoral fraud, if you have voter fraud, if you have a massive fraud,

00:04:00.720 then you're basically just terminating all the rules and regulations and articles of the Constitution

00:04:05.880 because the entirety of the Constitution is based on this idea that you have a procedure

00:04:11.260 that grants legitimacy to the rule of the current leadership.

00:04:17.480 So if you completely invalidate that ritual, if you completely invalidate or call into question

00:04:24.520 the veracity of an election on a regular basis, you make it clear that the way that people vote doesn't really matter

00:04:31.980 because ultimately the people in charge control the votes, they control what's being counted,

00:04:36.360 they control what's happening.

00:04:37.500 Well, then you've basically terminated all of the articles of the Constitution,

00:04:41.300 all the rules of the Constitution, because you are completely manipulating the process

00:04:45.500 that is supposed to regulate who is in charge.

00:04:48.460 But that's not what the New York Times wants Trump to have said,

00:04:52.000 so that's not what he said.

00:04:53.140 And they just completely lie out front.

00:04:55.580 Remember, however much you hate journalists, you don't hate them enough.

00:05:00.020 Outraged critics denounced him by threatening a document,

00:05:05.440 for threatening a document that is supposed to be sacrosanct.

00:05:08.780 We'll notice some scare quotes there.

00:05:10.520 But announcing his desire to throw off the constitutional constraints in order to satisfy his personal ambitions,

00:05:16.260 Trump was making his authoritarian inclinations abundantly clear.

00:05:19.080 Again, that's not what happened.

00:05:21.280 That's not what he did here.

00:05:23.780 However, we can notice that by the fact that they put sacrosanct in scare quotes here,

00:05:28.880 they are planning to do what they say Trump did.

00:05:31.480 They are planning to announce that they would actually like to throw off the shackles of the Constitution.

00:05:37.440 So, yeah, Trump is scary, but ultimately, maybe he had a point because we want to do it, right?

00:05:45.120 It's no surprise, then, that liberals charge Trump with being a menace to the Constitution.

00:05:49.880 But his presidency and the prospect of his re-election have also generated another very different argument,

00:05:55.340 that Trump owes his political assent to the Constitution,

00:05:59.200 making him the beneficiary of a document that is essentially anti-democratic

00:06:02.580 in this day and age increasingly dysfunctional.

00:06:06.200 So, very interesting switch here.

00:06:09.760 Trump is bad because he wanted to get rid of the Constitution, which he didn't,

00:06:13.880 and we completely lied about and made up.

00:06:15.680 However, we also want to get rid of the Constitution.

00:06:19.480 In fact, actually, the Constitution is the problem.

00:06:21.680 The Constitution is the whole reason that Trump even became president.

00:06:24.480 Well, that's true of everyone.

00:06:26.640 That's how the Constitution works.

00:06:28.980 It's the set of rules by which people become president.

00:06:33.260 That's how it lays out how the government is supposed to function.

00:06:37.040 So, all presidents have become president because the Constitution explains how someone becomes president,

00:06:43.580 if that's your chain of logic here.

00:06:45.920 We'll go deeper into this intellectually stimulating argument that they're putting together.

00:06:52.260 After all, Trump became president in 2016 after losing the popular vote but winning the Electoral College, Article 2.

00:07:00.360 They're going to cite the articles so you can know that they really did their homework on how the Constitution works.

00:07:05.720 Yes, the Electoral College is there to make sure that not only the largest populated states rule everything.

00:07:14.580 If that was the case, then California, Texas, Florida, and New York would decide every presidential contest. 0.67

00:07:21.240 So, the Electoral College is there so that we actually distribute the responsibility for selecting a leader across the entire United States.

00:07:30.300 It's not just the tyranny of a few states and their interests that rule the entire nation.

00:07:36.500 He appointed three justices to the Supreme Court.

00:07:38.860 Oh, no!

00:07:39.900 He used Article 3 of the Constitution to do the thing he's supposed to do by law,

00:07:46.800 two of whom were confirmed by senators representing just 44% of the population.

00:07:51.860 Article 1.

00:07:52.680 Again, another problem.

00:07:53.940 The Senate is a check on the Democratic impulse, which it was always supposed to be.

00:07:59.340 In fact, it was supposed to be much more of a check on the Democratic impulse until the 17th Amendment allowed for the direct election of senators, 0.96

00:08:09.040 which meant that no longer were senators a more aristocratic class chosen by state leadership representing the specific interests of the state,

00:08:18.340 but instead were just filtered through the exact same mass Democratic process.

00:08:23.360 But whatever, the fact that there's any vestige of resistance to complete and total raw democracy is the problem.

00:08:33.060 Those three justices helped overturn Roe v. Wade, a reversal which most Americans disagreed with.

00:08:38.800 What is omitted here is, of course, originally the Supreme Court instituted Roe v. Wade.

00:08:43.700 It created a right in the Constitution to an abortion that had never existed before.

00:08:49.740 We had to hear about the emanations of a penumbra.

00:08:53.040 That was the actual language used to justify, you know, a right to privacy was created in the Constitution,

00:09:01.300 which apparently only really applies to abortion.

00:09:03.440 And the majority of people at the time did not want this, which is why they had to do it through the courts.

00:09:10.760 So the courts were fine when they created Roe v. Wade.

00:09:13.980 And, of course, this is the favorite part about all of these arguments.

00:09:16.440 Back when the country was more conservative, back when the country was more right wing,

00:09:22.060 the fact that the Supreme Court suppressed the will of the majority and created these rights for the minority that wanted them,

00:09:31.640 that was fine.

00:09:32.780 That was good even.

00:09:33.860 That was the chant.

00:09:35.040 They were championed.

00:09:36.560 They're heroes of democracy for doing this, I guess, even though it was anti-democratic.

00:09:42.400 Now that the majority of people have, after many, many decades of being conditioned by the law,

00:09:49.240 and guys, the law is a teacher.

00:09:53.680 A lot of people like to say that Breitbart quote that culture or that politics is downstream from culture.

00:10:02.140 That's wrong.

00:10:05.000 Politics is or culture is largely downstream from power,

00:10:09.040 which means law and influential institutions on top of many other things.

00:10:15.760 So after many decades of people living under Roe v. Wade, their opinion changed because they got used to that standard.

00:10:24.860 But whatever, that's not what's important.

00:10:27.580 We don't need to actually think about the history or the implications of any of this.

00:10:31.260 The point is the Supreme Court is a threat to what the Democrats want now.

00:10:35.620 And so all they care about is now.

00:10:38.160 They don't care about the past.

00:10:39.480 They don't care that they used the Supreme Court to force through the entire civil rights revolution, 0.99

00:10:45.300 to force through Roe v. Wade, to force through gay marriage. 0.65

00:10:48.540 They don't care about any of that.

00:10:50.100 They don't care that the Supreme Court was a specifically anti-democratic institution that they loved for decades

00:10:57.160 because they used it to force top-down these changes against the will of the majority.

00:11:02.440 Now, today, since they think they have the majority advantage, all of a sudden, Supreme Court Constitution, very dangerous.

00:11:10.440 The eminent legal scholar, Erwin Chemerinsky, maybe, worried about opinion polls showing a dramatic loss of faith in democracy.

00:11:18.780 Oh, thank God, please.

00:11:22.500 Yes, you should be losing faith in democracy.

00:11:25.400 If there's one thing you should be losing faith in, it is most assuredly democracy.

00:11:30.560 He writes in a new book, No Democracy Lasts Forever.

00:11:35.940 Again, you know, God wheels it.

00:11:38.600 It is important for the Americans to see these failures that stem from the Constitution itself.

00:11:45.080 So the problem, what the, you know, the Constitution was great when it was advancing left-wing principles,

00:11:53.340 when it was advancing their political cause, now that it's putting a slight hinder on, you know,

00:11:58.880 it's slightly hindering that which the radical left would like to advance, it's got to be abolished now.

00:12:04.900 Him talking, you know, some of his background here, we'll skip all that, we don't care.

00:12:08.400 It talks about the tyranny of the minority. 0.72

00:12:13.020 Ah, yes.

00:12:14.080 All right, let's see here.

00:12:16.560 We'll begin on the next paragraph.

00:12:18.780 In 1787, when 55 delegates convened in Philadelphia to revise the Articles of Confederation,

00:12:25.960 that's an interesting way to say that they decided to overthrow the Articles illegitimately.

00:12:30.860 They completely ignored the actual requirements in the Articles of Confederation to suspend them and install a new constitution.

00:12:40.540 Instead, they just went ahead and ignored all procedures and rule of law and came up with a new governing document.

00:12:47.940 But, hey, why let that trip you up?

00:12:50.220 They ended up embarking on a project that was much bigger in scope.

00:12:53.160 As Americans are taught in history class, the Deadly Left draft a new document establishing a national government consisting of three branches,

00:12:59.580 legislative, executive, and judicial, each functioning as a check on the others.

00:13:05.100 The delegates were all white.

00:13:06.520 Oh, no.

00:13:07.760 This country full of people who came from majority of the United Kingdom, what would be the United Kingdom today,

00:13:16.080 they all happened to also be white.

00:13:18.200 Like, this country full of Anglos was full of Anglos. 1.00

00:13:22.680 So, you know, everything they did must be illegitimate, I guess.

00:13:26.380 Or illegitimate, I guess.

00:13:27.860 But they nevertheless diverged on what seemed to be an intractable issue, slavery.

00:13:31.980 Of course, this will be the only thing they care about in the Constitution is slavery, right?

00:13:37.880 That's going to be it.

00:13:38.640 This is going to be the whole reason.

00:13:39.940 You have to corrupt the foundation of it.

00:13:41.620 So you have to go back and say, like, well, actually, no.

00:13:44.520 The problem isn't that, like, actually they skipped the steps in the Articles of Confederation or whatever.

00:13:49.500 It's just, you know, it's white people and they were, you know, the entire document is there to protect slavery. 0.93

00:13:55.500 Though several states had already passed abolition status, nearly half the delegates were slaveholders. 0.81

00:14:02.160 The Constitution was thus born of a compromise.

00:14:04.640 With the enslavers getting the better end of the deal.

00:14:07.280 To determine representation of the House and the Electoral College, three-fifths compromise allowed slave states to count three-fifths of every five people that were held in bondage.

00:14:17.700 None of whom leaned into the state could vote.

00:14:19.780 And the Fugitive Slave Clause stipulated that even when enslaved people escaped in free streets, they would never be free.

00:14:25.760 Now, this is far from the most important thing in the Constitution.

00:14:28.720 This is, this doesn't even have any relevance to the rest of their actual objections to the Constitution.

00:14:37.840 They just put this in here to, to whine about racism.

00:14:41.220 That's it.

00:14:41.860 They, like, it's just here to say, well, the document is, it was founded in the original sin, sin and iniquity that can never be washed away.

00:14:50.460 And so therefore it's tainted.

00:14:51.680 But, yeah, they'll spend the rest of the time complaining about the fact that the Constitution protects us from wild and unmitigated democracy.

00:15:00.260 But they needed to take the time to let us know that slavery was really bad.

00:15:04.900 By the way, the three-fifths compromise is a, is a protection against slavery.

00:15:10.500 It made sure that the slave states could not count all of their slave population for the full count.

00:15:16.680 It could not have the full population.

00:15:18.020 But whatever, we don't, none of those facts matter.

00:15:20.580 None of that matters at all.

00:15:21.860 It's, it's, it's all racist.

00:15:23.560 It's all evil.

00:15:24.340 They were white people after all.

00:15:26.600 That was their greatest sin first, of course.

00:15:29.640 And then they also wrote some document that the current, the current New York Times editorial page is not a fan of.

00:15:36.980 Such compromises meant that those who shared overlapping politics would still draw wildly different conclusions from the Constitution.

00:15:44.380 Yeah, it turns out actually not everyone in the country immediately agreed on everything.

00:15:49.320 Abolitionists considered the, the abolitionists, William Garrison considered the compromise so damning to make the Constitution a covenant with death, an agreement with hell.

00:16:01.500 Okay.

00:16:02.560 But Frederick Douglass maintained the opposite, that slavery in the United States could only be upheld by claiming the Constitution does not mean what it says.

00:16:10.800 As the historian James Oak put it, Douglass shared Abraham Lincoln's view, recognizing the Constitution as the promise of universal freedom.

00:16:18.820 Except the left hates Abraham Lincoln now.

00:16:21.080 Like, they've gone back and they've looked about the fact that he was really not particularly interested in ending slavery in the Civil War.

00:16:27.860 At least initially, that was not his goal.

00:16:30.260 And his plan was to more or less send the freed slaves to Africa when they were done.

00:16:36.540 That's Abraham Lincoln's plan.

00:16:38.120 So, yeah.

00:16:38.980 But, you know, he's convenient for the moment.

00:16:42.520 They're pro-Lincoln in this paragraph, at least.

00:16:46.020 You know, I guess.

00:16:48.000 A promise of universal freedom.

00:16:49.700 Yes, but also instructions on how to thwart it.

00:16:52.840 Ah, the Constitution.

00:16:54.100 Instruction manual on how to thwart freedom.

00:16:56.120 These glaring discrepancies between the soaring words in the Constitution's preamble,

00:17:01.040 We the People, that is a seemingly ringing endorsement of popular governance.

00:17:09.620 So, the fact that they said We the People, but they didn't immediately in slavery, I guess, invalidates the Constitution.

00:17:21.020 When does fast grocery delivery through Instacart matter most?

00:17:24.620 When your famous grainy mustard potato salad isn't so famous without the grainy mustard.

00:17:29.700 When the barbecue's lit, but there's nothing to grill.

00:17:32.380 When the in-laws decide that, actually, they will stay for dinner.

00:17:36.100 Instacart has all your groceries covered this summer.

00:17:38.700 So, download the app and get delivery in as fast as 60 minutes.

00:17:41.960 Plus, enjoy zero-dollar delivery fees on your first three orders.

00:17:45.980 Service fees exclusions and terms apply.

00:17:48.300 Instacart.

00:17:49.100 Groceries that over-deliver.

00:17:52.120 As Cherminsky puts it, the distrust of democracy embedded in the rest of the document,

00:17:58.200 reflecting the framers' inability to conceive of a future where women and black people could have a right to vote.

00:18:03.860 So, this is a very interesting sleight of hand here.

00:18:08.000 Democracy is what we're aiming for in the leftist theory, I suppose, here.

00:18:14.500 Just completely unfettered democracy.

00:18:16.840 Mob rule at all times.

00:18:18.900 And so, any restriction on democracy is specifically a restriction on women and black people. 1.00

00:18:24.960 Now, obviously, these groups could not vote at the time, but even if they had been able to,

00:18:32.320 the same restrictions on democracy would still exist, just with them as actual voting blocks.

00:18:37.680 Which, of course, happens today.

00:18:39.740 Both of those groups can vote, and those restrictions do exist in the Constitution.

00:18:44.940 But, again, whatever.

00:18:46.580 That's not the problem.

00:18:47.680 The main thing is, everybody is racist, and that's why the Constitution has to go.

00:18:52.420 Originalism and its discontents.

00:18:53.960 You might think that such disputes would have been laid to rest by a bloody civil war

00:18:58.680 and Reconstruction amendments, which were outlawed slavery and granted all men the right to vote,

00:19:03.180 regardless of race.

00:19:04.340 Why, yes, you would think that that would put this to rest.

00:19:08.100 That was the whole point.

00:19:10.220 That's why you fought the war.

00:19:11.660 That's why you had the Reconstruction. 0.96

00:19:13.180 That's why you passed the amendments, was for this to be put behind you.

00:19:17.080 But, of course, it is against the interest of the Democratic Party, of the left,

00:19:21.820 to put any of this behind them, because the entire point is to bury us forever in this racial 0.98

00:19:27.100 conflagration.

00:19:29.540 Not to mention that the Constitution continued to change in the century after.

00:19:33.840 Senators would be directly elected, and women were granted the right to vote.

00:19:37.540 Yes, so you've been stripping away all of these limitations on the franchise,

00:19:41.020 and all of these limitations on democracy repeatedly.

00:19:44.220 But, of course, that's not enough.

00:19:45.920 That's insufficient.

00:19:47.760 But for the last 50 years, why 50?

00:19:51.220 The Constitution has appeared frozen in amber.

00:19:55.120 That's an amazing thing.

00:19:56.680 The last major amendment was in 1971, lowering the voting age to 18.

00:20:01.020 So, the last major amendment here is language, I guess, that just means amendments that only

00:20:06.680 adjust or directly address the civil rights movement, right?

00:20:11.280 So, if an amendment does not increase democracy and reduce protections against mob rule, then

00:20:18.500 it's just not a major amendment.

00:20:19.780 And, therefore, the Constitution has been frozen in amber, even though we did actually

00:20:23.380 pass several amendments after that.

00:20:25.180 In reaction to a landmark decision prohibiting segregation and bans on interracial marriage,

00:20:29.760 conservative legal scholars began to champion judicial interpretations that rested on the

00:20:34.360 framers' intentions 200 years before.

00:20:38.100 All right, guys, we'll continue this article in just a minute.

00:20:42.900 We'll also talk about the amendments, which is what I, for some reason, was trying to say.

00:20:46.740 But before we do that, let's talk about job stacking.

00:20:49.160 Hey, guys, let me tell you about today's sponsor, Job Stacking.

00:20:52.640 More paychecks, less hustle, working from home.

00:20:55.040 That's what job stacking is all about.

00:20:57.220 If you're a remote or hybrid worker looking to maximize your earning potential, then consider

00:21:01.100 joining the Job Stacking Mentorship Program.

00:21:03.420 The program is designed by Ralph Halza, the creator of Job Stacking, to help you successfully

00:21:07.700 implement a strategy that will allow you to collect multiple paychecks from different

00:21:11.500 jobs without burning out or getting caught by employers.

00:21:15.000 Job Stacking has already helped many people double or even triple their incomes.

00:21:19.140 Luke Hill, a financial analyst living in the UK, has used job stacking to stack three different

00:21:23.600 jobs and went from making $5K a month to $15K a month.

00:21:27.060 But job stacking isn't just about increasing incomes.

00:21:29.940 It's also about helping our guys gain more independence by no longer being a slave to debt

00:21:34.700 or a single employer who hates their values.

00:21:37.660 Andrew Gustafsson, a credit analyst from Australia, is now stacking four salaries, which he has used

00:21:42.980 to pay off his personal and student debt and buy a home for his family.

00:21:47.180 If you don't currently have a remote job, no worries.

00:21:50.300 The program is also designed to help you land remote jobs so that you can go ahead and get

00:21:54.660 started.

00:21:55.460 So if you want to double your income and stop relying on a single paycheck from a woke employer, 0.95

00:22:00.560 go to jobstacking.com slash start now.

00:22:04.360 That's jobstacking.com slash start now.

00:22:07.920 I book a call with Rolf today.

00:22:11.320 All right.

00:22:12.120 So a very interesting contradiction that we're going to get to here yet again.

00:22:16.340 And yeah, they can't keep the logic consistent even inside the article itself.

00:22:20.460 So they complain that the Constitution has been frozen in amber for the last 50 years,

00:22:27.080 which isn't true, but whatever.

00:22:29.480 Again, immaterial.

00:22:31.320 They did note that the Supreme Court had, you know, knocked down a lot of the made a lot

00:22:38.160 of rulings on things like segregation or laws against interracial marriage, these kind of

00:22:42.940 things.

00:22:43.180 Uh, but I remember 10 seconds ago when the Supreme Court was a problem that, uh, the existence

00:22:50.880 of the Supreme Court and its ability to restrain democracy or to make decisions against the

00:22:56.180 democratic will of the people was a huge issue.

00:22:59.140 Now it's looks like we're once again, pro the, uh, you know, inside the very same article,

00:23:04.380 uh, just a few paragraphs later, we're pro the, uh, Supreme Court, uh, overriding all

00:23:09.900 of those, the will of the people and being able to change all these things without any

00:23:15.000 additional actual alterations to the constitution, which has been busy being, uh, frozen in amber.

00:23:20.180 Uh, so all this, these complaints about the Supreme Court and its ability to, uh, defy the

00:23:26.180 democratic will of the people suddenly disappear when the Supreme Court was doing exactly what

00:23:30.520 the left wanted originalists as these scholars called themselves said that they were simply

00:23:34.840 reacting to the overreach by activist judges.

00:23:37.220 All of this in scare quotes.

00:23:38.580 Again, liberal critics counter that the interpretation of law, according to what the founders supposedly

00:23:43.680 wanted amounts to an end run around the protecting and promoting of multiracial democracy.

00:23:48.420 Okay.

00:23:49.740 So again, uh, multiple problems here.

00:23:55.180 You just said that the Supreme Court is the end run around democracy and that's a bad thing.

00:24:01.860 But now when the Supreme Court is denying the will of the people and making these changes,

00:24:08.500 uh, you're in favor of these things that people are saying are overreaches and activism

00:24:13.600 because they're winning you power.

00:24:15.680 You don't care about the overreach.

00:24:17.700 You don't care about the end run around democracy when it's doing your bidding.

00:24:22.020 And very interestingly, uh, the, the whole, uh, justification for ignoring what the founders

00:24:28.340 wanted is, uh, multiracial democracy, right?

00:24:32.080 That's all they cite that there, there's no, there's no moral argument here.

00:24:36.580 There's no logical argument here.

00:24:38.780 They're just saying, well, you can't think about what the founders wanted because the most

00:24:43.360 important thing is multiracial democracy.

00:24:45.420 When did we decide the most important thing was multiracial democracy?

00:24:48.780 Was there a vote saying that multiracial democracy was the best thing?

00:24:52.640 Did we put together a, uh, a, a large, um, you know, more, uh, moral case for this somewhere

00:24:59.280 and understand it as a people and validate it?

00:25:01.940 No, uh, did, did some authority from on high come down and issued?

00:25:06.840 Do we get another, uh, you know, another set of commandments, uh, that tell us that multiracial 0.62

00:25:11.580 democracy is the most important thing and it, uh, it, uh, supersedes all other concerns and

00:25:18.000 all other interests?

00:25:18.820 No, uh, very, very specifically not.

00:25:21.340 In fact, the, the, uh, the founders were explicitly in many cases, uh, we're wary of democracy,

00:25:28.960 uh, but democracy is a magical word.

00:25:32.020 And when we say democracy, uh, it's the only thing that's good, even though that's not the

00:25:36.940 intention of what the country is supposed to be.

00:25:38.920 Uh, you might want to point to issues, uh, and say, well, the constitution may have overestimated

00:25:45.240 the founders may have overestimated, uh, the ability of the people, uh, to understand that

00:25:50.540 democracy was, is, was limited, you know, specifically should have been more explicit

00:25:54.440 about that should have been something that was held to, you know, but whatever, all that

00:25:58.980 aside, uh, at no point did we like, you know, uncover some tome that says, oh, actually

00:26:05.240 multiracial democracy is the be all end all of the end moral goal of all action in the 0.99

00:26:10.980 United States.

00:26:11.640 And therefore, uh, we can just go ahead and ignore anything and everything that the founders

00:26:16.280 said, uh, previously, because ultimately if it's not multiracial democracy, it just doesn't

00:26:22.800 matter.

00:26:23.040 That's the only value that we have when people talk about the values and principles of the

00:26:28.080 United States, that's all the left means, uh, the attorney and columnist, uh, man, maybe

00:26:34.900 Madiba, uh, Denny argues that, uh, originalists, uh, canny use of apologetic, uh, or apolitical

00:26:43.060 language ensnares liberals into treating originalism as a coherent jurisprudence, even when it functions

00:26:49.760 more like an ideology.

00:26:51.180 Uh, yeah, so this is where we're going to get into, actually, let me just read this last

00:26:57.980 pair, this last sentence, and then we'll get, we'll get farther into this, uh, for, uh, far

00:27:02.340 from encouraging judicial restraint, she writes the originalism trap originalism is more effective

00:27:07.680 in restraining judges from doing good things.

00:27:11.500 All right.

00:27:12.780 So, uh, there's a problem at the heart of this entire debate, uh, on originalism and all of

00:27:19.280 these things.

00:27:20.280 And the issue here is, uh, is one that the left, um, is not going to acknowledge, uh, except

00:27:27.620 when it, it advances their cause, but it is true in a sense.

00:27:31.160 So the problem that they're pointing to is that originalism is an understanding about

00:27:37.360 how one should read the constitution.

00:27:38.940 It's a hermeneutic for looking at what the constitution says, uh, and how it should be

00:27:43.680 understood and saying, all right, we understand this document in the context of what the founders

00:27:48.640 wanted, what the founders intentions were.

00:27:51.120 Now, uh, it says here that, uh, you're, you're, they're calling for an apolitical language.

00:27:57.220 And that is, it's, it's making a, it's creating a standard and the standard is what the founders

00:28:01.520 would have wanted.

00:28:02.080 And this, uh, this standard is supposed to be a political it's supposed to be, it's supposed

00:28:06.980 to be neutral, uh, in political grounds.

00:28:09.820 We are simply referring to this authority, which is what the founders want.

00:28:13.760 We're using the founders as basically the Bible, you know, for, for, for, for understanding

00:28:18.020 this, when you, uh, when you do that, uh, it is to be fair in not entirely a political,

00:28:24.760 uh, in the sense that nothing is, is a political when everything in the foundation is up for

00:28:30.400 grabs.

00:28:30.740 So simply by making the case that you should refer to the founders, that the founding

00:28:36.340 matters, that the history matters, that the intent of the people who wrote the document

00:28:40.040 matters, you are making a statement in current American politics because current American

00:28:44.620 politics hates the founders.

00:28:47.660 It hates original America. 0.66

00:28:50.420 It hates everything about our history, everything about the, the entire document, uh, or the

00:28:55.220 entire article so far has been dedicated to invalidating the constitution because it was

00:29:00.160 written by white people who are racist.

00:29:01.900 Right.

00:29:02.300 And so if the, if white people are evil and they're all racist and racism is the worst

00:29:07.100 thing in multiracial democracy is the only actual objective goal, which of course it isn't,

00:29:12.260 that's itself is its own ideological goal.

00:29:14.820 Then what we really have here is a clash of worldviews and neither of them can make an

00:29:20.320 appeal to something neutral because neither of them agree on a basis on which we could

00:29:27.220 establish neutrality.

00:29:28.680 There is no null hypothesis here.

00:29:31.720 The founders believe this is not a null hypothesis to the left is the imposition of a political

00:29:36.960 understanding and ideology and multiracial democracy is not a null hypothesis to the right.

00:29:42.860 It is not the, it is not the default good, or at least it shouldn't be some, some people

00:29:47.800 on the right have bought into this, but that, but treating that as the ultimate goal is also

00:29:52.760 not a understanding that the right agrees to.

00:29:55.580 So there is no, a political neutral ground to appeal to, uh, ultimately, uh, back to the,

00:30:03.880 uh, article here, it may be a measure of the current crisis, or sorry, it may be a measure

00:30:08.860 of the current crisis that even the conservative scholar Yuval Levin doesn't, uh, think originalism

00:30:13.960 can remedy our constitutional woes.

00:30:16.740 Originalism is by definition a preoccupation with what judges do.

00:30:20.380 And the most urgent problem lies with the legislation that is, as he puts it in American covenant

00:30:26.360 under, uh, uh, under reactive, uh, members of the, uh, members of Congress behave like,

00:30:33.580 uh, performers or, uh, mere seekers of celebrity neglecting to do the hard work of wielding the

00:30:39.760 legislative power entrusted to them by the constitution.

00:30:42.640 So this is of course true that a large amount of the power that was vested in Congress in

00:30:49.620 article one has been given away.

00:30:52.180 Uh, it has been given away to judges and it has been given way to the executive, uh, the

00:30:57.360 executive bureaucracy.

00:30:58.660 Again, something I talk about at length in my book, the total state.

00:31:01.580 So there is a certain amount of truth here that the, that, uh, members of Congress are

00:31:06.640 busy raising funds, uh, and, you know, raising their profile on Twitter, but very rarely passing

00:31:12.940 any substantive legislation.

00:31:15.000 And this is one of the most infuriating things I see from Republicans all the time.

00:31:18.900 We see, uh, you know, a bunch of Republican senators whining about Democrats and what they're

00:31:24.520 doing and what the administration is doing and what the government is doing on Twitter.

00:31:28.080 It's your job.

00:31:31.640 It's literally your job to alter this.

00:31:34.340 You are the legislative branch.

00:31:36.420 You are the ones who should be able to decide that they cannot do this.

00:31:39.780 You are the ones that can deny them funding.

00:31:41.560 You are the ones that can make all kinds of radical changes to, uh, the, the, to the law

00:31:48.640 to fix these problems.

00:31:50.020 And they just won't do it or can't do it is really the answer.

00:31:53.320 In many cases, they recognize how, uh, uh, impotent they've become in those positions.

00:31:59.260 They don't really wield power.

00:32:01.280 They wield the same amount of power I do, which is just to be able to go out and tweet

00:32:05.080 about something.

00:32:06.240 That's, that's literally the most powerful thing they can do.

00:32:08.740 There's a reason that so many of these people go into media the minute they're done with

00:32:12.520 politics or are often trying to cross their media, their, their political career as media

00:32:18.440 pundits because they recognize that the actual power is in the media.

00:32:21.860 The actual power is in altering minds through the media complex, as opposed to the legislation

00:32:28.160 happening.

00:32:28.880 It doesn't really matter what you could theoretically write a law about.

00:32:32.840 If you can't get it passed, if people aren't listening, if you can't change the minds of

00:32:36.080 the people.

00:32:36.760 And so, so many of them don't even bother with the actual legislative process to anyone who

00:32:43.340 thinks the constitution has been tearing us apart.

00:32:45.740 Levin exists that it can bring us together.

00:32:47.280 He argues that precisely because constitution was a product of grudging and gradual compromise

00:32:52.180 is especially valuable in our fractious times.

00:32:54.680 The equipment of soup, uh, the requirement of super juries, which entails frustratingly

00:32:59.160 narrow majorities, he says is a good thing. 0.98

00:33:01.520 Members of Congress are supposed to build coalitions, which tends to make partisans more tolerant,

00:33:06.260 uh, and more tolerable.

00:33:08.020 And there's a certain level of truth to this, right?

00:33:10.060 When you're, especially when your, uh, disagreements are relatively minor, uh, building coalitions,

00:33:16.020 forcing people to regularly compromise does have a cooling tendency, right?

00:33:20.940 Uh, however, as the differences have become more exacerbated, the legislative bodies are less

00:33:29.700 interested in securing super majorities, uh, through any kind of actual compromise and

00:33:36.320 instead, uh, are, are doing it by simply, uh, you know, uh, trying to manipulate elections,

00:33:41.680 trying, trying to make sure that they can just force things through.

00:33:44.040 They want to reduce the ability of the other side to hinder any of their, uh, legislation

00:33:49.480 to have any, uh, constructive input that the fact that they're, uh, so far, uh, across from

00:33:55.560 each other, the gap between these two positions is so wide means that it's very difficult to

00:34:00.400 come to any kind of real compromise on any given issue.

00:34:03.520 Like, what are you going to be like, well, you can kind of, you know, mutilate the genitals 0.90

00:34:07.340 of kids sometimes.

00:34:08.400 Like, is that really a place that you can compromise on?

00:34:12.420 Uh, and so it's harder and harder to build those coalitions.

00:34:16.260 Uh, it does, they ask.

00:34:18.340 A lot of people looking at Congress today would be hard-pressed to find a glimmer of the tolerance

00:34:22.060 Levin is, uh, is so genially describing.

00:34:25.580 Even he has to admit that Congress looks dysfunctional from every angle.

00:34:28.900 But Levin's serene insistence that political frustration is healthy instead of corrosive

00:34:33.120 may have something to do with the fact that the Constitution's patchwork of compromises

00:34:36.820 happens to align with his own brand of cautious conservatism.

00:34:40.340 So the document is not a radical revolutionary document.

00:34:45.320 Uh, the Constitution, while it, you know, the America, America was founded in a revolution,

00:34:49.900 the Constitution, uh, was actually more of a reactionary compromise.

00:34:54.100 It was a way to temper, uh, a lot of what had been, uh, done.

00:34:58.320 It was, you know, they were trying to, uh, mediate things like Shade's Rebellion, uh, and

00:35:02.720 these other problems, uh, it was a consolidation of power, uh, for sure.

00:35:07.340 Uh, but ultimately it's a document that wanted things to, you know, change to take place slowly.

00:35:12.360 But the left needs the change to change to take place at a revolutionary speed all the

00:35:17.780 time.

00:35:18.540 It's not okay for things to change slowly.

00:35:20.560 It's not okay to let people adapt, uh, which is itself its own problem, uh, that, that

00:35:24.920 is a major problem with conservatism, uh, that, that I would point out is this, this

00:35:29.340 general approach of saying, well, uh, social revolution is fine as long as it happens at

00:35:33.800 a slower pace, right?

00:35:34.840 As, as Michael Malice says, you know, conservatives are just progressives driving the speed limit,

00:35:38.900 but the speed limit is the problem for these guys.

00:35:41.600 The fact that there's a brake pedal at all is an issue.

00:35:44.760 The only thing you're allowed to do is mash the accelerator to the floor.

00:35:48.340 That is what it means to be an American in our, the year of our Lord, 2024 constant social

00:35:54.340 revolution all the time.

00:35:55.960 So to the extent to which the constitution hinders that at all, it needs to go.

00:36:00.420 He says the presidential candidates should vie for voters in the most competitive stage,

00:36:04.620 which tends to fall near the ideological middle because it's good for both national unity and

00:36:09.440 competitiveness of our politics.

00:36:11.560 He singles out praise for the popular, the peculiar institution of the electoral college.

00:36:17.840 Yes.

00:36:18.100 The whole point of the electoral college is to force you to actually look at multiple states.

00:36:23.580 Uh, and it means in many cases, you have to, uh, debate issues in states that are down

00:36:29.120 the middle, that are battleground states.

00:36:30.960 So you can't just be radical one way or radical the other.

00:36:33.820 It naturally calls for some level of compromise.

00:36:36.660 Uh, the consequences of constitution worship.

00:36:41.840 The electoral college of course is one of the bargains the framers made in order to reassure

00:36:46.760 the slave states that they could keep their own peculiar institution.

00:36:49.520 Ah, of course.

00:36:50.840 So, you know, every, again, everything we don't like is actually there to protect slavery.

00:36:55.500 That that's the every, every time they run into something that is keeping them from completely

00:37:00.460 radically, uh, changing the United States, its origins can only be ones that were in justification

00:37:06.240 for slavery because that is the Trump card. 0.98

00:37:08.640 Anytime you say, yeah, but slavery, uh, the racism, uh, my racism is the argument.

00:37:13.760 It defeats all other arguments, uh, in, in any, in any confrontation.

00:37:17.640 And sadly, this works on a pretty regular basis on conservatives.

00:37:20.820 Uh, they tend to, they tend to agree, uh, that that is a Trump card.

00:37:24.160 Unfortunately, abolishing the electoral college has become a popular refrain among liberals.

00:37:28.520 Uh, something that the scholar, uh, the legal scholar Aziz Rana counts as one of the procedural

00:37:34.480 specifics, uh, that consumes, uh, the consume discussions about the constitution reform in his bold,

00:37:40.640 uh, new book, the constitutional bind, uh, Rana argues against his tendency to take our,

00:37:46.620 uh, problematic system as a given and then struggle to patch, uh, to patch, uh, especially

00:37:51.720 egregious leaks instead of focusing on the patchwork measure, he encourages to think more expansively.

00:37:56.660 Uh, so Aziz traditional American name, um, uh, you know, are these, are these the traditions

00:38:07.520 that he's looking at, or does he not care about revolutionizing these things because

00:38:11.300 not particularly attached to the history of the United States?

00:38:15.500 I, I don't know.

00:38:17.380 Um, interestingly, uh, you know, we, we just need to destroy all of these, you know, the, 1.00

00:38:22.180 the, the system is problematic and we just have to throw all of these things, uh, out of

00:38:27.800 the boat.

00:38:28.180 We can't, we can't, uh, think about how we might, uh, you know, improve on them, what importance

00:38:33.420 they might hold maybe, maybe, you know, people in the past or people who are part of this

00:38:37.560 tradition, the people who founded the tradition might have an insight into something that we

00:38:41.120 don't understand.

00:38:41.840 Nope.

00:38:42.300 They're white.

00:38:42.820 They're racist.

00:38:43.740 Uh, the slavery, something slavery, slavery, bad, uh, therefore destroy all of those traditions.

00:38:49.140 Uh, the bind he describes is familiar.

00:38:51.060 If untenable Americans who are justifiably disenchanted with the constitution still cling to it in times

00:38:57.520 of duress.

00:38:58.080 These defenses implicitly suggest that Americans can only effectively protect their bedrock liberties

00:39:02.780 from a, from demagogues by redoubling their commitment to the text.

00:39:08.180 Uh, so this is interesting.

00:39:10.160 Uh, we want to have liberties, uh, that's very important, right?

00:39:14.660 That this is what the left is all about.

00:39:16.420 More liberties, more rights, more rights, rights, rights, rights.

00:39:19.720 There's civil rights everywhere. 0.98

00:39:20.820 There's a right to everything.

00:39:21.920 Uh, there's a right to, uh, prisoners getting sex changes in prison.

00:39:25.900 Uh, there's a right to, uh, the, the state, uh, stealing children from their parents if

00:39:31.020 they won't, uh, let, uh, let them mutilate, uh, themselves, uh, the, the, all these rights 0.56

00:39:36.140 just exist in the constitution, except maybe the constitution is the problem.

00:39:39.740 Maybe we just, we should have all these rights free floating.

00:39:42.280 We don't need a referential text that actually, uh, gathers together all the beliefs that define

00:39:49.740 the country, uh, constitutional worship is so habitual that it's tempting to assume that the

00:39:55.040 veneration was baked into our politics from the beginning.

00:39:58.100 We run it, uh, uh, uh, situates its historic historically showing how it flourished in the

00:40:03.340 20th century, a long time, uh, alongside the country's global ambitions.

00:40:07.220 Uh, even as the United States pursued imperial projects in places like the Philippines and tolerated

00:40:13.300 racial terror and tolerate racial terror in the Jim Crow South, the constitution was offered 0.85

00:40:18.280 as proof that the country was profoundly committed to liberty and equality.

00:40:22.100 Uh, its interests are coterminous with the world's interests.

00:40:26.620 Uh, very interesting because the left wants to do exactly this, right?

00:40:31.280 So, uh, interestingly, the left wants to keep the world domination.

00:40:35.100 Okay.

00:40:35.660 I'm on board with saying, maybe we should think twice about turning America into an empire.

00:40:40.980 I'm pretty on board with, with saying that's a problem.

00:40:44.480 Uh, I'm even on board with saying, Hey, maybe using the constitution,

00:40:48.280 as, uh, you know, the, the George W. Bush, Oh, we just spread democracy everywhere, right?

00:40:54.160 We just, every, every country has a George Washington and an Alexander Hamilton and a,

00:40:59.880 uh, Thomas Jefferson hiding out in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan or Iraq.

00:41:03.700 And all we have to do is sprinkle a little America on them.

00:41:06.500 You know, just give them a constitution like the United States and sell from, okay. 0.61

00:41:09.820 I'm, I'm, I'm on board with, with, with understanding that.

00:41:12.760 But you notice that the left will be like, Oh, well, we shouldn't do the imperial project,

00:41:16.440 except actually we should continue exactly that NATO should exist.

00:41:19.820 You know, NATO should control the entire world.

00:41:22.220 Uh, the United States, uh, should, should, uh, regime change any, uh, place that isn't bought

00:41:28.000 into, uh, you know, the, the kind of the rainbow mafia, uh, that, you know, we, we have to go fight 0.82

00:41:33.400 wars, uh, in the middle East to make sure that, uh, you know, trans lesbian children, uh, can exist 1.00

00:41:39.440 in, I don't know, Iran.

00:41:40.740 Um, so they want to keep the part about world domination and constant, uh, rights and revolutions.

00:41:47.740 They just want to free it from the shackles of the constitution.

00:41:50.960 They just want to go ahead and discard entirely the document in which all of that was founded.

00:41:57.540 All of that was understood, um, in theory, because really they're twisting it all into

00:42:03.420 these new rights, the ones that certainly weren't built in the constitution.

00:42:06.740 So we need to jettison the document, but keep the imperialism, keep the world domination.

00:42:12.620 Originalism has gathered strength by tapping into this reverence, deploying the authority

00:42:17.440 of the framers in order to pass off originalist interpretations as the epitome of restraint

00:42:22.180 and objectivity.

00:42:24.260 Ran on notes that originalism has allowed conservatives to undermine progressive policies while using

00:42:29.000 soothing language of constitutionalism.

00:42:31.100 All right.

00:42:31.760 So either there is an objective standard one can appeal to.

00:42:36.740 Uh, at least objective inside the tradition of the United States, or there isn't, I'm

00:42:42.580 not saying there's an international objective standard here.

00:42:45.240 I have a lot to say about that and this isn't the episode to do it in, uh, but, uh, but either

00:42:51.420 there is a, a, a tradition we can appeal to that allows us to understand our identity and

00:42:59.160 our values and our way of life.

00:43:01.300 Or there isn't now the left doesn't believe there is.

00:43:04.400 So it says, oh, well, no, originalism is a trying to appeal to some kind of objective

00:43:08.440 reference point.

00:43:09.700 But we reject that because really the most important thing when you, like you see here,

00:43:12.940 the, the problem you notice, there's no argument against appealing to the founders other than

00:43:18.060 they were racist.

00:43:18.920 And that progressive policies and multiracial democracy are the actual goal.

00:43:24.180 Again, when did those become the goal?

00:43:26.000 When did the, become the primary, uh, driver?

00:43:28.680 Uh, could the nature of the American, uh, tradition, uh, itself deny the ascension of, uh, progressive

00:43:36.580 policies and the, uh, elevation of multiracial democracy to the place of primacy all by itself?

00:43:42.040 Well, no, because those are the things that the left cares about.

00:43:45.120 So we can just discard anything that the, the framers would have cared about, right?

00:43:50.160 Ultimately, according to this line of argument, the damage, uh, damages of constitutional worship

00:43:55.540 extend to the structures of the political system itself.

00:43:58.340 National politics gets increasingly funneled through the judiciary, which control, uh, which

00:44:03.780 control of the courts, especially the Supreme court becomes a way to consolidate power, regardless

00:44:08.420 of what the majority of people want.

00:44:10.380 Again, Republicans were making this argument forever.

00:44:14.000 The right was making this argument forever that you are, you are getting rid of this,

00:44:17.800 that you are creating the, the scenario where control of the Supreme court is the only thing

00:44:22.020 that matters.

00:44:23.320 And when the left had generational support, uh, control of the Supreme court, they did not

00:44:27.420 care.

00:44:27.860 In fact, they said, this is a feature, not a bug that the fact that the Supreme court can

00:44:33.380 smack down democracy can smack down the will of the people.

00:44:36.400 That's what we want.

00:44:37.440 That's what's just, that's what matters.

00:44:39.480 As long as it's a, you know, it's pushing the progressive revolution, the Supreme court,

00:44:44.420 and the fact that all politics was being funneled into the Supreme court was a free ride for

00:44:48.900 the left.

00:44:49.280 They didn't really have to worry ultimately about winning the election because they knew

00:44:53.460 they could always take it to the Supreme court.

00:44:55.540 And the Supreme court would functionally rewrite the law to make it progressive to, to meet the

00:45:01.040 progressive goal.

00:45:01.700 And now that actually, it may look like there is a multi-generational conservative Supreme

00:45:07.200 court in, in a rare win for conservatives and, uh, you know, credit to the pro-lifers

00:45:13.420 because not only did the pro-life movement, uh, achieve its goals, but more importantly,

00:45:18.720 uh, its goals achieved a multi-generational win for conservatives for a very long time because

00:45:24.340 they recognize that institutions made this policy and not democracy.

00:45:28.120 And so they went out of their way to ensure that they would win in the, in, in, in the,

00:45:34.420 uh, con in the game of the Supreme court in the institutional game and stopped focusing

00:45:38.580 so much on democratic politics.

00:45:40.840 And that was great.

00:45:41.940 I mean, you still had to win democratic contests, uh, in order to appoint these justices,

00:45:46.240 but they understand that long-term actually controlling the institution was far more important

00:45:51.980 than winning any individual election, uh, or even forwarding any specific piece of legislation.

00:45:57.520 Uh, and now that they figured out that game, the left hates it and they're willing to abandon

00:46:02.380 it.

00:46:02.820 This disempowerment of majorities, which yeah, yeah, the whole point, uh, this entire disempowerment

00:46:09.500 of majorities combined with a political gridlock and institutional paralysis outside of judiciary

00:46:13.560 feel, uh, fuels popular disaffection.

00:46:16.620 Uh, I thought the left hated populism.

00:46:19.300 I thought populism was a problem.

00:46:21.280 I thought the, the populism that swept Donald Trump into office was a problem, but of course it's

00:46:26.560 not when we, you know, they think that populism, the popular opinion is on their side, the document

00:46:31.620 that's, uh, the supposed to be a bulwark against authority, authoritarianism can end up fostering

00:46:37.020 the widespread cynicism that helps authoritarianism grow.

00:46:40.340 Uh, so they don't know what the word authoritarianism means here, or they don't care.

00:46:45.100 It's probably the latter.

00:46:46.840 Um, authoritarianism, uh, would mean that the rule of law, the, uh, procedures are being ignored.

00:46:56.000 Uh, but of course the left is the ones that would like to get rid of the rule of law.

00:47:01.160 They're the ones who are trying to destroy rule of law.

00:47:04.980 Uh, also, yes, the constitution was specifically designed to prevent, uh, the constant rule of the majority.

00:47:13.200 That is the whole point was that actually you shouldn't just be able to get 51% of people together

00:47:18.460 and they can radically and, uh, revolutionize the country.

00:47:22.240 That is not what you're supposed to do, but that's what the left wants to do.

00:47:25.900 So we need to go ahead and destroy any barriers to that.

00:47:29.320 Uh, Rana says that the urge to seek salvation in the constitution has been stunted, uh, not only our,

00:47:35.080 our political behavior, but also our understanding of what is possible.

00:47:38.300 Yes, that is the problem that the constitution limits what progressives can do.

00:47:42.740 So the, the constitution has been stunting our political behavior in the sense that we could,

00:47:48.300 you know, you'll go even further left.

00:47:50.340 It's also, it's under, it's, uh, limiting our, our understanding of what's possible in the sense

00:47:55.180 that we could become even more communist.

00:47:57.140 We could, we could become, we, we, gay race, communism could control everything.

00:48:01.440 And, uh, you know, so, so we need to throw off the shackles of the constitution.

00:48:05.260 Now, uh, America tends to overlook the possibilities of mass democratic politics precisely for this

00:48:11.420 reason, uh, we succumb to the conventional wisdom of constitutional worship, thinking

00:48:16.100 that political, political progress is a matter of adhering, uh, even more perfectly to the

00:48:20.640 essence of the document when the building of majorities is invariably a more complicated

00:48:25.720 process.

00:48:26.380 Uh, yeah.

00:48:27.060 So America has like a teleology, like it has a specific end point of that.

00:48:30.700 Like we are, we are trying to become a more perfect in the sense that we are trying to pursue

00:48:34.980 a specific goal, a specific, uh, understanding, a specific way of being that is immortalized in

00:48:40.840 the constitution.

00:48:41.340 Now I want to take a second because there's a lot of people who are going to say,

00:48:44.640 Oren, you have a problem with constitution worship and you're right.

00:48:50.520 So my problem, uh, and, and there's a small amount of overlap here, which I'll acknowledge

00:48:56.320 before going into where we differ very wildly.

00:48:59.620 My problem is that conservatives also look at the constitution and say, the purpose of the

00:49:06.640 the United States is the constitution.

00:49:09.800 The constitution, uh, is an, is some piece of political technology.

00:49:14.800 And if we just adhere to the constitution, uh, more closely, uh, then, then this solves

00:49:20.680 all of our problems.

00:49:22.280 Uh, the constitution, it doesn't matter what the people do.

00:49:24.860 It doesn't matter what the people believe.

00:49:26.160 It doesn't matter, uh, how many people we admit into this country that don't care about 0.96

00:49:30.500 it, uh, want to destroy it, have no allegiance to it.

00:49:33.260 So none of that matters because the constitution, the words as written, the procedures, uh, inscribed

00:49:39.300 therein, they all by themselves limit the government forever.

00:49:43.980 That is not the case.

00:49:45.080 It's obviously not the case.

00:49:46.240 You just had to live through 2020 to know that's not the case.

00:49:50.020 The, this, now a lot of people hear me say that, and they think, oh, well, that means

00:49:55.020 that Oren doesn't like the constitution.

00:49:56.640 He doesn't think the constitution matters.

00:49:58.500 Uh, the constitution is just some worthless piece of paper.

00:50:00.920 No, wrong, bad understanding.

00:50:04.060 That is not what I'm saying.

00:50:05.280 Constitution is not a worthless piece of paper.

00:50:07.440 Sorry.

00:50:07.880 It's not the constitution is a, uh, a formalization, uh, just writing down, uh, what the founders

00:50:19.700 believed, what the people of the United States believed, what the actual folk ways and the

00:50:24.520 American tradition was at the time.

00:50:26.900 Um, now that snapshot matters because it lets us know what they were thinking, what they

00:50:33.120 were feeling.

00:50:33.920 You can go a lot deeper into that.

00:50:35.660 I encourage people actually to read the federal papers.

00:50:37.860 Nobody does this.

00:50:39.040 Uh, federal papers are there for you.

00:50:40.480 They're not that hard to understand.

00:50:42.080 You can read a federal paper on the toilet half the time.

00:50:44.460 So it's not like it's a huge commitment to make your way through the federal papers.

00:50:47.760 And you can actually understand what the founders were thinking at the time.

00:50:51.460 Now, traditions, if done properly, have to deal with the current day.

00:50:58.240 And that's the problem that the conservatives have.

00:51:01.440 That's actually my problem with originalism itself.

00:51:04.000 I'm also not a fan of originalism.

00:51:05.740 Not because I don't think we should be looking at what the founders meant.

00:51:09.540 I think we should, I think that matters.

00:51:11.480 I think it matters what the American tradition was, but the problem with many conservatives

00:51:16.860 and many originalists is they, and the problem with some of the constitution worship is they

00:51:21.000 treat the tradition as a dead thing.

00:51:23.660 A thing that was captured on a piece of paper at some point.

00:51:28.320 And therefore it never changes that nothing matter.

00:51:31.580 You don't have to worry because it's locked in there, but the constitution does not actually

00:51:36.700 guarantee you anything, the constitution doesn't do anything on its own.

00:51:40.560 It's simply a list.

00:51:42.240 It's simply a manual for how the, the, this should run and a inculcation or a, um, instantiation

00:51:49.080 of the way of being of the people, their political traditions and their understanding at the founding

00:51:54.100 of the United States.

00:51:55.420 In order to keep that tradition alive, in order to honor that heritage, we have to actually

00:52:01.420 live it.

00:52:01.960 We have to actually believe it.

00:52:02.980 We have to animate it.

00:52:04.040 It has to be part of our daily life and it has to be, uh, it has to be continuously practiced.

00:52:11.500 And if it's continuously practiced over time, uh, some changes will take place.

00:52:16.720 And this is, this is ultimately where the left is correct about something about the constitution.

00:52:21.780 Constitution is a living document in the sense that constitutions don't just get frozen,

00:52:28.400 that constitutions are ultimately reflections of the way of being of the people.

00:52:32.520 And if the way of being of the people, if the, if the spirit, if the beliefs, if the, the history

00:52:38.060 and tradition and, uh, moral understanding, the religion of the people wildly differentiates

00:52:43.340 from the words written on the paper, then the words of the paper will not themselves save you.

00:52:48.000 And as we can see with the left in this very article calls to say, oh, well, uh, the original

00:52:54.860 was called to say, oh, well, actually we should appeal to the beliefs of the founders.

00:52:58.080 The beliefs of the founders matter fall on deaf ears because the left has no shared tradition.

00:53:03.300 They have no shared understanding.

00:53:04.960 They do not agree with you.

00:53:06.720 The, the, as this article points out repeatedly, they don't hold the founders as a foundational

00:53:12.340 bedrock.

00:53:13.040 They don't honor the political traditions of the United States.

00:53:16.320 These are bad things.

00:53:17.400 These people were white.

00:53:18.720 They were racist.

00:53:19.640 And well, I mean, those are just the worst things that can ever be.

00:53:22.600 And the real goal is not anything that the founders believed in.

00:53:25.820 And it's not anything that the founders wrote down.

00:53:28.160 The real goal is multiracial democracy that allows for perpetual progressive left-wing revolution.

00:53:35.720 That is the actual goal for them.

00:53:38.880 And so all the appeals to originalism and all the appeals to a shared tradition and all the

00:53:44.720 appeals to the words on the paper, the constitution mean nothing to them because they do not care.

00:53:50.480 And they tell you specifically that they don't care.

00:53:52.380 In fact, they care so little that jettisoning everything about the constitution, all of its

00:53:57.560 institutions, all of its restraint on democracy, all of its wisdom about prudence and the application

00:54:03.320 of, of, of, you know, carefully and slowly, uh, introducing change.

00:54:08.280 If you introduced it at all, all of that needs to be thrown out the window because it's impeding

00:54:12.120 the global revolution towards progressive, uh, utopia.

00:54:16.080 That's the problem.

00:54:17.100 Um, so yes, I do agree that constitutional worship is a problem, but not in the sense

00:54:22.120 that the constitution is bad or the constitution should be discarded or the constitution is

00:54:26.180 worthless people at peace paper.

00:54:27.660 No, that is not my point.

00:54:29.740 My point is the constitution does matter because it reflects the way that the founders understood

00:54:35.380 our political traditions and the United States.

00:54:38.740 However, those things do have to be lived.

00:54:42.140 It's not enough to simply look back at them 200 years ago and be like, oh, well, uh, it's

00:54:47.440 nice.

00:54:47.840 You know, there it is sitting in, it's in a, in a case somewhere it's protecting us, you

00:54:51.820 know, like the, like Warhammer 40k and the emperor sitting on his golden throw, it thrown,

00:54:56.460 it just protects us no matter what.

00:54:57.960 No, it actually has to be put into action.

00:55:00.420 And when it's put into action, it will look different today.

00:55:03.980 The tradition will slightly change.

00:55:06.180 It will slightly alter slowly over time.

00:55:09.180 It will have different applications over time.

00:55:12.440 But if you simply treat it as this document that is just preserved forever in this specific

00:55:17.700 instance and will always, uh, protect us.

00:55:22.240 Well, obviously that can't be the case if the people diverge radically from the document

00:55:26.340 itself.

00:55:26.680 And that's the place where we are, where appeals to constitutionalism mean nothing to the left.

00:55:32.320 And so you can sit there and make all the originalist arguments you want.

00:55:35.480 You can make all the arguments about the founding fathers you want.

00:55:37.940 You can appeal to all of the traditions of the United States you want.

00:55:40.500 The left doesn't care.

00:55:42.820 They are not interested.

00:55:44.400 They are not interested.

00:55:46.000 Reddit says the urge to seek salvation of the constitution has, uh, oh yes.

00:55:50.240 I already read this part.

00:55:51.460 America tend to overlook the possibilities, blah, blah, blah.

00:55:54.580 Uh, get through all of this.

00:55:56.360 Uh, we succumb to the conventional wisdom, worship, uh, the essence of the document, but

00:56:00.700 such complaints are often, uh, why we have, uh, felt held fast to the constitution.

00:56:05.480 For a long time.

00:56:06.340 It offered a shared language that we, uh, uh, when we couldn't agree on much else.

00:56:10.900 Yes.

00:56:11.580 Sadly, that was the, the ultimate, uh, problem is the constitution became the only thing that

00:56:17.640 Americans could share, but that's not how constitutions are supposed to work. 0.93

00:56:21.560 Americans are supposed to share a culture, share a belief, share a bedrock understanding.

00:56:26.240 And the constitution reflects that the problem for many conservatives is that they invert

00:56:32.540 this causality, right?

00:56:33.800 They think, well, we can be as radically different as we want, as long as the constitution is

00:56:38.240 there to agree on, but that's not how it works.

00:56:40.980 You are not radically different.

00:56:43.320 You share a moral vision.

00:56:44.680 You share a goal.

00:56:45.400 You share an understanding of how the, uh, the, the, the country is supposed to work and

00:56:50.060 what you believe in, what your tradition is.

00:56:51.640 And because you hold that tradition, you then have a constitution that reflects that there

00:56:56.740 are plenty of countries that don't have a written constitution.

00:56:58.920 We can debate the merits or, uh, or, uh, uh, problems of a written constitution.

00:57:04.060 The point being is that a constitution is not just a piece of paper.

00:57:07.880 It's not just a technical manual, though.

00:57:09.840 Sometimes it is that, but it is the reflection of the understanding and traditions of the people.

00:57:14.880 You cannot have the people radically alter from those, radically abandon those, and then 0.69

00:57:19.600 expect the piece of paper itself to hold back, uh, the, the revolution, uh, that the left

00:57:24.840 is trying to, uh, create, uh, the historian Linda Colley, who has written critically about

00:57:31.180 the connection between the constitution across the world, uh, and imperial, imperial expansion,

00:57:35.960 nonetheless concludes that such frail paper creations of value human beings, uh, can inscribe

00:57:41.480 expectations that governments are at least supposed to live up to, providing something of value,

00:57:47.400 even when violated, uh, in a deep, uh, in a deeply uncertain, shifting, unequal and violent

00:57:54.200 world, Colley writes, uh, the gun, the ship, and the pen, uh, oh, and I guess that's the book

00:57:59.240 in the gun, the ship, and the pen, such documents may be the best we can hope for. Americans aren't 0.81

00:58:04.260 alone in treating a constitution as a source of inspiration.

00:58:07.220 Colley cites, uh, uh, Colley cites, uh, Olga Misk, a young pro-democracy activist in Moscow,

00:58:14.920 who in 2019 stood in the street, surrounded by a formidable men in body armor, reading

00:58:19.740 allowed passages from the Russian constitution.

00:58:22.320 Police officers recognized the text, uh, from where she was reading, and they did not move

00:58:26.440 in to attack.

00:58:27.740 So saying, yeah, no, I guess constitutions can have, be a rallying point.

00:58:31.780 Uh, uh, yeah, and then to just talk some more about the book.

00:58:34.760 So yeah, ultimately what we see here is that, you know, there are some valid points about

00:58:40.260 constitutional worship in the sense of assuming that the constitution can do the work that

00:58:44.300 we have to do culturally.

00:58:46.040 Um, but, but the left here is calling, is calling for an abandonment of constitution,

00:58:50.180 not because they see constitution worship as like a restriction on the tradition.

00:58:54.840 And ultimately we should really live that tradition out every day and we should, we should make

00:58:59.000 it part of our, our lives.

00:59:00.380 Uh, and, uh, that's the problem with constitutional worship.

00:59:03.100 Their problem with constitution worship is that America has a tradition at all.

00:59:07.640 Their, their, their point is not one of, uh, you know, order of operations.

00:59:11.320 Their point is not one of saying, well, we should be more faithful to the tradition and

00:59:14.920 our, our worship of the parchment itself keeps us from being faithful to the tradition.

00:59:19.000 Their point is we should just discard the tradition entirely.

00:59:21.880 The tradition is bad.

00:59:23.060 White people, racists, uh, it was all created to protect slavery. 0.98

00:59:26.540 Uh, multi-racial democracy is the only thing that matters. 0.98

00:59:30.100 Uh, progressive revolution is the only thing that matters.

00:59:32.220 And to the extent where the Supreme court and the constitution were useful to forward

00:59:36.200 those things, we supported them, but now they're not useful anymore.

00:59:38.860 So we should get rid of them.

00:59:40.240 Ultimately that's the goal.

00:59:41.880 Those are the goals, uh, we've decided.

00:59:43.720 And if the constitution inhibits the progress in those directions in any way, it needs to go.

00:59:49.560 Uh, and, and that's really why we continually see things like, uh, you know, uh, the,

00:59:54.620 the New York times saying, well, democracy or the elections are bad for democracy.

00:59:59.380 Constitution is bad for the United States because ultimately what they're trying to

01:00:02.640 do is say, well, democracy is really just our understanding of left-wing revolution.

01:00:08.500 It's our power.

01:00:10.260 When we say our democracy, we mean our power.

01:00:12.400 Uh, the, the, the left should have the ability to, uh, pump their message through the media,

01:00:19.000 import as many new voters as they want game.

01:00:22.140 The system as much as possible, generate a majority, and then validate all actions that

01:00:27.220 they want to take at any moment.

01:00:28.460 And to the degree, which the constitution hinders any of that, it's an issue, right?

01:00:33.080 All right, guys, let's head over to the questions of the people real quick.

01:00:36.380 Uh, tiny, stupid demon says, I sense we have reached the point where there's not even bothering

01:00:42.680 to put the skin suit, uh, put on the skin suit anymore.

01:00:45.640 Yeah, they're really not even bothering to, uh, wear the institution like a skin suit.

01:00:50.080 That's right.

01:00:50.560 They, they, they're, they're now done pretending that they even need the, the, the institution.

01:00:54.980 This is the same thing that happened with Christianity when it comes to wokeness, right? 0.92

01:00:58.620 Wokeness is most definitely a Christian heresy. 0.99

01:01:00.440 Uh, it is, it is trying to take Christian principles and completely divorce them, uh, 0.92

01:01:06.460 from biblical truth, from Christ, uh, from their grounding in reality, their, their grounding

01:01:10.840 in the ultimate truth and completely disembodied them so they can be manipulated, uh, and, and

01:01:15.700 create the world that the, the left wants to make that they want to take those things and

01:01:19.640 use them to completely remake the world in their image.

01:01:22.000 Same thing here, right?

01:01:23.260 The, the, the constitution was useful to the extent where it allowed them to, uh, you

01:01:27.720 know, do, do the things they want to do when they could use the Supreme Court.

01:01:30.440 To ram through and through, through and manipulate things that was useful, but now that it's

01:01:34.080 a problem or a hindrance to the, the, the right has figured out the game.

01:01:36.940 Uh, the most important thing to do is to just throw that skin suit aside. 1.00

01:01:40.520 We're done with the institution.

01:01:41.720 We're done with the, uh, the, the shackles.

01:01:43.940 Uh, you know, we're, we're done with tying this to anything, uh, any actual tradition we've

01:01:48.680 com we're completely disembodied.

01:01:50.660 Uh, and the revolution is the only thing that really matters.

01:01:53.000 We're done with the pretense of tying this to any core values of the United States.

01:01:57.480 We're just going to call the United States evil.

01:01:59.220 We're just going to call it racist.

01:02:00.560 We're just going to denigrate white people. 1.00

01:02:02.300 Uh, everything about the United States is founded in slavery.

01:02:05.100 That's all that matters.

01:02:06.360 1619 project all the way, all the way through.

01:02:10.280 Uh, tiny stupid demon follows up with the correct sequence is politics. 1.00

01:02:15.020 Kayfabe is downstream from culture.

01:02:16.620 Uh, culture is downstream from power, actual power, power is downstream, uh, of nature or

01:02:22.980 God.

01:02:23.700 Again, uh, I think that there's a, uh, I think they're reducing things to, uh, you know, politics

01:02:30.900 is just, uh, culture or culture is just politics or it's all just power is a problem.

01:02:36.720 Um, these things matter and we should look at the connections that they have, but there

01:02:41.460 is a more complicated relationship.

01:02:42.760 There is a little bit more of a back and forth here.

01:02:45.080 Ultimately, I think power matters a lot more than conservatives understand.

01:02:48.780 Um, and because they, they, uh, don't get that, uh, they, they thought that culture was, uh,

01:02:55.020 this organic thing that was, uh, altering their politics, but that's not the case either.

01:03:00.060 Uh, so it's, it's a little more complicated than maybe one slogan lets us, uh, understand,

01:03:05.140 but ultimately I think a lot of the things that you're saying there are correct.

01:03:09.560 Uh, let's see here.

01:03:11.280 Uh, Wolfbane says politics is downstream from culture.

01:03:13.760 Culture is not downstream, uh, from one river, but the intersection of three rivers.

01:03:18.780 Two rivers, philosophy, education, and generational experience.

01:03:22.860 Uh, and that's true to some extent.

01:03:25.540 I think there's a couple more rivers there though, that you have the problem with.

01:03:28.560 Uh, we're assuming there that all culture is organic and some culture is organic, uh,

01:03:32.900 but especially with the mass man and mass, uh, uh, mass information propaganda, uh, actually

01:03:38.620 culture is highly, uh, influenced by a lot of, uh, straight propaganda media, you know,

01:03:44.820 social media, these things are wielded, uh, even financial incentives.

01:03:48.780 Uh, can, can heavily alter culture again, uh, all of these things interact.

01:03:53.600 It's not, it's not just one way.

01:03:55.080 It's not one way flow.

01:03:56.240 It's not a monocausal explanation.

01:03:58.780 Um, but all of those things that you're talking about do matter.

01:04:01.580 And those things are all heavily influential when it comes to formation of culture.

01:04:05.900 However, I think while those things, uh, you, you, you left out religion, maybe you're

01:04:10.480 folding it under philosophy.

01:04:11.560 I think that itself is also, uh, more of a problem, a lot more to say about this.

01:04:17.100 I'll probably try to do more episodes expanding on this.

01:04:19.720 Cause I think we, we should probably better understand, uh, the, the more of a spiderweb

01:04:23.980 configuration here, uh, that we have rather than, uh, just, just one direction or one,

01:04:29.500 one source for all of these changes.

01:04:30.940 But, uh, uh, the, the points you're making are all, uh, relatively true there.

01:04:35.640 Let's see.

01:04:37.420 Uh, Tom, uh, sorry guys, this is a little small today.

01:04:41.300 I need to fix this.

01:04:42.200 So I'm having a little trouble reading it.

01:04:43.380 Cause I'm an old man.

01:04:44.560 Uh, Thomas minus curious, maybe sorry if I got that wrong.

01:04:48.300 Uh, you haven't found a way around the fact that we haven't found a way around the fact

01:04:51.500 that the majority believes whatever the oligarchs pay them to believe that undermines democracy.

01:04:55.500 Yeah.

01:04:55.780 And you never will.

01:04:56.660 Uh, the problem with, uh, democracy in the age of the mass man is that the oligarchs will

01:05:02.640 always manipulate, uh, what the masses believe.

01:05:05.180 Again, I lay this out in my book, the total state, uh, in, in much more thorough detail.

01:05:09.300 Uh, but Gatano Mosca makes a, an excellent point about how the United States came, became

01:05:14.820 an oligarchy.

01:05:15.820 And his point is that every one of our institutions, all those evil branches and separation of powers

01:05:21.340 that the left hates so much, they were predicated on the idea that power came from different

01:05:26.780 parts of society, that there are different social spheres.

01:05:29.560 Uh, some of them are aristocratic, some of them are mercantile, some of them are the peasantry,

01:05:33.620 some of them are, are, are religious in nature.

01:05:36.000 Uh, all of these things, uh, check and balance each other and kind of limit things to some

01:05:40.060 extent because the power comes from different areas.

01:05:42.300 But once you turn all of these branches and all of these institutions into things that are

01:05:46.720 simply, uh, dictated by democracy, uh, then oligarchs and their ability to manipulate 0.99

01:05:50.980 information through the media end up ruling the day, which is why the left wants to destroy

01:05:55.080 all of these things, because that is what they are counting on.

01:05:57.920 They control the media, they control academia, they control the consistent making apparatus,

01:06:02.300 and therefore they want to get rid of all other forms of limitation, uh, all other social

01:06:07.840 spheres.

01:06:08.360 The only authority rests in democracy, multiracial democracy, apparently most importantly, uh,

01:06:13.780 to the point where you're allowed to disassemble everything about the traditions or heritage

01:06:17.980 or understanding, uh, of, of the past in the United States, because ultimately the only thing

01:06:23.480 that's allowed to influence any politics is mass democracy.

01:06:28.440 Uh, let's see here.

01:06:30.000 Roman Hank, I, I see I've, uh, I've triggered a 40k nerd out here, uh, with, with this reference.

01:06:35.400 The zinc strategy, gene stealer tactics, slim, best, uh, slimish ambitions, uh, enter the

01:06:41.840 institutions, delicately synthesize it into a tool, uh, for their aims.

01:06:46.200 Uh, yes, they have, they have the, the ability to hide amongst the population and corrupt them.

01:06:50.720 Uh, uh, that's not going to make a lot of sense to people who have never, uh, nerded

01:06:53.940 out on Warhammer 40k, but, uh, I give it what you're saying, man.

01:06:56.260 Thank you.

01:06:56.960 Uh, and then, uh, perspicacious heretic says, I don't get why people speed speed limit is

01:07:02.860 written on the side.

01:07:04.360 Uh, fantastic point.

01:07:05.940 Uh, very well said.

01:07:07.860 Yes.

01:07:08.120 The, the, the, the most powerful conservative argument we've, we've written it down somewhere.

01:07:11.980 Therefore, no one can break it.

01:07:13.620 And, and, and somehow that still seems to be the majority of, of conservative commentary.

01:07:18.900 Oh, look, it's written down in the constitution.

01:07:20.620 I've got it right here.

01:07:21.660 It's on the speed limit sign.

01:07:23.180 As you, as you point out there, no, you actually have to care that you have, you have to care

01:07:27.400 about, um, the reason that the rules are enforced, the reason that the tradition existed.

01:07:31.860 If you don't, then as we see in this article, uh, the left just spends all its time saying,

01:07:35.880 well, everyone who wrote this down was a racist, a sexist, uh, you know, they were all

01:07:40.280 white and so their opinions simply don't matter and they can be discarded.

01:07:44.040 All right, guys, we're going to go ahead and wrap this up.

01:07:46.940 Thank you everybody for coming by.

01:07:48.800 Always appreciate you watching.

01:07:50.540 If it's your first time on this channel, make sure that you go ahead, subscribe, click

01:07:54.080 the bell notification, all that stuff to let YouTube know.

01:07:56.260 You actually want to watch the channels that you are subscribed to.

01:07:59.780 If you would like to get these broadcasts as podcasts, make sure that you subscribe to

01:08:03.380 the or Mac entire show on your favorite podcast platform.

01:08:05.920 That way, when you are working out, mowing the lawn, doing your chores, you can listen

01:08:10.220 to this and if you do subscribe, make sure to leave a rating or review.

01:08:14.340 Also, if you'd like to pick up my book, the total state, you can do that on Amazon, Barnes

01:08:17.880 and Noble books, a million anywhere.

01:08:20.000 Fine books are sold.

01:08:21.040 You should be able to pick it up or order it there.

01:08:23.480 Thank you everybody for watching.

01:08:24.720 And as always, I will talk to you next time.

The Auron MacIntyre Show - September 04, 2024

NYT Claims the Constitution Is Dangerous ｜ 9⧸4⧸24

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript