The Auron MacIntyre Show - Why Christopher Nolan's 'Odyssey' Had to Go Woke ｜ Guest： James Keena ｜ 5⧸29⧸26

00:00:00.000 Hey everybody, how's it going? Thanks for joining me this afternoon. I am Oren McIntyre. I've got

00:00:05.280 a great stream with a great guest that I think you're really going to enjoy. Before we get

00:00:09.700 started, I just want to remind you that one of the ways we keep the lights on around here is,

00:00:14.280 of course, subscriptions to Blaze TV. So if you want to support what I'm doing and you also want

00:00:18.600 to get access to all your favorite Blaze TV hosts, head to blazetv.com slash Oren and get $20 off

00:00:24.760 your subscription today. That's blazetv.com slash Oren to get $20 off your subscription today.

00:00:32.980 Well, guys, we were promised that the woke was being put away, that it had finally hit its peak.

00:00:38.700 We were past peak woke. The market was going to correct everyone. Everyone was going to realize

00:00:43.080 that wokeness was no longer popular and they were going to walk away. Maybe they'd plug back into 1.00

00:00:47.740 some kind of left-wing economic message, that kind of thing. But more and more, we're seeing

00:00:52.640 that actually the wokeness is here to stay we have several movies that have currently been

00:00:57.940 blasted for the wokeness and many that are upcoming that are expected to be just as bad

00:01:04.120 you have the new super supergirl movie where the star can't stop talking about how much she doesn't

00:01:09.060 like white christian dads that kind of thing and now even christopher nolan a man whose work has

00:01:14.420 often been described as conservative or even reactionary due to some of the themes that it

00:01:19.400 is exploring. He's now doing his own version of The Odyssey, and from the casting, it's looking

00:01:24.580 pretty woke, at least at this point. Joining me today to talk about this is an author of many

00:01:30.140 books. James Keenan, thank you so much for coming on. Well, thank you, Oren. I'm excited.

00:01:35.840 Absolutely. So for my audience who isn't familiar with you, before we dive into the topic,

00:01:40.240 could you just give a minute or so about your background, what you do?

00:01:43.940 Sure. I'm an author, an educator, and a champion of freedom. That's my focus. I've written five

00:01:49.900 books. Most of them did dive pretty deeply into topics like this structurally. And prior to that,

00:01:57.620 I was a chief operating officer of a midsize company. I've got a large family. I have eight

00:02:02.980 kids and spend my time with them and spend my time studying. Fantastic. Well, let's get into

00:02:09.620 Christopher Nolan himself again like I said this is a guy who is often seen as maybe one of the

00:02:16.360 last real great directors out there somebody who can really tell a audience or even a studio this

00:02:24.600 is what we're doing this is where we're going and I've liked a lot of Christopher Nolan's work

00:02:28.900 many people have even pointed to some of it things like his work in the Batman series as

00:02:34.880 things that kind of communicate some level of reactionary idea some idea about the importance

00:02:41.920 of law and order tradition things that ultimately are usually cast down by movie studios seen as

00:02:49.000 you know two backwards shouldn't be addressed and yet even he now is running into a problem

00:02:55.620 that many people said we were going to be leaving behind we of course have not seen the movie yet

00:03:00.900 And so withhold final judgment.

00:03:03.820 But from many of his casting choices, from Elliot Page, I guess is what she's calling

00:03:08.440 herself these days, or putting a black woman in the role of Helen of Troy, these seem to

00:03:14.400 be themes that have kind of moved through Hollywood.

00:03:17.700 The desire to replace historically non-white or historically white characters with non-white

00:03:24.080 actors or replace men with women or women trying to be men, this kind of thing, has

00:03:28.760 become unfortunately very, very common.

00:03:30.900 Christopher Nolan was again seen as somebody who who might have resisted this at least would have

00:03:35.200 had the the power would have had the authority to tell a studio no if this is something he didn't

00:03:40.060 want to do or tell an audience no I don't want to cater to this kind of stuff and yet now we see

00:03:45.140 that that has worked its way at least as far as we can tell into his latest movie so what is this

00:03:50.680 obsession why is it so hard for even some of the most stalwart director for directors like

00:03:55.700 Christopher Nolan to avoid this trap? Well, there's a very deep answer that I'll get into

00:04:00.520 in a moment, but my initial answer is that this is an ongoing assault on Western civilization and

00:04:06.300 the norms of Western civilization. When you look at the story of the Odyssey, it's part of Greek

00:04:13.540 literature that is one of the foundational things in Western thought. But when you look at the

00:04:18.020 characters, for instance, Odysseus, who's a very strong type A male personality, some may even

00:04:24.900 want to call him a toxic male. And his quest is to get back home to Ithaca to his family, his wife

00:04:31.760 and his child, his nuclear family. He also wants to reinstitute control in Ithaca because while he

00:04:39.480 was gone going through his trials and tribulations, all hell broke loose in his castle and with his

00:04:46.100 family. And so he's going back to rectify that and to reestablish law and order. So at that level,

00:04:53.260 you can see why it sort of conflicts with what the ethos is now as to what a family should be,

00:04:58.900 what a male should be like, and even, you know, the normal assault on Western culture. It's all

00:05:06.240 part of that same stream. But at some point, I'd also like to talk to a deeper issue behind it all

00:05:11.440 and what's really driving it, in my opinion. Well, I think a lot of people have spoken about

00:05:17.680 kind of the general outline you're giving there, this idea that we have a heroic male character

00:05:22.680 that we're elevating the idea of a patriarch, someone who's responsible for the family at home,

00:05:28.640 his natural leadership role is being there. And when he's not there, his authority is a challenge.

00:05:34.100 Things go awry. As you say, he has to reassert his dominance, his leadership role in that scenario

00:05:41.120 to once again, return us to a state of order to put everything back in its place where it should

00:05:46.300 be. And of course, we can see this theme has been echoed so many times. You could see this,

00:05:49.840 that the scouring of the Shire and Lord of the Rings has echoes of this is obviously an archetypal

00:05:55.900 in the most literal sense of that word story. And so you want to, if you're a radical leftist,

00:06:03.620 undermine those things that kind of hold together the American or the Western identity. And this

00:06:09.580 would certainly be one of them. But as you say, that's something I think a lot of people have

00:06:14.100 noticed that it's true, but it is certainly a widely held and I think understood aspect of this.

00:06:19.400 So you alluded to a deeper meaning there.

00:06:21.560 What do you think that deeper meaning is?

00:06:23.960 Well, when you look at the collectivist group of philosophies, Marxism, socialism, communism,

00:06:30.820 they can't tolerate Western civilization or the concept of America.

00:06:37.220 And so if you understand Marx's methodology for analyzing cultures and making change within

00:06:43.240 systems. His view is that you have to use the Hegelian dialectic, thesis, antithesis, and

00:06:50.320 synthesis. So the thesis or the existing situation in America is this Western culture, the ideal of

00:06:58.220 the sovereign individual, the nuclear family. In order to move towards collectivism, socialism,

00:07:04.760 Marxism, communism, you have to destroy the current paradigm. And that's one of Marx's key

00:07:09.920 points is that you have to attack it, destroy it, replace it. And so what we're seeing on all levels,

00:07:14.880 not just about movies or literature, but education, music, anything that you can pick out in society

00:07:20.720 right now is essentially a collectivist assault on Western civilization because it has to be

00:07:26.220 destroyed in order to make room for the socialist revolution. Well, I think this is true on so many

00:07:32.820 levels. You could look at the work of someone like Bertrand de Juvenal talking about the different

00:07:37.820 social spheres and or Alexis de Tocqueville talking about, you know, the need for free

00:07:42.740 associations and how and this is something I think some libertarians miss, but I think it's

00:07:47.780 critical if you actually support the idea of liberty. If you want to have a society that is

00:07:52.920 free, you must first have a society that is virtuous and self-sustaining. The reason that

00:07:58.160 governments are so easily collectivized is when the duties of the home, the family, the church,

00:08:03.620 the wider community ultimately break down they need those bonds to be weakened so you can 0.95

00:08:08.960 ultimately build up the power of the state the fact that a woman no longer raises her family 0.86

00:08:14.260 educates her children the fact that a father no longer provides for the well-being of his children 0.72

00:08:19.760 or ultimately cares for the elderly these kind of things every one of those aspects of society that

00:08:25.000 we hand over are ultimately also something that breaks down our liberty and pushes us closer

00:08:30.040 towards that inevitable centralization that you are talking about there. However, I do think this

00:08:36.460 then provides a challenge to us because, you know, and I could be wrong, but just reading your profile

00:08:41.980 and hearing you talk, you sound like a free market guy. You sound like a guy who says,

00:08:45.800 you know, the market will ultimately sort these things out. And many people have made this claim,

00:08:50.580 right? If you go woke, you're going to go broke. Eventually, the people will stop showing up for

00:08:54.360 the movies. Eventually, Hollywood will stop making these movies. There'll be a market correction.

00:08:58.360 and that makes logical sense right that that's what i would assume would happen uh but i guess

00:09:04.580 i've been in too many of uh i've been in the belly of the beast too long i was in public education

00:09:09.760 i was a journalist i've stared these you know wide-eyed zealots in the eyes i know what they

00:09:16.540 believe i know this is their religion in a very real way and so even though many people made the

00:09:21.000 prediction that ultimately the market would correct this and that it would bring us back

00:09:24.980 to a point where movie studios would serve the interests of the people i i think that that has

00:09:29.960 ultimately not been the case now i don't think it was actually ever the case i think that hollywood

00:09:34.420 has been leading and not following for a very long time they have an agenda as you say and i think

00:09:39.760 it's one that is regularly enforced despite what the market might tell you uh but it's only gotten

00:09:44.820 obviously more ridiculous over the years we're not just breaking down the idea of the church and

00:09:49.720 footloose anymore. We're breaking down the ideal of male and female at this point. And so what is 0.74

00:09:55.800 your response to the fact that the market doesn't seem to have corrected, that the market is not

00:10:00.920 serving the consumer when it comes to entertainment, but instead it seems to be a tool to manipulate

00:10:07.340 the average consumer through the messages that are being pushed regardless if they're popular

00:10:12.260 or even profitable? Right. And I am a libertarian. I'm a free market guy. So everything you said

00:10:18.340 about that is correct. But I also think, you know, in the line of thought of there's very

00:10:22.820 deeper, there's deeper, more powerful forces at work here than I think a lot of people realize

00:10:28.000 that it isn't about does the free market work or not work. When you look at our civilization right

00:10:34.320 now, particularly Western civilization, we should have some very deep disillusions about what's

00:10:41.660 happening here. That, you know, we look at our government and think it's of the people, by the

00:10:46.340 people and for the people, but I'm pretty sure it's not. When you look at what moves the world,

00:10:51.060 I'm pretty sure it's closer to the banking cabal, the worldwide network of NGOs, all of the

00:10:59.960 intertwined organizations. Like if, I don't want to digress here, but if you look at the Epstein

00:11:07.840 files, set aside the sexual nature of that issue, what it really reveals is that there's this very 0.55

00:11:13.180 tightly woven elitist organization and network that drives the world. And we think we can vote

00:11:21.260 our way out of it or talk our way out of it or have a speech and get out of it. But these forces

00:11:26.420 are so powerful and they go so far back in time that I'm not even sure we fully understand what

00:11:31.960 we're up against here. There are very powerful forces, whether it's radical Islam, the collectivist

00:11:37.100 movement or the banking cabal that are out to change America simply because they can't tolerate

00:11:43.760 the concept of America. The concept of a sovereign individual who's free to make his own choices

00:11:49.140 violates collectivism. It violates radical Islam when you think of it in terms of there is no law 0.96

00:11:57.160 but Sharia and there is no God but Allah. And it also violates the banking cabal who wants 0.93

00:12:02.560 complete control of our society so you've got all those powerful forces that are going to push

00:12:09.280 all of our institutions to uh move towards this destruction of the the american ideal

00:12:15.200 and so it's not as simple as saying i hope the free market will fix it these these forces care

00:12:19.680 nothing about the free market they care nothing about our political system they're out to destroy

00:12:24.080 america all right there's a lot there and i certainly want to get to all of it but i guess

00:12:30.080 i'll start with the question that it's most closely related to our starting topic if we're

00:12:36.540 in a scenario and i agree 100 that there are pretty ancient and powerful forces that are

00:12:43.760 pushing back against western civilization want to see it uh destroyed if that's true

00:12:49.620 and we think that they are that old and that powerful then at some level is the notion of

00:12:57.140 a free market an illusion? Because if that is a constant thumb on the scale for what should be

00:13:04.280 happening, then aren't we constantly in a scenario where no transaction is truly free of these

00:13:10.860 influences? Is there a scenario where we need to actually use some level of restriction or

00:13:16.800 regulation to create a safer space for then the market to actually flourish? I guess I'll show my

00:13:23.660 cards here a little bit. I'm always telling libertarians, you kind of need authoritarianism

00:13:28.400 on the outside to get libertarianism on the inside. You need some level of hard regulation

00:13:33.940 to block out malicious forces. If you then want people to ultimately be able to live their lives

00:13:39.440 in their own way, making their own decisions, being an individual that is not constantly

00:13:44.420 pulled apart by these ancient and globalist forces. And so my question to you would be,

00:13:51.060 does the presence of these things and the level of influence to the point where they would

00:13:55.740 completely distort our entertainment education these other things does the presence of those

00:14:01.620 forces mean that at the very least we need some kind of barrier to allow the free market to thrive

00:14:08.100 or is the free market completely abandoned to these forces does it persist besides them is it

00:14:13.460 is it unaffected in some areas but affected in others what would be your response i'm gonna

00:14:18.560 to unwind that just a little bit in the sense that if you look at the essential conflict in

00:14:24.600 the world historically from the beginning of civilization is it's been a conflict of the

00:14:30.160 elites versus everyone else. And that elitism has taken many forms, whether it's monarchies,

00:14:35.780 dictatorships of the proletariat, Caesars, feudalism, you know, take your pick. It's all

00:14:41.880 essentially the same thing. It's how a group of elites have somehow taken control of the machinery

00:14:47.320 of civilization and the lifeblood of civilization to the detriment of common people. And the thing

00:14:53.720 that the only exception to that has really been the concept of the United States. When we had

00:15:00.680 our revolution against the empire upon which the sun never set and King George, it literally turned

00:15:07.580 the world upside down because it was a novel approach to self-governance where we introduced

00:15:12.300 the concept of the sovereign individual to the world. And we didn't take on an elitist

00:15:17.600 organization to run those sovereign individuals. We tried to turn the pyramid of power upside down.

00:15:24.540 That offended all of those ancient historical streams of power throughout the entire world.

00:15:32.280 And ever since then, their mission has been to destroy that concept of the sovereign individual,

00:15:37.660 will destroy the concept of freedom for that individual to choose where they want to work,

00:15:42.160 where they want to live, who they're going to associate with, what they want to say,

00:15:45.500 what they're going to write. They need to destroy that because it violates the elitist view of how

00:15:51.680 they're going to control the world. So what do you do about that? The answer is, since the elitists

00:15:56.920 are like chameleons, they're shapeshifters, no matter what is them you pick, they're going to

00:16:01.900 find a way to take control. Even you look at Marxism, the dictatorship, the proletariat is 0.99

00:16:07.080 just another elitist form of control over the masses. So the solution, in my opinion, is to

00:16:13.400 prevent elitism from doing that. And I think the founding fathers had some interesting ideas,

00:16:20.360 and I'm a big fan of the U.S. Constitution, but I think it has some weaknesses. And I think there's

00:16:24.540 some things we should have done differently there that would have created, as you said,

00:16:28.800 these barriers or firewalls against this elitist infiltration of our free society.

00:16:34.320 well this is very interesting this is why Hans Hermann Hoppe is probably my favorite libertarian

00:16:41.400 if for no other reason than he is directly photocopying most of Bertrand de Juvenal's

00:16:47.400 book on power and I say that with a lot of love because I think he does a great job of updating

00:16:51.500 it and clarifying it and adding some interesting concepts to it so I'm by no means not knocking

00:16:57.020 him for that but I think it gives him a metaphysics of power that most libertarians are often

00:17:01.980 unfamiliar with. And that gives the libertarian worldview a more robust understanding. However,

00:17:08.580 I am a little worried about the idea. Well, I shouldn't say I'm a little worried. I should

00:17:14.000 just say as I am someone who studies elite theory, I'm a big fan of Alfredo Pareto and

00:17:20.640 Katana Masca and their analysis of the world. And I think that their point that elites are ultimately

00:17:25.980 inescapable is correct. And I think this is also largely Bertrand de Juvenal's point. And I think

00:17:33.820 this is why Democracy the God the Failed is so compelling in its first half, where many people

00:17:39.600 assume it's defending monarchy, and less compelling in its next half, where it attempts to set up the

00:17:45.140 covenant communities and somehow bind us against these authoritarian structures. I am someone who

00:17:51.120 ultimately does not like totalitarianism. I think that we need to resist totalitarianism. I wrote a

00:17:55.560 called The Total State about how we needed to resist totalitarianism. But I do think that the

00:18:01.800 attempt to purge elites from this is ultimately doomed in the same way that I think the attempt

00:18:08.500 to like remove the profit modem by motive by Marxists is ultimately doomed because I think

00:18:14.220 this is a actual basic truth of human collective action. I think when we look at the history of

00:18:20.600 the world, as you say accurately, it is a history of elites exploiting individuals. I think that is

00:18:28.100 true. However, I think that dynamic is the case because that is how humans tend to organize. The

00:18:34.020 organized majority always wins against the disorganized majority. And so I think that

00:18:40.480 this is a dynamic that's very difficult to break. And so the question is less one of,

00:18:45.800 Can we get rid of elite influence? Can we avoid this pretty much inevitable metaphysics of power? Or is there a proper way to order this as where the elites would be constrained through, I think, the natural Aristotelian understanding of kind of a telos, a community, a common duty, a civic duty that is required,

00:19:09.580 and the self-governance of the people

00:19:13.300 creating those barriers to absolute power.

00:19:16.800 I would be more comfortable at some level

00:19:18.980 with a king who did very little

00:19:22.680 over a virtuous people

00:19:24.600 than I would a government that we have now,

00:19:27.600 which is entirely totalitarian,

00:19:30.120 over people who theoretically

00:19:31.420 have some level of freedom or democracy.

00:19:34.420 I don't think the form is so much important

00:19:37.280 as the result that it ultimately produces.

00:19:39.580 Yeah, I'm not an anarchist, so I do agree with your point that society requires some

00:19:44.700 enforceable structure in order to guarantee the rights that we want to claim as sovereign

00:19:49.100 individuals and to claim the freedom that we all want in our lives. There has to be some structure,

00:19:54.700 some enforceable structure enforced by someone to maintain that. Where the Founding Fathers went

00:20:01.740 awry, in my opinion, is when they created the Constitution, they thought America had an ethos

00:20:08.620 that was indestructible at the time, that we were in the process of conquering a continent,

00:20:13.320 we had fought off the empire upon which the sun never set, we defeated King George,

00:20:17.460 and we had a very clear set of principles, you know, Lockean principles about how to structure

00:20:22.000 a society, and a new opportunity to create one almost from a blank slate. And I think the

00:20:28.320 founding fathers assumed that that was going to be the American culture, that concept of American

00:20:32.640 exceptionalism, that it was going to be there forever. So one of the mistakes they made in

00:20:37.280 constitution is they gave congress far too much power and in in the sense that they they thought

00:20:43.600 well in this our representative republic will always have this ethos so it kind of doesn't

00:20:47.840 matter how much power congress has they'll just do what this ethos of people want done uh but our

00:20:53.920 ethos has changed and we've been uh in infiltrated by collectivism and some other thoughts to the

00:20:59.920 point where now our congress which really has very few barriers to what it can do is essentially

00:21:06.800 slowly moving us towards a totalitarian state and towards a collectivist state, and there's

00:21:11.780 really nothing to stop it in our constitution. So we should have put some different barriers in

00:21:17.260 place to prevent this from happening. I wish the founding fathers would have realized that

00:21:22.020 we're not always going to have the same ethos. So if you want to create, keep this same structure

00:21:26.460 that limits government and protects individual sovereignty, you better put some more firewalls

00:21:31.560 in that thing in order to stop the erosion of it.

00:21:36.800 Got PC Optimum points? Visit Shoppers Drug Mart for the bonus redemption event and get more for

00:21:41.840 your points. Friday, May 29th to Wednesday, June 3rd. Valid in-store and online.

00:21:50.780 I wonder if that's true. I certainly think that you're right that the founders assumed

00:21:56.040 too much about the character of the people and what it would remain. I think that

00:22:00.260 they were ultimately assuming that the people would continue to defend the rights of the

00:22:05.680 which is what they felt that they would do and what had been denied them by the king and parliament.

00:22:11.540 They assumed that that kind of Anglo-Protestant understanding that kind of ultimately flows from the English tradition would continue into the United States and be magnified.

00:22:25.500 If anything else, the United States seemed like more of a purifying strain of that understanding.

00:22:31.380 and that's kind of where they assumed would be the the trajectory going forward but as america

00:22:38.280 expands and moves into i think a world empire would be a pretty fair way to describe it after

00:22:45.080 world war ii we see a large influx of foreign peoples there had always been ways of immigration

00:22:52.340 in the united states to be sure we were trying to fill up a continent as quickly as possible and

00:22:57.520 try to deny other great powers access to it and so that meant we just needed a raw number of people

00:23:03.260 but it started to get faster and looser with who was allowed to come in and i think in a large

00:23:08.540 sense it started allowing many people who are completely unconnected to this tradition in any

00:23:13.000 way you have kind of the expanding rings of you know first uh kind of the the protestant dissenters

00:23:18.640 and then uh the rest of the english the irish you know some of western europe and then we start to

00:23:24.780 Eastern Europe and much further away and every time we got further away from kind of the birthplace

00:23:30.040 of this understanding of the world we seem to get less and less of the character that you're

00:23:35.360 describing there and so I think that this is also a tension between kind of the American identity

00:23:42.180 and the framers intention because you have a scenario where you have a way of being a life

00:23:50.180 that was ultimately derived from a set of understandings of attitudes of cultures of

00:23:56.740 traditions heritages and that was then attempt to like kind of be made abstract and apply to

00:24:03.420 a bunch of people who were completely outside that tradition were unfamiliar with it and even

00:24:07.660 though we wrote down a lot of this stuff in the constitution i think ultimately there's a limit

00:24:12.000 to the ability of written constitutions to dictate behavior i think constitutions emanate more from

00:24:17.520 the way of the being of the people than they do a priori construction at the beginning of a country

00:24:22.980 i don't think america is america because of the constitution i think the constitution looks like

00:24:27.120 it does because it was written by americans and so i think as we brought more and more people under

00:24:32.520 the umbrella of the united states as we attempted to then export our ideology our liberal democracy

00:24:38.640 and these other things to other places we quickly discovered that actually people aren't a blank

00:24:43.240 And you can't just photocopy these beliefs. You can write down all you want about the American Constitution for Liberians. Even if they have a photocopy of your Constitution, you're not getting the United States, you're getting Liberia. And so I think there is a greater difficulty there for a greater challenge for the document.

00:24:59.680 I think it's less about writing down more restrictions, though I could agree there are some mechanical issues ultimately with the function of the Constitution.

00:25:08.240 I think the larger thing is being aware that one must guard the traditions and the peoples that were attached to it.

00:25:14.940 And when you become a global empire, you turn a self-governing republic into something else because you absolutely have to.

00:25:20.860 I think that's true, but I do also think that people everywhere and at all times have some very deep driving aspects to their nature.

00:25:35.720 One of them is I think people truly want to be free.

00:25:39.120 I mean, I think people want to be able to control their own lives.

00:25:41.720 I think they want to make decisions for themselves.

00:25:43.640 I think they want to pursue their own happiness, their own path in life.

00:25:47.800 I think that's a natural thing.

00:25:50.280 I think people also want to collaborate with people.

00:25:54.300 I don't think we're loners.

00:25:55.820 I don't think we're savages.

00:25:58.180 I don't think we're Darwinian competitors in society.

00:26:02.640 I think people want a family.

00:26:04.420 I think people want to live in communities.

00:26:05.960 I think people want friends.

00:26:07.100 I think they want to work with people they want to work with.

00:26:09.080 I think they want to associate with people they want to associate with.

00:26:13.000 So the fact that people are coming from foreign countries,

00:26:15.340 I don't think violates those assumptions.

00:26:17.340 What happens, though, in the current structure of America is that we have different outlets that people can take advantage of.

00:26:25.540 For instance, if you bring in a lot of people who can't sustain themselves into a welfare state, you're going to create a whole different dynamic than you originally intended.

00:26:35.220 And I think that's part of what happened here in America.

00:26:37.560 So in my opinion, still, what we did was we created a government that could evolve to the point where it seeded all these destructive elements in and of itself.

00:26:47.340 when these people were coming in. So in my opinion, we should have had a hard constraint

00:26:52.720 on the size of the government. Pick a number. It can never be more than 10% of gross domestic

00:26:57.920 product. No matter what policy or program or welfare thing, you should never have anything

00:27:04.320 bigger than that as a government. I also don't think we should have the ability to take money

00:27:10.640 from some people and give it to others. I think that transfer of wealth between individuals is

00:27:15.380 terribly destructive. And that's part of what contributes to the breakdown of what we would

00:27:19.700 consider valuable, the concept of the nuclear family, the self-sufficient, self-reliant

00:27:24.460 individual. You start to destroy those things simply by the kind of government you allow to

00:27:28.980 come into place. And so I think if the founders would have thought a little bit differently and

00:27:33.700 said, I'm going to put some bigger constraints here, that the government can never become that.

00:27:37.960 And so the people who are coming here can't follow that path because it doesn't exist

00:27:41.960 as a path for them. And they have to actually learn to absorb the American culture,

00:27:47.300 the concept of the nuclear family, the concept of community, the concept of you have to work

00:27:51.800 and sustain yourself. That's part of the American culture, but we've allowed a different path for

00:27:56.400 people to follow. Yeah, I guess I'm less sanguine about the powers of social conditioning,

00:28:03.380 the ability to socially engineer entire populations into a new way of life. I don't

00:28:09.360 think that's always the case. And you can look at perhaps Andrew Jackson. This is a guy who

00:28:19.140 ultimately said, okay, we have Native Americans here. We have American Indians here. And some of

00:28:24.900 them are willing to live as we live. And those people can become Americans and that kind of

00:28:29.240 thing. But the large majority of them have no interest or capacity to join in the American

00:28:36.280 dream and the American nation and its identity. And we're willing to adopt those that will,

00:28:41.740 but those that won't, they have to go. And this is why we ended up with the reservation system.

00:28:45.360 It's not that Andrew Jackson particularly hated Indians. In fact, in many ways,

00:28:49.360 he was actually kind of a liberal in the sense that he thought that the Native people and their

00:28:54.320 ways of life should be preserved in their totality if they wish to continue them. 0.88

00:28:59.820 But he was very clear that he did not believe, and it was very evident, that the majority were

00:29:05.400 interested or capable of pursuing this. And I think if we look in places like China, you know,

00:29:11.120 there are, of course, always some people who are interested in freedom, but I think the vast

00:29:15.260 majority are actually not at all. I'm not wildly well-traveled, but I am well-traveled enough to

00:29:21.080 have met many people of many different cultures that actually have very little interest in freedom. 0.99

00:29:26.600 The ones that make to the U.S. tend to be self-selecting. You know, I'll give you that. 0.99

00:29:30.220 They tend to be self-sorting at some level. But as you say, the more and more we see large numbers of these people move in, the less and less we get kind of that spirit that you're discussing there.

00:29:43.480 So, for instance, I'm very sure that the first wave of Indian immigrants were quite capable, quite intelligent people, that kind of thing. 0.97

00:29:50.580 But what we're seeing now is large swaths of Indians acting as ethnic cartels in things like hotels or liquor stores, taking over HR departments, tech departments, these kind of things, only hiring people who look like them, share their identity. 0.50

00:30:04.400 Many of them all come from the same town. 0.98

00:30:06.600 They show up and get on the same government welfare.

00:30:08.500 They use that to leverage in and then buy out businesses and use all the all the different aspects of the state that favor them.

00:30:15.240 And, you know, there's, of course, then the libertarian argument there.

00:30:18.020 Well, if the state wasn't doing those things, then they wouldn't be able to leverage them. And that's true. But at the same time, the very existence of people with this very different way of being in large numbers radically changes the outlook. And no matter how we rearrange the government, I think that those people would ultimately pursue those ends.

00:30:35.440 Again, there's always some. I think you're right that there are at least some level of people interested in our way of life in different cultures. And over time, over generations, they might be able to be woven into the fabric of the United States. But that's absolutely not what we've pursued in any way, shape or form. We've pursued a very different path and it's destroying the US at many levels.

00:30:55.040 And I think this reflects itself ultimately in a project like Christopher Nolan's, a man who in many ways seemed like a very, you know, a filmmaker who's informed by the American ethos, even if himself is not, you know, born in the United States.

00:31:10.920 But but a guy who certainly seemed to align with many aspects of it and yet ultimately seems to succumb to this desire for multiculturalism and political correctness and all these things ultimately feels the need to deconstruct these things because, well, ultimately, he's not really affiliated with our values, not really assimilated into what we believe.

00:31:34.040 and therefore the foundation on which he stands is sand. And I think if you want to build the kind

00:31:38.700 of robust free republic that you're discussing, the building material matters. I think it actually

00:31:43.780 matters quite a bit how you build that foundation and you can't assume that it will stay the same

00:31:48.480 in perpetuity. So I guess I just don't know if there are enough constrictions that one can

00:31:53.560 draw into the constitution that will limit this if ultimately the people you're bringing in

00:31:58.220 are seeking an entirely different way of life. Yeah, that's an interesting point. And to some

00:32:04.040 extent, I agree with what you're saying, using radical Islam as an example, because they treat 0.98

00:32:11.400 their philosophy as superior to any American construct of government or politics. And I mean, 0.98

00:32:18.440 to simplify the Quran, it's as simple as there's no God but Allah, there's no law but Sharia.

00:32:22.640 well, that doesn't quite work in a pluralistic society like America, where everybody should be

00:32:30.280 free to pursue their own concept of God, their own concept of how they want to live their lives.

00:32:36.880 And it shouldn't be Sharia law. It should be laws derived from our Constitution and the processes

00:32:43.340 that are ancillary to our Constitution. So I do think that we need to start to think about how

00:32:50.320 do we filter that out that we can't you know you see in America right now like down in Texas for

00:32:54.940 instance there's a lot of these communities that are starting to be created that are entirely 0.99

00:32:59.040 Islamic where they really have found ways to exclude Christians cleverly and they're building 0.79

00:33:05.880 a community around Sharia law within our republic and I think we need to you know when you talk 1.00

00:33:12.860 about how do we put some barriers I think that can't be acceptable because you're essentially 0.98

00:33:17.480 creating another, not just a culture, but another political system inside our political system. And

00:33:24.040 I think that will ultimately end in disaster here. I agree 100%. And the only thing I would say to

00:33:31.020 that, the only thing I would add to it, what I otherwise agree with there, is that many politicians 0.59

00:33:36.020 in the GOP will just say things like, well, ban Sharia law. And fine. Ron DeSantis, my governor, 0.99

00:33:40.960 who is great on all kinds of levels, love Ron, has banned Sharia law here. But ultimately, 1.00

00:33:47.480 That, I think, is a paper tiger, because what you need to ban is Islamic immigration. 1.00

00:33:52.380 As long as Muslims are coming into the country en masse, you will get Islamic law. 1.00

00:33:57.240 You can write all the restrictions in you want. 1.00

00:33:59.560 You can ban it in the Constitution.

00:34:01.020 You can ban it in your state constitution, whatever. 1.00

00:34:02.980 Once you get a critical mass of Muslims here, it really doesn't matter what you've written down. 1.00

00:34:07.740 They're going to force Sharia law. 1.00

00:34:09.480 They might even do it in many cases. 0.60

00:34:12.280 Sharia law is administered in these closed societies, these private associations, where they basically wall off anyone else from coming in, resolving any of the issues.

00:34:21.100 And by the way, this is not, you know, specific only to Muslims. We just had, you know, the Tyler Olivera, who did the video looking at Jewish communities, really Orthodox communities that were boxing out local, you know, investigators, local reporters, even the police.

00:34:42.180 They had their own courts. They had their own basically de facto police in the area. So any ethnic diaspora can ultimately do this. It's the differentiation of authority. And to be fair, I think in more classical constructions of culture, including many of the ones that we admire when we're looking at possible pursuits of liberty, that was often the case.

00:35:04.380 Justice was handled in the tribe. It was handled in the family. That's actually what gave the government less authority. The magistrate was an overseer, not an absolute authority. And you would take things to the head of the Roman household before you would ever imagine taking it to a civil magistrate. And that creates a certain barrier of authority.

00:35:24.320 The problem is, while you and I might be fans of barriers to authority for our government, we want them to be the right kind of barriers, right? We don't want them to be Islamic law barriers. We don't want them to be Orthodox Jewish barriers. We want them to be, well, Christian American Western barriers. 0.95

00:35:39.820 And so those are the ones that we would kind of agree with. And so there's a kind of a catch-22. At some level, these insular immigrant communities are kind of constructing the individual community barriers we're talking about, but they're constructing them against our civilization, our way of life, our understanding. 0.97

00:35:57.400 And so this is where I think the interesting debate and conflict comes into play, right? Because we recognize the value of these communities and even their value in restricting the size of the government. But ironically, in this case, they're working in exactly the opposite direction one would hope. 1.00

00:36:11.200 Yeah, it's an interesting point. And I come at the thought from, you know, I'm mostly Irish. And, you know, as the Irish immigrated to the United States, they did create their own communities. You know, you can look at a lot of the big cities, and a lot of them have, you know, Corktown, Iristown, whatever.

00:36:30.100 I'm also part Indian, so I understand a little bit of the perspective from that direction.

00:36:35.800 But I also strongly believe that if you have some foundational principles that all of society should and could rally around that are not unique to a religion, they're not unique to a ethnicity, they're simply unique to what it means to be a human being.

00:36:52.780 and one of those being the sovereignty of an individual and the right to live your life as

00:36:58.640 you choose. And as we create a social compact or a constitution and derive laws from that

00:37:05.400 constitution, they should all orient around the fact that the purpose of the society is to protect

00:37:10.880 that individual's right to do that. And if you want to introduce Sharia law, which conflicts

00:37:17.740 with that, it simply can't be tolerated. This is a nation of laws derived from a constitution that

00:37:24.360 are based on certain fundamental principles, and we should intend to keep it that way.

00:37:29.860 Well, I think that might just have to be a point of disagreement between us. I think you're a little

00:37:33.960 more universalist in your understanding of humanity, and I'm a little more particular.

00:37:38.380 That said, you did mention earlier, both interestingly, Sharia law and the Epstein

00:37:44.200 files, banking cartels, elite influence. I thought that was interesting because currently I also

00:37:50.640 agree both of these are a problem. Both of these are a huge problem. However, it seems like they've

00:37:54.940 been pitted against each other. A lot of people will say, well, if you're worried about Jeffrey

00:37:59.680 Epstein and a banking cartel, you must be some pro-Islam person, someone who embraces Sharia

00:38:08.300 law and in the importation of Islam or or ultimately kind of saddling up beside it. 0.58

00:38:13.520 On the other side, there are people who are saying, well, if you oppose Islam, you must

00:38:18.300 ignore all of the Epstein files and the banking cartels because there might be some connection

00:38:23.000 to Israel or some other faction.

00:38:24.940 And so you have to shut up about that stuff because ultimately we're too busy fighting 1.00

00:38:30.240 against Islam. 1.00

00:38:31.640 My answer has been both. 0.78

00:38:32.940 I think we should expose everything in the Epstein files.

00:38:35.420 I think we should go after banking cartels. 1.00

00:38:37.140 And I think we should ban Islamic immigration. And I don't think there's anything that should 1.00

00:38:41.340 any way conflict with each other. I might be more radical on the last one than you are even,

00:38:45.440 but I don't think that there should be any conflict between these two positions. Why do

00:38:49.600 you think people are framing it in this idea that we either have to side with Jeffrey Epstein or

00:38:53.960 side with radical Islam? Can't everyone here lose? Shouldn't that be the best outcome?

00:38:59.040 I think what you're seeing is an interest in protecting the entrenched hidden elites in our

00:39:05.480 society that are actually pulling the strings in the background. And what they don't want,

00:39:10.460 the very last thing they want is exposure, regardless of where it comes from or who gets

00:39:15.340 exposed, that once you start unraveling that curtain and pulling it back and start turning

00:39:22.000 the stones over and see what crawls out, you'll see something far uglier than I think we ever

00:39:27.080 imagined. And so I think there's a lot of people in Washington or in positions of power who simply

00:39:32.660 don't want any of that revealed anyhow anyway anywhere because it will ultimately lead to the

00:39:38.760 unraveling of their power i think there's a lot of truth to that and i think that's why you know a lot

00:39:45.240 a lot of people looked at the epstein files and of course we still didn't get all of them plenty

00:39:48.980 of it still redacted that kind of thing but even with what we saw there they said oh well it doesn't

00:39:53.520 have all the explicit sexual innuendo that we thought it was going to have you know a lot of

00:39:58.960 people really invested in the salacious narrative attached to Epstein the idea that Epstein was this

00:40:05.180 you know broker of child you know sexual abuse and these kind of things and he was selling

00:40:09.980 you know eight-year-old boys to ravenous elites you know and that kind of thing and it does seem

00:40:16.180 for sure that Jeffrey Epstein was involved at some level in sex trafficking that very much

00:40:22.240 very obvious he was literally convicted for it in Florida before basically getting a sweetheart deal

00:40:26.840 So we know that that is real. That said, what was interesting in the Epstein files, what a lot of people, I think that with the lack of just straight up Jeffrey Epstein selling, you know, 12 year olds to Bill Clinton, when that wasn't immediately revealed in the Epstein files, many people then use that as a way to dismiss what was there.

00:40:47.300 And what was there, I think, is very much what you are explaining. And again, it's very interesting because a lot of people were really interested in the Epstein files for Epstein's connection with Israel, which I think is obvious and exists. But I don't think it was the only thing he was connected to. It's very clear he was connected to American intelligence, banking cartels, the Rothschilds, the WEF. Yeah, all of these, right? All of these actors.

00:41:12.980 Jeffrey Epstein was a broker for foreign interests and Israel was one among many clients. Maybe he worked with them more than others, but he worked with all of these people. It was in no way an exclusive agent of just Israel. And so I think, again, when people didn't see that direct overarching connection, they then ignored the fact that those files really reveal several interlocking and in many ways very ethnic cartels that were coordinating interests.

00:41:41.340 You had, yes, Israeli interests. You had, but also Chinese interests. You had Middle Eastern interests. You had many interests reflected in those documents. The one thing you didn't really see was American elites fighting for American interests in all of this.

00:41:57.260 It seemed that every other group, every other power block had someone fighting inside the seedy underworld background that existed in the banking world and all these things, except for someone fighting for the United States.

00:42:13.000 And that, I think, is the most revealing part of the Epstein files, that there was all of this backroom dealmaking done.

00:42:19.320 There are all these elites that are corrupt and interacting.

00:42:22.040 They are working for foreign interests, but they're all fighting for their own interests, which is what you would expect, at least at some level, elites to do.

00:42:30.500 And yet, for America, not so much.

00:42:33.640 Yeah, I think if you really dig into the Epstein files, you realize a couple of things.

00:42:39.020 Yeah, there was some sexual nature to it, but that sexual deviance has gone on for a long time in many different ways, long before Epstein.

00:42:48.040 So that isn't even about Epstein, so to speak.

00:42:52.040 But it wasn't even about that sexual nature of it. It was about how people are manipulating each other in this massive global network of elites and how they're trying to gain advantage over this group or advantage over this person or try to influence this particular thing using techniques like bribery and extortion because of sexual deviation.

00:43:12.520 you mentioned you know american interests my belief at this point is there is no such thing

00:43:20.500 as an american interest in this global elite that has taken over the world that they don't

00:43:25.360 care about america they really don't care about any particular country it's transnational it's

00:43:29.500 globalist and what they really care about is the institutions that they represent and profit from

00:43:35.340 and so to look for some american-centric thing i think is a mistake it's not there it doesn't exist

00:43:42.340 I largely agree. Again, I wrote a book called The Total State about how this transnational elite arises and why those institutions become their actual base of power, why they separate away from the countries.

00:43:59.860 Now, interestingly, I think that this is a consequence of scale, that when you attempt to run the world, when you attempt to go beyond the natural boundaries of a republic and you try to operate at a much larger scale, you have to make institutions that then create their own interests.

00:44:19.000 Right. We end up with the principal agent problem and we have a scenario where all of these bureaucrats, all of these people operating inside the institutions are far more interested in the continuation of their own power and maybe even the mission of the institution than they are in the people who was supposed to serve in the first place.

00:44:36.320 And so whenever you grow to a certain size, just like a company, ultimately, you're going to start having this breakdown in incentive structures. And so I guess the question then becomes, is this something that we can address without scaling down?

00:44:52.680 Can we return to a republic, a limited government, without ultimately reducing the size and scope of America itself? Is the mission of America having this post-World War II global empire inevitably tying it to the production of this global elite? Is that why it's turned into basically like this economic zone for the plaything of these different interests?

00:45:16.540 if we somehow found a way to reduce that scope, could we then return to the type of government

00:45:21.960 you're talking about? I think that's a big part of it. And I agree with a lot of your analysis

00:45:27.640 there. I've got a book coming out in August called The Elites Versus Everyone Else, which

00:45:32.680 digs into a lot of those. But if you go back in time and look at how this elitist globalist

00:45:38.180 cabal has evolved, it's largely oriented around a financial nature. When you start to see the rise

00:45:44.340 of the multinational banks, when you start to see the rise of the Federal Reserve Banks or the

00:45:50.320 whatever reserve bank exists in the other countries, when you start to see the rise of

00:45:54.520 the Bank for International Settlements, when you start to see the rise of these NGOs that are not

00:45:59.600 attached to any particular political system anymore, they sort of float by themselves around

00:46:04.480 the world as their own network tied to these financial networks. I agree we have to separate

00:46:11.360 from that. And when you look at the original concept of the founding fathers, the principle

00:46:16.020 of subsidiarity, that you want to invest most of the power in an individual, that was their concept

00:46:22.240 of a sovereign individual. Maybe there's some power in a local community that is above that

00:46:27.280 to plan roads and schools or whatever. Maybe there's a little bit of power in a state to

00:46:31.620 administer the laws of a state. And the federal government was designed to have very little power

00:46:35.880 at all and to actually be fairly separate from the rest of the world. And I think part of where

00:46:41.040 we've gone astray is like in 1944, we decided to take over the World Financial Network and basically

00:46:48.320 replace the British pound with the US dollar as the reserve currency of the world. And that was

00:46:53.900 our way to manage everything going on in the world. And it also forced us to be connected

00:46:59.480 to everything going on in the world. I think that was a terrible mistake. And I don't mean to sound

00:47:05.500 like an isolationist because I believe in free trade and things like that. But I don't believe

00:47:09.600 in these connections to nebulous financial forces around the world. I don't believe in these

00:47:15.640 connections to nebulous non-governmental organizations around the world. And I think

00:47:20.160 we've gotten ourselves into that mess and have lost not only our individual sovereignty, but our

00:47:24.460 national sovereignty along the way. I think there's a lot of truth to that, but it also then

00:47:30.300 makes me ask the next question, which is, at some level, is the liquidity of capital responsible for

00:47:36.900 these breakdowns, is the promise that it brings with scale ultimately one of the issues? Because

00:47:44.080 most of these organizations arise at some level with an argument of economic efficiency. By

00:47:50.040 standardizing transactions across continents or peoples or governments, nations, we can create a

00:47:56.220 guarantor that is a non-state actor. But I don't think there ultimately are guarantors that are

00:48:02.040 non-state actors at scale. And I think that's why we see all of these banks and corporations and

00:48:08.060 NGOs eventually become a government unto themselves, the global governments that you're

00:48:14.280 talking about. Well, they are governments in and of themselves. And this was, as I dug into this

00:48:19.900 whole concept of the elites versus everyone else, this is one of the startling realizations I came

00:48:24.220 to is that the lifeblood of civilization is money. And when you look at who creates and controls

00:48:29.420 money. For instance, it's the banks and the concept of the fractional reserve banking system

00:48:34.780 where they basically create money out of thin air as they establish these loans. That money didn't

00:48:40.700 exist until they created it. They get very rich from the interest on money that actually doesn't

00:48:46.240 really exist. The same thing happened with the Federal Reserve when it was created, where it

00:48:50.740 became the banker for the federal government. The federal government gives it pieces of paper

00:48:55.140 called Treasury bills. And in return, the Federal Reserve creates money out of thin air and puts it

00:49:01.480 in an account for the federal government. That money didn't exist until three seconds before

00:49:06.120 they hit the keyboards. And yet that money now is being flowing through the elites throughout the

00:49:12.560 world, all these organizations, all the people that feed at the trough of the federal government,

00:49:16.640 the bankers themselves who see that as a very profitable opportunity to hold $39 trillion of

00:49:23.320 U.S. debt and charge interest for it, which we taxpayers maybe someday will pay for if there

00:49:28.680 isn't a revolution. But what I've seen throughout the world and throughout history is that the

00:49:33.520 bankers essentially have hijacked the lifeblood of civilization. They create the money, they

00:49:38.160 control the money, they control the interest rates. And with that control over money, you gain

00:49:42.980 control over all the institutions that we're now afraid of. When you travel well, your KLM Royal

00:49:50.200 Dutch Airlines ticket takes you to more than just your destination. It takes you to winding streets,

00:49:56.640 spontaneous detours, and the realisation that neither of you is actually good with directions.

00:50:03.600 And when the final shortcut taken isn't exactly short, our crew is here to give you a trip home

00:50:12.140 that goes just as planned. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines. When you travel, travel well.

00:50:17.800 I think that's true. But again, I think that also could be a function of the nature of capital control, right? Like when money was less influential, when it flowed less freely, when the velocity of capital was much lower, you had, I think, other influences in your society that were less powerful.

00:50:42.260 This is Gatano Mosca's argument about why the United States became an oligarchy, because the reason the Constitution should work, the reason that Montesquieu thought that separation of powers were important, was not that three was some kind of magic number.

00:50:55.000 it's that the different aspects the different branches of government ultimately represented

00:51:00.080 different interests in society and you know finance was only one of them you had the nobility you had

00:51:05.680 the king you had the church you had the common people you had the the you know the the merchants

00:51:10.560 you had the guilds you had all kinds of different you know intermediate social organizations again

00:51:16.180 to go back to a kind of a de toqueville idea that would create these these barriers and the branches

00:51:22.120 were just supposed to represent those the the structure of the constitution itself didn't have

00:51:26.020 any power but as mass democracy kind of consumed the united states we kept expanding the franchise

00:51:32.880 and the power of money to buy votes became more and more obvious basically all of these branches

00:51:40.180 just turned into whoever could buy the most like to the point where now even supreme court justices

00:51:46.020 are largely influenced by current topics of the day and so you you have kind of that natural

00:51:52.920 barrier that we admire that we'd like from the constitution is dissolved in a way because of the

00:51:59.240 dominance of a merchant class the dominance of money in the society and that certainly highlights

00:52:04.140 the bank's power because if you didn't have that level of reliance on you know currency exchange

00:52:10.280 then you would have less of an emphasis on banking power but over and over again we see that banks are

00:52:15.520 far more powerful than kings at the end of the day. And tyrannical governments have to kneel

00:52:19.640 before what many people think of as a function of the free market, even though both of us know

00:52:24.560 it's really not. Well, there's something really nonsensical about the way it's set up right now,

00:52:29.180 because if you look at Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, it says Congress is responsible

00:52:33.680 for the monetary system of the United States. And yet they've outsourced that to the Federal Reserve.

00:52:40.200 And so what it essentially means at the most ridiculous level is that if the United States

00:52:44.980 needs money, it goes to these private bankers and they say to them, I'll give you a treasury bill,

00:52:50.860 an IOU, if you just create money out of nothing and give me that money out of nothing.

00:52:56.280 The federal government could do that just as easily. If we're all about creating money out

00:53:01.420 of nothing, the government could do it directly. We don't need this cartel of bankers who have

00:53:06.380 their thumb on the lifeblood of civilization somehow controlling this process. And I think

00:53:12.220 that's the root of why we've lost control of everything that you're right money is a terrible

00:53:18.120 negative influence in our political system right now but we've also lost control of the monetary

00:53:23.120 system not not just the political system but the monetary systems sure well it's been really

00:53:29.900 interesting speaking with you james i know we didn't stay on the actual topic of christopher

00:53:34.620 nolan very long but i think we had a much more interesting discussion along the way and i'm

00:53:38.340 always happy for things to develop naturally. So I appreciate that. We do have, I think,

00:53:43.080 one question from the audience. Before we go to that, can you tell people where they can find

00:53:48.360 your work? I know you've got a book coming out you just said. Can you tell people where they

00:53:51.720 can look for that? Sure. You can go to my website, which is jameskina.com, or on Amazon,

00:53:58.520 you can find my books. I have a couple that have been out already that are part of a trilogy,

00:54:02.920 2084 American Apocalypse

00:54:05.300 which talks about

00:54:06.560 how and why the United States is going to collapse

00:54:09.260 and then a book called

00:54:11.200 Outcast Island which is a study

00:54:13.480 in human nature about

00:54:15.160 how we're going to put it all back together

00:54:16.780 so you can find those on Amazon

00:54:19.260 Excellent guys, well make sure that

00:54:21.380 you're checking out James' work

00:54:22.960 and let's see what the questions of the people are here

00:54:25.360 real quick

00:54:26.080 Jacob Zendel says

00:54:28.780 8 kids, this guy is a giga chad, great stream

00:54:31.160 as always well yes we always appreciate the blessing of a large family and you certainly

00:54:35.920 deserve credit for having one it's a rare enough thing these days so a blessing when it is seen

00:54:41.420 all right guys we're gonna go ahead and wrap this up once again appreciate speaking with james make

00:54:45.720 sure you're checking out his work if it's your first time on this youtube channel you need to

00:54:49.680 subscribe click the bell notifications all that stuff so you know when we're going live if you

00:54:54.000 want to get these broadcasts as podcasts you need to subscribe to the army mcintyre show on your

00:54:57.780 favorite podcast platform and when you do leave a rating or review it really helps with the algorithm

00:55:02.320 magic head over to amazon and you'll find the second printing of my book the total state it's

00:55:07.200 now out in paperback along with a new chapter so if you want to pick that up you can do that now

00:55:11.380 and while you're there you might as well find james's books as well thank you for watching

00:55:14.740 and as always i'll talk to you next time

The Auron MacIntyre Show - May 29, 2026

Why Christopher Nolan's 'Odyssey' Had to Go Woke ｜ Guest： James Keena ｜ 5⧸29⧸26

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript