The Ben Shapiro Show - October 30, 2018


The Knowledge Of Good And Evil | Ep. 649


Episode Stats


Length

50 minutes

Words per minute

201.00496

Word count

10,134

Sentence count

694

Harmful content

Misogyny

9

sentences flagged

Hate speech

34

sentences flagged


Summary

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

Trump says he might want to end birthright citizenship by executive order. Plus, the President of the United States has now unleashed a new controversy: He says that he may want to sign an executive order getting rid of Birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants.

Transcript

Transcripts from "The Ben Shapiro Show" are sourced from the Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool. Explore them interactively here.
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 President Trump says he might want to end birthright citizenship by executive order.
00:00:03.000 We investigate the nature of anti-Semitism and we talk about the relationship between rhetoric and violence.
00:00:08.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.
00:00:09.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
00:00:15.000 So, every day a new news cycle.
00:00:16.000 There's a lot to talk about today, as well, still more news in the aftermath of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting.
00:00:21.000 Plus, the President of the United States has now unleashed a new controversy.
00:00:26.000 He says that he might want to sign an executive order getting rid of birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants. 0.55
00:00:31.000 We'll talk about the legality of that and the policy considerations and what this has to do with the 2018 elections.
00:00:36.000 But first, let's talk about managing your money.
00:00:38.000 So, as a human who does not have tons of time to manage my own money, I have
00:00:42.000 Advisors who tell me how to manage my money for me.
00:00:45.000 And, you know, I'll tell you, it's kind of expensive.
00:00:47.000 But the reality is you don't need a really expensive financial advisor.
00:00:51.000 What you really need is somebody who's going to help you outsmart average.
00:00:54.000 And that's where Betterment comes in.
00:00:55.000 Betterment is the smart way to manage your money.
00:00:57.000 It's the investing tools for people who refuse to settle for average investing.
00:01:00.000 It's cutting-edge technology combined with human expertise.
00:01:03.000 Here's what it does.
00:01:04.000 It's technology designed to help you make more from your investments
00:01:07.000 Unlimited expert advice designed to help you make smart financial decisions.
00:01:10.000 You don't have time to read all the prospectuses.
00:01:12.000 You need somebody helping you out.
00:01:13.000 And this is what Betterment does.
00:01:15.000 They give you tax-efficient investing strategies that give you an edge with low transparent fees, constant access to information, tools that allow you to track progress toward your goals.
00:01:23.000 So you can always feel like a smart, savvy investor.
00:01:25.000 Sign up today.
00:01:26.000 Get up to one year managed for free.
00:01:28.000 Betterment helps you outsmart average.
00:01:29.000 Investing does involve risk.
00:01:31.000 The Ben Shapiro Show listeners can get up to one year managed for free.
00:01:34.000 For more information, visit Betterment.com slash Shapiro.
00:01:37.000 That's Betterment.com slash Shapiro.
00:01:38.000 You owe it to yourself to invest your money the smart way.
00:01:40.000 Betterment helps you outsmart average.
00:01:42.000 Betterment.com slash Shapiro.
00:01:44.000 So you can get up to one year managed for free.
00:01:46.000 Go check it out right now.
00:01:47.000 All right, so the big controversy of the day, because every day a new controversy.
00:01:51.000 That's the theme of today's America.
00:01:54.000 The President of the United States has now said in an interview that he is interested in signing an executive order that would end birthright citizenship for illegal immigrant children.
00:02:03.000 So here is the way the law currently operates.
00:02:05.000 If you come to the United States for virtually any purpose, unless you are a foreign diplomat,
00:02:10.000 You come to the United States and you have a baby in the United States.
00:02:12.000 That baby is automatically a citizen of the United States entitled to all rights and privileges conferred upon all citizens of the United States.
00:02:20.000 The reason that this is a controversial issue is because nothing in the Constitution actually says that this is the case.
00:02:26.000 Not only does nothing in the Constitution actually say that this is the case,
00:02:29.000 There's pretty good evidence that the framers of the 14th Amendment had no intent to do anything remotely like this.
00:02:36.000 Suggest that just because you come to the United States and then you have a baby here, your baby is now a United States citizen.
00:02:42.000 And this does have some pretty significant costs involved.
00:02:45.000 Right now you have in California, we've seen many stories about this, you've had situations where
00:02:50.000 Legitimate birth tourism is happening.
00:02:52.000 People are traveling to the United States just to have babies in the United States so that their kids become American citizens. 0.57
00:02:58.000 And there's some pretty significant impacts.
00:03:00.000 The Center for Immigration Studies, which is very anti-illegal immigration.
00:03:04.000 They estimate that between 300,000 and 400,000 children are born to illegal immigrants in the United States every single year, meaning one out of every ten births in the United States is to an illegal immigrant mother.
00:03:14.000 All of those children are considered by the executive branch of the U.S.
00:03:17.000 government to be U.S.
00:03:17.000 citizens enjoying the same rights and privileges as the children of U.S.
00:03:22.000 citizens.
00:03:22.000 The population of U.S.-born children with illegal alien parents has expanded rapidly
00:03:27.000 From 2.3 million in 2003 to 4 million in 2008.
00:03:31.000 And that does not include children who are 18 years of age or older, so the actual figure is actually somewhat larger.
00:03:37.000 All of the benefits that are available to American citizens are obviously available to these American citizens.
00:03:42.000 There's a lot of talk about illegal immigration not having a tremendous impact on the American economy.
00:03:46.000 Because illegal immigrants are barred from federal welfare, for example.
00:03:50.000 Their children, however, are not.
00:03:51.000 And this does lead to chain migration because children are now U.S. 0.95
00:03:55.000 citizens and they can sponsor their parents for United States citizenship.
00:03:59.000 The Center for Immigration Studies suggests that many of the welfare costs associated with illegal immigration are due to current birthright citizenship policy.
00:04:06.000 They say greater efforts at barring illegal aliens from federal welfare programs do not reduce costs because the kids are still American citizens.
00:04:14.000 Nationwide, 40% of illegal alien-headed households receive some type of welfare.
00:04:19.000 In some states, the rate is higher.
00:04:20.000 In New York, 49% receive welfare.
00:04:23.000 In California, 48%.
00:04:23.000 Only 19% of households headed by native-born citizens make use of a major welfare program.
00:04:29.000 In other words, illegal aliens who have American citizen children are taking advantage of welfare at exorbitant rates. 0.57
00:04:36.000 And states offer additional welfare benefits as well.
00:04:39.000 This is all according to the Center for Immigration Studies.
00:04:41.000 Again,
00:04:42.000 The L.A.
00:04:43.000 County supervisor estimates that illegal immigration and birthright citizenship cost taxpayers in L.A.
00:04:47.000 County over a billion dollars annually, not including education costs.
00:04:51.000 That's a lot, a lot of money.
00:04:52.000 59% of illegal aliens and their U.S.-born children live in or near poverty.
00:04:58.000 And again, then these kids are able to sponsor their parents for residency in the United States.
00:05:02.000 So there's a lot of talk today about this is racist, this is the Trump administration trying to simply bar people who are differently colored from coming into the United States.
00:05:11.000 No, there are serious economic costs associated with low-income people and poorly educated folks who are illegally immigrating to the United States, coming here, having babies, their kids become citizens, and now their kids are entitled to all of the benefits that American citizenship confers. 0.68
00:05:28.000 So, President Trump suggested today that he could change all of this by executive order.
00:05:33.000 Here's what he said.
00:05:33.000 He said, So, there are a couple of contentions that he makes here.
00:05:56.000 Intention number one, birthright citizenship is bad policy. 0.92
00:06:01.000 I tend to agree with this.
00:06:02.000 I think the birthright citizenship...
00:06:04.000 is bad policy.
00:06:06.000 If you're just coming across the border and having a baby in the United States, that does not mean that you have come in through our legal immigration system and your children are going to be much more impacted, obviously, by their parents than they're going to be impacted simply by force and dint of living in the United States.
00:06:20.000 So, if you're interested in a country that assimilates people to American values, you need people immigrating legally and then having babies here legally. 0.99
00:06:27.000 Now, listen, legal residents of the United States, different story, because legal residents very often are preparing to become immigrants to the United States.
00:06:34.000 So my in-laws, for example, were legal residents to the United States.
00:06:38.000 My wife came here as a child.
00:06:39.000 She came here back and forth until she was 12.
00:06:42.000 I don't know.
00:06:59.000 But her younger brother was born in the United States, and he was an American citizen, as he should have been.
00:07:04.000 His parents were legal residents of the United States.
00:07:06.000 The 14th Amendment essentially guarantees that if you are a legal resident of the United States or a citizen of the United States, your children are American citizens.
00:07:14.000 Which, again, makes a fair bit of sense.
00:07:16.000 Because if you want to make sure that kids are ensconced in the American way of life, you want to make sure that their parents are loyal to the United States government and are loyal to the American Constitution.
00:07:27.000 The same is not true for the children of illegal immigrants.
00:07:29.000 If you just come across the border, have a baby, never go through the legal process, we didn't want you, right? 1.00
00:07:35.000 I mean, there's no evidence that we wanted you.
00:07:37.000 Maybe we do want you, but we don't know.
00:07:38.000 There's no evidence of this.
00:07:39.000 Then suggesting that this inherently is a good idea is kind of foolhardy.
00:07:45.000 President Trump says that we're the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby's a citizen of the United States.
00:07:51.000 That's not true.
00:07:51.000 There are 30 countries across the world that have birthright citizenship.
00:07:54.000 Most of those happen to be in Central and South America.
00:07:57.000 Cuba, Haiti, these are places with birthright citizenship.
00:08:00.000 He is not wrong, however, that in the developed world, we are...
00:08:03.000 Almost unique.
00:08:04.000 And when I say almost, I mean the only other country that has anything remotely like a birthright citizenship category is Canada.
00:08:10.000 So Canada has sort of a birthright citizenship category as well.
00:08:13.000 No country in Europe does.
00:08:14.000 So for all the talk about Europe being open and welcoming to immigrants, the United States' birthright citizenship policy is significantly more open than the European policy.
00:08:23.000 If you come in from Morocco to France, you have a baby in France that does not make your citizen an actual citizen of France. 0.61
00:08:28.000 You have to apply for legal citizenship 0.99
00:08:31.000 In France.
00:08:31.000 So, the key phrase here in the 14th Amendment is subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
00:08:36.000 Here's what the 14th Amendment says.
00:08:37.000 And you're seeing a lot of folks in the media who don't know anything about constitutional law opine on these issues, suggest that the 14th Amendment dictates that children of illegal immigrants are, by necessity, under the Constitution, citizens of the United States.
00:08:50.000 That is not clear.
00:08:52.000 Nor is it correct, I think, under the text of the 14th Amendment.
00:08:55.000 So the 14th Amendment says this.
00:08:56.000 That key phrase is subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
00:08:58.000 Again, I'll read it again.
00:08:58.000 Why is that phrase necessary?
00:09:20.000 If you're just reading that, why do you need the phrase subject to the jurisdiction thereof?
00:09:23.000 Why not just all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States?
00:09:28.000 Obviously, the phrase comes to add something.
00:09:30.000 What does the phrase come to add?
00:09:31.000 What does the phrase subject to the jurisdiction thereof come to add?
00:09:34.000 Well, the people who framed this amendment knew what it came to add.
00:09:37.000 It was to prevent a situation where a foreign diplomat comes to the United States, the ambassador from France comes to the United States, and his wife has a baby, and now the baby is an American citizen.
00:09:46.000 Not only that, it was meant to prevent citizenship for Native American tribes because we were trying to ensure that Native American babies born to Native American tribes were not automatically American citizens because that would be taking sovereignty from the Native American tribes. 0.91
00:10:00.000 The same thing was true of soldiers who were fighting from abroad in the United States.
00:10:03.000 Let's say there was a mercenary force that came to the United States.
00:10:06.000 Some of them brought along their wives.
00:10:07.000 They were fighting the United States government.
00:10:09.000 Their wives had babies in the United States.
00:10:12.000 It was meant to exclude that.
00:10:13.000 Why?
00:10:13.000 Because they were not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States government.
00:10:16.000 Meaning, that if you were subject to the jurisdiction of another government, you were not subject to the jurisdiction of the American government.
00:10:24.000 Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute points out, again, the phrase was originally written to exclude the children of Native American tribes from American citizenship, as well as the children of foreign diplomats and soldiers from abroad fighting on American land.
00:10:35.000 The amendment itself, the 14th Amendment, was specifically designed to reverse Dred Scott.
00:10:39.000 There's an awful, evil Supreme Court case in which an escaped slave named Dred Scott sued for his American citizenship.
00:10:46.000 He said, I'm an American citizen, I was born in the United States, I was freed, I escaped my masters, I'm now in the North, and now I'm free.
00:10:53.000 I'm not going to be returned to slavery.
00:10:56.000 And it abrogates my rights to be returned to slavery.
00:10:58.000 In Dred Scott, the Supreme Court, in evil fashion, found that the Constitution of the United States did not apply to black people born in the United States because they were not covered by the Constitution.
00:11:07.000 The 14th Amendment was designed to reverse that and say that if you're a freed slave, if you're a black person born in the United States, then you are a citizen of the United States.
00:11:16.000 Senator Jacob Hauer, Republican of Michigan, explained the purpose of the subject to the jurisdiction thereof provision back when it was written.
00:11:22.000 He said, This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.
00:11:35.000 It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States.
00:11:41.000 Well, in just a second, we'll get to the Supreme Court jurisprudence on this, which kind of muddies the issue more than the amendment actually does from the very outset.
00:11:49.000 We'll talk about that in just a second.
00:11:50.000 First, let's talk about the fact we're all going to plot.
00:11:52.000 The fact we're all going to plot means that you've got to prepare for that eventuality.
00:11:55.000 If you're not, you're not being a responsible human.
00:11:58.000 You got a family to take care of.
00:11:59.000 There are funeral expenses.
00:12:00.000 You're not going to be earning the same way you were before you were dead.
00:12:03.000 Just a fact of life, unfortunately.
00:12:05.000 So you need life insurance.
00:12:06.000 Life insurance is just something that it is responsible to have.
00:12:09.000 Having life insurance is a pretty good feeling because you know at least that your family is secure.
00:12:13.000 And Policy Genius helps you get it.
00:12:14.000 It's the easy way to get life insurance online.
00:12:16.000 In just two minutes, you can compare quotes from the top insurers to find the best policy for you.
00:12:20.000 And when you compare quotes, you save money.
00:12:22.000 It is indeed that simple.
00:12:23.000 PolicyGenius has helped over 4 million people shop for insurance, placed over $20 billion in coverage, and they don't just make life insurance easy.
00:12:30.000 They also compare disability insurance and auto insurance and home insurance.
00:12:33.000 If you care about it, they can cover it.
00:12:35.000 So, if you've been avoiding getting life insurance because it's difficult or confusing, give PolicyGenius a try.
00:12:40.000 Go to PolicyGenius.com, get your quotes, apply in minutes.
00:12:43.000 You can do the whole thing on your phone right now.
00:12:45.000 PolicyGenius is indeed the easy way to compare and buy life insurance.
00:12:48.000 Again, PolicyGenius.com.
00:12:50.000 Go check them out right now.
00:12:51.000 Let them know we sent you PolicyGenius, the easy way to compare and buy life insurance.
00:12:55.000 Okay, so the Supreme Court has weighed in on birthright citizenship.
00:12:59.000 Kind of, but not really.
00:13:01.000 What I mean by this is there's a line of cases with regard to citizenship that don't actually clarify the issue with regard to children of illegal immigrants.
00:13:08.000 So here's the line of cases.
00:13:10.000 In 1884, there was a Supreme Court case.
00:13:12.000 It's called Elk v. Watkins, I believe?
00:13:15.000 In which the Supreme Court ruled that a Native American born under the jurisdiction of a Native American tribe could not unilaterally make himself a citizen of the United States.
00:13:23.000 So what happened is there was a baby who was born to a Native American family under Native American tribal sovereignty.
00:13:28.000 He said, listen, I don't want to be subject to Native American tribal sovereignty. 0.94
00:13:31.000 And I was born in the United States.
00:13:33.000 I'm a United States citizen.
00:13:35.000 And the court said, no, you don't get to make yourself a United States citizen just because you were born in the United States if your parents were subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign body, namely Native American tribes.
00:13:45.000 This seems to cut against birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants.
00:13:49.000 Illegal immigrants are, in fact, citizens of another country. 0.99
00:13:52.000 And they're subject to the jurisdiction of those other countries.
00:13:55.000 How do we know this?
00:13:55.000 Because under the Vienna Conventions,
00:13:58.000 If an illegal immigrant in the United States from Mexico, say, commits a crime, we have an obligation under the Vienna Convention to let him know about his consular rights.
00:14:06.000 We have to let him know that he can go to his local consulate and that the consulate will provide him services.
00:14:11.000 This was adjudicated in a case called Midian v. Texas.
00:14:14.000 It went all the way to the Supreme Court, in which this guy who murdered someone on American soil
00:14:20.000 Or raped someone?
00:14:22.000 It may have been a rape and murder.
00:14:23.000 In any case, he was not informed of his right to consular access, and this was considered a violation of his rights because he was an illegal immigrant in the United States.
00:14:32.000 So this seems very much in line with that, right?
00:14:35.000 This 1884 case that says, just because you're born in the United States, if you are subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign power, you are not a United States citizen.
00:14:42.000 In 1898, there was another case, and this is the one that proponents of birthright citizenship like to cite.
00:14:47.000 The Supreme Court ruled that Wong Kim Ark, who was a child born in the United States to a legal resident Chinese immigrant couple, was included in birthright citizenship.
00:14:55.000 But again, that was to legal residents.
00:14:57.000 That's more like the case of my parents-in-law and my brother-in-law.
00:15:01.000 He was born in the United States to legal resident parents, and therefore he's an American citizen.
00:15:05.000 Fine.
00:15:06.000 This was not adjudicated.
00:15:07.000 The question of illegal immigrant children was not adjudicated all the way until 1982.
00:15:12.000 We're going to talk about this ruling, which is really the only ruling on record with regard to birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants in just one second.
00:15:19.000 So, the case in 1982 is a very famous case called Plyler v. Doe.
00:15:23.000 It is a wrongly decided case.
00:15:25.000 This case, made famous by a very left Supreme Court,
00:15:29.000 This case basically was about whether the state of Texas could deny educational benefits to children of illegal immigrants.
00:15:35.000 So, kids were born in the United States.
00:15:38.000 They were the children of illegal immigrants.
00:15:40.000 And the question was, do they actually have to be given free public education at the cost of the state?
00:15:46.000 The state of Texas said no.
00:15:48.000 The Supreme Court said yes.
00:15:49.000 That's because it was a leftist Supreme Court.
00:15:51.000 There's no evidence that this is really accurate or this is a good ruling.
00:15:55.000 Justice William Brennan, a very leftist judge, wrote in a footnote, quote,
00:16:09.000 Well, that obviously is bullcrap, okay?
00:16:12.000 We make distinctions along those lines all the time.
00:16:15.000 All the time.
00:16:15.000 We are constantly making legal distinctions between resident aliens who came here lawfully and resident aliens who came here unlawfully.
00:16:22.000 Like, for example, if you're a resident alien and you came here unlawfully, we can deport you, right, under American law. 0.99
00:16:27.000 If you're a resident alien and you came here lawfully, we cannot deport you under American law.
00:16:30.000 At least not without some sort of violation.
00:16:33.000 So this is simply a nonsense opinion.
00:16:34.000 Now, just because it's a nonsense opinion does not mean that it does not have some sort of legal standing.
00:16:39.000 It does.
00:16:40.000 And the fact is that there is legal standing for Plyler versus Doe.
00:16:44.000 What that means is that when President Trump says that he can simply issue an executive order and overrule that Supreme Court ruling or overrule the federal laws that have taken precedent in order to ensure the quote-unquote rights of children of illegal immigrants, that's not correct.
00:17:01.000 Inactive Congress might be able to do it, maybe not. 0.87
00:17:03.000 In any case, it was going to go to the Supreme Court, and that's really what this is all about.
00:17:06.000 President Trump was going to sign an executive order, and then this was going to be litigated all the way to the top of the Supreme Court, at which point the Supreme Court would rule on all this.
00:17:15.000 Now, is Trump really going to do all of this?
00:17:18.000 Who knows?
00:17:19.000 And when I see folks on the left who are very, very upset about Trump talking about executive orders this way,
00:17:24.000 I don't like executive orders this way either.
00:17:25.000 I don't think this is what the executive branch should be doing.
00:17:28.000 The executive branch does not have the power, nor does it have the capacity, to rewrite laws or rewrite the Constitution.
00:17:34.000 I felt that way about Barack Obama rewriting the laws to simply suggest he was not going to prosecute illegal immigrants, and I don't like it when President Trump says he can rewrite the laws with regard to birthright citizenship from the office of the presidency.
00:17:45.000 The president is not a king.
00:17:46.000 The executive branch is not a monarchy.
00:17:48.000 With that said, the same folks who cheered when President Obama said he could unilaterally rewrite law to prevent the deportation of millions of illegal immigrants in the United States, without any change from Congress,
00:18:00.000 Those same people are suddenly finding refuge in the Constitution and in the balance of powers and checks and balances of the American constitutional system.
00:18:09.000 I find that somewhat ironic.
00:18:11.000 Now, what is this really about?
00:18:13.000 Well, the truth is, the President, if he wants to pursue something like this, he does have a Republican Congress.
00:18:18.000 He could push his Congress for a law.
00:18:20.000 He does have a Republican Senate.
00:18:22.000 He could push the Senate for a law.
00:18:23.000 This is really about ginning up the base in advance of the 2018 election.
00:18:27.000 And it ties into what President Trump's key argument has always been with regard to immigration, going all the way back to 2015-2016, which is that we are far too nice about illegal immigration in this country.
00:18:39.000 And that we have to start taking measures and steps to prevent illegal immigration from draining the United States of economic benefit, right?
00:18:46.000 That's been President Trump's contention for legitimately years at this point.
00:18:51.000 It's also connected with his rhetoric with regard to the caravan that is coming up through Mexico.
00:18:56.000 Now, there are a lot of folks who are suggesting that his rhetoric with regard to the caravan is over the top, that his rhetoric with regard to the caravan is not accurate.
00:19:05.000 In some ways it's accurate and in some ways it's not.
00:19:07.000 I want to be as fair as I can to both the president and his critics when it comes to his treatment of this migrant caravan.
00:19:13.000 The migrant caravan is indeed a publicity stunt. 0.95
00:19:16.000 I mean, there's just no question that that's what it is.
00:19:18.000 It's being promulgated and pushed by Central American, Latin American governments.
00:19:22.000 It's being pushed by the government of Mexico, which is allowing migrant caravans to travel toward the United States border.
00:19:27.000 When the president says these are not folks who are eligible for asylum, he is basically correct. 1.00
00:19:31.000 Asylum is for people who are being targeted by a government.
00:19:34.000 It is not for economic migrants who simply want to cross over into the United States in order to take advantage of the economic benefit of living in a rich and powerful country.
00:19:42.000 That said, is it an invasion?
00:19:44.000 It's not an invasion when you walk up to a point of entry and ask for asylum.
00:19:48.000 That does not count as an invasion.
00:19:49.000 An invasion is when you cross the border with a gun, right?
00:19:51.000 That's an invasion.
00:19:52.000 This is not an invasion.
00:19:53.000 And the overwrought rhetoric with regard to illegal immigration is not useful.
00:19:58.000 You can be against illegal immigration.
00:20:00.000 You can point out the demerits of illegal immigration.
00:20:02.000 You can point out that the system is being abused, which it surely is.
00:20:06.000 You can even oppose birthright citizenship on constitutional and
00:20:10.000 Moral grounds.
00:20:11.000 But what you shouldn't do is suggest that the United States is in imminent doom and peril from a thousand people who are walking up to points of entry at the southern border because that does raise hackles in a way that seems inaccurate.
00:20:23.000 You know, alarmism is not something I'm very much in favor of on either side of the political aisle.
00:20:27.000 I'm not going to pretend I haven't engaged in it from time to time, but
00:20:30.000 We need to be at least somewhat circumspect in how we approach these issues, even though I'm generally on President Trump's side of the illegal immigration issue.
00:20:37.000 We'll talk about that in just one second.
00:20:39.000 Plus, I wanna talk about the latest fallout from the Pittsburgh shooting and all of the rest.
00:20:44.000 But first, let's talk about Elizabeth Warren.
00:20:46.000 So, Elizabeth Warren, turns out she's whiter than anyone, anyone on earth. 0.97
00:20:51.000 How do we know?
00:20:51.000 Well, because she took a genetic test to tell us, and then she bragged about how she might be one 1,024th Native American, which really meant Peruvian or Colombian.
00:20:59.000 That was interesting information.
00:21:01.000 You could have similarly interesting information about your own ancestry by going over to 23andMe.
00:21:05.000 Find out whether you're more Native American than Elizabeth Warren.
00:21:08.000 The 23andMe Health and Ancestry Service includes reports.
00:21:11.000 We're good to go!
00:21:37.000 The Deep Sleep Report.
00:21:39.000 That tells you if you're more likely to be an especially deep sleeper.
00:21:41.000 There's a Saturated Fat and Weight Report telling you, based on your genetics, how your weight might be affected by saturated fats in your diet.
00:21:46.000 So you can actually change your diet for the better based on this.
00:21:49.000 Order your 23andMe Health and Ancestry Service Kit at 23andme.com slash Shapiro.
00:21:54.000 That's the number 23andme.com slash Shapiro.
00:21:57.000 23andme.com slash Shapiro.
00:21:59.000 Go check it out right now.
00:22:00.000 Let them know that we sent you.
00:22:01.000 And again, find out whether you are, in fact, more Native American than Elizabeth Warren.
00:22:05.000 Interesting information for everyone to have.
00:22:07.000 Okay, so let's talk about President Trump's rhetoric with regard to illegal immigration and the caravan.
00:22:11.000 Because here's where the news really meets its sort of nexus right now.
00:22:15.000 The left is contending that President Trump's language about illegal immigration and about the migrant caravan is what led to the shooting at a Pennsylvania synagogue in Pittsburgh, the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh.
00:22:25.000 The case that they're making is basically a white supremacist got all riled up about illegal immigration because of President Trump railing against migrants, and then he went and shot up a synagogue.
00:22:34.000 Now, suffice it to say, white supremacists have been shooting up Jewish places of worship and Jewish sites for as long as I can remember.
00:22:41.000 As I mentioned yesterday on the show, in 1991, in my community, a synagogue was firebombed.
00:22:46.000 In 1999, the West Valley JCC was shot up by a white supremacist.
00:22:49.000 That same year, there was a shooting of Orthodox Jews in Chicago by a white supremacist.
00:22:53.000 This sort of stuff is not infrequent.
00:22:55.000 It's not infrequent, and it is a real threat in the United States.
00:22:58.000 But I guess the case is that he wouldn't have shot up this particular synagogue or gone after this particular group, except that he was very angry at the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, which is a group that welcomes refugees into the United States.
00:23:10.000 And so if President Trump weren't using such inflammatory rhetoric, then this shul wouldn't have been targeted.
00:23:17.000 This raises a couple of questions.
00:23:19.000 One,
00:23:20.000 Whether, in fact, his rhetoric, whether inflammatory rhetoric, is connected with violence.
00:23:25.000 And number two, whether it's accurate.
00:23:27.000 So, as far as it's accuracy, Shep Smith was on Fox News last night saying there is no invasion.
00:23:31.000 He was getting all sorts of plaudits from folks on the left for saying this.
00:23:34.000 Here was Shep sort of railing against the language being used with regard to the migrant caravan.
00:23:39.000 Tomorrow is one week before the midterm election, which is what all of this is about.
00:23:47.000 There is no invasion.
00:23:49.000 No one's coming to get you.
00:23:51.000 There's nothing at all to worry about.
00:23:54.000 When they did this... Okay, now the question is whether people really believe, whether people really believe that when Trump says there's an invasion taking place, whether he means this in sort of generalized fashion, meaning that waves of illegal immigrants are coming across the border.
00:24:09.000 Thousands at a time, and that this is having an impact on our culture, it's having an impact on our economics, it's having an impact on our labor force, or whether they actually believe the most inflammatory version of this, which is that there are legitimately people who are coming in to destroy the United States with ill intent.
00:24:24.000 I'm not a fan of this sort of rhetoric of invasion because I don't actually think that illegal immigrants are invading the country.
00:24:31.000 I think they're people who are coming here for the most part to work.
00:24:33.000 That doesn't mean we have to accept them.
00:24:35.000 It doesn't mean that it's in the United States' interest to simply allow people to cross the border illegally.
00:24:41.000 I don't, I'm not fond of the sort of rhetoric, you know, the sort of scare tactics that people are bringing in criminality and disease.
00:24:47.000 Like we actually have to look at the statistics and see whether that is true or not.
00:24:51.000 With that said, with that said, I am deeply worried that people are connecting rhetoric to violence in a way that actually risks censorship.
00:25:00.000 So, let's be frank about the connection between rhetoric and violence.
00:25:04.000 It is true that speech is related to action.
00:25:07.000 It is.
00:25:07.000 You listen to my show.
00:25:08.000 Presumably, if you agree with me, you are now more likely to get involved in politics in a way that I would agree with.
00:25:14.000 That's why I do the show every day.
00:25:15.000 I'm trying to get people to think in a different way or to examine the issues a little bit differently.
00:25:19.000 And that's normal.
00:25:20.000 That's the way politics works.
00:25:21.000 We do it every day with our children.
00:25:23.000 We do it every day with our friends, with our co-workers, with our spouses.
00:25:26.000 Speech is related to action.
00:25:27.000 With that said, the attempt by folks on the left to connect every action of speech with violence, and to suggest that speech is connected with violence, is a way of shutting down speech.
00:25:38.000 Of course, more nasty rhetoric is more likely to create more nasty action.
00:25:44.000 That is a question really of us being circumspect, but I really don't think that that's what we ought to be debating in the how we speak question.
00:25:53.000 First of all, I will note that the left's utter refusal to acknowledge that the left hasn't been in any way responsible for the heightening of rhetoric over the past 10 years,
00:26:05.000 That's irresponsible.
00:26:06.000 That's irresponsible.
00:26:06.000 Not only is it irresponsible, it's polarizing and it actually leads to radicalization.
00:26:11.000 Radical rhetoric leads to radicalization.
00:26:12.000 You know what else leads to radicalization?
00:26:14.000 Being called a radical by the other side unjustifiably.
00:26:17.000 That also leads to radicalization.
00:26:19.000 All we've got right now is everybody pointing fingers at everybody else and nobody looking at themselves and saying, OK, what can I do to change the tenor and climate of the political debate?
00:26:28.000 And what the left has been doing with regard to Trump's talk on caravans and migrants has been saying, well, Trump is causing violence.
00:26:34.000 I don't actually think that's the biggest problem with what President Trump is doing.
00:26:38.000 And the same thing is true on the left.
00:26:40.000 When Bernie Sanders says millions will die because of Republican health care,
00:26:43.000 I don't think that the big problem with that is that somebody is going to go and shoot up a congressional baseball game.
00:26:48.000 I don't hold Bernie Sanders responsible for that.
00:26:51.000 I think the problem with the sort of radical polarized rhetoric, the kind of inflamed rhetoric, the problem with that sort of thing is that when something terrible does happen,
00:27:00.000 When somebody does something that is truly evil, when somebody goes and shoots up a synagogue, for example, instead of us unifying and saying, all of that is bad, we are now more likely to see the other side as responsible for a crime that we all agree is evil.
00:27:14.000 The social fabric relies on us looking at each other as though we are friends and not enemies.
00:27:18.000 But if our politics is all about how we are enemies, then when something bad happens, the first reaction is to blame it on your enemy.
00:27:25.000 And when that happens, the social fabric actually decays.
00:27:27.000 That's the biggest problem that I see here.
00:27:29.000 You know, when Cass Sunstein, he writes a piece for Bloomberg today in which he says that Trump's hateful speech raises the risk of violence, the one-sided focus on President Trump's speech as opposed to the left's speech is counterproductive.
00:27:44.000 If we want to say let's all take it down, let's all take it down a notch, this I agree with.
00:27:48.000 But if you want to say that Trump is uniquely responsible for the tone and tenor of American political debate right now,
00:27:54.000 That's just not accurate.
00:27:55.000 It's just not accurate.
00:27:57.000 And you know it's not accurate.
00:27:58.000 I mean, legitimately, in the last 24 hours, a Republican Party headquarters in Volusia County in Florida, the windows were shot out.
00:28:07.000 Here's footage from that.
00:28:09.000 Okay, so the idea that violent rhetoric is only happening on one side is just a lie.
00:28:12.000 There's another problem with suggesting that rhetoric is deeply connected with violence, and that is the compulsion to censorship.
00:28:35.000 So there is a threat in saying that rhetoric is directly connected with violence.
00:28:40.000 Here's the threat.
00:28:40.000 The threat is that people will then say, okay, let's restrict the rhetoric.
00:28:44.000 Let's restrict the rhetoric.
00:28:45.000 And that's the move that's being made in, for example, Europe.
00:28:48.000 It's being made, right now I'm broadcasting from Vancouver.
00:28:50.000 It's a move that's being made in Canada.
00:28:53.000 In Europe, and there's a case that's being wildly undercover, in Europe, there's an amazing, amazing case in which a woman was fined for criticizing the Prophet Muhammad.
00:29:04.000 This is the description of the case from The Atlantic.
00:29:08.000 Grimwood writes,
00:29:21.000 The host seemed awfully open-minded, I thought, given how humorless jihadists tend to be about the Prophet.
00:29:25.000 When the lights went up and the program began, I mentioned the child molester issue.
00:29:28.000 The host remained true to his word, neither bursting into rage nor chiding me for my impertinence.
00:29:32.000 Around the same time, a woman referred to as E.S. 1.00
00:29:35.000 was convicted in Austria for, in effect, not phrasing her identical curiosity in the form of a question.
00:29:41.000 On Thursday, the European Court of Human Rights upheld her 2011 conviction for disparagement of religious precepts, a crime in Austria.
00:29:49.000 The facts of what E.S.
00:29:50.000 did are not in dispute.
00:29:51.000 She held seminars in which she presented her view that Muhammad was indeed a child molester.
00:29:54.000 Dominant Islamic traditions hold that Muhammad's third wife, Aisha, was six at the time of their marriage and nine at its consummation.
00:30:00.000 Muhammad was in his early fifties.
00:30:02.000 The Austrian woman repeated these claims. 0.62
00:30:04.000 The Austrian court ruled she had to pay 480 euros or spend 60 days in jail.
00:30:08.000 And the ECHR ruled Austria had not violated her rights.
00:30:11.000 This is the consequence of restricting speech because you believe that speech either leads to violence or is violence.
00:30:17.000 There are consequences on the other side of this equation.
00:30:19.000 It's not all about rhetoric and violence are connected, therefore take down the rhetoric.
00:30:24.000 There is a problem with saying rhetoric and violence are connected and therefore we must restrict the rhetoric.
00:30:29.000 So let's be very careful about what it is that we are calling for here.
00:30:32.000 We have to be very careful, because if we're not careful, then the impact of that is going to be a lot worse than the actual disease itself.
00:30:40.000 Okay, in just a second, I want to talk about antisemitism, about the media's radical rhetoric.
00:30:46.000 We're going to get to all of that in just one second.
00:30:48.000 But first, let's talk about the software that your company uses.
00:30:51.000 When you're dealing with a real head-scratcher about which software to use, you need a go-to person on call.
00:30:56.000 But when it comes to software,
00:30:57.000 Those people are SoftwareAdvice.
00:30:58.000 When it comes to picking the right software for your business, SoftwareAdvice has done all the research for you.
00:31:02.000 Their team of advisors can point you in the right direction, so you can start working more effectively right now.
00:31:07.000 And it's absolutely free.
00:31:08.000 Just go to softwareadvice.com slash ben.
00:31:10.000 Answer a few short questions about your business.
00:31:12.000 You're connected with an advisor to discuss the best software options for your needs.
00:31:16.000 You can talk to an advisor since like 10 minutes or less.
00:31:18.000 It doesn't matter what profession you're in.
00:31:20.000 You need better software.
00:31:21.000 You're still using like Excel 1997.
00:31:24.000 That's not going to cut it.
00:31:25.000 You need something better.
00:31:26.000 If you're an entrepreneur, if you work solo, software advice is a great way to get an expert opinion even without the resources of a big company.
00:31:32.000 So to end the software struggle right now, go to softwareadvice.com slash ben to get started.
00:31:37.000 These experts are ready to be your on-call go-to team right now.
00:31:39.000 That's softwareadvice.com slash Ben.
00:31:42.000 Connect with an advisor for free.
00:31:43.000 Again, that's softwareadvice.com slash Ben.
00:31:47.000 Talking to an advisor takes just 10 minutes and you can make your business significantly more efficient with pretty much a simple phone call.
00:31:52.000 Go to softwareadvice.com slash Ben right now.
00:31:55.000 Go check it out.
00:31:56.000 Okay, so I do want to talk about the one-sidedness of the media's rhetoric talk.
00:32:00.000 Because, again, I think that that is actually exacerbating the divisions in our society in an extraordinarily serious way.
00:32:06.000 I'm going to talk about all of that.
00:32:07.000 You're going to have to subscribe over at dailywire.com.
00:32:10.000 All you have to do is go over to dailywire.com.
00:32:13.000 $9.99 a month gets you the subscription.
00:32:14.000 You see the rest of my show live, the rest of Andrew Klavan's show live, the rest of Michael Knowles' show live.
00:32:18.000 Plus, you get the latest episode of Another Kingdom early.
00:32:20.000 So we have this amazing new kind of animated series or illustrated series.
00:32:25.000 It's based on Andrew Klavan's book, Another Kingdom.
00:32:28.000 He's in the second volume.
00:32:29.000 Michael Knowles reads it, and believe it or not, isn't bad at what he does.
00:32:31.000 So, go check that out.
00:32:32.000 The visuals are really beautiful.
00:32:34.000 And you can get that if you subscribe.
00:32:35.000 You can't get it until Friday in audio version, and you can't really get it all visually until you subscribe.
00:32:40.000 So, go check it out right now for $9.99 a month.
00:32:42.000 Also, for $99 a year, you get this.
00:32:44.000 The very greatest in beverage vessels.
00:32:46.000 See it here in my hand?
00:32:47.000 Of course you don't, because when I'm on the road, it goes invisible.
00:32:49.000 That's one of the great things about the Leftist Tears hot or cold tumbler.
00:32:53.000 You don't have to worry about security, because you just hit the button on the back and boom!
00:32:56.000 It's gone.
00:32:57.000 And then it reappears as soon as I get back to my studio in Los Angeles.
00:33:00.000 You get all of those things for $99 a year.
00:33:03.000 Also, please subscribe over to iTunes or YouTube.
00:33:05.000 Leave us a review.
00:33:06.000 It really does help us over at iTunes.
00:33:07.000 Five-star reviews are the only ones that are accepted.
00:33:09.000 You wanna help us in the rankings?
00:33:10.000 You wanna help us defeat all of the other podcasts in the rankings?
00:33:13.000 Be victorious!
00:33:14.000 Then you have to leave us a five-star review.
00:33:15.000 Go check that out.
00:33:16.000 Also, this week we have an amazing Sunday special.
00:33:18.000 Tucker Carlson stopped by.
00:33:20.000 It's so good.
00:33:21.000 It's gonna be so good.
00:33:22.000 So go check that out right now.
00:33:24.000 We are the largest, fastest-growing conservative podcast in the nation.
00:33:32.000 I want to talk about the polarization and one of the reasons that lying about the level of rancor on the other side while whitewashing yourself is a bad idea.
00:33:41.000 I have two kids.
00:33:42.000 I have a kid who's 4 1⁄2 and I have a kid who's 2 1⁄2.
00:33:44.000 The 4 1⁄2-year-old is just a wonderful, beautiful girl.
00:33:49.000 She definitely stands up for herself.
00:33:50.000 The 2 1⁄2-year-old has now decided he's had enough.
00:33:53.000 And so he's going to harass her every waking minute of every single day.
00:33:57.000 And we as parents have to decide exactly how we're going to treat this.
00:34:00.000 Now, the easy response is that when he pushes her and she screams in his face, which is basically every hour or two in our house right now, do I simply punish him or do I punish her also?
00:34:13.000 The answer is what I do is I say to him, you need to go in your crib right now, right?
00:34:16.000 You get a timeout.
00:34:17.000 You're not allowed to push your sister.
00:34:18.000 And I say to her, Leah, when you have a problem, I need you to come and talk to me about it.
00:34:23.000 I need you to actually talk to me.
00:34:25.000 I'm standing right here.
00:34:26.000 You don't need to scream in his face.
00:34:27.000 There's an authority figure to which you can appeal.
00:34:30.000 And screaming in his face or pushing him back is not the proper solution to this problem.
00:34:34.000 Is he more responsible than she is?
00:34:36.000 You bet.
00:34:36.000 Of course he is, right?
00:34:38.000 He's pushing her.
00:34:39.000 But that doesn't mean that she gets to act like a brat.
00:34:41.000 She doesn't get to scream in his face. 0.98
00:34:43.000 She doesn't get to push him back.
00:34:44.000 She doesn't get to do any of those things. 1.00
00:34:45.000 Right now in American politics, here's how things are going.
00:34:48.000 People on the left see themselves as my daughter.
00:34:52.000 People on the right see themselves as my daughter.
00:34:54.000 Everybody feels like they are being pushed by the other side.
00:34:57.000 And they feel like it's okay to scream back in that person's face.
00:35:00.000 Nobody is saying, yeah, I'm being pushed by the other side, and that's bad.
00:35:03.000 But also, I shouldn't scream in anybody's face and push back.
00:35:05.000 Maybe what I should do instead is appeal to the broader moral authority of the American people and not act like this.
00:35:11.000 You know, the media have been saying for a long time, President Trump needs to stop saying the press are the enemy of the people.
00:35:15.000 Now, President Trump, I got a lot of blowback yesterday because I tweeted out that President Trump should not say that the media are the enemy of the people.
00:35:21.000 A lot of folks on the right say, no, no, no, he means the fake news are the enemy of the people.
00:35:26.000 I would buy that narrative, except that President Trump has never been very clear about what constitutes the fake news.
00:35:31.000 Now, there's stuff I think is fake news, right?
00:35:34.000 People who are quote-unquote journalists, who are actually just opinion makers.
00:35:39.000 There are actual headlines that are wrong.
00:35:42.000 That stuff is fake news, but the president has been a blunderbuss in his use of the term fake news.
00:35:46.000 If there's a poll he doesn't like, it's fake news.
00:35:48.000 If there's a story that he doesn't like, it's fake news.
00:35:50.000 He's never actually been very good about objectively saying what is fake news and what is not, so I'm not going to buy that exact excuse.
00:35:57.000 The press, though, say, you know, the president shouldn't say that Trump... Trump shouldn't say that the press are the enemy of the people.
00:36:03.000 That's true.
00:36:04.000 Also true.
00:36:04.000 The media should not portray President Trump as the enemy of the people, which they have been doing literally since the day he was elected and before.
00:36:10.000 They say he is a Russian agent.
00:36:11.000 They say that he's a traitor to the country.
00:36:13.000 They say that he's doing all of this for his own personal enrichment without any evidence to this point.
00:36:18.000 They say all of these things, and then they think, okay, well, our hands are clean.
00:36:21.000 Our hands are clean.
00:36:22.000 And you can see this sort of attitude.
00:36:24.000 You want to know why folks are angry at the media on the right?
00:36:26.000 This is one of the reasons that folks are angry at the media on the right.
00:36:28.000 Here's Jim Acosta going after Sarah Huckabee Sanders on this basis.
00:36:32.000 Can you state, for the record, which outlets that you and the President regard as the enemy of the people?
00:36:41.000 I mean, the President is going to say that fake news media are the enemy of the people, and if you're going to stand there and continue to say that there are some journalists, some news outlets in this country that meet that characterization, shouldn't you have the guts, Sarah, to state which outlets, which journalists are the enemy of the people?
00:37:02.000 Okay, and really what she should say is, I mean, what Trump thinks is, you, Jim Acosta, right?
00:37:07.000 I mean, that's what's obviously running through Sarah Huckabee Sanders' head.
00:37:10.000 She's stuck between a rock and a hard place because, as the press secretary, you don't want to start labeling people enemy of the people.
00:37:15.000 It's why Trump shouldn't be using the phrase.
00:37:18.000 But if you're going to talk about fake news, right?
00:37:20.000 I mean, I think that Jim Acosta is not a good journalist.
00:37:23.000 I think just as objectively speaking as I can be, I think Jim Acosta loves him some Jim Acosta.
00:37:28.000 He sees himself as an activist more than as a journalist.
00:37:30.000 And it's obvious to everyone.
00:37:32.000 CNN then tweeted out in response to Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who said that the, that Sarah Huckabee Sanders went after the media. 1.00
00:37:39.000 She said, you guys are polarizing the debate because you're suggesting that President Trump is responsible for shootings and bombings.
00:37:44.000 CNN Communications said no, Press Secretary.
00:37:47.000 CNN did not say Donald Trump was directly responsible for the bombs sent to our office by his ardent and emboldened supporter.
00:37:52.000 We did say that he and you should understand your words matter, every single one of them.
00:37:55.000 But so far, you don't seem to get that.
00:37:57.000 Okay, that's a lie.
00:37:58.000 CNN has been saying for a week, for a week, that Trump should be taking responsibility for the bombing.
00:38:03.000 I mean, I read you the chyrons, like, last week.
00:38:08.000 We're good to go.
00:38:20.000 This president has radicalized so many more people than ISIS ever did.
00:38:24.000 I mean, the way he talks, the way he... The way he... That is... That's just... It's impossible to say that.
00:38:30.000 The way he talks, the way that he allows these people... The way he winks and nods to these groups, the way he says, I know I'm not supposed to say it, but I'm...
00:38:39.000 What she says right there is insane.
00:38:40.000 It's so insane she actually had to come back and quasi-apologize for it.
00:38:43.000 But let's not pretend that the heated rhetoric and the escalation of moral calumny on the other side, that that hasn't taken place on both sides because it absolutely has.
00:38:51.000 Okay, in just one second I want to talk about anti-Semitism because I think that there's a deeper debate to be had right now in the wake of the Pittsburgh shooting about what anti-Semitism is and what's driving anti-Semitism on the far right and on the mainstream left.
00:39:03.000 Because it really is this, right?
00:39:04.000 Okay, it's not the mainstream right that has embraced anti-Semitism.
00:39:07.000 It is the mainstream left, which has embraced Keith Ellison and Linda Sarsour, has embraced BDS, has embraced an anti-Israel position that amounts to anti-Semitism.
00:39:15.000 Not every opposition to Israeli policy is anti-Semitism.
00:39:18.000 I've opposed many Israeli policies, but that does not amount to anti-Semitism.
00:39:23.000 What does, is if you are embracing policies that lead to the destruction of the Jewish state.
00:39:27.000 And you don't care about that.
00:39:28.000 That is embracing the boycott-divest-sanctions regime, for example.
00:39:32.000 That is anti-Semitism.
00:39:34.000 If you want the Jewish state to be destroyed by treating it like unlike any other state on planet Earth, then this means that you're engaged in anti-Semitism.
00:39:42.000 But the left and the right see anti-Semitism as two very different things.
00:39:45.000 And I'm not even sure it's a left-right divide.
00:39:47.000 I think that it's a correctly understanding anti-Semitism versus not correctly understanding anti-Semitism divide.
00:39:53.000 Here are the two ways of seeing antisemitism.
00:39:55.000 One, antisemitism is a unique evil in world history.
00:39:58.000 It is not like any other form of bigotry.
00:40:00.000 Antisemitism is based on a generalized conspiracy theory whereby anything that happens in the world that is bad is the responsibility of the Jews.
00:40:07.000 So, if you are a capitalist and you don't like the communists, it's because the communists are Jews that you really have a problem. 0.91
00:40:13.000 And if you're a communist and you don't like the capitalists, the real problem is Goldman Sachs and all those Jews who are at the top of the heap. 1.00
00:40:18.000 And if you are an internationalist and you don't like nationalism, well, it's those evil Jews in Israel who are responsible for the breakdown of the global order. 1.00
00:40:25.000 And if you're a nationalist who doesn't like internationalism, it's the globalist cuck Jews who are responsible for everything in the world. 1.00
00:40:32.000 In other words,
00:40:33.000 Antisemitism is a solution to every problem for the conspiracy-minded person.
00:40:39.000 The Jews are responsible for everything. 1.00
00:40:41.000 Antisemitism is based on the idea that there is this powerful nefarious group that is running things, undermining your society.
00:40:47.000 And that is why antisemitism is so chameleonic.
00:40:51.000 It's so changeable.
00:40:52.000 Racism against black folks has basically taken one form in the United States, saying that black folks are inferior.
00:40:58.000 That's really what racism in the United States has been about against black folks.
00:41:02.000 And it's evil.
00:41:03.000 It's evil.
00:41:03.000 But a conspiracy theory about folks running the world is a different sort of evil than an evil that says that people are genetically inferior.
00:41:11.000 And not the same thing.
00:41:13.000 So, theory number one is that anti-semitism is a unique evil in world history where you attribute everything bad happening in the universe to the Jews.
00:41:21.000 And, in essence, anti-semitism is sort of an anti-God position because if you're a God-based person, what you believe is that the world is the way that God made it.
00:41:30.000 And the Jews are not responsible for the world the way that God made it.
00:41:33.000 If you are anti-God, then you say, okay, I have to look for some nefarious force behind world events.
00:41:38.000 That will be the Jews. 1.00
00:41:39.000 And this is the thread that holds true, whether you're talking about Christian antisemitism during the Crusades, it's the Jews who are undermining our society because they killed Christ, or you're talking about Islamic antisemitism today, it's the Jews who are behind the state of Israel, and who are the sons of dogs and pigs and monkeys, and they're manipulating world events against us, it's behind Nazi antisemitism and communist antisemitism, this generalized conspiracy theory. 0.93
00:42:02.000 And it gets violent, because if you believe the Jews have power, then that means the Jews must be stopped. 0.73
00:42:06.000 That's what drove this white supremacist in Pittsburgh.
00:42:08.000 If you look at his feed, it was all about the Jews have too much power, the Jews must be stopped. 1.00
00:42:12.000 So anti-Semitism is a difference in kind, not just a difference in degree.
00:42:16.000 The second theory of anti-Semitism is that all anti-Semitism is just basically a small version of generalized bigotry.
00:42:25.000 Bigotry comes in all forms.
00:42:26.000 Anti-Semitism is just bigotry against Jews.
00:42:29.000 That's sort of the perspective that Barack Obama was pushing in the aftermath of the shooting in Pittsburgh.
00:42:33.000 He said,
00:42:42.000 Okay, so the idea is here that anti-semitism is just another iteration of intersectional racism.
00:42:49.000 That basically there's this dominant society that hates minority groups.
00:42:52.000 Jews are a minority group and that's why the dominant society hates them. 0.99
00:42:55.000 The first version of anti-semitism suggests that America is a success story.
00:42:59.000 Because America is the most tolerant country for Jews in history, in world history, except for the state of Israel itself.
00:43:05.000 It is the most tolerant country
00:43:07.000 For Jews ever, right? 1.00
00:43:09.000 So that means that America is a success story specifically because America does not see this grave ill that is plaguing the world as the Jews or anything like that, that speaks to America's bastion of liberty. 0.94
00:43:21.000 The version of antisemitism as a sort of subset of generalized bigotry
00:43:27.000 That version of anti-semitism, that really suggests that America is a bad place.
00:43:33.000 Because even if the United States is different, it's only different because the Jews are white. 1.00
00:43:38.000 The reason that anti-semitism isn't bad in the United States is because Jews are more powerful and they are higher on the intersectional hierarchy of power than other groups. 0.95
00:43:46.000 Now, what this leads to on the left is a belief that anti-Semitism is actually less important than other forms of bigotry, specifically because the left sees all bigotry as rooted in hierarchies of power.
00:43:56.000 So if Jews are powerful, if Jews are rich, if Jews are tolerated in the United States, that means anti-Semitism is less important than other forms of bigotry.
00:44:05.000 And that means that you can attribute Jewish success not to freedom, not to the good of the United States, not to the good of the world.
00:44:12.000 Instead, you can attribute lack of anti-Semitism to Jews gaining power themselves. 0.76
00:44:16.000 Because Jews can actually be outstripped in the intersectional hierarchy by other forms of racism.
00:44:21.000 And so the intersectional version of what antisemitism is actually can lead to more antisemitism.
00:44:27.000 Because what it suggests is if the Jews escape antisemitism, if the Jews succeed in Israel, if the Jews succeed in the United States, that is an effect of them climbing that intersectional power hierarchy and thus leaving behind their membership in the group victimhood clan. 0.63
00:44:42.000 Right?
00:44:42.000 In the group victimhood clique.
00:44:44.000 And this is why the left-wing version of antisemitism is not only wrong, it is actually counterproductive and leads to more antisemitism and has been mainstreamed into the Democratic Party today.
00:44:53.000 It's actually a grave, grave problem.
00:44:55.000 Understanding antisemitism is the key to fighting it, and I fear that a lot of folks don't actually understand what antisemitism is, or if they do, they're ignoring it.
00:45:02.000 Okay, time for a quick thing I like, and then a thing that I hate, and then we'll be out of here.
00:45:06.000 So,
00:45:07.000 Things that I like.
00:45:09.000 I sort of pine for a Dane American when our ideals were the same.
00:45:14.000 Our ideals used to be that if you came to the United States to engage in the freedoms and liberties provided by the United States Constitution, if you came here and you embraced what we were, then you were part of our country.
00:45:27.000 And this has always been sort of my guiding light.
00:45:29.000 I've said a thousand times, really a thousand times, that people who are born in the United States, who don't believe in the foundational ideals of the United States,
00:45:37.000 I would trade those folks for people who live outside the United States and who want to come in and join those ideals in a heartbeat.
00:45:42.000 Because ideals matter to me a lot more than where you were born.
00:45:46.000 Ideals matter to me.
00:45:47.000 Race doesn't matter to me.
00:45:48.000 Ethnicity doesn't matter to me. 0.94
00:45:49.000 Ideals matter to me.
00:45:50.000 This used to be what everyone agreed on, left and right.
00:45:54.000 And now it seems like it's being abandoned on the left.
00:45:56.000 And in response, some on the right are abandoning it too.
00:45:59.000 And that's really gross and terrible.
00:46:00.000 When I say that folks on the left used to embrace this,
00:46:02.000 You know, Frank Sinatra was a mainstream member of Hollywood.
00:46:06.000 He was a JFK supporter, obviously.
00:46:07.000 He was a Roosevelt supporter.
00:46:09.000 Well, during World War II, very end of World War II, the studios cut a 10-minute little movie.
00:46:16.000 With a very, very young Frank Sinatra called The House I Live In.
00:46:19.000 And it was basically an ode to what America should be.
00:46:25.000 And the plot of this little 10-minute movie is basically there's a Jewish kid in a neighborhood and kids start taunting him and chasing him.
00:46:30.000 And Frank Sinatra stops them from taunting and chasing the Jewish kid and then he sings a song called The House I Live In. 0.73
00:46:34.000 This was the closing number for Sinatra for years.
00:46:36.000 He believed that this was what America was all about.
00:46:39.000 Here's a little bit of The House I Live In, which
00:46:42.000 was written by real leftists, real leftists in the United States who still believed in the at least aspirational ideal that America's people could all live together if we abided by certain notions of freedom and liberty.
00:46:56.000 What is America to me?
00:47:00.000 A name?
00:47:02.000 A map?
00:47:03.000 Or a flag I see?
00:47:06.000 A certain word?
00:47:09.000 Democracy, what is America to me?
00:47:24.000 A house I live in, a plot of earth, a street, a grocer and a butcher,
00:47:34.000 And the people that I meet The children in the playground The faces that I see All races and religions That's America to me
00:47:59.000 I played the whole thing, but it's, you know, it's worth listening to again.
00:48:03.000 There was a time in America where we all sort of agreed on this stuff, but apparently that time is long gone in favor of intersectional identity politics on one end and then a sort of responsive reactionary identity politics on the other.
00:48:15.000 Okay, time for a couple of things that I hate.
00:48:21.000 Okay, so thing number one that I hate.
00:48:22.000 So I don't know what Hollywood is doing.
00:48:25.000 I really don't know.
00:48:26.000 So apparently there is a new movie that's going to come out about a story of a refugee from Syria who is trying to, or I guess she was fleeing Egypt, and she was trying to flee Egypt for Sweden, and she was shipwrecked along the way, and she basically held her two small children as she was shipwrecked.
00:48:43.000 So Steven Spielberg and J.J.
00:48:45.000 Abrams are co-producing this movie, and they have tapped Lena Dunham to write this.
00:48:50.000 Lena Dunham.
00:48:51.000 Even folks on the left are going, um, what?
00:48:53.000 Like, why is Lena Dunham doing this? 0.99
00:48:55.000 Like, why did they tap Lena Dunham for it? 0.63
00:48:57.000 It just shows you that if you're on the left, there's no such thing as an actual talent judgment.
00:49:02.000 It's pretty amazing.
00:49:03.000 I mean, you're pretty much able to get away with virtually anything on the left.
00:49:08.000 I mean, Lena Dunham has a very, very poor track record in public, from allegedly abandoning dogs to the stuff that she wrote in her autobiography about molesting her sister.
00:49:17.000 You know, she's still getting shots in Hollywood because everyone gets a shot in Hollywood so long as you are of the proper...
00:49:23.000 As long as you're of the proper political persuasion.
00:49:27.000 So, that's pretty bad stuff.
00:49:30.000 And people wonder why Hollywood is out of touch.
00:49:33.000 Hollywood is deeply, deeply out of touch, obviously.
00:49:36.000 Okay, well, you know, I've talked a lot about things that I dislike today, so I think I'm gonna stop it there.
00:49:41.000 We're in Vancouver tonight.
00:49:42.000 I'm speaking at a Jewish community event tonight.
00:49:45.000 I'm speaking at the University of British Columbia tomorrow, so we have a lot of big events coming up.
00:49:48.000 I'm really looking forward to talking here and hopefully not getting arrested.
00:49:51.000 So that'll be my goal here is to say as many true things as I can without getting arrested because, hey, this is Canada.
00:49:56.000 It's like the upside down out here.
00:49:58.000 It's weird.
00:49:59.000 But we'll be back tomorrow with all the updates.
00:50:01.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.
00:50:01.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
00:50:06.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Senya Villareal, executive producer Jeremy Boring, senior producer Jonathan Hay.
00:50:12.000 Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, and our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
00:50:16.000 Edited by Alex Zingaro.
00:50:18.000 Audio is mixed by Mike Carmina.
00:50:20.000 Hair and makeup is by Jesua Alvera.
00:50:21.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire Ford Publishing production.
00:50:24.000 Copyright Ford Publishing 2018.