The Charlie Kirk Show - Reimagining a Better GOP with Will Chamberlain

00:00:00.000 Today, my conversation with Will Chamberlain from Human Events, humanevents.com.

00:00:00.000 Hey, everybody.

00:00:06.000 We talk about the GameStop craze.

00:00:07.000 We talk about the future of the Republican Party, tech censorship.

00:00:10.000 You're going to love his analysis.

00:00:12.000 I want to thank you for supporting us at charliekirk.com/slash support.

00:00:17.000 Our team right now is editing episodes up very late.

00:00:21.000 We almost run 24-hour shifts.

00:00:22.000 So, when you guys support us at charliekirk.com/slash support, you make our messaging, our content able to be delivered to you.

00:00:32.000 And so, thank you for that.

00:00:33.000 CharlieKirk.com/slash support.

00:00:35.000 Email us your questions, freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:00:37.000 Will chamberlain is here.

00:00:39.000 Buckle up, everybody.

00:00:40.000 Here we go.

00:00:42.000 Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.

00:00:43.000 Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.

00:00:45.000 I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.

00:00:49.000 Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.

00:00:52.000 I want to thank Charlie.

00:00:53.000 He's an incredible guy.

00:00:54.000 His spirit, his love of this country, he's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created.

00:01:01.000 Turning point USA.

00:01:03.000 We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.

00:01:11.000 That's why we are here.

00:01:15.000 Hey, everybody, welcome to this episode of the Charlie Kirk Show.

00:01:18.000 We're having a couple technical difficulties, but we're still connected.

00:01:22.000 I guess that's one of the few things that's a positive of all the technology.

00:01:26.000 Besides that, everything's terrible.

00:01:27.000 Speaking of technology, I want to, we're here with Will Chamberlain from HumanEvents, humanevents.com.

00:01:32.000 Make sure you check out their website.

00:01:34.000 I write a weekly piece for them.

00:01:36.000 I'm actually finishing up a piece right now.

00:01:38.000 They do a phenomenal job.

00:01:39.000 And Will is the man behind that.

00:01:42.000 Will, welcome back.

00:01:44.000 Good to be with you, man.

00:01:45.000 Looking forward to your piece.

00:01:47.000 Yes, thank you.

00:01:48.000 So, Will, I do not have Twitter.

00:01:52.000 I do not have Instagram.

00:01:53.000 So, I just read articles.

00:01:54.000 I know it's strange.

00:01:55.000 Sometimes people send me tweets, but I actually have been wanting to see your commentary on this GameStop thing because I can imagine that we are thinking so similarly in this.

00:02:06.000 Can you walk us through what your thought is on this entire GameStop hedge fund populist revolt?

00:02:14.000 So, you know, I have an interesting take on this.

00:02:16.000 And I'm, because, and, and the thing is, I've actually been a short seller in the past, right?

00:02:20.000 And this is actually going to go.

00:02:22.000 I short sold Tesla stock at one point before it blew up.

00:02:25.000 So I didn't get, you know, blown up personally by that.

00:02:29.000 But I've been a short seller before and I'm reasonably familiar with the marketplace.

00:02:33.000 Basically, what happened is, you know, from a, you know, in terms of the broad, you know, narrative scenario, you have a bunch of individual investors collecting together and actually pushing up the price of GameStop stock to the point that a number of hedge funds convinced that the company would go bankrupt are now themselves facing bankruptcy.

00:02:55.000 And there's an element of those short-selling hedge funds were cocky, had it coming, weren't doing good risk management.

00:03:03.000 There's an element of kind of a populist, you know, us versus the hedge funds.

00:03:06.000 What are the hedge funds actually doing that's productive or good debate?

00:03:11.000 And there's also, you know, a question of like, well, is short selling bad generally?

00:03:15.000 Like I saw in Tucker Carlson, the idea that short selling should be banned generally.

00:03:19.000 And I, and I actually, you know, it's easy to like, I think let's go back maybe 10 years to the housing crisis.

00:03:25.000 I still remember when short sellers were kind of seen as this, this kind of the, you know, the anti-hero or the sort of, you know, underdog against the entrenched financial powers.

00:03:35.000 You know, I don't know if you guys, if you've seen Moneyball, the movie.

00:03:38.000 Oh, not Moneyball, sorry, the big short, the big short.

00:03:40.000 Moneyball, yeah, Moneyball is the baseball film with Brad Pitt.

00:03:43.000 Right, right, right.

00:03:44.000 But the same author.

00:03:45.000 This is also very relevant.

00:03:46.000 It's a great film too, but yes.

00:03:48.000 Yeah, agreed.

00:03:49.000 But it's the big short that's relevant here.

00:03:50.000 And, you know, the idea is that you had these really renegade, isolated, Just a few hedge fund managers that figured out the housing market was going to collapse, that it was an entire, it was all BS, and they bet against it and made a lot of money.

00:04:05.000 And they're the protagonists of that story.

00:04:08.000 They're heroic.

00:04:08.000 Now, we've come 10 years later, this story comes up, and it's the hedge fund short sellers that are really the bad guy, the villain.

00:04:15.000 And the hero is the people pumping up GameStop stock to send the short sellers into the increase.

00:04:22.000 And so, you know, the question is: what's different about each of these two scenarios?

00:04:28.000 It's like, well, you know, in the case of, if you look back to the big short, the people who were saying the housing market is going to crash were really iconoclastic.

00:04:38.000 They were taking a very brave stand with their own money and it completely against the dominant narrative.

00:04:43.000 And the narrative about GameStop was a whole bunch of dominant big hedge fund managers taking a very, very small company that was, you know, in hard times.

00:04:53.000 Everybody knows it's in hard times and trying to drive that company to bankruptcy.

00:04:56.000 So it's just a different nature of what the short sellers were actually doing.

00:05:00.000 One that is the one person who's standing up in a sea of conformity and saying, no, This housing market is fake.

00:05:08.000 It's based on massive fraud and we should see it come down.

00:05:12.000 And while everybody else, all CNBC, is saying the other going the other way.

00:05:16.000 And this time it's like the short sellers and everybody targeting GameStop is part of the establishment, part of CNBC, and it's going the other direction.

00:05:24.000 So it's interesting from that dilemma.

00:05:26.000 I think the right take is not short selling is always bad because there is a valid role for short sellers as the people who are out there looking for and policing fraud.

00:05:35.000 I think that that's the best example of, you know, the housing market is a classic example of that.

00:05:39.000 There was massive housing market fraud.

00:05:41.000 A whole bunch of people were benefiting and the short sellers were the ones putting their own capital at risk to call that out and try and stop the fraud in its tracks.

00:05:51.000 But when the short sellers are instead bullying a small company into bankruptcy, that's not good anymore.

00:05:58.000 That's not helpful.

00:06:00.000 That's not really necessarily societally productive.

00:06:03.000 So that's point one.

00:06:05.000 And then I have more on the risk analysis side.

00:06:07.000 I mean, this hedge fund this hedge fund completely blew risk analysis 101.

00:06:13.000 They apparently sold short more than 100% of the company, right?

00:06:18.000 So if the market cap of the company is a couple billion dollars and they're $3 billion short, then they're doing what's called naked short selling.

00:06:26.000 I'm trying to remember the exact mechanism by which that happens, but normally in a short sale, you have to borrow the shares in order to then sell them.

00:06:34.000 And then you have an obligation to repay them at some other point.

00:06:37.000 I think naked short selling is effectively just making a bet on the stock price that it will go down.

00:06:44.000 And the problem was, I think somebody else explained it, that by short selling so much of the company, by borrowing so many shares, it meant that there were not that many free shares available to be bid on.

00:06:56.000 And somehow it meant that a small number of people kind of trying to pump the stock could trigger a massive escalation in price and therefore a squeeze on the short sellers.

00:07:04.000 And that happens because short sellers can be forced to repurchase the shares.

00:07:09.000 Think about it, for example.

00:07:11.000 Say you buy a stock and you're just all you do is just spend your own money, you buy a stock.

00:07:15.000 The most you can lose is the amount of money you put in, right?

00:07:17.000 The stock could conceivably go to zero and you just lose your money.

00:07:20.000 If you sell a stock short, you are borrowing that stock and then selling it on the market.

00:07:25.000 You hold the capital in the interim, but you have this lingering obligation to repurchase the stock, which means your loss is theoretically infinite.

00:07:34.000 Like the stock could go to the moon and maybe you short sold the stock at $50 or $10 in the case of GameStop, and you're having to rebuy every one of those pieces of stock at $350, $400.

00:07:45.000 Because of that, you're always on a margin account if you're selling a stock short, which means that you can be forced to repurchase your shares if your broker no longer believes that you are capable of being meeting, you know, making good on whatever your obligation is.

00:08:00.000 But yeah, so that's essentially why they're in so much trouble.

00:08:03.000 Like all these hedge funds failed risk analysis 101, got in a position where they could be blown out and forced to cover and lose a huge amount of money based on this bad short position.

00:08:15.000 Well, and so Will, what I'm trying to understand, though, is just how the creative destruction worked together to make this possible.

00:08:23.000 It seemed that millions of people quickly participate in it, participated.

00:08:28.000 But if I were to, if I'm reading this correctly, it was less about making money and it was more like, no, you're not going to get rid of GameStop just for doing this all over again.

00:08:38.000 It felt more of a point of challenging incumbent financial institutions more than here's a way to make a quick buck, which I'm sure a couple of people were rallying behind that.

00:08:52.000 Yeah, I think there's sort of this weird stubbornness of, no, you're not going to bully GameStop out of existence and you're not going to bully us into agreeing with you that the company should go bankrupt.

00:09:03.000 And I think that's a sort of novel, again, it's due to the kind of novelty of this particular short-selling situation where you have a bunch of, you know, you have a sort of weak, you know, financially, you know, weak company that everybody knows is financially weak, but that still has a lot of like positive feeling among the younger generation.

00:09:21.000 Like I went to GameStop.

00:09:22.000 I'm sure I bought video games.

00:09:24.000 Yeah, I did too.

00:09:25.000 And I think that's also where AMC and BlackBerry came in.

00:09:28.000 It's like there were this, it's this Gen Z millennial nostalgia that converted into market defense.

00:09:34.000 Like we'll keep defending these companies and keeping them going, even if they don't look good right now.

00:09:34.000 Right.

00:09:40.000 But I mean, that's what like, you know, think about what that's actually what private equity investors do all the time.

00:09:44.000 They sort of look for undervalued companies and buy them.

00:09:47.000 Like Warren Buffett with sees candies.

00:09:50.000 He does, this is exactly what happens.

00:09:52.000 Right.

00:09:54.000 And so, and, and when you have, I mean, and suddenly this sort of, again, as we talked about, the sort of rationale of short seller as hero or short seller as what's the, what's the word I'm really looking forward?

00:10:05.000 Not even villain, but just I'm trying to think of contrarian.

00:10:09.000 The short seller is contrarian, right?

00:10:11.000 I think that's the big difference.

00:10:12.000 You know, in the housing market, the short sellers were the contrarians standing up for what they believe was the truth in the face of the world.

00:10:19.000 In the GameStop case, that's not the establishment wisdom was GameStop is doomed.

00:10:23.000 And really the contrarian position was actually, no, this company is going to be successful.

00:10:28.000 And I think that that's a good way to look at, you know, if short sellers stop being contrarian and start the establishment trying to bully a small company into bankruptcy, maybe they're not actually doing that much of significant societal value.

00:10:44.000 With the ever-increasing numbers of makes and models such as Fiat, Kia, Pacifica, X-T5, it is now impossible to stock all the parts you need in a traditional chain storefront.

00:10:54.000 Why endure often pointless or seemingly intimidating questioning and wait while the counterman orders the parts on his computer, choosing only brands his warehouse happens to carry?

00:11:04.000 You have computers with access to rockauto.com at home and in your pocket.

00:11:09.000 One reason to repair and maintain your cars is to save money that you can then use for other important things like mortgages or food.

00:11:17.000 Why would you then choose to spend 30, 50 or 100% more for the exact same auto parts at a chain store or new car dealership?

00:11:25.000 Chain stores have different price tiers for professional mechanics and do-it-yourselfers.

00:11:29.000 Rockauto.com prices are the same for everybody and are reliably low.

00:11:34.000 Rockauto.com always offers the lowest prices possible rather than changing prices based on what the market will bear like airlines do.

00:11:42.000 Rockauto.com is for everybody and does not require membership or account login.

00:11:47.000 Rockauto.com is a family business serving auto parts customers online for 20 years.

00:11:52.000 Go to rockauto.com to shop for auto parts and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.

00:11:57.000 They have everything from engine control modules and brake parts to tail lamps, motor oil, and even new carpet.

00:12:02.000 Whether it's your classic or daily driver, get everything you need in a few easy clicks delivered directly to your door.

00:12:07.000 The rockauto.com catalog is unique and remarkably easy to navigate.

00:12:11.000 Quickly see all of the parts available for your vehicle and choose the brands, specifications, and prices you prefer.

00:12:18.000 Best of all, prices at rockauto.com are always reliably low, and the same for professionals and do-it-yourselfers.

00:12:24.000 Why spend up to twice as much for the same parts?

00:12:27.000 Go to rockauto.com and see all the parts available for your car or truck.

00:12:31.000 Write Charlie Kirk in their How Did You Hear About Us box?

00:12:34.000 So they know we sent you.

00:12:35.000 Amazing selection, reliably low prices.

00:12:38.000 All the parts your car will ever need, rockauto.com.

00:12:44.000 So walk me through what you think this tells us politically.

00:12:48.000 It tells us, do you think that there's a deeper point here?

00:12:51.000 Do you think that this might be a harbinger of things to come?

00:12:54.000 Or is this this kind of a fun little episode in the latest of a day trading craze post-lockdowns?

00:13:01.000 Well, I think it's, I mean, it's yet another example of how social media in general can upend different spheres of human activity, right?

00:13:10.000 So, I mean, politics is one area that's been upended by social media.

00:13:14.000 I mean, that's, you know, the election of Donald Trump and the development of the new nationalist conservative movement.

00:13:20.000 And nobody in the establishment per se saw it coming.

00:13:23.000 It felt it was a way that social media provides a sort of locus and a meeting point for people to collect and then act collectively that didn't exist before.

00:13:33.000 And so they were able to do that in politics, which is obviously one place where collective action can create change, but another place where collective action can create changes is the financial markets.

00:13:42.000 And so this is sort of a just an I think it's another instantiation of how social media changes the world broadly.

00:13:49.000 And so can you talk about the response?

00:13:52.000 As we predicted, federal regulators got involved, politicians, media companies, all because millennials and Gen Z folks were putting in their money to try to say AMC BlackBerry and GameStop.

00:14:05.000 We're going to try and keep it alive and try to stick it to the man, if you will.

00:14:08.000 But the institutional response has been unbelievable from many of these actors and many of the power sources.

00:14:17.000 Can you help us unpack that?

00:14:18.000 Yeah, so I mean, I saw a lot of reporting that not only was there, I mean, so there was a massive institutional response both from governmental actors and major private actors to try and stop what was happening to these hedge funds.

00:14:33.000 Citadel, which I'm actually not familiar with exactly what their operation is, but they're just a massive financial operation and an investor in Melvin Capital, which was the most prominent public short seller of GameStop.

00:14:46.000 They apparently made a call to Robinhood, who they are actually the biggest customer of, and told them, hey, maybe you should stop trading in, maybe you should stop this whole nonsense where you're letting your users engage in market manipulation to screw us.

00:15:02.000 And then you also, there were rumblings on Twitter that Janet Yellen, too, was involved in making calls and connecting people.

00:15:08.000 And she's a person who's taken $800,000 in speeches from Citadel and a total of millions for paid speeches from these various Wall Street banks.

00:15:16.000 And it sort of immediately showed, I think, what the nature of the Biden administration really is.

00:15:21.000 You know, you had this sort of fake populism when Biden tried to pretend he was like the scram candidate and Trump was the Wall Street candidate.

00:15:29.000 I remember that.

00:15:29.000 And I'm just like, look at where your donations come from.

00:15:31.000 They come from Wall Street.

00:15:32.000 You're outraising him there like nine to one.

00:15:34.000 There's a reason for that.

00:15:37.000 And if you remember, I think also that Chinese professor who gave that speech about how, you know, our old friends are now in power now because, you know, our old friends are Wall Street and Wall Street has Biden's ear.

00:15:48.000 I think we're seeing.

00:15:50.000 And so that's almost more notable itself than the sort of uprising against the short-selling hedge funds, which is just how quickly the Biden administration revealed itself as the tool of Wall Street.

00:16:02.000 And I argued that if the Republican Party was smart, which they aren't, they would have seized on this opportunity.

00:16:02.000 Yeah.

00:16:09.000 They would have been able to win over millions of young people that saw in real time a system that was already manipulated, but they say you can't further manipulate this system.

00:16:20.000 And look, the trust in the institutions is already eroding.

00:16:24.000 It's eroding day by day, week by week, month by month.

00:16:28.000 Normal people do not trust the system, the educational system, the media system, and definitely not the financial system.

00:16:35.000 And Trump was just the latest chapter in all of that.

00:16:38.000 It just kind of, it manifests itself in different ways.

00:16:42.000 And this, we call it kind of populist energy.

00:16:45.000 I think that's fine.

00:16:46.000 I think that's a good filler word.

00:16:47.000 Go back to the election of 1896 with William Jennings Bryan, who kind of kicked off this century and nearby, nearly a century and a half of populism, where he got us out of kind of the post-Civil War finger pointing and kind of got us into talking about a lot bigger issues.

00:17:03.000 And what I think we're seeing here, though, Will, and this is something you've been talking about, and I'm trying to build out a thesis around is that, you know, 1896 to about 1910, you had William Jennings Bryan, President McKinley, then he obviously got shot, and Teddy Roosevelt.

00:17:18.000 And we kind of successfully transitioned from the farms to the factories.

00:17:23.000 And it was kind of that agrarian to industrial transition.

00:17:26.000 And not every country was able to do that.

00:17:28.000 Russia, for example, was not able to successfully transition from an agrarian-based economy to an industrial economy without a Leninistic style figure rise up.

00:17:38.000 We had our own version of that, a lot less, less deadly, Woodrow Wilson, obviously, but we had that kind of progressive moment.

00:17:46.000 But my concern is that we are now in that next major economic change.

00:17:53.000 And it's not anything even close to like when the internet was developed or when smartphones came out.

00:17:58.000 It is a completely different economy that will disenfranchise more people than the Industrial Revolution did with old family farms.

00:18:06.000 And I'm talking about a different way of accumulating capital, a different way of starting businesses, a different way of communicating where for us, we'll be able to survive.

00:18:13.000 You know, we understand how to work these things.

00:18:15.000 We know how we're on top of the curve, but I'm afraid even other people in our generation will not be able to survive, even with the tech savviness that they might have where they grew up around it.

00:18:27.000 Can you talk about this kind of new economic system?

00:18:30.000 Whether we like it or not, it's coming through that's no different than the agrarian to the industrial transition.

00:18:36.000 Right.

00:18:36.000 I mean, you end up with, I mean, I think there's much more of a winner-take-all nature to the modern internet economy than there was to, you know, I mean, I think the closest thing would be something like the early railroads, which had similar, which created similar economy problems.

00:18:51.000 Which was the same sort of thing.

00:18:52.000 Yeah.

00:18:53.000 I mean, and, you know, one of the things I did when researching, you know, kind of regulating big tech is one of the big moments of national regulation that just had this bipartisan support was when they decided to regulate the early railroads because those early railroads had monopolies.

00:19:08.000 And I mean, think of it, you're the only railroad from New York to Chicago.

00:19:10.000 You control the entire means of Leland Stanford.

00:19:14.000 You're getting taxed.

00:19:15.000 Yeah.

00:19:15.000 Right, exactly.

00:19:16.000 Like you're getting taxed.

00:19:17.000 No, I mean, you're so big and so important and so dominant to something everybody needs that guess what?

00:19:22.000 There's a societal interest at stake in how you run your company and you don't just get to do whatever you want.

00:19:28.000 Like that's that was the decision that, and that was a bipartisan, there was no meaningful disagreement.

00:19:32.000 That was a massive bipartisan act that regulated the railroads and prevented reduced some of their power.

00:19:38.000 And so I think we're now transitioning into some of these winner-take-all type markets.

00:19:42.000 Like I look at Facebook and Twitter as having this dominant, this dominance in their relative spheres.

00:19:48.000 Google, obviously, I mean, I think we talked about a couple of weeks ago how Google and Apple combined have 98 or 99.8% of the mobile operating system market.

00:19:58.000 And so because of, you know, this sort of the winner-take-all effect of everybody, everybody in the world having a smartphone, everybody being able to use, you know, these two companies dominating the operating system and having essentially control of that gateway that we're all using.

00:20:15.000 Yeah, regulation is going to be inevitable by someone because there's only so much power we'll allow those companies to accrue.

00:20:22.000 And I think, and also that has downstream effects on everybody's life generally, where, you know, if you have a few winner, you know, companies that won these massive competitions and have dominant control over their markets, you know, that impacts, I mean, it impacts the way startups end up working.

00:20:40.000 But it also means that there's just, there's a lot less, I guess, you know, kind of what you might call middle class career work, the sort of work that I think people found, you know, I think Tucker's talked about this, but the sort of, you know, kind of union work, but also just normal middle class class work to be done.

00:20:58.000 And so I think that's the economic dislocation that we're going to, we are experiencing.

00:21:02.000 We're going to experience more of.

00:21:04.000 And, you know, how our politicians deal with it is going to determine whether or not we have real radicals come into power.

00:21:11.000 Well, and what, you know, there's a starting probably around the financial crisis in 08, Obama was kind of the first person to benefit from this sort of populist outrage.

00:21:22.000 And he didn't do it all because of him.

00:21:24.000 He had charm.

00:21:24.000 He had charisma, but he just happened to be the right political party at the right time when there was just Republican fatigue.

00:21:31.000 He ran on a lot of very popular reforms that actually never ended up happening, such as transparency in government, restricting Wall Street.

00:21:39.000 And the next thing you know, he has Timothy Geifner as his treasury secretary.

00:21:44.000 There's just this kind of repeated pattern from Obama where he was able to really benefit from a lot of that populist energy.

00:21:52.000 Trump would obviously be another variation of that, but we have the Tea Party movement, the Occupy Wall Street movement.

00:21:57.000 But I think when history is written here, and we have to take a step back and look at this from more of just kind of a decade snapshot and less from just kind of a day-to-day snapshot, like what does 2010, 2020 tell you?

00:22:09.000 It shows you that through different points of outrage and different points of concern, normal people are trying to get their leaders' attention.

00:22:21.000 And they've been doing it clumsily, but I'm just think about this 30 years from now when the historians look at this period of time.

00:22:27.000 What is 2010 to 2020 going to tell you?

00:22:30.000 It's going to show you the Tea Party movement, the Occupy Wall Street movement, Trump, MAGA, and all of a sudden, this entire now new economic populace, or I don't know if GameStop will make it into that sort of history.

00:22:44.000 We'll see how significant it is. 0.97

00:22:46.000 But what concerns me, though, and where I think that the leaders have terribly underestimated where this can go is a president like Biden is actually the manifestation of what normal people hate the most, is that he is a pathological liar. 0.96

00:23:05.000 He's a corporate type.

00:23:08.000 He's whatever deal that can be cut to give him the most amount of permanent power, he will do it.

00:23:12.000 He's not ideological in that sense.

00:23:14.000 And for him, he knows the greatest threat to his political power comes from Cortez and Talib.

00:23:18.000 So he says, okay, I'm going to go ban fracking and that'll keep him off me for two weeks, right?

00:23:22.000 Or I'm going to go support impeachment.

00:23:25.000 So that his biggest political calculus, his political calculus, which is not incorrect, it's just selfish and it's immoral, is that the left wing has the greatest chance of preventing him from staying as president.

00:23:39.000 With that being said, though, Will, is where this goes next will go one of two ways.

00:23:45.000 It's either the Republican Party is going to decide to become a Teddy Roosevelt party and actually get very serious about the robber baron and trench corporate interests and care about small C conservative values, or we're going to see a Bolshevik revolution in this country that will terrify everyone.

00:24:02.000 And do you agree with that? 0.73

00:24:06.000 Yeah, I think that's right.

00:24:08.000 I mean, it reminds me of something Tucker said about if you think Trump is scary, like, what do you think will happen next?

00:24:13.000 Or the people who are trying to be like, you know, criticize Josh Hawley, who I think is a great Republican and a great senator.

00:24:20.000 And also, I mean, I'm reminded of, you know, even a few weeks ago, you know, I work as senior counsel for the Internet Accountability Project.

00:24:27.000 You know, we fight big tech's abuses.

00:24:29.000 And, you know, there was some letter sent by some kind of the classic think tank bigwigs in DC on the conservative side that was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, we can't use antitrust against these big tech companies.

00:24:40.000 Got to protect competition.

00:24:42.000 Got to do all that.

00:24:43.000 And I'm just like, these people need to, you know, it's not, it's not 2010 anymore, guys.

00:24:48.000 It's not 2005.

00:24:49.000 It's 2021.

00:24:51.000 And these companies are oppressing your donors, right?

00:24:54.000 And they are oppressing the base of the party that you are a part of.

00:24:59.000 And you're sitting here doing their bidding.

00:25:02.000 Why?

00:25:03.000 Because they because they get paid, right?

00:25:05.000 I mean, it's like, do you take money from George Soros?

00:25:08.000 No, stop taking money from Google.

00:25:10.000 Like, you know, that seems really straightforward.

00:25:14.000 Like, Google's not on our side.

00:25:17.000 They censor our users.

00:25:18.000 They oppress our, they, you know, oppress our base.

00:25:21.000 No, don't take their money.

00:25:22.000 Stop it.

00:25:26.000 Are you guys sick of all the cancel culture?

00:25:28.000 Stand with one of the fighters, Mike Lindell, right now.

00:25:31.000 I want to talk to you about how MyPillow has changed so many people's lives.

00:25:34.000 I know people that use MyPillow, made in America, by the way, and they say they're sleeping better, they're a better person, and it's just a game changer.

00:25:42.000 For a limited time, Mike is offering his premium MyPillows for his lowest price ever.

00:25:46.000 You can get a queen-size premium MyPillow for $29.98, regular $69.98, and that's $40 savings.

00:25:53.000 Kings are $5 more.

00:25:55.000 Not only are you getting the lowest price ever, $29.98 for a queen-size premium, but Mike is extending a 60-day money-back guarantee to March 1st, 2021.

00:26:04.000 So right now, support the good guys, support the people that are trying to cancel.

00:26:07.000 Go to mypillow.com and click on the Radio Listener Square and use the promo code Kirk.

00:26:12.000 You will also get deep discounts on MyPillow products, including the Giza Dream bedsheets, the MyPillow Mattress Topper, and MyPillow Towel Sets.

00:26:20.000 Or call 800-876-0227 and use promo code Kirk.

00:26:24.000 Support Mike Lindell.

00:26:26.000 He's a good American.

00:26:27.000 He's fighting hard.

00:26:28.000 Go to mypillow.com, promo code Kirk.

00:26:34.000 There's a two-part argument on the tech side.

00:26:37.000 First of all, we must understand that they have created monopoly in a space that is rather new, no different than Carnegie and Rockefeller.

00:26:47.000 And they've been able to create this incumbency based purely on computing power.

00:26:53.000 And that is an arena that we're still trying to figure out.

00:26:56.000 We're still trying to figure out server space and how to compete against it.

00:27:00.000 And any competition they have, they buy up at a massive, at a massive multiple. 0.97

00:27:07.000 And so they have economic dominance and they also treat us like garbage. 0.98

00:27:11.000 They suppress us. 0.98

00:27:12.000 They go through ideological manipulation.

00:27:15.000 And my fear, Will, is that if we do not create some form of a bipartisan agreement like the railroads to go after these companies and go after them quickly, I'm not really sure where that's going to lead.

00:27:31.000 Yeah, I worry, I worry very much about it.

00:27:33.000 I've been worrying about it for 40 years.

00:27:36.000 I was really aggressive about pushing Republicans to act in 2018 to even, I think I started a White House petition to get them to protect digital speech in the public square back in 2018, got 100,000 signatures for it.

00:27:49.000 But, you know, it's hard to get everybody out of their entrenched habits.

00:27:52.000 Now, that being said, I think, you know, the Republican Party's got two years to figure out, okay, like, what are we going to be for?

00:27:59.000 And what are we going to do?

00:28:00.000 Exactly right.

00:28:02.000 And the answer can't be, it's like, oh, well, Trump's gone.

00:28:05.000 Now, we could ignore all those populist concerns.

00:28:07.000 Clearly, you know, we just need to go back to, you know, Mitt Romney Republicanism and everybody will be fine with that.

00:28:12.000 No, no, no, actually.

00:28:15.000 Liz Cheney's about to find out really, you know, when she decides that she's going to respectfully decide for family reasons not to run for her seat in the House of Representatives again.

00:28:25.000 She's going to be the first to find out.

00:28:26.000 It's like, actually, no, the party's changed and you need to get with the program.

00:28:32.000 If the Republican Party came out and said, we are for small business, not big business, if we are for entrepreneurs, not kleptocrats, and we are for choice and markets, but not manipulation, and we are for the creation of a family. 0.95

00:28:48.000 And by the way, we're totally against this woke industrial complex crap, right? 0.99

00:28:54.000 Against, I mean, just so if you come out with just a sword and just every day, just a metaphorical sword and just say this stuff is a bunch of garbage. 0.97

00:29:01.000 But then you also say, look, we'll work with anyone to say that maybe it's not a good thing that the Louis Vuitton guy is worth $150 billion, right?

00:29:10.000 Bernard Arnault or whatever.

00:29:13.000 I mean, what did he do in the last calendar year that made your life better?

00:29:17.000 You know, he makes all of his products in mainland China.

00:29:20.000 He's a half French citizen, spends some time here, whatever.

00:29:24.000 He's just a good manifestation of really, if we're going to have a market system that rewards ingenuity and entrepreneurship and good ideas, what the heck did the Louis Vuitton guy do to make himself 70, Will, $70 billion richer just this year?

00:29:40.000 Well, I mean, it's the same.

00:29:41.000 It's a different form of status signaling, right?

00:29:43.000 You know, the woke industrial complex is status signaling through its intellectual framework, right?

00:29:49.000 Like we are better than you, we are more woke than you.

00:29:51.000 And then they're also signaling they're better, you know, they're wealthier than you because it's those same people going out and buying Louis Vuitton purses.

00:29:58.000 That's exactly right.

00:30:00.000 Like that's, that seems maybe, you know, why, you know, perhaps that's not as valuable.

00:30:05.000 That said, I mean, okay, it's Louis Vuitton.

00:30:07.000 Like if people want to pay for the branding, it's a free country.

00:30:10.000 They're not, that's, that's not the first thing on my list of big problems, but I get where you're coming from, right?

00:30:15.000 But no, the point is that, look, I could go through Zuckerberg has another $80 billion in net worth, right?

00:30:20.000 The Google people have another $30 billion.

00:30:24.000 Billionaires have added $500 billion to the net worth over the last year.

00:30:29.000 And conservatives' unwillingness to even talk about rising wealth inequality is a really serious issue.

00:30:36.000 It was like a really big issue.

00:30:36.000 Yes.

00:30:38.000 And look, I get it.

00:30:39.000 The most liberating thing that I've ever done is I wrote in a piece of paper saying, I can challenge markets now.

00:30:48.000 You see, when you grew up in the conservative movement, we did, we've talked about this before, Will, in 2010, 2011, 2012, no different than the 10 Commandments, we as conservatives learned markets can never be wrong.

00:31:00.000 We must always praise and worship wealth creation at all costs.

00:31:03.000 And look, 95% of the time, I completely sympathize with that.

00:31:07.000 I really do.

00:31:08.000 You know, when I go to my local coffee shop, I don't want them to be regulated.

00:31:11.000 I think they should be able to have a second, third, fourth, or 10th coffee shop.

00:31:15.000 But when you have economies of scale, when you're dealing with hundreds of millions of people and you're in the data surveillance capitalism business, and okay, I'm going to challenge my preconceptions a little bit, right?

00:31:25.000 Like, like, I mean, you're not the wrong coffee shop, right?

00:31:25.000 Right.

00:31:28.000 Like, Robin Hood.

00:31:29.000 Okay, what is what is Robin Hood's business model?

00:31:31.000 They charge almost nothing for their trades, and then they, what they do, how they make money, they sell that data that they get from bringing in all the retail traders and getting this huge market data.

00:31:31.000 Right?

00:31:41.000 They sell it to the hedge funds.

00:31:42.000 It's like, oh, but we're the ones democratizing trading.

00:31:45.000 We found out actually, no, they're not.

00:31:46.000 We, you know, we're actually the product, not the customer.

00:31:49.000 That's right.

00:31:50.000 You know, and that's, I mean, there's so many different examples of that.

00:31:52.000 And it's true that I think in particular, watching this happen on the right, this is especially why the whole like going back to the Martha Orthodoxy and insisting that we're just all wrong isn't going to work.

00:32:03.000 You and I, we grew up with this stuff, right?

00:32:06.000 Like we, we were all the books, Will.

00:32:08.000 Yeah, all I read my Rothbard.

00:32:10.000 I read my Mises.

00:32:11.000 I read my Milton Friedman.

00:32:12.000 I've got it all.

00:32:13.000 Hayek, I read all of it.

00:32:14.000 Ayn Rand, Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged.

00:32:17.000 You know, I read my Bostiat, and I like some of it.

00:32:20.000 I think it's actually really intellectually stimulating.

00:32:22.000 But then I also need to leave Narnia and come back to America.

00:32:26.000 Right.

00:32:27.000 Like, I don't know why.

00:32:29.000 I mean, because, and I think it's almost like the tech debate was the one that just, you know, crystallizes for me.

00:32:34.000 I mean, when I, when I talk about the rights of conservatives to speak freely on the internet and they're like, but what about Jack Dorsey's right to ban you?

00:32:39.000 I'm like, I don't care about Jack Dorsey's right to ban me.

00:32:43.000 Like, shockingly, I mean, again, we settled the debate about, you know, whether private companies can do whatever they want in the 1870s.

00:32:51.000 They cannot.

00:32:52.000 They cannot.

00:32:54.000 Well, and you're right, you're spot on.

00:32:56.000 And I will say some of the stuff that the purest market people say, I completely agree.

00:33:02.000 The lockdown stuff, I've been the most anti-lockdown person, I think, living it actually through the event we did at SAS.

00:33:09.000 A lot of the libertarians have been silent on that stuff, interestingly.

00:33:12.000 But I think if you, one of the major reasons we're seeing all this is because of the stupid lockdown policies that only allowed people that had wealth to be able to get more wealth. 0.88

00:33:20.000 Anyway, that, and I could sympathize with that with a libertarian, where they really lose me, though. 0.88

00:33:25.000 And this is the example that I use quite a lot, Will.

00:33:28.000 And if you ask them, just this example, they will expose how committed they are to an idea and not to what's actually good for people.

00:33:41.000 And that's a different thing, right?

00:33:43.000 So let me give you an example.

00:33:44.000 If you've ever driven through the industrial Midwest where I grew up from Indiana to downtown Chicago, there's something called the Chicago Skyway.

00:33:52.000 The Chicago Skyway is about 25 to 35 miles, about 30 miles long.

00:33:57.000 It goes from northern Indiana, Gary, Indiana, all the way up to downtown Chicago.

00:34:01.000 It's super fast.

00:34:02.000 It's privately owned with its own private tollway with a private group of investors.

00:34:09.000 And so if I were to go to a libertarian, I said, okay, so just to make sure we're all on the same page, you think that the owners of the Chicago Skyway can ask when you go and pay your toll, hey, are you a Trump supporter?

00:34:20.000 And if I say yes, they should be allowed to not have me go on the Chicago Skyway so I can go into Chicago the most efficient way.

00:34:28.000 A pure market guy will say, yeah.

00:34:31.000 Well, how am I supposed to find a competitor?

00:34:33.000 There's one Skyway.

00:34:36.000 Right, right.

00:34:37.000 Yeah, what are you going to do?

00:34:39.000 Like, build your own Skyway?

00:34:40.000 Build a notch.

00:34:42.000 Really?

00:34:43.000 But that's.

00:34:43.000 How much eminent domain do you need to do that?

00:34:46.000 How do you think that happened?

00:34:46.000 Like, what do you think?

00:34:48.000 You know, no government action at all involved in the creation of a massively.

00:34:53.000 Yeah, so the government that we have public-private partnership, which is basically what these tech companies are.

00:34:58.000 They're public-private partnerships.

00:35:00.000 And then they create this highway into downtown Chicago.

00:35:03.000 It would be insane.

00:35:05.000 I mean, the fact is, when you go on the Chicago Skyway, if you pay $16, you could be a bigot, you could be a pope, you could be a priest, you can drive on the skyway.

00:35:15.000 That's the amazing thing.

00:35:16.000 Because, and here's why, and the courts justify it as economies of scale.

00:35:21.000 When you reach a certain economy of scale, you can't discriminate.

00:35:25.000 You become a public good.

00:35:27.000 Yeah.

00:35:28.000 I mean, and that's literally the rationale behind Section 230.

00:35:31.000 People don't even understand that.

00:35:32.000 Like, that's why they created Section 230.

00:35:34.000 They said, okay, like, we want you to be able to do some moderation.

00:35:38.000 So, like, for porn, for, you know, just you name it, for like horrible abuse, harassment.

00:35:44.000 Okay.

00:35:45.000 I mean, and we also want you to not be liable for defamation if you do that.

00:35:49.000 That's the 230 balance, knowing that if you're running a social media platform, that you are essentially publishing all these third parties' posts.

00:35:56.000 Great.

00:35:57.000 But that carve out from the government, that makes it a public-private partnership.

00:36:01.000 That creates this exemption from common law tort liability that every other person in business in this country is subject to if they publish a third party's posts or a third party's content and it's defamatory.

00:36:13.000 Like, why can't we then, there's clearly a public interest in ensuring you're able to run your business this way.

00:36:20.000 Isn't there a public interest in ensuring you don't infringe on everybody's freedom of speech too?

00:36:24.000 Like, why is one public interest regulatable, the other not?

00:36:28.000 Again, that's exactly right.

00:36:29.000 Yeah.

00:36:30.000 There's so much tension here.

00:36:32.000 So much tension.

00:36:33.000 Well, and I think they're, I think that they're so wrong.

00:36:36.000 It's just more and more clear than ever before.

00:36:39.000 So, so, Will, can you help us unpack where you think the Republican Party needs to go specifically?

00:36:46.000 We have impeachment coming up this week.

00:36:48.000 There's just on impeachment, it's clear.

00:36:50.000 I mean, we should, every single senator should be voting to oppose the impeachment.

00:36:55.000 I actually think it's a really straightforward argument that it's unconstitutional.

00:37:00.000 Essentially, the Constitution says shall impeach only presidents and other executive officers.

00:37:08.000 That, you know, that the penalty is both removal from office and potential exclusion from future offices.

00:37:17.000 There's really basic textual arguments that, and 45 senators already think it's unconstitutional.

00:37:21.000 That's the way they should go.

00:37:22.000 I have no idea why any Republicans feel the need to virtue signal about impeaching a private citizen.

00:37:30.000 That just doesn't make any sense.

00:37:32.000 So that's yeah, I think the Republicans need to say, we are not going to debate the merits of this.

00:37:39.000 We are going to just say, and this entire exercise is unconstitutional.

00:37:43.000 Our vote will be a rejection of this circus.

00:37:47.000 As soon as you get into the weeds of what did he know or what did he say, you're already conceding that this entire circus is legitimate.

00:37:54.000 Yeah.

00:37:55.000 I think that's exactly right.

00:37:58.000 You know, that it's beneath us.

00:37:59.000 I mean, and if people, because the whole argument about like, well, then how, then he's able to invade impeachment by doing something impeachable in his last day in office.

00:38:07.000 It's like, no, He can't just do anything in his last day in office.

00:38:10.000 There's criminal prosecution available if he commits a crime.

00:38:13.000 There's the entire point of impeachment is to prevent, to remove an officeholder.

00:38:18.000 And you don't get to do bills of attainder in this country.

00:38:22.000 Like we don't, we don't just target random people in Congress.

00:38:24.000 That's not, that's not how it works.

00:38:26.000 Like that's, and, and that's how it used to work in Britain.

00:38:29.000 And that's literally one of the things that the founders were said they didn't want any part of.

00:38:34.000 So this, that's easy.

00:38:35.000 Impeachment, nobody should be voting for impeachment.

00:38:38.000 And I'm shocked by how weak, you know, that Chuck Schumer, people like that are saying, oh, it's a slam dunk.

00:38:44.000 I mean, read the constitutional text.

00:38:45.000 Basic textualism would say this is not something that the founders are okay with.

00:38:50.000 They were very reluctant to include impeachment in the Constitution at the outset and constrained it more narrowly than it had been done under British practice as a result.

00:38:59.000 And even beyond that, Chuck Schumer and these Democrat senators, they seem intent to try and create America or the Senate and the House to become a parliamentary system less than a bicameral constitutional republic.

00:39:15.000 They basically want it that if you have 51 votes, you absolutely can prevent a private citizen from running again.

00:39:23.000 And the left has always hated how slow our process is, how many checks and balances are built into it, and how difficult it is actually to effectuate change.

00:39:35.000 Yeah.

00:39:36.000 I mean, they're already calling the filibuster a Jim Crew relic, despite the fact that they used it a million times just over the last four years.

00:39:45.000 They really want to have created these massive structural changes in the way our government works.

00:39:49.000 I mean, the thing number one, Republicans should do is oppose every single one of those as forcefully as they can.

00:39:56.000 And I think one important point is, I don't know if they've won the filibuster debate or not already.

00:40:01.000 It's unclear.

00:40:02.000 But, you know, if they have to pick and choose when they filibuster so that they don't trigger the Democrats getting rid of it, I think you just make sure you pick and choose all the structural changes.

00:40:11.000 Like we can overcome a policy, a credit policy, but we can't overcome DC and Puerto Rico becoming exactly right.

00:40:18.000 We can't overcome national mail-in voting.

00:40:21.000 We can't overcome like electoral college stuff.

00:40:26.000 That's the stuff that needs to be like the third rail.

00:40:28.000 We filibuster this.

00:40:29.000 We oppose it with everything.

00:40:30.000 We've got to not change our system.

00:40:32.000 And we shouldn't, we should not do what the Democrats did.

00:40:35.000 Remember, do you remember the Democrats deciding to filibuster Gorsuch when he was appointed?

00:40:41.000 And that was still when they had the filibuster for the Supreme Court justices. 0.83

00:40:44.000 Well, that was really dumb because Gorsuch was as moderate a pick as Republicans were ever going to put forward.

00:40:50.000 And if you were going to line up in unison against scoreship, you'd line up in unison against every conservative judicial nominee, which means, well, guess what? 0.94

00:40:57.000 We have to get rid of the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees.

00:40:59.000 I completely agree.

00:41:00.000 You're not even going to be reasonable.

00:41:02.000 So we do have to be reasonable with how we use it. 0.83

00:41:04.000 I think that we should use it as the nuclear option.

00:41:08.000 And I think that on the big structural changes, for example, on the COVID relief bill, I wouldn't filibuster.

00:41:13.000 I just wouldn't. 0.73

00:41:15.000 Do I think it's trash? 0.97

00:41:16.000 Of course I do. 1.00

00:41:17.000 Do I think it's garbage? 1.00

00:41:18.000 Absolutely. 0.96

00:41:19.000 Do I think that we should use cinema and mansion for when they want to add DC as a state?

00:41:23.000 Yes.

00:41:24.000 That's when I think we should say, no, no, no, you're going to have to invoke culture.

00:41:28.000 They don't have the votes to do it if Mansion and Cinema hold the line.

00:41:31.000 They don't.

00:41:32.000 If every Republican decides not to break culture.

00:41:36.000 Yeah.

00:41:37.000 And I think, I mean, I just, I worry that we're going to do the same thing where we have like this ultimate grassroots pressure of must oppose every single Democrat issue using all means to our at our disposal.

00:41:46.000 Like we are not in, this is the consequence of losing the Senate, right?

00:41:51.000 I would love to be in a position where we didn't lose the Senate and we're able to do what we wanted, but we did lose the Senate.

00:41:55.000 So our hold on power, the tools we have available to us are fragile and will break with overuse.

00:42:02.000 So we have to be careful about how we use them.

00:42:04.000 Humanevents.com, Will, anything else on your mind?

00:42:04.000 I agree.

00:42:08.000 Not too much right now, other than the Lincoln Project, of course, being outed as this horrible apologizers for, you know, grooming is terrible, terrible stuff.

00:42:18.000 Couldn't have seen it coming at all, given the nature of their founders.

00:42:21.000 Horrible, horrible.

00:42:22.000 We'll have to dive into that at a different episode.

00:42:24.000 So, all right, Will.

00:42:25.000 Thanks.

00:42:26.000 All right, man.

00:42:26.000 Humanevents.com.

00:42:27.000 Talk to you soon.

00:42:28.000 Thanks.

00:42:28.000 Yep, later.

00:42:31.000 Thanks so much for listening, everybody.

00:42:33.000 If you want to get involved at Turning Point USA, go to tpusa.com.

00:42:36.000 Email us your questions, freedom at charliekirk.com.

00:42:40.000 Thanks so much for listening, everybody.

00:42:41.000 And thank you for supporting us at charliekirk.com slash support.

00:42:45.000 God bless.

The Charlie Kirk Show - February 07, 2021

Reimagining a Better GOP with Will Chamberlain

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript