The Matt Walsh Show - December 04, 2019


Ep. 383 - Terrible And Unlikable Candidate Ends Campaign. The Left Blames Racism


Episode Stats

Length

44 minutes

Words per Minute

163.00085

Word Count

7,191

Sentence Count

244

Misogynist Sentences

22

Hate Speech Sentences

37


Summary


Transcript

00:00:00.000 You know, Kamala Harris was a viscerally unlikable, chronically dishonest, morally corrupt, thinly veiled authoritarian.
00:00:11.580 And honestly, I'm shocked she didn't get more support among Democrats for that reason, because they tend to go for those types.
00:00:17.120 But they didn't go for Harris, apparently, and that's why her campaign ended yesterday.
00:00:20.940 If you heard the news, she dropped out.
00:00:23.640 They didn't like her. Why didn't they like her? Well, because of racism.
00:00:27.700 Obviously. The media has already figured that out.
00:00:31.420 In fact, an article went up in The Independent pinning Kamala's campaign's failure on racism.
00:00:38.360 And this article went up, I swear it was like 14 seconds after she announced that the campaign was ending.
00:00:43.320 They already put the article up, because they had written it six months ago, probably, and they were just sitting there waiting to publish it.
00:00:49.740 So as soon as she announced it, the bat signal went up, they grabbed the crowbar, broke the glass, hit the big red button, deployed the It Was Racism article.
00:00:58.460 And let me read a little bit from this article, since we're on the subject.
00:01:03.460 Title, Kamala is a Cop was a racist narrative that killed Harris's campaign dead.
00:01:09.100 And whatever you think about her, it's deeply unfair.
00:01:12.980 Killed it dead.
00:01:14.240 Didn't just kill the campaign, killed it dead.
00:01:16.420 Didn't kill it alive, killed it dead.
00:01:18.880 This is written by Frederick Joseph.
00:01:20.300 It says, um, uh, there's a saying among, uh, there's a saying that almost every black person in America is familiar with.
00:01:27.900 If you have, if you have to work two times harder and be twice as good.
00:01:30.900 This phrase has been passed down for generations from parents and grandparents, uh, and, uh, to young black people.
00:01:37.600 It's not just an explanation.
00:01:38.700 It's a warning.
00:01:39.800 America was built for white people.
00:01:41.260 So if black people want something, it will be much harder.
00:01:43.680 It began with subtle racism and microaggressions, such as being seen as not likable and being called overconfident.
00:01:52.000 And it escalated from there.
00:01:53.500 So this is somebody who uses the phrase microaggression unironically, just so you know who we're dealing with.
00:01:59.320 Uh, which I didn't even think that was a thing anymore.
00:02:02.340 I thought using the phrase microaggression unironically, it's kind of like saying you're triggered unironically, which I figured that people who are apt to be triggered by things probably use a different phrase now because that one has become so poisoned by the mockery that has been rightfully heaped upon it.
00:02:21.940 But not for this individual, Frederick Joseph.
00:02:24.100 He says, and it is, it's a microaggression.
00:02:28.120 So if you, if you didn't think that Kamala Harris was, was, uh, was likable, then you're subtly racist.
00:02:35.600 You have to think that every black person is likable because if you don't, now you could think that a white person is not likable and that's perfectly fine.
00:02:43.360 What about Beto O'Rourke?
00:02:44.800 He dropped out.
00:02:47.220 A lot of people didn't find him likable.
00:02:49.040 I found him to be intensely unlikable, Beto O'Rourke, like so many other people, which is why his campaign was a failure, why he was polling at 0.0%.
00:02:57.180 So is that a microaggression?
00:02:59.180 Is that racism?
00:03:01.220 And if it's not, then isn't it possible that we, in the same spirit that we find Beto O'Rourke unlikable, we also find Kamala Harris unlikable?
00:03:11.080 From the start, many had fair questions about Harris's policies, the platform she'd be running on, and her prosecutory record.
00:03:19.060 These were all important questions, but nothing that would ordinarily be insurmountable for a candidate with her experience in pedigree.
00:03:27.040 With claim and surging support would also come strategic moves by her opposition to throw her campaign into disarray.
00:03:33.280 Well, I can only imagine.
00:03:34.940 Wait, you're telling me that Kamala Harris's political opposition tried to throw her campaign into disarray?
00:03:41.680 Well, this is the first time that's ever happened.
00:03:43.520 It must be racism.
00:03:45.440 You're telling, well, wait a second, Frederick Joseph.
00:03:47.760 Are you telling me that the people running against her were trying to stop her from doing well?
00:03:56.140 What?
00:03:57.520 Well, this is scandalous.
00:03:59.160 This is surely the first time in the history of politics this has ever happened.
00:04:04.140 She's the victim.
00:04:05.100 This is unfair.
00:04:06.660 It is so unfair for her political opponents to try to prevent her from beating them.
00:04:12.680 It's so unfair.
00:04:16.120 Let's see what else.
00:04:17.060 So it goes on and on.
00:04:21.560 Racism, racism.
00:04:23.640 And anyway, I don't think we need to go from there.
00:04:27.320 Kamala Harris started out from behind, operating in a system fueled by double standards.
00:04:34.840 She tried to be the first woman of color to become president in a country with a legacy of racism.
00:04:39.060 She tried to do it during the xenophobic presidency of Donald Trump.
00:04:42.660 This isn't a defense of Kamala Harris as a politician, nor is it a defense of her record.
00:04:46.360 This is a defense of her as a black woman who was treated unfairly.
00:04:49.320 Defense of black women everywhere who are treated unfairly.
00:04:51.580 The black women who work twice as hard and are twice as good, yet still receive less.
00:04:56.000 Now, hold on a second.
00:04:57.120 So you're not defending her record.
00:04:59.140 Well, why not?
00:05:00.940 Frederick Joseph, what do you think of her record?
00:05:03.040 Did you think it was a good record?
00:05:04.020 Because if you didn't, if you're telling me that you didn't like her record either and didn't support her,
00:05:10.020 then maybe you're starting, is it starting to come together for you now?
00:05:12.860 Are you maybe starting to see why?
00:05:14.860 See, you're not defending her record.
00:05:16.860 Well, a lot of people didn't like her record.
00:05:19.060 And that's why she had to drop out.
00:05:20.920 Are you starting to see how this all sort of comes together?
00:05:23.340 And do you like how these race hustlers, they just pretend that Barack Obama never existed?
00:05:35.980 We're just going to pretend that never happened.
00:05:39.660 Are you really going with the Americans wouldn't support a black candidate because of racism
00:05:44.460 three years after a black president completed his second term in office?
00:05:49.420 Is that really what you're going with?
00:05:51.380 This is one of those things.
00:05:54.060 It's like, you know what it's like?
00:05:55.360 It's like when people always say that the I have a black friend excuse isn't a good defense against racism.
00:06:03.840 It's kind of the classic, it's considered the classic bad defense against racism.
00:06:09.620 But actually, I mean, it's a pretty good defense.
00:06:14.620 It might not be bulletproof, but it's pretty good.
00:06:18.640 Because it stands to reason that racists probably don't have friends that belong to the race that they're racist against.
00:06:27.960 Just like, you know, if you call a guy an anti-Semite and then he tells you that,
00:06:33.720 well, I just got back from my Jewish friend's daughter's bat mitzvah.
00:06:38.460 It doesn't mean he's not an anti-Semite, but it's pretty good evidence that he isn't, isn't it?
00:06:43.380 It's at least evidence in his favor.
00:06:47.800 To act like it's not even evidence, like it can't even be brought into the discussion, is just absurd.
00:06:52.620 Of course it can.
00:06:54.400 Well, it's the same thing with a black president.
00:06:56.060 We're told that, well, America had a black president,
00:06:58.980 isn't a good defense against the charge that America is systematically racist.
00:07:02.720 But it kind of is, though.
00:07:06.100 It may not settle the dispute.
00:07:08.740 There have to be other things brought in.
00:07:10.460 But it's a really good piece of evidence in favor of the claim that America is not systematically racist.
00:07:18.220 And if it isn't, if electing a black man president isn't even evidence that America might not be systematically racist,
00:07:28.480 then what you're really saying is that the claim America is systematically racist is unfalsifiable.
00:07:35.380 You're saying that nothing could be evidence against it.
00:07:38.300 Because if that's not evidence against it, then I can't imagine what,
00:07:42.700 and then there couldn't possibly be evidence.
00:07:44.620 Because that's about as good a single piece of evidence that you could possibly present.
00:07:51.640 And if you're tossing that out, well, then what you're saying is it's unfalsifiable,
00:07:56.860 which is another way of saying that your claim has no real support or basis.
00:08:03.780 And so there you go.
00:08:07.140 Meanwhile, Cory Booker is still in the race, isn't he?
00:08:10.720 He didn't drop out yet.
00:08:11.500 So we're going to race him, too?
00:08:15.500 Pretend he's not there?
00:08:18.580 Oh, there was one other thing from this article.
00:08:21.080 I skipped right past it.
00:08:22.220 But there's somewhere in here, I believe, he mentions the claim that Kamala Harris, quote,
00:08:31.180 isn't black enough.
00:08:32.180 And he gives that as evidence of racism against Kamala Harris.
00:08:37.060 But are you, if that claim was made, or yeah, here it is.
00:08:41.340 At one point, it even appeared the social media bots were maliciously spreading tweets
00:08:45.220 claiming she wasn't black enough and questioning her ethnicity.
00:08:48.060 So you're saying that white racists were attacking Kamala Harris because she wasn't black enough?
00:08:56.100 That's what you're saying?
00:08:58.820 Is that how white racists operate?
00:09:00.940 Is that going to be there?
00:09:01.800 No, that's not.
00:09:04.940 You know, generally, when with that kind of claim, if that claim was being made, it probably
00:09:11.440 wasn't white people making that claim.
00:09:15.240 All right, let's let's move on.
00:09:18.120 In fact, there's a lot to talk about today.
00:09:19.380 But first, before we get to any of that, a word from Paint Your Life.
00:09:23.300 You know, we just got our painting a few weeks ago.
00:09:25.160 It's one of our favorite pictures of our kids.
00:09:27.320 They're standing on a dock at the lake at our lake vacation last year.
00:09:32.020 And the painting is just great.
00:09:33.700 It captures not just the kids, but also the background, the lake, the environment.
00:09:37.860 Every last detail is there.
00:09:39.160 It's wonderful.
00:09:40.060 And you can have an original painting of yourself, your children, family, a special place,
00:09:43.860 or a cherished pet at a price that you can afford from paintyourlife.com.
00:09:48.080 This is a true painting done by hand by a world-class artist created from a favorite photo.
00:09:53.120 So this isn't something that they do like on a computer.
00:09:56.580 This isn't a Photoshop thing where you can make it look like a painting.
00:09:59.320 They actually have a real artist sit down and paint this thing for you.
00:10:02.020 It makes a perfect holiday gift, but it's also great for birthdays, anniversaries, weddings.
00:10:07.620 I gave it as a gift to myself and to my wife, to us.
00:10:11.200 You can give it as a gift to yourself as well.
00:10:12.760 You choose the artist who's a work you most admire and work with them throughout the process
00:10:16.780 until every detail is perfect.
00:10:18.320 It's very hands-on.
00:10:20.000 They're very receptive to feedback, and they're going back and forth,
00:10:23.140 and they want to make sure that you love the painting.
00:10:24.620 There's no risk.
00:10:25.560 If you don't love the final painting, your money is refunded.
00:10:28.340 Great for decor.
00:10:29.480 Also, it's a work of art as well.
00:10:31.400 With Paint Your Life, you get your favorite memories transformed into a work of art
00:10:34.800 that will be cherished forever.
00:10:36.540 And right now, as a limited-time offer, get 30% off your painting.
00:10:40.060 That's right.
00:10:40.460 You get 30% off right now, plus free shipping, which is a big perk as well.
00:10:45.220 To get this special offer, text MATT to 64000.
00:10:49.940 That's M-A-T-T to 64000.
00:10:52.700 MATT to 64000.
00:10:56.240 By the way, did you guys hear about the drama at the NATO summit?
00:11:02.800 Yeah, apparently Justin Trudeau was talking behind Trump's back,
00:11:06.880 and then Trump found out about it and was totally pissed.
00:11:11.240 And he called Trudeau two-faced, then he canceled his press conference,
00:11:14.840 and then Jake told Becky that Dave had a crush on her,
00:11:18.420 and he was all like, what?
00:11:20.880 And the other people at the lunch table were like, you didn't know that?
00:11:23.960 And she was like, ew.
00:11:26.080 And now I'm just like, oh my God, there's going to be so much drama
00:11:28.880 at Sarah's party on Friday.
00:11:31.880 Because, yes, our world leaders are a bunch of middle schoolers,
00:11:34.800 if you didn't know.
00:11:35.340 So that's basically how that works.
00:11:38.160 Although I did appreciate, with Trump calling Trudeau two-faced,
00:11:42.040 I did appreciate the joke there.
00:11:44.300 I wish that he had been more explicit with the joke.
00:11:48.180 Because, of course, this is Trudeau we're talking about.
00:11:50.900 He's literally two-faced.
00:11:52.200 He's got two faces, one white and one black.
00:11:54.500 So that was an accurate assessment.
00:11:56.740 I wish that Trump had gone all the way with that comeback
00:11:59.680 and made the explicit connection between two-faced and the blackface thing.
00:12:03.540 He didn't quite do it.
00:12:05.220 But it was still a good comeback, nonetheless.
00:12:08.180 All right.
00:12:10.700 There's something else I wanted to talk about.
00:12:12.140 A freelance writer for the New York Times
00:12:16.260 and for some other publications as well.
00:12:19.180 Her name is Susanna Weiss.
00:12:21.320 And according to her bio,
00:12:22.620 she specializes in feminism, sex, and psychonautics.
00:12:26.500 I don't know what psychonautics are,
00:12:30.200 but you kind of get a general impression of what we're dealing with here.
00:12:33.680 And she recently attempted to basically instruct the unwashed Twitter masses
00:12:38.720 about the intricacies of consent.
00:12:41.440 And the main thing Weiss wanted us to know is that
00:12:44.500 consent is necessary in every sexual encounter,
00:12:49.900 even if it's a sexual encounter via text message.
00:12:52.540 So Weiss tweeted, she said,
00:12:54.980 ask consent for all sexual encounters.
00:12:57.200 Yes, even sexting.
00:12:58.580 I just came up with this script.
00:13:00.320 You're all welcome to borrow.
00:13:02.520 And then she actually provided a script
00:13:03.920 of how you might get,
00:13:07.140 obtain consent in order to sext with someone.
00:13:10.260 And her script has the would-be sexter saying,
00:13:13.460 I've been having some sexual thoughts about you.
00:13:15.940 I'd like to share over text if you'd enjoy that.
00:13:19.420 That's the opening line.
00:13:21.260 That's how you get consent.
00:13:23.140 Now, in this scenario,
00:13:24.920 the lucky sextee gives clear consent by saying,
00:13:28.640 okay, and then with the blushing smiley face.
00:13:33.700 Now, what do you do?
00:13:35.220 She doesn't get into this,
00:13:36.120 but what do you do if you open with that?
00:13:38.960 I've had sexual thoughts I'd like to share.
00:13:41.560 And then you get back,
00:13:42.420 instead of okay, smiley face,
00:13:43.880 you get back like a K with a period,
00:13:47.560 just K period.
00:13:48.600 Because everyone knows that that's passive aggressive.
00:13:53.380 Everyone except for my wife, actually.
00:13:55.840 Because my wife will do that.
00:13:56.940 She'll send a one-word text message with a period.
00:13:59.580 Then I always respond by saying,
00:14:00.800 what's wrong?
00:14:01.180 Are you okay?
00:14:01.640 She says, what do you mean?
00:14:03.240 I said, well, you can't do one word in a period.
00:14:05.440 Periods are passive aggressive in the year 2019.
00:14:08.060 If it's a one-word or one-letter text,
00:14:10.100 you've got to leave the period off
00:14:11.040 so I know that everything's okay.
00:14:12.500 Anyway, she doesn't get into the specifics there.
00:14:15.940 But this is the script for sexting.
00:14:20.140 And she doesn't give us a sample
00:14:22.640 of what the sexting itself might look like, thankfully.
00:14:25.380 But I guess we can use our imagination.
00:14:27.840 Now, there are, of course, a number of problems here.
00:14:30.880 The first and most obvious problem
00:14:33.240 is that the sexter, in this case,
00:14:35.520 comes across like Spock
00:14:37.340 or maybe a vaguely self-aware robot.
00:14:41.800 You know, like, greetings life form
00:14:43.760 requesting permission to initiate
00:14:45.300 robotic erotic communication sequence.
00:14:48.720 Which would be a great way
00:14:51.180 to maybe sweep one of the coneheads off their feet.
00:14:53.960 But it probably will be kind of weird
00:14:58.540 and tend to freak out any normal earthling.
00:15:02.020 And secondly, we have a sort of
00:15:03.740 chicken and egg problem here.
00:15:07.140 Because if you don't, you know,
00:15:09.880 you didn't have permission to think sexually
00:15:12.420 about the other person in the first place.
00:15:15.400 And you certainly didn't have permission
00:15:17.220 to ask permission to share the thoughts
00:15:20.280 that you're having.
00:15:22.080 So I think a real sexting with consent script
00:15:25.040 would have to begin with a neutral greeting.
00:15:27.460 Something like, hello.
00:15:29.980 And then work its way very slowly
00:15:32.460 over many pages
00:15:33.900 and hundreds of introductory questions
00:15:35.980 to the sexting request.
00:15:38.820 So it's sort of a Socratic dialogue
00:15:41.260 where you finally get to the sexting part.
00:15:44.940 Now, it's probably not fair
00:15:47.640 to pick on the sex expert Susanna Weiss here
00:15:51.200 because she's just one small example
00:15:53.420 of a growing trend
00:15:54.400 with her notion of consent.
00:15:58.320 This brings to mind, for example,
00:16:00.360 a few months ago,
00:16:01.100 maybe you saw the consent condom,
00:16:03.520 which would require four hands to open.
00:16:07.800 And NBC News said
00:16:08.900 that it makes a powerful statement
00:16:10.420 about consent.
00:16:12.120 More troubling,
00:16:13.120 certainly more dangerous,
00:16:14.220 are the affirmative consent laws
00:16:15.940 across the country,
00:16:17.140 especially on college campuses.
00:16:18.660 And what the affirmative consent law says
00:16:21.800 is that
00:16:22.480 any sexual encounter,
00:16:25.160 even one that seems to be consensual,
00:16:28.060 can turn into rape
00:16:29.220 if consent is not verbal and ongoing.
00:16:32.780 Now, what does ongoing consent mean?
00:16:34.360 It means that throughout the act,
00:16:37.580 and really it always comes down to the man,
00:16:40.260 throughout the act,
00:16:40.940 the man has to stop
00:16:42.120 and has to be given continuous
00:16:43.660 and explicit consent
00:16:45.680 to continue
00:16:46.800 as it's happening.
00:16:50.840 And then there's a consent checklist
00:16:52.500 over at Cosmopolitan,
00:16:54.920 which takes it a step further.
00:16:57.080 Now, at Cosmopolitan,
00:16:58.820 with their consent checklist,
00:17:00.920 item number three on the list,
00:17:03.340 and this is a checklist
00:17:04.060 that you go over
00:17:04.840 before engaging in sexual activity
00:17:06.360 to make sure that you have consent.
00:17:09.020 Now, here's item number three on the list.
00:17:10.700 Is consent ongoing
00:17:13.880 before, during,
00:17:16.620 and after an encounter
00:17:19.060 or throughout in a relationship?
00:17:22.260 After.
00:17:23.980 They're saying you have to get consent
00:17:25.740 for a sexual act
00:17:27.620 before it happens,
00:17:29.940 while it's happening,
00:17:31.440 and also after it's already happened.
00:17:35.300 How does that work exactly?
00:17:36.860 Who knows?
00:17:37.180 But it does mean
00:17:39.260 that you may become
00:17:40.120 an unwitting rapist
00:17:41.200 if consent for sex
00:17:42.700 is withdrawn
00:17:43.600 after the deed's
00:17:45.260 already been done.
00:17:47.320 Then Planned Parenthood,
00:17:48.820 which is an organization
00:17:49.700 that, by the way,
00:17:50.820 violates the consent
00:17:51.880 of 300,000 unborn children a year
00:17:54.120 by killing them
00:17:55.020 without their consent,
00:17:56.520 but they add another wrinkle
00:17:57.760 to this on their website.
00:18:00.260 They say that consent
00:18:01.600 has to be enthusiastic as well.
00:18:03.780 So, affirmative,
00:18:06.820 ongoing,
00:18:07.720 before, during, after,
00:18:08.920 and also enthusiastic.
00:18:12.320 The way they explain it,
00:18:13.540 they say,
00:18:13.880 when it comes to sex,
00:18:14.760 you should only do stuff
00:18:15.760 you want to do,
00:18:16.620 not things that you feel
00:18:17.680 you're expected to do.
00:18:19.380 Which, yes,
00:18:20.960 but how is your sex partner
00:18:23.180 supposed to know
00:18:24.160 if you don't want to do
00:18:26.420 the thing you said
00:18:27.460 you wanted to do?
00:18:28.340 And what does it have to do
00:18:31.240 with consent anyway?
00:18:32.180 Because if I choose freely
00:18:34.520 to do something,
00:18:35.480 despite not wanting to do it,
00:18:38.060 I've still consented.
00:18:40.940 Begrudging consent
00:18:41.800 is still consent.
00:18:43.560 The begrudging nature
00:18:44.840 of my consent
00:18:45.520 does not erase the fact
00:18:46.720 that it is consent.
00:18:48.400 So it's like if I walk outside
00:18:50.300 of the grocery store
00:18:51.260 and, you know,
00:18:51.720 you've got those,
00:18:52.780 some booth set up
00:18:53.940 and they're soliciting money
00:18:55.240 for whatever,
00:18:55.940 Little League,
00:18:56.940 or whatever it is,
00:18:57.860 and you feel
00:18:59.500 you don't really want
00:19:00.700 to give to them
00:19:01.280 but you feel guilty
00:19:02.280 because you still have
00:19:03.000 your change in your hand
00:19:04.040 with your receipt.
00:19:04.660 You haven't put it
00:19:05.040 in your pocket yet
00:19:05.800 and then they stop you.
00:19:06.860 Sir, would you mind helping?
00:19:08.180 And you've got,
00:19:08.720 you just,
00:19:09.320 you give them the money
00:19:09.920 because you feel guilty.
00:19:11.820 Now, it's begrudging.
00:19:13.620 You didn't want to give
00:19:14.900 but you did consent.
00:19:16.820 They didn't rob you.
00:19:18.700 It wouldn't be fair
00:19:19.500 to give to the
00:19:20.200 Little League fundraiser
00:19:21.100 and then later turn around
00:19:22.280 and say they robbed you
00:19:23.020 because they didn't.
00:19:25.680 So begrudging charity
00:19:27.000 is not robbery.
00:19:27.860 Begrudging sex
00:19:28.720 is not rape.
00:19:30.860 But it is,
00:19:32.540 I think,
00:19:33.940 ironic
00:19:34.380 that sex
00:19:36.400 in our
00:19:37.440 over-sexed age
00:19:38.880 has turned into this.
00:19:41.180 It's become
00:19:41.640 laden with rules
00:19:42.700 and stipulations
00:19:43.760 and fine print
00:19:44.800 and you've got
00:19:46.060 a packet of information
00:19:47.080 you have to go through
00:19:47.900 and get it notarized
00:19:48.940 and signatures
00:19:49.500 and you've got to get
00:19:50.300 a lawyer there.
00:19:52.220 That's what it's become.
00:19:53.480 even though we live
00:19:56.260 by all appearances
00:19:57.180 in a hedonistic,
00:19:59.400 amoral culture.
00:20:01.620 So there appears to be
00:20:02.700 some kind of paradox here.
00:20:05.900 And I think what happened
00:20:07.200 is that we fled
00:20:08.360 so far
00:20:09.280 and so fast
00:20:10.460 from anything
00:20:11.220 resembling sexual morality
00:20:12.800 that we basically
00:20:14.540 came full circle
00:20:15.620 all the way around the globe
00:20:16.660 and ran into it
00:20:18.340 from the opposite side.
00:20:19.200 and we end up
00:20:21.540 with our culture's
00:20:22.360 weirdest
00:20:22.640 and most significant
00:20:23.800 innovation
00:20:24.320 which is
00:20:25.560 hedonistic
00:20:26.460 prudishness
00:20:27.940 or prudish hedonism.
00:20:30.040 We become like
00:20:31.060 this Frankenstein
00:20:32.100 mixture
00:20:32.520 of Victorian England
00:20:34.020 and the 1960s.
00:20:37.420 It's not
00:20:38.260 very hard
00:20:40.060 to see how it came to this
00:20:41.100 because the hookup culture
00:20:43.700 is not what it was
00:20:45.120 cracked up to be.
00:20:46.120 It is, in fact,
00:20:47.760 as people like
00:20:48.480 Susanna Weiss
00:20:49.220 realize
00:20:50.400 it is fraught
00:20:52.200 with danger.
00:20:53.320 Physical danger,
00:20:54.420 emotional danger,
00:20:55.420 psychological danger,
00:20:56.480 spiritual danger.
00:20:58.080 When you put yourself
00:20:59.320 into the role
00:21:00.160 of a stranger's
00:21:01.220 sex toy
00:21:01.740 the pleasure
00:21:03.400 is sure to be fleeting
00:21:04.400 and it won't be enough
00:21:05.780 to compensate
00:21:06.380 for the peril
00:21:07.160 that comes with it.
00:21:08.660 So you've got
00:21:09.500 this ever-expanding
00:21:10.620 list of rules
00:21:11.680 and stipulations
00:21:12.680 and fine print
00:21:13.480 which is meant
00:21:14.280 to offer protection
00:21:15.120 from some of those perils
00:21:16.240 but the rules
00:21:17.320 always fail
00:21:18.040 and so more
00:21:18.760 and more rules
00:21:19.360 are added.
00:21:21.320 But
00:21:21.780 here's the point.
00:21:23.420 Why are these rules
00:21:24.560 necessary to begin with?
00:21:29.280 They're only necessary
00:21:30.620 because we've thrown out
00:21:32.260 the two ingredients
00:21:33.380 or
00:21:34.260 you know
00:21:35.360 the three ingredients
00:21:36.200 the main ingredients
00:21:37.100 that make sex
00:21:38.840 truly joyful
00:21:39.700 and also truly safe
00:21:40.940 and those ingredients
00:21:41.800 as much as we hate
00:21:42.700 to admit it
00:21:43.220 are love,
00:21:44.480 devotion,
00:21:45.080 commitment
00:21:45.480 also known as marriage.
00:21:47.380 So
00:21:49.660 the Cosmopolitans
00:21:52.600 and Susanna Weiss
00:21:53.600 of the world
00:21:54.240 they're not giving us
00:21:55.560 rules for sex
00:21:56.640 per se
00:21:57.340 rather
00:21:58.900 they're giving you
00:21:59.900 rules for sex
00:22:00.860 with strangers
00:22:02.820 who don't give a damn
00:22:03.700 about you.
00:22:04.360 What they're saying is
00:22:05.040 if you're going to do this
00:22:06.080 with someone
00:22:06.460 who doesn't care about you
00:22:07.620 and who you
00:22:08.620 hardly know
00:22:10.140 well then
00:22:12.020 here's a whole list
00:22:12.740 of rules
00:22:13.060 to keep you safe.
00:22:13.740 they're trying
00:22:16.100 to spare you
00:22:16.800 from the danger
00:22:17.500 inherent
00:22:18.020 in giving yourself
00:22:19.240 to a person
00:22:19.960 who doesn't know you
00:22:22.060 and doesn't care about you
00:22:23.140 and doesn't love you.
00:22:26.140 But
00:22:26.620 what they don't want
00:22:28.460 to admit
00:22:28.800 is that
00:22:29.460 the best way
00:22:30.340 to avoid those dangers
00:22:31.500 is just to
00:22:32.620 not do that
00:22:34.220 to begin with.
00:22:36.700 You don't need
00:22:37.520 to worry as much
00:22:38.480 about the lawyerly
00:22:39.700 stipulations
00:22:40.440 if you're with someone
00:22:41.660 that you know
00:22:42.500 you love
00:22:42.980 and you trust.
00:22:47.720 I mean
00:22:48.320 think about
00:22:49.900 with something
00:22:51.020 like sexting
00:22:51.780 now
00:22:52.820 I'll say on the record
00:22:55.120 probably not a good idea
00:22:56.780 to sext anyone
00:22:57.480 even your spouse
00:22:58.200 because nothing
00:22:59.120 you do on your phone
00:23:00.100 is really private
00:23:00.740 and
00:23:02.160 so I think
00:23:02.900 everyone would do well
00:23:03.800 to remember that
00:23:04.500 with everything
00:23:05.000 they do online
00:23:06.060 and on their phones
00:23:06.840 and on their computers
00:23:07.440 none of it is private
00:23:08.920 none of it
00:23:10.080 ever will be
00:23:10.800 so just to keep
00:23:12.240 that in mind
00:23:12.700 but
00:23:14.280 part of the
00:23:16.680 part of what
00:23:17.660 Susanna Weiss
00:23:18.300 is getting at here
00:23:19.020 is that
00:23:19.700 well
00:23:20.180 you know
00:23:20.560 if you
00:23:20.940 do this
00:23:21.760 with someone
00:23:23.060 you know
00:23:25.120 you gotta be careful
00:23:26.100 because
00:23:26.660 if it's unsolicited
00:23:28.580 who knows
00:23:29.080 what's gonna happen
00:23:29.700 maybe they'll call
00:23:30.260 the cops on you
00:23:30.980 maybe they'll take
00:23:32.560 your sext
00:23:33.660 and they'll put it
00:23:34.400 online
00:23:34.740 and they'll embarrass you
00:23:35.780 yeah but
00:23:37.820 again
00:23:38.160 see
00:23:38.500 those are the
00:23:39.280 dangers inherent
00:23:40.300 when you're
00:23:42.000 trying to act
00:23:42.720 this way
00:23:43.180 with someone
00:23:43.640 you don't know
00:23:44.480 and who's not
00:23:45.580 your spouse
00:23:46.160 at least
00:23:50.280 you know
00:23:50.620 you probably
00:23:51.380 don't have to worry
00:23:52.260 about the cops
00:23:53.180 getting involved
00:23:53.780 if you're being
00:23:54.360 flirtatious
00:23:54.860 with your spouse
00:23:55.460 because marriage
00:23:58.220 affords
00:23:58.800 a certain security
00:23:59.800 that a million
00:24:00.680 consent checklists
00:24:02.040 could never offer
00:24:03.660 now
00:24:05.900 that's
00:24:06.460 not to say
00:24:07.260 that abuse
00:24:08.000 and assault
00:24:08.480 and things
00:24:08.840 don't happen
00:24:09.360 in a marriage
00:24:09.800 of course
00:24:10.160 they do
00:24:10.560 but
00:24:13.680 verbal consent
00:24:16.400 all of these
00:24:16.960 consent rules
00:24:17.680 we come up with
00:24:18.500 it turns out
00:24:19.820 that they don't
00:24:20.300 really amount
00:24:20.860 to much
00:24:21.340 if they don't
00:24:22.020 begin with
00:24:22.540 the words
00:24:22.940 I do
00:24:23.440 if you're
00:24:24.360 taking those
00:24:24.780 words out
00:24:25.500 then
00:24:26.360 as we have
00:24:27.360 discovered
00:24:27.780 there's really
00:24:30.040 nothing you can
00:24:31.040 do to make
00:24:31.900 this completely
00:24:32.580 safe
00:24:33.000 because you
00:24:36.840 are
00:24:37.240 at the end
00:24:38.480 of the day
00:24:38.940 you are
00:24:39.740 giving yourself
00:24:40.460 over to
00:24:41.220 someone
00:24:41.820 who
00:24:42.860 isn't
00:24:43.980 committed
00:24:44.260 to you
00:24:44.700 and
00:24:46.760 you know
00:24:48.400 that they're
00:24:48.760 just using
00:24:49.240 you
00:24:49.560 now again
00:24:53.560 bad things
00:24:54.160 can happen
00:24:54.540 in a marriage
00:24:55.160 but
00:24:55.600 you know
00:24:56.500 when it's
00:24:56.980 in the hookup
00:24:57.780 culture
00:24:58.160 which is what
00:24:58.680 we're talking
00:24:59.100 about here
00:24:59.560 you go
00:25:01.560 into it
00:25:02.080 there's really
00:25:02.860 only bad
00:25:03.600 things that
00:25:04.000 can come
00:25:04.300 of it
00:25:04.760 if something
00:25:07.460 bad happens
00:25:08.100 in a marriage
00:25:08.680 if an assault
00:25:09.560 abuse
00:25:10.000 that's when
00:25:10.960 things go
00:25:11.400 wrong
00:25:11.760 but in the
00:25:13.060 hookup
00:25:13.260 culture
00:25:13.600 it's just
00:25:14.060 designed
00:25:14.740 that way
00:25:15.400 there's no
00:25:16.620 other
00:25:17.020 possible
00:25:18.060 outcome
00:25:18.640 you are
00:25:21.460 giving yourself
00:25:22.040 over
00:25:22.280 you are
00:25:22.520 making yourself
00:25:23.060 vulnerable
00:25:23.520 to
00:25:23.920 someone
00:25:24.860 who doesn't
00:25:25.860 give a damn
00:25:26.380 isn't devoted
00:25:28.340 to you
00:25:28.760 isn't committed
00:25:29.760 to you
00:25:30.020 doesn't even
00:25:30.400 pretend to be
00:25:30.920 committed
00:25:31.140 to you
00:25:31.540 and who
00:25:32.800 is just
00:25:33.140 using you
00:25:33.740 and you
00:25:35.160 know that
00:25:35.600 and that's
00:25:35.940 what the
00:25:36.160 arrangement
00:25:36.500 is all
00:25:36.840 about
00:25:37.140 all right
00:25:41.580 let's
00:25:41.960 go to
00:25:42.780 emails
00:25:43.080 mattwalshow
00:25:43.760 at gmail.com
00:25:44.800 mattwalshow
00:25:45.460 at gmail.com
00:25:46.520 this is from
00:25:47.800 Tony
00:25:48.140 says
00:25:51.040 hi Matt
00:25:51.440 you've said
00:25:51.880 in many
00:25:52.260 shows
00:25:52.680 that eating
00:25:53.300 dogs
00:25:53.820 is the same
00:25:54.400 as eating
00:25:54.820 other animals
00:25:55.600 have I said
00:25:56.860 that in many
00:25:57.300 shows
00:25:57.580 I know I
00:25:57.860 talked about
00:25:58.180 it yesterday
00:25:58.560 briefly
00:25:58.980 but is that
00:25:59.580 a topic
00:26:00.280 I go back
00:26:00.820 to frequently
00:26:01.340 eating dogs
00:26:02.520 maybe it is
00:26:03.460 I disagree
00:26:06.240 because dogs
00:26:07.020 have been
00:26:07.400 completely
00:26:07.720 domesticated
00:26:08.360 over hundreds
00:26:08.980 maybe thousands
00:26:09.620 of years
00:26:10.180 it is thousands
00:26:12.420 by the way
00:26:12.840 some new
00:26:13.520 breeds of dogs
00:26:14.400 would have
00:26:15.020 zero chance
00:26:15.580 of surviving
00:26:16.020 on their own
00:26:16.620 all they know
00:26:17.140 is how to
00:26:17.580 love humans
00:26:18.360 because dogs
00:26:19.320 have basically
00:26:19.780 evolved to be
00:26:20.420 our pets
00:26:20.820 it seems wrong
00:26:21.440 to turn our
00:26:21.860 backs on them
00:26:22.560 and eat them
00:26:23.180 it seems
00:26:23.560 treacherous
00:26:24.040 even
00:26:24.300 do you take
00:26:25.900 the stance
00:26:26.320 that we can
00:26:26.680 do anything
00:26:27.080 with animals
00:26:27.580 or is there
00:26:28.520 some moral
00:26:29.220 obligation
00:26:29.840 we have
00:26:30.240 towards them
00:26:30.740 maybe the
00:26:31.600 bad things
00:26:32.040 we do
00:26:32.460 to animals
00:26:33.040 are only
00:26:33.480 bad in
00:26:33.860 relation to
00:26:34.280 ourselves
00:26:34.600 for example
00:26:35.040 if there was
00:26:35.840 a serial killer
00:26:36.480 of dogs
00:26:37.100 would that
00:26:37.360 person only
00:26:37.840 be wrong
00:26:38.240 because they
00:26:38.720 are themselves
00:26:39.420 being wrathful
00:26:40.280 slash violent
00:26:40.940 what are your
00:26:41.740 thoughts
00:26:42.160 P.S.
00:26:42.840 I'm not a
00:26:43.220 dog owner
00:26:43.640 and don't
00:26:43.960 plan to be
00:26:44.500 smart plan
00:26:46.600 by the way
00:26:47.040 to not be
00:26:48.360 a dog owner
00:26:48.820 no Tony
00:26:49.660 I don't think
00:26:50.460 there's anything
00:26:51.080 intrinsically
00:26:52.000 immoral about
00:26:52.980 eating dogs
00:26:53.640 my point
00:26:55.220 yesterday is
00:26:55.740 it's a
00:26:56.040 cultural convention
00:26:56.840 you know
00:26:58.340 you're talking
00:26:58.920 about how
00:26:59.840 we as
00:27:00.480 Westerners
00:27:01.080 see dogs
00:27:01.880 not everybody
00:27:02.940 sees dogs
00:27:03.500 that way
00:27:03.900 not everybody
00:27:04.980 sees them
00:27:05.360 in the same
00:27:05.720 way
00:27:05.980 and you know
00:27:09.500 we see cows
00:27:10.780 as a source
00:27:11.860 of food
00:27:12.420 and we tend
00:27:13.100 to cherish
00:27:13.600 dogs
00:27:14.160 and not
00:27:16.240 see them
00:27:16.640 that way
00:27:17.140 some cultures
00:27:19.080 have a different
00:27:19.580 attitude towards
00:27:20.220 cows
00:27:20.560 is our
00:27:22.920 attitude
00:27:23.340 correct
00:27:23.940 and theirs
00:27:24.320 is wrong
00:27:24.700 I wouldn't
00:27:25.880 well if
00:27:26.340 they're
00:27:26.500 worshipping
00:27:27.580 the
00:27:28.640 idolatry
00:27:30.260 or worship
00:27:30.680 of animals
00:27:31.160 is wrong
00:27:31.620 but
00:27:31.960 in terms
00:27:33.360 of which
00:27:33.800 animals
00:27:34.240 we
00:27:34.500 domesticate
00:27:35.320 and which
00:27:36.320 we tend
00:27:36.740 to form
00:27:37.160 bonds
00:27:37.640 with
00:27:37.960 and which
00:27:38.260 we don't
00:27:38.620 you know
00:27:39.080 that I
00:27:39.540 think is
00:27:39.860 really just
00:27:40.280 a cultural
00:27:40.720 convention
00:27:41.220 I don't
00:27:42.140 think that
00:27:42.420 there's
00:27:42.580 anything
00:27:42.820 inherently
00:27:43.400 there's
00:27:44.120 any inherent
00:27:44.700 morality
00:27:45.240 going on
00:27:45.700 here
00:27:45.900 we do
00:27:47.060 have a
00:27:47.380 moral
00:27:47.560 obligation
00:27:48.060 to treat
00:27:48.560 animals
00:27:49.040 with respect
00:27:49.880 obviously
00:27:50.400 all animals
00:27:51.120 we shouldn't
00:27:51.440 be cruel
00:27:51.880 we shouldn't
00:27:52.260 torture
00:27:52.540 animals
00:27:52.960 or abuse
00:27:53.440 them
00:27:53.780 but I don't
00:27:55.180 see any
00:27:55.480 reason why
00:27:56.240 eating a
00:27:57.160 dog
00:27:57.640 should be
00:27:58.240 considered
00:27:58.660 intrinsically
00:27:59.580 different
00:28:00.140 from eating
00:28:00.880 a cow
00:28:01.440 or a pig
00:28:02.520 pigs are
00:28:03.820 very smart
00:28:04.260 animals
00:28:04.660 pigs are
00:28:05.060 social
00:28:05.440 animals
00:28:05.940 whatever
00:28:07.160 consciousness
00:28:07.900 dogs have
00:28:08.960 which I'm
00:28:09.340 not sure
00:28:09.840 nobody really
00:28:10.820 knows how
00:28:11.420 that works
00:28:11.800 exactly inside
00:28:12.440 a dog's
00:28:12.880 head
00:28:13.100 whatever
00:28:13.800 what sort
00:28:14.440 of awareness
00:28:15.020 a dog
00:28:15.480 has
00:28:15.820 we know
00:28:16.100 they have
00:28:16.320 some kind
00:28:16.700 of awareness
00:28:17.100 it's not
00:28:17.900 the same
00:28:18.240 as people
00:28:18.680 but I
00:28:20.360 don't think
00:28:20.560 there's any
00:28:20.880 reason to
00:28:21.440 assume
00:28:21.920 that a
00:28:23.500 dog's
00:28:24.120 awareness
00:28:25.280 and consciousness
00:28:26.280 and capacity
00:28:27.260 for suffering
00:28:27.900 is any
00:28:29.420 greater than
00:28:30.380 a pig's
00:28:31.340 I don't think
00:28:32.740 there's any
00:28:32.960 reason to
00:28:33.300 assume that
00:28:33.780 so let me
00:28:36.180 ask you this
00:28:36.680 what if a
00:28:38.640 dog dies
00:28:39.500 on its own
00:28:40.780 let's say
00:28:42.000 your family
00:28:42.480 dog dies
00:28:43.200 you didn't
00:28:44.260 kill it or
00:28:44.680 anything
00:28:44.860 the dog
00:28:45.560 died
00:28:45.800 would it
00:28:47.760 be immoral
00:28:48.580 to
00:28:49.340 eat
00:28:50.500 your family
00:28:51.920 dog that
00:28:52.360 just died
00:28:52.780 I mean
00:28:55.580 could you
00:28:56.320 articulate
00:28:56.820 any reason
00:28:57.960 why it
00:28:58.980 would be
00:28:59.300 immoral
00:28:59.760 now you're
00:29:00.240 I know
00:29:00.620 your reaction
00:29:01.280 your reaction
00:29:02.060 is like my
00:29:02.660 reaction which
00:29:03.260 is that's
00:29:03.680 weird
00:29:03.940 my first
00:29:07.040 visceral
00:29:07.340 reaction is
00:29:08.040 yeah that is
00:29:08.580 wrong
00:29:08.860 yeah you're
00:29:10.000 not gonna
00:29:10.200 Fido dies
00:29:11.640 you're not gonna
00:29:11.920 eat Fido
00:29:12.460 but that's
00:29:14.040 a visceral
00:29:14.440 reaction if
00:29:14.940 you ask me
00:29:15.320 to explain
00:29:15.980 it
00:29:16.280 I couldn't
00:29:18.640 really explain
00:29:19.140 it why is
00:29:19.640 it wrong
00:29:19.960 the dog's
00:29:20.780 dead
00:29:21.100 it's not
00:29:22.580 gonna hurt
00:29:22.860 him any
00:29:23.360 he's already
00:29:23.720 gone
00:29:24.020 so I think
00:29:27.040 the answer
00:29:27.480 is that again
00:29:28.380 it's a cultural
00:29:29.000 thing this is
00:29:29.680 just cultural
00:29:30.660 programming and
00:29:31.680 and that's why
00:29:32.540 we think it's a
00:29:33.380 problem in other
00:29:34.420 cultures they
00:29:35.040 would say
00:29:35.540 what's what's
00:29:36.300 the problem
00:29:36.700 and like I
00:29:39.680 said yesterday
00:29:40.040 when it comes
00:29:40.460 to the cultural
00:29:41.040 stuff this is
00:29:42.760 not cultural
00:29:43.360 relativism that
00:29:44.180 I'm doing
00:29:44.480 here cultural
00:29:45.860 relativism is
00:29:46.840 saying that each
00:29:47.920 culture makes
00:29:49.300 up its own
00:29:50.020 moral rules
00:29:51.060 there is no
00:29:52.060 inherent or
00:29:52.680 objective morality
00:29:53.560 and so whatever
00:29:54.480 is right in a
00:29:55.360 culture is
00:29:55.920 therefore right
00:29:56.480 I'm not saying
00:29:57.020 that if a
00:29:58.820 culture decides
00:29:59.780 that slavery
00:30:00.520 is okay it
00:30:01.240 doesn't make
00:30:01.540 it okay
00:30:01.820 but there are
00:30:04.100 some things
00:30:04.960 that that are
00:30:06.240 just conventions
00:30:07.380 and I think
00:30:08.140 that this is
00:30:08.820 one of them
00:30:09.180 when it comes
00:30:09.520 to your diet
00:30:10.160 okay that's
00:30:10.780 a classic
00:30:11.140 example aside
00:30:12.660 from things
00:30:13.000 like cannibalism
00:30:13.860 this is a
00:30:14.900 classic example
00:30:15.660 of a cultural
00:30:16.300 convention and
00:30:17.420 and that's
00:30:18.680 all let's
00:30:20.400 see this is
00:30:21.320 from Matt
00:30:22.080 says Matt
00:30:22.860 love the show
00:30:23.440 and I
00:30:23.680 appreciate your
00:30:24.380 insight quick
00:30:25.020 question how
00:30:26.000 would you refute
00:30:26.700 Buddhism why
00:30:28.600 does it seem
00:30:29.220 that so many
00:30:29.760 on the left
00:30:30.200 are more likely
00:30:30.760 to embrace
00:30:31.240 Buddhism go
00:30:33.220 Ravens yes
00:30:34.340 go Ravens
00:30:35.240 that's an
00:30:36.020 interesting
00:30:36.300 question and
00:30:37.080 the short
00:30:37.440 answer is I
00:30:38.320 don't know
00:30:39.380 the answer
00:30:39.780 to it
00:30:40.120 because I'm
00:30:40.760 not very
00:30:41.540 familiar with
00:30:42.560 Buddhism
00:30:42.940 certainly not
00:30:44.340 familiar enough
00:30:45.080 about it to
00:30:45.680 speak intelligently
00:30:46.500 about it for
00:30:47.040 very long
00:30:47.500 so I'm mainly
00:30:49.020 reading your
00:30:49.520 email because
00:30:51.100 I'm interested
00:30:52.480 to see if
00:30:53.100 other listeners
00:30:54.500 maybe know
00:30:55.100 something about
00:30:55.620 it and want
00:30:55.920 to chime
00:30:56.220 in and this
00:30:58.800 is something
00:30:59.120 that I've
00:30:59.420 thought about
00:30:59.780 it does seem
00:31:00.980 like obviously
00:31:02.200 there's Buddhism
00:31:03.080 has an appeal
00:31:03.840 in the West
00:31:04.440 especially
00:31:05.460 among people
00:31:06.620 on the left
00:31:07.160 why is that
00:31:09.260 exactly it's an
00:31:09.860 interesting question
00:31:10.640 based on my
00:31:11.740 very limited
00:31:12.440 knowledge of
00:31:13.080 Buddhism I'll
00:31:13.720 say first of
00:31:14.240 all that I
00:31:14.620 think you have
00:31:15.140 to distinguish
00:31:15.620 between Buddhism
00:31:17.380 as a sort of
00:31:18.500 system of thought
00:31:19.520 and outlook
00:31:20.180 a philosophy
00:31:21.260 even a
00:31:23.360 self-help
00:31:24.320 method so
00:31:25.700 there's that
00:31:26.820 sort of
00:31:27.300 Buddhism and
00:31:27.940 then you have
00:31:28.600 Buddhism as a
00:31:29.480 traditional religion
00:31:30.280 with metaphysical
00:31:31.680 claims and
00:31:33.800 I think many
00:31:34.660 Buddhists do
00:31:35.620 practice it as
00:31:36.500 a religion and
00:31:37.300 do believe the
00:31:38.360 metaphysical claims
00:31:39.300 of Buddhism but
00:31:41.580 the Western
00:31:42.100 liberals who find
00:31:43.220 Buddhism appealing
00:31:43.940 the ones you're
00:31:44.360 talking about
00:31:45.000 they're not
00:31:45.680 looking at it as
00:31:47.000 a religion
00:31:47.440 they're going to
00:31:49.020 it for more of
00:31:49.640 the psychological
00:31:50.360 aspects
00:31:50.920 now the
00:31:54.020 reason why they
00:31:54.660 would flock to
00:31:55.280 Buddhism over
00:31:55.880 Christianity I
00:31:56.640 think is easy
00:31:57.160 enough to see
00:31:57.880 Christianity makes
00:31:58.900 moral demands
00:31:59.960 whereas Buddhism
00:32:01.720 Buddhism in the
00:32:02.560 form that they
00:32:03.120 find appealing
00:32:03.720 does not
00:32:04.420 I also think
00:32:06.200 that even
00:32:07.380 religious even
00:32:08.600 even non-religious
00:32:09.540 people have a
00:32:10.440 desire an
00:32:12.860 innate desire
00:32:13.680 for some kind
00:32:15.140 of system some
00:32:16.380 kind of philosophy
00:32:17.240 that brings order
00:32:18.980 and meaning to
00:32:19.580 life and so
00:32:21.100 that's why they're
00:32:22.140 looking at
00:32:22.460 Buddhism but
00:32:24.200 then I also
00:32:25.180 think that we
00:32:25.760 should acknowledge
00:32:26.700 that Buddhism as
00:32:28.960 I understand it
00:32:29.900 does have
00:32:31.000 certain insights
00:32:31.880 into the human
00:32:32.760 condition
00:32:33.320 insights about
00:32:34.640 suffering about
00:32:35.620 contentment and
00:32:37.600 this is where I
00:32:38.060 might start
00:32:38.440 mangling things
00:32:39.260 but I think
00:32:42.440 two of the
00:32:42.900 main insights
00:32:44.600 Buddhism offers
00:32:45.420 from a
00:32:45.740 psychological
00:32:46.140 standpoint are
00:32:47.780 one that to
00:32:49.520 live is to
00:32:49.980 suffer
00:32:50.280 Buddhists were
00:32:52.380 not the first to
00:32:52.980 think of that
00:32:53.340 one but it is
00:32:54.420 an important
00:32:54.740 insight
00:32:55.100 suffering is a
00:32:57.440 part of life
00:32:57.880 okay that's
00:32:58.520 that's important
00:32:59.000 yeah and
00:33:00.680 then number
00:33:01.000 two
00:33:01.440 suffering is
00:33:03.920 born from
00:33:04.620 desire so
00:33:06.180 we suffer
00:33:07.800 because of
00:33:08.460 what we
00:33:09.480 want in
00:33:11.200 all cases of
00:33:11.960 suffering you're
00:33:13.140 suffering because
00:33:14.000 something is not
00:33:15.000 happening that you
00:33:15.780 wish was happening
00:33:16.740 or something is
00:33:19.520 happening that you
00:33:20.140 wish was not
00:33:20.620 happening and
00:33:22.240 that's sums up
00:33:23.400 all forms of
00:33:24.420 suffering for
00:33:24.940 human beings
00:33:25.460 it's your desire
00:33:28.140 for a thing to
00:33:29.140 stop or for a
00:33:30.380 thing to start as
00:33:31.580 the case may be
00:33:32.140 that really creates
00:33:32.840 suffering so the
00:33:33.580 Buddhist says if
00:33:34.380 you overcome
00:33:34.800 desire if you
00:33:36.820 overcome attachment
00:33:37.960 if you become
00:33:39.460 unattached from
00:33:40.540 desire if you live
00:33:41.400 in the present
00:33:41.880 moment while
00:33:42.660 accepting all that
00:33:43.760 is happening
00:33:44.220 without wanting it
00:33:45.140 to be different
00:33:45.640 then you'll
00:33:46.600 overcome suffering
00:33:47.720 and you'll be
00:33:48.400 content and I
00:33:49.600 guess that's
00:33:50.100 supposed to be
00:33:50.540 zen and so
00:33:51.440 on
00:33:51.580 I think
00:33:52.540 there's a lot
00:33:53.000 to be said
00:33:53.500 for some of
00:33:55.100 that especially
00:33:56.800 in our culture
00:33:57.480 where we have
00:33:59.500 the ad industry
00:34:00.300 and the media
00:34:00.860 and Hollywood
00:34:01.420 etc.
00:34:02.800 constantly trying
00:34:03.780 to convince us
00:34:04.980 that we should
00:34:08.980 want what we
00:34:09.560 don't have and
00:34:10.160 we shouldn't
00:34:10.600 want what we
00:34:11.060 do have and
00:34:13.220 we have this
00:34:13.860 effect of
00:34:15.120 desires constantly
00:34:16.560 multiplying and
00:34:18.220 you turn on the
00:34:18.760 TV and you
00:34:19.560 develop a desire
00:34:20.480 for something that
00:34:21.280 you didn't even
00:34:21.680 know existed
00:34:22.200 before you
00:34:22.940 turned it on
00:34:23.420 and so we're
00:34:24.760 constantly wanting
00:34:25.600 things we don't
00:34:26.080 have right
00:34:26.500 and so yes
00:34:28.820 the more that we
00:34:29.720 focus on wanting
00:34:30.740 what we don't
00:34:31.220 have and not
00:34:32.000 wanting what we
00:34:32.600 do have the
00:34:33.740 more we will
00:34:34.180 suffer and yes
00:34:35.820 living in the
00:34:36.480 present moment
00:34:37.060 accepting it for
00:34:37.860 what it is is a
00:34:38.720 key to being
00:34:39.260 content and
00:34:39.840 healthy I think
00:34:42.020 that live in the
00:34:43.720 moment is one
00:34:45.420 of the wisest
00:34:46.260 cliches that
00:34:47.600 modern culture
00:34:48.400 seems to
00:34:49.220 seems to
00:34:51.800 enjoy you
00:34:52.840 know of all
00:34:53.780 the cliches
00:34:54.300 people say I
00:34:54.720 think living in
00:34:55.220 the moment is
00:34:55.740 is actually
00:34:56.660 there's a lot
00:34:57.380 of truth to
00:34:57.780 that if you
00:34:58.640 can if you
00:34:59.020 can manage
00:34:59.420 it and this
00:35:04.160 is something
00:35:04.540 that again this
00:35:05.200 isn't just
00:35:05.540 Buddhism Jesus
00:35:06.600 talks about this
00:35:07.280 in the Sermon
00:35:07.660 on the Mount
00:35:07.960 but I think
00:35:11.060 I think that
00:35:15.820 one of the
00:35:16.260 one of the
00:35:16.660 problems though
00:35:17.500 with Buddhism
00:35:19.060 is the danger
00:35:19.960 of making
00:35:20.420 people too
00:35:21.020 detached even
00:35:22.400 indifferent
00:35:22.900 because that's
00:35:26.440 the balance
00:35:27.020 where and I
00:35:28.940 think Jesus
00:35:29.300 does a good
00:35:29.780 job of
00:35:30.140 Jesus does a
00:35:31.260 good job of
00:35:31.660 this but I
00:35:33.380 think the
00:35:33.700 Sermon on the
00:35:34.080 Mount strikes
00:35:34.540 this balance
00:35:35.000 I'm not sure
00:35:36.620 how well
00:35:36.920 Buddhism strikes
00:35:37.520 it where you
00:35:39.080 want to live in
00:35:39.600 the moment you
00:35:40.100 can't be obsessed
00:35:40.700 with desires
00:35:41.380 but you also
00:35:42.260 have to care
00:35:42.940 you should care
00:35:44.640 about the
00:35:45.180 suffering of
00:35:45.660 others you
00:35:46.320 should care
00:35:46.660 about the
00:35:46.980 state of
00:35:47.240 the world
00:35:47.540 you should
00:35:47.880 care about
00:35:48.180 the state
00:35:48.440 of your
00:35:48.640 soul and
00:35:51.000 there are
00:35:51.280 good things
00:35:51.900 that you
00:35:52.100 should desire
00:35:52.540 you should
00:35:52.760 desire holiness
00:35:53.360 you should
00:35:53.960 desire
00:35:54.360 happiness
00:35:55.620 real happiness
00:35:56.740 for yourself
00:35:57.260 and for your
00:35:57.620 family and your
00:35:58.080 children right
00:35:58.880 so maybe that's
00:36:00.460 where some of
00:36:01.180 the problems
00:36:01.540 come in but
00:36:02.200 I said that I
00:36:02.900 wasn't that I
00:36:03.300 don't know a lot
00:36:03.700 about it I'm
00:36:04.040 not going to
00:36:04.300 talk about it
00:36:04.700 and I talked
00:36:04.980 about it for
00:36:05.260 15 minutes so
00:36:06.080 that's the way
00:36:06.520 this generally
00:36:07.080 goes and now
00:36:08.420 I will enjoy
00:36:09.160 all the emails
00:36:09.740 from people
00:36:10.260 informing me
00:36:10.940 that I know
00:36:11.260 nothing about
00:36:11.780 Buddhism which
00:36:12.480 is basically
00:36:13.100 true let's
00:36:15.460 go let's
00:36:16.300 see we do
00:36:16.560 one more
00:36:16.880 here this is
00:36:17.240 from John
00:36:17.740 says kind
00:36:18.480 sir while I
00:36:19.140 do agree with
00:36:19.720 you personally
00:36:20.360 on practically
00:36:20.840 all points on
00:36:21.520 abortion I am
00:36:22.220 still pro-choice
00:36:22.980 on a governmental
00:36:23.520 level and I
00:36:25.940 see it the
00:36:26.700 pro-life position
00:36:27.440 of any
00:36:29.020 termination
00:36:29.460 after conception
00:36:29.960 being equivalent
00:36:30.480 to murder as
00:36:31.860 a theocratic
00:36:32.600 imposition
00:36:33.280 sans God
00:36:35.380 the value of
00:36:36.500 human life is
00:36:37.140 arbitrary so the
00:36:38.080 line of what is
00:36:38.920 or isn't
00:36:39.320 murder is
00:36:39.740 arbitrary as
00:36:40.300 well to call
00:36:41.120 terminating a
00:36:41.940 blastocyst murder
00:36:44.100 hinges on the
00:36:44.860 religious belief of
00:36:46.100 inherent value of
00:36:46.900 human life it's
00:36:47.880 obvious that many
00:36:48.540 people in the
00:36:48.960 country feel that
00:36:50.340 at least at the
00:36:50.820 earliest stages of
00:36:51.560 development an
00:36:52.120 embryo doesn't
00:36:52.840 equal a human
00:36:53.440 life that being
00:36:54.080 the case you
00:36:54.640 must admit that
00:36:55.180 your standard is
00:36:55.880 exactly that your
00:36:57.120 standard and the
00:36:57.840 imposition of your
00:36:58.520 belief on the
00:36:59.000 other people would
00:36:59.780 be theocratic even
00:37:01.360 though science says
00:37:02.220 life starts a
00:37:03.580 conception science
00:37:04.460 can't assign value to
00:37:05.780 life our
00:37:06.640 constitution applying
00:37:07.640 only to citizens
00:37:08.400 would necessarily
00:37:09.040 exempt this life
00:37:09.920 from constitutional
00:37:10.520 protections on
00:37:11.320 life seeing how it
00:37:12.540 clearly is not a
00:37:13.560 US citizen how
00:37:15.000 would it not be the
00:37:15.740 height of theocracy to
00:37:16.880 force your religious
00:37:17.960 standards on others
00:37:18.960 using the powers of
00:37:20.100 the state it seems to
00:37:21.320 me all valuations of
00:37:22.420 human life at any
00:37:23.220 stage and in any
00:37:23.980 form should be for
00:37:24.820 the purposes of
00:37:25.460 non-theocratic state
00:37:26.420 completely arbitrary
00:37:27.580 and drawn on a
00:37:28.420 compromise of public
00:37:29.280 consensus can't wait
00:37:30.860 to hear why I'm
00:37:31.540 wrong well I agree
00:37:34.220 with much of what you
00:37:34.860 just said there
00:37:35.340 believe it or not
00:37:35.960 John you say that
00:37:37.520 without God the
00:37:38.180 value of human life
00:37:38.940 is arbitrary this is
00:37:40.480 probably true but you
00:37:42.620 must see the problem
00:37:43.500 for your position I
00:37:46.060 assume that you still
00:37:47.020 think that murdering
00:37:48.240 born humans should be
00:37:49.700 illegal right not to
00:37:52.220 mention rape slavery
00:37:53.520 kidnapping theft and so
00:37:55.020 on all of that should be
00:37:56.820 illegal I assume you
00:37:58.380 would you would say
00:37:59.000 well by your logic these
00:38:01.880 are also theocratic
00:38:03.220 impositions as you say
00:38:04.620 because they all hinge
00:38:05.880 on the belief the
00:38:07.340 doctrine of the value
00:38:09.760 and dignity of human
00:38:10.500 life and that
00:38:12.380 doctrine lies at the
00:38:13.820 foundation of our
00:38:14.500 country it's it's very
00:38:16.140 much a spiritual
00:38:17.180 doctrine so we can
00:38:19.240 have this argument
00:38:19.740 about whether or not
00:38:20.320 America was founded on
00:38:21.240 Christianity America
00:38:22.540 was not founded on
00:38:23.400 Christianity that much
00:38:24.180 is clear but it's also
00:38:25.340 clear that it was
00:38:26.760 founded on a belief in
00:38:28.160 God on a belief in the
00:38:29.120 supernatural and that's
00:38:32.440 why it says in our in
00:38:33.460 our you know founding
00:38:34.620 documents in the
00:38:36.700 Declaration of
00:38:37.200 Independence everything
00:38:41.020 there about you know
00:38:42.780 created equal everything
00:38:45.180 about human rights that
00:38:46.780 are are inherent to human
00:38:48.660 beings well I have never
00:38:52.440 heard of a I've never
00:38:54.480 heard anyone explain what
00:38:57.240 human rights could be
00:38:58.780 without some sort of
00:39:01.500 supernatural without
00:39:02.120 without introducing some
00:39:03.360 element of the supernatural
00:39:04.560 into it because without
00:39:08.440 that then human rights are
00:39:09.980 well you said yourself
00:39:10.720 arbitrary where does it
00:39:13.440 come from now you could
00:39:15.640 certainly argue that
00:39:16.560 without God the case
00:39:17.860 against abortion is
00:39:18.660 rather weak because who
00:39:19.920 says that unborn children
00:39:20.860 have a right to life what
00:39:22.440 does it mean where does
00:39:23.740 that right come from which
00:39:25.420 okay fine I agree with you
00:39:27.180 but then who says that
00:39:28.760 anybody has a right to
00:39:29.720 life what does it mean
00:39:31.660 for anyone to have a
00:39:32.680 right to life or to have
00:39:33.460 any other right to
00:39:34.140 anything else where does
00:39:35.560 that come from and I'm
00:39:38.300 not sure how an atheist
00:39:39.340 solves that problem but
00:39:40.780 if you manage to solve it
00:39:43.340 for born people then I
00:39:45.320 think you've also solved
00:39:46.180 it for unborn people
00:39:47.060 whatever you have to do in
00:39:49.400 your mind to come up with
00:39:50.640 some idea of born people
00:39:52.380 having human rights and
00:39:55.020 having the right to be free
00:39:56.000 from murder and torture
00:39:57.160 and all these things
00:39:57.920 however you do that in
00:40:00.300 your head without God
00:40:01.800 well I don't see why it
00:40:03.560 wouldn't apply to to the
00:40:04.520 unborn as well but if you
00:40:06.760 can't solve it then you
00:40:10.100 must either say that all
00:40:11.880 laws are arbitrary and
00:40:13.400 grounded in nothing and
00:40:14.520 that human rights are a
00:40:15.480 fiction or you must say
00:40:18.760 that human rights and
00:40:20.140 human dignity have some
00:40:21.340 other source and I'm not
00:40:22.920 sure what that other
00:40:23.520 source would be that's not
00:40:24.640 my problem to solve I
00:40:25.620 think it's yours but
00:40:27.260 whatever that other
00:40:27.820 source is if it exists
00:40:29.960 it's the source from which
00:40:32.620 the unborn draw as well
00:40:34.540 so I think that's the
00:40:38.000 issue that you that you
00:40:38.880 run up against now if you
00:40:42.240 want to take a totally
00:40:43.260 nihilistic approach and
00:40:46.760 say that life has no
00:40:47.700 meaning none of this means
00:40:48.800 anything there's no reason
00:40:49.960 what really why anybody
00:40:51.020 should be protected from
00:40:52.660 murder or rape or
00:40:53.480 anything else and but you
00:40:56.780 know we do it just because
00:40:57.620 it makes it easier on us
00:40:58.600 if you know it's easier to
00:41:00.780 have a society if we all
00:41:01.940 pretend that it's wrong to
00:41:03.480 rape and murder and kill
00:41:04.700 if that's what you want to
00:41:07.820 argue then I mean we could
00:41:09.760 have that argument I think
00:41:11.880 you have to make it clear
00:41:12.680 that that's where you're
00:41:13.400 coming from as a nihilist
00:41:15.780 who does just doesn't value
00:41:16.800 human life at all and I
00:41:20.640 admit that that would be a
00:41:21.680 more difficult conversation
00:41:22.620 to have because if we're
00:41:24.280 starting you know if we do
00:41:25.920 not have a starting
00:41:27.340 consensus that at the very
00:41:29.600 least human life has value
00:41:31.040 if we can't even agree on
00:41:31.900 that then it does make it
00:41:34.260 more difficult to have the
00:41:35.100 conversation but if that's
00:41:37.600 not the world you want to
00:41:38.460 live in if you want to live
00:41:41.860 in a world where things have
00:41:42.960 meaning and it's wrong to
00:41:45.220 kill people you know and
00:41:47.580 murderers should be punished
00:41:48.740 because what they did is
00:41:49.560 terrible if you want to
00:41:50.800 live in that world then I
00:41:53.400 don't see how you exclude
00:41:55.180 the unborn from that I
00:41:56.820 think that is the
00:41:57.620 arbitrary thing to do see
00:41:59.700 it's not me drawing an
00:42:00.740 arbitrary line I think it's
00:42:01.760 you if you agree that human
00:42:05.680 beings generally should be
00:42:07.520 protected from these things
00:42:08.620 what I'm saying is yeah I
00:42:10.520 agree I'm with you so these
00:42:12.860 are human beings why exclude
00:42:14.980 them what reason is there to
00:42:16.120 exclude them I kind of would
00:42:20.940 say that the burden of proof
00:42:22.000 is on you to come up with a
00:42:23.120 good reason for I think that
00:42:25.760 our starting point our default
00:42:27.560 position should just be
00:42:29.880 assuming that all human
00:42:32.160 beings in any stage of
00:42:33.860 development should be
00:42:36.020 protected from murder I think
00:42:38.500 that's our default if you want
00:42:41.320 to draw a line and start
00:42:42.820 excluding people then I think
00:42:45.240 you the burden of proof is on
00:42:47.000 you to come up to explain your
00:42:49.160 reason for that and I don't
00:42:54.400 think that you've done that
00:42:55.180 here but I appreciate the email
00:42:57.220 and I appreciate everybody for
00:42:59.600 listening and watching have a
00:43:01.020 great day Godspeed
00:43:01.900 if you enjoyed this episode
00:43:05.620 don't forget to subscribe and if
00:43:07.100 you want to help spread the word
00:43:08.020 please give us a five-star review
00:43:09.560 and tell your friends to
00:43:10.380 subscribe as well we're
00:43:11.440 available on Apple podcast
00:43:12.940 Spotify wherever you listen to
00:43:14.720 podcasts also be sure to check
00:43:16.340 out the other Daily Wire
00:43:17.400 podcast including the Ben
00:43:18.540 Shapiro show Michael Knowles
00:43:19.820 show and the Andrew Klavan show
00:43:21.440 thanks for listening the Matt
00:43:24.040 Wall show is produced by Sean
00:43:25.560 Hampton executive producer
00:43:27.000 Jeremy boring senior producer
00:43:28.840 Jonathan Hay supervising producer
00:43:30.860 Mathis Glover supervising
00:43:32.660 producer Robert Sterling
00:43:33.780 technical producer Austin
00:43:35.460 Stevens editor Donovan Fowler
00:43:37.600 audio mixer Mike Coromina the
00:43:39.940 Matt Wall show is a Daily Wire
00:43:41.020 production copyright Daily Wire
00:43:42.440 2019
00:43:43.060 hey everyone it's Andrew Klavan
00:43:45.480 host of the Andrew Klavan show
00:43:46.900 there's no question the left
00:43:48.540 owns American culture but
00:43:49.980 sometimes that backfires on
00:43:51.320 them the media told the
00:43:52.440 Democrats this Ukraine story was
00:43:54.100 a bombshell they told Kamala
00:43:55.860 Harris she was a top-tier
00:43:57.060 candidate but you can't tell a
00:43:58.540 good story without a core of
00:43:59.980 truth we have the truth on the
00:44:01.400 Andrew Klavan show I'm Andrew
00:44:02.980 Klavan
00:44:03.320 you