The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 413 - The Significance Of Celebrity Deaths

00:00:00.000 Well, thank you for being here, everybody. Welcome to the show. I hope your weekend was well spent.

00:00:04.640 We start today with the big news of the weekend, the terribly sad news, of course, of NBA legend

00:00:09.560 Kobe Bryant dying at the age of 41 alongside eight other people, which we shouldn't forget

00:00:15.280 to include, including his teenage daughter, Gianna, in a helicopter crash on Sunday. They were,

00:00:20.760 as I understand it, on their way to a travel basketball game. He was bringing his daughter

00:00:24.760 to her game, and the helicopter crashed. According to investigators today, the latest is that

00:00:31.300 they're saying it was probably weather-related. There was dense fog in the area at the time of the

00:00:34.980 crash. So I want to discuss a few things related to this story, and the first thing I want to talk

00:00:40.780 about is why a death like this, a celebrity death, affects people the way that it does. Why does it

00:00:48.520 get under our skin the way it does? Why are we so shocked by it? And my point is not to criticize

00:00:56.800 or complain about our tendency to care so much about celebrity deaths. I've seen some of that

00:01:01.820 online, and any time a famous person dies unexpectedly, there are always people saying,

00:01:07.960 oh, he was just a person like us, and why cry about this if you're not crying about the thousands

00:01:13.680 of other people who died across the world, you know, on any given day. I think those sorts of

00:01:19.940 comments deny something fundamental about human nature. It's normal that we care about it, and at

00:01:27.900 one level, it doesn't require explanation or justification. These are people who, if they're

00:01:33.300 famous people, whether they're, you know, famous actors or athletes or what have you, they are people

00:01:39.840 who, even if we didn't know them personally, they were still a part of our lives in some sense. Not

00:01:45.960 a central part, of course, but they were a part. And when they die, we do feel like we've lost

00:01:52.840 something, and we have. So I'm not looking to justify or explain, but I do think it's good to

00:02:00.860 understand. I want to try to understand why the death of somebody like Kobe Bryant tends to hit people

00:02:06.440 hard, aside from the obvious, which is the obvious things like he was a young man, he had a family,

00:02:11.960 his daughter was killed too. Those things are obviously make it all the more tragic, but I want

00:02:17.440 to go deeper than that. I think there's a deeper level of why we react the way we do to these sorts

00:02:22.580 of things, and I want to talk about that. And then also related to this story, unfortunately, we have to

00:02:26.780 discuss the media's embarrassing performance in reporting it. But as we discuss that, I am going to do

00:02:34.580 something I've probably never done before and may never do again, and that is defend an MSNBC anchor,

00:02:40.860 who's come under fire for something that happened while she was reporting about Kobe Bryant. But I'm

00:02:45.860 going to defend her, and there are others who I'm not going to defend because they're indefensible.

00:02:50.140 So we're going to get to all of that. But first, before we do, a word from ExpressVPN. Listen,

00:02:55.340 there are tons of VPN providers out there. You've probably heard of a couple of them.

00:02:58.300 And some of you maybe have used a VPN before, but I only recommend brands to my listeners that

00:03:04.520 I believe in. If I don't like the product, if I don't believe what the company's marketing team

00:03:10.640 is saying to sell the product, then I'm not going to endorse it. And by the way, I've turned potential

00:03:16.500 sponsors away before because, well, I didn't believe in their product. But I can say with full

00:03:22.320 confidence that ExpressVPN is my favorite VPN on the market. Here's why. ExpressVPN doesn't log

00:03:28.600 your data. Lots of really cheap or free VPNs make money by selling your data to ad companies. You

00:03:34.380 don't want that. That's the last thing you want. ExpressVPN developed a technology called trusted

00:03:38.380 server that makes it impossible for their servers to log any of your info. Second, and this for me is

00:03:45.460 probably the most important thing, especially for what I do for a living, is speed. Many slow your

00:03:50.620 connection down or they make your device sluggish. With ExpressVPN, my internet speeds are blazing

00:03:57.340 fast. And unlike other VPNs, you don't have to input or program anything to use ExpressVPN. You just

00:04:03.000 fire up the app, click one button to connect, and it's as simple as that. So it's quick, it's fast,

00:04:11.060 your data is secure. And it's not just me saying this. TechRadar, The Verge, CNET, many other tech

00:04:17.280 experts. Rate ExpressVPN, the number one VPN in the world. So to protect yourself with the VPN that I

00:04:23.100 use and trust, use my link, expressvpn.com slash Walsh today. That's expressvpn.com slash Walsh. And

00:04:31.860 you get an extra three months free on a one-year package. Visit expressvpn.com slash Walsh to learn

00:04:38.500 more. Okay, so here's my thought as we get back to Kobe Bryant. Because I've been thinking about this,

00:04:44.500 why do we tend to react so strongly to celebrity deaths, especially when the celebrity in question

00:04:49.160 is young and healthy and, you know, not known for reckless behavior? Not a celebrity who, in the back

00:04:56.140 of your mind, you're kind of expecting might die of an overdose or something like that. And not a

00:05:01.580 celebrity who's been around for 60 years and is getting older. And, you know, the ones in those

00:05:05.980 categories where you're sort of expecting this news about them. So when you go online and you

00:05:10.720 see their name trending, you immediately think, oh, well, yeah, I guess it, I guess it finally

00:05:15.120 happened. With, I think, Kobe Bryant, a lot of people had the same experience I did. I learned

00:05:19.140 about it on social media. I saw his name trending on Twitter and I thought, oh, I don't know, did he

00:05:23.560 say something controversial or whatever? Then you click on it and it's the last thing you expect to

00:05:27.380 see is that he's dead. And that's what makes the reaction all the stronger. And a big part of the

00:05:34.080 sadness is simply, as I said, that he was a young man, a father, his child died with him, which makes

00:05:40.380 it just ghastly or even ghastlier than it already would have been anyway. So that's part of it. But

00:05:46.320 I think there's something deeper, which is this. We spend so much of our lives, you know, hiding from

00:05:55.460 the fact that we are mortal beings. And then something like this happens unexpectedly and

00:06:03.380 forces us to acknowledge this reality, a reality, a terrible reality, that death is always with us,

00:06:10.260 always walking alongside us. And at any moment, it can point its finger at you and say, now's your

00:06:18.320 time. And it will happen. It absolutely will happen to you, to me, to all of us, no matter

00:06:24.920 what. It's as simple as that. Now, we know this, of course. You know, we all know it. Nobody is

00:06:33.000 surprised to learn that human beings are mortal. I'm not saying that we're surprised in that sense.

00:06:39.380 But in a way, we are surprised to learn it, I guess, because we spend so much time repressing

00:06:46.920 that knowledge and keeping those thoughts at bay. And then when the reality of death hits us in the

00:06:52.900 face from an unexpected direction, it's almost as if we have to relearn the fact that human beings are

00:06:59.680 mortal. I remember talking to my wife about this yesterday when I got home. And she said, oh, did you

00:07:06.120 hear about Kobe Bryant? And I said, yeah. And then I said, oh, it's crazy. Crazy. That was the first

00:07:12.080 first word I said. But really, it's not crazy at all, is it? Someone dying? Well, that's about the

00:07:20.560 least crazy thing they can do. It's the most normal thing in the world, actually. It's the one thing that

00:07:26.660 everybody does. And all of us will do. So what's crazy about it? Sad? Sure. Unwelcome? Yeah. Crazy? No.

00:07:35.960 It only seems crazy because, again, we keep death thoughts at bay by lying to ourselves and telling

00:07:43.720 ourselves that death is something that can be controlled, if not avoided altogether. We can

00:07:48.980 at least control it. We can hold it off at a distance because it's not our time, whatever that

00:07:54.100 means. If we're young and we have plans and we have stuff to do, we think, no, I can't die now. I've got

00:07:59.180 all these plans. I've got stuff on the calendar, see? But death doesn't care about that, doesn't

00:08:05.580 care about our plans or our age or anything, really. Again, none of this is a revelation.

00:08:13.040 None of this is news to anyone, but it is a stark reality that we don't dwell on, most of us. We try

00:08:18.100 not to think about it. And then somebody dies, somebody who, in our minds, very much belong in

00:08:24.460 the category of living, someone like a still young sports legend. They die and we're forced to peer

00:08:31.580 over at the reaper in the room, the dude with the cloak and the scythe, and go, oh yeah. Oh yeah.

00:08:39.960 And it can also be disturbing, I think, to watch somebody kind of go from present to past,

00:08:46.960 to watch someone who is turn abruptly into was. Especially, again, when in our minds,

00:08:56.080 it's too early for that, whatever that means. Especially when there's no gradual transition

00:09:01.500 from is to was. Somebody dies from a disease over time and there's sort of this transition

00:09:08.500 where you're getting ready for it. But in a case like this, it's just the person is,

00:09:14.720 and then they become a was, 10 seconds later, out of nowhere. And it's disturbing because we know

00:09:22.020 that the same thing will happen to us. One day we will be a past event, you know, a memory,

00:09:27.820 and then not even that. There was a book written decades ago by a guy named Ernest Becker,

00:09:34.100 which I just read recently, as a matter of fact. Somebody recommended it to me.

00:09:38.680 And the book is called Denial of Death. He was a psychoanalyst. And there's a lot in his theory

00:09:45.420 that I don't agree with. And there's a lot in psychoanalysis that I find to be pseudoscientific,

00:09:50.760 you know, silliness, really. But the central thesis of his book, in my opinion, is compelling

00:09:55.260 and persuasive. And it relates to what I'm saying now. He argued that our repressed anxiety about death

00:10:03.400 is a driving factor in our lives and in a culture. And so much of human culture, in fact,

00:10:08.860 according to him, is set up specifically to distract us from and to evade thoughts of death.

00:10:19.240 So much of human culture, really, at the end of the day, is about managing terror. It's about

00:10:24.340 managing our terror of death, even if it is a repressed or suppressed terror. I think there's a lot

00:10:30.300 of truth to that. And by the way, interesting fact about Ernest Becker, he won the Pulitzer Prize for

00:10:36.020 that book a few months after it was released. But he wasn't around to receive the award because he

00:10:41.960 died shortly after finishing the book. So a morbid illustration of his point, I suppose.

00:10:50.400 Okay, well, all of that is thoroughly depressing. But I was thinking about it and

00:10:55.920 I wanted to share it. So there's that. More discuss on this in just a moment. But first,

00:11:04.340 a word from LifeLock. You know, we all spend a lot of time online and we put our information out there,

00:11:09.820 all kinds of information about us. The scary thing is that this leaves us vulnerable, right,

00:11:15.180 to identity theft, which is why in this day and age, if you don't have some kind of protection

00:11:18.880 against identity theft, it's recklessness. It's crazy not to have protection. And that's why you need

00:11:23.700 LifeLock. Every two seconds, there's a victim of identity theft, which means a criminal could be

00:11:27.820 spending your money, applying for loans in your name, even damaging the credit that you've worked

00:11:33.160 hard to build up over time. And checking bank statements and monitoring your credit yourself

00:11:37.580 isn't going to be enough because you could still miss threats to your identity. Good thing there's

00:11:41.700 LifeLock, identity theft protection. LifeLock uses proprietary technology to detect and alert you to a wide

00:11:48.740 range of potential identity threats like your social security number for sale on the dark web.

00:11:55.100 Stuff that you would never be able to find on your own unless you peruse the dark web, if you even know

00:11:58.880 how to do that, which I don't. And if you do have an issue involving identity theft, one of LifeLock's

00:12:05.320 identity restoration specialists will work to fix it. Of course, no one can prevent all identity theft or

00:12:10.980 monitor all transactions at all businesses. But with LifeLock, you get identity theft protection to help

00:12:16.800 protect your devices against cyber threats for up to 25% off your first year. Just go to

00:12:22.660 LifeLock.com slash Walsh. That's LifeLock.com slash Walsh for 25% off. Again, that's LifeLock.com

00:12:30.180 slash Walsh. Okay, well, the other inevitable thing about celebrity deaths is that people, especially

00:12:36.540 people in the media, will try to capitalize on the tragedy by posting hot takes as soon as the death

00:12:42.860 occurs, because they're trying to get attention. And there was a lot of that happening yesterday. And I don't

00:12:48.020 want to highlight most of it, because they're doing it for attention. And if I give them attention, I'm doing

00:12:52.080 exactly what they want. So I don't want to do that. But there is one especially notable example, I think, a

00:12:58.680 Washington Post reporter, Felicia Sonmez, posted an article about Kobe Bryant's rape case. She posted this

00:13:07.440 article. Now, it's not an article she wrote. It was the Daily Beast wrote it years ago. But what made

00:13:14.720 this so callous and, you know, calling it tacky would be way underselling it. She posted this article

00:13:24.180 literally hours after he had died in a fiery wreck alongside his teenage daughter. I mean, just really

00:13:30.800 didn't wait very long at all. Didn't even wait for the bodies to be pulled from the wreckage.

00:13:35.680 And she's posting this article. And there was no tweet before this one expressing condolences or even

00:13:41.900 reporting on the story. Instead, the very first thing she says about it, the very first reaction that

00:13:50.640 she offers, is calling attention to his rape case 15 years ago. And there was a lot of that, actually.

00:13:56.960 And like I said, I'm not going to specifically call attention to most of it. But a lot of prominent

00:14:01.980 prominent people, especially prominent women on Twitter, immediately tweeting about Kobe's rape case.

00:14:07.740 Some actually calling him a rapist, despite the fact that he was never convicted of anything, by the way.

00:14:13.520 Now, Felicia has been suspended by the Washington Post, not for the rape tweet, but for follow-up tweets 0.90

00:14:20.840 where she posted screenshots of angry emails she had gotten with the full names of the people.

00:14:26.640 And so that was a violation of company policy. And she was suspended for that. But she offered

00:14:32.480 no apology in her follow-up tweets. And she made herself the victim. She said, oh, geez, look at all

00:14:36.960 these mean things people are saying about me. As if she wasn't expecting that, right? As if that wasn't

00:14:42.000 the entire point, was to garner this negative attention for herself, using the death of a person, 0.99

00:14:48.860 of nine people as a way to do it. So that's all, you know, I don't even want to get into it because

00:14:57.400 this is the point. It's like not what we should be talking about right now. But all these people

00:15:03.180 posting about Kobe Bryant's rape case, I do think it's relevant to note, as I said, that not only is

00:15:11.880 just not the time, but by the way, he was never convicted of anything. So you're putting this out

00:15:20.220 there right after he dies. He's not around to defend himself. But, you know, who cares? We're

00:15:25.740 going to, it's, there's no, you know, slander a dead man. This is just what we do now. But as I said,

00:15:34.820 I do want to also defend at least one person in the media. Lots of people on social media have been

00:15:40.080 whipping up outrage against an MSNBC anchor who, according to them, said the N word on air while

00:15:46.320 discussing Kobe Bryant. Maybe you've heard this, but here's that moment where she supposedly used

00:15:50.960 the N word on MSNBC. Listen to this. Yeah, it seems like he was just the kind of athlete,

00:15:56.660 the kind of star that was perfectly cast on the Los Angeles Nakers, Los Angeles Lakers. Kavita,

00:16:03.000 if I could ask you to stay with us. So a lot of people shared that saying, oh my gosh,

00:16:08.240 she said the N word, she's racist, so on and so forth. The anchor though came out and clarified

00:16:13.480 that she didn't say the N word. She was actually about to say Nicks, but then stumbles and changes

00:16:20.000 it to Lakers midstream. So she almost said Los Angeles Nicks and changed it. And then it came

00:16:26.760 out as Nickers. So you can hear the K sound, the Nick. You can hear that K sound in the clip. 0.97

00:16:32.220 There was no G sound. And that explanation makes sense. Okay. It's a stumble. Sometimes people

00:16:38.040 mess up sports teams and names and things. And so it's a verbal stumble. It happens. It happens to

00:16:43.680 all of us. We all do it. And if you spend a lot of time on TV, you're going to do it on TV sometimes.

00:16:49.380 Now to say Los Angeles, Los Angeles N words wouldn't even make sense. I mean, even if she's a secret

00:16:56.860 racist and she says the N word all the time in her private life, which I doubt is the case, but 0.84

00:17:01.880 my point is, even if it were, it wouldn't make any sense for her to say Los Angeles N words.

00:17:09.260 Certainly to do it on purpose. I mean, is that the theory here that she's some kind of racist and 0.99

00:17:14.580 she thought that now would be a time to throw the N word out there and ruin her career, her life in

00:17:19.420 the process? Really? Or maybe, maybe she, she, it was a slip of the tongue, like a Freudian slip

00:17:25.400 revealing her racism. Well, but again, even as a slip of the tongue, it doesn't, it makes sense as

00:17:31.540 a stumble, a stutter. It's just, you're jumbling up words, but as a slip of the tongue where she

00:17:36.660 accidentally said a racial slur that she had in her head, but didn't want to say out loud,

00:17:41.660 it doesn't even make any sense that that theory makes no sense. That's not how the mind works.

00:17:49.420 Um, yet this is what people do. It doesn't matter if it doesn't make sense.

00:17:57.420 What we do now is we look for the most negative possible interpretation of everything. We are

00:18:04.520 constantly searching for reasons to destroy anyone and everyone for anything. And so we extend no grace,

00:18:12.640 no understanding at all, none. Okay. We, we dig for the absolute worst possible interpretation.

00:18:23.120 Doesn't matter if it's plausible. Doesn't matter if it's likely, but if it's a possible interpretation,

00:18:29.820 because yeah, it is, it is, it's possible that she really said the N word because she's a racist and

00:18:36.220 it just slipped out. Um, it's not plausible. That it's not very plausible. It's not likely.

00:18:42.660 It doesn't make a lot of sense, but yeah, it's possible. So what people do is they say, well,

00:18:47.260 it's possible. So let's just go with that. It's possible and it's negative and it would destroy

00:18:53.200 her. I don't know her. I've got nothing against her personally, but let's just go with it because,

00:18:57.400 hey, um, just going for the worst interpreter, the worst spin, trying to paint people in the worst 0.97

00:19:06.860 light all the time. And it's, it's, I mean, it's evil, honestly, it's an evil thing. We act like evil

00:19:16.980 people when we do that. Now, maybe you could say what I'm saying here is a little bit self-serving

00:19:22.680 because people do this kind of thing to me and I get frustrated. And maybe there is an element of

00:19:27.200 that. I admit, um, this is something people do to me where I'll say something and, you know, maybe I

00:19:33.680 was, I didn't word it exactly right. And it was a little bit clumsy. And maybe if you take this part

00:19:39.800 out of context, you can kind of make it seem like something else. And people do that to me. And yeah,

00:19:45.560 it's frustrating because, you know, my point is always, do you, do you really think that's what I

00:19:51.760 meant to say? Is it, do you really think that I meant to say that? No, you don't. It's just,

00:19:57.440 you can make it seem like I maybe meant to say that. And so even if you don't believe it, you're

00:20:02.640 going with it. Um, but anybody who speaks in public to any kind of audience in any forum will have to

00:20:12.480 deal with this now where people are casually sort of ripped to shreds, casually smeared and slandered

00:20:20.960 on the flimsiest pretense. And why? For fun, I guess, mostly. Now I've heard some conservatives

00:20:30.380 who've said, well, she works for MSNBC and they do this kind of thing to people all the time. So,

00:20:34.760 so she deserves it. Really? She deserves to be dishonestly smeared and potentially have her career 1.00

00:20:41.260 ruined because you don't like the media company she works for? I mean, how would you react to that

00:20:46.800 if somebody used the same logic with Fox News? What if somebody who hates Fox News smeared somebody on

00:20:51.580 Fox News dishonestly and said, well, it doesn't matter if it's true or not. They work for Fox. They

00:20:56.460 deserve it. I mean, do you hear yourself? And don't you hate MSNBC precisely because of their propensity

00:21:07.560 to be dishonest? Yet now you're advocating for dishonesty yourself. So you apparently have no

00:21:15.780 problem with dishonesty. So why? So then what's your problem with MSNBC? Is this really a, well,

00:21:22.980 they started it. They started it. Yeah. I mean, I don't like being dishonest and smearing people,

00:21:28.460 but they did it first. So what am I going to do? Have principles? What am I going to do? Have

00:21:33.080 integrity? What am I going to be a good person? Well, no, I can't be that. No, I'm a piece of

00:21:40.280 garbage just like them, but, uh, I'm a different kind of piece of garbage. So, you know,

00:21:44.700 I, I, I hate this so much. And especially when people try to justify it on ideological

00:21:52.620 grounds or they try to justify it as I'm a, I'm just fighting. You don't, you don't,

00:21:57.460 you don't have the guts. You don't have the, uh, stomach to fight. Like I'm fighting. We

00:22:02.160 got to fight them. You're not fighting. This is not for you. Retweet, you, you know, you

00:22:07.100 accusing someone of something that you know, isn't true online. That's not you fight. What

00:22:10.820 are you? You're a warrior now. No, you're just a small, pathetic little liar. And I don't

00:22:21.620 know. You, you, you think you, um, achieve some kind of victory by becoming that? I don't

00:22:27.380 think so. It's, it's just, it's all a bunch of nihilistic Machiavellian ends justify the

00:22:36.580 means nonsense. And I wish we would, we would stop, especially when, look, if you're looking

00:22:43.040 to, uh, criticize MSNBC, there are so many valid avenues of criticism that you could turn

00:22:53.220 on MSNBC anytime and find completely legitimate, honest, uh, righteous reasons to criticize.

00:23:03.520 You don't need to latch onto something like this. All right, let's move on and over, unfortunately,

00:23:10.500 to politics backing up. Um, well, let's, let's back up a moment. There's been a controversy,

00:23:16.280 more controversy, uh, this time because Joe Rogan endorsed Bernie Sanders and didn't really

00:23:23.280 endorse, I mean, it wasn't like an official endorsement. He said, Rogan said on his podcast

00:23:27.420 a few days ago that he's probably going to vote for Bernie Sanders. And I, I, I think he

00:23:33.080 was talking about in the primary, first of all. Um, but you want to call that an endorsement

00:23:38.920 and, and then Sanders campaign ran with it and, and acted like it was a full throated

00:23:42.800 endorsement. Why is this controversial? Well, um, and is it that Rogan's conservative listeners

00:23:49.700 are up in arms? Uh, are, are they upset about it? No, not from what I've seen. I'm a conservative

00:23:55.980 and I'm a Rogan fan and I don't care that he's going to vote for Bernie Sanders. It makes

00:23:59.800 no difference to me. He's got his own opinion. We don't line up exactly politically. I already

00:24:04.300 knew that. I don't care. It makes no difference. Um, the controversy is from the left, from

00:24:09.720 progressives who say that Rogan, excuse me, is a bigot and a bad guy. And thus now Bernie

00:24:16.500 is tainted by the bigotry. Bernie is now a bigot due to his proximity to this other alleged

00:24:22.020 bigot. Now, why is Rogan a bigot? Well, apparently he's told a bunch of mean jokes. He is a comedian.

00:24:27.760 And, uh, if you go through his whole catalog of jokes, look, speaking of, of taking things

00:24:33.540 out of context and being dishonest and trying to smear people, well, now we're doing it with

00:24:37.260 Joe Rogan. He's a comedian. He's got hours and hundreds of hours of material out there

00:24:41.880 through his podcast and his standup career. And so now they're digging through all of that,

00:24:46.960 trying to find isolated incidents out of context, him saying a bad word or saying a bad thing.

00:24:52.240 Um, that's part of it. And then, but I think the, the bigger part and the reason why they're doing

00:24:59.120 this in the first place where they're digging through and looking for out of context bits to

00:25:03.220 use against him. The reason they're doing that is because he raised their ire a few years ago,

00:25:08.420 Rogan did when he came out against men, men competing in women's sports. So Rogan, especially in the MMA.

00:25:16.880 Um, so Rogan took the radical position that men are men and thus should compete against other men

00:25:28.140 and not against women. And this is inexcusable, uh, according to the left. It's, um, this is

00:25:37.300 transphobia. It's bigotry. It's wicked. It's evil. So on and so forth. Well, other candidates are

00:25:44.480 looking to capitalize. And that's why Biden came out over the weekend with a brief statement

00:25:48.540 and he said, quote, transgender equality is the civil rights issue of our time.

00:25:56.060 There is no room for compromise when it comes to basic human rights.

00:26:01.140 The civil rights issue of our time. Really?

00:26:06.360 Now, first of all, obviously from my perspective, and if you're not a radical left winger,

00:26:13.300 from your perspective, this is already crazy. The idea that trans equality is a civil rights 0.98

00:26:19.740 issue of our time. I would say the civil rights issue of our time is abortion. But even from a 0.63

00:26:25.700 leftist perspective, if you didn't know any better, wouldn't you expect them to say that,

00:26:31.580 you know, I don't know, something like police brutality or, you know, mass incarceration or

00:26:37.540 something like that is the civil rights issue of our time. You'd expect, if you didn't know any

00:26:40.920 better, you would expect them to go with something racial as being the civil rights issue of our

00:26:46.200 time. And at least in that case, now, I don't think that police brutality is the civil rights

00:26:52.300 issue of our time, but at least in that case, there's some meat on the bones there. And you

00:26:55.540 can, there's something really, there's some kind of argument you could make reasonably that it's at

00:27:02.200 least an issue. But no, they go with trans equality. They say that allowing men to change

00:27:12.380 in the women's locker room, that is the civil rights issue of our time, the number one most 1.00

00:27:16.940 important thing. Now, this only surprises you if you don't understand how leftism actually works and

00:27:25.160 the victim pyramid, as I've explained many times. Trans people are the uber victims, the ultimate 1.00

00:27:32.380 victims, and their victimhood claims trounce all other claims. Doesn't matter that most of their

00:27:38.960 victimhood claims are utterly superfluous and ridiculous. And in fact, what they are asking is

00:27:46.120 that they should be allowed to victimize other people by, for example, cheating women out of gold

00:27:52.880 medals in their sports and championships and by taking away their privacy in the locker room. Like

00:27:58.060 what they really want is to, is to be the victimizers of women when they advocate for those sorts of

00:28:05.200 things. Um, but that doesn't matter because they, this is how it works. They, they are at the very top.

00:28:11.540 And so all of their victimhood claims are not only correct and right and unquestionable, but also are,

00:28:19.040 are the most important victimhood claims that anybody makes.

00:28:23.880 So Biden understands all this and he is dutifully playing along with it. Um, but I would like to ask

00:28:31.340 Biden a question if I had a chance or, or really if we had a real news media, this is a question they

00:28:36.000 would ask, especially at a debate. And it's a very relevant, pertinent question. And, and that is simply

00:28:40.700 this, um, Joe Biden, when did you decide all of this? So you've decided that trans, trans equality is a

00:28:51.760 civil rights issue of our time. You've decided you, and so, and so thus you must have also decided

00:28:57.080 that men can be women. If you haven't decided that, then it doesn't make any sense at all to say that

00:29:03.560 this is a civil rights issue of our time. So you've decided that a dude with a penis and XY chromosomes 0.59

00:29:11.060 can be a woman and that he has a God given right to go into women's locker room. And if you don't allow 0.96

00:29:18.080 him to, it becomes a civil rights issue of our time. When, when did you decide that? Because you're

00:29:25.060 what, almost 80 years old. So nearly 80 years on this earth. And you never mentioned this before.

00:29:32.360 Before, like, just five seconds ago. You spent well over the first 70 years of your life never

00:29:39.700 mentioning any of this. Not once. I mean, go back to any other time. Go back to the early 2000s.

00:29:47.180 Or even the mid-2010s. Certainly go back to the 90s, the 80s, the 70s. This guy's been in public

00:29:52.720 life this whole time. You think you're going to find him saying anything about transgender equality?

00:29:59.660 What if you asked him back in the early 2000s when he was at the very young age of, you know,

00:30:06.340 50 or something or 60. If you'd asked him, a person with a penis, can that be a woman? 0.89

00:30:16.540 Or if you'd asked him, can men get pregnant? What do you think you would have said?

00:30:20.040 Did he believe this whole time that actually men can get pregnant? And never said anything? Or

00:30:27.620 probably not. So he had some sort of, not just him, but Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, all these

00:30:33.880 people. At some point, very late in life, he had this transformation, this conversion experience,

00:30:40.160 where he realized somehow that, oh, you know what, actually. So what, can you explain it? I think

00:30:46.080 it's a very valid question, isn't it? I just want to know what happened. Was there some sort of

00:30:50.260 scientific breakthrough that I'd never heard about? Did you have a vision? Did you have a dream?

00:30:56.360 Was this a road to Damascus type of moment? What was it? Now, of course, I know the answer to that 0.84

00:31:04.740 question. What was it is, what it was, is just the political winds shifting and his base and the

00:31:10.200 Democrat Party going so far left, especially in recent years. That's what happened, but he's not

00:31:15.140 going to say that. So what would he say? It was somewhat easy for guys like Obama. Obama, who we

00:31:25.540 forget, we often forget, was elected in 2008 as an opponent of same-sex marriage. And then in 2012,

00:31:34.320 for the re-election, magically, he was a proponent of it. And he was asked to explain that. And it was

00:31:40.820 pretty easy for him to say, oh, I've evolved on the issue and I've realized the blah, blah, blah.

00:31:47.060 It would be a little bit more difficult and awkward to say that you evolved on the issue of

00:31:54.260 whether or not women can have penises. But because what could possibly justify that evolution? 0.51

00:31:59.980 And the thing is, the media knows that it would be very embarrassing for Democrats to have to try to

00:32:06.780 justify and explain this nonsense. And so they're never asked to. And as I often say, this goes to

00:32:16.840 show that media bias and fake news and all that, it's usually about what isn't said. The questions that

00:32:24.900 aren't asked. The stories that aren't covered. The angles that are not exploited. It's usually not

00:32:31.440 about what is being covered and what is being said. Sometimes it's that. And it's not usually that

00:32:37.880 they're making up stories that didn't happen, although sometimes they do that too.

00:32:42.600 But mostly, it's just about what they ignore. And this is a great example of that.

00:32:47.140 Where they have, I think, silently conspired. It's a sort of silent understanding they all have in

00:32:52.960 left-wing media. We are not going to ask these people this question. Yeah, we'll ask them very,

00:32:58.860 very broad, give them an opportunity for platitudes where we just say, oh, how do you feel about this?

00:33:05.340 We give them a chance to talk about the need to be accepting of transgender people. But we're not 1.00

00:33:11.560 going to dig down into that even one inch deeper and ask them something like, when and why did you decide?

00:33:19.680 When and how did you change your mind? Yeah, we asked them that about same-sex marriage.

00:33:28.640 And we would still ask them that now because we know that they have a relatively non-embarrassing

00:33:34.140 answer ready for it. But they couldn't possibly have a non-embarrassing answer for this because

00:33:39.440 it's crazy. And so we're just not going to ask. All right, let's see. Before we get to emails,

00:33:46.620 I did want to mention the Grammys last night. I don't know who was nominated. I don't know who

00:33:53.460 won most of the awards. Doesn't matter. But there was one little thing that I want to highlight just

00:33:57.280 because it shows you the state of the music industry. The great John Prine won a Lifetime

00:34:02.580 Achievement Award. If you don't know who John Prine is, what are you doing with your life? But do yourself

00:34:08.960 a favor and look him up on iTunes. And I only say, I meet people. When I get to talk about music with

00:34:14.860 people, I often meet people who have never heard of this guy somehow. He's a musical legend. Okay.

00:34:19.860 So look him up on YouTube or something and do yourself a favor. Anyway, he won Lifetime Achievement

00:34:24.160 Award. Well-deserved. And he is one of our great living artists. And then Bonnie Raitt, speaking of

00:34:31.940 great living artists, got up to perform a rendition of one of Prime's songs, one of his best songs,

00:34:38.500 Angel from Montgomery. Angel from Montgomery, by the way, is one of the best American songs of the last

00:34:44.520 100 years. It's a beautiful, sad, simple, yet poetic song. And here's Raitt singing that song at the

00:34:56.320 Grammys last night.

00:34:57.020 I am an old woman named after my mother. My old man is another child.

00:35:10.120 This old man is grown old. Dreams were lightning. Thunder was desire. This old house would have

00:35:23.280 burnt down a long time ago.

00:35:28.860 Okay. Gorgeous rendition, which is what you would expect from Bonnie Raitt, who's a brilliant 0.84

00:35:34.120 singer and has been for a long time. I think she's, I looked it up. She's like in her 70s now,

00:35:39.260 believe it or not. But here's the problem. They gave her 75 seconds, less. They gave her less than

00:35:48.960 75 seconds to sing that song. It's like a four minute song. Everybody would benefit from hearing

00:35:55.160 the whole song. Beautiful song. They give her 75 seconds and then they usher her off the stage. 0.73

00:36:00.960 And probably, partly because they had to free up six minutes for Ariana Grande, she of donut-licking 1.00

00:36:10.660 fame, to perform in her underwear. And here's what that looked like. 0.99

00:36:13.820 I think we'd tell therapy, my new addiction. Whoever said money can't solve your problems.

00:36:21.520 Must not have had enough money to solve. Let's say which one I said.

00:36:27.520 Happiness is the same. Races, rib bottoms, yeah.

00:36:31.640 My smile is gleaming. My skin is gleaming. The way you shine, I know you've seen it.

00:36:38.260 I bought a crib just for the closet. Both his and hers. I want it. I love it.

00:36:45.920 So there you go. I just want to highlight that because what a startling contrast you see.

00:36:51.380 On one hand, you have soulful, meaningful, real, authentic music.

00:36:59.760 And then on the other hand, you have an idiot rolling around in her underwear. 1.00

00:37:02.660 But, you know, of course, the idiot gets all the time. She gets six whole minutes to go on 1.00

00:37:09.860 with her pretty average, I'm not going to claim that she's a bad singer, okay?

00:37:16.340 She's obviously, she's better than me, Ariana Grande, but she's not great.

00:37:22.100 There's nothing spectacular about her voice.

00:37:24.900 Her music, the lyrics that she's singing, of course, are lyrics that anyone with a sub-75 IQ

00:37:33.080 could come up with, even though, you know, she didn't even write her own songs.

00:37:37.500 There's nothing impressive happening here.

00:37:40.240 You know, not great. The arrangements are just typical cookie-cutter pop arrangements.

00:37:45.640 So rather bland singing, terrible lyrics, standard cookie-cutter melody and arrangement.

00:37:52.500 The dancing, even the dancing, not even that impressive of dancing.

00:37:57.000 At least with Beyonce. I mean, Beyonce, not that great of a singer.

00:38:00.580 Her songs are pretty stupid. She is a really good dancer, at least.

00:38:06.780 Then you've got someone like Ariana Grande, so many of these pop stars. 0.91

00:38:09.240 They're not even really great at anything.

00:38:12.980 Yet, of course, we give her all the attention. I get it.

00:38:15.140 I mean, she's the big-name star, and people these days,

00:38:19.100 a lot of them have never even heard of John Prine or Bonnie Rae.

00:38:21.800 But that's, you know, just a sad statement.

00:38:26.500 All right, let's go to emails.

00:38:28.500 But first, if you're a regular listener of this show,

00:38:31.280 you've heard me talk many times about the pro-life issue.

00:38:34.620 I was just saying it's a civil rights issue of our time,

00:38:37.400 and I do believe that, and it's very easy to come to that conclusion

00:38:41.520 when you consider the 60 million human beings that have died from abortion.

00:38:45.160 But we know that as, you know, we do everything we can in the pro-life movement

00:38:51.520 to call attention to this issue and to fight back,

00:38:53.860 the left is going further and further off the cliff.

00:38:56.580 There was the New York state law allowing abortion up to birth,

00:38:59.720 the Illinois state law allowing partial birth abortions.

00:39:02.540 So they are going further and further, deeper and deeper,

00:39:06.020 into just this extreme advocacy for not only abortion but infanticide.

00:39:12.580 Think about what Ralph Northam said about delivering the children

00:39:15.340 and then making a decision about what to do with them, i.e., maybe we kill them.

00:39:19.140 So as that's happening, of course, the left is also viciously attacking anyone

00:39:25.240 who stands for the pro-life cause, and we've experienced that here at The Daily Wire

00:39:29.280 with them coming after our advertisers and our sponsors,

00:39:32.740 especially after Ben Shapiro spoke at the March for Life last year.

00:39:36.160 But it's not just us that are being targeted.

00:39:38.340 Live Action is one of the best pro-life groups out there.

00:39:41.700 They have been for a long time.

00:39:42.960 They're one of the leaders of the pro-life movement,

00:39:44.460 and they're being targeted for censorship in many different platforms.

00:39:49.140 There are platforms on social media where they're not allowed to advertise anymore.

00:39:52.320 They were kicked off Pinterest entirely simply for speaking the truth about abortion.

00:39:57.780 And this is why, you know, our DailyWire.com members are so important.

00:40:02.040 Your membership helps keeps our cameras on and our microphones turned up,

00:40:06.380 even when the left is pressuring our sponsors.

00:40:09.600 But you can also be a big help, not just to us, but to Live Action as well.

00:40:13.620 And that's why from now until January 31st,

00:40:15.740 a portion of any DailyWire.com membership will be donated.

00:40:19.140 And to Live Action with the promo code LIVEACTION to support awareness and education

00:40:22.920 around the world on this issue.

00:40:25.040 So join DailyWire.com and make your pro-life voice heard.

00:40:29.900 All right.

00:40:31.360 We'll do a few emails here.

00:40:34.260 MattWalshshow at gmail.com.

00:40:35.960 MattWalshshow at gmail.com.

00:40:37.380 This is from Corey.

00:40:39.060 It says,

00:40:39.260 Mr. Walsh,

00:40:40.160 I'm an admirer of personality assessments as a tool to better know oneself,

00:40:44.980 one's own motivations,

00:40:46.160 and for interpreting the actions of other people significant to you.

00:40:49.220 I'm a proponent of the Enogram personality test over Myers-Briggs,

00:40:57.220 but both can be useful for people.

00:40:59.040 If you end up curious,

00:40:59.900 I'm fairly positive you are an Enogram 1, 1.00

00:41:04.360 parentheses,

00:41:05.060 the reformer,

00:41:05.980 and you're an ISTJ.

00:41:08.900 I'm grateful for the show.

00:41:10.520 Okay, this is something that,

00:41:11.580 I talked briefly about personality tests last week on the show,

00:41:14.440 and I said I don't believe in them.

00:41:16.700 And ever since then,

00:41:17.580 I've been getting tons of emails from people,

00:41:19.800 not only defending personality tests,

00:41:22.720 but telling me what my personality is,

00:41:24.840 according to personality tests,

00:41:25.800 because I guess they've taken it for me.

00:41:27.960 But I want to just show,

00:41:28.880 because this is just a great example.

00:41:30.260 So Corey says that,

00:41:32.360 you know,

00:41:33.180 he believes in the personality tests,

00:41:35.380 and he says that I'm an Enneagram 1,

00:41:38.900 and he gave me a link which describes my personality.

00:41:41.820 And I want to show you,

00:41:42.480 I want to show you,

00:41:42.880 this is why it's so bogus,

00:41:43.920 okay?

00:41:44.900 And so here I am at the Enneagram Institute,

00:41:48.760 describing what apparently is my personality,

00:41:51.960 and here's what it says.

00:41:53.840 The reformer,

00:41:54.520 Type 1,

00:41:57.220 the rational,

00:41:58.080 idealistic type,

00:41:59.500 principled,

00:42:00.320 purposeful,

00:42:01.040 self-controlled,

00:42:02.180 perfectionist.

00:42:04.120 Type 1 in brief,

00:42:06.180 ones are conscientious and ethical,

00:42:08.400 with a strong sense of right and wrong.

00:42:10.200 They are teachers,

00:42:10.960 crusaders,

00:42:11.920 advocates for change,

00:42:13.140 always striving to improve things,

00:42:14.960 but afraid of making a mistake.

00:42:16.680 Well-organized,

00:42:17.580 orderly,

00:42:18.340 fastidious.

00:42:19.220 They try to maintain I standards,

00:42:20.700 but can slip into being critical and perfectionist.

00:42:22.700 They typically have problems with resentment and impatience.

00:42:26.640 At their best,

00:42:27.880 they are wise,

00:42:28.660 discerning,

00:42:29.200 realistic,

00:42:29.680 and noble.

00:42:30.480 They can be morally heroic.

00:42:32.980 Okay.

00:42:33.860 Now,

00:42:34.440 idealistic and rational.

00:42:37.500 You got the best of both worlds.

00:42:38.540 Now,

00:42:40.780 does this describe me?

00:42:42.460 Well,

00:42:42.900 of course.

00:42:44.120 I am a hero.

00:42:45.320 I mean,

00:42:45.580 obviously this describes me.

00:42:47.000 I totally see myself in this.

00:42:51.280 Maybe the stuff about being organized,

00:42:52.860 I can't quite claim that for myself.

00:42:54.220 Even right now in this very room.

00:42:55.720 Well,

00:42:55.820 you can see my bookshelf.

00:42:56.620 Look at my bookshelf.

00:42:57.280 Does that look like the bookshelf of an organized person?

00:42:59.040 But this is my point.

00:43:02.060 I mean,

00:43:02.900 it's obviously,

00:43:04.900 I would love to see myself in this.

00:43:06.920 It's nothing but a,

00:43:07.740 but a glowingly positive review of my personality.

00:43:12.160 And then the only negatives it throws in there are the kinds of negatives you would say in a job interview if you're asked,

00:43:18.260 what are your weaknesses?

00:43:19.840 And so,

00:43:20.540 you know,

00:43:20.800 the negative is I'm a little too critical and perfectionist.

00:43:25.180 And I can be impatient.

00:43:26.580 It's like,

00:43:27.000 okay.

00:43:27.480 I mean,

00:43:28.120 I'm fine with admitting that about myself.

00:43:31.100 And it's true,

00:43:31.840 actually.

00:43:32.720 But here's the problem.

00:43:35.180 This applies to almost everybody.

00:43:37.520 Okay.

00:43:37.820 Almost everyone is impatient.

00:43:40.340 Almost everyone can tend to be critical.

00:43:42.580 Almost everybody is a perfectionist in some areas of life.

00:43:45.720 And then the rest of it is just a bunch of compliments that,

00:43:51.580 yes,

00:43:51.900 I,

00:43:52.120 I am,

00:43:52.660 I would love to believe that.

00:43:54.220 I,

00:43:54.520 yes,

00:43:54.740 I would love for the,

00:43:55.620 so this is,

00:43:56.260 see,

00:43:56.760 this isn't so much describing me.

00:43:58.440 It's more like,

00:43:59.360 this is what I wish I was.

00:44:02.560 But I don't know if I actually am.

00:44:05.280 And,

00:44:05.740 and I'm sure if I looked at every,

00:44:07.580 you know,

00:44:07.880 type twos and type threes and fours and fives,

00:44:10.540 it would be very similar.

00:44:12.220 Like mostly a bunch of really good stuff,

00:44:14.500 stuff that I,

00:44:16.000 I would love if it,

00:44:16.940 if it described me,

00:44:17.920 um,

00:44:19.700 with like a few token negatives thrown in there.

00:44:22.640 But that's why people believe in personality tests,

00:44:24.720 because they see it,

00:44:26.140 they're flattered by it.

00:44:27.560 And they see themselves,

00:44:29.220 quote unquote,

00:44:29.980 because it's exactly what they want to believe about themselves.

00:44:32.700 Now,

00:44:33.120 if a personality test had any hope of,

00:44:36.880 of being really valid,

00:44:38.460 there would have to be personality types that are pretty much a hundred percent

00:44:43.140 negative.

00:44:43.520 Like there would have to be some personality tests that are the reverse of this,

00:44:47.900 where there are a few minor positives,

00:44:50.540 but most of it is really negative.

00:44:53.300 There would have to be personality tests where the result comes back and says,

00:44:56.860 um,

00:44:57.900 you're a boring,

00:44:58.980 uninteresting person.

00:45:00.400 You have no original ideas.

00:45:02.380 You're a follower.

00:45:03.540 You're weak.

00:45:04.280 You're a coward.

00:45:05.800 Um,

00:45:06.540 and you know,

00:45:07.320 nobody likes you.

00:45:08.320 It,

00:45:09.220 because there are people like that in the world.

00:45:12.900 Who knows?

00:45:13.520 Maybe you're looking at one of them.

00:45:14.420 I mean,

00:45:15.280 but I would never think that about myself.

00:45:17.360 I couldn't possibly think that you could never see yourself that way.

00:45:20.920 But we've all met people who seem to have almost no redeeming personality traits at all.

00:45:28.300 We've all met just miserable.

00:45:30.260 There should be a personality type that says,

00:45:31.960 you are a miserable a-hole. 0.99

00:45:34.440 End of discussion.

00:45:35.480 That's what you are.

00:45:36.680 Because those people exist,

00:45:38.360 yet they don't exist on personality tests.

00:45:40.880 Because nobody wants to be that.

00:45:43.400 If a miserable a-hole took a personality test and it came back and came back as a miserable a-hole, 0.99

00:45:49.900 because they are miserable a-holes, 1.00

00:45:52.560 they would never,

00:45:53.300 they would just,

00:45:53.880 they would conclude that,

00:45:54.760 oh,

00:45:54.820 this thing is broken.

00:45:56.060 That thing doesn't work.

00:45:57.660 That's not me.

00:46:00.040 No,

00:46:00.520 show me a personality type.

00:46:01.660 This is what I want.

00:46:02.340 Are there any personality tests

00:46:04.280 where it could come back with a bunch of positive glowing things like this,

00:46:10.580 but it's also possible that there are personality types that you could be diagnosed with that are really negative.

00:46:18.140 Show me that personality test.

00:46:20.680 Maybe it's,

00:46:22.380 there's a possibility that it's sort of valid.

00:46:26.880 Because you just cannot convince me.

00:46:28.980 I'm sorry.

00:46:29.400 I've met people.

00:46:31.920 We all have.

00:46:35.260 It's just not true that everybody has a basically positive personality.

00:46:41.380 That's not,

00:46:42.200 I wish it were true.

00:46:43.940 But it's not.

00:46:44.740 Finally from Justin says,

00:46:49.800 I'm a big fan of the podcast.

00:46:51.000 Appreciate everything you do.

00:46:51.940 I'm a 22-year-old Christian.

00:46:53.260 Have been all my life.

00:46:55.460 You've been a 22-year-old Christian all your life, huh? 0.88

00:46:57.760 So,

00:46:58.920 defying,

00:47:00.180 you're defying the,

00:47:01.500 I guess I just got through with saying,

00:47:03.260 you know,

00:47:03.440 everybody,

00:47:04.000 we're all mortal,

00:47:04.760 and time catches up with all of us,

00:47:07.040 but you've been 22 years old your whole life.

00:47:09.980 Anyway,

00:47:10.340 sorry.

00:47:11.900 I'm an a-hole,

00:47:12.700 remember?

00:47:13.000 That's my personality type.

00:47:14.200 Hopefully you can give some insight into this question,

00:47:16.220 which is,

00:47:16.580 which is older?

00:47:18.400 Christianity,

00:47:19.380 parentheses,

00:47:19.880 Judaism,

00:47:20.680 or Hinduism?

00:47:22.340 Throughout school,

00:47:23.180 all my history,

00:47:23.640 all my history classes seem to teach that Hinduism is the oldest religion.

00:47:27.700 This seems to be the consensus online as well.

00:47:30.020 The age of the religion is typically based on the earliest known evidence of its existence.

00:47:33.920 Both religions claim to be the oldest,

00:47:35.460 since both have creation stories.

00:47:36.860 As a Christian,

00:47:37.420 I believe that Christianity is older, 1.00

00:47:39.120 but I was wondering how you would answer this question,

00:47:41.400 and what evidence you would point to for your answer.

00:47:44.880 Well,

00:47:45.420 Justin,

00:47:45.760 Christianity is definitely not even in the running for the oldest religion in the world.

00:47:52.320 I get that you're incorporating Judaism,

00:47:54.620 and you're saying that's what makes Christianity the oldest,

00:47:57.480 but I don't think you can do that.

00:48:00.640 I mean,

00:48:00.900 there's no question the religion of Christianity began,

00:48:03.680 with the resurrection and ascension of Jesus in the age 33,

00:48:08.180 or thereabouts.

00:48:09.760 That's Christianity's beginning date, 1.00

00:48:11.640 and Christianity is unique,

00:48:14.440 or nearly unique,

00:48:16.940 among world religions,

00:48:19.660 in that it has an almost precise beginning date.

00:48:23.220 Most religions don't. 0.99

00:48:24.920 Some do,

00:48:25.560 but most don't.

00:48:27.860 Which is what makes it hard to say exactly how old Judaism is,

00:48:31.760 or Hinduism,

00:48:32.480 but if you go with archaeological and textual evidence,

00:48:37.080 the most generous estimate you could probably come up with for Judaism,

00:48:43.660 at least with the Jewish text,

00:48:46.420 the Jewish Bible,

00:48:47.180 the oldest texts in the Jewish Bible,

00:48:51.620 the Old Testament,

00:48:52.340 I think the most generous estimate,

00:48:55.720 and what most,

00:48:56.920 you know,

00:48:57.180 sort of evangelical,

00:48:58.120 biblical scholars will say probably,

00:48:59.860 is that they were written in around 1500 BC.

00:49:04.980 That's probably as far as you could push it.

00:49:08.120 Most sort of secular scholars will say it was more like maybe 600 BC that was written.

00:49:14.380 But, okay,

00:49:17.020 even let's put it at 1500.

00:49:19.460 The problem is that Hinduism does have evidence of its existence, 1.00

00:49:23.820 both in its texts,

00:49:25.500 and in,

00:49:26.260 you know,

00:49:26.680 you look at monuments,

00:49:28.240 and sculptures,

00:49:28.820 and so on,

00:49:29.980 there is evidence of its existence going back a thousand years before that.

00:49:33.740 So that's just where the evidence points.

00:49:37.000 But if your history textbooks are saying that Hinduism is the oldest religion, period,

00:49:42.480 then your textbooks are still wrong.

00:49:46.440 So your suspicions that there might be some incorrect information here, I think,

00:49:51.340 are well-founded,

00:49:52.760 because that is definitely not the case.

00:49:55.900 Hinduism is definitely not the oldest religion.

00:49:57.980 Now, if the question is oldest currently still practiced religion,

00:50:04.540 then maybe you can make a case for Hinduism,

00:50:08.080 though Zoroastrianism,

00:50:09.760 which is an ancient Persian religion,

00:50:11.980 is probably even older.

00:50:14.380 But if it's oldest religion, period,

00:50:16.480 then you got to go back to like the fertility cults before the Neolithic era,

00:50:22.760 you know,

00:50:23.840 30,000, 40,000 years ago,

00:50:26.000 or even later,

00:50:26.960 or said earlier than that,

00:50:29.320 they've got evidence of religious practices.

00:50:32.320 So those would probably be the oldest religions,

00:50:34.880 the oldest religion still around today,

00:50:37.980 maybe make an argument for Hinduism or Astrinism,

00:50:40.620 still is practiced by some people, I think,

00:50:42.920 which is probably older.

00:50:44.740 But no, I don't think it's Judaism.

00:50:46.680 Which, you know, I don't see that as a problem.

00:50:49.580 The oldest doesn't mean the truest,

00:50:51.600 because if the oldest is the truest,

00:50:53.340 then we should all be fertility cultists, right? 0.94

00:50:56.260 We should all still be practicing the primitive religions that they practiced 1.00

00:50:59.940 before the agricultural,

00:51:02.220 before the advent of agricultural societies.

00:51:08.660 And I don't think anyone thinks that.

00:51:10.360 So oldest just doesn't, you know, mean,

00:51:14.440 I don't think oldest translates to most credible or closest to the truth or whatever.

00:51:20.160 This is just a question of archaeology

00:51:22.880 and what the evidence tells us.

00:51:25.720 And yeah, I don't think the evidence points to Judaism being the oldest religion.

00:51:30.460 Not even close to it, honestly.

00:51:32.340 All right.

00:51:34.400 Good question, though.

00:51:35.260 Thanks for the question.

00:51:36.660 And I wrap that up with, of course, the disclaimer that I'm not a historian or an archaeologist myself.

00:51:44.440 So take what I'm saying with a grain of salt.

00:51:45.960 This is just based on my own reading.

00:51:48.080 But thanks for that.

00:51:48.820 We will leave it there.

00:51:49.620 Thanks, everybody, for watching.

00:51:50.860 Godspeed.

00:51:51.140 We'll see you next time.

00:52:21.140 Supervising Producer Robert Sterling.

00:52:23.240 Technical Producer Austin Stevens.

00:52:25.180 Editor Donovan Fowler.

00:52:26.620 Audio Mixer Robin Fenderson.

00:52:28.420 The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production.

00:52:30.720 Copyright Daily Wire 2020.

00:52:32.880 Hey, everyone.

00:52:33.340 It's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.

00:52:35.820 We're going to be talking about matters of life and death today.

00:52:38.340 President Trump standing up for life.

00:52:40.540 And basketball great Kobe Bryant has died.

00:52:43.220 It's a lot to talk about.

00:52:44.160 We'll talk about it all on The Andrew Klavan Show.

The Matt Walsh Show - January 27, 2020

Ep. 413 - The Significance Of Celebrity Deaths

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript