TRIGGERnometry - An Honest Conversation with a Christian Nationalist - Andrew Wilson

00:00:01.000 The outcomes of Christian ethics, even on secular society, are the best outcomes. 0.99

00:00:06.000 That's the case I would make for why I think Christians should be in charge of basically everything. 1.00

00:00:10.000 What you're talking about is dominance by one group over everybody else, 1.00

00:00:15.000 because we've got a better view, right?

00:00:17.000 Yeah. 0.80

00:00:18.000 You would outlaw homosexuality? 0.99

00:00:20.000 Sure. Well, I would outlaw homosexual marriage. 1.00

00:00:23.000 But isn't homosexuality wrong also? 1.00

00:00:26.000 Sure, it's immoral. 1.00

00:00:27.000 Sure, it's immoral.

00:00:27.900 So why wouldn't you outlaw it?

00:00:28.760 You don't need to necessarily always place a law in against something which is immoral. 1.00

00:00:33.500 I don't even understand what the purpose is of the vote for women.

00:00:37.360 What is it? 0.99

00:00:38.240 What is the point here?

00:00:39.380 Because it affects them as much as it affects us. 1.00

00:00:41.700 I've never seen a great reason why women should be able to vote. 0.99

00:00:44.920 Because they can vote to send men to war that they themselves do not have to go fight. 1.00

00:00:49.840 Why do women get exempt from that? 0.94

00:00:51.760 If you want me to be blunt... 0.98

00:00:53.060 Why do you hate leftists? 0.98

00:00:54.040 There are psychopaths who are going to destroy everything that I care about through suicidal empathy. 0.96

00:01:01.120 Well, Andrew Wilson, welcome to Trichnometry.

00:01:03.360 Thanks for having me. I appreciate it.

00:01:04.860 Great to have you on. Tell us about you, your background, how you've come to be where you are,

00:01:09.460 and also some of the things that you've become well-known for talking about and debating.

00:01:15.200 Well, I'm known as maybe the premier bloodsport debater on the right-wing side.

00:01:20.940 I debated almost every issue imaginable from a Christian foundational view, including politics.

00:01:28.920 So the way I got in the space was by pure accident.

00:01:32.020 It was during COVID-19.

00:01:34.040 They had shut all the businesses down.

00:01:35.700 I was a robotics mechanic, and I worked in meat plants.

00:01:40.620 And they shut those down in Michigan because the governor at the time, her name is still the governor, Gretchen Whitmer.

00:01:47.240 um that was part of like her whole device for michigan was shutting shutting everything down

00:01:53.420 so um so i was basically furloughed and when that was happening i was extremely pissed off

00:02:00.460 and so what i did was i went on facebook and other places like this and started arguing with 0.78

00:02:05.360 stupid progressives much like the coomer gremlin who you recently debated people like that and 0.71

00:02:11.540 And some of them actually had little video shows, and so I'd started to ask to come up 0.99

00:02:17.440 and talk to them.

00:02:18.440 Hey, why don't you have me up on your little show here? 0.95

00:02:20.940 And then I'd go on the show and obliterate them.

00:02:24.580 And after a while, that picked up a little bit of steam.

00:02:26.780 People started putting it on YouTube, and then the content became popularized, and here

00:02:33.460 I am.

00:02:34.460 Never thought in a million years I'd be an entertainer, and I never thought in a million

00:02:37.220 years that i would uh be engaged in as many high profile debates as i have been and you

00:02:42.100 why do you enjoy doing this because a lot of people because i hate leftists

00:02:47.700 so i mean uh just like you want me to be blunt uh why do you hate leftists uh because they're 0.99

00:02:53.860 they're psychopaths who are going to destroy everything that i care about through suicidal 0.96

00:02:58.660 empathy do you mean progressives or do you mean leftists like the entire left i don't i look i 0.99

00:03:03.620 I consider the delineation of the threshold my new because, um,

00:03:07.860 because when you really get into the granularity,

00:03:10.500 it's all about ethics and they don't have any. And so because there's no ethical

00:03:14.820 foundation, all you're talking about is degrees of psychopathy.

00:03:19.340 What about people who just want like a little bit more wealth redistribution,

00:03:23.100 but generally they love America. I mean, those people that they are decreasing

00:03:27.180 in percentage on the left, but they do exist, right? Why do they want it?

00:03:30.420 because they think they have a different vision to the right of human nature and they think that

00:03:37.340 a lot of things that happen to people in life are partly about luck and structures and stuff

00:03:44.040 like that so they think that you know they think the right massively overestimates the consequences

00:03:50.400 of agency so the idea that sometimes you know the caricature of the right would be well everyone

00:03:57.020 gets what they deserve because it's a matter of your hard work and talent and application and

00:04:02.100 whatever and the left you know the sensible left i think says well sure but luck is a big part of

00:04:06.780 it thereby the grace of god go we therefore if someone is struggling um you know not everyone 0.95

00:04:12.800 is struggling because they didn't put an effort sometimes shit happens people get sick accidents

00:04:16.980 happen whatever so we should look after people a little bit more than the people who want the 0.95

00:04:22.000 lowest tax as possible that that would be the steel man argument i think okay so that makes

00:04:26.560 sense so the idea here is social safety nets right right okay so how come those aren't voluntary

00:04:34.640 well probably because you can't achieve the level of redistribution you want without applying some

00:04:39.600 level of force interesting yeah because the entire idea of progressive liberalism is supposed to be

00:04:44.960 volunteerism and that the left-wing government does not force you or compel you to do anything 0.99

00:04:51.440 No, but that's bullshit. 0.97

00:04:52.600 But that's the promise. 0.99

00:04:53.660 No, the point of government is to make people do shit they don't want to do. 0.95

00:04:56.500 I completely agree. 0.96

00:04:57.280 But the promise of the leftists, the promise of the progressive, the reason they demand

00:05:02.560 that we have a secular government and we can't move towards Christian ethics or Christian

00:05:05.940 nationalism is because secularists are going to do what's fair.

00:05:10.120 And what's fair is you can do whatever you want.

00:05:12.660 As long as you're not hurting anybody else, we're not going to force you to do anything. 0.96

00:05:15.440 The evil Christian nationalists will.

00:05:17.380 But here you just laid out a case for how it is that they're compelling me against my 0.72

00:05:21.180 will to do various things.

00:05:22.500 Well, right.

00:05:23.500 I mean, any government is about the, I mean, the thing that really defines a state is the

00:05:29.420 legalized use of force.

00:05:30.640 It's all about the use of force. 0.92

00:05:31.640 Totally agree.

00:05:32.640 Right?

00:05:33.640 That's what the state is.

00:05:34.640 Yeah, of course. 1.00

00:05:35.640 But see, I think if we want to have a discussion about progressives being idiots, we're going 1.00

00:05:39.620 to be on the same page with that one. 1.00

00:05:41.020 But we were talking about distinction between the center left, I guess, and the progressives.

00:05:46.240 I was saying, isn't there quite a lot of reasonable people on the center-left who would agree with us that the state is about shaping human behavior and making people do stuff, but what they want is well-motivated and actually based on some rationale that we might agree or disagree, but it's kind of logical, which is about a higher level of, like, I don't believe in zero taxes and no government redistribution at all personally, right?

00:06:13.120 so therefore it's just a matter of degrees and it's about is it you know five percent taxes or

00:06:18.660 you know 20 percent taxes but once you start getting into the high 80s that's where i'm at

00:06:23.600 you know what i mean like there's do you see where i'm getting there so that's where i think

00:06:27.520 sometimes in these arguments the existence of the reasonable center right and the reasonable

00:06:32.120 center left gets lost because we're constantly arguing with the extremes of the other side

00:06:35.940 well is that fair yeah i guess but maybe we can dive into semantics a bit if you want okay so

00:06:41.880 So when you say right or left, you agree with me that that's dialectical?

00:06:47.480 What do you mean by dialectical?

00:06:49.660 They're opposites of each other, you mean?

00:06:51.380 Well, not just that, but when we view politics in the paradigm in the United States,

00:06:56.240 we view it through a dialectic that is dual.

00:07:00.520 It's left, it's right.

00:07:02.700 So even you said center-left, that plays within a dialectic, right?

00:07:07.960 Yes, there's a center, but it's still left or right.

00:07:09.780 I don't mean to be pedantic either, but this is where it gets more difficult because someone

00:07:17.300 could actually be in the center, meaning they have some center-right opinions and some center-left

00:07:22.340 opinions that don't neatly align with either party.

00:07:25.120 I think the existence of those people is probably quite underestimated, even in a country

00:07:28.820 as polarized as this one, just from talking to people.

00:07:31.060 Maybe.

00:07:32.060 Yeah.

00:07:33.060 But dialectic, I guess I think I agree.

00:07:34.060 Yeah.

00:07:35.060 There's a dialectic.

00:07:36.060 say left what is what are we what's the referent and when we say right what's the referent like

00:07:42.060 what are we referencing here well you the position relative to the center sure maybe but i mean what

00:07:49.780 is what is left and what is right politically is it social issues is it taxes is it a mixture of

00:07:56.280 both mixture of both mixture of both okay so i think that we can break it down further into

00:08:01.880 pillars. So, I think that these are philosophical positions, and people just don't realize it.

00:08:07.560 When you're arguing with a guy like Destiny, the reason he's very frustrating for you to debate

00:08:13.560 with, the reason that he wanted to bog things down into things, like the most ridiculous thing

00:08:18.120 in the world, though it's unprecedented, everything's unprecedented, that's unprecedented,

00:08:22.120 right? The whole idea there, and you pointed this out rightly, is, well, I guess words don't mean

00:08:27.880 anything right uh we just use unprecedented i guess when we mean new um when we get down to

00:08:35.160 the core the pillar that holds up the belief of destiny what is it what is the pillars that hold

00:08:41.560 up the left what is the philosophical underpinnings i don't know in his case i think in his case

00:08:46.520 uh actually the philosophical underpinning is people who don't agree with him are bad people

00:08:50.600 and therefore they need to be destroyed by any means necessary i think that's it so it's about

00:08:55.000 power really well i think i think the idea the philosophical underpinnings operate from the left

00:09:01.640 right dialectic the left wing pillar is based around anti-realism anti-moralism so that's why

00:09:09.480 you end up with post-modernism and many of these other philosophies which come from left-wing

00:09:14.520 liberalism those aren't coming from right-wingers those are coming from left-wingers right-wingers

00:09:19.960 are the reason that they're so much more associated with things like traditionalism

00:09:23.640 or things like religion, this kind of thing,

00:09:27.740 is because they view society as being duty-bound.

00:09:32.180 And progressives view everything through the prism of rights.

00:09:35.340 So I have a right to do this.

00:09:36.960 I have a right to do this.

00:09:37.960 I have a right to do that.

00:09:39.800 And the right is saying you have a duty to do this.

00:09:43.000 You have a duty to do that.

00:09:44.240 You have a duty.

00:09:44.720 So this is where that dialectic really clashes.

00:09:48.140 From destiny's standpoint, there's no such thing as a moral fact.

00:09:52.040 None.

00:09:52.840 They don't exist.

00:09:53.640 Everything is dependent upon stance.

00:09:56.340 So if that's the case, you can't actually do anything immoral,

00:10:00.460 which is why he does so many things which are immoral, right?

00:10:03.180 Because from his perspective, it's just dependent on stance.

00:10:07.380 The right is saying there's universality with morality.

00:10:11.200 It's not just stance dependent.

00:10:13.060 It's stance independent.

00:10:14.780 The reason that they get so upset with the left is because they perceive them as doing things which are horrendously immoral.

00:10:20.080 But from the left stance, they're like, well, but it's all stance dependent.

00:10:23.640 So I can't be doing anything immoral.

00:10:26.180 And that's why the underpinnings for the kind of like philosophical pillars, they don't align and why we're constantly clashing.

00:10:33.840 The right considers these people complete immoral degenerates.

00:10:37.740 And from their view, they are. 0.95

00:10:39.400 The left, on the other hand, sees that as being totalitarian and evil and that they're there to control, destroy, oppress.

00:10:47.180 because from their view, what could they be doing immoral

00:10:50.880 if everything which is moral is dependent on their own stance?

00:10:54.800 Right.

00:10:56.220 Which I think is an accurate description of what happens

00:10:59.040 when the right looks at the extremes of the left

00:11:01.680 and the left looks at the extremes of the right.

00:11:03.880 Well, what I'm trying to get in with you first of all,

00:11:05.720 because it's interesting to me because our country,

00:11:07.920 hard as it is to believe, if you look at social media,

00:11:10.820 is not nearly as divided as the U.S., right?

00:11:13.560 Like the binariness of the U.S. is kind of weird for us a little bit

00:11:17.120 coming from the UK. So I guess to me, it's always weird when people, well, I was going to say

00:11:24.600 acknowledge, but I don't want to impose my view because, you know, Americans know that country

00:11:28.040 better than I do. It's weird to me how little people give faith to the other side. And I see

00:11:34.420 this on the left and I see this on the right. Whereas my model for the world is there's like

00:11:39.060 really good people within the 80% middle. And then there's pretty out there people in the extremes.

00:11:44.480 and what we see on the internet is those people arguing and pretending they represent the entire

00:11:48.720 movement and then the other side is incentivized to to argue as if they represent the entire

00:11:53.600 movements as well does that make sense of course right sure there's a i understand what you're

00:11:58.000 saying and that sells right it sells to be on that extremist end right um that's what makes

00:12:04.160 it fun it makes it fun to watch people who come in and they say ridiculous over the top things

00:12:09.040 and then everyone's arguing right that's part of human nature they want the fun however i do think

00:12:14.800 that people are more divided than you think i think i think that there's um the way that we

00:12:20.480 operate in public in survival mode will be pretty nice to each other good morning how are you no

00:12:26.800 one's no one's gonna like run you off the road because you're a democrat they might run you off

00:12:30.400 the road if you're a trump supporter and you have that stick but um for the most part we'll treat

00:12:34.800 each other fairly well but when you start to get to the underpinnings of what people actually

00:12:38.560 believe there's a lot more hatred here than you think on both sides and it's even from the center

00:12:44.640 they it it becomes apparent uh once you start to get to the underpinnings of the pillars which hold

00:12:51.400 up people's beliefs do you think that's kind of why there used to be a rule that you don't talk

00:12:56.180 about religion and politics of the table because when you start digging like if you really pursue

00:13:00.640 people's beliefs to the very ends of the earth you do find out like people do fundamentally disagree

00:13:05.560 because they have a difficult different philosophical view but if we don't constantly

00:13:09.720 talk about this stuff it's actually easier to get on with each other it's true yeah it's true

00:13:15.400 well that used to be a thing in the workplace and it used to be a thing like like you said around

00:13:19.640 the dinner table with family you call your family in and it's like hey we're all gonna have dinner

00:13:24.360 we're not talking politics we're not talking about sex we're not talking right these are the divisive

00:13:29.720 issues right love sex politics and of course that's what everybody's talking about all the time now

00:13:34.840 But with the internet, this was bound to happen.

00:13:39.560 Now you can have ideologies which are exported and imported.

00:13:43.760 And they can be exported and imported quickly.

00:13:46.140 And so because of that, you can have, you know, whole swaths of a population begin to

00:13:51.720 move towards an ideology which they never would have before because there was no way

00:13:56.000 to basically deliver it.

00:13:58.180 But now there is.

00:13:59.380 And so now it's a race for power.

00:14:01.340 It's made the best ideology win. 0.99

00:14:03.820 And from my view, if it's not Christians who win it, then it's going to be somebody else 0.91

00:14:08.420 who wins it and Christians are going to be ruled by whoever that is or whatever ideology 0.81

00:14:13.320 that is. 0.54

00:14:14.580 But if you think that I'm wrong, explain Hassan Piker, explain Vosch, explain the rise

00:14:22.020 of communism in the United States and the brand new communist lens in which many leftist

00:14:27.260 progressives are now looking.

00:14:29.080 These are the most popular streamers.

00:14:30.920 well i mean that ideology was all but dead but now it's re-emergent through the technology of

00:14:38.100 the internet and introduced to a whole new generation as being edgy and uh you know

00:14:43.020 counter-cultural just like it was the first time do you not think the the reason that we've seen

00:14:48.860 this resurgence of communism as someone who comes from a country who sadly embraced it

00:14:53.600 Britain. Yeah, exactly. We are embracing it, which is Venezuela. Do you not just simply think

00:15:04.180 that people grasp for anything when things are getting particularly difficult? You mean for any

00:15:10.100 type of ideology? Yeah. Sure. But what's difficult here? Well, the gap between rich and poor is

00:15:16.160 ever widening. But you have a problem there, right? That's true. But people are still getting richer

00:15:22.360 than they've ever been. It's like when I think of a gap between rich people and poor people,

00:15:27.620 if we go back 500 years or a thousand years, the difference was you lived in a dung heap

00:15:32.260 and this guy lived in a castle. Now the difference is this guy lives in a castle and you live in a

00:15:37.780 three bedroom apartment. It's like, it is true that the guy living in the castle is richer than

00:15:44.200 the guy in the castle has ever been. But the reason you're not a dung heap is because the

00:15:49.100 poor are also richer than they've ever been and so it's scalable it's a matter it's you know it's a

00:15:54.460 it's a matter of scalability um but show me in the fattest country in the world where's all the

00:16:01.240 starving people where are they but it's all understood within context isn't it andrew it's

00:16:06.120 it's comparisons so people will go online they will look at their life they will see

00:16:11.320 that they don't have a lot of money somebody else is doing very well things like for instance a

00:16:16.060 housing crisis, particularly in cities like New York, LA, etc. Yeah, so this is a strict materialist

00:16:23.040 view. The thing is, I don't know when this shift happened to strict materialism, but this seems to

00:16:31.900 be part of a new conversation which people want to have. And again, that's part of what communism

00:16:37.660 is. The lens of communism is strictly materialist. There is no spiritualism. Communists kill anybody

00:16:43.320 who's religious because that affects a materialist view it's an oppressor oppressed class so if 0.59

00:16:50.080 you're looking through everything from a materialist view you can always find an oppressor

00:16:53.960 class there'll always be people who have more than other people do it's one of the big faults

00:16:58.040 with communism you can never reach this stateless utopia but as far as that goes um where like when

00:17:06.680 And I think, historically, the endless suffering that happened to people inside of nation-states,

00:17:14.440 inside of city-states, inside of places like that, in comparison to what you see in modern

00:17:18.660 Western democracies, it's like, if these people had to deal with that in any capacity, they

00:17:24.560 would, I mean, you would just fall over dead, it was miserable, it was literally misery.

00:17:29.640 Where is all of that?

00:17:30.640 I mean, the West conquered that, industrialization conquered that, the starvation's gone.

00:17:36.440 is it you know i've told i've i've heard liberals they've said to me there's people starving right

00:17:40.980 now where in my nation where i'll go feed them right now guarantee you i'll have a meal arranged

00:17:46.820 by this afternoon if you could show me a person's actually starving in the united states they can't

00:17:51.100 because they're not we've conquered it these are concrete issues like so what are you bitching

00:17:58.080 are you just bitching that this guy makes way more money than this guy it's like what's the

00:18:02.000 complaint. That's achievable. That sort of dream's achievable now to people. That never used to be

00:18:07.660 possible. I travel a lot. And until recently, every trip started the same way. Standing in an

00:18:13.420 airport, fumbling with a SIM card or downloading yet another app. New SIM, new app, new setup every

00:18:18.900 single trip. All the while, roaming charges ticking up. Yumi is the fix. It's a universal

00:18:24.300 eSIM. You install it once, it stays on your phone permanently, and when you travel, you just add

00:18:29.720 data that's it works in over 200 destinations your balance is pay as you go and it never expires

00:18:35.980 it has 4.9 stars on the app store one install every trip no more fat download the yumi app

00:18:42.580 use code trigger20 at checkout for 20% off your first purchase and get your e-sim sorted before

00:18:48.440 your next trip the link is in the description or go to reach umi.com get yumi on your phone

00:18:54.900 before your next trip you'll wonder why you didn't do it sooner i think it also plays

00:18:59.640 into the fact that this generation particularly for example in the UK is going to be the first

00:19:05.020 generation to not do as well as their parents and the things that they were promised you know you go

00:19:10.420 to college you get a good job you're going to be able to have a house a family for a lot of these

00:19:14.940 people they come out and they've graduated college they're under enormous they're in enormous amounts

00:19:18.520 of debt and they're looking and they're seeing well the life that my parents had I am not going

00:19:25.080 to have. And I think there's a great deal of anger, resentment and frustration because of

00:19:30.360 that. And I think people reach for an ideology such as communism in the desperate hope that

00:19:35.660 it's going to somehow make everything better. I don't agree with it, but I think that's the

00:19:40.160 argument. Well, I think it's more complex than that.

00:19:45.300 So maybe we're having this conversation the wrong way around. Why do you think there's

00:19:49.660 There's been a rise of radical leftism and particularly the appeal of communism now,

00:19:54.700 as you do see with some young audience fans.

00:19:58.800 Because of the moral loading of the term Nazi, fascist, and other things like this,

00:20:03.460 it's pure panic-mongering.

00:20:05.900 The idea is that you need to move towards this shielding ideology

00:20:09.560 because the Nazis are coming, the stormtroopers are coming.

00:20:12.200 Oh, so you mean like since 2016, basically, I mean, they did it before as well,

00:20:15.860 but the far left has been calling the right Nazis,

00:20:18.240 and you think people are going for communism

00:20:21.180 because it's the ideology that can protect you against that?

00:20:25.180 Communism, socialism.

00:20:26.720 These are the...

00:20:27.620 So it's a winner takes all.

00:20:29.880 Like I said, it's a race to power

00:20:32.160 for which ideology gets power. 0.90

00:20:34.520 Is it going to be the Christian nationalists?

00:20:36.100 Is it going to be the socialists?

00:20:37.140 Is it going to be guys in New York like Mamadi?

00:20:39.520 Or Mamadi?

00:20:40.460 What is his name?

00:20:41.520 Mamadani. 0.59

00:20:42.600 See, it's communist Mamadani.

00:20:45.600 Who gets it?

00:20:47.340 Which ideology gets it?

00:20:49.700 I mean, right now, the ideology which has been kind of traditionally getting it is the status quo ideology.

00:20:55.280 Well, that's changing.

00:20:56.440 That's been changing since Trump.

00:20:58.700 Like, I don't know who our future presidents are going to be, but they're not going to have the same ideologies that they held for the last 40 or 50 years.

00:21:06.260 That's not where we're heading.

00:21:08.420 So which ideology gets it?

00:21:09.660 But that doesn't, I mean, I agree with what you're saying, except the one thing we started

00:21:15.740 this with, which is the appeal of communism is to push back against the Nazis, right?

00:21:23.020 But why wouldn't you just, I don't know, why wouldn't the ideology be like we're against

00:21:28.520 Nazism or we're for liberal democracy?

00:21:30.160 That's how, but that's exactly how it's pushed.

00:21:33.180 What do the Antifa, anti-fascist people in both our nations say?

00:21:36.840 They say just that.

00:21:38.380 this is about our republic but they are our democracy yes they are right but this is about

00:21:43.440 our democracy this is about our freedom of speech our freedom of assembly this is about stopping

00:21:48.800 nazis and stopping fascists and stopping duper you know or allowing for due process they literally

00:21:54.520 market it the exact way you just said so when you say why don't they say that we're just anti-nazi

00:21:59.980 and pro-democracy or pro-republicanism that's exactly how they market it no because i guess

00:22:05.520 That's the reason I'm saying is like, I would say I am anti-Nazi and pro-democracy, right?

00:22:10.760 And I am.

00:22:11.760 I'm also not a communist.

00:22:12.840 So why is communism the appealing version of those statements?

00:22:17.920 Well, this is a worldview issue.

00:22:20.740 So do you think that you think a Nazi is the same thing a leftist thinks a Nazi is?

00:22:25.020 No.

00:22:26.020 No.

00:22:27.020 Because a leftist thinks you're a Nazi.

00:22:28.020 Well, I know what words mean.

00:22:29.020 But this is the problem is like, I know what words mean, right? 0.65

00:22:32.480 So I know that Nazis exist.

00:22:34.560 And by the way, there are some Nazis on the right, including in the U.S., and you can

00:22:38.160 see them, right? 0.51

00:22:39.980 But I also know what a Nazi is, and therefore someone who has right-wing or centrist opinions

00:22:45.460 like me is not a Nazi.

00:22:47.860 But words do mean different things depending on worldview.

00:22:51.300 They do, actually.

00:22:52.300 If you are a postmodernist, they do, right?

00:22:53.800 Not just a postmodernist.

00:22:55.380 So if you look at definitions of words, you agree they have multitudes of definitions,

00:22:59.280 right?

00:23:00.280 Well, those are applying often to the distinctions in worldview.

00:23:03.380 say spiritual as a christian i'm looking at that from a christian view right if you say spiritual

00:23:08.980 as a buddhist are we saying the same thing i actually think in a way you probably are but

00:23:14.020 the structure that underpins that is different but you're trying to point at the same thing which is

00:23:19.220 whatever it is that is greater than that is greater than human beings somewhere and i'm

00:23:23.860 pointing to the sky because that's kind of but the way we view epistemology ontology cosmology

00:23:28.580 everything is going to be completely different so when we say we say that word we may be pointing

00:23:33.540 to a concept which is similar sure but we're actually pointing at something which is different

00:23:37.780 but what progressives do and this is really worth discussing i think is what they do is they if i

00:23:44.100 say the word cabbage there's a hundred types of cabbage but you know what i'm talking about right

00:23:48.660 sure and what a progressive will do in a debate as you referenced is they'll pretend they don't

00:23:52.900 know what a cabbage is yeah that's equivocation right so the phallus debating with progressives

00:23:58.580 I've been doing it for years and years.

00:24:01.240 The number one fallacy run into with them,

00:24:03.940 fallacious form of argumentation is equivocation.

00:24:05.780 They use the ambiguity of a word to switch between its meaning

00:24:08.300 depending on which one serves them best at the time.

00:24:11.440 Yeah.

00:24:11.860 Which is why you have to pin them down on semantics immediately

00:24:14.380 because if you don't, they'll spend an entire debate session

00:24:18.340 or conversation using equivocation to move between meanings

00:24:23.420 in an ambiguous way so that they never really have to give

00:24:26.880 accounting for the things that they actually think because those things are abhorrent i do agree with

00:24:31.360 that i also understand though that meanings of words are going to change with worldview from

00:24:37.920 the progressive worldview you are a nazi and i wish because i don't agree with them i wish more

00:24:43.520 people would accept well it's not just because you don't agree with them it's because from that

00:24:47.280 frame from that worldview right you uh they're going to perceive you as being a white nationalist

00:24:53.120 you're a person who thinks that white people are above other people why because you're arguing

00:24:57.680 against mass migration and the only reason you would do that is because you want to see more

00:25:02.320 white people but i'm an immigrant myself doesn't matter well how but but no it does matter though

00:25:07.280 because that doesn't make any logical sense doesn't have to world views don't have to make logical

00:25:11.200 sense but they are the prism in which we interpret the world and so every debate that you have in

00:25:17.360 every conversation you have i wish more people would go in them understanding this concept

00:25:21.120 But worldview is what shapes your interpretation of all of reality around you.

00:25:27.080 It shapes the meaning of words, how you interpret them, what people mean by the things they say, and what they don't mean by the things they say.

00:25:33.900 The reason I think I got very popular on the right is because one of the things I've always done is sit down and make my opposition actually explain what they mean and why they mean it before I will ever even dive into a conversation with them.

00:25:49.660 And the reason for that is because I want to know what their worldview is.

00:25:55.020 What is it that you're interpreting different here than me?

00:25:58.620 And that's where you start to actually have a debate about.

00:26:01.140 Debates are about worldviews.

00:26:02.620 Conversations are about worldviews, right?

00:26:04.660 If we have completely different understandings of our interpretation, how do we even speak?

00:26:10.480 But there's also a level of deception we're talking about here. 0.74

00:26:13.260 Because if you take an ideology like Nazism, there's tenets to it. 0.70

00:26:17.640 And if you then go, well, you're a Nazi, but then you don't obey or follow any of the tenets, then that is fundamentally illogical.

00:26:25.080 I've had multiple debates with people on whether or not Donald Trump's a fascist, okay, from their worldview. See, it's simple. All you have to do is you take the historic prism of what fascism is. They'll admit, clearly he doesn't meet that.

00:26:38.620 but he meets certain tenets which we can say have overlap with fascism enough that they reach like

00:26:45.980 a fascist minimum well what the hell does that mean well it just means that interpretively

00:26:51.260 from their kind of um stance dependent view right which means i made it up um this arbitrary metric

00:27:00.620 he meets it therefore he is it now unless you have some grounding which is objective

00:27:06.240 how do you argue with that well you really can't because what most political debating is is it's

00:27:11.880 taking a fact and then it's arguing about your feelings over that fact that's 90 of what a

00:27:17.600 political debate is here's a fact and now let's argue our vibes so unless there's some objective

00:27:23.300 grounding that you have to tell them that they're wrong right it's actually very difficult to get

00:27:28.780 the upper hand in a vibes debate isn't it so you really have to bring it back to not just facts but 0.92

00:27:34.120 foundation they don't have any they're more this is why i hate them because they're morally corrupt 0.99

00:27:41.080 uh ambiguous no morality having scumbags and that's what they want to do they want to take 0.94

00:27:47.240 a fact and argue their vibes about the fact but when you get to their foundations what is their

00:27:51.400 foundation they don't have any their entire foundation is there are no moral facts so

00:27:57.000 that's the case how can you do anything immoral if there's no moral facts how you can't you can't

00:28:03.000 ever do anything immoral if you don't believe there's no moral facts well but they believe

00:28:06.840 that we are we are with all our different perspectives because we have different

00:28:10.280 perspectives on things you and i certainly they believe that we are immoral so they must have

00:28:15.320 some kind of morality it's just stance dependent morality meaning what what's the difference

00:28:21.160 between that and what your morality because you you would say your morality comes from god or the

00:28:25.320 bible or sure there's two kinds there's two kinds of foundations for how it is that you can interpret

00:28:31.240 morality there may be more but there's usually going to be two it's uh is morality real or not

00:28:38.920 if it's not real then you're an anti-realist let's say if it is real then you're not when i

00:28:44.280 say real here i'm saying this is a universal fact that this is a moral fact now the left

00:28:51.640 and progressives and atheists and secularists they don't they don't generally believe in those moral

00:28:56.520 facts they think that morality is a social construction that we make up and it's societally

00:29:01.300 dependent there is no overwhelmed there is no overarching like moral facts the religious say

00:29:08.000 that there are that god gave us moral facts then these are the moral ways in which you have to live

00:29:13.600 your life and so they're willing to enforce that they're willing to enforce those moral facts and

00:29:19.020 because for them not to do that is immoral right allowing my society to run around do immoral

00:29:25.100 things obviously i want to curtail that the other side thinks that that's totalitarian though right

00:29:30.940 that's the worldview divide so the question is how can you tell a person how do you tell destiny

00:29:36.700 that it's immoral that he sucked 50 days how do you how do you do that if it's the case that 0.96

00:29:42.460 that's not a moral fact how well you can't and that's where they live that's well his sucking 1.00

00:29:48.700 of dicks is irrelevant to me personally he's perfectly entitled to suck as many dicks as he 1.00

00:29:53.020 want i encourage why i encourage him to do more yeah but why well like why is it that the the 1.00

00:29:58.060 this idea of like only fans hookers and homosexual marriage and stuff like this why is that stuff

00:30:05.100 stuff we have to deal with again what like why why isn't it well see we see what i mean though

00:30:10.140 like even that question why isn't it it's like that's not giving an accounting for a worldview

00:30:16.460 that's asking me to give an accounting for it is yeah but the thing you're insisting that

00:30:21.020 there is a world view that's correct sure right and therefore it's up to you to articulate why

00:30:25.260 sure sure but when you say why isn't it it's a genuine question i'm trying to probe your world

00:30:29.740 you know that's all and i'm gonna i'm gonna walk you through it if there are no moral facts because

00:30:35.020 i said so that's why and that's the failure of uh left-wing and progressive anti-realists

00:30:43.020 if there are no moral facts and you ask me why why it is that i should enforce my world view 0.59

00:30:47.900 because i fucking want to and you there's no way for you to ever object against that any objection 0.76

00:30:54.100 you have which is stance dependent which it will be this is going to be the same objection that i 0.97

00:30:59.840 give you which stands dependent so which one of us is right well that's why we have uh elections

00:31:06.020 so that that is adjudicated and then legislated on right because ultimately there's philosophy

00:31:10.760 and then there's politics right so you might philosophically believe that homosexuality is

00:31:15.800 wrong. But at a level of society, we can have a vote and it may turn out that the majority of

00:31:21.580 the country doesn't agree with you. But do you agree with me that your morality cannot come from

00:31:26.020 the majority? Because if it does, all you're doing is doing the exact same thing. You're just saying,

00:31:30.580 hey, now the majority says there are no moral facts or only moral facts come from the majority.

00:31:36.120 Well, sure. If that was the case, then we could have slavery and that would be moral simply

00:31:39.700 because the majority said it was. And at one point it was, right? And those people believed

00:31:45.220 god way more than we do um well yes they did this is well this is true but the thing is is like

00:31:52.980 that's the idea of presentism the whole world always believed in that just like the whole world

00:31:57.860 usually didn't entertain things like uh race mixing though they had no conceptualization of

00:32:02.740 race uh they thought of things in a tribal way yeah but they didn't do that either like um that

00:32:08.100 was one of the things the united states always gets because in the uh you know 20s 30s 40s

00:32:13.940 uh especially heading into world war ii post world war one well you know there was a lot

00:32:18.740 of mesage or there was a lot of uh segregation with black people this and well that was global

00:32:23.060 though that was global you know everyone was racist then like everybody and so you're looking

00:32:29.780 at the this through the prism of of um you know presentism and the reason that um that's kind of 0.97

00:32:36.100 come back to the destiny sucking dicks point because it's important obviously right um why 1.00

00:32:42.420 why is it that uh you think he shouldn't suck dick because i said so and if you're 0.99

00:32:49.140 an answer but that's fair enough right but then the question is are you seeking to convert your 0.99

00:32:52.980 philosophical view into political reality why shouldn't i uh i suppose that's a fair question

00:32:58.020 actually yeah why shouldn't i well i guess it's a question of what happens when the majority of

00:33:04.020 of the public vote for somebody who doesn't know we're just outsourcing our morality again to the

00:33:08.200 pop but see there's laws that i don't agree with right uh and there's laws that don't exist that

00:33:13.080 i think should exist but i accept the the majority of the country in which i live doesn't agree with

00:33:18.060 me and that is a kind of compromise we all have to make at some level right because why do we have

00:33:22.100 to make that because we want to live in the society of other people that have different views

00:33:25.780 but right now we're now we're moving into the right reduction and so i guess maybe this is

00:33:30.880 where i wanted to get to in the conversation if there aren't any moral facts and i just say because

00:33:36.440 i said so and you say well that's fair enough right because that's all we're just all of us

00:33:41.040 are just doing because i said so i guess um all of us are entitled to a view yeah i don't want

00:33:46.520 democracy because i said so i want fascism because i said so i want a new hitler because i said so

00:33:52.420 right let's say that if you can't point at that and say that that's wrong right there's some

00:33:58.520 objective appeal to a standard for why that's really immoral and you shouldn't do it uh then

00:34:04.580 what happens is erosion and the reason that erosion happens is because everything becomes permitted

00:34:10.100 so an example of this i was told with gay marriage that it's still a big deal it's just

00:34:17.900 like heterosexual people getting married well okay well what's the argument against three men

00:34:23.060 or four men getting married and then adopting a child there really isn't one you can't really

00:34:27.560 be consistent and be against that like what where's the consistency issue i mean you say well

00:34:33.080 it's the outcomes it's like well can you prove the outcomes will always be bad no or can you prove

00:34:38.680 that um if if if there's two straight people who are heterosexuals who are from vastly different

00:34:45.000 backgrounds they could have really bad outcomes statistically too we wouldn't prevent them from

00:34:48.920 having a kid it's like what's stopping 10 men from getting married and adopting a kid

00:34:53.080 nothing nothing's preventing that and by the way it's happening now now you see

00:34:58.960 men getting married in threes and fours and you see polygamy coming back in a big way you see

00:35:05.600 birth rate collapses like these are real issues in society and they come in fairness i don't think

00:35:10.620 birth rate collapses to do with 10 men getting married to each other right no it has to do but

00:35:15.040 it has to do with another issue okay which is um women if you want to get women pregnant you have 0.95

00:35:21.060 small window and it's best to do it in their 20s and we what we do is we tell women to defer their 0.98

00:35:27.380 best childbearing years to go to college during those years which is insane that's the dumbest 0.96

00:35:33.060 thing i've ever heard in my life i don't know why you would take the opposite sex who has the most 0.89

00:35:37.780 limited window for childbirth for healthy babies and tell them to squander all of that um especially

00:35:44.340 because they end up at college running you know the carousel often and things like this and it's

00:35:48.500 And it's like, it's just not good for society.

00:35:51.400 But kind of back to what I was saying,

00:35:53.500 when we were getting to the idea of moral facts,

00:35:55.860 this erosion begins, always begins with the idea of,

00:36:00.180 well, you can't really make a case. 1.00

00:36:01.940 You know, like, I don't believe in your stupid objective morals. 0.99

00:36:04.900 I don't believe in any of this. 1.00

00:36:06.580 And so you can't really tell me that being a hooker is wrong.

00:36:09.560 You can't really tell me doing this is wrong. 0.88

00:36:11.460 You can't really tell me doing that is wrong.

00:36:13.360 And so if you come to me and you say,

00:36:16.460 gays should be allowed to get married,

00:36:17.800 and I just ask you back, why can't three of them get married?

00:36:20.980 What's your answer to that?

00:36:22.600 What is it?

00:36:24.420 I have people in my life who depend on me.

00:36:27.040 Most of you listening do too.

00:36:28.640 And if you're honest with yourself,

00:36:30.120 you've probably had that moment where you think,

00:36:32.100 what happens to them if I'm not around tomorrow?

00:36:34.880 It's not a fun question,

00:36:36.380 but ignoring it does not make it go away.

00:36:38.680 This is why I think today's sponsor

00:36:40.560 is worth paying attention to.

00:36:42.300 Through Ethos, you apply in minutes,

00:36:44.560 receive a quote instantly and get same day coverage.

00:36:47.380 No medical exam, you just answer a few simple health questions.

00:36:51.300 The whole process is 100% online and you can get up to $3 million in coverage

00:36:55.720 with some policies starting as low as $30 a month.

00:36:59.400 Ethos has 4.8 out of 5 stars on Trustpilot with over 4,000 reviews.

00:37:04.180 Take 10 minutes to get covered today with life insurance through Ethos.

00:37:08.080 Get your free quote at ethos.com slash trigger.

00:37:11.600 That's E-T-H-O-S dot com slash trigger.

00:37:15.340 Application times vary.

00:37:16.780 Rates may vary.

00:37:18.580 Why can't three of them get married?

00:37:20.100 What's your answer to that?

00:37:21.740 What is it?

00:37:23.220 I don't have one.

00:37:24.160 Yeah, exactly.

00:37:25.580 So what's preventing it?

00:37:26.740 Nothing.

00:37:28.040 Nothing.

00:37:28.560 And so then you see society become more and more and more absurd over time.

00:37:33.640 Why is it important? 1.00

00:37:36.300 What happens when three gays get married? 1.00

00:37:39.100 Well, individually, perhaps nothing. 1.00

00:37:42.120 Right?

00:37:42.440 Like on an isolated... 1.00

00:37:43.900 Like, what happens when one Muslim gets imported to the U.K.? 1.00

00:37:47.060 Nothing. 1.00

00:37:47.600 Well, it depends on what he does, but yeah.

00:37:49.140 Exactly.

00:37:49.700 But now what happens when 50,000 of them get imported to the U.K.?

00:37:53.060 Well, now something.

00:37:54.100 And it's the same thing when it comes to the importance of moral character inside of a nation is the exact same way.

00:38:00.920 What happens, it doesn't matter.

00:38:03.220 To clarify for me, Andrew, so when you have, I mean, we have, I think, 4 million Muslims in the U.K.,

00:38:08.380 over one majority are perfectly good people.

00:38:10.120 But when you have a large Muslim population, what we've discovered is you have a smaller percentage of extremists and Islamists, right? 0.55

00:38:17.640 What happens when gays get married? 0.91

00:38:19.560 What is the Islamist version of homosexuality? 0.96

00:38:22.220 Yeah, so what happens is if you're going to say three men can get married, then you need to be able to say one man can marry three women. 0.90

00:38:29.280 Why? 0.68

00:38:30.220 Because, tell me, what argument could you possibly have against it if you allow one and not the other?

00:38:35.760 What?

00:38:36.800 i suppose if you start unpicking i mean if you start unpicking laws like that you you probably

00:38:41.280 unpick most laws right yeah on that basis it would erode the moral character of the very

00:38:46.240 thing you're trying to preserve which is your culture but your whole culture is founded on

00:38:50.000 christian ethics and so if you say when you ask individually what's wrong with three guys getting

00:38:55.040 married maybe i could say maybe the effect is so minimalistic who cares right but that's not the

00:39:00.800 point the point is is that if you let three men get married then you have to let one man marry

00:39:04.560 three women why wouldn't you what would be the consistent argument between the two that's a pain 0.98

00:39:09.600 on the ass man yeah having three wives maybe but the thing is is like how would just get yeah how 0.98

00:39:15.280 would how would polygamy so what's your answer to all those questions your answer is god said 0.99

00:39:20.080 this is right this is wrong therefore that's how we know what's right and wrong basically well

00:39:23.840 i i would say something more important which is that christian ethics even if you don't believe

00:39:29.520 it let's say i'm not a christian i don't believe in any of that nonsense what you should believe

00:39:34.320 though is in outcomes and the outcomes of christian ethics even on secular society

00:39:39.360 are the best outcomes so if that's the case that's the case i would make for why i think christians

00:39:43.920 should be in charge of basically everything is that the outcomes are still going to be best for

00:39:48.080 even the people who aren't christians now maybe they don't like that but so what i don't like

00:39:53.360 their view either and i think christians should be in charge and they have no objection because

00:39:57.120 they have no moral facts so who cares it comes down to like you said at the very beginning of

00:40:02.080 conversation will circle it all the way back comes down to who has the force well it's going

00:40:07.040 to be the ideology in charge who has the force so is it going to be mine there's going to be

00:40:11.200 yours could be the commies who's it going to be and that's what i think the state of actual world

00:40:16.160 affairs and politics is now it's a like a race to the top who gets who gets their press i don't know

00:40:22.800 if it's depressing like um almost it's almost like let the may the best man win right may the best

00:40:28.160 ideology when i don't know if it's depressing you don't think all government is fundamentally

00:40:33.360 even in dictatorships is about power sharing what you're talking about is dominance by one

00:40:40.560 group of everybody else because we've got a better view right yeah yeah that's that's what's

00:40:46.640 depressing to me why is that depressing because like i say in most societies there's a recognition

00:40:51.520 it might be tribal societies there's the pashtuns and the blah blah blahs right the countries that

00:40:56.160 do well are the countries where those different interests are regulated through some kind of

00:41:00.560 peacemaking mechanism at the level of politics that's what politics is for really right whereas

00:41:05.600 the country it doesn't need to be exclusionary though just because one like one particular

00:41:11.360 ideology holds the brackets of most of the power doesn't mean that it has to be exclusive or that

00:41:17.920 it can't in some way accommodate other sections of society well how are you going to accommodate

00:41:22.560 the population of san francisco when you're in charge well i mean tell me how would san francisco

00:41:27.920 like die off if you stop letting gays get married there it's not going to i mean that's all they do 0.82

00:41:32.720 from what i could tell when we're inside they don't get married there they just do a lot of 0.98

00:41:36.880 gay there right but they're not uh they're not i didn't observe that directly yeah but marriage

00:41:42.880 but marriage is not the big thing in san francisco but let's see what i'm saying yeah but i can point 0.89

00:41:47.760 to in because you would outlaw homosexuality i'm sure well i know i would outlaw homosexual marriage 0.81

00:41:54.080 but not homo but isn't homosexuality wrong also sure it's immoral so why wouldn't you 0.82

00:41:58.960 you don't need to necessarily always place a law in against something which is immoral it's not

00:42:03.680 always conducive to the society to do that that's fair so for instance i would say for homosexuality

00:42:09.120 you're not going to jail right none of this type of thing but there doesn't need to be any

00:42:13.680 glorification right you're not going to get married i'm not going to no one's going to bust

00:42:17.920 in your bedroom and tell you what's what right but there's not going to be any rainbow flags in the

00:42:21.280 white house either there's not going to be any pro-gay government propaganda anywhere does that

00:42:25.200 not go against the first amendment well i think that that would be the the most important aspect

00:42:30.160 of the first amendment to say that the government's not going to propagandize towards one ideology or

00:42:34.640 the other isn't that the whole point of secularism the second they put the rainbow flags up on the

00:42:39.200 white house what about christian yeah what about it should that be in in public communication well

00:42:45.040 so in in this particular case i do think it should be yes but you just have the first amendment is

00:42:50.400 about not propaganda right well his argument to me is wouldn't it be against the first amendment

00:42:55.520 to outlaw rainbow flags right i say no that wouldn't be against the first amendment that

00:43:00.400 would be more in line so wouldn't it be again wouldn't it be compliant with the first amendment

00:43:04.880 to outline crucifix you wouldn't necessarily need to even promote crosses or crucifixes

00:43:10.960 but what you could do is you could promote things like value structures so let me give you an example

00:43:15.680 of this um you're driving down the street you look over to the right and there's billboards

00:43:20.800 you've seen this a million times right um what if the billboards had things like family right

00:43:27.760 mom and it showed a mommy and a daddy and the kids right and yeah exactly and the push was

00:43:34.480 towards the ideas of normalcy the push was towards the idea of this is what we want to see in

00:43:40.080 society what if tax breaks went to to uh to married people right what if we drastically

00:43:47.360 increase this to the point like um some eastern european countries have done which has helped

00:43:51.920 their birth rates where it's like okay you have three kids you don't have to pay taxes anymore

00:43:56.400 oh sign me up for that yeah you don't have to but you don't have to be christian to pursue that you

00:44:00.400 You could be a secularist politician and promote all those things.

00:44:03.960 Sure, but under a secular view,

00:44:07.340 why do we need to have a domestic increased population anyway? 0.77

00:44:10.940 They can just import who they want. 0.93

00:44:13.080 And that's what they did in your country. 0.98

00:44:14.740 That's what they do in my country. 0.71

00:44:16.520 I can give you lots of secular arguments

00:44:18.900 for why having a bigger population is better

00:44:21.100 and having more children is better.

00:44:21.680 Yeah, but why not import it?

00:44:24.220 Why not import it?

00:44:25.320 Because you get issues with integration, cultural compatibility. 0.62

00:44:29.360 Unless you import so many of them that the original culture is replaced. 0.96

00:44:32.400 Well, you don't know who you're importing. 0.59

00:44:34.380 And also, you know, the argument for tradition, it's actually one of the interesting differences.

00:44:38.540 I mean, we had Dr. David Starkey explain this to her.

00:44:40.560 I don't remember if it was on our show or not.

00:44:42.600 The difference between American conservatism and British conservatism is British conservatism

00:44:47.220 is about tradition and history, whereas American conservatism is about religion and value.

00:44:52.360 So you could argue for the preservation of a society or the multiplication of an existing culture through time from a non-religious point of view, which is like what we have is good by definition, a priori, because that's what it is.

00:45:08.700 It's our country.

00:45:09.580 It's our society.

00:45:10.360 We want to make more of that.

00:45:11.660 So it's good because it's good?

00:45:12.920 It's good because we are already here, right?

00:45:15.700 It's good because where we are as a product of where we've come from and where we are, we like ourselves, right?

00:45:21.700 But then you can't argue against mass migration because what you're saying is just a tautology.

00:45:27.280 This is good because it's good, and that's good.

00:45:29.580 This is good because if my dad gives me a watch, it's not necessarily the watch and its unique qualities that make it special.

00:45:40.780 It's the fact that I got it from my dad.

00:45:42.620 So the culture that we got from our ancestors is worth valuing because we got it from our ancestors because it's where we've come to as a civilization.

00:45:49.360 But that's, again, a tautology.

00:45:50.720 Why?

00:45:51.080 Right. Because what you're saying is, because I got this from my ancestors, it's good. What makes

00:45:56.480 that good? Because I got that from my ancestors. Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. And that's

00:45:59.540 tautology. So what you're doing is you're pointing to the identification of the thing as being the

00:46:06.780 thing, right? Which makes the thing the thing. I get what you're saying, but I think you're

00:46:09.900 missing my point. So then I say, well, mass migration is good. Why is it good? Well,

00:46:12.840 because it's good. No, but I think what I'm saying is, if you take the watch example that

00:46:17.780 gave you my dad gave me a watch right there is a sentimental value to that why is that well it's

00:46:22.100 connected to the passing down from generation to generation why is that important well it's kind of

00:46:26.340 i mean you might not agree with this but from an evolutionary perspective the point of life is to

00:46:31.540 recreate itself you'd probably say that's tautology if the point of something well no that that i mean

00:46:36.340 from again so now we're getting a world view right i totally agree with you the primary edict from

00:46:41.380 an evolutionary standpoint is reproduction right there's no if answer buts about that so that's

00:46:45.540 why mass immigration is not good because you're not reproducing your culture you're bringing in

00:46:50.340 a foreign culture why can't you reproduce your culture with mass migration because it doesn't 0.50

00:46:54.420 work in practice clearly let me because people don't integrate let me give you the counter 0.84

00:46:58.740 okay are the people that you're importing generally more or less traditional than you 0.58

00:47:02.820 traditional to their tradition yes okay do they usually uh do their women get pregnant younger

00:47:08.820 than your women yes well then that seems like it's really good for reproduction 0.65

00:47:13.140 of their culture not of ours well it's culture if they don't if they don't integrate our culture 0.92

00:47:19.320 they're not reproducing our culture but you want to reproduce your genetics right

00:47:22.020 uh from an evolutionary perspective why can't you do it with them

00:47:26.200 because culture matters okay right but and our culture is better but you said the primary edict's

00:47:32.200 reproduction yeah not reproduction of culture no but it's like saying you said the primary edict

00:47:37.280 reproduction so why didn't you adopt kids well no i want to have my own kids that's what i'm saying

00:47:41.440 But that would be reproduction.

00:47:43.820 You reproducing your genes.

00:47:45.220 You adopting kids, not you reproducing your genes.

00:47:46.700 It's not reproducing.

00:47:47.720 But culture itself, the idea of it, it's an externalized philosophical concept, or it's

00:47:55.540 a concept of the mind, right?

00:47:57.580 You would agree with that?

00:47:58.440 Sure.

00:47:59.120 You're not reproducing that, you're reproducing your genes.

00:48:02.240 That would be the evolutionary view.

00:48:04.120 Sure.

00:48:04.380 And so what the evolutionist progressives would say is like, this is the best way for 0.56

00:48:08.400 you to reproduce your genes because you can bring in a bunch of women who you can breed with younger

00:48:13.360 so they're going to have more of your children but that isn't what's happening you're important

00:48:16.740 people who bring their own culture with their own family structure and they are producing that

00:48:21.040 look i'm not arguing this right i'm a hundred thousand percent with you i would if i were in 0.98

00:48:26.200 charge if i was king of the uk tomorrow monarch tomorrow yeah i would close the gates of immigration

00:48:31.240 immediately and give tommy robinson a badge and be like good job man you did the best you could

00:48:36.200 with what you had but the thing is is like i'm what i'm i guess what i'm getting at

00:48:40.680 before we get into too many reductios i'm just trying to point this out yeah that what you're

00:48:46.700 arguing you see how what we just did we took a fact and we're like vibing over it but now i've

00:48:51.260 introduced some philosophy to it and so now i'm asking about the grounding what is the grounding

00:48:56.320 what is the thing under the i think actually we were both talking about the philosophy your

00:49:00.700 argument is from a secular perspective or from a perspective that's not aligned with yours you

00:49:06.700 can't argue against mass immigration i thought i gave you some pretty compelling arguments from a

00:49:10.540 secular perspective against mass immigration you can look you can argue it okay what i'm saying to

00:49:16.140 you is that if if you're if everything that you're arguing is just coming from a me perspective all

00:49:23.420 morality is just dependent on stance then even if these people are doing something you consider dumb

00:49:28.700 it's not immoral how could it be immoral or how could it be wrong for them to do

00:49:33.440 that how and this is a question when you reduce to the ethical purview I realized 0.95

00:49:39.740 long time ago Christians can basically do whatever the fuck we want to secular 0.95

00:49:45.020 atheist regressifs now because what happens to treating others as you would 0.97

00:49:48.420 like to be treated well so that's so you're gonna bank on the benevolence of

00:49:51.680 my view but I should because you're a Chris right so if you're gonna bank on

00:49:58.040 benevolence of my view are you seeding that my view is is the right one because if it's not no

00:50:03.960 but i'm saying benevolence is an inherent part of being a christian so but but if you have a

00:50:09.160 foundation of just stance dependence for all of your moral claims right then even if i violated 0.63

00:50:15.400 this and was a complete hypocrite and actually just uh verbally just paid at lip service for 0.88

00:50:20.680 the purpose of controlling your mind you can't tell me why that's wrong you can't really point 0.99

00:50:25.880 to it and be like that's immoral because there are no moral facts yeah but okay but that being

00:50:31.800 the case but what we're talking about is you're saying that you want your ideology to dominate

00:50:38.120 yes effectively yes is that a christian way of doing things yes why well i mean well if we want

00:50:44.920 to look back through human history we start with a byzantine empire if you want to no but massive

00:50:49.800 massive orthodox empire we can talk about the naming of kings by god himself we can dive

00:50:55.000 right into the lineage of the king of kings, if you want to. The thing is, is that I'm not

00:51:00.480 out here advocating for a monarch. What I'm saying is that society is better off dominated

00:51:05.140 by Christians than dominated by non-Christians. And if you can point to me as society where that's 1.00

00:51:09.660 not true, I'm all ears. Yeah. And what do you mean by dominated? Because a lot of people hear

00:51:13.940 that word and go, whoa, that sounds authoritarian. The social political, well, there is some

00:51:18.800 authoritarianism to it, I suppose, but I just think there's authoritarianism to each ideology

00:51:23.200 which exists including liberal ideology it's just authoritarianism now by direct democracy

00:51:29.040 now it's like i suppose christians might come in and say some things that are pretty controversial 0.86

00:51:34.240 they might be like no gays can't get married prostitution's illegal no more pornography 0.92

00:51:38.800 right blasphemy ah let's be a little more chill on that right maybe they'll put in some things 0.98

00:51:44.240 like that tell me how society's worse like well how's society worse because 18 year olds can't 0.98

00:51:49.040 show their asshole on only fans like i want i honestly want to hear how's it worse like it 0.98

00:51:53.920 seems to me like by every metric it's way better right and the people who are arguing against it 0.99

00:51:58.640 like well we don't want totalitarianism that's totalitarianism i'll tell you what i saw as

00:52:03.360 totalitarianism was covet checkpoints uh that potential vaccine mandates uh communications

00:52:09.600 going through facebook and the government to identify people who wouldn't wear their mask

00:52:14.080 that seems like a lot more of this totalitarianism fascism thing than like oh 0.99

00:52:19.200 you know you sorry you're 18 you can't put your asshole all over the internet sorry it's like 0.99

00:52:25.360 what we're at some point maybe we can introduce rationality back into the uh the scheme here 0.99

00:52:32.160 right it's like it's not you do whatever the you want or it's totalitarianism that's not how it

00:52:37.360 works it works like this we're a nation of laws and laws are governed by ethics like it or not

00:52:44.560 all laws are informed by a person's ethical worldview so which ethical worldview you want 0.98

00:52:48.640 to make the laws the people want to put want 18 year old girls to put their assholes on only fans 0.97

00:52:53.680 or the people who don't which ones would you prefer make the laws of your nation but that 0.99

00:53:00.000 is not just quite a simplistic way of looking at for instance if you look at literature yeah

00:53:04.880 we had christians silence well saying certain books shouldn't be published for instance lady

00:53:10.560 chatterley's lover by dh lawrence a classic of a classic of english literature they didn't want

00:53:15.280 that to be published they were boulder rising shakespeare but surely but surely you're freedom

00:53:21.840 of speech guy aren't you i mean to an extent there's no so here's my view on rights what is a

00:53:29.600 right let's start with that what is it you tell us well it's a it's a social construction that

00:53:34.960 we made the up that's what a right is if it's something else other than that tell me what it is

00:53:41.440 where is it i can't see it touch it taste so it's the social construction that you have a right not

00:53:45.920 to be forced to wear a mask yeah why what else would it be okay fine yeah like so where is this

00:53:52.640 going what's your well the argument is just like rights are made up here's what here's what's

00:53:57.680 actually true what's actually true is you have a right to do whatever you can do within the purview

00:54:02.960 of force and that's it you have rights because people use force to ensure that you have rights

00:54:09.280 the second people don't ensure that there's force used so that you have rights you don't have them

00:54:14.080 anymore but the secularists or the in this case not really the secularist but the atheist mind or

00:54:21.680 the non-religious mind they can't ground rights in anything they made them up so they don't come 0.99

00:54:28.320 from god they just made them up so what they're saying is is that we just make this shit up 0.98

00:54:33.380 and somehow we're just all going to adhere to it even though there's no overarching real moral duty 0.89

00:54:38.160 to do so where does it come from nowhere so rights don't even exist you can't again can't taste them

00:54:44.720 can't touch them can't smell them right they're just products of the mind but come back to me

00:54:48.880 about the dh lawrence boulderizing shakespeare point yeah and you clutched your heart as if you

00:54:54.500 were clutching pearls in a kind of mocking way which is interesting why do you feel that who 0.92

00:54:59.440 gives a shit i give a shit well okay great ground it ground why i shouldn't outlaw that book why is 0.96

00:55:06.660 it immoral for me to do that because you are american you believe in the in the first amendment 1.00

00:55:12.300 you believe in freedom of speech so you're gonna appeal you're gonna appeal to my morals so from

00:55:17.240 your view your view why is it immoral for me to do that why why is it immoral for you to do that

00:55:23.380 because i believe the artistic creation is how is one of the ways that the human being expresses

00:55:30.880 itself makes sense to me notice how you copy out of that with i believe well i don't believe that

00:55:37.820 now what now where are we well that's why we have democracy so we can adjudicate it right so again

00:55:44.860 now we're just back to out so so as long as i can democratically convince enough people to outlaw

00:55:49.660 that book yeah well i guess but that's kind of unavoidable isn't it like if you live in a society

00:55:55.540 where 99 out of 100 people believe that something should be x and you believe y i mean logically

00:56:02.620 speaking you're going to end up in a society that outlaws x you would end up in a society which

00:56:07.880 outlawed x but that doesn't mean that's right no i agree or wrong right but then ultimately you have

00:56:12.720 choice of whether you choose to live in that society or not right to an extent yeah i mean

00:56:17.680 to some extent maybe you have some control over that but i guess the point i'm making to you is

00:56:22.800 not that i would outlaw this book right the point that i'm making to you is that you don't have any

00:56:26.480 justification for me not to like who cares oh you believe that so i believe different what now now

00:56:33.600 what's the media what you know like what is the threshold breaker well now we're just going to

00:56:37.280 appeal to a majority again well if that's the case then if i appeal to the majority to outlaw the

00:56:41.120 book bye-bye book andrew i'm not trying to argue with you for the sake of argument it's really

00:56:45.120 great really enjoyable conversation actually i appreciate the way that you you stay calm and on

00:56:49.440 the point but i'm not clear what point you're trying to make here particularly with this

00:56:53.440 shakespeare thing like rights or force that's my point i know i agree with you on that ultimately

00:56:58.480 in practice that is what happens but what what what does what are you trying it's not ultimately

00:57:02.480 in practice what happens even it's even philosophically the case from the non-christian

00:57:07.680 view when you say things like don't you appeal to the first amendment or this right right that's

00:57:13.200 what i'm getting at okay don't you appeal to this right this right we need to have the adult

00:57:18.000 conversation doesn't even exist it's just the social construction that we made up and

00:57:23.840 and it was pinned on a piece of paper and we pretend that it's um that it's something we

00:57:28.320 actually adhere to um but it's really not well violated constantly i don't care well you argue

00:57:35.440 about and that's why you have a judiciary system to adjudicate whether you are right but i mean

00:57:40.380 it's not just some random people wrote it down it's the founders of your country wrote it down

00:57:44.740 because they were trying to set a set of rules for this society to operate by in order to fulfill

00:57:51.700 what they thought would be a vision of a new country that would be a good one one thing that

00:57:57.180 doesn't get talked about enough is how demanding modern diets can be on digestion especially if

00:58:02.980 you're eating higher protein meals. So I've started using Masszymes by BioOptimizers,

00:58:09.000 a full spectrum digestive enzyme formula designed to support how your body breaks down food.

00:58:16.140 BioOptimizers has been around since 2004 and they're still a founder-owned company. Their

00:58:22.120 whole thing is quality and formulation first. They've even got their own in-house lab team

00:58:27.980 and they test raw ingredients because in supplements that part matters more than most

00:58:33.860 people realize. Masszymes is their digestive enzyme product and what sets it apart is that

00:58:40.720 it's a full spectrum blend. It includes 18 enzymes that support the breakdown of proteins, fats,

00:58:47.160 carbohydrates and fibers. It's also got a high level of protease to support protein breakdown

00:58:53.780 and phytase, which helps make minerals like iron and zinc more accessible from the food you're

00:58:59.980 already eating. When your body breaks food down more effectively, that can support smoother

00:59:05.440 digestion, better nutrient absorption, and may help with occasional post-meal discomfort or

00:59:11.240 bloating. No drama, no miracle claims, just supporting the process. Here's how I'm using it.

00:59:17.520 I take two to three capsules with meals, especially heavier meals, and I'm paying attention over time

00:59:23.120 to how I feel afterwards. The point is consistency, not chasing some overnight transformation.

00:59:29.900 And here's the big trust piece. Bio-Optimizers back themselves with a 365-day money-back guarantee

00:59:37.100 so you can try it properly. And if it's not for you, you're not stuck with it. Just let them know

00:59:42.620 and they will refund you 100%. Quick UK note, if you click the link from the UK,

00:59:49.080 you may be redirected to a UK distributor site.

00:59:53.060 That's normal and the offer will still apply.

00:59:55.680 If you want a practical way to support digestion and nutrient absorption

00:59:59.720 without changing your whole routine,

01:00:02.360 Mass Zymes is a straightforward place to start.

01:00:05.120 Click the link in the description of this episode

01:00:07.500 or go to biooptimizers.com slash trigger

01:00:11.420 and use our code TRIGGER at checkout to get 15% off your order.

01:00:16.280 Go through 2026 with better digestion and more energy with mass zymes by bio-optimizers.

01:00:24.420 The founders, what they wrote down was based on a massive compromise because beforehand they had the Articles of Confederation.

01:00:33.640 And the Articles of Confederation made each little kind of state, which wasn't a state even really then, their own nations.

01:00:41.120 And it didn't work out very well because they couldn't regulate trade or raise armies or things like this.

01:00:45.260 So, what they did via the Compromise was they had a 10th Amendment.

01:00:48.760 Now, the 10th Amendment says that all the rights that are not given to the federal government

01:00:52.760 are given to the states, prospectively.

01:00:53.760 And at our founding, almost every single state had a state religion.

01:00:56.760 Okay.

01:00:57.760 Almost all of them.

01:00:58.760 Well, of course.

01:00:59.760 And they were religious people.

01:01:00.760 And they continued to have them, I mean, clear up until there was an interpretation

01:01:05.360 of the 14th Amendment, which was widely viewed as being unconstitutional to this day.

01:01:11.920 were always allowed to have their own religion and put in their own religious practices.

01:01:16.180 And those practices were to be adhered to if you wanted to hold office, if you wanted

01:01:19.440 to swear oaths, if you wanted to do things like this.

01:01:21.920 That was part and partial of American society and the way that we did things.

01:01:27.260 Now that has changed as progressives have kind of demonized the whole idea that, well,

01:01:35.480 that's against the First Amendment.

01:01:36.480 And it's like, well, no, it ain't.

01:01:39.000 was part of the initial compromise anyway when we're talking about the idea of rights to get

01:01:43.800 get this back to the idea of rights right why is it that states don't have the right to do that

01:01:49.880 well it's because there's an interpretation of an amendment and then they said well you'd no

01:01:54.120 longer have the right to have your own religions inside of these states that's what they did

01:01:58.680 i was like and who has the force they do so everything really comes down when you're talking

01:02:04.360 about rights to the ideas of force and the reason that that's so important to understand

01:02:10.920 is because this republic when we moved it towards a direct democracy the reason that that's going to

01:02:16.920 fail is because um people don't understand this concept that that rights only exist as some kind

01:02:25.000 of like bizarre social construct if they're not grounded in god how does a secular society uphold

01:02:30.920 rights. How? But how do you uphold your right not to have to wear a mask in the middle of a pandemic

01:02:36.820 through scripture or God? You would still utilize it through force. Right. The scripture doesn't

01:02:42.740 prevent you from utilizing force. But this idea of like Christian pacifism and Christians being 0.99

01:02:48.140 pussies, I don't know where that came from. Britain, I think. Boy, that was never. So what 1.00

01:02:53.600 about the teachings of Jesus Christ? Which ones? Which ones do you want to dive into? Well, I was

01:02:58.400 raised as catholic so i'm not as well versed in scripture as you uh when he was on the cross

01:03:03.060 forgive them lord if they know not what they do of course and you should forgive people

01:03:07.000 i absolutely agree with that i may forgive a man who attempted to rape my wife but i'm going to

01:03:13.600 kill him in the attempt right like uh i don't what which thing's contradictory here it's like 0.92

01:03:20.440 i can forgive my enemies but that doesn't mean i need to let them crush me i can forgive people 0.97

01:03:25.100 who have done me wrong doesn't mean I need to let them do me more wrong. I can forgive people for

01:03:29.400 doing horrible acts against me. It doesn't mean I need to continue to let them do horrible acts

01:03:32.660 against me. Christian ethics has been widely bastardized by progressive leftists as being

01:03:38.000 some kind of like hippie religion. It is definitely not. It never has been, and I don't know where that

01:03:42.640 came from. Yes, it's true the teachings of Jesus Christ are very heavy on loving your neighbor

01:03:47.560 and understanding forgiveness and understanding the mode of sin, and that most people are going

01:03:52.220 engage in sin so we need the forgiveness of jesus christ for that that's true but it's not a

01:03:57.260 pacifistic religion and it never has been a path jesus told one of his disciples to sell a cloak

01:04:02.540 and buy a sword but these were not pacifists jesus ran money changers out of a temple that

01:04:07.900 with a braided cord that he made a feather and whipped them out of the temple so like i don't

01:04:13.980 i don't know where the idea of pacifism came from he called them serpents he called people

01:04:17.740 servants whitewashed tombs he called them all sorts of names these were killable offenses in

01:04:22.220 his day i don't know enough about scripture to challenge you but it's interesting what you said

01:04:26.300 but what i wanted to get back to so this idea of of boulderizing shakespeare canceling books etc

01:04:33.280 i guess for me now thinking about it is the reason that it's not good is that you begin to silence

01:04:40.280 ideas and what christianity did and not solely christianity but other religions did is it

01:04:45.220 silent scientists and people making breakthrough in the scientific fields and i guess the ultimate

01:04:51.140 example is is people be worrying that essentially in schools is we'd be back to teaching creationism

01:04:57.700 for example if certain christians were in charge and presenting creationism as fact why couldn't

01:05:04.340 you just have a compromise there where you said okay you can learn either or you can learn neither

01:05:09.620 that should be up to the parents don't you think the education standards for their kids

01:05:14.380 Why should that be up to the state?

01:05:16.040 Do you think the state should have control over that?

01:05:17.840 Or do you think the parents should?

01:05:19.240 So if the parents say, yeah, you know, I don't really want them to learn evolution,

01:05:23.860 why can't they opt them out?

01:05:25.840 Because evolution has been proven to be scientifically correct.

01:05:29.220 That's not your business, what people do with their kids' education.

01:05:32.100 That's their business, right? 0.99

01:05:33.280 Okay, well, then why can't I raise my child to be a jihadist? 0.98

01:05:37.100 So you're going to raise your kid to blow people up? 0.91

01:05:40.360 No, but why not?

01:05:42.240 I mean, if you say it's not your business, then it's not your business.

01:05:45.060 Yeah.

01:05:45.320 Well, I mean, can you stop parents from raising their kids to be a jihadist? 0.56

01:05:50.620 You can. 0.50

01:05:51.400 How?

01:05:51.720 Well, you can make sure that within the confines of a school that they're not learning it.

01:05:55.360 We have had schools in the UK where people have been, there's misvalues and those schools

01:06:00.460 have been closed down.

01:06:01.760 Okay.

01:06:02.120 So what can, why is it in school that you're supposed to learn reading, writing, arithmetic,

01:06:09.320 and you're supposed to learn science as well, right?

01:06:10.820 Yeah.

01:06:10.960 Okay.

01:06:11.480 so you're saying well this is a scientific fact so that so kids need to learn it right yeah okay

01:06:16.240 so parents say well i dispute this fact right i'm not going to teach my kid evolution how does that

01:06:23.740 hamstring the kid exactly like what what about that's going to hamstring the child what's going

01:06:28.880 to well maybe they want to be a scientist maybe the way that they see the world you're actually

01:06:32.560 taking out a fundamental part of their understanding of the world and how it works that's a strictly

01:06:37.960 materialistic view and it's silly is what about the the ideas of metaphysical accounting accounting

01:06:43.880 for metaphysical things like the laws uh that are immaterial laws of logic things like this i think

01:06:49.320 they should be taught in school as well i don't understand they're not proven facts

01:06:54.440 even though you believe in them they're not proven facts but you still want them taught in school

01:06:58.440 yeah okay so the bible's not a proven fact do you want that taught school yeah i believe you should

01:07:04.360 learn the bible as part of part as part of religious studies education well that's fantastic

01:07:08.680 great okay here's my compromise because now i tell you what you can teach evolution or or you can

01:07:15.080 teach uh creationism or you can teach both and parents can have them have the kids uh do both

01:07:20.360 or do neither which is exactly what i said before you say same thing they should teach both no no

01:07:25.560 no no no that's not what i was saying i was saying that you should teach you should teach

01:07:29.640 evolution because it has been scientifically proven but you should also teach the bible and

01:07:34.920 you say this is what christians believe and it's up to you whether you believe it or not okay so

01:07:39.800 then i don't understand why so let me ask you in a different way um is it the case that if you're

01:07:49.560 a religious christian that your kids should have to sit through sex education hearing about 0.98

01:07:54.280 homosexual sex should they should have to hearing about homosexual sex no they shouldn't i but i 0.96

01:08:00.440 believe that why not why not let me finish the i think the point there's an important distinction 0.99

01:08:04.840 here between different types of sex education showing kids porn as some of your schools do

01:08:10.040 it shouldn't happen irrespective of whether it's sexual homosexual whatever straight whatever 0.95

01:08:14.840 yep so that's an important distinction well you have to show them porn like i remember when i 0.94

01:08:18.920 went through sex ed they showed they definitely showed the naked human body walk through showed 0.95

01:08:24.280 you these are what breasts are these are what ovaries are this is what this is this is what

01:08:28.360 this is this is where babies come from didn't appear overtly it wasn't pornographic right right 0.85

01:08:34.280 you do the same exact thing with with homosexuality right but why do you think that religious

01:08:39.400 fundamentalists should be able to offer kids out of that i don't believe that we should be teaching

01:08:43.640 I think sex ed should be about, I think sex ed should primarily be about safety, actually.

01:08:50.040 That's it?

01:08:50.940 Primarily be about safety and also about how the biological functions work when you have children, etc.

01:08:58.620 So you don't want to talk in school at all?

01:09:01.320 Well, sex ed, yes.

01:09:02.960 You do?

01:09:03.480 Yes, I do.

01:09:03.960 Okay, great.

01:09:04.240 So then why do you want the parents' ability to tell their teachers, hey, I want to opt my kid out of this? 0.97

01:09:11.440 if you're going to be talking about gay sex you're going to be talking about this you're 0.91

01:09:14.940 going to be talking about that i want to opt them out of that right i wouldn't be talking i don't 0.98

01:09:18.700 think you should include gay sex in the curriculum why though why yeah because i believe why because 0.97

01:09:25.020 i believe that it actually could offend religious minorities oh okay just like creationism right 0.93

01:09:30.720 no not like creationism not like well like darwin no but but when you have evolutionary that that is

01:09:38.720 a scientific fact. That is a scientific... I actually wouldn't go quite that far. It's

01:09:43.640 a scientific theory that's currently accepted. But look, this is actually...

01:09:47.600 The distinction between theory and fact, I mean...

01:09:49.900 Well, this is actually... I mean, it's interesting because just so... All of this will get condensed

01:09:56.480 into clips on the internet where it's like, this person destroyed that person, which is

01:09:59.600 really not the angle of conversation for us. Really trying to explore the arguments. I

01:10:03.640 would say a stronger version of your argument is, should parents be able to

01:10:08.140 opt their children out of being taught that climate change is real, right?

01:10:12.380 Because that's where you're going to get someone like Francis or me to go, yeah,

01:10:16.840 I think they should be able to opt out of that, right?

01:10:18.520 Even though that's a scientifically accepted consensus.

01:10:21.320 Well, I'm not here for destruction.

01:10:23.420 No, no, no, none of us all.

01:10:24.760 But let me come back to a point that I think Francis made that you haven't

01:10:27.540 addressed, which I think is a strong argument.

01:10:29.120 What about the jihadi thing? 0.53

01:10:30.340 Like, should devout Muslim families be able to create schools, according to this devolvement of religion to the states or whatever, where they teach that particular worldview? 1.00

01:10:41.760 No. 1.00

01:10:42.600 Because?

01:10:43.380 Because I believe in Christian ethics as the dominant force in society.

01:10:47.940 And since that's the case, I would tailor laws towards Christian ethics being the dominant force in society.

01:10:53.660 So there would be no schools that taught anything except Christian ethics?

01:10:57.100 no it wouldn't be that they would teach nothing but christian ethics but we could definitely 0.94

01:11:01.020 tailor laws against jihadist ethics or definitely tailor laws against even importing muslims at all 1.00

01:11:06.860 the hell are we importing muslims here for anyway we don't need them here never needed them here 0.99

01:11:12.380 diversity is our strength has not been a strength having muslims here the idea that that we can't 1.00

01:11:17.820 tailor or craft legislation and laws around the things that our children learn or at least what 0.97

01:11:22.460 you can opt into and out of um let's just say for consistency sake sure you could teach your kid i 0.86

01:11:29.100 guess theoretically to be a jihadist and there's nothing i can do about it there's nothing a 0.76

01:11:32.460 secular state can do about it either except not let them come in and then it's really hard to 0.54

01:11:37.180 train your kid to be a jihadist right because you're not here well so from a policy level this

01:11:41.900 is kind of ultimately comes back to the final question i suppose of what is um do you call

01:11:48.540 yourself a christian nationalist is that your i would say christian populist christian nationalism

01:11:53.100 is often conflated with forms of ethno nationalism and people do use it as a cloak it is for ethno

01:11:59.100 nationalism i would fall more in line with what's called cultural nationalism uh-huh you would you

01:12:04.220 guys i think from watching your content would fall more in line with uh by civic nationalism

01:12:09.900 so uh cultural nationalism is talking about the glue which holds cultures together

01:12:15.180 and the ethno-nationalists obviously believe that's your race right uh obviously i think that

01:12:23.100 race is not enough to hold a nation together there has to be some kind of cultural glue you

01:12:28.760 know and that usually comes from religion so all the laws that i can see seem to be informed by

01:12:33.800 ethics and those ethics seem to almost universally be informed by christianity so you would uh you

01:12:39.400 support mass migration from christian countries no why not well i don't understand i want my

01:12:45.660 domestic population to grow so if i want to tailor the best outcomes for my society then i want my

01:12:52.780 domestic population to grow i want those families to be very happy i want them to have the biggest

01:12:57.760 slice of that american dream right because i'm christian but also a nationalist so the idea here

01:13:04.180 is nation first me importing a bunch of people from other countries not putting my nation first

01:13:09.000 putting their nation first so my list of priorities would be god nation right or i'm sorry god family 0.67

01:13:16.520 nation so culture culture and borders are very important for the nation and so i uh so you don't

01:13:23.880 you're not a christian nationalist cultural nationalist so describe to me the america that

01:13:29.080 you want what does it look like what are the you mean by tomorrow well let's say i was king tomorrow

01:13:34.680 well you seemed very keen on this idea which you know i'm sure you're excited about what i mean is

01:13:41.640 ultimately you you want to transform america into something that it used to be or that you'd like it

01:13:47.560 to be or whatever let's not argue about it yeah sure okay let's just say you want america to be

01:13:51.560 a certain way is that fair yeah okay what does it look like once you've got to the to that destination

01:13:57.320 once you've got to that perfect america which represents your values as someone who's really

01:14:02.920 interested in christianity being the dominant force in society what can you do what you how

01:14:06.840 is it different from what we have so while i would say that there's um this is a bit of like

01:14:11.400 hypothetical utopianism of course um as long as you're granting me that this is a bit of

01:14:16.040 hypothetical utopianism uh so there let's say i was king wilson tomorrow i'm king andrew wilson

01:14:22.600 and my decrees and edicts go out to all of the land first thing mass migration that's gone

01:14:27.560 immediately next thing is focusing on domestic birth rates and domestic birth policies 0.84

01:14:32.920 and trying to move America back to a one-income family. 0.64

01:14:36.520 The best way to do that is to prioritize from the government level down 1.00

01:14:40.260 that women do not defer their childbearing years for college, right? 0.99

01:14:44.800 But rather, you offer massive incentives to families for them to get married younger, right? 0.97

01:14:49.820 Stay at home, have babies with their husband.

01:14:52.440 And if you contract them from the workforce, wages are going to necessarily skyrocket. 1.00

01:14:57.380 The second you begin contracting women from the workforce, wages are going to shoot through the roof, 0.98

01:15:01.620 especially if you're not filling those roles with migrants. 1.00

01:15:04.580 So those would be some of the very first policies that I would put in place. 1.00

01:15:08.940 I would also, I'd ban porn, I'd ban gay marriage. 1.00

01:15:11.740 I'd put in some kinds of laws which had dominion over the airwaves when it came to degeneracy, right? 1.00

01:15:20.220 Meaning, I don't think you should turn on Fox or, you know, like Channel 32 and see naked women. 1.00

01:15:27.960 I don't think that that's good for the public. 1.00

01:15:30.380 i don't think it's particularly useful i would probably outlaw smartphones uh put age restrictions

01:15:35.980 on smartphones probably till you were like 18 years old there would be some pretty restrictive

01:15:40.700 things that i would put in place but they would also maximize it would also maximize human ethical

01:15:46.140 flourishing right the idea here is like why do kids need to be looking at smartphones and training

01:15:51.660 their brain towards smartphones it's been terrible for them no we just did an episode recorded an

01:15:55.820 episode on it well several actually so i agree with you on that and is it important to you that

01:16:01.020 that outcome is a has arrived that democratically that like you persuade half the country that this

01:16:06.460 is the way to be so ultimately the views the views of what's best for the nation that's what's going

01:16:14.380 to be first and foremost in my brain right yes the re the religious aspect uh that's it's always

01:16:21.020 going to be god first but from like the the things that i can do something about it's going to be

01:16:26.620 from the national level the nation that we have is a check checks and balance based republic so

01:16:32.620 obviously i'm going to work within the confines of that in order to make as many compelling and

01:16:38.220 convincing arguments and as as many compelling and convincing things i can possibly do to move people

01:16:44.060 towards this view but remember the problem with democracy the big hole in it is you can

01:16:48.940 democratically remove it so you can vote out democracy that's it's built in right into

01:16:55.660 democracy to be able to do that and the most american thing you can do is to remove amendments

01:17:01.180 and put in new amendments we do it all the time right and is that what you prefer you don't want

01:17:05.180 america to be a direct democracy no what would you like it to be i would like it to be what it used

01:17:10.380 to be at the beginning which is a stakeholder democracy at the very least what does that mean

01:17:14.700 It means you're either going to have, like, one household voting, right, so that we're not dividing husbands and wives because that's really stupid, or it means that you're going to have to have some kind of stake in property or perhaps four years of unpaid public service before you can vote.

01:17:31.560 There has to be some skin in the game, in other words. 0.58

01:17:34.540 I'd also raise the voting age probably to 25, right? 1.00

01:17:38.520 Would women be allowed to vote? 1.00

01:17:41.160 I mean, yeah, to at least the degree that men are, but I don't want men to vote for the most part, 0.99

01:17:47.960 either. I don't think it's a great idea. But it would be equal between men and women, 0.66

01:17:51.720 in your view. Really? It doesn't sound like it. What do you mean?

01:17:55.080 Well, what I mean is it sort of sounds like, well, forgive me if I'm misunderstanding this,

01:17:59.240 genuinely. You'd like people to get married and to vote as a household, which I imagine would

01:18:05.000 kind of mean the head of the family, which is the husband, would tend to decide that. 0.52

01:18:10.280 And if a woman isn't married, presumably she wouldn't be getting a vote partly for that reason. 0.60

01:18:14.300 Is that fair? 1.00

01:18:14.760 Sure.

01:18:15.400 Okay.

01:18:15.820 Yeah, what's wrong with that system?

01:18:17.120 Sounds great.

01:18:17.720 I'm just interested in explaining.

01:18:18.960 Well, it sounds great to you.

01:18:19.900 I'm just interested in...

01:18:21.300 The thing is, is like, it's really hard.

01:18:25.360 It's really difficult.

01:18:27.120 When people think of things like, what's the argument against this?

01:18:30.500 This is an immutable character.

01:18:32.140 How could you argue that women shouldn't be able to vote or that men shouldn't be able to vote?

01:18:35.880 It's like, well, at our founding, they couldn't. 0.55

01:18:39.000 women could not vote well your founding as you've said yourself you had slavery 0.79

01:18:43.680 right so things do change over time sure but the thing is is like sometimes in a

01:18:48.480 good direction sure it's sometimes in a bad direction absolutely the thing is

01:18:51.540 is like the the idea that they had there was that most men couldn't vote there

01:18:55.980 was no universal suffrage for men including slaves right for the most part

01:19:00.300 were men and women couldn't vote because most people weren't allowed to vote now 0.59

01:19:06.900 Now, women, the arguments against women voting are pretty simple, and the idea is landholdership 0.80

01:19:11.960 and force, right? 1.00

01:19:13.800 Can women utilize force in order to maintain land? 1.00

01:19:15.880 The answer is no. 1.00

01:19:16.880 Generally, that takes men. 0.63

01:19:19.180 So the biggest, like the, if you're looking at feminism, for instance, you had the anti-suffragettes 0.62

01:19:25.280 and then the suffragettes, but the anti-suffragettes' arguments were way better.

01:19:29.040 The argument was pretty simple, it just worked like this.

01:19:32.700 You cannot erode or get rid of the patriarchy because you always have to appeal to it for

01:19:36.640 your rights.

01:19:38.360 And that's a fundamental truth. 1.00

01:19:40.140 And since that's a fundamental truth, I've never seen a great reason why women should 1.00

01:19:43.800 be able to vote. 0.95

01:19:45.640 Because they can vote to send men to war that they themselves do not have to go fight.

01:19:50.580 They are not beholden to the draft, only men are.

01:19:54.220 And they can say, well, you're not beholden to the draft perhaps because you're too old

01:19:57.940 for it, but you were beholden to the draft when you were not too old for it, so your

01:20:01.480 time could have come. We're at a strange moment where people are pouring their most private

01:20:06.860 thoughts into AI. Health issues, business ideas, political opinions, things you wouldn't even tell

01:20:12.080 some of your friends. And you're just meant to trust that none of this will be stored,

01:20:15.580 analyzed, or eventually used against you because tech companies have always handled power

01:20:19.480 responsibly. Obviously. There is another problem too. You've probably noticed that some AI tools

01:20:24.660 now decide what you're allowed to ask. Programmers at these companies get to decide what isn't

01:20:29.260 isn't acceptable for you to think about. That's where our sponsor Venice AI comes in. If you like

01:20:33.880 AI but don't like surveillance or censorship, Venice is for you. Venice lets you use powerful

01:20:38.540 AI models anonymously. Your prompts are submitted on your behalf so they're not tied to your

01:20:43.000 identity and your conversations are encrypted and stored only on your device, not on some company

01:20:48.340 servers. That alone puts it in a completely different category from most mainstream AI tools.

01:20:53.000 You can use open source models for writing, coding, images, even video all in one place. You can switch

01:20:58.460 between leading models depending on what you're doing, whether that's sharpening an argument,

01:21:02.760 preparing for an interview, or generating ideas. Because your conversations stay on your device,

01:21:07.460 no corporation or government can spy on you or use your data for profit. You get the power of

01:21:11.960 modern AI without handing over your private thoughts. Venice was founded by Eric Vahiz,

01:21:16.720 a longtime privacy advocate. So privacy here is not a marketing add-on. It's the point.

01:21:21.780 If you want AI without surveillance or ideological guardrails, go to venice.ai

01:21:26.660 slash trigonometry or click the link in the description. Use our code TRIGGER to get 20%

01:21:31.540 off a pro plan. That site again is venice.ai slash trigonometry. Could you not flip this

01:21:37.500 argument the other way around and say men are able to vote on things that affect women that

01:21:43.940 don't affect men? Right. Well, all kinds of things. For example, their right to vote. I mean, 0.68

01:21:48.740 among other things. But, you know, things to do with sexual health, abortion, all kinds of things,

01:21:53.680 right well i don't understand abortion does have to do with men okay fine i mean it does but it

01:21:59.200 has more to do with women because it affects them more directly uh but lots of other things i mean

01:22:03.840 men could pass a law that women have to wear a headscarf for example right so we our votes

01:22:09.600 affect each other that's not an argument to deny the other sex the vote oh i don't understand um 0.95

01:22:16.560 like your argument is women can vote to send men to war and my argument my argument is it's called

01:22:22.640 force doctrine my argument reduces to this if you always have to appeal to one sex for your rights

01:22:29.560 right then why are you why are you being imbued with the responsibility of that at all

01:22:35.800 because women have to appeal to men for their rights and anytime men want to take rights away

01:22:40.500 from women they can't like that and there's not a damn thing women can do about it and if you want

01:22:44.820 proof of that let me show you half the world anytime collectively men say women have no rights

01:22:50.840 they don't have any and that's that and there's not a damn thing that they can do about it

01:22:56.840 so the idea that they can erode the patriarchy or remove the patriarchy or in some way 0.98

01:23:03.640 um get away from the patriarchy to be strong independent women is nonsense they're just

01:23:08.440 always appealing to the benevolence of men always and so i don't i don't even understand what the 1.00

01:23:14.440 purpose is of the vote for women what is it we can literally via force take it whenever we want anyway

01:23:22.680 what is the point here well i would imagine the point is to include the voice of half the

01:23:26.920 population which is naturally set on different priorities to those of men and since we live

01:23:31.560 in a society which is half female it would be worthwhile to include that perspective in how

01:23:36.520 we make decisions why does voting because it affects them as much as affects us have you 0.91

01:23:41.560 let me ask you a question are you aware that in the united states we abolished alcohol

01:23:46.920 for a period of time i've seen some movies about how that went 0.94

01:23:50.200 who got who got that amendment passed i don't know women okay oh no no if you want to have an

01:23:57.080 argument about our disagreements with how women choose to vote no no no there's not much wouldn't

01:24:02.180 vote oh i see that's what that's what you're saying okay they couldn't vote but but they

01:24:08.280 still got that amendment passed okay the idea that women did not have influence or do not have 1.00

01:24:13.040 influence or don't have moral influence on society because they can't vote is stupid so what's wrong 0.99

01:24:19.280 with formalizing that in the form of a vote well i just told you the very idea that women well like 0.99

01:24:27.140 let's start with this do you want women to be able to get drafted in the military

01:24:31.580 uh i personally don't know why why uh because i've never really thought about it but it's just

01:24:44.580 an instinctive reaction actually uh i'd have to think about the exact reason but um i i just don't

01:24:50.080 think combat is what men do i guess it's a very simplistic way of saying it and there'll be there 0.99

01:24:55.020 will be women who blow can kick your ass and and there are women sure like that right uh but not 0.98

01:25:00.380 generally uh what i i am not against women serving in the military if that's what they 0.99

01:25:05.580 choose to do what about the draft though but i don't think they should be compelled to no

01:25:10.380 but men should uh in i think in some circumstances yes like when the survival of the country is at

01:25:16.220 state so women get a privilege men don't get sure why men get certain privileges so why do they have

01:25:22.540 equal rights no what privileges name a single privilege men yet that women don't have access

01:25:27.500 to what you mean legislative anything like literally in life any yeah any aspect whether 0.99

01:25:33.260 it be governmental social women have all the privilege all the privilege oh yeah hey when

01:25:38.380 the titanic goes down who gets on the lifeboat yeah yeah but that's a very narrow context or 1.00

01:25:43.180 who dies in childbirth right like coming come on there's we're different and almost no women

01:25:48.380 die in childbirth anymore oh some just still do sure but i mean some people died just like i mean

01:25:54.060 there's probably more women that die in childbirth in america than people who die on the titanic in

01:25:58.060 the modern yeah childbirth avoidable you just don't have don't have sex right no but what i'm

01:26:05.340 saying is there are outcomes that are better for men in life and for women and that's a fundamental

01:26:11.420 difference between men and women yeah i understand but i'm talking about privilege what what are any

01:26:16.780 can he give me any privilege at all that men have uh that women don't whereas i can give you tons

01:26:24.460 of privileges that women have that men don't that's what i'm asking um privilege well i mean

01:26:31.180 the privilege concept outside the legislative framework is a difficult one even inside of it

01:26:35.980 i'm asking for both either any in fact um i don't have the data on all this stuff but i i i would

01:26:45.340 assume there are contexts in which men are more likely to be employed for a certain thing because

01:26:49.420 they're more likely to be perceived as authoritative as leaders things like that although that has

01:26:54.300 changed with the kind of work agenda the last 10 years and it works both ways like for instance

01:26:59.180 preschool teachers yeah i would assume that people would vastly prefer that their kid go to a woman

01:27:04.300 right right so it seems like that privilege is striped across the board so like what what is the 1.00

01:27:10.780 why is it that women get all of the equality right uh but also get all the privilege that

01:27:16.940 doesn't seem right to me that seems like it's backwards so like what i'm still waiting to hear

01:27:22.300 from anybody ever what are these what are these um privileges men have over women versus what

01:27:29.180 women have over men so if you can go and you can be drafted you can be sent off to war right um

01:27:37.180 and women can't but they can vote to send you off to war how is that not something which 0.50

01:27:41.260 fundamentally needs to be addressed immediately that seems to me like it's completely lopsided 0.93

01:27:46.700 and it's giving one class of people a significant privilege over another so if we allowed women to 0.81

01:27:52.220 be drafted you'd be happy with them having well see now we come into pragmatic problems though

01:27:57.020 the reason that you said earlier i'm against women being drafted is because they can't really serve

01:28:02.140 in combat roles only in support roles as draftees of men would have to serve in combat roles 0.95

01:28:07.180 the reason women don't do well in combat roles is because well driving tanks is hard work it takes 1.00

01:28:12.860 muscles and you gotta you know run the shells and you have to carry hundreds of pounds of equipment 1.00

01:28:17.660 with you and you have to do all of this type of thing and generally speaking women aren't equipped 1.00

01:28:21.580 for it which is why we've never had a female navy seal to date even though they've been trying for 1.00

01:28:26.300 like 25 years we still haven't had a single one they can't do the job now what people always do 1.00

01:28:33.340 is point out liars right well some women can do it that's true some can't but in general they can't 1.00

01:28:39.340 i guess but when you vote for a government you don't vote whether to go for war or not

01:28:45.740 it's the government makes the decision there's plenty of people who voted for

01:28:49.340 donald trump and are absolutely disgusted that he's started a war with iran i thought government

01:28:56.400 was forced we are agreed on that right government's force like ultimately that's what it reduces to

01:29:01.680 so you say you're voting you're voting for force and you're voting for force use why does the

01:29:05.960 united states have a massive military well because we're going to use it that's why we're going to

01:29:10.960 use it why do we have a draft well because we're going to use that too and have used it so the

01:29:16.560 thing is, is that a lot of what we're voting on is force. We want to, we're trying to protect our

01:29:20.920 nation from all foreign threats, right? That's why we have this massive military. That's why we have

01:29:26.560 a draft. That's why we have the potential for mass combat. That's why we entered into World War II,

01:29:32.000 right? That's why we entered and there was a draft then. And we're going to institute a draft

01:29:37.060 at some point again, likely. It's more likely than not. At some point, we're going to do it.

01:29:42.160 so the thing is it's like why do women get exempt from that and if it's the case that you don't want

01:29:46.940 them exempt from that why is it that they don't go right to the front lines then and battle it out

01:29:50.640 like draftees have the at least the potential to well that's a fundamental privilege that is not 0.99

01:29:56.420 being addressed right and yet women have the vote doesn't seem like they care too much about men's 0.65

01:30:01.360 rights even though we're supposed to care about theirs seems like they have a lot of privilege

01:30:05.760 in society is that fair andrew i think a lot of women care about men's rights actually look there's

01:30:09.980 there's this there's the vocal minority which say that they don't and they hate men and we look we

01:30:14.940 know those type of women let's be honest a lot of women care about men's rights they do give us give

01:30:19.820 me like three of the most prominent ones you can think of who care about men's rights uh well 1.00

01:30:26.140 i'm trying to think now but i mean we've had feminists on the show who are feminists like 0.99

01:30:30.380 louise perry for example they're different type of feminists to the idiots that you'd be spending 1.00

01:30:34.300 your time arguing with but the people who have a very sensible view of these things yeah lots 1.00

01:30:38.940 of people like that by the way coming back not not to change the subject but coming back to your

01:30:42.460 point i mean uh one of the things that doesn't make a lot of sense to me is for example yes it's

01:30:48.220 true uh men serve in combat roles and women don't but women bear children and men don't and there's

01:30:54.700 a huge disadvantage you know in all sorts of societal outcomes from a materialistic career

01:30:59.980 perspective to spending the time to bear the child and then to nurture that child right so uh we what

01:31:06.620 like what well that's backwards no no hold on yeah the the gender pay gap discussion which is kind of 0.97

01:31:14.380 stupid in a lot of areas is actually a reflection of the fact that there is a motherhood gap in 0.96

01:31:19.100 lifetime earnings which is if you're a woman who bears children and take more time off and then 1.00

01:31:24.060 you take time off then over the course of your life less overtime yeah you will learn less so 1.00

01:31:28.860 that would be one disadvantage that i could give you where women contribute a different thing so 0.83

01:31:33.100 you might say well men get drafted women carry children it's not a disadvantage 1.00

01:31:37.900 so oh no oh they have to stay at home oh and raise their kids oh ah what where's the

01:31:44.380 disadvantage again the man's oh no the men get drafted where's the disadvantage they die

01:31:49.980 okay they get shot in the face and women earn less money over the course of their lives and

01:31:53.980 have to carry a thing no they are there's a risk to they have potentially what what they have

01:31:58.300 instead is they now don't have to pay for daycare and they can depend on somebody else's income

01:32:02.300 which is taking care of them oh that's terrible oh my god you get to stay at home and you don't

01:32:07.340 have to do anything except raise your kit wow and by the way they're putting their kids on a bus

01:32:11.500 almost every morning to go to a public school they don't even have them for eight hours out

01:32:15.100 of the day most of the time so like how is this the most incredibly difficult job ever or uh in

01:32:21.420 some way requires them to have that that's they're the ones who are privileged you know there's an old

01:32:26.700 comedian who made this joke and i agree with any job you can do in your pajamas can't be that hard

01:32:30.940 bill bird favorite comedian of ours but okay it can't be that hard he was joking though um

01:32:36.300 knowing bill and now that he's married with kids i think his perspective has changed some more

01:32:40.220 um but i guess you know i'm married with kids right you're my i mean you watched your wife

01:32:44.940 carry the baby or babies inside her for nine months like that's a big deal sure so i guess

01:32:51.660 that to me would be one example versus the hypothetical risk of once every 50 years you get 0.95

01:32:56.540 drafted in a two-income household it's a privilege that women get to stay at home it's a privilege

01:33:02.140 but we're not talking about staying at home we're talking about carrying the child yeah but 1.00

01:33:05.740 carrying and then the child has to be raised and most women in america then go back to work yeah 1.00

01:33:09.580 at a disadvantage as we just that's not a disadvantage though right they don't have to 1.00

01:33:13.580 have children you have to go out for a draft well women do have to have children for our society 0.89

01:33:20.060 well they're not so well i mean they are i mean they're definitely my wife yeah but what's the 0.97

01:33:26.300 birth rate we're under we're under replacement levels i know but what you're talking about

01:33:31.660 side argument what i'm saying is in a society that wants to reproduce men have to go to war

01:33:37.820 and women have to bear the children that's true and so why isn't why don't we just say well the

01:33:42.780 men go to war the women have children that's why they both when are they going to start having the 0.91

01:33:47.340 children part of this i mean my wife's doing it yeah but your wife's doing it so shouldn't they 0.99

01:33:52.780 have the right to vote? You're not fucking fighting war, are you? Men, well, but is there the potential 0.98

01:34:00.460 for that through the draft? Well, like just the potential for them to have children. You say

01:34:03.900 they're not. Well, I could say you're not being drafted. Same thing. No, there is no equivalency

01:34:09.100 and I can point out the distinction. Yeah, the compulsion thing. The convulsion, yes. But for

01:34:12.780 a society to work, men have to go to war and women have to have kids. I agree, but you need to get 1.00

01:34:18.700 to the they're having kids part before you can tell me that there's some equivalency to men being

01:34:23.340 drafted because they're not having kids. And you're not being drafted. But I can be compelled

01:34:29.660 because I've signed up for the draft. Where have they signed up to have kids? I think this is a

01:34:35.420 splitting hairs argument. I think it's not. I think that the idea that my children can be drafted

01:34:41.660 or I could be drafted even at my age because perhaps I have knowledge which would be useful

01:34:45.500 to the united states military they could do it in five seconds they could bring me on they they in

01:34:50.460 ukraine they draft six-year-old men okay if they need you they're gonna take you and you can peel 0.99

01:34:55.340 potatoes or whatever it is they need right women do not have to do that they do not have to sign

01:35:00.780 up for selective service they're not compelled and will never be symmetrical in that way they

01:35:04.860 can avoid pregnancy though right and if you're saying that they have a duty no to have children

01:35:09.980 i'm not saying they have a duty but do you have a duty to go fight a war if you get drafted correct

01:35:13.740 oh okay and this is fair how where do we get to the fairness well not everything has to look

01:35:19.340 exactly symmetrical but your argument initially was where's a privilege that men enjoy and women

01:35:25.240 don't well i would argue in a function in society where women where we want to reproduce women end

01:35:31.440 up with the burden of childbearing and child rearing in a way that men don't i think it's a 0.99

01:35:35.860 fairly simple and obvious argument and yet they they're privileged when it comes to custody and

01:35:40.820 divorces. They're privileged when it comes to child support. They're privileged when it comes

01:35:44.700 to alimony. They're privileged when it comes to all of these things. They have every advantage

01:35:48.460 when it comes to having the child. And so it's like, no.

01:35:51.920 It's a different argument. What I'm saying is the burden of bearing the child is uniquely with

01:35:56.880 women in the same way that the burden of fighting in war is uniquely with men.

01:36:02.500 So it's an ontological argument. The nature of women is to have children. The nature of men is 1.00

01:36:06.860 to go to war. 0.66

01:36:07.860 Right.

01:36:08.860 And so... 1.00

01:36:09.860 The woman needs to be fulfilling her nature then, right?

01:36:11.860 Well, my woman is, and so is yours, right? 1.00

01:36:13.860 Yes, but most women aren't. 0.99

01:36:14.860 So I would insist for my woman to have the right to vote on that basis, that she's contributing, 1.00

01:36:17.860 frankly, at this point, way more than I am.

01:36:19.860 Drafting is collective, right?

01:36:20.860 Yeah.

01:36:21.860 So then the duty is collective?

01:36:22.860 Yeah.

01:36:23.860 Then why isn't childbirth?

01:36:27.860 I don't understand. 1.00

01:36:29.860 You're saying for women to have the right to vote, they must have a duty to bear children. 0.92

01:36:33.860 Yeah, well, if you're saying that there's a duty for men to go to war, and you're saying that the reason that they do is because that's their ontological nature, and the ontological nature of women is to have children, okay, I can concede that argument. 0.69

01:36:44.420 But we just ran into a problem then, because if one is collective and then the other is collective, why do I have to fulfill my duty, but they don't have to fulfill theirs?

01:36:53.220 Well, I never said that. I thought it was a collective duty for women to have children.

01:36:57.760 But it's a collective duty for men to go.

01:36:59.800 Yeah, yeah. 0.52

01:37:00.660 Well, then, again, that sounds like privilege.

01:37:02.400 Yeah. Well, in the same way that fire safety in your own house is a personal thing that you do,

01:37:08.000 but if there's a fire in the neighborhood, it's the collective duty of the neighbors to get

01:37:11.200 together and try and put it out, right? There's a different... Do you go to jail if you don't do

01:37:15.920 that? Yeah. Look, I agree with you. The compulsion element is different, but not everything is

01:37:21.680 exactly the same. I'm not even asking... I agree with you, getting drafted and having babies is

01:37:28.800 different we can agree with that right both important though right both important but the

01:37:32.880 idea here that we are talking about which should be equal is the idea of duty if we're talking

01:37:38.080 about the compelling of you if your country drafted you even if you're in terrible shape

01:37:43.360 and they told you look we're in a collective war effort and we need you and you're going to come

01:37:48.160 in here and just cook food because our soldiers need food right are you going to go do it i've

01:37:52.880 got to voluntarily to be honest but yeah you would do it i wouldn't be very useful but yeah

01:37:57.440 now terrible terrible now you're you're compelled to do that right and part of your duty and honor

01:38:02.800 is that you have to go do it sure i agree with this okay but if we have a compelling duty that

01:38:08.320 men have an ontological function only men can do this therefore they should why is that duty not

01:38:14.400 applied the other way that to me is inconsistent and it's a hole in the world view it makes no

01:38:19.120 sense to me i agree with you it's inconsistent but that's because the acts are not equivalent

01:38:23.840 like not everything is the same i don't i don't i think in order for the defense of the realm so

01:38:29.440 to speak you'll have to compel all the men to fight in certain very where those men come from

01:38:35.040 women right so then one duty is being fulfilled i'm i'm all with you in terms of we need a higher

01:38:41.360 birth rate i just don't think duty is the way to get there anyway we've well couldn't you just

01:38:46.480 i'll just wrap yeah yeah it's just a time thing when you say duty yeah can't you instill the ideas

01:38:53.920 of duty and honor even absent legislation through propaganda things like that yeah those are the

01:38:59.280 routes that i would be more apt to move towards well yeah to be honest with you man this is the

01:39:04.880 thing is like actually a lot of this discourse i think is misguided because the vast majority of

01:39:09.120 women actually do want to have kids but there are circumstances in their life which make them less

01:39:13.920 likely to do so i agree uh and so if we i mean you you made this point yourself there are countries

01:39:19.360 it's not they're not having as many results as people would like to think unfortunately places

01:39:23.680 like hungary but um i think the way to get people to have more kids is to get obstacles out of their

01:39:29.600 way not to compel them through the drought system like oh here's your ticket have two kids you know

01:39:35.440 what i mean i don't think that's gonna work but it seems we agree on that anyway andrew it's been

01:39:38.720 great uh having you on uh you too guys i really appreciate the combo you know and it's actually

01:39:43.120 interesting because like obviously there's areas of disagreement but it's just fascinating to me

01:39:49.600 that it's so much easier to have a conversation from a place of complete disagreement with someone

01:39:55.360 on the right than with someone who's progressive well that's because um i i think that this comes

01:40:01.040 down a lot of times to being good faith right i want to know your view yeah and i truly believe

01:40:07.280 that you want to know mine yeah we do and so the reason that this what we just did right now i

01:40:14.000 guarantee you much of it's going to go viral and this type of thing isn't just because you have a

01:40:17.680 huge channel and we both have big audiences but it's also because people just saw a discussion

01:40:22.480 that seemed real right yeah it was real and that it it it seemed like we were trying to get at each

01:40:27.760 other's views yeah try to understand them i'm not killing each other no right so it's like maybe we

01:40:33.120 can start there i think that's a great place to start yeah and you know and and it just frustrates

01:40:38.640 me because i would love you know i i raised this right at the beginning with you which is isn't

01:40:44.640 there a center-left sensible part of society and i truly this may be an article of faith on my part

01:40:51.280 but i truly believe lots of people like that exist but where is their champion where is their

01:40:57.600 champion because what you what we see now is people who can't have to come like there will

01:41:04.280 be lots of people who watch your views on this particularly outside the u.s where they're kind

01:41:08.020 of more crystal ethics based uh world views more common who will be horrified by what you said

01:41:13.340 right they will be completely horrified but we explored that and we got to the bottom of what

01:41:19.520 you believe right and you're entitled to believe what you believe other people are entitled to not

01:41:22.960 agree but if there was a progressive sitting in our seat or even in your seat we'd never even get

01:41:30.080 to what the views were and that to me is so frustrating well yeah it's a it's a fundamental

01:41:36.120 it's a fundamental dishonest like i said at the very beginning i hate the left and it's there is

01:41:42.120 a fundamental there there is a fundamental dishonesty that comes with their anti-realism

01:41:48.580 views on morality that makes me sick to my stomach and the thing is it's like look maybe you don't

01:41:54.260 get everything i want maybe i get 30 or 20 of what i want maybe you get 80 right at least i'm getting

01:42:00.740 we're getting to something yeah we're getting to something we're addressing something these

01:42:05.220 people you can't even address it well because why well because it's unprecedented says meth jaw oh

01:42:10.580 it's unprecedented but everything's unprecedented right destiny is meth jaw these people live in

01:42:17.860 ambiguity and so that's why you can't ever get to anything everything's equivocation's ambiguity

01:42:23.140 they never want to pin down their actual positions um and then when you get to their actual positions

01:42:28.580 they know that they're untenable so they just obfuscate away from them and they move on to

01:42:32.020 other things you can say you can all disagree with everything i just said here you can't say

01:42:36.020 that it's not reasoned out yeah you can't say there's no logic to it you can't say that i didn't

01:42:41.220 really sit and have a good think before i came to these views you can say that about progressives

01:42:46.340 though andrew uh thank you for the discussion uh what is the one thing we're not talking about as

01:42:52.020 a society that we should be we're not talking about the birth rate enough that's the the critical

01:42:58.260 view and component which keeps all of humanity and society going and if you look at projections

01:43:04.020 for humanity in the next 200 years it doesn't look good and ultimately as a christian first and

01:43:10.740 and foremost, I am the ultimate humanist. I want to see human beings and more of them all over this

01:43:16.640 planet, having more babies and families and all that good, wonderful stuff. So I think that that's

01:43:22.060 the thing we should focus on more than anything else. All right, head on over to triggerpod.co.uk

01:43:27.780 where Andrew is going to answer your questions. After years of speaking with and debating people

01:43:33.880 of opposing beliefs and values, what's something you've changed your mind on regarding your own

01:43:38.280 beliefs and values as a result of these discussions.

TRIGGERnometry - April 19, 2026

An Honest Conversation with a Christian Nationalist - Andrew Wilson

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript