WEBVTT - Is “The Woke Right” Even a Real Thing?

0:00:02.720 --> 0:00:08.039
<v Speaker 1>Life Audio. What's happening in America is because of what

0:00:08.240 --> 0:00:11.760
<v Speaker 1>happened on the campuses. Everything moves from campus to culture.

0:00:11.840 --> 0:00:15.400
<v Speaker 1>It comes from upstream and moves downstream, and so what

0:00:15.480 --> 0:00:19.040
<v Speaker 1>we're seeing in this cultural revolution has already been embedded

0:00:19.040 --> 0:00:21.720
<v Speaker 1>in the campuses for a long, long, long time.

0:00:21.840 --> 0:00:24.400
<v Speaker 2>Why does it matter whether we call something woke left

0:00:24.520 --> 0:00:27.560
<v Speaker 2>or woke right? Why do you think the terms that

0:00:27.640 --> 0:00:29.520
<v Speaker 2>we use really matter?

0:00:30.000 --> 0:00:33.120
<v Speaker 1>Because if we don't have an adequate diagnosis, we can't

0:00:33.159 --> 0:00:34.680
<v Speaker 1>offer an adequate prescription.

0:00:36.000 --> 0:00:39.040
<v Speaker 2>Is there really a woke right? And why is this

0:00:39.159 --> 0:00:43.040
<v Speaker 2>question so important and timely today? According to our guest today,

0:00:43.080 --> 0:00:46.080
<v Speaker 2>it is a big mistake to compare what's called the

0:00:46.120 --> 0:00:50.400
<v Speaker 2>woke left with the woke right. Doctor Corey Miller is

0:00:50.440 --> 0:00:54.520
<v Speaker 2>the author of The Progressive Miseducation of America, and he's

0:00:54.560 --> 0:00:57.200
<v Speaker 2>here to make his case why the term woke right

0:00:57.400 --> 0:01:01.080
<v Speaker 2>is a misnomer and why it deeply matters. Corey, Welcome

0:01:01.120 --> 0:01:02.720
<v Speaker 2>back to the show. We had you on telling your

0:01:02.720 --> 0:01:05.840
<v Speaker 2>story how you grew up in a LDS faith and

0:01:05.880 --> 0:01:09.240
<v Speaker 2>then became an evangelical, which is amazing. You and I

0:01:09.319 --> 0:01:11.640
<v Speaker 2>went to school together way back in the day with

0:01:11.640 --> 0:01:14.120
<v Speaker 2>our master's program so it's always fun to have you on.

0:01:14.200 --> 0:01:15.039
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for joining me.

0:01:15.680 --> 0:01:18.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so good to be back, Sean, Thank you.

0:01:18.560 --> 0:01:21.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, absolutely so. I'm super intrigued. You sent me an

0:01:21.120 --> 0:01:23.760
<v Speaker 2>email and you said, hey, here's a thought for a story.

0:01:23.800 --> 0:01:25.959
<v Speaker 2>What do you think? And in the back of my mind,

0:01:26.000 --> 0:01:28.720
<v Speaker 2>I've wanted to talk about what's called the woke right

0:01:29.200 --> 0:01:31.840
<v Speaker 2>because there's been a ton of attention that we have paid,

0:01:32.160 --> 0:01:35.039
<v Speaker 2>maybe not enough attention, but certainly some attention to the

0:01:35.040 --> 0:01:38.959
<v Speaker 2>woke left, and this term has bubbled up, and you

0:01:39.040 --> 0:01:41.679
<v Speaker 2>brought a perspective to it that I haven't really thought

0:01:41.680 --> 0:01:44.520
<v Speaker 2>about it. So I'm actually hoping you can help me

0:01:44.880 --> 0:01:48.560
<v Speaker 2>and my audience think through what this woke right means,

0:01:49.000 --> 0:01:52.080
<v Speaker 2>why it's growing in popularity, how concerned we should be,

0:01:52.600 --> 0:01:55.160
<v Speaker 2>and how it's similar and or different from what's called

0:01:55.200 --> 0:01:59.080
<v Speaker 2>the woke left. But to start with, what interests you

0:01:59.240 --> 0:02:01.800
<v Speaker 2>in this topic? What's the background that has made you

0:02:01.840 --> 0:02:03.360
<v Speaker 2>pay so much attention to this?

0:02:04.760 --> 0:02:07.320
<v Speaker 1>Well, you know, many years ago, after you and I

0:02:07.400 --> 0:02:11.320
<v Speaker 1>had class together, I moved away stayed in philosophy of religion,

0:02:11.560 --> 0:02:14.280
<v Speaker 1>arguments for and against God's existence for you know, ten

0:02:14.360 --> 0:02:16.760
<v Speaker 1>or fifteen years. When I went off to Purdue University

0:02:16.840 --> 0:02:21.480
<v Speaker 1>for my doctorate, faced some hardships there. Didn't complete the

0:02:21.520 --> 0:02:23.280
<v Speaker 1>doctorate because I was told I had too much of

0:02:23.320 --> 0:02:27.600
<v Speaker 1>a faith perspective. Right at the beginning, I'm taking classes

0:02:27.639 --> 0:02:31.240
<v Speaker 1>on Marxism from a distinguished professor of philosophy there, and

0:02:31.280 --> 0:02:33.560
<v Speaker 1>I saw my classmates, and I saw where they went,

0:02:33.880 --> 0:02:37.880
<v Speaker 1>and I had congressmen calling me up asking for character

0:02:37.919 --> 0:02:41.400
<v Speaker 1>assessments on some of these guys. These were radicals, and

0:02:42.919 --> 0:02:46.200
<v Speaker 1>I saw, wow, this is really coming. I studied liberation

0:02:46.360 --> 0:02:49.040
<v Speaker 1>theology many years before in seminary, but I never thought

0:02:49.040 --> 0:02:52.400
<v Speaker 1>we would actually encounter it much in America when I

0:02:52.440 --> 0:02:55.360
<v Speaker 1>got to Purdue, and it wasn't just analytic philosophy. But

0:02:55.400 --> 0:02:59.120
<v Speaker 1>I'm in continental philosophy now, a place where most evangelical

0:02:59.160 --> 0:03:04.000
<v Speaker 1>Christians don't, you know, focus their attention. I saw something

0:03:04.080 --> 0:03:08.600
<v Speaker 1>significant was coming down the pipeline, and my interest began

0:03:08.680 --> 0:03:11.600
<v Speaker 1>to change, in part because of my new position with

0:03:11.840 --> 0:03:15.000
<v Speaker 1>Raschio Christi and all of the litigation that we are

0:03:15.040 --> 0:03:19.520
<v Speaker 1>involved with constantly to be on campus across America, to

0:03:19.600 --> 0:03:22.840
<v Speaker 1>have freedom of speech, freedom of thought, and so forth.

0:03:23.520 --> 0:03:29.520
<v Speaker 1>But you know, with that and my understanding more of

0:03:29.600 --> 0:03:33.480
<v Speaker 1>cultural Marxism, it started to open up a vista of

0:03:33.560 --> 0:03:38.520
<v Speaker 1>an almost untapped area in Christian apologetics. And then I

0:03:38.600 --> 0:03:43.960
<v Speaker 1>ran into a guy who was my sort of doppelganger opposite,

0:03:44.520 --> 0:03:48.880
<v Speaker 1>and that was an activist Peter Bagoshian, who wrote the

0:03:48.880 --> 0:03:53.480
<v Speaker 1>book A Manual for Creating Atheists, forward by Richard Dawkins

0:03:53.520 --> 0:03:57.320
<v Speaker 1>and endorsed by Michael Shermer, or vice versa. He invites

0:03:57.360 --> 0:04:00.840
<v Speaker 1>me to his atheism seminar at Portland State University to

0:04:01.160 --> 0:04:04.280
<v Speaker 1>give a two hour lecture on God's existence and then

0:04:04.320 --> 0:04:06.360
<v Speaker 1>allows his students to try to take me down. And

0:04:06.400 --> 0:04:08.400
<v Speaker 1>then we went and had lunch together. It was great,

0:04:08.800 --> 0:04:12.160
<v Speaker 1>that's awesome. He proposed an alliance, and I thought, okay,

0:04:12.200 --> 0:04:14.720
<v Speaker 1>this is odd. I wasn't expecting this, but I did

0:04:14.800 --> 0:04:17.479
<v Speaker 1>know that we both had a similar background and a

0:04:17.560 --> 0:04:22.440
<v Speaker 1>similar vista in our trajectory. And he said, we need

0:04:22.480 --> 0:04:25.560
<v Speaker 1>you and you need us. He said, if we go,

0:04:25.839 --> 0:04:28.400
<v Speaker 1>you go, and if you go, we go. In fact,

0:04:28.440 --> 0:04:34.359
<v Speaker 1>you're already gone from the universities. And I remember telling

0:04:34.400 --> 0:04:36.479
<v Speaker 1>him at that time, I said, Okay, I see the

0:04:36.560 --> 0:04:38.520
<v Speaker 1>sense of what you're talking about. The enemy of my

0:04:38.640 --> 0:04:41.640
<v Speaker 1>enemy is my friend. We had to partner with Stalin

0:04:42.520 --> 0:04:45.640
<v Speaker 1>in the early days of World War two, and then

0:04:46.200 --> 0:04:48.599
<v Speaker 1>at the same time keeping our eye open on the

0:04:48.640 --> 0:04:54.560
<v Speaker 1>other person. And he later admitted that, yes, we ruined things.

0:04:55.160 --> 0:04:59.640
<v Speaker 1>We him, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and so forth. We

0:04:59.680 --> 0:05:02.720
<v Speaker 1>always talked and wondered if we destroy the God of

0:05:02.760 --> 0:05:05.120
<v Speaker 1>the West, some other god or gods are going to

0:05:05.160 --> 0:05:07.479
<v Speaker 1>replace it. But they had no idea how bad it

0:05:07.480 --> 0:05:11.160
<v Speaker 1>would become. And so when I walked him to his office,

0:05:11.200 --> 0:05:13.800
<v Speaker 1>I said, Peter, why is your office the only office

0:05:14.040 --> 0:05:17.680
<v Speaker 1>in the Portland State Police Department. He said, I think

0:05:17.720 --> 0:05:21.080
<v Speaker 1>it's for my safety from Antifa, the anti fascists, the

0:05:21.120 --> 0:05:25.560
<v Speaker 1>Marxists that are doxing him and endangering him and his family.

0:05:26.560 --> 0:05:29.000
<v Speaker 1>So a lot of people know the story of him

0:05:29.040 --> 0:05:33.440
<v Speaker 1>and James Limsay and other people on the Grievance Studies

0:05:33.480 --> 0:05:37.520
<v Speaker 1>and how they put forth these fake published papers in

0:05:37.839 --> 0:05:42.520
<v Speaker 1>leftist peer review journals and had half of them accepted

0:05:43.640 --> 0:05:51.279
<v Speaker 1>by simply overlaying contemporary woke or Marxist or new Left

0:05:51.360 --> 0:05:56.799
<v Speaker 1>thought on the surface layer. And it passed muster until

0:05:56.920 --> 0:06:00.480
<v Speaker 1>someone blew the whistle from the Wall Street Journal and

0:06:00.520 --> 0:06:03.800
<v Speaker 1>said it's all fake. And so from that time forth

0:06:03.960 --> 0:06:07.480
<v Speaker 1>he was now running from the new Left, he being

0:06:07.839 --> 0:06:11.800
<v Speaker 1>a new atheist trying to destroy Christianity being a total

0:06:11.880 --> 0:06:17.279
<v Speaker 1>liberal himself. Now that liberal atheist and me, a conservative Christian,

0:06:17.720 --> 0:06:20.359
<v Speaker 1>are now going on a speaking tour together. And we

0:06:20.480 --> 0:06:22.880
<v Speaker 1>began at Utah State University.

0:06:22.880 --> 0:06:24.559
<v Speaker 2>Hey, let me jump let me jump in here before

0:06:24.560 --> 0:06:28.040
<v Speaker 2>he tyler. He began, because you've probably heard Justin Brierly,

0:06:28.240 --> 0:06:31.960
<v Speaker 2>of course, UK apologist who wrote the book The Surprising

0:06:32.120 --> 0:06:37.040
<v Speaker 2>Rebirth of God in twenty eighteen, or The Surprise and

0:06:37.040 --> 0:06:39.359
<v Speaker 2>Rebirth of Belief in God. Yeah, so in twenty eighteen

0:06:39.440 --> 0:06:43.919
<v Speaker 2>or twenty nineteen he hosted a conversation in Portland and

0:06:44.000 --> 0:06:46.960
<v Speaker 2>I ended up being the Christian side of that. And

0:06:47.000 --> 0:06:51.520
<v Speaker 2>he originally went to Peter Bagosian asking him to be

0:06:52.080 --> 0:06:56.400
<v Speaker 2>the atheist kind of interlock youateur for this dialogue. And

0:06:56.480 --> 0:06:59.960
<v Speaker 2>Peter at that point he said, I'm not so interesting

0:07:00.200 --> 0:07:04.200
<v Speaker 2>in this atheist theist conversation as I was. I'm concerned

0:07:04.240 --> 0:07:08.080
<v Speaker 2>with something new, and he started talking about cultural Marxism.

0:07:08.600 --> 0:07:12.040
<v Speaker 2>So he's the same one who woke up so to speak,

0:07:12.080 --> 0:07:15.200
<v Speaker 2>for lack of a better term, and shifted the narrative

0:07:15.240 --> 0:07:18.080
<v Speaker 2>for Justin Bridle to go, wait a minute, maybe times

0:07:18.120 --> 0:07:20.840
<v Speaker 2>are changing from what you referred to earlier, just to

0:07:20.840 --> 0:07:24.200
<v Speaker 2>give context to people when you mentioned Sam Harris and

0:07:24.320 --> 0:07:28.160
<v Speaker 2>Richard Dawkins and names like Christopher Hitchins. For the first

0:07:28.320 --> 0:07:33.680
<v Speaker 2>ten years of the twentieth century roughly dominated conversations about

0:07:33.680 --> 0:07:36.840
<v Speaker 2>God in this group called the New Atheists, and the

0:07:36.920 --> 0:07:40.520
<v Speaker 2>idea was that religion is false and it's bad, it's

0:07:40.720 --> 0:07:44.400
<v Speaker 2>ran out of justifications. If we just get rid of it,

0:07:44.400 --> 0:07:47.840
<v Speaker 2>we'll have a blissful, wonderful state. But the way you

0:07:48.000 --> 0:07:51.040
<v Speaker 2>frame that, Corey, is so interesting that Peter would say,

0:07:51.040 --> 0:07:53.000
<v Speaker 2>I'm not sure if Sam or Richard would agree with

0:07:53.040 --> 0:07:56.560
<v Speaker 2>this or not, but that he said we actually opened

0:07:56.640 --> 0:07:58.720
<v Speaker 2>up the door for a lot of this trying to

0:07:58.800 --> 0:08:02.640
<v Speaker 2>knock down the Christian God, not realizing what worldview would

0:08:02.720 --> 0:08:06.160
<v Speaker 2>come in and take its place. That is such a

0:08:06.160 --> 0:08:08.800
<v Speaker 2>fascinating point you made. So you're going on this speaking

0:08:08.880 --> 0:08:11.800
<v Speaker 2>tour with Peter pick up where we left off.

0:08:12.400 --> 0:08:15.360
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. So we started at the university where Charlie Kirk's

0:08:15.360 --> 0:08:20.080
<v Speaker 1>alleged assassin began his college career, and we hit four

0:08:20.200 --> 0:08:24.680
<v Speaker 1>universities in two days, and we got canceled by a

0:08:24.760 --> 0:08:30.040
<v Speaker 1>Christian campus ministry, ironically, and he couldn't get the atheist

0:08:30.120 --> 0:08:33.480
<v Speaker 1>groups to attend either because he said they wouldn't lift

0:08:33.480 --> 0:08:35.640
<v Speaker 1>a hand to help me. And Richard Dawkins now they've

0:08:35.640 --> 0:08:39.040
<v Speaker 1>all gone woke, and I followed up with them because

0:08:39.080 --> 0:08:40.760
<v Speaker 1>I didn't know if he was telling the truth, and

0:08:40.800 --> 0:08:44.600
<v Speaker 1>he was absolutely right. So we were like this odd

0:08:44.640 --> 0:08:48.920
<v Speaker 1>couple coming together. Our own camps wouldn't show up at

0:08:48.960 --> 0:08:51.760
<v Speaker 1>the events, and we were just going to be talking

0:08:51.760 --> 0:08:55.200
<v Speaker 1>about viewpoint diversity and the death of intellectual diversity in

0:08:55.240 --> 0:08:59.120
<v Speaker 1>the universities. Now he lost his first PhD attempt. I

0:08:59.200 --> 0:09:01.760
<v Speaker 1>lost my first PhD attempt. I got told I had

0:09:01.800 --> 0:09:05.040
<v Speaker 1>too much of a faith perspective, and the Marxist professor

0:09:05.080 --> 0:09:06.920
<v Speaker 1>put a permanent note in my file that I was

0:09:07.200 --> 0:09:10.040
<v Speaker 1>delusional in schizophrenic. And then when I went on for

0:09:10.080 --> 0:09:14.400
<v Speaker 1>the second PhD attempt, I defended before a guy who

0:09:14.480 --> 0:09:19.440
<v Speaker 1>claims to be the first trans UK philosopher in the

0:09:19.600 --> 0:09:22.920
<v Speaker 1>entire British Isles. And I talked to Justin Bryerly at

0:09:22.960 --> 0:09:24.800
<v Speaker 1>that time and said, could you get all three of us,

0:09:24.800 --> 0:09:31.079
<v Speaker 1>one Bagosian and this guy who is now a gal Right,

0:09:31.720 --> 0:09:34.800
<v Speaker 1>But anyway, we only made it a weekend. We were

0:09:34.800 --> 0:09:37.679
<v Speaker 1>going to hit Texas next and hit other states after that.

0:09:38.240 --> 0:09:41.600
<v Speaker 1>But then shortly after that COVID hit, George Floyd died,

0:09:41.840 --> 0:09:44.400
<v Speaker 1>and all of a sudden, all hell bro clues across

0:09:44.440 --> 0:09:48.880
<v Speaker 1>the nation and the university we ended our lecture at

0:09:49.360 --> 0:09:53.520
<v Speaker 1>was Utah Valley University, where Charlie Kirk was assassinated. Wow

0:09:54.080 --> 0:10:00.240
<v Speaker 1>for giving viewpoint diversity and dialogue right. And so I

0:10:00.320 --> 0:10:02.760
<v Speaker 1>just talked with Peter this morning. Actually, we were talking

0:10:02.800 --> 0:10:06.800
<v Speaker 1>about a possible new book on freedom because of where

0:10:06.840 --> 0:10:10.640
<v Speaker 1>we began and how much things have changed ever since then.

0:10:11.520 --> 0:10:15.679
<v Speaker 1>So finding allies in the strangest places now is just

0:10:16.000 --> 0:10:17.800
<v Speaker 1>it's a really weird thing. You know. We're in a

0:10:17.840 --> 0:10:21.200
<v Speaker 1>cultural revolution, and that's why you get people like Richard

0:10:21.240 --> 0:10:23.960
<v Speaker 1>Dawkins claiming to be a cultural Christian and Elon Musk

0:10:24.000 --> 0:10:27.960
<v Speaker 1>a cultural Christian, and Jordan Peterson an existentialist Christian and

0:10:28.280 --> 0:10:33.599
<v Speaker 1>Democratic presidential candidates now on the Republican you know platform

0:10:33.679 --> 0:10:38.800
<v Speaker 1>with Trump and Caitlyn Jenner, Bruce Jenner running for the RNC,

0:10:39.160 --> 0:10:43.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, the Republican governor in California. I mean, this

0:10:43.240 --> 0:10:46.160
<v Speaker 1>is just crazy. Our world is different now, we are

0:10:46.160 --> 0:10:49.040
<v Speaker 1>in a cultural revolution, and so I wanted to figure

0:10:49.040 --> 0:10:51.400
<v Speaker 1>out what in the world is going on, what kind

0:10:51.440 --> 0:10:54.800
<v Speaker 1>of revolution is this And that's where I really set

0:10:54.840 --> 0:10:59.560
<v Speaker 1>into this trajectory in social political philosophy and thinking from

0:10:59.600 --> 0:11:03.679
<v Speaker 1>a distinct Christian position, how do we navigate this now?

0:11:03.760 --> 0:11:07.160
<v Speaker 1>And we understood what the woke left was, and I

0:11:07.200 --> 0:11:10.440
<v Speaker 1>was trying to spend a lot of time educating our

0:11:10.480 --> 0:11:14.679
<v Speaker 1>own people and our own audiences on this. And suddenly

0:11:14.720 --> 0:11:18.439
<v Speaker 1>this thing after Charlie Kirk died, It's almost like it

0:11:18.520 --> 0:11:23.120
<v Speaker 1>burst on the scene. It was already there, but now,

0:11:23.360 --> 0:11:27.560
<v Speaker 1>you know, with people asking questions about whether Charlie Kirk's

0:11:27.640 --> 0:11:32.840
<v Speaker 1>tactics were sufficient. Gen Z Boys, for example, I was

0:11:32.880 --> 0:11:36.000
<v Speaker 1>interviewed by Fox News and they talked about this resurgence

0:11:36.040 --> 0:11:38.679
<v Speaker 1>of gen Z Boys coming back to church and back

0:11:38.720 --> 0:11:41.559
<v Speaker 1>to conservatism, and I said, I don't know, are they

0:11:41.600 --> 0:11:44.760
<v Speaker 1>coming back following Jordan Peterson and Joe Rogan who are

0:11:44.800 --> 0:11:47.200
<v Speaker 1>knocking at the door of the churches, Or is it

0:11:47.280 --> 0:11:51.200
<v Speaker 1>Andrew Tate with his wife beater shirt, or Nick Fuentes

0:11:51.559 --> 0:11:54.760
<v Speaker 1>and the Droipers, or is it the late Charlie Kirk

0:11:55.320 --> 0:11:58.439
<v Speaker 1>who's now deceased and who knows what's going to happen

0:11:58.480 --> 0:12:01.440
<v Speaker 1>with that movement. But he was already struggling for what

0:12:01.559 --> 0:12:04.439
<v Speaker 1>he called the Lost Boys of the West. Where are

0:12:04.480 --> 0:12:07.240
<v Speaker 1>they going to land? And the jury is still out

0:12:07.240 --> 0:12:11.000
<v Speaker 1>on that one, because the woke right is now a term,

0:12:11.440 --> 0:12:14.080
<v Speaker 1>but whether or not we should use that term as

0:12:14.120 --> 0:12:15.680
<v Speaker 1>another question entirely.

0:12:15.920 --> 0:12:17.959
<v Speaker 2>Okay, That gives us to the heart of what we're

0:12:18.000 --> 0:12:19.520
<v Speaker 2>in talk about. And one of the reasons I wanted

0:12:19.520 --> 0:12:21.640
<v Speaker 2>to in particular to have you on is last week

0:12:21.679 --> 0:12:25.280
<v Speaker 2>I talked about concerns from the left and Scott Ray

0:12:25.320 --> 0:12:27.800
<v Speaker 2>and I from Talbot, one of my colleagues, we reviewed

0:12:27.800 --> 0:12:31.080
<v Speaker 2>a book about why Christian should be leftists and what

0:12:31.120 --> 0:12:35.920
<v Speaker 2>he meant was socialists. So we critique that and made

0:12:35.920 --> 0:12:40.120
<v Speaker 2>a case for capitalism, not that it's perfect, but a

0:12:40.200 --> 0:12:44.079
<v Speaker 2>positive case that it works as an economic system because

0:12:44.120 --> 0:12:48.040
<v Speaker 2>so many people have been taken in by socialism for

0:12:48.160 --> 0:12:50.880
<v Speaker 2>reasons we don't have to go into here. But what

0:12:50.920 --> 0:12:53.800
<v Speaker 2>I wanted to do is also have a critique of

0:12:54.000 --> 0:12:57.840
<v Speaker 2>ideas on the right, or what's called the woke right

0:12:58.559 --> 0:13:01.400
<v Speaker 2>that also concerned me, and that's why your email was

0:13:01.440 --> 0:13:06.080
<v Speaker 2>absolutely perfect. Now remind us, maybe briefly, before we come

0:13:06.120 --> 0:13:08.360
<v Speaker 2>to the woke right. This will help set us up

0:13:09.360 --> 0:13:12.840
<v Speaker 2>what do we even mean by woke left? Because this

0:13:12.960 --> 0:13:17.160
<v Speaker 2>term has changed and also can mean different things to

0:13:17.240 --> 0:13:19.160
<v Speaker 2>different people. And I know you talk about this in

0:13:19.200 --> 0:13:22.120
<v Speaker 2>your book, but maybe just remind us some of the

0:13:22.240 --> 0:13:24.800
<v Speaker 2>key ideas of what we mean by kind of wokeism

0:13:25.000 --> 0:13:26.680
<v Speaker 2>and how that relates to the wolk left.

0:13:27.720 --> 0:13:31.760
<v Speaker 1>Sure, and the book title is called The Progressive Miseducation

0:13:32.000 --> 0:13:35.440
<v Speaker 1>of America. It wasn't the title that I originally chose.

0:13:35.800 --> 0:13:39.120
<v Speaker 1>The publisher forced that one on me. Okay. I had

0:13:39.280 --> 0:13:42.000
<v Speaker 1>the third revolution from the campus to the culture and

0:13:42.040 --> 0:13:45.400
<v Speaker 1>a vision forward. I wanted to show people what's happening

0:13:45.400 --> 0:13:49.440
<v Speaker 1>in America is because of what happened on the campuses.

0:13:49.520 --> 0:13:52.800
<v Speaker 1>Everything moves from campus to culture. It comes from upstream

0:13:53.240 --> 0:13:56.200
<v Speaker 1>and moves downstream, and so what we're seeing in this

0:13:56.240 --> 0:13:59.800
<v Speaker 1>cultural revolution has already been embedded in the campuses for

0:13:59.800 --> 0:14:04.560
<v Speaker 1>a long, long long time. I was talking, though, not

0:14:04.640 --> 0:14:08.640
<v Speaker 1>about a violent revolution. I was talking about an ideological

0:14:08.880 --> 0:14:12.599
<v Speaker 1>revolution and primarily focused on the universities, which is the

0:14:13.280 --> 0:14:17.080
<v Speaker 1>waters that I swim in, and the publisher decided to

0:14:17.160 --> 0:14:19.680
<v Speaker 1>change it. So it makes me look now a bit

0:14:19.720 --> 0:14:23.680
<v Speaker 1>more like my book is about politics. It's not. It's

0:14:23.920 --> 0:14:27.840
<v Speaker 1>more about ideology and what's happening from the ideas up

0:14:27.920 --> 0:14:30.800
<v Speaker 1>in the campus are coming down in culture such that

0:14:30.960 --> 0:14:34.640
<v Speaker 1>today we now live on campus. And so I'm trying

0:14:34.680 --> 0:14:39.040
<v Speaker 1>to explain to people what is it that this revolution

0:14:39.240 --> 0:14:42.160
<v Speaker 1>is about, Where did it come from, how did this happen,

0:14:42.240 --> 0:14:44.640
<v Speaker 1>and what can we do about it? And so I

0:14:44.720 --> 0:14:48.120
<v Speaker 1>basically show that there were two major ideological revolutions that

0:14:48.160 --> 0:14:51.840
<v Speaker 1>took over our universities that we Christians started. The first

0:14:51.840 --> 0:14:55.080
<v Speaker 1>with scientific naturalism. I won't go into that, a lot

0:14:55.080 --> 0:14:57.800
<v Speaker 1>of people understand what that is, but that laid the

0:14:57.800 --> 0:15:02.160
<v Speaker 1>groundwork the apex of the scientific the naturalist experiment after

0:15:02.200 --> 0:15:06.000
<v Speaker 1>about a century was Richard Dawkins and Peter Bagogian and

0:15:06.040 --> 0:15:09.440
<v Speaker 1>things like that. And I look at Dawkins as sort

0:15:09.440 --> 0:15:11.800
<v Speaker 1>of like the Robest Pierre of the French Revolution, who

0:15:11.840 --> 0:15:15.280
<v Speaker 1>created the guillotine for his enemies, and then he got

0:15:15.280 --> 0:15:17.640
<v Speaker 1>guillotined by his own guillotine, and now he wants to

0:15:17.640 --> 0:15:23.680
<v Speaker 1>be friends. And so what was coming behind them has

0:15:23.760 --> 0:15:26.680
<v Speaker 1>done the same thing that they did to the founders

0:15:26.720 --> 0:15:29.920
<v Speaker 1>of the universities to the Christians. And right at the

0:15:29.960 --> 0:15:33.040
<v Speaker 1>time when the dust was settling in America in the

0:15:33.120 --> 0:15:36.000
<v Speaker 1>nineteen thirties and we had to go start our new

0:15:36.120 --> 0:15:40.280
<v Speaker 1>universities like the Bible Institute of Los Angeles, like Calvin

0:15:40.320 --> 0:15:43.880
<v Speaker 1>College and Wheaton and other places. Over in Germany, once

0:15:43.920 --> 0:15:46.880
<v Speaker 1>again was this nefarious thing happening, And now we know

0:15:46.920 --> 0:15:52.440
<v Speaker 1>it was critical theory, which was a Freudian Marxist sort

0:15:52.440 --> 0:15:57.440
<v Speaker 1>of synthesis that eventually their leaders came over and they

0:15:57.520 --> 0:16:01.080
<v Speaker 1>taught in our brightest universities, and then within about fifteen

0:16:01.160 --> 0:16:06.000
<v Speaker 1>years the founders of postmodernism began, and that was in France.

0:16:06.720 --> 0:16:11.680
<v Speaker 1>We hear names like Leotard or Deredaf or Deconstructionism or

0:16:12.000 --> 0:16:16.480
<v Speaker 1>fu cot all of these guys. When we think postmodernism,

0:16:16.520 --> 0:16:20.320
<v Speaker 1>maybe we think relativism, skepticism toward a meta narrative or whatever.

0:16:20.920 --> 0:16:24.640
<v Speaker 1>But if they're relativists, then it means that their politics

0:16:24.680 --> 0:16:27.200
<v Speaker 1>ought to be everything from far left to far right.

0:16:27.600 --> 0:16:30.720
<v Speaker 1>But the surprising fact is that they weren't. They were

0:16:30.800 --> 0:16:34.680
<v Speaker 1>all uber left. They were called the new left. They

0:16:34.720 --> 0:16:38.360
<v Speaker 1>were card carrying members of the French Communist Party or

0:16:38.400 --> 0:16:42.040
<v Speaker 1>sympathizers with it. And so they were taking off from

0:16:42.160 --> 0:16:49.320
<v Speaker 1>the scientific naturalism, moving in now to the neo Marxist synthesis,

0:16:49.320 --> 0:16:53.840
<v Speaker 1>the Freudian Marxists adding to it, this new postmodern witch

0:16:53.920 --> 0:16:56.480
<v Speaker 1>is brew So we can go into that or not,

0:16:56.720 --> 0:16:59.600
<v Speaker 1>but it is this new phenomena that eventually came over

0:16:59.640 --> 0:17:04.240
<v Speaker 1>to our universities and they went into the humanities and

0:17:04.280 --> 0:17:08.720
<v Speaker 1>social sciences, whereas the First Revolution went into the hard sciences.

0:17:09.080 --> 0:17:13.720
<v Speaker 1>And these guys, eventually, decades into it, started making their

0:17:13.760 --> 0:17:18.840
<v Speaker 1>move and started kicking out the first guard. And by

0:17:18.880 --> 0:17:23.159
<v Speaker 1>the mid nineteen nineties, you know, the ratio of liberal

0:17:23.160 --> 0:17:26.280
<v Speaker 1>the conservative professor was two point three to one. In

0:17:26.320 --> 0:17:29.959
<v Speaker 1>the last twenty five years, it's now twenty three to

0:17:30.080 --> 0:17:34.119
<v Speaker 1>one or twenty seven to one for the IVY leagues.

0:17:34.160 --> 0:17:37.400
<v Speaker 1>In some places it's seventy to one, at Yale at

0:17:37.480 --> 0:17:41.480
<v Speaker 1>seventy eight to one. And so these are not viewpoint

0:17:41.600 --> 0:17:46.920
<v Speaker 1>diversity academies at all. So we need to be preparing

0:17:46.960 --> 0:17:50.840
<v Speaker 1>and understanding what's coming from upstream is coming downstream, and

0:17:50.920 --> 0:17:55.960
<v Speaker 1>this is what's pushed out the Richard Dawkinses and the

0:17:56.000 --> 0:18:00.879
<v Speaker 1>Peter Bagosians and the Elon Musks and the RFK and

0:18:00.960 --> 0:18:05.760
<v Speaker 1>Tulsi Gabbards and everybody else into this cultural revolution. We

0:18:05.960 --> 0:18:10.439
<v Speaker 1>are in an ideological revolution. And so rather than just

0:18:10.520 --> 0:18:14.080
<v Speaker 1>a simple definition of woke, what I like to do

0:18:14.160 --> 0:18:17.480
<v Speaker 1>is I like to layer it for you and I

0:18:17.560 --> 0:18:21.000
<v Speaker 1>as trained philosophers helping out everybody else to see that

0:18:21.080 --> 0:18:24.920
<v Speaker 1>philosophy is. It's kind of simple. It's three branches. It's

0:18:25.400 --> 0:18:27.720
<v Speaker 1>what is real? How do we know what is real?

0:18:28.040 --> 0:18:30.159
<v Speaker 1>How should we then live based on what we know

0:18:30.280 --> 0:18:35.520
<v Speaker 1>about reality? Woke is part of epistemology, it's part of knowledge,

0:18:36.440 --> 0:18:39.399
<v Speaker 1>so it fits right in there. But this whole woke

0:18:40.080 --> 0:18:44.240
<v Speaker 1>worldview part of the critical race theory or the postmodern

0:18:44.280 --> 0:18:49.239
<v Speaker 1>cultural Marxism. It's got a metaphysic at epistemology and an

0:18:49.240 --> 0:18:51.960
<v Speaker 1>ethic or what is real? How do I know what

0:18:52.040 --> 0:18:53.760
<v Speaker 1>is real? How should I then live based on what

0:18:53.800 --> 0:18:56.520
<v Speaker 1>I know about reality? And so I choose not to

0:18:56.560 --> 0:19:00.879
<v Speaker 1>define this popular slogan of DEI in that way. I

0:19:00.960 --> 0:19:05.800
<v Speaker 1>do it dee because the D fits in metaphysics, what

0:19:05.960 --> 0:19:10.920
<v Speaker 1>is real in human relations, the I fits in epistemology inclusivity,

0:19:11.600 --> 0:19:15.000
<v Speaker 1>and the E fits in ethics equity, and it goes

0:19:15.000 --> 0:19:18.240
<v Speaker 1>in that order. And this will help us understand what

0:19:19.040 --> 0:19:23.119
<v Speaker 1>woke really is and eventually why I think it's a

0:19:23.160 --> 0:19:26.280
<v Speaker 1>misnomer to be applied to the right inasmuch as we've

0:19:26.320 --> 0:19:31.760
<v Speaker 1>got problems there. We need to use terms accurately and

0:19:31.840 --> 0:19:34.840
<v Speaker 1>be clear about what we're saying, because we can't provide

0:19:34.880 --> 0:19:38.359
<v Speaker 1>an adequate prescription if we don't have an adequate diagnosis.

0:19:38.840 --> 0:19:43.720
<v Speaker 2>So, okay, super fair. There's been a lot of books written.

0:19:43.720 --> 0:19:46.080
<v Speaker 2>This actually just got in the mail today Post Woke

0:19:46.359 --> 0:19:49.080
<v Speaker 2>by Neil shanv one of my favorite kind of popular

0:19:49.200 --> 0:19:52.520
<v Speaker 2>level books on this. I know you guys Rascho Christy

0:19:52.560 --> 0:19:55.640
<v Speaker 2>did a great pamphlet with him some of the rudimentary

0:19:55.680 --> 0:19:59.280
<v Speaker 2>ideas of this that's really really well done. So we

0:19:59.400 --> 0:20:01.960
<v Speaker 2>talked about what kind of wokeism is here and in

0:20:02.000 --> 0:20:04.399
<v Speaker 2>the culture, but we haven't talked about it on the

0:20:04.400 --> 0:20:07.720
<v Speaker 2>woke right. And I'm totally up for you persuading me

0:20:07.840 --> 0:20:10.800
<v Speaker 2>and convincing me not to use the term woke right.

0:20:11.359 --> 0:20:15.359
<v Speaker 2>I've somewhat adopted it because I've heard it used didn't

0:20:15.359 --> 0:20:19.280
<v Speaker 2>really see the harm in it. So before we talk

0:20:19.320 --> 0:20:22.680
<v Speaker 2>about what's meant by that, why does it matter? Why

0:20:22.800 --> 0:20:25.440
<v Speaker 2>is it whether we call something woke left or woke right?

0:20:25.560 --> 0:20:29.760
<v Speaker 2>Why do you think the terms that we use really matter?

0:20:31.840 --> 0:20:34.120
<v Speaker 1>As I just said, because if we don't have an

0:20:34.119 --> 0:20:38.600
<v Speaker 1>adequate diagnosis, we can't offer an adequate prescription, okay, and

0:20:39.480 --> 0:20:43.600
<v Speaker 1>the words we use matter. We want it to be accurate.

0:20:43.720 --> 0:20:45.639
<v Speaker 1>We want it to be truthful, we want it to

0:20:45.680 --> 0:20:50.719
<v Speaker 1>be helpful. And already it's taken a lot of effort

0:20:50.760 --> 0:20:53.560
<v Speaker 1>to try to get people to understand what woke itself is.

0:20:54.240 --> 0:20:57.640
<v Speaker 1>And now if we start applying it in the wrong area,

0:20:58.119 --> 0:21:00.240
<v Speaker 1>we end up running into a couple of problems. One

0:21:00.359 --> 0:21:06.440
<v Speaker 1>is this both sideism narrative. Right after Charlie Kirk was assassinated,

0:21:08.000 --> 0:21:10.560
<v Speaker 1>there was a lot of sympathy in the country for

0:21:10.600 --> 0:21:13.920
<v Speaker 1>about twenty four hours, and then you started seeing some

0:21:14.560 --> 0:21:20.280
<v Speaker 1>really you know, nasty language coming out from people who

0:21:20.640 --> 0:21:24.720
<v Speaker 1>thought of him poorly and thought of conservatives poorly, and

0:21:27.200 --> 0:21:32.480
<v Speaker 1>the the temperature started to raise with all of that.

0:21:32.840 --> 0:21:37.119
<v Speaker 1>And it was after that that people started to choose

0:21:37.200 --> 0:21:41.159
<v Speaker 1>sides and push away from where Charlie Kirk was going,

0:21:41.560 --> 0:21:43.960
<v Speaker 1>and they wanted to adopt this name that had been

0:21:44.000 --> 0:21:49.520
<v Speaker 1>given to them, called the woke right. But something required

0:21:49.560 --> 0:21:53.920
<v Speaker 1>a pause. This both sides ism that was happening was that,

0:21:54.320 --> 0:21:57.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, assassinations happen on both sides, We have extremists

0:21:57.640 --> 0:22:01.400
<v Speaker 1>on both sides. Violence is both both sides. In fact,

0:22:01.520 --> 0:22:04.479
<v Speaker 1>political violence happens more on the right than it happens

0:22:04.520 --> 0:22:07.800
<v Speaker 1>on the left. So you started seeing data sets coming

0:22:07.840 --> 0:22:12.480
<v Speaker 1>out in the social media showing that on the right

0:22:13.560 --> 0:22:16.840
<v Speaker 1>political violence is far worse. Most people aren't going to

0:22:16.920 --> 0:22:18.720
<v Speaker 1>look that up. They're just going to wonder about it

0:22:18.880 --> 0:22:22.000
<v Speaker 1>until you start to open up the hood and see

0:22:22.000 --> 0:22:25.359
<v Speaker 1>what's under there. They're considering neo Nazis on the right,

0:22:25.840 --> 0:22:28.960
<v Speaker 1>and you might think Nazism as a kind of socialism,

0:22:29.000 --> 0:22:32.240
<v Speaker 1>maybe it should be left. They've got the KKK on

0:22:32.320 --> 0:22:36.600
<v Speaker 1>the right. Well, the Democratic Party invented the KKK. They

0:22:36.600 --> 0:22:40.520
<v Speaker 1>have Islamists on the right. They don't account for a

0:22:40.520 --> 0:22:44.920
<v Speaker 1>lot of the trans shooters in this category and so forth.

0:22:45.280 --> 0:22:48.680
<v Speaker 1>So you started to see cherry picking happening with the data,

0:22:48.960 --> 0:22:52.399
<v Speaker 1>and the effect of the both sidesism is that, wow,

0:22:52.480 --> 0:22:57.080
<v Speaker 1>we've got problems on both sides. Everybody's got extremists. Let's

0:22:57.200 --> 0:23:01.159
<v Speaker 1>just all beware of the extremists. So the reality is

0:23:01.800 --> 0:23:05.080
<v Speaker 1>that people on the right, not everybody, but those that

0:23:05.119 --> 0:23:08.440
<v Speaker 1>are conservatives, and more deeply, what are they trying to conserve,

0:23:08.920 --> 0:23:11.840
<v Speaker 1>and that is they're deeply held religious beliefs beginning with

0:23:11.920 --> 0:23:15.919
<v Speaker 1>Genesis one twenty six. We are made in God's image.

0:23:15.960 --> 0:23:18.520
<v Speaker 1>That's why black lives matter, That's why all lives matter.

0:23:18.560 --> 0:23:23.480
<v Speaker 1>That's why liberals, conservatives lives matter, everyone's matters, because God

0:23:23.720 --> 0:23:28.119
<v Speaker 1>is the sanctifier of human life. And so you would

0:23:28.600 --> 0:23:30.919
<v Speaker 1>think it predictable that you're not going to have as

0:23:31.000 --> 0:23:35.080
<v Speaker 1>much violence on the right. Forget just the abortion question.

0:23:35.200 --> 0:23:38.680
<v Speaker 1>Is violence even political violence? And you start to look

0:23:38.720 --> 0:23:41.680
<v Speaker 1>at the left and you start to see most atheists

0:23:41.800 --> 0:23:46.440
<v Speaker 1>vote left. They feel most comfortable in that camp Republican

0:23:46.440 --> 0:23:50.520
<v Speaker 1>and Democrat. That's superficial. Below that is conservative and liberal

0:23:50.720 --> 0:23:56.920
<v Speaker 1>or Marxist now, and below that is secularism or religion. Well,

0:23:57.040 --> 0:24:03.840
<v Speaker 1>those things should have consequences in the behaviors. And so

0:24:04.800 --> 0:24:07.919
<v Speaker 1>I think when we have this both sides ism, what

0:24:08.080 --> 0:24:10.879
<v Speaker 1>happened then is it sort of neutralized the conversation and

0:24:10.920 --> 0:24:14.360
<v Speaker 1>that there's just bad violence on the left and the right. Well,

0:24:14.359 --> 0:24:18.520
<v Speaker 1>that's true, but if we can't really diagnose the problem,

0:24:19.320 --> 0:24:22.560
<v Speaker 1>we can't offer a prescription. And I contend that the

0:24:22.960 --> 0:24:27.240
<v Speaker 1>violence is predominantly on the left. We have you know this,

0:24:27.240 --> 0:24:33.680
<v Speaker 1>this notion of what's it called an assassination culture now

0:24:33.760 --> 0:24:37.440
<v Speaker 1>came out of the Washington Post. And when Luigi Mangioni

0:24:37.560 --> 0:24:44.080
<v Speaker 1>assassinated Brian Thomas Thompson of United Healthcare, what was amazing.

0:24:44.280 --> 0:24:47.720
<v Speaker 1>Wasn't just that he came from University of Pennsylvania as

0:24:47.720 --> 0:24:51.720
<v Speaker 1>a graduate student and so forth, but how many people

0:24:51.960 --> 0:24:58.840
<v Speaker 1>in gen Z were lauding him as a heathen? Yeah,

0:24:59.000 --> 0:25:01.040
<v Speaker 1>and so you started to see and then out of

0:25:01.160 --> 0:25:06.520
<v Speaker 1>Rutgers came this study that showed that fifty six percent

0:25:06.720 --> 0:25:10.720
<v Speaker 1>of those who claim to be on the left think

0:25:10.800 --> 0:25:15.280
<v Speaker 1>it justifiable to assassinate President Trump. And so you're finding

0:25:15.359 --> 0:25:19.359
<v Speaker 1>all of these other studies that counterbalance the other side.

0:25:19.400 --> 0:25:21.760
<v Speaker 1>So that said that both sides is, I think is

0:25:22.080 --> 0:25:27.600
<v Speaker 1>an effect we want to avoid if it is inaccurate

0:25:27.760 --> 0:25:32.040
<v Speaker 1>just throwing terms around. The other thing is hang.

0:25:31.920 --> 0:25:33.600
<v Speaker 2>On before you come the SEGMENTE. I just want to

0:25:33.600 --> 0:25:36.879
<v Speaker 2>make sure I'm tracking with you, because there's multiple questions

0:25:36.880 --> 0:25:39.120
<v Speaker 2>at play here. There's a question of like, is the

0:25:39.240 --> 0:25:42.680
<v Speaker 2>left more violent than the right? Who do we characterize

0:25:42.680 --> 0:25:45.680
<v Speaker 2>as the left? Who do we characterize as the right.

0:25:46.440 --> 0:25:50.040
<v Speaker 2>And there's the question of should we even call what's

0:25:50.200 --> 0:25:53.280
<v Speaker 2>on the right woke right? And the way we call

0:25:53.359 --> 0:25:57.159
<v Speaker 2>something on the woke left. Your concern, just to make

0:25:57.200 --> 0:25:59.399
<v Speaker 2>sure I understand, is you think if we just call

0:25:59.480 --> 0:26:02.840
<v Speaker 2>woke left and woke right, it leads to kind of

0:26:02.880 --> 0:26:06.840
<v Speaker 2>a relativistic or a neutral playing field. Resay, Well, there's

0:26:06.880 --> 0:26:08.880
<v Speaker 2>just problems on the left and the right, and it's

0:26:08.880 --> 0:26:11.919
<v Speaker 2>all equal, and we fail to show where the problem

0:26:11.960 --> 0:26:15.959
<v Speaker 2>really lies. That's your concern. Did I capture that fairly?

0:26:16.119 --> 0:26:17.359
<v Speaker 1>Yeah? Yeah, that's correct.

0:26:17.400 --> 0:26:17.600
<v Speaker 2>Okay.

0:26:17.680 --> 0:26:20.920
<v Speaker 1>And there is a distinction you've seen it made on

0:26:21.000 --> 0:26:23.960
<v Speaker 1>social media between the left and the new left. The

0:26:24.040 --> 0:26:27.600
<v Speaker 1>new left is the Marxist left. It's the illiberal left,

0:26:27.800 --> 0:26:31.560
<v Speaker 1>contrary to the old left, those who are liberal. So

0:26:31.600 --> 0:26:35.120
<v Speaker 1>someone like Peter Bagosian would call himself a liberal. He's

0:26:35.240 --> 0:26:39.120
<v Speaker 1>the old left. But the left has been classically liberal,

0:26:39.200 --> 0:26:42.480
<v Speaker 1>even if atheist, but they would believe. And this is

0:26:42.480 --> 0:26:47.000
<v Speaker 1>where Peter Bogosian and I, as allies, we adopted Voltaire's

0:26:47.200 --> 0:26:51.040
<v Speaker 1>statement together, who is a deist? I may disagree with

0:26:51.080 --> 0:26:52.600
<v Speaker 1>what you say, but I would defend to the death.

0:26:52.640 --> 0:26:56.040
<v Speaker 1>You're right to say it. But Stalin comes along and

0:26:56.119 --> 0:26:59.280
<v Speaker 1>says something more like, ideas are more powerful than weapons.

0:26:59.320 --> 0:27:01.400
<v Speaker 1>We don't allow our enemies to have weapons, so why

0:27:01.440 --> 0:27:04.199
<v Speaker 1>should we let them have ideas. That's the heart of

0:27:04.280 --> 0:27:08.239
<v Speaker 1>cancel culture. And it is primarily on the left, not

0:27:08.359 --> 0:27:12.200
<v Speaker 1>just anecdotally in my experience, but according to data where

0:27:12.240 --> 0:27:15.439
<v Speaker 1>the cancel culture is rooted in. And it's not in

0:27:15.520 --> 0:27:19.040
<v Speaker 1>the old left either, it's in primarily the new Left.

0:27:19.119 --> 0:27:23.040
<v Speaker 1>So there is something happening over on the left that

0:27:23.680 --> 0:27:28.920
<v Speaker 1>has been infiltrated by this post modern cultural Marxist zeitgeist.

0:27:29.359 --> 0:27:33.000
<v Speaker 1>It's a worldview that started outside of America and came

0:27:33.040 --> 0:27:37.080
<v Speaker 1>into America, and it happened to infiltrate into the Democratic

0:27:37.119 --> 0:27:41.119
<v Speaker 1>Party more so than into the Republican Party, probably because

0:27:41.160 --> 0:27:45.920
<v Speaker 1>it was already leaning toward a secularist base. But now

0:27:45.960 --> 0:27:49.720
<v Speaker 1>you've got this thing happening on the right which is

0:27:50.000 --> 0:27:56.520
<v Speaker 1>a reaction to their experienced people's experiences, their lived experiences

0:27:56.560 --> 0:27:59.120
<v Speaker 1>on the left. So let me explain that lived experience,

0:27:59.160 --> 0:28:03.399
<v Speaker 1>because that's where rests. Okay, So when we think about

0:28:03.400 --> 0:28:06.639
<v Speaker 1>this in terms of what is real? How do I

0:28:06.680 --> 0:28:08.280
<v Speaker 1>know what is real? How should I then live based

0:28:08.280 --> 0:28:11.880
<v Speaker 1>on what I know about reality? Metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics

0:28:11.880 --> 0:28:18.399
<v Speaker 1>the three branches of philosophy. Diversity in academia means you

0:28:19.000 --> 0:28:22.560
<v Speaker 1>locate all of these and you identify all of these

0:28:22.720 --> 0:28:28.000
<v Speaker 1>identity politics groups and you formulate them on the two

0:28:28.080 --> 0:28:30.520
<v Speaker 1>sides of the haves and the have nots. The oppressed

0:28:30.560 --> 0:28:34.120
<v Speaker 1>and the oppressors, the victims and the victimizers, And you're

0:28:34.160 --> 0:28:37.000
<v Speaker 1>either in one camp or the other, and you might

0:28:37.119 --> 0:28:43.760
<v Speaker 1>have multiple intersectional levels of this. You might be black

0:28:43.960 --> 0:28:49.160
<v Speaker 1>and not white, woman and not man, transgender and not cisgender, whatever.

0:28:49.480 --> 0:28:52.920
<v Speaker 1>But everybody belongs to at least one, and most people

0:28:53.000 --> 0:28:56.960
<v Speaker 1>to multiple of these classes. And what you do with

0:28:57.080 --> 0:29:02.040
<v Speaker 1>that at this point comes next. But first, this is important.

0:29:02.640 --> 0:29:07.960
<v Speaker 1>It's not just that you've divided oppressor and oppress e camps.

0:29:08.760 --> 0:29:12.840
<v Speaker 1>It's the nature the definition of the oppression is not

0:29:13.000 --> 0:29:17.440
<v Speaker 1>just psychologized, but it's also embedded in an entire worldview.

0:29:17.840 --> 0:29:20.360
<v Speaker 1>I've heard you say on one of your podcasts, quoting

0:29:20.600 --> 0:29:24.080
<v Speaker 1>Thomas Soul, Jonathan Height says it a lot too, that

0:29:25.600 --> 0:29:31.840
<v Speaker 1>disparate treatment does not entail disparate outcomes. In other words,

0:29:31.920 --> 0:29:37.120
<v Speaker 1>inequality entails injustice. And they would say, no, it doesn't,

0:29:37.920 --> 0:29:42.120
<v Speaker 1>but if you're part of the Marxist ideology, you believe

0:29:42.440 --> 0:29:47.280
<v Speaker 1>absolutely it does. It's not just oppression, and you know

0:29:47.800 --> 0:29:51.320
<v Speaker 1>someone being oppressed by someone else, And so that claim

0:29:51.400 --> 0:29:53.400
<v Speaker 1>being true of people on the right, and that claim

0:29:53.480 --> 0:29:58.240
<v Speaker 1>being true of people every year of every Earth year

0:29:58.280 --> 0:30:04.560
<v Speaker 1>that we've existed, it's a particular philosophy that inequality entails

0:30:04.880 --> 0:30:09.920
<v Speaker 1>in justice always. It's that kind of oppression. And the

0:30:09.960 --> 0:30:15.520
<v Speaker 1>epistemology then is that those people who are the oppressed,

0:30:16.400 --> 0:30:21.680
<v Speaker 1>they have special insight once they have emerged with what

0:30:21.840 --> 0:30:27.520
<v Speaker 1>is called critical consciousness in Marx's thought. It's part of

0:30:27.520 --> 0:30:32.280
<v Speaker 1>what is called standpoint epistemology. Your standpoint theory started in

0:30:32.400 --> 0:30:37.120
<v Speaker 1>second wave feminism by people like Sandra Harding, who applied

0:30:37.120 --> 0:30:39.360
<v Speaker 1>it first in feminism, but she says she got it

0:30:39.400 --> 0:30:43.480
<v Speaker 1>from Marx. And so you have a special esoteric knowledge

0:30:43.960 --> 0:30:47.760
<v Speaker 1>based on your positionality or based on your social location,

0:30:49.200 --> 0:30:54.040
<v Speaker 1>and you have special insights. So you were once blind,

0:30:54.120 --> 0:30:57.400
<v Speaker 1>but now you see the other people they could just listen,

0:30:57.560 --> 0:31:00.560
<v Speaker 1>learn and lament because they're blind. The us they can

0:31:00.640 --> 0:31:03.640
<v Speaker 1>be is be less white, or be less male, or

0:31:03.680 --> 0:31:08.400
<v Speaker 1>be less whatever. But you have special insight. And so

0:31:09.080 --> 0:31:13.960
<v Speaker 1>we should include practice inclusivity only for those who are

0:31:14.000 --> 0:31:17.520
<v Speaker 1>part of the oppressed camps. We should exalt them, promote them,

0:31:18.720 --> 0:31:24.960
<v Speaker 1>give them platforms and d platform or exclude those who

0:31:25.000 --> 0:31:28.960
<v Speaker 1>are the oppressors. And then what you do next in

0:31:29.360 --> 0:31:34.200
<v Speaker 1>ethics is, if the problem is social oppression, the solution

0:31:34.840 --> 0:31:42.080
<v Speaker 1>is social liberation. Liberational consciousness, and it is equity, revenge, reparations,

0:31:42.560 --> 0:31:47.000
<v Speaker 1>payback for however long. Now, what's going on here is

0:31:47.040 --> 0:31:51.480
<v Speaker 1>these guys, ultimately, at least this is what they say.

0:31:51.280 --> 0:31:56.480
<v Speaker 1>They imagine for the Beatles song, imagine this utopia, this

0:31:56.640 --> 0:32:00.160
<v Speaker 1>communist utopia where we're all sharing things in common and

0:32:00.360 --> 0:32:03.400
<v Speaker 1>there's no more competition, there's no haves and have nots.

0:32:03.760 --> 0:32:09.840
<v Speaker 1>It requires a little bloodshed, the dictatorship of the proletariat,

0:32:10.120 --> 0:32:12.920
<v Speaker 1>but after a while they give it back to the people.

0:32:13.000 --> 0:32:16.440
<v Speaker 1>The state just withers away, and we've got this harmony

0:32:16.480 --> 0:32:21.360
<v Speaker 1>across the land. Their ultimate goal is utopia and equality.

0:32:21.440 --> 0:32:27.000
<v Speaker 1>It's egalitarian. None of those things in d I E.

0:32:27.480 --> 0:32:31.320
<v Speaker 1>Are what we're seeing on those who are charged with

0:32:31.480 --> 0:32:39.000
<v Speaker 1>being woke. Right, These people who are say white Christian nationalists,

0:32:39.480 --> 0:32:43.080
<v Speaker 1>if they are out there, and they are, they're not

0:32:43.520 --> 0:32:48.600
<v Speaker 1>people who think that inequality entels injustice. They think inequality

0:32:48.680 --> 0:32:51.680
<v Speaker 1>is the right way to go. But they're supremacists. They

0:32:51.720 --> 0:32:55.120
<v Speaker 1>need to be on top. Their ultimate goal is not

0:32:55.760 --> 0:33:00.959
<v Speaker 1>equality egalitarianism. Their ultimate goal is to have themselves on

0:33:01.080 --> 0:33:06.920
<v Speaker 1>top and have perpetual inequality. We don't call the Confederate

0:33:07.080 --> 0:33:11.360
<v Speaker 1>soldiers woke. We don't call the Nazis woke, they're just

0:33:11.440 --> 0:33:16.200
<v Speaker 1>white supremacists. And so what's going on here with these

0:33:16.240 --> 0:33:20.360
<v Speaker 1>people on the woke right being charged with, Well, they're

0:33:20.360 --> 0:33:24.960
<v Speaker 1>involved in identity politics, you know, white supremacy or Christian

0:33:25.040 --> 0:33:32.960
<v Speaker 1>supremacy or male patriarchy and imposing their viewpoints on other people. Okay,

0:33:33.240 --> 0:33:37.280
<v Speaker 1>their tactics are similar, their methods might be similar, but

0:33:37.440 --> 0:33:41.360
<v Speaker 1>they're metaphysic, they're epistemology, and their ethic they're not the same.

0:33:41.440 --> 0:33:46.280
<v Speaker 1>And so while there are similarities, there aren't relevant similarities

0:33:46.440 --> 0:33:50.880
<v Speaker 1>to provide necessary and sufficient conditions to defining what woke

0:33:51.040 --> 0:33:53.640
<v Speaker 1>really is and what we've tried so hard to do

0:33:54.120 --> 0:33:56.920
<v Speaker 1>to get people to understand what this revolution is and

0:33:56.960 --> 0:33:59.640
<v Speaker 1>where it came from. People on the so called woke

0:33:59.720 --> 0:34:01.520
<v Speaker 1>right don't believe those things.

0:34:02.120 --> 0:34:04.360
<v Speaker 2>Okay, so let's take this one by one and break

0:34:04.360 --> 0:34:07.080
<v Speaker 2>this down. I think I'm seeing the distinction that you're

0:34:07.120 --> 0:34:10.040
<v Speaker 2>making that you're saying woke left and woke right have

0:34:10.400 --> 0:34:14.400
<v Speaker 2>maybe some similarities on the surface, but when you go

0:34:14.600 --> 0:34:19.320
<v Speaker 2>beneath the surface, then those similarities fade. Hence we shouldn't

0:34:19.440 --> 0:34:23.440
<v Speaker 2>use the same terms. So let's start with what you

0:34:23.480 --> 0:34:26.840
<v Speaker 2>call epistemology. Now these are big, fancy philosophical terms, but

0:34:26.840 --> 0:34:29.880
<v Speaker 2>it basically just means knowledge. It's the study of how

0:34:30.160 --> 0:34:35.239
<v Speaker 2>we know things through testimony, through intuition, through science, and

0:34:35.280 --> 0:34:38.799
<v Speaker 2>when it comes to what's on the what you call

0:34:38.880 --> 0:34:44.480
<v Speaker 2>cultural Marxism wokeism, the way to know something is through

0:34:44.640 --> 0:34:49.040
<v Speaker 2>standpoint epistemology. That's the term that's used that if you

0:34:49.080 --> 0:34:54.720
<v Speaker 2>have certain intersections, so a certain economic status, a certain

0:34:54.760 --> 0:34:59.800
<v Speaker 2>sexual orientation, a certain approach and understanding of your gender,

0:35:00.320 --> 0:35:04.040
<v Speaker 2>if you're able bodied, if you're certain religion. By the way,

0:35:04.120 --> 0:35:07.120
<v Speaker 2>earlier you said all of us have at least one Corey,

0:35:07.239 --> 0:35:09.080
<v Speaker 2>I have none of them. I don't think I have

0:35:09.120 --> 0:35:12.560
<v Speaker 2>a single one. I'm not sure you do either. When

0:35:12.600 --> 0:35:16.040
<v Speaker 2>I show the chart of intersectionality of my students, I say,

0:35:16.120 --> 0:35:19.439
<v Speaker 2>I'm actually the face of oppression. Now I'm not rich,

0:35:19.520 --> 0:35:21.840
<v Speaker 2>but I live in southern Orange County. I'm doing fine,

0:35:21.880 --> 0:35:23.720
<v Speaker 2>so compared to the rest of the world, I guess

0:35:23.760 --> 0:35:27.400
<v Speaker 2>on some level I would maybe check that box just

0:35:27.640 --> 0:35:32.080
<v Speaker 2>living where I live. But the point being, based on

0:35:32.200 --> 0:35:35.919
<v Speaker 2>a certain standpoint you have of a category or characteristic

0:35:36.000 --> 0:35:41.239
<v Speaker 2>you belong to, you have special knowledge and insight because

0:35:41.280 --> 0:35:45.560
<v Speaker 2>of that because of my sexual orientation, because I'm male

0:35:45.680 --> 0:35:49.920
<v Speaker 2>or female. Because whatever it is you're saying, that doesn't

0:35:50.000 --> 0:35:53.799
<v Speaker 2>carry over to the woke right. They don't have the

0:35:53.960 --> 0:35:58.359
<v Speaker 2>same kind of epistemology. Then what kind of epistemology does

0:35:58.440 --> 0:36:01.680
<v Speaker 2>this group that we call the woe right have and

0:36:01.800 --> 0:36:04.680
<v Speaker 2>how is it different from standpoint epistemology?

0:36:05.880 --> 0:36:09.400
<v Speaker 1>The similarities and I, like I said, at surface level,

0:36:09.719 --> 0:36:15.759
<v Speaker 1>they are on the level of the same behaviors imposing

0:36:15.760 --> 0:36:23.919
<v Speaker 1>our ideologies, maybe deplatforming in some cases. They are fixated

0:36:24.760 --> 0:36:28.480
<v Speaker 1>on certain identities. But I want to be careful with

0:36:28.520 --> 0:36:33.480
<v Speaker 1>identity politics because identity politics as such was rooted in

0:36:33.560 --> 0:36:39.000
<v Speaker 1>this Marxist New Left understanding of group identity being either

0:36:39.080 --> 0:36:42.759
<v Speaker 1>in the oppressor or oppressed groups. They don't adopt that

0:36:42.920 --> 0:36:48.560
<v Speaker 1>social binary metaphysic. They don't adopt the standpoint epistemology when

0:36:48.560 --> 0:36:52.840
<v Speaker 1>it comes to knowledge, and they don't adopt the egalitarian

0:36:53.080 --> 0:36:56.720
<v Speaker 1>ultimate goal because they might be supremacist in these ways.

0:36:56.760 --> 0:36:58.799
<v Speaker 2>Okay, let me, let me, let me rudely jump in.

0:36:58.800 --> 0:37:01.200
<v Speaker 2>I'm trying to grasp you're arguing here, So let's come

0:37:01.239 --> 0:37:05.239
<v Speaker 2>back to they don't adopt the egalitarian you said. They

0:37:05.239 --> 0:37:10.160
<v Speaker 2>don't adopt identity politics, oppressor and oppressed. What I hear

0:37:10.320 --> 0:37:13.880
<v Speaker 2>coming from is people flipping it and saying, oh, it

0:37:14.160 --> 0:37:18.600
<v Speaker 2>is the white Christian male who are those who are

0:37:18.719 --> 0:37:23.719
<v Speaker 2>being oppressed? And they'll give examples of how they think

0:37:23.800 --> 0:37:27.920
<v Speaker 2>this is the case. So it seems to me, unless

0:37:27.920 --> 0:37:31.920
<v Speaker 2>I'm missing something, they're kind of adopting the same kind

0:37:31.960 --> 0:37:34.760
<v Speaker 2>of framework that's given to them from the woke left,

0:37:35.400 --> 0:37:40.120
<v Speaker 2>but saying instead saying, no, it's not black people, it's

0:37:40.160 --> 0:37:44.480
<v Speaker 2>not straight people. I'm sorry, it's not gay people, it's

0:37:44.520 --> 0:37:49.239
<v Speaker 2>not transgender, it's not poor people. It's white male Christians

0:37:49.520 --> 0:37:51.759
<v Speaker 2>understood a certain way, who are the ones who are

0:37:51.760 --> 0:37:55.960
<v Speaker 2>being oppressed? So why am I wrong in terms of

0:37:56.000 --> 0:38:00.120
<v Speaker 2>them adopting the same framework but just switching who who

0:38:00.239 --> 0:38:03.399
<v Speaker 2>is actually the oppressed versus the oppressor? When it comes

0:38:03.400 --> 0:38:04.400
<v Speaker 2>to this, Wolk right.

0:38:04.840 --> 0:38:11.319
<v Speaker 1>It's the necessity operator in logic, in equality entails injustice,

0:38:11.960 --> 0:38:19.719
<v Speaker 1>or inequality might intel injustice. What caused the inequality? You

0:38:19.760 --> 0:38:23.759
<v Speaker 1>know some study show, for example, and I've seen you

0:38:23.880 --> 0:38:29.239
<v Speaker 1>use this. Neil has used this illustration in job employment.

0:38:29.960 --> 0:38:32.239
<v Speaker 1>If you just give names and they sound like say

0:38:32.280 --> 0:38:36.640
<v Speaker 1>African American or Hispanic names, they might get passed over

0:38:36.840 --> 0:38:41.280
<v Speaker 1>for some more white sounding name. Likewise, you could find

0:38:41.400 --> 0:38:45.040
<v Speaker 1>things on the opposite side where the Supreme Court needs

0:38:45.040 --> 0:38:50.240
<v Speaker 1>to weigh in, because clearly there was racist admissions hiring

0:38:50.680 --> 0:38:54.480
<v Speaker 1>at Harvard and University of North Carolina and so forth.

0:38:54.560 --> 0:38:59.759
<v Speaker 1>So we're not saying that these white males haven't been oppressed,

0:38:59.920 --> 0:39:05.360
<v Speaker 1>or that there isn't oppression among blacks or Hispanics or

0:39:05.360 --> 0:39:08.719
<v Speaker 1>something like that. There may well be, but that's an

0:39:08.760 --> 0:39:11.640
<v Speaker 1>empirical matter. We have to go investigate that. We have

0:39:11.719 --> 0:39:16.080
<v Speaker 1>to look at the facts. But the facts are our hindsight,

0:39:16.239 --> 0:39:19.040
<v Speaker 1>those are our second most. If it doesn't fall into

0:39:19.080 --> 0:39:24.359
<v Speaker 1>the theory, you push it out. The metaphysics simply is

0:39:24.840 --> 0:39:31.800
<v Speaker 1>inequality entails injustice. If there's an unequal outcome, it's because

0:39:31.880 --> 0:39:37.359
<v Speaker 1>it's caused by injustice, full stop. And so someone like

0:39:37.400 --> 0:39:41.160
<v Speaker 1>ib Ibrames Kendy, he's not going to be interested in

0:39:41.200 --> 0:39:44.360
<v Speaker 1>your stats. He's always just going to say there's an outcome,

0:39:44.600 --> 0:39:48.680
<v Speaker 1>whether it's SAT scores or whatever. If blacks are always

0:39:48.719 --> 0:39:51.800
<v Speaker 1>down here and whites are always up here, there must

0:39:51.880 --> 0:39:55.480
<v Speaker 1>be It's a must, it's a necessity. Operator there must

0:39:55.520 --> 0:40:00.359
<v Speaker 1>be some causal link of injustice. Something nefarious go going on.

0:40:00.880 --> 0:40:05.600
<v Speaker 1>Thomas Sulla comes along in his book on Disparities Right.

0:40:06.200 --> 0:40:09.320
<v Speaker 1>He shows that no, there's there's awful. There's an awful

0:40:09.400 --> 0:40:15.080
<v Speaker 1>lot of possible explanations for inequality. Sometimes it's unjust, and

0:40:15.160 --> 0:40:20.279
<v Speaker 1>sometimes it's just because of the river systems or the

0:40:20.680 --> 0:40:22.680
<v Speaker 1>social policies or whatever.

0:40:22.840 --> 0:40:25.200
<v Speaker 2>We don't know, all right, let me so, let me

0:40:25.280 --> 0:40:26.960
<v Speaker 2>jump in. I wouldn't normally do this a guest, but

0:40:27.000 --> 0:40:28.440
<v Speaker 2>you and I have friends, We go way back, and

0:40:28.440 --> 0:40:30.719
<v Speaker 2>I'm really trying to understand the case that you're making here.

0:40:30.760 --> 0:40:34.759
<v Speaker 2>You're saying, so the book left, it's built into their

0:40:34.880 --> 0:40:40.240
<v Speaker 2>ideology and the worldview from the ground up that these

0:40:40.400 --> 0:40:46.319
<v Speaker 2>categories mean by definition, that there is inequality built in

0:40:47.360 --> 0:40:53.320
<v Speaker 2>and any sign of any inequity different outcome is proof

0:40:53.960 --> 0:40:58.719
<v Speaker 2>of the inequalities. So they so they that's not a

0:40:58.800 --> 0:41:02.279
<v Speaker 2>negotiable part. That's not something you have to prove by

0:41:02.280 --> 0:41:07.359
<v Speaker 2>empirical evidence. That is a starting point its opera. It's

0:41:07.360 --> 0:41:10.239
<v Speaker 2>an a priori how they know and understand the world.

0:41:10.560 --> 0:41:15.319
<v Speaker 2>This woke right is flipping it on its head and

0:41:15.440 --> 0:41:18.480
<v Speaker 2>saying no, actually, we're the ones who are pressed here,

0:41:19.160 --> 0:41:23.400
<v Speaker 2>but not because they start with the same world views,

0:41:23.560 --> 0:41:30.120
<v Speaker 2>saying by definition, white Christian males, etc. Are oppressed. They're

0:41:30.160 --> 0:41:35.320
<v Speaker 2>saying in practice, this is what's happened. So it's reactionary

0:41:35.360 --> 0:41:40.520
<v Speaker 2>against it. It's almost parasitic upon it, rather than the

0:41:40.560 --> 0:41:43.520
<v Speaker 2>same kind of built in ideology from the bottom up.

0:41:43.840 --> 0:41:44.279
<v Speaker 2>Is that fair?

0:41:44.520 --> 0:41:48.280
<v Speaker 1>Right? That's right? And there are some people like James Lindsay,

0:41:48.400 --> 0:41:52.760
<v Speaker 1>for example, who was part of the New Atheists years ago.

0:41:53.000 --> 0:41:56.080
<v Speaker 1>He's now a conservative. He's done a lot to educate

0:41:56.160 --> 0:41:58.040
<v Speaker 1>even Christians in Christian movements.

0:41:58.040 --> 0:42:00.360
<v Speaker 2>He's an atheist still right now.

0:42:00.520 --> 0:42:04.520
<v Speaker 1>He's agnostic now and he's playing with the idea of God.

0:42:06.120 --> 0:42:08.640
<v Speaker 1>Peter Bagozian now wants to call himself a skeptic and

0:42:08.680 --> 0:42:12.880
<v Speaker 1>not so much an atheist. It's interesting to see what happens,

0:42:13.000 --> 0:42:16.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, in this is in this cultural revolutionary moment.

0:42:18.360 --> 0:42:19.440
<v Speaker 1>Where was I going with that?

0:42:19.840 --> 0:42:23.319
<v Speaker 2>Oh man, I cut you off. Sorry, Corey, Shoot, you're

0:42:23.320 --> 0:42:25.480
<v Speaker 2>making a point about James Lindsay.

0:42:28.440 --> 0:42:32.879
<v Speaker 1>Oh Lindsay, who is one of the biggest educators on

0:42:32.920 --> 0:42:36.000
<v Speaker 1>this a year ago when I was looking at his stuff,

0:42:36.560 --> 0:42:39.320
<v Speaker 1>he was the one who sort of popularized this notion

0:42:39.960 --> 0:42:44.560
<v Speaker 1>woke right, and now every blogger is starting to use it.

0:42:46.320 --> 0:42:49.600
<v Speaker 1>But even he said back then I'm not comfortable with

0:42:49.640 --> 0:42:52.640
<v Speaker 1>the term. And then two months ago I saw him

0:42:52.719 --> 0:42:56.120
<v Speaker 1>again using the term and he said, I use it

0:42:56.280 --> 0:43:00.080
<v Speaker 1>loosely of the right. And then today when i'm rea

0:43:00.239 --> 0:43:04.680
<v Speaker 1>a material, once again he's applying it on the surface

0:43:04.800 --> 0:43:10.040
<v Speaker 1>level of behavior, of tactics, of methodology. He's not going

0:43:10.080 --> 0:43:13.360
<v Speaker 1>to the deeper philosophical issues. One of my other friends

0:43:13.640 --> 0:43:18.120
<v Speaker 1>that we've mentioned, Neil Shenvy, is also very careful as

0:43:18.120 --> 0:43:23.000
<v Speaker 1>a scholar, and he gets in many of the essential ingredients,

0:43:23.160 --> 0:43:27.080
<v Speaker 1>but he misses certain aspects that I've just pointed out

0:43:27.480 --> 0:43:30.960
<v Speaker 1>that need to be packed in because they're baked into

0:43:31.640 --> 0:43:35.040
<v Speaker 1>the philosophy of the identity politic on the left that

0:43:35.200 --> 0:43:38.359
<v Speaker 1>can't be on the right. Once anyone does accept that

0:43:38.400 --> 0:43:42.239
<v Speaker 1>they're automatically on the left, it's a Marxist left, it's

0:43:42.280 --> 0:43:45.600
<v Speaker 1>a new left. And so even Nil Shenvy says, if

0:43:45.600 --> 0:43:48.480
<v Speaker 1>you don't like the term, I understand, maybe use a

0:43:48.520 --> 0:43:52.000
<v Speaker 1>different term, like dissident right or the new right. And

0:43:52.040 --> 0:43:54.120
<v Speaker 1>so I say, okay, so that we don't confuse things,

0:43:54.200 --> 0:43:57.960
<v Speaker 1>let's do it now. There is another major thinker who's

0:43:57.960 --> 0:44:02.360
<v Speaker 1>got a book out there called The Case for Christian Nationalism,

0:44:02.960 --> 0:44:07.680
<v Speaker 1>and that is Stephen Wolfe. He's part of the reformed movement.

0:44:07.920 --> 0:44:11.279
<v Speaker 1>Not everybody in that movement likes what he's doing. Some

0:44:11.320 --> 0:44:15.200
<v Speaker 1>people like theologian Kevin Dejung first challenged him on it

0:44:15.239 --> 0:44:19.160
<v Speaker 1>and asked, you know, whether his idea of imposing this

0:44:19.320 --> 0:44:24.640
<v Speaker 1>Christian nationalism, this white Christian nationalism, what does it do

0:44:24.760 --> 0:44:27.520
<v Speaker 1>with the First Amendment? For example? Was the First Amendment

0:44:27.640 --> 0:44:30.960
<v Speaker 1>a mistake? You know, what are we going to do

0:44:31.080 --> 0:44:32.719
<v Speaker 1>with the Muslims, What are we going to do with

0:44:32.760 --> 0:44:36.080
<v Speaker 1>the Mormons, what do we do with the Baptists? And

0:44:36.120 --> 0:44:38.800
<v Speaker 1>what do we do with the Catholics. Nick Fuentes, who's

0:44:38.800 --> 0:44:42.439
<v Speaker 1>often said to be one of those on the woke right,

0:44:42.920 --> 0:44:46.920
<v Speaker 1>well he's a Catholic and America's founding was largely Protestant,

0:44:47.480 --> 0:44:50.080
<v Speaker 1>so there's a lot of messiness there. But even Stephen

0:44:50.160 --> 0:44:55.600
<v Speaker 1>wolf he's one who actually says explicitly, I'm going to

0:44:55.880 --> 0:45:00.239
<v Speaker 1>advocate that we take the principles of critical theory and

0:45:00.400 --> 0:45:04.080
<v Speaker 1>we make them work for us with a different starting

0:45:04.160 --> 0:45:09.560
<v Speaker 1>point to give us the wanted, desirable conclusion. The problem

0:45:09.640 --> 0:45:12.000
<v Speaker 1>is when you start to read his comments on it,

0:45:12.440 --> 0:45:19.480
<v Speaker 1>he doesn't understand the essential ingredients going into again the metaphysics, epistemology,

0:45:19.480 --> 0:45:24.799
<v Speaker 1>and ethics either. So we need clarity philosophically from the

0:45:24.840 --> 0:45:28.919
<v Speaker 1>three branches of philosophy. What do we mean by these

0:45:28.920 --> 0:45:33.040
<v Speaker 1>social binaries? What is packed in in the woke left

0:45:33.280 --> 0:45:36.320
<v Speaker 1>is not what the right is appealing to. Stephen Wolf

0:45:36.400 --> 0:45:40.520
<v Speaker 1>is not going to embrace that view on the reality

0:45:40.600 --> 0:45:44.480
<v Speaker 1>of social binaries. He's not going to embrace the next

0:45:44.480 --> 0:45:48.319
<v Speaker 1>category or the final category either. So we can call

0:45:48.400 --> 0:45:51.600
<v Speaker 1>it that, as Lindsay says, loosely, we can say we're

0:45:51.680 --> 0:45:53.880
<v Speaker 1>uncomfortable with it. We can come up with a different

0:45:54.000 --> 0:45:56.600
<v Speaker 1>term for it. And I lawd that, and I say,

0:45:56.600 --> 0:45:58.719
<v Speaker 1>I think we do need a different term because it

0:45:58.760 --> 0:46:01.960
<v Speaker 1>only confuses and already confusing issue.

0:46:02.440 --> 0:46:05.239
<v Speaker 2>Okay, So who falls in this category of what we

0:46:05.280 --> 0:46:08.920
<v Speaker 2>would call the woke right and is it similar on

0:46:08.960 --> 0:46:13.640
<v Speaker 2>the surface when we say the woke left. There's a

0:46:13.680 --> 0:46:17.319
<v Speaker 2>lot of different people that kind of fall into that category.

0:46:17.440 --> 0:46:21.640
<v Speaker 2>Some would identify as Christians, some would identify more as materialists,

0:46:21.640 --> 0:46:23.399
<v Speaker 2>even though I know you would argue that the world

0:46:23.480 --> 0:46:27.640
<v Speaker 2>view behind it is more materialist with its Marxist roots.

0:46:28.400 --> 0:46:32.280
<v Speaker 2>But who would be some of the key figures whatever

0:46:32.320 --> 0:46:34.640
<v Speaker 2>we call it? Aside for now, the new right, the

0:46:34.680 --> 0:46:37.480
<v Speaker 2>dissident right. Some still refer to the woke right. We've

0:46:37.480 --> 0:46:39.799
<v Speaker 2>talked about issues to that. Who'd be some of the

0:46:39.880 --> 0:46:42.480
<v Speaker 2>key people that you would place in that category.

0:46:43.760 --> 0:46:46.759
<v Speaker 1>I think you would consider someone like Steven Wolf who

0:46:46.840 --> 0:46:53.560
<v Speaker 1>is Reformed Protestant, and you would consider someone like Nick Fuentes, okay,

0:46:53.560 --> 0:46:56.080
<v Speaker 1>who is Catholic and he has the followers that are

0:46:56.120 --> 0:47:01.200
<v Speaker 1>now called the Gropers, and he's the hottest thing now

0:47:01.280 --> 0:47:05.160
<v Speaker 1>in social media. Almost no one knew of him. He

0:47:05.280 --> 0:47:08.960
<v Speaker 1>started out with Daily Wire trying to get in there,

0:47:09.480 --> 0:47:12.680
<v Speaker 1>and Ben Shapiro just went scorched Earth on him a

0:47:12.680 --> 0:47:17.640
<v Speaker 1>couple of weeks ago. Because when you're speaking to conservatives

0:47:17.840 --> 0:47:20.640
<v Speaker 1>and you use the term woke and you stick that

0:47:21.080 --> 0:47:26.280
<v Speaker 1>on someone like a dirty sock, immediately amongst a conservative audience,

0:47:26.360 --> 0:47:30.880
<v Speaker 1>there is a visceral effect. And that's the intent is

0:47:30.920 --> 0:47:34.600
<v Speaker 1>to stick someone like Fuentes right or wrong. You stick

0:47:34.680 --> 0:47:40.319
<v Speaker 1>them with this notion woke that already has a a

0:47:40.400 --> 0:47:45.279
<v Speaker 1>negative term, a negative connotation to it, and you get

0:47:45.360 --> 0:47:48.400
<v Speaker 1>rid of your enemies. And there is a lot going

0:47:48.480 --> 0:47:51.959
<v Speaker 1>on there with we could get into this the whole

0:47:52.000 --> 0:47:58.560
<v Speaker 1>issue of anti Semitism Israel. Israel is actually somewhat central

0:47:58.719 --> 0:48:02.080
<v Speaker 1>to many of these people that are charged with being

0:48:02.200 --> 0:48:03.080
<v Speaker 1>on the woke right.

0:48:05.640 --> 0:48:07.239
<v Speaker 2>Okay, so let me chum up here. I want to

0:48:07.239 --> 0:48:10.920
<v Speaker 2>come back to some of Fuince's beliefs and the appeal,

0:48:11.560 --> 0:48:15.760
<v Speaker 2>because I think he by far represents what's called again

0:48:16.000 --> 0:48:19.160
<v Speaker 2>the woke right, and it does concern me, and I

0:48:19.200 --> 0:48:22.040
<v Speaker 2>want to come back to your level of concern with that.

0:48:22.680 --> 0:48:25.359
<v Speaker 2>But let's maybe just let's maybe take a step back

0:48:25.360 --> 0:48:27.480
<v Speaker 2>and compare and contrast. You said, we want to make

0:48:27.520 --> 0:48:32.480
<v Speaker 2>this simple. There's ethics how we live, there's epistemology, how

0:48:32.520 --> 0:48:37.799
<v Speaker 2>we know, and there's metaphysics what is real? So presumably

0:48:37.840 --> 0:48:41.240
<v Speaker 2>on the woke side, you would say the woke left,

0:48:41.400 --> 0:48:44.960
<v Speaker 2>what is real is more materialism with its Marxist ruth.

0:48:45.040 --> 0:48:47.680
<v Speaker 2>There might be exceptions, but it's more of an atheist

0:48:47.800 --> 0:48:50.040
<v Speaker 2>materialist worldview. Would you agree with that? Is that what

0:48:50.120 --> 0:48:51.600
<v Speaker 2>you would argue for wokeism?

0:48:52.440 --> 0:48:56.880
<v Speaker 1>That's most consistent for it. But yes, it has, As

0:48:57.280 --> 0:49:02.000
<v Speaker 1>Antonio gramscy envisioned, you must infiltrate the long march through

0:49:02.040 --> 0:49:08.680
<v Speaker 1>the institutions, which were academia, media, and ecclesia, until we

0:49:08.800 --> 0:49:12.880
<v Speaker 1>get into the churches, the seminaries, the Christian academic societies,

0:49:12.920 --> 0:49:17.800
<v Speaker 1>campus ministries. We haven't done our job yet. So while

0:49:17.800 --> 0:49:24.759
<v Speaker 1>it's grounded historically on naturalism, it can be divorced from that. Okay,

0:49:24.719 --> 0:49:28.520
<v Speaker 1>and that's I think what has happened with progressive Christians.

0:49:29.520 --> 0:49:32.720
<v Speaker 2>Okay, got it, which is a whole other conversation. That's fair.

0:49:32.800 --> 0:49:35.200
<v Speaker 2>I don't want to put everybody who embraces a kind

0:49:35.239 --> 0:49:38.600
<v Speaker 2>of woke belief in the atheist camp. That be far

0:49:38.680 --> 0:49:42.799
<v Speaker 2>too simplistic. But it's roots that makes sense. Epistemology, how

0:49:42.800 --> 0:49:47.080
<v Speaker 2>we know stuff, lived experience, and ethics, how we should live.

0:49:47.320 --> 0:49:51.239
<v Speaker 2>You talked about we should if you're not in one

0:49:51.239 --> 0:49:54.600
<v Speaker 2>of those categories, wake up to your contribution to the

0:49:54.640 --> 0:49:58.760
<v Speaker 2>oppression and become an ally to those who are fighting

0:49:58.880 --> 0:50:03.319
<v Speaker 2>against oppression. That's how we should live. Let's shift that

0:50:03.440 --> 0:50:07.000
<v Speaker 2>to this new dissonent. Right, is it possible to put

0:50:07.000 --> 0:50:10.560
<v Speaker 2>it in similar categories or is it just so broad

0:50:10.600 --> 0:50:13.839
<v Speaker 2>and different that we can't simplify it in that same way.

0:50:16.040 --> 0:50:19.640
<v Speaker 1>You can put them in identity categories, but the identity

0:50:19.760 --> 0:50:23.160
<v Speaker 1>politic or identity power is not going to be the same. Remember,

0:50:23.200 --> 0:50:26.680
<v Speaker 1>the end goal for someone like a let's say Nick Fuentes,

0:50:26.800 --> 0:50:30.960
<v Speaker 1>Let's just say he was actually a white supremacist. There

0:50:31.080 --> 0:50:34.000
<v Speaker 1>might be more reason to think that Stephen wolf Is

0:50:34.440 --> 0:50:37.080
<v Speaker 1>than Nick fuents Is when you get down to their

0:50:37.120 --> 0:50:41.720
<v Speaker 1>real views and not just their performative actions. In any case,

0:50:42.760 --> 0:50:46.680
<v Speaker 1>let's say he is really a white supremacist. Well, we

0:50:46.760 --> 0:50:51.399
<v Speaker 1>don't call the Confederate soldiers woke just because they're white supremacist.

0:50:52.000 --> 0:50:56.960
<v Speaker 1>They weren't Marxists. They were Theists, at least on paper,

0:50:57.600 --> 0:51:03.640
<v Speaker 1>and they didn't have this idea of egalitarian utopia in

0:51:03.719 --> 0:51:07.600
<v Speaker 1>the future. Their idea was that and they would cite

0:51:07.920 --> 0:51:12.200
<v Speaker 1>as much Darwinian science and Confederate theology as it took

0:51:12.239 --> 0:51:16.560
<v Speaker 1>to convince people that they were superior to blacks. Right,

0:51:17.640 --> 0:51:23.080
<v Speaker 1>So you can have an identity power in this new

0:51:23.360 --> 0:51:27.640
<v Speaker 1>movement on the right, but it doesn't connote the same

0:51:27.719 --> 0:51:31.440
<v Speaker 1>thing as the wokeness on the left, which has the

0:51:31.480 --> 0:51:38.400
<v Speaker 1>necessity operator inequality entails injustice. Disparate outcomes always must entail

0:51:38.600 --> 0:51:42.640
<v Speaker 1>disparate treatment. They're saying, we we agree that there should

0:51:42.680 --> 0:51:49.440
<v Speaker 1>be unequal outcomes. That's fully just we're superior. They're they're

0:51:49.480 --> 0:51:52.319
<v Speaker 1>not in the same category. And to complicate things even more,

0:51:53.080 --> 0:51:58.200
<v Speaker 1>you have Fuentes, for example, befriending others that are in

0:51:58.239 --> 0:52:02.920
<v Speaker 1>the black community that are blacks of premacists, and so

0:52:03.040 --> 0:52:07.080
<v Speaker 1>talk about the identity politic like say a Lewis Farakahn,

0:52:07.400 --> 0:52:10.800
<v Speaker 1>or you know, think about anyone who's a member of

0:52:10.840 --> 0:52:13.640
<v Speaker 1>the black supremacist movement. It might be smaller than the

0:52:13.640 --> 0:52:18.920
<v Speaker 1>white supremacist movement, but neither of those supremacist are egalitarian,

0:52:19.600 --> 0:52:25.319
<v Speaker 1>so they can't technically be classified as woke, falling under

0:52:25.360 --> 0:52:29.600
<v Speaker 1>the categories of D, I and E once we define

0:52:29.640 --> 0:52:30.960
<v Speaker 1>the terms in philosophy.

0:52:31.840 --> 0:52:34.560
<v Speaker 2>Okay, So you don't like the term woke, and I

0:52:34.560 --> 0:52:39.520
<v Speaker 2>think you've made your case that there's similar practices, they're

0:52:39.600 --> 0:52:45.160
<v Speaker 2>similar maybe strategies, but the belief system underlying it is

0:52:45.360 --> 0:52:51.439
<v Speaker 2>fundamentally different. And that makes sense to me. I think

0:52:51.440 --> 0:52:54.000
<v Speaker 2>I'm with you on that. What would you say to

0:52:54.040 --> 0:52:58.040
<v Speaker 2>somebody who just said okay, or actually, let me refrain that.

0:52:58.400 --> 0:53:01.360
<v Speaker 2>So maybe we shouldn't use the term woke, But you

0:53:01.480 --> 0:53:04.719
<v Speaker 2>still are okay with the term right. So we've got

0:53:04.840 --> 0:53:07.719
<v Speaker 2>kind of the woke left, we've got the dissident right,

0:53:07.800 --> 0:53:08.800
<v Speaker 2>the new right.

0:53:09.160 --> 0:53:11.880
<v Speaker 1>The problematic right, whatever we.

0:53:11.760 --> 0:53:14.960
<v Speaker 2>Want to call them. And you know, I haven't done

0:53:15.040 --> 0:53:19.040
<v Speaker 2>a deep dive on violence on the left versus violence

0:53:19.080 --> 0:53:21.440
<v Speaker 2>on the right. How concern I am with the left

0:53:21.520 --> 0:53:23.480
<v Speaker 2>concerned I am with the right. I just I have

0:53:23.600 --> 0:53:26.640
<v Speaker 2>not personally done a deep dive on that, but I

0:53:26.680 --> 0:53:29.479
<v Speaker 2>can tell you some of that stuff I'm hearing fwent

0:53:29.600 --> 0:53:33.640
<v Speaker 2>to say, and talking with young people on campuses. You know,

0:53:33.719 --> 0:53:35.759
<v Speaker 2>I teach it talbot, I teach a bio. But I'm

0:53:35.760 --> 0:53:39.400
<v Speaker 2>out speaking on campuses all the time. This is bubbling

0:53:39.520 --> 0:53:43.920
<v Speaker 2>up and it concerns me. It concerns me a lot.

0:53:44.400 --> 0:53:47.920
<v Speaker 2>Tell me what you're seeing on college campuses in terms

0:53:47.960 --> 0:53:50.360
<v Speaker 2>of this dissident right, and what do you think the

0:53:50.400 --> 0:53:51.640
<v Speaker 2>attraction is for it.

0:53:53.239 --> 0:53:57.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. So, first of all, the final chapter in my

0:53:57.160 --> 0:54:00.439
<v Speaker 1>book is called Maga and the morning after I asked

0:54:00.480 --> 0:54:05.160
<v Speaker 1>the question, can America be made great again if America

0:54:05.280 --> 0:54:10.279
<v Speaker 1>is not made good again? And I say no, America's

0:54:10.280 --> 0:54:13.480
<v Speaker 1>greatness comes from her goodness. And if we don't reestablish

0:54:13.760 --> 0:54:18.640
<v Speaker 1>that revolutionary foundation, we're not going to be able to

0:54:18.840 --> 0:54:23.080
<v Speaker 1>politicize this without violence. And this is the concern of

0:54:23.120 --> 0:54:27.800
<v Speaker 1>some of those on the right because they are saying

0:54:28.080 --> 0:54:30.759
<v Speaker 1>and the younger generation, and I'm talking to gen z

0:54:30.920 --> 0:54:35.440
<v Speaker 1>ers saying this, They say, we thought Charlie Kirk may

0:54:35.480 --> 0:54:39.160
<v Speaker 1>have been the way, but they killed him. It's not

0:54:39.320 --> 0:54:42.919
<v Speaker 1>the way. It's ineffective. Not even Trump is the way.

0:54:43.320 --> 0:54:46.040
<v Speaker 1>The whole thing needs to burn down. Some of them

0:54:46.080 --> 0:54:50.799
<v Speaker 1>are just anti GOP, so they're right, but it's not

0:54:50.880 --> 0:54:54.680
<v Speaker 1>necessarily Republican as far as they're concerned. Let the whole

0:54:54.719 --> 0:54:58.440
<v Speaker 1>thing burn down and start all over. But their vision

0:54:58.600 --> 0:55:04.760
<v Speaker 1>tends to be more political. In my estimation, I'm thinking

0:55:04.880 --> 0:55:09.560
<v Speaker 1>it needs to be more transformational. We need to be

0:55:09.640 --> 0:55:13.360
<v Speaker 1>thinking about soul saving, but we also need to think

0:55:13.400 --> 0:55:21.840
<v Speaker 1>about institutional recapture because the institutions are critical. James Davison Hunter,

0:55:21.960 --> 0:55:24.399
<v Speaker 1>who wrote the book To Change the World, says that

0:55:25.320 --> 0:55:27.640
<v Speaker 1>even when you look back at many of the Christian

0:55:27.800 --> 0:55:32.640
<v Speaker 1>revivals that were substantial or cultural revolutions or movements, they

0:55:32.640 --> 0:55:36.960
<v Speaker 1>may start out in among the masses, but they never

0:55:37.280 --> 0:55:41.239
<v Speaker 1>really get traction until they're baptized by the elite. And

0:55:41.320 --> 0:55:43.920
<v Speaker 1>so my claim is in the original title of the

0:55:43.920 --> 0:55:47.440
<v Speaker 1>book is the third revolution from the campus to the

0:55:47.440 --> 0:55:50.480
<v Speaker 1>culture and a vision forward. As goes the campus, so

0:55:50.560 --> 0:55:53.359
<v Speaker 1>goes the culture. As goes the US campus, so goes

0:55:53.400 --> 0:55:57.440
<v Speaker 1>the world. It's that influential. You can't escape it because

0:55:58.640 --> 0:56:01.520
<v Speaker 1>everything is coming from camp down into the corporate world,

0:56:01.560 --> 0:56:05.560
<v Speaker 1>into the churches, into the seminaries, into your closets, even

0:56:05.920 --> 0:56:09.799
<v Speaker 1>you've got your cell phones there. And everybody, even if

0:56:09.800 --> 0:56:11.840
<v Speaker 1>they're not called to go back on campus, needs to

0:56:11.840 --> 0:56:16.160
<v Speaker 1>prepare for this false, poisonous ideology coming from the campuses

0:56:16.200 --> 0:56:19.920
<v Speaker 1>because you can no longer escape it. So when we

0:56:19.960 --> 0:56:22.840
<v Speaker 1>look at where the statistics are going right now with

0:56:22.880 --> 0:56:25.759
<v Speaker 1>the young men and the young women on the campuses,

0:56:26.880 --> 0:56:30.799
<v Speaker 1>the young the young women are going more progressive, and

0:56:31.040 --> 0:56:36.600
<v Speaker 1>there is a demographic feminization of academia across the board.

0:56:37.360 --> 0:56:42.239
<v Speaker 1>More young girls are enrolled in college, more girls in

0:56:42.320 --> 0:56:46.959
<v Speaker 1>graduate school in PhD programs, more assistant professorships, and within

0:56:47.000 --> 0:56:51.799
<v Speaker 1>the next decade, more university presidents and full professors. The

0:56:51.880 --> 0:56:55.840
<v Speaker 1>whole thing will be demographically feminized. That's not even talking

0:56:55.880 --> 0:57:00.320
<v Speaker 1>about ideological feminization and all that it entels and implications

0:57:00.360 --> 0:57:03.040
<v Speaker 1>that it'll have for the church. For example, if you're

0:57:03.080 --> 0:57:05.920
<v Speaker 1>going to college to get graduate degrees, you're going to

0:57:05.960 --> 0:57:09.120
<v Speaker 1>want to go get a job for a while, and

0:57:09.160 --> 0:57:13.520
<v Speaker 1>that's going to put off, you know, baby making. And

0:57:13.640 --> 0:57:15.800
<v Speaker 1>if the women are getting the higher degrees, and the

0:57:15.880 --> 0:57:21.560
<v Speaker 1>higher degrees you have translates into higher paychecks. The woman

0:57:21.760 --> 0:57:26.160
<v Speaker 1>is going to be the breadwinner going forward, including in

0:57:26.400 --> 0:57:30.080
<v Speaker 1>Christian traditional homes. What is that going to look like

0:57:30.320 --> 0:57:34.480
<v Speaker 1>for everybody going forward? The men do happen to have

0:57:36.040 --> 0:57:41.440
<v Speaker 1>a greater zest for spirituality right now, but who are

0:57:41.480 --> 0:57:45.760
<v Speaker 1>they going to again? Are they following Jordan Peterson or

0:57:45.840 --> 0:57:51.200
<v Speaker 1>Joe Rogan, who perhaps haven't crossed over quite yet, they're

0:57:51.240 --> 0:57:55.680
<v Speaker 1>not yet Christians, but very close. Are they following Andrew Tait,

0:57:56.160 --> 0:58:01.080
<v Speaker 1>who's advocating red pelling everybody you know, pushing back against

0:58:01.080 --> 0:58:05.680
<v Speaker 1>feminism in a very unhealthy, non Christian sort of way.

0:58:06.400 --> 0:58:09.440
<v Speaker 1>Or are they following someone like a Nick Flintests. And

0:58:09.520 --> 0:58:13.920
<v Speaker 1>even if you exonerate Nick flintests on his real views

0:58:13.960 --> 0:58:16.840
<v Speaker 1>and not just the performative views or the you know,

0:58:16.960 --> 0:58:21.439
<v Speaker 1>clips that people take of him. Nonetheless, he's got enough

0:58:21.560 --> 0:58:27.880
<v Speaker 1>groupers who really are women haters, haters of Jews, haters

0:58:27.880 --> 0:58:30.959
<v Speaker 1>of blacks. I've met many of them too, the men.

0:58:31.280 --> 0:58:36.920
<v Speaker 1>Ironically on college campuses, in our college campuses anyway, are

0:58:37.600 --> 0:58:42.320
<v Speaker 1>our groups are dominated by men over women. Men flock

0:58:42.440 --> 0:58:47.240
<v Speaker 1>to engineering programs, women flock to nursing programs. Men flock

0:58:47.360 --> 0:58:51.040
<v Speaker 1>to apologetics more than the women do. So we have

0:58:51.080 --> 0:58:53.920
<v Speaker 1>an opportunity for these men who are now reacting to

0:58:54.000 --> 0:58:57.080
<v Speaker 1>a culture that they are so sick of being battered

0:58:57.120 --> 0:59:03.240
<v Speaker 1>by as toxic, masculine and mails. The best hope you

0:59:03.320 --> 0:59:07.200
<v Speaker 1>could ever be is Homer Simpson. And so they are

0:59:07.360 --> 0:59:10.920
<v Speaker 1>coming back to some conservative roots. But where they're landing

0:59:11.800 --> 0:59:15.280
<v Speaker 1>it's competitive right now. We need to go after them.

0:59:15.360 --> 0:59:19.320
<v Speaker 1>They're open. There's a crisis of belief that Justin Brierly

0:59:19.440 --> 0:59:22.160
<v Speaker 1>might talk about. Yeah, and it's an opportune moment for

0:59:22.280 --> 0:59:25.120
<v Speaker 1>us to capture the men. And when the men convert,

0:59:25.200 --> 0:59:27.200
<v Speaker 1>and when the men have families and they take their

0:59:27.680 --> 0:59:31.640
<v Speaker 1>families to church, the statistics show the kids come to

0:59:31.720 --> 0:59:33.880
<v Speaker 1>church more often if the dad comes than if the

0:59:33.920 --> 0:59:36.800
<v Speaker 1>mom comes. So this is a good thing that these men,

0:59:37.040 --> 0:59:40.600
<v Speaker 1>these young men are open right now. But Nick Frentes

0:59:40.760 --> 0:59:45.520
<v Speaker 1>is after Charlie Kirk's young men, and he says, explative, explative, explative,

0:59:45.960 --> 0:59:51.320
<v Speaker 1>we ft TPUSA. Your young men are following us, They're

0:59:51.360 --> 0:59:55.280
<v Speaker 1>going in his direction. How many I don't know yet,

0:59:55.360 --> 0:59:58.440
<v Speaker 1>none of us do. The young women we need to

0:59:58.760 --> 1:00:02.040
<v Speaker 1>in the field of Christian apost pogetics and evangelism, we

1:00:02.200 --> 1:00:04.680
<v Speaker 1>need to find a better way to reach them, especially

1:00:04.720 --> 1:00:07.360
<v Speaker 1>on the campuses, and it might be through a new

1:00:07.360 --> 1:00:11.680
<v Speaker 1>developing field we could talk about as rhetorical apologetics.

1:00:12.320 --> 1:00:14.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, definitely could.

1:00:14.080 --> 1:00:18.200
<v Speaker 1>But they're the ones that are the majoritarians now, and

1:00:19.360 --> 1:00:23.320
<v Speaker 1>in critical race theory, they're not talking about just numeric majority.

1:00:23.360 --> 1:00:29.800
<v Speaker 1>They're talking about minoritization or majoritarian the positions of power.

1:00:30.280 --> 1:00:35.120
<v Speaker 1>So now women are ascending to and within the decade

1:00:35.600 --> 1:00:37.920
<v Speaker 1>they will be at the top positions of power in

1:00:38.000 --> 1:00:42.400
<v Speaker 1>all of these universities, and that will have implications.

1:00:42.880 --> 1:00:45.840
<v Speaker 2>It definitely will. Let me ask you, I have so

1:00:45.840 --> 1:00:47.680
<v Speaker 2>many questions for you about this. You help me kind

1:00:47.680 --> 1:00:50.400
<v Speaker 2>of work this out real time. But part of me,

1:00:50.600 --> 1:00:54.440
<v Speaker 2>and I know a skeptic would say something like Corey,

1:00:54.480 --> 1:00:57.400
<v Speaker 2>why are we putting so much emphasis in the long

1:00:57.520 --> 1:01:03.560
<v Speaker 2>term institution of the universe city Even even Charlie Kirk

1:01:03.640 --> 1:01:07.240
<v Speaker 2>wrote a book on like the Scam of College and

1:01:07.280 --> 1:01:12.040
<v Speaker 2>you can self educate today. It would make sense in

1:01:12.080 --> 1:01:16.160
<v Speaker 2>the early part of the twentieth century that the university

1:01:16.160 --> 1:01:21.080
<v Speaker 2>would be so significant, But now things aren't moving out

1:01:21.120 --> 1:01:24.400
<v Speaker 2>from the university. They're moving from influencers, and they're moving

1:01:24.440 --> 1:01:29.880
<v Speaker 2>from podcasters and YouTubers and TikTokers, etc. So what's the

1:01:29.920 --> 1:01:32.400
<v Speaker 2>big deal about the university. What would you say to that.

1:01:33.920 --> 1:01:39.280
<v Speaker 1>It's true, but prestige still matters. The name of where

1:01:39.320 --> 1:01:45.400
<v Speaker 1>you hail from, where you graduated from, where you work matters.

1:01:46.320 --> 1:01:50.520
<v Speaker 1>The New York Times has less subscribers than say, at

1:01:50.520 --> 1:01:53.320
<v Speaker 1>the USA today, but the New York Times is still

1:01:53.360 --> 1:01:54.360
<v Speaker 1>the paper of record.

1:01:54.680 --> 1:01:55.160
<v Speaker 2>That's true.

1:01:55.200 --> 1:02:00.280
<v Speaker 1>Harvard. As conservatives, we might disdain Harvard right now, but

1:02:00.440 --> 1:02:03.760
<v Speaker 1>we still think Harvard is the top university in terms

1:02:03.760 --> 1:02:08.320
<v Speaker 1>of prestige. Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, it still has that

1:02:08.440 --> 1:02:12.160
<v Speaker 1>kind of cultural cash value. And moreover, it's a chance

1:02:12.240 --> 1:02:15.919
<v Speaker 1>to change the world. Right now, one in every three

1:02:18.720 --> 1:02:23.200
<v Speaker 1>world leaders, whether they be prime ministers, presidents, dictators, or whatever,

1:02:23.680 --> 1:02:29.120
<v Speaker 1>one in three earned an academic degree from a US university.

1:02:29.880 --> 1:02:33.080
<v Speaker 1>And right now, even with the lower numbers, perhaps going

1:02:33.120 --> 1:02:35.640
<v Speaker 1>to the university and maybe maybe the boys are looking

1:02:35.720 --> 1:02:39.880
<v Speaker 1>at trades more and so forth. Nonetheless, the average of

1:02:40.280 --> 1:02:46.360
<v Speaker 1>church going attendance today is about thirty percent weekly. If

1:02:46.360 --> 1:02:49.920
<v Speaker 1>you say almost weekly, it's thirty I think thirty nine percent,

1:02:49.960 --> 1:02:53.840
<v Speaker 1>thirty seven or thirty nine percent, but exactly thirty seven

1:02:53.880 --> 1:02:57.520
<v Speaker 1>to thirty nine percent of people that are age eighteen

1:02:57.560 --> 1:03:01.000
<v Speaker 1>to twenty four are enrolled in college. If you go

1:03:01.040 --> 1:03:04.439
<v Speaker 1>to church every week, you get fifty two sermons a year.

1:03:05.520 --> 1:03:10.360
<v Speaker 1>You get sixty sermons in your first month as a freshman.

1:03:11.080 --> 1:03:13.920
<v Speaker 1>So who has the ear of the future. And so

1:03:14.080 --> 1:03:16.400
<v Speaker 1>last month I was with doctor James Torr, one of

1:03:16.440 --> 1:03:18.720
<v Speaker 1>the top ten chemists in the world, top fifty most

1:03:18.760 --> 1:03:23.000
<v Speaker 1>influential scientists. And on the podcast that I did with him,

1:03:23.000 --> 1:03:25.160
<v Speaker 1>and then in the Sunday school teaching class we did,

1:03:25.200 --> 1:03:28.800
<v Speaker 1>he said it both times. This guy was crazy. I mean,

1:03:29.000 --> 1:03:31.320
<v Speaker 1>he came from Purdue, he did his PhD under a

1:03:31.320 --> 1:03:35.440
<v Speaker 1>Nobel Prize winning Japanese chemist here and he went to

1:03:35.480 --> 1:03:37.160
<v Speaker 1>the same church that I go to now. And so

1:03:37.200 --> 1:03:40.760
<v Speaker 1>we had a great conversation about this. He knocked on

1:03:40.960 --> 1:03:44.960
<v Speaker 1>every single apartment door and did door knocking evangelism when

1:03:44.960 --> 1:03:47.080
<v Speaker 1>he was here. That's the kind of guy he is.

1:03:47.360 --> 1:03:49.920
<v Speaker 1>When he had kids, he used to wake up every

1:03:49.960 --> 1:03:52.479
<v Speaker 1>morning at five point thirty am and wake his kids

1:03:52.520 --> 1:03:56.200
<v Speaker 1>up and do family devotionals. That's the kind of father

1:03:56.320 --> 1:04:00.280
<v Speaker 1>he is. And he's a super scientist. But he said

1:04:00.320 --> 1:04:02.960
<v Speaker 1>this in the podcast. He says, I used to tell

1:04:03.000 --> 1:04:04.960
<v Speaker 1>people train your child in the way they should go

1:04:05.040 --> 1:04:06.880
<v Speaker 1>and when they get older, they won't depart from it.

1:04:07.400 --> 1:04:10.560
<v Speaker 1>I will not tell people that proverb anymore. When all

1:04:10.600 --> 1:04:13.080
<v Speaker 1>four of my kids went off to college, two of

1:04:13.120 --> 1:04:16.160
<v Speaker 1>the four had their worldviews rocked, and one has not

1:04:16.240 --> 1:04:21.040
<v Speaker 1>returned yet. The philosophical subtlety that's going on in the university.

1:04:21.400 --> 1:04:24.240
<v Speaker 1>When the ratio is twenty three to one, twenty seventy,

1:04:24.560 --> 1:04:27.520
<v Speaker 1>twenty seven to one, seventy to one, or seventy eight

1:04:27.560 --> 1:04:30.760
<v Speaker 1>to one, no one can compete with that unless we

1:04:30.840 --> 1:04:33.440
<v Speaker 1>adequately train them. And this is why I say in

1:04:33.480 --> 1:04:35.560
<v Speaker 1>the end of the book, it's all hands on deck.

1:04:35.600 --> 1:04:40.000
<v Speaker 1>It's the university stupid. It's still the paper of record,

1:04:40.320 --> 1:04:43.480
<v Speaker 1>it's still the place of prestige and whatever comes in

1:04:43.520 --> 1:04:48.960
<v Speaker 1>the future with AI, with technology, wherever the education source

1:04:49.040 --> 1:04:51.080
<v Speaker 1>is located, that's where we want to be. So you're

1:04:51.120 --> 1:04:55.120
<v Speaker 1>right in terms of podcasting or whatever, because we want

1:04:55.120 --> 1:04:59.680
<v Speaker 1>to be upstream where the ideas come downstream and have consequences.

1:05:00.240 --> 1:05:04.120
<v Speaker 1>Good ideas. Bad ideas have consequences that make victims. Good

1:05:04.160 --> 1:05:07.520
<v Speaker 1>ideas have the kind of consequences that transform lives for

1:05:07.600 --> 1:05:12.800
<v Speaker 1>good and civilizations as well. So wherever that sources, we

1:05:12.840 --> 1:05:15.600
<v Speaker 1>want to be there. But right now it's still at

1:05:15.640 --> 1:05:19.560
<v Speaker 1>the university, and so Peter Bagosian, for example, he joined

1:05:19.600 --> 1:05:22.840
<v Speaker 1>and he said, let all the universities burned down. And

1:05:22.880 --> 1:05:25.040
<v Speaker 1>I said, I don't think so, and he said he

1:05:25.160 --> 1:05:27.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, he started with Steven Pinker and a number

1:05:27.360 --> 1:05:31.200
<v Speaker 1>of other people, groups of people, the University of Austin

1:05:31.800 --> 1:05:37.240
<v Speaker 1>that was modeled after Grove City and Patrick Henry College

1:05:37.240 --> 1:05:41.640
<v Speaker 1>in Hillsdale where they don't accept any government funding. And

1:05:41.680 --> 1:05:45.800
<v Speaker 1>now certain ones of them have left. It's still pursuing accreditation.

1:05:46.640 --> 1:05:49.920
<v Speaker 1>But think about it. You start over all over again,

1:05:50.600 --> 1:05:52.320
<v Speaker 1>and what are you going to have a ten thousand

1:05:52.440 --> 1:05:56.600
<v Speaker 1>dollars endowment with an Atari computer? You're behind two hundred

1:05:56.640 --> 1:05:59.800
<v Speaker 1>and fifty years from Harvard. So I'm saying, yes, let's

1:05:59.800 --> 1:06:02.480
<v Speaker 1>throw multiple socks against the walls. Let's do what you're

1:06:02.520 --> 1:06:05.880
<v Speaker 1>doing social media presence, Let's do what I'm doing the campus.

1:06:06.200 --> 1:06:08.440
<v Speaker 1>But I'm also doing something else that I'm trying to

1:06:08.440 --> 1:06:12.560
<v Speaker 1>build a coalition around, and that is the MALEIK Academic Fellowship.

1:06:12.600 --> 1:06:15.720
<v Speaker 1>We are trying to learn from the Marxists about the

1:06:15.760 --> 1:06:20.480
<v Speaker 1>long March through the institutions, and we're pumping PhD students

1:06:20.560 --> 1:06:24.680
<v Speaker 1>getting into top one hundred institutes. Their whole job is

1:06:25.040 --> 1:06:33.080
<v Speaker 1>to land a credible, sustainable, durable PhD student only chapter

1:06:33.640 --> 1:06:37.240
<v Speaker 1>that after forty or fifty years, we will be reclaiming

1:06:37.800 --> 1:06:42.760
<v Speaker 1>through institutional recapture ground at the universities. Al Muller I

1:06:42.840 --> 1:06:45.960
<v Speaker 1>interviewed him. He took over a liberal university, it's now

1:06:46.000 --> 1:06:50.600
<v Speaker 1>conservative al planning. He went into philosophy and behind him

1:06:50.760 --> 1:06:55.440
<v Speaker 1>was a beachhead and awake that transformed the entire discipline

1:06:55.480 --> 1:06:59.480
<v Speaker 1>and philosophy of religion. The fact that this ideological revolution

1:06:59.720 --> 1:07:03.240
<v Speaker 1>number one and number two have happened two times shows

1:07:03.280 --> 1:07:07.320
<v Speaker 1>that it can happen again. So is it uphill it is?

1:07:07.440 --> 1:07:10.120
<v Speaker 1>Do we have our work cut out for us? We do.

1:07:10.880 --> 1:07:14.600
<v Speaker 1>But regardless, everybody must either go back into the universities

1:07:14.600 --> 1:07:18.800
<v Speaker 1>for institutional recapture or prepare for the poisonous ideology coming

1:07:18.800 --> 1:07:21.160
<v Speaker 1>out of it because you can no longer escape it.

1:07:22.880 --> 1:07:25.240
<v Speaker 2>Well, that feels like a mic trop moment to end

1:07:25.280 --> 1:07:27.640
<v Speaker 2>on Corey, You've been thinking about this a lot. Your book,

1:07:27.720 --> 1:07:32.800
<v Speaker 2>The Progressive Miseducation of America. I indorsed it, John stone

1:07:32.800 --> 1:07:35.520
<v Speaker 2>Street endorsed it. You had a few other people indorse it.

1:07:36.440 --> 1:07:40.720
<v Speaker 2>Very thoughtful, very compelling, especially somebody working at a university

1:07:40.760 --> 1:07:44.640
<v Speaker 2>and a theological school that cares deeply about my university

1:07:45.200 --> 1:07:47.880
<v Speaker 2>resonate with so much of what you have written there.

1:07:48.400 --> 1:07:50.040
<v Speaker 2>I got a ton more questions for you about the

1:07:50.040 --> 1:07:52.720
<v Speaker 2>woke right. I'd love to know what, Folks listening, what

1:07:52.880 --> 1:07:55.320
<v Speaker 2>do you think? Do you agree with the assessment here

1:07:55.520 --> 1:07:58.800
<v Speaker 2>about the woke right? Would you different say? No, the

1:07:58.800 --> 1:08:01.720
<v Speaker 2>worldview doesn't matter. If the tactics and the strategy are

1:08:01.760 --> 1:08:04.560
<v Speaker 2>the same, we should call it the woke right. I'd

1:08:04.560 --> 1:08:07.520
<v Speaker 2>love to know what people think about this, so comment

1:08:07.560 --> 1:08:09.880
<v Speaker 2>put your two cents below would be interesting to know

1:08:11.520 --> 1:08:13.320
<v Speaker 2>you help me think this through, Corey. It's not often

1:08:13.320 --> 1:08:15.560
<v Speaker 2>that I bring somebody on and I'm kind of live

1:08:15.680 --> 1:08:19.880
<v Speaker 2>processing these ideas. But I think I'm compelled to not

1:08:20.080 --> 1:08:21.920
<v Speaker 2>use the term woke right, at least in the same

1:08:21.960 --> 1:08:25.360
<v Speaker 2>way or without serious qualification as to some of the

1:08:25.400 --> 1:08:29.280
<v Speaker 2>differences I said. Folks watching, make sure you have subscribed.

1:08:29.320 --> 1:08:31.600
<v Speaker 2>We've got some other conversations coming up you will not

1:08:31.880 --> 1:08:34.920
<v Speaker 2>want to miss. And if you thought about studying apologetics,

1:08:34.960 --> 1:08:37.880
<v Speaker 2>we are doing cultural apologetics, which is a lot of

1:08:37.920 --> 1:08:41.479
<v Speaker 2>what you heard here, and also classical apologetics in our

1:08:41.520 --> 1:08:46.400
<v Speaker 2>program about the Bible, Science and Faith, philosophical evidences, etc.

1:08:47.040 --> 1:08:51.360
<v Speaker 2>Information is that is down below. Corey as always enjoyed it,

1:08:51.400 --> 1:08:51.800
<v Speaker 2>my friend.

1:08:51.960 --> 1:08:54.519
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for coming on, Sam Sean, take care of Go Team,

1:08:54.560 --> 1:08:54.920
<v Speaker 1>Go God.

1:08:55.200 --> 1:08:57.920
<v Speaker 2>Hey friends, if you enjoyed this show, please hit that

1:08:58.000 --> 1:09:00.920
<v Speaker 2>fall button on your podcast app. Most of you tuning

1:09:01.000 --> 1:09:03.320
<v Speaker 2>in haven't done this yet and it makes a huge

1:09:03.360 --> 1:09:06.120
<v Speaker 2>difference in helping us reach and equip more people and

1:09:06.120 --> 1:09:10.519
<v Speaker 2>build community. And please consider leaving a podcast review. Every

1:09:10.720 --> 1:09:13.840
<v Speaker 2>review helps. Thanks for listening to The Sean McDowell Show,

1:09:13.960 --> 1:09:17.760
<v Speaker 2>brought to you by Talbot School of Theology at Biola University,

1:09:17.840 --> 1:09:21.200
<v Speaker 2>where we have on campus and online programs and apologetic

1:09:21.200 --> 1:09:24.439
<v Speaker 2>spiritual formation, marriage and family, Bible and so much more.

1:09:24.600 --> 1:09:27.559
<v Speaker 2>We would love to train you to more effectively live, teach,

1:09:27.680 --> 1:09:30.519
<v Speaker 2>and defend the Christian faith today and we will see

1:09:30.520 --> 1:09:32.360
<v Speaker 2>you when the next episode drops.