Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong, Joe Getty. I'm strong and Jetty,
Speaker 1: and now he I'm strong and Natty.
Speaker 2: You know, I'm transgender. I'm a woman.
Speaker 3: I'm identify as sometimes identifying as a woman for purposes
Speaker 3: of basketball professional basketball. So I'll be declaring for the
Speaker 3: WNBA Draft in twenty twenty seven as well.
Speaker 1: That's a proud American woman. Royce White. She is six
Speaker 1: foot eight and two hundred and seventy pounds, an NBA
Speaker 1: player until a few years ago, I think, but she
Speaker 1: has now come out as transgender, and MS White goes on.
Speaker 3: I mean, I think I'd be unstoppable, you know. But
Speaker 3: I'm a team first guy.
Speaker 2: You know. I'm a pass first kind of player. I
Speaker 2: do the little things, you know.
Speaker 3: I led my team in all five major stack categories
Speaker 3: at Iowa State University, So I do a little bit
Speaker 3: of every I'll do whatever the coach needs me to do.
Speaker 3: I'll do whatever the girls need me to do.
Speaker 1: Rice one of two former NBA players who are declaring
Speaker 1: for the WNBA draft, taking them at their word as
Speaker 1: progressives that trans women are women and the WNBA commissioner
Speaker 1: has announced an emergency meeting of the general managers and
Speaker 1: coaches of the league to deal with being asked to
Speaker 1: live up to their principles. The fact that that would
Speaker 1: be an emergency meeting tells you everything you need to know.
Speaker 1: I think about progressivism Before we get into a little
Speaker 1: more of that, one of the issues is, and Michael,
Speaker 1: we'll start with fifteen in a second, but one of
Speaker 1: the issues is, as Jack's mentioned in Katie Too, the
Speaker 1: WNBA started as a pr project of the NBA. It's
Speaker 1: heavily subsidized by the NBA. It would not stay in
Speaker 1: business if it were not for that. You might be
Speaker 1: firmly in favor of girls sports and women's sports and
Speaker 1: women's collegiate sports.
Speaker 2: I am.
Speaker 1: I'm a big fan. I defend them with my life.
Speaker 1: But the idea that yes, there's a women's league for
Speaker 1: every sport and it should be as popular as the
Speaker 1: men's is just silly. It's not. It's not even close.
Speaker 1: But because of the nature of it, the way it started,
Speaker 1: the WNBA, and the fact that it is heavily black,
Speaker 1: heavily lesbian, and extremely progressive, they embrace all sorts of
Speaker 1: progressive nuttiness. For instance, Sophie Cunningham and who's also on
Speaker 1: the same team with Caitlin Clark on Indiana and is
Speaker 1: kind of the enforcer. Somebody takes out your star, you
Speaker 1: give them an elbow in the mouth. That's the way
Speaker 1: Basketball's always were a hockey, the rest of them, So
Speaker 1: how you protect the stars? Got absolutely mugged. I've seen
Speaker 1: this video, Katie. Have you seen the foul on Sophie Cunningham.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, she.
Speaker 4: Got basically punched in the face.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, a big what do you call it? A
Speaker 1: clothes line As she goes up for layup, this Dja
Speaker 1: Carrington clotheslined right in the neck and head and sent
Speaker 1: her crashing to the ground. Just a big, angry, nasty, deliberate, blatant,
Speaker 1: flagrant fowl. But Sophie explains what happens after miss Carrington
Speaker 1: was ejected.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so Carrington is a dirty player, probably the dirtiest
Speaker 5: player in the league. And then she has the audacity
Speaker 5: to go online right after her ejection and claim that
Speaker 5: she got ejected because of racism. She definitely learned well
Speaker 5: from Angel Reese. Whenever something goes against you, just pull
Speaker 5: out that race card. I think she's jealous of my
Speaker 5: natural blonde hair. She'll never have this hair. I literally
Speaker 5: got clotheslined in the air, and this clown has to
Speaker 5: turn it into race. Her level of IQ needs to
Speaker 5: be studied for generations.
Speaker 1: Number one meow yeah, number number two. Yeah. Djna Carrington
Speaker 1: got ejected for this playtant assault foul, and he goes
Speaker 1: to the locker room and texts white privilege.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 4: She sent it out on uh threads, which is like
Speaker 4: Instagram's Twitter, right right right essentially.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So and then, oh my god, this just shows
Speaker 1: how incredibly woke this league is. So after her star
Speaker 1: player gets almost killed by a blatant, flagrant fowl, here's
Speaker 1: coach Stephanie White of Indiana defending the player who committed
Speaker 1: the foul.
Speaker 6: Was a hard foul.
Speaker 7: I don't think that dj and A intentionally came out
Speaker 7: to get her across the neck like she did, but
Speaker 7: it did happen, and I thought it was the right call.
Speaker 7: But you know, one of the things about Nay is
Speaker 7: that she's gonna.
Speaker 6: Play her butt off.
Speaker 1: Man, She's gonna compete.
Speaker 7: Nobody's gonna go walking in for a layup, and so
Speaker 7: I'm not I don't oppose the hard foul. But I
Speaker 7: also don't think that she intentionally would for the name.
Speaker 1: Here's the visual Caitlin Clark and who is the other
Speaker 1: player next door? At that press conference, their heads were
Speaker 1: in their hands, Their heads were hanging with a blank look.
Speaker 1: As let me tell you this. Maybe you're not an athlete,
Speaker 1: maybe you don't follow sports. There is no league, there's
Speaker 1: no team on earth. We're after a flagrant, injectable foul
Speaker 1: like that. Your coach would be defending the person who
Speaker 1: did it. There is no way. That's because miss the
Speaker 1: coach Stephanie White, feels the need to defend the black
Speaker 1: perhaps lesbian player because of oppressor oppresse political theory, critical theory.
Speaker 1: As a white woman, white straight woman, Sophie Cunningham has
Speaker 1: the power and so the black player is automatically always
Speaker 1: right in critical theory. Right, you're used to that. The
Speaker 1: underdog mote was called in the early days victim oppresser theology,
Speaker 1: and so she felt like she had to. That's how
Speaker 1: woke this crazy league is. Katie Moore on that before
Speaker 1: I move on to the next pointer.
Speaker 4: Yeah, so if you Cunningham actually followed up on this,
Speaker 4: there somebody you know commented on, how you know, I
Speaker 4: wouldn't watch this, but the fights are getting good, and
Speaker 4: she said, yeah, I wouldn't watch this circus either, and
Speaker 4: everybody's just tuning in for the cat fights.
Speaker 1: Wow. Wow, that's gonna make her popular.
Speaker 4: But so here is.
Speaker 1: Here's John Root, who's a citizen journalist, an independent journalist
Speaker 1: on the street, asking various people, including this woke young woman,
Speaker 1: about the move of the former NBA players to go
Speaker 1: out for the WNBA. The truth is.
Speaker 8: Trans women or women, and so if they would like
Speaker 8: to play women's sports, then that would be something that
Speaker 8: they should do as women.
Speaker 4: A few former NBA first round picks came out yesterday
Speaker 4: and declared for the WNBA draft.
Speaker 1: Are you supportive of them?
Speaker 7: Yeah?
Speaker 8: So if they truly were trans, then I would be
Speaker 8: perhaps supportive of them, but they're not.
Speaker 1: Who determines he's really a woman?
Speaker 8: Though, I would say I would love to see them
Speaker 8: play against Asia Wilson and Peter her I doubt they would,
Speaker 8: so thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Okay, so you've got a couple of things, and then
Speaker 1: she rolls her eyes. Number one, those six foot eight,
Speaker 1: two hundred and seventy pound guys and I've seen them
Speaker 1: play recently. Would make Asia Wilson look like, you know,
Speaker 1: a girl. They would crush her sweetheart. It would be
Speaker 1: it would be embarrassing, it would be ugly. You couldn't
Speaker 1: watch more than a little bit because then it would
Speaker 1: just be sad. Right, But she, in her plucky, proud way,
Speaker 1: denies that reality. I don't want to see it. I
Speaker 1: just want these people called on their bluff. Man, this
Speaker 1: crowd is sick in the head at all. They really are.
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah. And then responding to one of your Wolke
Speaker 1: type people, you had this big woke Twitter account saying, uh,
Speaker 1: Andrew Mercado invent men, invent a problem, then try to
Speaker 1: make it real. There are no men playing in the
Speaker 1: WNBA yet, Enis Kanter and now Roy Swaiter announcing plans
Speaker 1: to enter the draft as actors in a broader anti
Speaker 1: trans narrative that falsely portrays women's sports as being overrun
Speaker 1: by men. That's the new argument that they act like
Speaker 1: it's the biggest problem in women's sports. No, no, it's
Speaker 1: just it's a problem if you're on the field at
Speaker 1: that time. It's a problem for the girls who are
Speaker 1: having medals denied to them. It's a problem for the
Speaker 1: college women who are taking volleyballs in the face or
Speaker 1: losing out on the podium, or losing out on their dreams,
Speaker 1: or being beat in meats or championships. That's it. That's
Speaker 1: all I care about, Andrew. So your straw man is cute.
Speaker 1: I hope you keep him out for Thanksgiving. The kids
Speaker 1: will enjoy him. But nobody's claiming that, not at all.
Speaker 1: But then he gets into there. They're not sincere, and
Speaker 1: the brave and brilliant JK. Rowling replies, you say some
Speaker 1: men's sincerely identify as women, but that these two men
Speaker 1: aren't sincere. Do sincere men injure fewer women and girls
Speaker 1: than insincere ones? How do we test for sincerity? What
Speaker 1: if the sincerity jury is split? Very much looking forward
Speaker 1: to your answers, I'm looking at the clock. I wish
Speaker 1: we had time to get into my ultimate point. Jack
Speaker 1: is going to weigh in from the vacation road in
Speaker 1: a couple of minutes. The problem. The problem is, as
Speaker 1: I alluded to earlier, the concept of the big lie.
Speaker 1: And that's what's at the root of this. And this
Speaker 1: is why I care, not only because I'm a huge
Speaker 1: fan of girls and women's sports. As a supporter, I
Speaker 1: don't necessarily want to watch the w NBA, In fact,
Speaker 1: I don't. But this is not about boys and girls sports. Ultimately,
Speaker 1: it's about communism and Marxism and the big Lie. And
Speaker 1: you know, if you haven't been listening long and you
Speaker 1: don't understand the connection, wait a second. In what censor
Speaker 1: are like dudes who convert to being quote unquote a woman.
Speaker 1: What do they have to do with communism? I'll explain
Speaker 1: it to you a little more thoroughly in a little while.
Speaker 1: Don't want to wearry you out. Well, we got all
Speaker 1: sorts of other news to get to, and we'll check
Speaker 1: in with Jack in a couple of minutes as well,
Speaker 1: including the again to progressivism. The progressive prescription for our
Speaker 1: schools is falling apart more and more and more. It's
Speaker 1: going broke. The scores are miserable, the kids are unhappy,
Speaker 1: the parents are unhappy. Government schools are crumbling. We'll get
Speaker 1: to that and much more.
Speaker 9: Stay with us, you know, right right now, I'm just
Speaker 9: having a blast in my feminine eraror.
Speaker 2: I never thought that I was a woman.
Speaker 3: You know, I've always trusted the science and I thought
Speaker 3: I was a man my entire life. But you know,
Speaker 3: after further review, you know, look a strong look at
Speaker 3: my personal preferences, it would appear that I am indeed
Speaker 3: sometimes identifying as a transgender woman. And I think it's
Speaker 3: only fair I get a chance to play with with
Speaker 3: some of my queens here in the twilight of my career.
Speaker 1: My athletic prime that's future WNBA player Royce White, recently
Speaker 1: come out as trans. We congratulate her on her courage.
Speaker 1: Speaking of courageous here, he is the co host of
Speaker 1: the Armstrong and Getty Show, Jack Armstrong, Jack, How are you, sir?
Speaker 6: I feel like she's making a mockery of the issue.
Speaker 1: I disagree. Well, who are you to judge her sincerity?
Speaker 2: How old is this man?
Speaker 1: This woman is? I don't know, forty ish?
Speaker 6: I think I just wondered. I mean, because he's still
Speaker 6: a great, big, giant dude. Who is NBA an NBA?
Speaker 1: Whoa whoa whoa whoa?
Speaker 6: What?
Speaker 1: We got to beg you to stop misgendering this poor woman.
Speaker 1: But she's thirty five, thank you, Michael. Okay, so he's
Speaker 1: still plenty young, Yes she is.
Speaker 6: They have got such a problem. What are they going
Speaker 6: to do.
Speaker 1: With this, right, calling their bluff. I love this, and
Speaker 1: this illustrates for the millionth time, and it's one of
Speaker 1: the reasons we do what we do. Certainly, it's one
Speaker 1: of the reasons I do what I do and the
Speaker 1: way I do it is that evildoers will put up
Speaker 1: with a certain amount of opposition, but the one thing
Speaker 1: they can't take is mockery. They can't take being called
Speaker 1: on their bluffs and people laughing at them. I am
Speaker 1: so delighted by this, as I said to Jack or
Speaker 1: that we can This is like Christmas for me, this
Speaker 1: whole deal.
Speaker 6: So there's two dudes, right, there's this guy and one other.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you Atanter.
Speaker 6: Yeah, and he was a pretty good player too, by
Speaker 6: the way, both of them, both of them are.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they're They're a real credit to American womanhood for sure.
Speaker 6: So what what what do you think the WNBA is
Speaker 6: going to do?
Speaker 1: As I think, you know, Jack, they're having an emergency
Speaker 1: meeting this week of all the general managers and coaches
Speaker 1: to discuss what to do about somebody calling them on
Speaker 1: their bluff, to figure out how they decide who's a woman.
Speaker 1: I suspect very strongly that they will go with if
Speaker 1: you went through male puberty, you don't get to play,
Speaker 1: which is almost the right solution. But my problem with
Speaker 1: that is there will be some some progressive lunatics, child abusing,
Speaker 1: child mutilating lunatics who would think, oh my god, that
Speaker 1: makes it all the more important that if an eight
Speaker 1: year old is trans we start feeding them hormones and
Speaker 1: mutilate their bodies while they're still children so they can
Speaker 1: realize their dreams as women, which will create hundreds thousands
Speaker 1: more of these poor, poor victims of this Joseph Mengela
Speaker 1: style experiment.
Speaker 6: Man, this like the clip that you just played.
Speaker 1: This woman, Yes.
Speaker 10: He's's doing he's doing, keeping a straight face, yes she is,
Speaker 10: you know, and really playing it up like you know,
Speaker 10: I'm just excited to finally get to express by them.
Speaker 6: And then I'm the basketball court.
Speaker 1: And her very low voice really heads to the comedic effect.
Speaker 1: And what I'm what I'm doing now, obviously, and I
Speaker 1: could deadpan this for a very long time. I could
Speaker 1: approach this one hundred percent with the words, the slogans
Speaker 1: and the philosophies of the progressive left, and it would
Speaker 1: be like the funniest thing I could do just insisting
Speaker 1: over and over again that Royce White is a woman.
Speaker 1: That's about the funniest thing I could do.
Speaker 6: Have you seen the clip. I just saw this a
Speaker 6: few minutes ago, so I've been thinking about it. AOC
Speaker 6: was on some interview show and talking about, Yeah, woke
Speaker 6: one was crazy.
Speaker 1: I didn't see that the idea of.
Speaker 6: Being that, yeah, that whole woke period woke one, that
Speaker 6: things got out of hand, but the new woke now
Speaker 6: that we've you know, got our acts together or whatever. Yeah,
Speaker 6: and somebody said that that is the history of like,
Speaker 6: you know, Stalin murdering people or Mao starving people or whatever.
Speaker 6: It's just like, yeah, things got out of hand and
Speaker 6: that was crazy, but you know, we're not deviating from
Speaker 6: our plan because it still works. It just something went
Speaker 6: wrong there.
Speaker 1: She actually called it.
Speaker 6: She said, I've got this mayor friend. He calls it
Speaker 6: woke one and woke one was crazy and they laugh.
Speaker 1: Right. Turns out Stalin was a counter revolutionary. Now we've
Speaker 1: got her act together and we still have a total power, yeah, exactly,
Speaker 1: which reminds me Jack. I wish you could be here
Speaker 1: for this, but I'll send it to you so you
Speaker 1: can read it. On your own. One of my favorite
Speaker 1: thinkers is a poll, a fellow from Poland who lived
Speaker 1: through communism, and he explains what the West still doesn't get.
Speaker 1: He calls it the most dangerous intellectual failure of our time.
Speaker 1: And I'm gonna I'm going to talk about that with
Speaker 1: the good folks in just a couple of minutes. Hope
Speaker 1: you can stay tooky. What are you guys doing? You
Speaker 1: and the boys.
Speaker 6: Here's the thing I learned last night arriving in Canada,
Speaker 6: driving across Driving across the border, they put gravy on
Speaker 6: the French fries at the restaurants. Oh my god, I
Speaker 6: don't think I'm ever coming back. I think of renouncing
Speaker 6: my US citizenship and I will live here the rest
Speaker 6: of my life.
Speaker 1: You know, if you'd ended that sentence they put gravy
Speaker 1: on with virtually anything, it would have been good news.
Speaker 1: Gravy makes everything better. We'll have a great trip where
Speaker 1: we look forward to updates from Canada. America has had
Speaker 1: that Polish thinker. I promise you coming up in moments
Speaker 1: stay with us. Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 11: Alexandria Cosio Cortes has not endorsed Hong in an interview
Speaker 11: this weekend, she joked about some of those far left stances,
Speaker 11: distancing herself from ideas that she previously supported.
Speaker 12: Francesca Hang has made clear her present stances. He's moved
Speaker 12: away from it.
Speaker 1: And I have.
Speaker 12: A local city councilman that has this, saying woke one
Speaker 12: was crazy.
Speaker 1: So yeah, they're moving away from what they told you
Speaker 1: you had to believe or you would they would end
Speaker 1: your career, they would kick you out of school, they
Speaker 1: would insist that Twitter and Facebook remove your accounts. And
Speaker 1: now they've just kind of like they're changing clothes, disavowed
Speaker 1: those very policies that were so important that they argued
Speaker 1: in favor of suspending free speech if you uttered them,
Speaker 1: because that was hate speech. Hate speech is not free speech.
Speaker 1: You remember that, those are the beliefs they've now abandoned.
Speaker 1: Almost makes you want to embrace free speech.
Speaker 2: Huh.
Speaker 1: So on that topic came across this. This guy's become
Speaker 1: one of my favorite thinkers. There's too much good stuff
Speaker 1: these days. Have you ever noticed that, Oh, my gosh,
Speaker 1: there's so much good stuff. His name is Christoph Schavinsky
Speaker 1: at least close his Twitter handle is Christoph of Poland.
Speaker 1: But I've been trying to communicate this to y'all for
Speaker 1: a long time, and you know, me quoting George Orwell
Speaker 1: all the time, and the Voltaire's saying that I love
Speaker 1: so much that those who could compel you to repeat
Speaker 1: absurdities or say absurdities can make you commit atrocities. And
Speaker 1: I've tried to explain, and James Lindsay's books and lectures
Speaker 1: and stuff are wonderful about this. Cynical theories is a
Speaker 1: great place to start, But try to explain to you
Speaker 1: how like the transgender thing, the thing that bothers me
Speaker 1: the most about it. I hate women getting beat up
Speaker 1: by men on the field of play, but the absurdity
Speaker 1: of forcing you to say that man is a woman.
Speaker 1: And I actually got a note from a very nice
Speaker 1: lady the other day says Joe, why are you so
Speaker 1: on about this? It reminds me of the AIDS crisis.
Speaker 1: And you got to stop. No, no, no, no, you're
Speaker 1: totally misunderstanding the problem here. The problem is the absurdity
Speaker 1: being made to repeat, the absurdity being made to repeat
Speaker 1: something you know that is not true. Otherwise you'll be
Speaker 1: in trouble and they will hurt you. Okay, So here's
Speaker 1: where we get to Christoph Schavinsky what the West still
Speaker 1: doesn't get. And I found this fascinating. I hope you
Speaker 1: do too, that it's just so clear Communism's true core
Speaker 1: is the systemic lie. Most people in the West think
Speaker 1: they understand communism. They picture breadlines Gulag's failed five year
Speaker 1: plans in the collapse of the Soviet Union. They treated
Speaker 1: as a discredited economic theory, an experiment that proved that
Speaker 1: abolishing private property doesn't work. Case closed, history moved on.
Speaker 1: This misunderstanding may be the most dangerous intellectual failure of
Speaker 1: our time. Communism was never primarily an economic system. Economics
Speaker 1: was the surface. Beneath it lay something far more insidious,
Speaker 1: a total, systemic, institutionalized commitment to lying, not occasional dishonesty,
Speaker 1: not spin or propaganda in the ordinary sense, something deeper. Civilism,
Speaker 1: civilizational war against truth itself, wages through every institution, every classroom,
Speaker 1: every newspaper, every conversation, until reality itself became negotiable and
Speaker 1: the lie became the air people breathed. And then I
Speaker 1: found this part really really interesting. The words were miss
Speaker 1: missing the Polish language, which was forged by decades of
Speaker 1: living under the communist system produced words for this phenomenon
Speaker 1: that we don't have in English. He mentions zaquemanya a
Speaker 1: state of total, pervasive, socially embedded falsehood, a condition in
Speaker 1: which an entire society is saturated and flies so thoroughly
Speaker 1: that truth becomes almost inaccessible. Poles all know that word
Speaker 1: because they lived through it. Zaquamanya. Then there's a woodha,
Speaker 1: a deep performative hypocrisy, the gap between what is proclaimed
Speaker 1: and what is actually practiced, the mask worn so long
Speaker 1: it begins to feel like a face. That is, for instance,
Speaker 1: your Soviet tractor factory person saying yeah, we produced to
Speaker 1: one hundred tractors this month, and then his supervisor, getting
Speaker 1: the reports from ten different plants, says, yeah, we produced
Speaker 1: a thousand tractors this month. The tractors don't exist, they
Speaker 1: can't be found. But everybody checked the box. And that's
Speaker 1: a woudha, a deep performative hypocrisy, the gap between what
Speaker 1: is proclaimed and what is actually practiced, and everybody does it.
Speaker 1: These are not words for individual liars. They describe a system,
Speaker 1: he writes, a mode of social organization built on an
Speaker 1: organized mendacity, meaning dishonesty. Where the lie is not the exception,
Speaker 1: but the foundation. English has no single word for either concept,
Speaker 1: and that linguistic gap is not a coincidence. It reflects
Speaker 1: a gap in experience. Cultures that did not live under
Speaker 1: communism lacked the vocabulary because they lack the wound, and
Speaker 1: because they lacked the vocabulary, they struggle to recognize the
Speaker 1: thing when it appears in new clothing. So here's the continuity.
Speaker 1: Here's how it flows communism, leftism, and wokeism. And here's
Speaker 1: where we get into why I'm so agitated about people
Speaker 1: trying to force me to say something I know to
Speaker 1: be untrue, christoff Wright. What we call wokeism today or
Speaker 1: the broader radical left is not a new phenomenon. It
Speaker 1: is the same operating system running on updated hardware. The
Speaker 1: specifics have changed. Instead of the proletariat, we have marginalized
Speaker 1: identity groups instead of bourgeois class enemies. We have racists
Speaker 1: and transphobes. Instead of socialist realism, we have dei statements.
Speaker 1: But the deep structure is the same. That deep structure is.
Speaker 1: This truth is not discovered, it is a sign. In
Speaker 1: other words, in plain language, they tell you what the
Speaker 1: truth is, and you just repeat it. Reality is not
Speaker 1: something to be understood honestly, but something to be narrated strategically.
Speaker 1: Language is not a tool for communication, but a weapon
Speaker 1: of power. And anyone who resists the approved narrative is
Speaker 1: not simply wrong. They are dangerous and must be silenced, shamed,
Speaker 1: or destroyed. This is Zakhlamanni in its modern form. This
Speaker 1: is oblue to wearing a human rights badge. And how
Speaker 1: many of you, especially you in academia, in education, or
Speaker 1: in blue states and cities, know how that felt when
Speaker 1: you rejected the approved narrative. And maybe it was about transgenderism.
Speaker 1: Maybe it was about systemic racism, the idea that all
Speaker 1: white people are oppressors, and blah blah blah. Maybe it
Speaker 1: was some of the COVID policies. Anyone who resisted the
Speaker 1: approved narrative is not simply wrong. They're dangerous and must
Speaker 1: be silenced, shamed, or destroyed. Does that sound familiar to you, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know it does. Back to christoph the same movement
Speaker 1: that insists men it can become women will insist with
Speaker 1: equal fervor that questioning this is an act of violence.
Speaker 1: Speech is violence. Remember that he's getting to the core
Speaker 1: of why I'm so hardcore about this. The same movement
Speaker 1: that insists men can become women will insist with equal
Speaker 1: fervor that questioning this is an act of violence. The
Speaker 1: same institutions that claim to champion free inquiry systematically suppressed dissent.
Speaker 1: The same people who invoke tolerance is their highest value
Speaker 1: are among the most intolerant forces in public life. The
Speaker 1: contradiction is not accidental. It is structural. It is the
Speaker 1: system working as designed. And here's why the West still
Speaker 1: doesn't get it. People who grow up in freedom tend
Speaker 1: to assume at some level that bad actors know they
Speaker 1: are lying. This is the conversation Jack has started many
Speaker 1: times because I'll, you know, I'll talk about neo Marxism
Speaker 1: and how it's assumed a new face and new words
Speaker 1: and vocabularli like Christoph was describing. And he always asks
Speaker 1: how many of these people who are advocating this stuff
Speaker 1: know that? And you know, I always go to there's
Speaker 1: the activists who know what they're doing than the useful
Speaker 1: idiots and the masses who just they believe the moral arguments,
Speaker 1: they think they're doing the right thing. But here's another
Speaker 1: aspect of it that I hadn't really grasped. People who
Speaker 1: grew up in freedom tend to assume at some level
Speaker 1: that bad actors know they are lying, that somewhere behind
Speaker 1: the ideological performance there is a cynical operator who privately
Speaker 1: acknowledges reality. This assumption is wrong, and it is why
Speaker 1: Westerners consistently underestimate what they are dealing with. The totalitarian
Speaker 1: lie at its mature stage is not cynical. It is believed.
Speaker 1: Or rather, it creates a condition in which the distinction
Speaker 1: between belief and performance collapses entirely. People learn to say
Speaker 1: things they do not believe so fluently and for so
Speaker 1: long that they lose access to what they actually think.
Speaker 1: I'll let you contemplate that for a minute. You get
Speaker 1: so beaten down by a system where you have to
Speaker 1: say what you know to not be true over over,
Speaker 1: for so long you lose access to what you actually think.
Speaker 1: That's the brilliance of war will. By the way, reread
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty four. Anyway, this system does not just produce lies.
Speaker 1: It produces people who can no longer clearly distinguish truth
Speaker 1: from the narrative they've been trained to admit. This environment
Speaker 1: also produces a kind of cognitive adaptation often described as
Speaker 1: double think, the ability to hold two contradictory beliefs at
Speaker 1: the same time and to accept both as true when required.
Speaker 1: It is not merely lying to others, but a learned
Speaker 1: internal tolerance toward contradiction itself, where inconsistencies are tolerated because
Speaker 1: your survival depends on it. You knew that ebramex Kendy,
Speaker 1: Robin DiAngelo crap. You knew it was wrong, but you
Speaker 1: sat there and repeated it in that classroom so you
Speaker 1: could keep your job or keep your scholarship. A lot
Speaker 1: of you had to do that, and I sympathize with you.
Speaker 1: I kind of wish you'd stormed out or something, but
Speaker 1: I get why you didn't. So you will learned internal
Speaker 1: tolerance toward contradiction itself because your survival dependent on it.
Speaker 1: Literally twisting people's minds, poles checks, Hungarians, and others who
Speaker 1: lived through this recognize the pattern immediately when they see it.
Speaker 1: In Western institutions today, the show trials of the Twitter mobs,
Speaker 1: the compelled speech those anti racism, Robin DiAngelo white gilt sessions.
Speaker 1: That's compelled speech. The ideological litmus tests for employment, the
Speaker 1: memory holding of inconvenient facts, fauci, the ritualistic confessions of privilege.
Speaker 1: To a post communist eye, it's unmistakable they know what
Speaker 1: we're doing. Two eyes that have only known freedom. It
Speaker 1: looks like a passionate, if misguided, social movement. But that
Speaker 1: gap in perception between those who have vocabulary for Zaklimane
Speaker 1: and those who do not maybe one of the most
Speaker 1: consequential fault lines in the Western world today. Because you
Speaker 1: cannot fight a disease you cannot name, and you cannot
Speaker 1: name what your language was never built to describe. The
Speaker 1: first task, then, is translation, translation, not just of words,
Speaker 1: but of the lived understanding those words carry the law
Speaker 1: is not a bug in the system, It is the system.
Speaker 1: Until that is understood, the West will keep arriving, perpetually
Speaker 1: surprised to find that the institutions that trusted have been
Speaker 1: quietly hollowed out from within. I think that's enough of
Speaker 1: that for now. We will post that under hot links
Speaker 1: at armstrong and getty dot com. If you want to
Speaker 1: reread it yourself, send it to all your friends, printed out,
Speaker 1: memorize it, have a tattooed on your chest.
Speaker 2: Whatever.
Speaker 1: Every single word of that is true, every single word
Speaker 1: and a lot of you, I think it probably blew
Speaker 1: your mind. But trust me, and I'm not some or
Speaker 1: all powerful authority. Seriously been studying communist system since I
Speaker 1: was a teenager. Every single word he wrote is true.
Speaker 1: And if we don't absorb it and understand what it means,
Speaker 1: God help us, and God help our liberty, because it
Speaker 1: will go away more to come stay with us. And
Speaker 1: this fits in so beautifully with what we've been talking about.
Speaker 1: Had to throw it in. Thanks Eric for sending this along.
Speaker 1: It's a great old saying. You can vote in socialism,
Speaker 1: but you have to shoot your way out. You can
Speaker 1: vote in socialism, but you have to shoot your way out.
Speaker 1: Let's listen to AOC with John Carr real quickly.
Speaker 3: What in your mind is the difference between socialism and communism.
Speaker 12: I think, to me, the fundamental difference is one democracy.
Speaker 12: And I believe that democratics socialists are fundamentally pro democracy,
Speaker 12: and we believe in the ballot box. We believe in
Speaker 12: respecting the outcomes of elections and governing democratically and ensuring
Speaker 12: that the ideas and policies that are implemented are one
Speaker 12: through popular vote and popular opinion.
Speaker 1: And so that.
Speaker 12: I think that's why so much of what we focus
Speaker 12: on is also making sure that we are providing for
Speaker 12: the majority of Americans, guaranteeing healthcare, raising wages, strengthening the
Speaker 12: right to a union. And I think that that's at
Speaker 12: its core what we're about.
Speaker 1: Okay, thanks AOC. So let's game this out, keeping in
Speaker 1: mind the saying that I gave you a second ago.
Speaker 1: You can vote in socialism, but you have to shoot
Speaker 1: your way out. So AOC gets their wishes and we
Speaker 1: impose socialism. And most, if not all, economic policy is
Speaker 1: run through the government. The government picks winners and losers.
Speaker 1: The government takes a substantial amount of what those who
Speaker 1: remain producers produce and redistributes it to people through you know, food, housing, healthcare,
Speaker 1: you know, just everything.
Speaker 2: Everything.
Speaker 1: So you've got the government which is all powerful. Essentially,
Speaker 1: I'm incredibly powerful, and the rest of us all depend
Speaker 1: on it. Now we've all seen how like a intellment
Speaker 1: program can start, or a social benefit of some sort
Speaker 1: can start, and if they decide it's a bad idea,
Speaker 1: two days later you hear just screeching that what will
Speaker 1: happen to the whatever who have been depending on this program?
Speaker 1: For two days. It's like, you can never end a
Speaker 1: social problem because oh, those people depend on it and
Speaker 1: they expect it, and you're going to balance the budget
Speaker 1: on their back. So you've got an entire system, a
Speaker 1: huge part of the economy that's like that. So in
Speaker 1: loocs world number one, the populace would get together and say, Okay,
Speaker 1: we're entirely dependent on this system. We're going to vote
Speaker 1: it out. And then what all of the government controlled
Speaker 1: industries are going to become independent again, run by whom?
Speaker 1: And at what level of efficiency? And how do we
Speaker 1: decide who's employed because the governments had their hand in that.
Speaker 1: How would the entire economic system work? How do you
Speaker 1: unplug it? There is zero chance the average voter would say, yeah,
Speaker 1: let's take that chance. Let's roll that dice. I know
Speaker 1: life is crappy and I don't have any hopes of
Speaker 1: it ever getting better, but they're telling me I'll starve
Speaker 1: if I vote out socialism. Okay, So that's the problem
Speaker 1: number one. Problem Number two is and this happens every
Speaker 1: single blanking time, And y'all know this. You grant such
Speaker 1: a now harmost power to the government that the economy
Speaker 1: and everything we need runs through them. They are in
Speaker 1: control of it. And then if we all win by
Speaker 1: half a percent, all those people, all those bureaucrats, those technocrats,
Speaker 1: those apparatics as they used to call them in the
Speaker 1: Soviet Union, all of those people are gonna say, well, hey, guys,
Speaker 1: an elections election, give up your super cool datcha in
Speaker 1: the country, and your luxury car that nobody else has,
Speaker 1: and your nice salary and your first access to those
Speaker 1: government grocery stores and the graft we get because everybody
Speaker 1: below us, if they want something a little extra, they
Speaker 1: gotta bribe us. We're all giving that up because did
Speaker 1: you see the headline. We lost in the election by
Speaker 1: half a percent, so we're giving it all up. Haw haw,
Speaker 1: comma haw. You can vote in socialism, but you have
Speaker 1: to shoot your way out. Thanks for reminding us of
Speaker 1: that pearl of wisdom, Eric, appreciate it. You can drop
Speaker 1: us an ope mail bag at Armstrong and Geddy dot com,
Speaker 1: and you really ought to subscribe to the podcast Armstrong
Speaker 1: and Getty on demand everything auto downloads, including the One
Speaker 1: More Thing podcasts, which sometimes have swears, and you can
Speaker 1: listen to him at your leisure whenever you want. Coming
Speaker 1: up next hour, we will talk to nonpartisan political analyst
Speaker 1: Gary Dietrich about the conundrum facing the Republican Party and
Speaker 1: that of the Democrats, and just kind of get a
Speaker 1: nonpartisan look at where things lay. Hope you can stay tuned.
Speaker 1: If not, again, it's a podcast Armstrong and Getty