WEBVTT - Is Systemic Racism A Conspiracy Theory? 0:00:03.279 --> 0:00:15.080 You are entering the freedom hudge is systemic racism, a 0:00:15.120 --> 0:00:19.680 conspiracy theory. The LA sheriff who's calling out Lebron James, 0:00:20.120 --> 0:00:24.040 a judge in Pennsylvania says some lockdown measures are in 0:00:24.120 --> 0:00:31.400 fact unconstitutional and CDC's critical race theory training cancel. Buck Sexton, 0:00:32.320 --> 0:00:39.000 coding the news and disseminating information is actionable intelligence. Make 0:00:39.080 --> 0:00:43.360 no mistake, you're a great American again. This is the 0:00:43.560 --> 0:00:48.760 buck Sexton Show. Former CIA analysts. I can speak to 0:00:48.880 --> 0:00:52.519 three hours without a phone call. Try doing that sometime. No, 0:00:53.520 --> 0:00:56.640 welcome my friends to the buck Sexton Show. You feel 0:00:56.640 --> 0:00:58.760 that you feel that energy, friends, you see it, you 0:00:58.840 --> 0:01:01.160 know it. It's there, you can almost touch it. The 0:01:01.280 --> 0:01:05.039 battle is under way. Who's going to be running this 0:01:05.080 --> 0:01:07.800 country for the next four years? What's that going to 0:01:07.920 --> 0:01:12.680 mean for? You're free toom, your safety, your bank account, 0:01:12.720 --> 0:01:17.360 you're everything, you name it, right, your kids schooling. There's 0:01:17.360 --> 0:01:20.080 a lot that's affected by this. I wish we could 0:01:20.080 --> 0:01:22.399 say we live in a country where no one has 0:01:22.400 --> 0:01:25.200 to pay attention to who the government is, who's running 0:01:25.200 --> 0:01:27.560 it at least, but that's not the case. As we know. 0:01:27.680 --> 0:01:31.120 It's a big deal, a big difference. Wars can be 0:01:31.160 --> 0:01:33.960 started for the wrong reasons, or its can be lost. 0:01:34.840 --> 0:01:38.760 Economies can collapse and crash. It does matter who's in charge, 0:01:38.959 --> 0:01:41.679 and it does matter that we speak honestly about what 0:01:41.720 --> 0:01:46.480 the real downsides can be. But today I wanted to 0:01:46.480 --> 0:01:48.200 start with something a little bit different, a little bit 0:01:48.280 --> 0:01:51.440 less in the center of the news side. Oh, there's 0:01:51.440 --> 0:01:53.160 so much with Trump and now that we've got the 0:01:53.240 --> 0:01:56.160 Abraham Accords, we'll talk about that later on in the show, 0:01:57.640 --> 0:02:02.480 but the presidents finding these agreements for for Midi's peace 0:02:02.600 --> 0:02:06.160 between Israel, the UAE and Bahrain. But I want to 0:02:06.160 --> 0:02:08.920 start with something else, because what has really royal the 0:02:08.960 --> 0:02:11.760 country this year? As we know that the twin pillars 0:02:11.919 --> 0:02:15.920 of our politics have been COVID, the lockdowns, the response 0:02:16.120 --> 0:02:20.080 and BLM. Let's drill down into this BLM issue, which 0:02:20.160 --> 0:02:25.800 is really an ongoing conversation. That's one way of putting it. 0:02:26.720 --> 0:02:29.480 Riots and looting and violence and all this around this 0:02:29.680 --> 0:02:33.480 too and police brutality discussions, but it's really an ongoing 0:02:33.520 --> 0:02:37.400 conversation about race relations in this country. And at the 0:02:37.480 --> 0:02:43.720 center of it, there have been some theories, some concepts 0:02:43.760 --> 0:02:48.200 that we've all been told we have to accept uncritically 0:02:48.560 --> 0:02:52.560 we can't discuss, isn't it fascinating? Critical race theory is 0:02:53.480 --> 0:02:58.000 a doctrine that insists that you not be critical of 0:02:58.040 --> 0:03:01.160 the theory, that you're not allow it's based in critique, 0:03:01.160 --> 0:03:05.119 but criticism for you of these ideas is not allowed 0:03:06.280 --> 0:03:08.959 in that sense. It's kind of a rhetorical trick, isn't it. 0:03:09.960 --> 0:03:14.600 But this was fascinating. There's a guy named Matthew Frank 0:03:15.639 --> 0:03:20.720 and he is a associate director of the James Madison 0:03:20.760 --> 0:03:25.440 Program and lecturer and politics at Princeton Universities. So this 0:03:25.520 --> 0:03:29.639 is a smart guy. Never heard him before, and he 0:03:29.680 --> 0:03:32.680 wrote this. This was on the Public Discourse dot com site. 0:03:32.680 --> 0:03:34.880 I've never heard of before, but this crossed my radar 0:03:34.920 --> 0:03:36.880 and I want to tell you about this because it's 0:03:36.920 --> 0:03:41.440 fascinating and it's philosophically central to this moment we were in. 0:03:42.200 --> 0:03:45.000 No not everyone else. Today's were focused on oh, you know, 0:03:45.080 --> 0:03:47.160 Trump did this or Trump said that, And yeah, of 0:03:47.200 --> 0:03:48.960 course that's part of our fight, and we have to 0:03:48.960 --> 0:03:51.040 talk about that on many days too. But I want 0:03:51.080 --> 0:03:54.000 to take you into the philosophy of the fight for 0:03:54.040 --> 0:03:56.880 a moment because there are some concessions that have been 0:03:56.920 --> 0:03:59.040 made in our debates about all this. There have been 0:03:59.120 --> 0:04:06.120 some phrases, some mindsets, concepts that we've adopted consciously or 0:04:06.200 --> 0:04:08.640 not that maybe we really need to take a step 0:04:08.640 --> 0:04:10.720 back and think much more about. One of them would 0:04:10.760 --> 0:04:14.360 be white supremacy. I've been trying to raise the alarm 0:04:14.520 --> 0:04:17.560 for a few years now on this show and an 0:04:17.560 --> 0:04:22.919 every platform and an area that I can that white 0:04:22.920 --> 0:04:26.800 supremacy as a term has been expanded because it is 0:04:26.880 --> 0:04:31.599 so odious and hateful and wrong. Actual white supremacy, the 0:04:31.680 --> 0:04:37.240 notion of white people being better than other people, is irrational, immoral, 0:04:37.440 --> 0:04:41.720 and wrong. And we all agree on that. Right, our 0:04:41.800 --> 0:04:46.200 society agrees white supremacy. Bad white supremacists in movies are 0:04:46.320 --> 0:04:49.800 the bad guys. They're meant to be cheered against by 0:04:49.800 --> 0:04:53.599 the entirety of the American audience. And that is what happens. Right. 0:04:53.680 --> 0:05:00.400 They were the black boot wearing, swastika tattooed skinhead bad 0:05:00.440 --> 0:05:04.200 guys of the nineties. That's what white supremacy meant. And 0:05:04.320 --> 0:05:06.800 you could take it back to Jim Crow and to slavery, 0:05:06.800 --> 0:05:10.280 and there has been real, evil white supremacy in our history, 0:05:10.440 --> 0:05:14.599 but the term has now been expanded. Now we will 0:05:14.640 --> 0:05:20.880 hear that the judicial system is a continuation of white supremacy. 0:05:21.279 --> 0:05:25.920 That landownership, that capitalism is white supremacy. These are all 0:05:26.000 --> 0:05:30.160 things the left claims. The expansion of white supremacy to 0:05:30.279 --> 0:05:33.279 include all these other areas is just meant to be 0:05:33.839 --> 0:05:39.120 a method of attack that you can't push back against. Well, 0:05:39.240 --> 0:05:41.640 are you in favor of white supremacy all of a sudden, No, 0:05:41.680 --> 0:05:45.360 I'm in favor of capitalism. Well, capitalism, according to our 0:05:45.480 --> 0:05:49.560 new Marxist overlords on the left and the Democrat Party, 0:05:49.800 --> 0:05:54.080 capitalism is a form of white supremacy. We'd say, well, 0:05:54.080 --> 0:05:55.839 wait what, and they'll say, well, look at history and 0:05:55.839 --> 0:05:58.240 look what's happened. They'll try to make this argument, but 0:05:58.400 --> 0:06:01.280 ultimately the argument is are you in favor of They're 0:06:01.279 --> 0:06:03.760 just redefining what white supremacy is. So then you have 0:06:03.800 --> 0:06:05.400 to say, wait, hold on, I'm not in favor of 0:06:05.440 --> 0:06:11.000 white supremacy. Ah, you're on defense, You're on defense. Another 0:06:11.120 --> 0:06:19.599 area of this is systemic racism. Right, systemic racism. Now, 0:06:19.839 --> 0:06:25.279 it's perhaps worth noting systematic racism would be a system that, 0:06:25.400 --> 0:06:31.480 as part of its function, produces racist outcomes. Systemic racism 0:06:31.880 --> 0:06:35.279 is just a way of saying, it's all throughout the system. 0:06:35.320 --> 0:06:38.640 It's not even just one output of a process that 0:06:38.640 --> 0:06:43.400 would be systematic. Systemic is the whole thing. There's racism 0:06:43.440 --> 0:06:47.960 oozing out of its pores, racism just billowing out from 0:06:47.960 --> 0:06:52.279 all over the entirety of the system. So systemic racism 0:06:52.360 --> 0:06:55.120 is really just a fancy way of saying everything is 0:06:55.160 --> 0:06:58.480 kind of racist that the Left doesn't like. There's racism 0:06:58.480 --> 0:07:02.919 and everything that they don't like. We've allowed this to 0:07:02.960 --> 0:07:06.480 creep into our conversations, and in fact, I've come across 0:07:06.520 --> 0:07:09.400 this many times. You'll have people who think they're intelligent, 0:07:09.480 --> 0:07:12.840 who think they're knowledgeable and wise. They're wrong, but they 0:07:12.840 --> 0:07:16.640 do believe these things. You'll have Democrats and even some Republicans. 0:07:16.640 --> 0:07:21.280 Look at Mitt Romney marching with BLM on his never 0:07:21.440 --> 0:07:24.280 ending quest to embarrass me and everybody else who voted 0:07:24.320 --> 0:07:27.000 for the guy in twenty twelve, and he's succeeding. He's 0:07:27.000 --> 0:07:32.640 succeeding in that quest. Good job, Mitte. But the whole 0:07:32.680 --> 0:07:37.560 purpose of this is to put you on defense because 0:07:37.600 --> 0:07:42.200 they'll ask you, are you saying there's no systemic racism? 0:07:42.200 --> 0:07:44.720 And you toronto and say, well, what does that even mean? 0:07:45.360 --> 0:07:47.840 And yes, in fact, I will say where is the 0:07:48.120 --> 0:07:53.120 systemic racism? Because if you're just going to judge something 0:07:53.160 --> 0:07:55.680 by the output of a system without looking at either 0:07:56.000 --> 0:08:01.120 individual circumstances and other variable that go into a system, 0:08:01.160 --> 0:08:03.560 like the judicial system, for example, you would have to 0:08:03.560 --> 0:08:10.280 explain it is our judicial system systemically anti in some ways? 0:08:10.280 --> 0:08:12.000 It is antimail if you ever spend any time in 0:08:12.600 --> 0:08:15.840 family court. But is it's esthetically anti mail? Because men 0:08:15.880 --> 0:08:20.920 are ninety percent of the of the defendants in criminal 0:08:20.960 --> 0:08:25.520 court over violent assaults more than No, that's that doesn't 0:08:25.520 --> 0:08:28.440 make any sense. It's not anti maile. It's just there 0:08:28.440 --> 0:08:32.520 are more males who commit violent acts than females. I know, 0:08:32.840 --> 0:08:35.280 is oh? Is that? Who were allowed to say this? Buck? 0:08:35.360 --> 0:08:37.920 Why are you? Why are you speaking the most obvious 0:08:37.920 --> 0:08:40.320 truths that everybody already knows. You're not allowed to do 0:08:40.360 --> 0:08:46.760 that anymore. Isn't that interesting now? To borrow from one 0:08:46.760 --> 0:08:49.920 of to borrow from one of orwell is lesser known? 0:08:50.640 --> 0:08:54.240 To speak the truth in a time of universal deceit 0:08:54.360 --> 0:08:56.880 is a revolutionary act. That's what it feels like right now. 0:08:57.720 --> 0:09:00.320 There is so much universal deceit going on in it 0:09:00.360 --> 0:09:06.800 is this systemic racism construct? Now? This author I mentioned you. 0:09:06.880 --> 0:09:11.320 Matthew Frank He wrote a piece, an opinion piece in Newsweek, 0:09:12.360 --> 0:09:15.040 and it was accepted, and he wrote about this on 0:09:15.040 --> 0:09:18.640 the public discourse as it was accepted on September eleventh 0:09:18.640 --> 0:09:22.000 for publication by the opinion editor of Newsweek, Josh Hammer. 0:09:22.000 --> 0:09:24.200 I know Josh's work. Just a good guy as a conservative. 0:09:24.200 --> 0:09:26.920 He's trying to get diverse opinions on there. It was 0:09:26.960 --> 0:09:31.199 accepted and published on September fourteenth in the morning. Two 0:09:31.320 --> 0:09:34.760 hours later, the editor in chief of Newsweek, Nancy Cooper, 0:09:34.880 --> 0:09:39.839 just took it down, just took it down. Who does that? 0:09:40.720 --> 0:09:43.600 You have opinion editors that are allowed to approve and 0:09:43.640 --> 0:09:46.400 put on the side things. Here you have an academic 0:09:46.440 --> 0:09:50.480 from Princeton who writes about whether systemic racism is a 0:09:50.600 --> 0:09:57.080 conspiracy theory, which it is. We'll get to that. But 0:09:57.200 --> 0:10:02.560 they pulled down this piece two hours after its publication online, 0:10:03.080 --> 0:10:06.520 which is completely contrary. You're noticing this more frequently now. 0:10:06.520 --> 0:10:08.520 That happened the New York Times with the publishing of 0:10:08.559 --> 0:10:11.600 the Tom Cotton op ed that op ed editor had 0:10:11.640 --> 0:10:15.880 to resign because he published a sitting center who, especially 0:10:15.880 --> 0:10:20.440 in retrospect, made not just an entirely within the bounds 0:10:20.480 --> 0:10:27.199 of discourse written argument, but was correct in the argument 0:10:27.240 --> 0:10:30.560 that he made that the rioting lunatics should face the 0:10:30.600 --> 0:10:35.120 force of the state. Sorry, Libs, but that was the 0:10:35.160 --> 0:10:37.120 Tom Cotton op ed of the New York Times. And 0:10:37.120 --> 0:10:39.680 now we have this Newsweek op ed. What was the crime, 0:10:40.280 --> 0:10:44.720 so to speak, that Matthew Frank committed here. Well, he 0:10:44.760 --> 0:10:49.200 wrote a piece about how systemic racism is effectively a hoax, 0:10:49.240 --> 0:10:53.320 that systemic racism as a concept is just abuse for 0:10:53.360 --> 0:10:55.599 political purposes, and it does not really exist. It is 0:10:55.640 --> 0:10:58.720 in fact a conspiracy theory because you don't have any 0:10:58.760 --> 0:11:02.240 proof of it, and it is alleged to be disprovable 0:11:02.280 --> 0:11:07.559 based upon the emotional impulses around it. In fact, when 0:11:07.600 --> 0:11:10.640 you try to disprove it, that is taken as evidence 0:11:11.280 --> 0:11:15.840 that you have fallen for the or you are part 0:11:15.880 --> 0:11:19.280 of I should say, the conspiracy. Right, you are part 0:11:19.320 --> 0:11:21.600 of the conspiracy. That's why this is It is a 0:11:21.640 --> 0:11:27.320 conspiracy theory. And this really upsets liberals. This really upsets 0:11:27.320 --> 0:11:29.320 them because they think that this is a this is 0:11:29.320 --> 0:11:32.120 now a centerpiece of their ideology of their belief Oh 0:11:32.200 --> 0:11:36.559 my gosh, I oppose systemic racism just like they oppose 0:11:36.760 --> 0:11:40.880 climate change, just like they believe in, you know, women's 0:11:40.920 --> 0:11:46.160 reproductive rights, these concepts that they either speak about dishonestly 0:11:47.160 --> 0:11:50.880 or they become emotionally invested in without ever thinking what 0:11:51.080 --> 0:11:53.120 is it that they're really claiming? What is what is 0:11:53.120 --> 0:11:55.520 the real claim of systemic racism is that there was 0:11:55.600 --> 0:11:58.880 racism in the past, there is racism today. If there's 0:11:58.920 --> 0:12:01.960 systemic races, show me where it is in the system. 0:12:02.000 --> 0:12:06.240 In fact, the only systemic racism that really exists is 0:12:06.280 --> 0:12:10.439 in favor in our system of black and Hispanic and 0:12:10.559 --> 0:12:14.840 Latino and Native American minorities in college admissions and for 0:12:15.360 --> 0:12:19.640 employment opportunities. That's the only systemic racial discrimination. And you 0:12:19.640 --> 0:12:21.920 can say it's positive discrimination. They come up with new 0:12:22.000 --> 0:12:25.440 terms to justify this, but it's racial discrimination. And as 0:12:25.440 --> 0:12:28.360 the Supreme Court has already written in recent years, if 0:12:28.360 --> 0:12:33.840 you want to stop discriminating by race, stop discriminating by race. 0:12:34.760 --> 0:12:39.000 It's very straightforward. But they don't like that the left 0:12:39.040 --> 0:12:41.160 is invested in this. They derive power from this, They 0:12:41.160 --> 0:12:46.199 derive moral meaning from this gihad that they can wage 0:12:46.280 --> 0:12:50.520 without actually taking any risks themselves. That's what's one of 0:12:50.559 --> 0:12:54.080 the things that's so seductive about left wing politics and ideology. 0:12:54.720 --> 0:12:58.480 All you have to do is espouse the approved phrases. 0:12:58.520 --> 0:13:00.600 All you have to do is, like a little arionette, 0:13:00.840 --> 0:13:03.760 dance to the tune that they want you to. And 0:13:03.920 --> 0:13:06.360 now they'll be nice to you, they'll help you, they'll 0:13:06.360 --> 0:13:10.040 promote you, they'll like you, and you're a good person. 0:13:10.800 --> 0:13:13.400 So this is why we have, you know, these labs. 0:13:13.440 --> 0:13:16.400 This is why you have you know, a white female 0:13:16.440 --> 0:13:19.400 Wesleyan grad who thinks that she's a warrior for racial 0:13:19.440 --> 0:13:22.960 justice by screaming epithets in the face of a black 0:13:23.040 --> 0:13:26.200 police officer in DC who's just trying to do his job. 0:13:27.280 --> 0:13:29.960 That's how you get to that point in society because 0:13:29.960 --> 0:13:33.600 people are invested in this. They like this feeling that 0:13:33.640 --> 0:13:40.680 they get that is unearned virtue. Unearned virtue is central 0:13:40.800 --> 0:13:45.240 to the Democrat mindset today. Oh I believe these things. 0:13:45.640 --> 0:13:49.520 I share them publicly. I take these positions. I vote 0:13:49.559 --> 0:13:55.040 this way, therefore I'm a good person. I don't even 0:13:55.040 --> 0:13:57.160 take the position that I vote for Republicans or that 0:13:57.200 --> 0:14:00.040 I'm a conservative because I'm a good person, although I 0:14:00.040 --> 0:14:03.480 think you could make that case, but I do it 0:14:03.480 --> 0:14:06.480 because I think it's just better correct right. It makes 0:14:06.520 --> 0:14:12.080 for a society of more safe, happy, prosperous, healthy, free 0:14:12.520 --> 0:14:16.320 human beings. But we have to keep pushing for that. 0:14:16.360 --> 0:14:18.480 It's not just oh, I take this position, therefore I'm 0:14:18.520 --> 0:14:21.840 better than other people. So what happened in this Newsweek piece? 0:14:22.720 --> 0:14:27.360 Why is systemic racism a concept that the left is 0:14:27.400 --> 0:14:30.160 so devoted to. Well we should dig into this some more, 0:14:30.600 --> 0:14:33.800 but here's the short version of what happened in this 0:14:33.840 --> 0:14:37.200 case with the piece by Matthew Frank. They could not 0:14:37.240 --> 0:14:40.080 allow the editor in chief of Newsweek could not abide 0:14:40.360 --> 0:14:45.800 a piece making this case without at least an oppositional 0:14:45.920 --> 0:14:49.600 piece running alongside it. That was the claim they made. 0:14:50.480 --> 0:14:53.720 You see friends that are always tilting the battlefield in 0:14:53.760 --> 0:14:57.600 their favor and looking at you like, I'm not weighing 0:14:57.640 --> 0:15:00.120 in on one side or the other. I'm just the 0:15:00.360 --> 0:15:05.920 journal like we're all a bunch of idiots. You're in 0:15:06.000 --> 0:15:09.560 the freedom mud. This is the Buck Sex and Show podcast. 0:15:13.600 --> 0:15:19.520 Is systemic racism a conspiracy theory. Brilliant stuff here from 0:15:19.600 --> 0:15:22.880 Matthew Frank. You know it's good because the Libs panicked 0:15:22.880 --> 0:15:25.840 at the very mention of it, at the very title, 0:15:26.560 --> 0:15:29.680 the thesis. They can't handle it. You think if systemic 0:15:29.800 --> 0:15:32.680 racism was so easily proven, if it was so omnipresent, 0:15:32.840 --> 0:15:35.720 How many times have you heard about that? Turn on CNN, 0:15:36.200 --> 0:15:40.920 turn on MSNBC. You'll have some halfwit expert go on 0:15:40.960 --> 0:15:44.000 TV says, oh, we're all understand that systemic racism exists. 0:15:44.000 --> 0:15:46.840 In systemic racism, it's stomach. That's just kind of a 0:15:46.840 --> 0:15:50.200 fancy dressed up way of saying racism. But then when 0:15:50.240 --> 0:15:52.440 you're saying, well, if you're going to talk about a 0:15:52.480 --> 0:15:56.640 system that produces racism, show me the racism in the system, 0:15:56.840 --> 0:15:59.600 you got nothing. You get nothing. The best they can 0:15:59.600 --> 0:16:03.080 come up with is disparate impact theory. And when you say, well, 0:16:03.080 --> 0:16:05.800 what does disparate impact theory tell you? It's well, look 0:16:06.240 --> 0:16:08.200 New York City. I know the prison system here a 0:16:08.200 --> 0:16:11.120 bit because I worked the NYPD New York City. Nine 0:16:11.800 --> 0:16:13.680 of Riker's Island, which is the main prison for New 0:16:13.760 --> 0:16:18.440 York is black and Hispanic. Now are we claiming in 0:16:18.440 --> 0:16:21.640 this that or would they claim I should say that 0:16:22.240 --> 0:16:25.880 the Bureau of Prisons or that Rikers Island New York 0:16:25.880 --> 0:16:29.040 Bureau of Prisons or Rikers Island is putting innocent people 0:16:29.080 --> 0:16:34.320 in prison? Is the system racist? Is that why? There 0:16:34.400 --> 0:16:39.120 is that disparity in Rikers Island. Let's hear them make 0:16:39.160 --> 0:16:41.960 that claimant, and let's talk about that. Maybe they're right, 0:16:42.000 --> 0:16:44.880 but let's talk about that now. I think that they 0:16:44.880 --> 0:16:47.200 would not be right, but at least we could no. 0:16:47.320 --> 0:16:51.240 But instead it's just you are told to bow your 0:16:51.320 --> 0:16:54.760 head in solemnity and say you're right. You're right, there's 0:16:54.800 --> 0:17:03.480 systemic racism in and we'll where This is where Frank 0:17:03.600 --> 0:17:06.639 makes his most compelling arguments, and this is why the 0:17:06.720 --> 0:17:12.520 left was so upset with this. Here he goes, Americans 0:17:12.600 --> 0:17:16.919 quote are talking constantly these days about racism and if 0:17:16.960 --> 0:17:21.480 anyone needed reminding of its dominant historical form, specifically anti 0:17:21.520 --> 0:17:24.320 black racum, it's still a very real thing and we 0:17:24.400 --> 0:17:27.760 all have a stake in its eradication. But is systemic 0:17:27.880 --> 0:17:32.280 racism a real thing in the United States? To judge 0:17:32.320 --> 0:17:35.320 from the weakness of the case made for it, I 0:17:35.359 --> 0:17:39.119 would say no. In fact, a thesis for the existence 0:17:39.119 --> 0:17:43.520 of systemic racism looks just like a conspiracy theory, with 0:17:43.640 --> 0:17:48.040 one salient difference from other conspiracy theories. Let me explain, 0:17:49.480 --> 0:17:54.800 my friends, end quote. There is this is a thermonuclear 0:17:54.840 --> 0:17:58.280 stuff in politics. Now you're not allowed to ask these questions. Right. 0:17:58.320 --> 0:18:01.640 The Libs take this as ground they've already won. They 0:18:01.680 --> 0:18:05.360 say systemic racism, and the right runs and cowards in fear. 0:18:05.400 --> 0:18:09.959 And you say, why can't we talk? Show me this? 0:18:10.000 --> 0:18:11.520 If you want me to make this better? If I'm 0:18:11.520 --> 0:18:13.679 supposed to be an ally which is a term that 0:18:13.800 --> 0:18:15.600 is much abused, But if you want me to be 0:18:15.600 --> 0:18:18.920 an ally with you, then point to where this is 0:18:19.280 --> 0:18:23.160 and don't expect me to accept false premises or lies 0:18:23.320 --> 0:18:28.439 or misrepresentations in the specifics. Oh, it gets better. Thanks 0:18:28.480 --> 0:18:31.760 for listening to the bus and show podcasts. Remember to 0:18:31.760 --> 0:18:35.639 subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you 0:18:35.680 --> 0:18:41.560 get your podcasts. I yes. Continuing with this polled Matthew 0:18:41.560 --> 0:18:44.480 Frank piece Newsweek doesn't like to write anything or doesn't 0:18:44.480 --> 0:18:49.159 like to publish anything that's worth reading, it seems. I 0:18:49.200 --> 0:18:54.320 also I love this conceit that conservatives, and Frank writes 0:18:54.320 --> 0:18:57.520 this many conservatives, No, their views must always be balanced 0:18:57.560 --> 0:19:01.159 and contextualized in conjunct him with liberal views in the 0:19:01.160 --> 0:19:05.520 mainstream media. But liberals opinions are never treated that way. 0:19:06.240 --> 0:19:09.560 One hundred percent. You see this all the time. I'll 0:19:09.600 --> 0:19:11.480 never forget when I was at CNN and I was 0:19:11.480 --> 0:19:16.359 sitting there with a CNN anchor on set, and I 0:19:16.400 --> 0:19:18.760 asked her the question because she kept we kept doing 0:19:18.760 --> 0:19:22.960 these segments and it would be conservative political commentator Buck 0:19:23.000 --> 0:19:28.560 Sexton and political analyst Van Jones, political analyst or Gurgle 0:19:28.640 --> 0:19:32.119 and Garbor or one hundred and eighty years old, and 0:19:32.720 --> 0:19:37.440 Sexton over here wasn't around for her. Reagan Nixon administrator 0:19:37.440 --> 0:19:43.680 over or administration of Rutherford B. Hayes. Always I'm like, 0:19:43.960 --> 0:19:46.840 why don't we have this guy on TV? Or Jeff 0:19:46.960 --> 0:19:51.960 Rucker says I'm smarting or sound old and authoritator, but 0:19:51.960 --> 0:19:54.480 they would always say political analyst for this other person. 0:19:54.680 --> 0:19:56.280 It was always the other person was a political and 0:19:56.400 --> 0:19:59.120 why was I a conservative political commentator but the lib 0:19:59.240 --> 0:20:02.240 DNC pro bigandist who always got to talk more and 0:20:02.240 --> 0:20:04.520 didn't get interrupt. Look, CNN was great training. It was 0:20:04.560 --> 0:20:06.800 like going into the enemy camp for two years and 0:20:06.880 --> 0:20:11.040 seeing how all the sausage is made and it's gross. 0:20:12.960 --> 0:20:15.399 But I would see this happen, and I remember I 0:20:15.440 --> 0:20:18.760 asked the anchor, I said, why is that the case? 0:20:18.800 --> 0:20:20.600 And she looked at me with just this dumb stair, 0:20:20.640 --> 0:20:24.600 like what do you mean and I said, why am 0:20:24.640 --> 0:20:28.960 I always labeled as a conservative? But the liberal is 0:20:28.960 --> 0:20:32.959 always just a person who has expertise, a person with 0:20:33.040 --> 0:20:35.879 a point of view. Now we all know the answer 0:20:35.880 --> 0:20:37.199 to this, but I'm telling when I tell you this, 0:20:37.240 --> 0:20:43.199 I'm being serious. She's now an anchor on CNN, and 0:20:43.400 --> 0:20:45.399 was she was an anchor then, but now she's a 0:20:45.440 --> 0:20:48.240 bigger anchor. And she looked at me and it was 0:20:48.240 --> 0:20:50.040 clear from her face, and this was off camera, and 0:20:50.119 --> 0:20:52.040 being honest with that, she just had never this had 0:20:52.040 --> 0:20:55.400 never occurred to her before. See it's so you want 0:20:55.400 --> 0:21:02.240 to talk about systemic, systemic undermining and silencing of conservative 0:21:02.320 --> 0:21:07.640 voices in the American news media. That is systemic. It's 0:21:07.760 --> 0:21:10.679 all over the place. You see it. I'll show it 0:21:10.720 --> 0:21:13.920 to you. CNN doesn't even have real conservatives on air anymore. 0:21:14.480 --> 0:21:16.680 I mean, they got poor Rick Santorum, who's clearly got 0:21:16.680 --> 0:21:18.440 a mortgage to pay, so he shows up to get 0:21:18.440 --> 0:21:20.320 punched in the face over there. Feel bad for the guy. 0:21:20.720 --> 0:21:23.800 That's it. I mean, you know, what, do you want 0:21:23.800 --> 0:21:26.320 to talk about a system that is a system that 0:21:26.480 --> 0:21:31.040 is thoroughly soaked with anti conservatism. So, and I'll argue, 0:21:31.040 --> 0:21:33.760 I'll talk about who are your contributors. How much time 0:21:33.760 --> 0:21:35.840 do they get on air? How often are they You know, 0:21:36.000 --> 0:21:40.080 I can actually point to why I'm saying this is systemic? 0:21:40.280 --> 0:21:43.159 Where is the proof? Taking us back to our initial 0:21:43.160 --> 0:21:48.720 thesis here, where's the proof for systemic racism in America? 0:21:48.840 --> 0:21:51.600 If they're going to talk to me about outcomes of 0:21:51.640 --> 0:21:55.080 systems only and not what is being done by this system, 0:21:55.119 --> 0:21:57.040 I would say, I would say, hold on a second. 0:21:58.880 --> 0:22:03.680 Lots of things have spirit outcomes, right, I mean I 0:22:05.080 --> 0:22:09.280 remember it in CrossFit class, you know, seeing my bench 0:22:09.320 --> 0:22:10.919 press vers. You know, you put all your stuff on 0:22:10.960 --> 0:22:13.280 the board, and yes, I could bench press more than 0:22:13.320 --> 0:22:16.560 all of the women. That doesn't make me impressive, right, 0:22:16.720 --> 0:22:20.359 but it's a disparate outcome. Yeah, why you know is 0:22:20.400 --> 0:22:22.880 there oppression in that system? No, that's just the reality 0:22:22.920 --> 0:22:26.359 of it. There was no there was no bias against 0:22:26.359 --> 0:22:28.359 the women. It just I could you know, I'm a dude, 0:22:28.400 --> 0:22:31.080 I could bench warn, right, I mean, who who cares? 0:22:31.280 --> 0:22:33.720 I'm just feeling these days like the gym is so 0:22:33.760 --> 0:22:35.640 depressing because I haven't been in seven months. And I'll 0:22:35.680 --> 0:22:38.080 take I'll take it. I'll take any upside I can. 0:22:39.280 --> 0:22:41.959 But my point is that just because there are differences 0:22:42.080 --> 0:22:45.080 in a system. Unless you're a true Communist or Marxist, 0:22:45.119 --> 0:22:47.439 you'd have to and as we know, they create in 0:22:47.480 --> 0:22:50.240 many ways the most disparate systems where you have no rights, 0:22:50.440 --> 0:22:53.199 where the vast wealth disparities are even greater than they 0:22:53.200 --> 0:22:57.840 would be in a system like our own. Anyway, But 0:22:58.160 --> 0:23:02.400 you see here they won't even allow the debate to happen. 0:23:02.440 --> 0:23:07.800 They won't even allow the argument to occur. And they 0:23:07.840 --> 0:23:10.560 don't even they won't admit to the ways where they're 0:23:10.560 --> 0:23:13.920 trying to skew the conversation. So back to this Frank 0:23:14.040 --> 0:23:17.080 piece where he's saying that this is a conspiracy theory. 0:23:17.160 --> 0:23:20.560 Conspiracy theories are a hardy species of weed, he writes. 0:23:21.000 --> 0:23:24.600 Anti Semitism, whether left or right, thrives on them. Think 0:23:24.600 --> 0:23:27.280 of the foul fantasies of the protocols the elders of Zion. 0:23:27.680 --> 0:23:31.000 What else can explain these spread of the ludicrous q 0:23:31.280 --> 0:23:36.080 Anon examples could be multiplied, But two related features mark 0:23:36.200 --> 0:23:40.520 all conspiracy theories. First, the lack of evidence for their 0:23:40.640 --> 0:23:44.680 central claims does not count against them. Indeed, evidence of 0:23:44.720 --> 0:23:47.760 the contrary does no damage to belief in them, but 0:23:47.920 --> 0:23:50.959 is regarded as either proffered a proffered by the credulous 0:23:51.040 --> 0:23:56.120 or deliberately faked by the conspirators themselves. Second, the very 0:23:56.200 --> 0:23:59.560 denial of a conspiracy theories truth is taken as confirmation 0:23:59.600 --> 0:24:02.159 of it. The denier will typically be declared to be 0:24:02.280 --> 0:24:05.560 in on the conspiracy himself. Of course, he would say 0:24:05.560 --> 0:24:09.720 that he's one of them, judged by the presence of 0:24:09.760 --> 0:24:15.399 these two characteristics, that for its adherence is unfalsifiable, and 0:24:15.480 --> 0:24:20.200 that denial is taken as a guilty confirmation. The proposition 0:24:20.880 --> 0:24:26.359 that American society and institutions are afflicted by systemic racism 0:24:27.400 --> 0:24:31.119 has to be one of the greatest conspiracy theories of 0:24:31.119 --> 0:24:36.080 our time. So widely believed, is it? And what is fascinating? 0:24:36.480 --> 0:24:39.680 The true genius of the theory is that it has 0:24:39.720 --> 0:24:44.199 no conspirators at all. It doesn't need them. In fact, 0:24:44.280 --> 0:24:49.960 their absence is central to the theory. Is this is important? 0:24:50.000 --> 0:24:53.000 I mean, I know, this isn't a huge news story today. 0:24:53.080 --> 0:24:55.840 Oh it always you're the latest Trump sweet No, this 0:24:55.920 --> 0:24:59.520 is important. This is if we're going to win not 0:24:59.600 --> 0:25:01.480 just the battle for this election, but the battle for 0:25:01.480 --> 0:25:07.480 this country's future. We have to fight back against wrong ideas. 0:25:08.440 --> 0:25:13.520 We have to fight back against destructive, incorrect, divisive ideology. 0:25:14.800 --> 0:25:18.480 And I have seen this. There is a pervasiveness now 0:25:18.520 --> 0:25:21.199 of Okay, well, the left went through a period and 0:25:21.320 --> 0:25:24.159 went into the nineties where everything was racist. Oh, everything 0:25:24.240 --> 0:25:27.879 is racist. You watch the movie PCU and there's a 0:25:27.880 --> 0:25:32.840 group of uh, you know, black activists on campus in it, 0:25:32.920 --> 0:25:34.680 and there they walk around and it's supposed to be 0:25:34.720 --> 0:25:36.520