Patrick Casey on the "Woke Right"

Conversations That Matter

Subscribe

Download

Share

00

00:15

Conversations That Matter podcast, I'm your host John Harris. We have with us today, for the first time, Patrick Casey.

00:21

He is the host of the Restoring Order podcast, and he also does writing for organizations like Chronicles Magazine and The Blaze, and he's here to talk with us about the so -called woke right.

00:33

He did a piece recently in Chronicles Magazine, which I thought was really good on this subject, and of course those who follow me know

00:40

I did a piece as well, and we share, I think, a lot of agreement about this critique and how ridiculous it is, and so I appreciate him coming on to discuss it.

00:51

Welcome, Patrick. Thank you. Happy to be here. Yeah. Thank you. Well, let's start here.

00:56

You wrote an article for Chronicles Magazine on James Lindsay, and the title is

01:02

James Lindsay is wrong about wokeness, and that's kind of like a bold thing in a way because James Lindsay has made his bread and butter and his whole public career about wokeness, and with the assumption that he is an expert on this, and he does seem to understand a lot about modern critical race theory and how it works, and he's read the sources, so in what sense do you think that he is wrong about wokeness, and is it just because of the woke right stuff, or do you think in general he's wrong about it?

01:35

I'm sure he's wrong about all sorts of things, frankly, but the main thing to keep in mind with James Lindsay here is that he has an agenda that takes precedence over accurate analysis of or honest analysis of wokeness.

01:51

His new niche is combating the woke right, and he'll still go after what he calls the woke right.

01:57

It doesn't really exist, and of course, the woke left, but when you have a political project, then a lot of oftentimes people who engage in intellectual history and political philosophy, those two disciplines end up becoming not warped, but utilized and kind of weaponized and distorted in the process in service of the political agenda, so that's basically the thing to understand, even if he's read every book on wokeness, all of the primary sources or whatever, but I'm sure he's read something.

02:31

When you're tweeting out stuff like the woke right, and he's using that to refer to paleocons,

02:38

Christian nationalists, someone like Pat Buchanan, not extreme figures by any means, when he's talking about how the woke right are, what was the term he used?

02:50

Stalinist national socialists. A lot of what he does is just makes things up.

02:56

He combines mutually exclusive political ideologies, right?

03:04

Any similarities between Stalinism and national socialism probably exist between any totalitarian regime, right?

03:11

They had an all powerful government, they had kind of a cult of personality for their main leader.

03:18

You can say that about a lot of stuff. So the thing to keep in mind with James Lindsay is he has an ax to grind.

03:24

This is a political project that he makes money off of. I'm unaware of any other things that he's doing.

03:32

It seems like it's his job, his main focus, so that's just the main thing to keep in mind is he's not really interested in being accurate.

03:42

He's got an ax to grind for reasons of personal vindictiveness, sincere ideological aversion to things like Christian nationalism, and also, he's making money.

03:54

I don't know if someone's paying him, at the very least, I'm sure his website accepts donations or something.

04:01

Yeah, no, I'm sure there's no question about that being platform where he's at and he has ways to receive donations and the rest.

04:12

But the thing I wanted to talk about is in your piece, this idea that he tries to attribute things to the quote, unquote, woke right, which, as you said,

04:26

I think can be even fairly vanilla. It can be someone like Patrick Buchanan or just Christian conservatives really who want to defend themselves against the forces of decadence and modernity.

04:39

And he does it in such a way that it would apply to liberalism itself. It would apply to a myriad of political approaches.

04:47

In fact, maybe politics itself would fall under the critique that he's bringing because one of the things

04:54

I think you pointed out is there's this oppressor oppressed dichotomy, which he brings out. And in social justice, that's a rigid kind of binary universal thing, but it's not for every political system, but all every political system must identify threats and try to meet those threats.

05:10

And that's what he seems to be picking on and saying that quality makes something woke.

05:18

And if that's true, then wouldn't liberalism be woke? I mean, am I understanding the point that you're making?

05:25

Sure. Well, yeah, there are different liberalisms. I always defer to Professor Gottfried and his great book after liberalism.

05:33

He argues that the 19th century tradition of liberalism in America, which he refers to as bourgeois liberalism, is very, very different than what developed in the 20th century, right?

05:44

With mass democracy, liberal democracy, with the 20th century, 19th century liberalism, that was defined by things like property rights, limited franchise,

05:55

Christianity, traditional values by today's standards, certainly non -woke views on race.

06:05

We all know how people saw things that way in the past. And also things like separation of church and state, sure, rule of law, yeah, okay.

06:13

Over the course of the 20th century, as Professor Gottfried outlines in his book, you see those things in many cases get inverted.

06:22

All of those, some of those things get turned into, instead of the government existing to preserve the natural rights of man and limited government, all of a sudden you get this idea of civil rights, of minority rights, you have a subjective right to X, Y, and Z, people talking about how they have, it carries over to today.

06:46

People think that they have a right, the government owes them healthcare or something of the sort.

06:51

They have a right to this, they have a right to that, and that's not the natural rights tradition of the founders.

06:58

You also had, instead of property rights in the 19th century liberalism, what came in the 20th century, you saw the development of the welfare state.

07:09

So traditionally, the white patriarchal norms of the 19th century, okay, well, we saw over the course of the 20th century how all of those became viewed as evil, and you had anti -white politics and feminist politics basically be enshrined into law.

07:24

So the point that Gottfried makes, it's right there in the title of his book, After Liberalism, that what developed over the course of the 20th century isn't really liberalism.

07:32

Now we can call people libs, libtards, liberals, whatever, and people understand what we're getting at, but there is an understanding, as long as we understand that this liberal tradition changed a lot.

07:44

Now, someone like James Lindsay would point to some of the developments of the 20th century and say that those are bad.

07:50

But it's this idea of classical liberalism that he and others in his orbit cling to, where they believe that there's this unbroken liberal tradition that was anti -identity politics, anti -Christian influence on society, and that that's what

08:07

America was about at the beginning, and the wokesters did away with it. But again, when we actually look at what liberalism looked like in this country, what the classical liberals are trying to, they're kind of groping at very clumsily, again, it's very different than what he's saying.

08:24

If you had told people in the 19th century who, again, that was a liberal, a bourgeois liberal time, they still would have had pornography banned, abortion banned, these sorts of things.

08:37

So basically, the fundamental error that Lindsay makes is thinking that there's really ever been a time in America where someone's values haven't reigned, essentially.

08:52

There is really no such thing as a truly value -neutral institution. I think a lot of what the founders had in mind was good, but that was all within the parameters of what they basically assumed was there wasn't going to be trillions of people from sub -Saharan

09:05

Africa immigrating here. There wasn't going to be open borders to Haiti or something of the sort.

09:12

They also, the transgender stuff, the LGBT agenda, they really, as classical, as liberals, whatever, they weren't into that.

09:22

The last I would say is, again, this whole classical liberal tradition, people invoking Locke, saying, oh, this guy was against identity politics.

09:30

No, he believed in slavery based on racial differences the way basically everyone did back then.

09:37

He also thought atheists should be subject to some pretty extreme legal.

09:43

So all of this classical liberal tradition that they try to paint, it doesn't exist. It's basically just Reaganism, but they try to act like that's historically what

09:55

America has been about. Anyone who wants to impose Christianity on people or have Christianity influence government, it's like that's some aberration.

10:03

No, no, no. That literally is the norm for most of American history. So he's wrong about all that, and he's wrong about plenty of other things too.

10:12

Yeah, what strikes me about him, and not just him, but others who have critiqued the so -called woke right, is the fact that they seem to lack some historical context and background.

10:24

They approach it almost like an engineer would approach something, and there's no room for the ideological and utopian kind of egalitarian flavor that gets sprinkled onto all of these,

10:42

I would say, intrinsic political categories that occur in social justice.

10:48

So for example, you point out the oppressor -oppressed dichotomy, right? There's bad guys, there's good guys, if you want to simplify it into that framework.

10:58

All political approaches, including classical liberalism and modern liberalism, and I can't think of one that doesn't have this feature to it, have to take into account those things and are in the business of trying to defeat threats and enemies and those who would oppose their vision for the good.

11:19

And social justice makes these very firm categories. I know they're not the only political philosophy to do this, but they've turned them into ideological, rigid, binary categories that are universal, and it's why you're a white male, so you're racist and these kinds of things.

11:35

But Lindsay wants to conflate these things, it seems like to me. He wants to point out that someone who just points out that there's friends and enemies or oppressors -oppressed or people who are bad guys and good guys are somehow aping the social justice movement, when in reality, it seems like if you go back to classical liberalism,

11:56

I don't care really what political philosophy you want to point to, isn't that intrinsic to all politics, like this idea that there's going to be bad guys and good guys, you need to stop the bad guys?

12:06

I mean, am I oversimplifying it or is it really that? No, that is the essence of politics, as Schmidt would argue.

12:13

And I know that they're citing woke authors again. But yeah, Carl Schmidt, in the concept of the political, the idea of the friend -enemy distinction, that the essence of politics is about identifying friend and enemy, and that's not on a personal level, that's at a group level.

12:28

And one of Schmidt's main gripes with liberalism was that he felt that liberalism was insufficiently poised to or capable of doing that, because a government, a state needs to be able to say, this is a threat.

12:45

Obviously, you can point to many examples throughout history of a government doing that and it resulting in genocide, tragedy, whatever else.

12:53

So obviously, there are abuses of that. But at the same time, you can also look to instances where the government is identified like a terrorist network or something.

13:01

And yeah, the government's got to be able to say, these people are an enemy of the public order, of the good, and act accordingly.

13:10

So Schmidt felt that liberalism, by trying to remove that friend -enemy distinction function from the state, was preventing it from, you know, he was writing some of this time during the

13:24

Weimar years, he was worried about communism and so forth. So now the thing to keep in mind there is,

13:33

I would argue that whatever we live under, again, this is, we're after liberalism or we're in a different form of liberalism at the very least, this isn't classical liberalism.

13:44

What we live in now is like the state absolutely is making these friend -enemy distinctions, but it's done under the pretext that it doesn't do this.

13:52

That myth of impartiality is integral to the perceived legitimacy of this regime.

14:00

The regime says, no, no, no, no, no. When we try to put Trump in prison, when we twist one minor campaign finance misdemeanor into like 36 felonies or however many it was, no, this is the rule of law, we would never go after our political rivals, but then when

14:20

Trump fires James Comey, that's the politicization of the weaponization of the government, he's making the government political.

14:29

So really the main thing to, I think, to critique of the system that we're up against is that, yeah, it absolutely is making a friend -enemy distinction.

14:37

And that would point to the fact that even the regime that is founded on the idea of not making these friend -enemy distinctions is still doing it, goes to show that it's probably not going anywhere.

14:50

What would identifying a woke right group and wanting them punished fit into this? Because I think it would, it's self -refuting.

14:58

You're looking at a group of people that you're afraid are going to create some kind of a theocratic system or a totalitarian system that's more,

15:06

I guess, conservative, but you're saying these guys must be stopped. If there was an imminent like trad calf takeover, would he use the power of the state against the woke right in that instance?

15:18

Because I think Lindsey would say, well, I'm just arguing, we're just debating. I'm pointing out ideas that I think are bad.

15:24

But the real question that comes down to it is, okay, well, like if it's between you and your, James Lindsey is president of the classical liberals, you know, states of America or something.

15:33

Would you, James Lindsey, use state power to prevent a trad calf takeover of the government?

15:39

Now, I'm not talking about a violent trad calf takeover. I'm talking about Christian nationalists in general. Christian nationalists through the use of the system lawfully, politically are going to take over and just totally reorient society.

15:52

Would you use the power of the government to stop that? And that's where things would be interesting. He would, to remain consistent, he would have to say no.

16:00

Uh, but you know, I don't know, remains to be seen. Yeah. I mean, it doesn't, we're never, we're never going to get to that.

16:07

It's, it's interesting. Hey, maybe, I don't know. Maybe create

16:12

Christian nationalists, regime change. You got a lot, you got Christian nationalists like Russ Vaughn, who are going to be, um, in high level positions of, of the coming

16:19

Trump administration. So that, that is somewhat of a reality, but James Lindsey being president, having to make those tough decisions, no, no, that is, that doesn't appear to be something we have to worry about.

16:33

Well, this is, this is an interesting, uh, dynamic. And I'd be curious of your thoughts of what do you think lies ahead?

16:39

Because, um, you rightly pointed out differences between modern liberalism and classic liberalism.

16:44

And what I've noticed is a lot of neo -conservatives, uh, and James Lindsey, uh,

16:51

I wouldn't even categorize as a conservative. I don't even know if he would categorize himself as a conservative. I know years ago he did not, but, uh, he would frame himself as a liberal, but he was, uh, he, he is pro

17:03

LGBT. He is pro abortion on social issues. He is,

17:09

I don't even know how you fit within classical liberalism because they would have all disagreed with him on those things.

17:15

Yeah. Like the Reagan era stuff. And we don't even have to go back to John Locke or what the founders thought. You can just go back to what.

17:21

Yeah. That's, that's just the thing is where, where is this classical liberalism? When did it exist? When was it ostensibly the norm?

17:28

Um, because, because it's very funny. Lindsey accuses the woke right of hating the West. I've seen, uh, maybe

17:35

Michael LaFowle, people, people in that orbit saying these things. But I've also seen James Lindsey say that if the

17:41

West was still trad calf, meaning like predominantly Christian, you would probably apply that to, you know, uh, 17th century

17:48

England, which wasn't, uh, particularly the Catholic, but, um, yeah, 17, 18th century, like well after the reformation.

17:55

The, the thing, the thing though, is, is he said if, if the West wasn't trad calf or the

18:01

West was still trad calf, he would not be supportive of the West. So he is someone

18:06

I'm able to say, I love the West throughout, you know, depending on however you want to start it.

18:12

I think starting it with Charlemagne is, uh, is, is kind of a safe, uh, you know, around 800

18:18

AD is a pretty safe time to do it. Uh, there's debate over whether or not antiquity counts as, as the

18:23

West. Uh, it's certainly a foundation upon which the West is built. Uh, many, many, you know, political,

18:30

I mean, many brilliant minds, uh, Oswald Spengler in particular would classify antiquity as, as something else. But regardless antiquity, uh, the, the middle ages going on to, you know, the enlightenment, uh, there's, there's things

18:43

I agree and disagree with, but this is, this is our history. This is our civilization. And I don't feel the need to say, well,

18:51

I dislike this part of it. So, you know, screw it. So that's what he accuses us of doing. But he only thinks that the

18:57

Western, Western civilization has value because it's, it's dispensed with because, because of the enlightenment.

19:04

But again, it is a romanticized and a retconned version of the enlightenment.

19:10

Whatever critiques there are to be made of the enlightenment, um, he's, he, he imagines that his, his

19:16

Western civilization, he imagines it, it began with like John Locke or something. In reality, it began with civil rights, the sixties, right?

19:24

So this is the 20th century stuff that, that, that huge transvaluation of values.

19:30

Every, you know, it was many, many people would argue what we had of the 20th century was the creation of a new regime, a new country.

19:36

Um, and many of the, uh, original rights conferred by the, granted by the constitution were done away with such as freedom of association, these sorts of things.

19:45

You had the growth of the fourth branch of government administration. So, um, we really, we really live in, in, in a new time.

19:52

Um, and it's not like it was, you know, wokeness came about 10 years ago. No, it was really over the course of the 20th century with the great society,

19:59

LBJ's great society being one of the main, one of the main, uh, early turning points of this.

20:05

So most of what most people believe came about, uh, as a result of civil rights and people suffer from amnesia.

20:14

So they think that this is, this is like how it's kind of always been. The founders wanted, uh, there to be open borders and drag queen story hours or something of the sort.

20:24

And the thing to keep in mind though, some people believe is sincerely, I don't know what James Lindsay sincerely believes.

20:30

I do think that he hates Christianity. He hates paleo -conservatism. He hates anything to,

20:36

I think he hates conservatism in general. Um, I, but, but at the same time, when someone's has an ax to grind and they, they have a career and a brand to further, to promote, you have to really, and all of that is based on a certain read of history, you really have to ask yourself, do they even care if their read is true, you know, their, their historical read is true because it's polemical at the end of the day and it serves a different purpose than just telling the truth.

21:01

I think you're justified in being cynical as to the motivations of people like Lindsay.

21:08

I'd like to, uh, spread it out though, beyond just Lindsay and maybe just talk about this, um, notion of political neutrality and, you know, individual rights, you don't have to think in terms of groups, uh, this sort of liberal ethos that, uh, not just James Lindsay, but other neoconservatives and liberals today, uh, want to claim the mantle of, um, this is the interesting thing to me, as we've already discussed, they will eschew the older religious views that they categorize them,

21:41

I think mostly as religious on sexuality and, um, religious observance and public blasphemy laws, that kind of thing.

21:49

They don't like that. Uh, and they see threats from integralists and Christian nationalists and just traditional conservatives of all stripes, they put them into one pot and say, those guys are against your individual rights.

22:02

They want to suppress them. They want to use the power of the state to do it. They want to put restrictions on you that really it's not their business.

22:09

There should be some kind of a principled, uh, universal line that says government can't step into these areas, but those areas keep changing.

22:18

I think, as you've rightly pointed out with liberalism, the older liberals that they like to claim the mantle of didn't agree with them on this.

22:25

Um, I, I listened to part of an episode, uh, again, I guess I want to get away from just James Lindsay, but it was

22:31

James Lindsay. So, um, and I don't listen to him much. It was in the writing my article. I wanted to know how he categorized himself.

22:38

Is he a classical liberal? Is he a libertarian? How does he see himself? And so he did some episodes on classic liberalism.

22:44

And one of the things I noticed he was saying was, uh, you know, he really likes, I guess, Thomas Jefferson and I like Thomas Jefferson, but, uh, he, he had to kind of frame

22:54

Thomas Jefferson as this guy with these great ideas who we are now taking to their logical conclusions.

23:01

And we're, we're more Jeffersonian than Jefferson, right? He had these flaws and we've taken the, the kernels of truth that he held.

23:09

And, uh, we can honor him for those things. Uh, not obviously for his views on race or labor relations or anything else or sex, you know, relationships and that kind of thing.

23:19

Um, so moving forward in the conservative movement, which I think largely,

23:25

I don't know if you agree with me as capitulated to this understanding of society and the role of government that, um, you know, they don't want you to take into account groups, they don't want the government to privilege one group or another.

23:40

They, they have this neutralist kind of outlook. That's what they, I think, think liberalism is.

23:46

Um, and then seeing the rise and it's not, it's not a new thing. That's the thing, like seeing the return of these older ways of constructing society, what do you think is going to happen in the next few decades?

24:00

Because you, you, you have one road. It's like the meme, right? Like one path is which way,

24:05

Western man, are you going to go the James Lindsay path and it's got LGBTQ rights and it's got pro abortion, but look, there, there's this supposed guardrail that the government can't overstep.

24:16

Or are you going to go a more traditional path? Uh, you know, maybe, maybe you write for Chronicles of Paul Godfrey, you know, type of, uh, outlook.

24:27

So I'm asking you to predict. To predict which way, well, I think Trump is, is a very, he's, he's moderate in, in this sense.

24:34

And I think that's kind of the future of the right, like it or not. Now I'm a big supporter of state's rights.

24:40

If at the state level, people want to enact more restrictive policies on abortion and these sorts of things, then that's, that's totally fine.

24:49

Um, I don't, uh, yeah, I mean, we look, Trump, Trump has set the tone.

24:54

I think his, you know, most likely successor JD Vance will probably kind of follow in these footsteps where.

25:01

I don't know if they're going to be doing away with gay marriage. I mean, that's, it's, it's crazy to think that Barack Obama, when he was running for, it was either election or reelection,

25:09

I can't remember which he explicitly said marriage is between a man and a woman. I think both times.

25:16

Yeah, that was, um, and it was, I think it must've been towards the end of his second term where he, where he changed that.

25:21

But the point is, it's like, that's, it's crazy to think about probably for Gen Z. I mean, they, they, that's, they've grown up, they've never been politically conscious in a world where the

25:31

Democrats, um, you know, to the right of Republicans today on, on gay marriage. But the thing is, is like 50, it's somewhere 40, 50 % of Republicans support gay marriage at this point.

25:44

So the cat's like for, it's, it's not a good thing I'm arguing, but, um, the cat is kind of out of the bag here.

25:50

So I think the, with regard to social conservatism, the future of the right, and this isn't me saying what

25:58

I want, this is just me saying what I think it's going to be, is going to be about fighting the battles of like the trans agenda, particularly with kids.

26:07

It's going to be, there's going to be abortion fights. Some of these abortion referenda in, in red states haven't really gone so well.

26:14

So it's, um, my friend Oren McIntyre says it's kind of up to the pro -life movement and conservatives to sell this, find a new way to sell this to people because it's kind of not working.

26:25

Uh, the overturn of Roe v. Wade was, was good. It turned it back to the states. But again, if, if some relatively red states can't, can't pass this stuff, then, uh, you gotta, you gotta take a new strategy.

26:34

So, but, but Lindsay -ism definitely isn't the future. I don't think the future of, of the right is like a super hardline social conservatism.

26:42

But I also don't think it's, it's, uh, Lindsay -ism. Um, I think it looks like Trump, right?

26:48

He gave the pro -life movement its biggest victory, but is that a, is that a federal abortion ban? No, I would love to see, you know,

26:55

I think abortion's a horrible thing. I'm not supporting it, but, um, just in terms of pragmatism, I don't know if there's the popular support for like a really hardline social conservatism.

27:04

So that's just generally my, my view. I think, I think like it or not, moderation on social issues is kind of going to be, uh, the, at the center of, of the

27:14

Republican party coalition. Now there's going to be tons of people who are more socially conservative and want to push things in that direction.

27:21

And naturally you're going to have people that are more socially liberal, but I think the average Republican voter is, is moderate by today's standards.

27:28

Which as far as the left is concerned is like, you know, uh, Handmaid's Tale or whatever, uh, yeah.

27:34

If you're, if you support it, you want to leave it up to the States. If you, uh, don't think that, you know, kids should be forcibly injected with hormones because they said one thing once, um, yeah, yeah.

27:45

That's, that's, that's like, uh, Christo fascism or something, uh, as far as the left is concerned. But, but from a sober, you know, more mature perspective, it's, it's a pretty moderate, uh, position.

27:58

Well, I've seen some interesting polling. I'm sure you've seen of young men, Gen Z men and how they are pulling to the right.

28:06

Women are not, but Gen Z men are, women are going the other direction. Uh, they're more religious than millennials, uh, or interested in religion.

28:15

And, uh, there's a rising, I think, audience, especially in the podcast sphere, which is obviously where you and I are operating right now.

28:23

Uh, where there's this niche carved out for these kind of, uh, men who have been left behind, who have been told that all the problems in society rest on them.

28:32

And they're pushing back against it. And this, I wonder whether this creates a broader coalition in the

28:40

Republican party itself that now to make room for these guys and some more, uh, some, somewhat innovative ideas, also older ideas, uh, there's more political diversity that, um, maybe this is a reaction to that.

28:56

This is a practical way I'm looking at it. But I would think that the old guard, uh, or those who are, you keep saying

29:04

Reagan -esque, but maybe from that era, the, uh, even in Christianity, we had the religious right at one time.

29:10

Like these guys were kind of like the old guard, like whether or not they don't like the new blood coming in and the new blood has some different ideas.

29:17

And maybe it's as simple as that, a gatekeeping maneuver. Um, I know this would go way past Lindsay's, uh, accusation of woke rights to try to smear conservative

29:28

Christians, but, uh, do you think more broadly speaking there there's a gatekeeping attempt on the right to keep these young guys out?

29:39

Um, I, so, so it all depends. I mean, which coming, come from, from where specifically, because there's some, some parts of the right, they love having young people, you know, maybe it's conservative media.

29:51

They want to find the next, like, well, everyone likes young people. And their movement, there's no question about that.

29:57

Right. So is it specific ideas you think are being kicked? Yeah. So, so yeah, like,

30:02

I, I think that, um, like, so tea party USA, right. They are sometimes I've called them spring break conservatism sometimes because their events are sometimes very geared for young people.

30:12

They're exciting and young people show up. They're throwing like t -shirts in the audience, right. It's like a youth group. Um, I understand that exists and that's in the mainstream, right.

30:21

But there's also, uh, various dissident groups that are sometimes very different from each other.

30:27

You have like the Nick Fuentes type of, uh, Groper wing, you know, out there. They're not accepted obviously at all.

30:34

And, um, I'm no Nick Fuentes fan at all, but, uh, um, I, I see that as one of the, one of the places that young men who have been disenchanted or disaffected have gone to, obviously you have the

30:48

Christian nationals movement, which James Lindsay is a dead set against Stephen Wolf being probably the main figure in that who you ironically used to write for sovereign nations who long story.

30:59

I was telling you a little bit about it, but that the guy who runs that, uh, manages James Lindsay. But, uh, but that movement is trying to recover a lot of magisterial reforms, political philosophy.

31:12

Um, you have the, you, you mentioned trad cats before, but traditional Catholic. Uh, I know,

31:18

I know Nick Fuentes tries to take that mantle. I don't know if you want him as a representative of that, but, uh, but I know they're out there.

31:24

I'm not as familiar with that, but, um, yeah, I mean, uh, you know, I don't know. Like you, you mentioned

31:30

R McIntyre. I mean, even someone like him, he's at the blaze, which is pretty amazing, but he is definitely not your average political commentator at the blaze or the daily wire or any of these places that that is a dissident, right?

31:44

That people, I think it's a useful descriptive term to apply it to everything to the right of, of MAGA, basically everything, um, to the right of establishment, established conservatism, and that's kind of the scene that I've been in for like eight years at this point and in different iterations, and I think there's been considerable overlap in recent years.

32:08

Really, it started with the insanity of 2020 and just kind of everyone feeling like they're, uh, a lot of that, that pushed a lot of people rightward and just four years of, uh, of Biden tyranny, uh, that made everyone kind of feel like we're in this together.

32:22

Now, not everyone, uh, but there's increased the overlap between, uh, people like these, like bigger, like a non -accounts that post like some really right -wing stuff and, and people in conservatism is, is like, you could say the online right, um, is, is there's a considerable overlap and people it's, it's very clear that people with influence and so forth are like people that work for the

32:47

Trump campaign and these sorts of things are keeping up with some pretty right -wing stuff on Twitter. They might not agree with everything, but, um, they're aware that there's kind of organic counterculture on Twitter and there are different factions within that as, as you kind of mentioned.

33:02

So are there some gatekeeping efforts? Yeah. I think that's a big part of what James Lindsay and the

33:09

Babylon Bee people in general, yeah, it's, it's very, it seems very concerted that they're like, okay, there's rising opposition to wokeness, right.

33:20

But we're, we're good, but, but, but it's going too far now. Some of the stuff that they take issue with,

33:25

I also take issue with, but I think that they take issue with it. Uh, it's, it's very clear they have different motivations.

33:32

Like, for example, um, there are people that when they talk about Jews, for example, they do sound a lot like, um, like, uh, you know, uh, white people talking about, yeah, that, but, uh, uh, this more specifically, they sound a lot, they sound like woke people talking about white people, right.

33:53

That there is that, uh, you know, white people have, you know, have all of the power, white supremacy is this all powerful force and, you know, blah, blah, blah.

34:03

So there are critiques to be made of Jewish, uh, you know, organizations like the ADL promoting, um, you know, bad things.

34:09

There are critiques to be made of, of US Israel policy. Okay, sure. And you can have those conversations, uh, ideally in like a pretty, you know, um, uh, a reasonable manner, uh, regardless of whether or not everyone can agree and everyone can agree on, on certain issues like this.

34:24

Um, but yeah, like the people that are tweeting out, um, you know, the Jews are evil, like 24 hours a day. That's like, okay, that's, that's, uh, stuff like that.

34:32

I can agree with these guys is, is not good news, but it's very clear that like with, with Lindsay's attack, it doesn't even seem like he's that focused on, on like the extreme stuff like that.

34:44

It seems like he's a little more focused on the Christian nationalist, like this whole thing with the American reformer where he published, uh, you know,

34:51

Karl Marx's manifesto, meaning he would change 90 % of the words or something. You know, he turned a, uh, yeah, he turned a, he basically took an article in defense of communism and made it in defense of Christian nationalism.

35:04

So when, yeah, form and content are very different things, believe it or not. Yes. So, but, but what

35:09

I'm getting at here with that is that it's not, that's just not like the, the kooky out, like outlandish stuff on the right, that's not what

35:16

Lindsay's taking issue with. And in fact, it seems like he spends more time attacking people who are very reasonable, like the

35:22

American reformer crowd, whatever disagreements I might have with them, or he might have with them, these aren't, these aren't crazy people, and he even, he even says as much, but he says that they're still woke right because they think they're oppressed by liberalism.

35:34

So this whole like oppressed, oppressor dichotomy that James Lindsay on multiple occasions has pointed, he's not the only one, has pointed to as like one of the defining features of what wokeness is.

35:45

It's not just like people who say, oh, I am a minority and I am oppressed by white people.

35:52

And that I, okay, that's, that's like a, that's a big part of wokeness, sure. Or it's not even just people that are like, oh,

35:58

I'm a non -Jew and I'm oppressed by the Jews who have all of the power or something of the sort, that's, that's not also not, it's apparently

36:06

Lindsay thinks that it's also woke to say that you take issue with liberalism, right?

36:12

You are critiquing a, an idea, an intellectual, a whole school of thought, political ideology, basically.

36:21

He thinks that's, that's, that's somehow an oppressed, oppressor dichotomy. I don't see a lot of people saying they're oppressed by liberalism.

36:27

I see, you know, in the stuff with the American reformer, they're talking about the post -liberal consensus, post -war liberal consensus and how it's been bad for Christians.

36:35

It's undeniably been bad for Christians. I've been bad for the country overall. We're facing a number of existential crises that would have been unthinkable to people prior to World War II.

36:45

Now, the point with all of that is this whole oppressor, oppressed dichotomy is ridiculous. Because what does

36:50

James Lindsay do all day? He critiques wokeness, which is enshrined in the halls of, in the law and the halls of power.

36:56

It's like the dominant ideology. Okay. Is that not a woke exercise then? Are you saying you're oppressed by wokeness,

37:02

James? But at the end of the day, it's, it's just very, it's just very dishonest. It isn't intellectually consistent whatsoever, and it doesn't need to be for, because what he's doing is, is grinding an ax and he doesn't really care if it's, if it's true or consistent.

37:15

I think you make a really good point here, and this is worth everyone considering. Uh, the targets are very important to see.

37:23

So someone who legitimately is, is operating on some kind of like an ideological, universal, rigid binary of some kind that it's like in all circumstances, uh, we'll take the, when you referenced

37:38

Jewish people are the oppressors and white Christians are the oppressed and there can be no shared society because that's how the arrangement is and it's firm and it's fixed.

37:49

And, you know, this is going back, uh, throughout all time and we'll go into the future.

37:54

Um, that's a rigid ideology. Same with wokeness, the way that they conceive of white people and, uh, males and, uh, heterosexual

38:03

Christians and that kind of thing. But when you talk about, uh, you just referenced American reformer and guys who are more,

38:11

I think, practical and they're looking at real on the ground problems and they're saying, Hey, look in this narrow time period, which is actually pretty recent since world war

38:19

II or since the civil war, since, you know, whenever they want to start the clock, this is a recent problem.

38:25

We've had liberalism, uh, doing not good things to society. And they're not in our best interests as Christians or conservatives or whatever.

38:34

And in order to meet this threat, here's the tangible ways that, you know, there's been problems in order to meet this threat, we should use political power to stop it.

38:43

Right. That's a very different thing, but in both cases, there's, uh, you have to be critical on some level.

38:49

That's not critical theory, but you get the impression, uh, reading guys like Neil Shenvey or, uh, you know, tweets from Babylon B guys, sometimes that like you're engaging in critical theory to notice that there's a threat out there and then to meet that threat, you know, is, uh, with government power is somehow going to lead to totalitarianism and, um, but they put it all in one bucket.

39:12

So like the crazy guys that we would rightly critique, uh, I think they would say they're just like us.

39:18

We have the same problems and, and you know, what's the shared commonality there, I guess, as you said, we.

39:23

Uh, deviate from liberalism. We don't want, uh, the, the kind of the modern liberalism that they seem to be advocating, uh, because that doesn't exist.

39:31

There isn't a neutralist society. So, um, I think that's related to the question I was asking earlier about the future, because I don't see how this is sustainable.

39:39

I don't see how the guys who want to maintain what they see as some kind of multicultural, religiously neutral society are going to be able to continue because, uh, people are by nature, it's, it's like putting, um, in a pool, you know, like the beach ball, you're trying to push it down.

39:57

It's always going to come up. Like people are by nature going to worship something.

40:02

They're going to form groups. They're going to recognize threats. They're going to come up with strategies to meet those threats.

40:10

Um, I don't see how you can, uh, continue what we've been in and what we've been in seems to be very, uh, cold war era type, like unique, um, you know, very transitional stuff in my mind.

40:24

I don't know if you see it that way, but it seems to me like we we've come from a Christianized society into a more secular society, but that's a pathway to more of a paganism of some kind, like, cause you can't have a neutral society.

40:37

Uh, would you agree with that? I, I generally, I generally agree.

40:43

So you raised a very good point, which is that man will always worship something. Yeah, man, you can get rid of organized religion, but you can't get rid of man's religious drive.

40:54

Um, I mean, you see, I don't know if I'd fully say that wokeness is a religion, but at the very least it's like a religion.

41:00

It has many religious qualities to it. They were literally doing George Floyd baptisms, um, outside of, uh, you know, where, where he, where he died in Minneapolis that they turned into like a sacred shrine, almost like a shrine, a sacred, a sacred location.

41:15

So yeah, I don't know. I mean, the term paganism it's used in a lot of, a lot of different ways in terms of, you know, just from a

41:23

Christian perspective, I guess you're worshiping something that isn't God. Um, so maybe, maybe it's, uh, pagan in that, in that sense, the interesting thing, yeah, is

41:32

I don't know about the future of, of Christianity. I'm obviously would support,

41:37

I do support a revival of Christianity. Um, the pessimist in me kind of thinks that it's just as a result of technology, as a result of science, not that Christianity has been disproven by any means, but it's, it's just like a little harder for people to, people have more distractions and it's harder for people to, um, to have faith.

41:57

Now there have been periods, I'm sure in the past of, of atheism. I'm sure these things move in cycles.

42:03

There are some reasons why it's a little bit different now. Um, but yeah, it's at the very least, there's got to be a place for Christianity on the right.

42:10

Uh, it's been the foundation of Western civilization. So the very least hostility to it is, is, is no good.

42:17

And that's basically what I see from, from Lindsay and these guys, you know, they say they're not hostile to Christians, just like super,

42:24

I guess, just the woke Christians. But it's so, it's so ridiculous because you hear woke Christian, that already is a term that exists, right?

42:30

That refers to the Christians who are participating in what actual wokeness is like the ones that wave rainbow flags outside of their churches.

42:39

And, you know, you go and listen to a sermon and it's, it's your sound, like, it's just reading off DNC propaganda, which is basically what it is.

42:49

Um, so like, yeah, it's just, there's already terms for all of these things.

42:54

I saw people saying like, no, you're... Twitter saying things to, uh, to a guy I follow saying you're like woke.

43:01

You're, you're like a woke, uh, you're a race communist because the guy was saying like positive things about the contributions of Europeans to history.

43:11

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. That's, that's like wokeness, but on the other side, no, it isn't. Like it isn't. There's race communism already exists.

43:18

It's like, you know, people used to use the term cultural Marxism. I think it just kind of fell out of fashion because, uh, people just kind of, it's kind of a dumb word, kind of a clumsy word, but there's some truth to that.

43:29

You want to say, oh, this is like Marxism, but with race, that's what, that's what wokeness, yeah, the original wokeness is where they say white people are evil.

43:38

The oppressed, oppressed, oppressed, oppressor dichotomy is defined by, you know, and everyone else as the oppressed, like that already exists.

43:48

So to say like, oh no, this woke right. They're like, they're like, uh, Marxist, but for race, no, they're not right.

43:55

And by the way, Marx and, and historical communist regimes were very, very anti white, uh, they promoted, um, you know, they, they pushed back against colonialism.

44:05

Uh, they supported, you know, racial revolutions. If you look at, especially here in America, man, 60s, 70s,

44:10

Black Panthers, that was the communists. That's the point that, um, I believe in the book, uh,

44:16

Days of Rage makes, which is that the left was far more concerned with racial revolution in this country than they were with like the anti -war stuff.

44:26

The anti -war stuff was a good way for like these hardcore race communists to get in and seize on something that maybe a lot, a lot of people who were not communists felt strongly about.

44:35

So, um, yeah, these, these are just, these people are not intellectual historians. James Lindsay has a

44:41

PhD in mathematics, which is no small feat, but he immediately went to work as a massage therapist, which raises a number of questions, frankly.

44:49

Um, and, uh, he's just not an intellectual story. Now, Paul Gottfried, who is, uh,

44:54

Ivy league educated, uh, you know, paleo con great guy, so not like a lib, uh, by, you know, university professor or something.

45:03

No, this is, this is a serious intellectual, very rigorous intellectual historian. And he wrote an article pointing, pointing out that, uh,

45:10

James Lindsay is wrong about this stuff. James Lindsay just dismissed him as an idiot on Twitter. Oh yeah. That guy's an idiot. So, um, yeah,

45:16

I think the article you're referring to was on how the failure of liberalism led to wokeness.

45:21

And I don't know if he mentioned Lindsay, but, uh, that was, I think the, the thing that got him called an idiot, which is crazy.

45:29

Yeah. And that's something I touched on in my piece as well, too. This is why Lindsay is so adamant about attacking anyone who critiques liberalism is because, well, it's because he's defending liberalism, the people around him are defending this classical liberalism, whatever.

45:45

Whatever that is. So it reminds me of, uh, go ahead. He, he's doing this, but he, it's a lot of his work is to deflect away from people seeing the reality that what we understand wokeness to be today is the growth of this 20th century liberal, liberal democracy that developed out of civil rights, but because his worldview also came out of the civil rights movement, that's the true origin of, of what he refers to as a classical liberalism.

46:14

He doesn't want people looking at that. So for him, you have to say it's 100 % Marxist. And this whole woke right thing is a good way of, of making people not look at the real origins.

46:24

They're, you know, it's like social, the sixties, you know, revolutionaries and so forth.

46:30

Um, a lot, these people were influenced by Marxism to some extent, but I mean, there were certainly like communists involved, you know, with the

46:39

Hudson river school and, um, or there's, I'm mixing that up. Hudson river is, uh, yeah.

46:45

The Hudson river painting is, uh, those are nice. I like looking at those. It's the folks, there was a very famous, um, well,

46:51

Woodstock was in that area. And, uh, there was a, there's like a folk academy or something

46:57

I'm butchering it here, but there were, we're, um, we're the, the civil rights movement. Many of these activists were trained and that was like commie central.

47:05

Like you had like actual card carrying communist members. So while communists did play a part in developing the civil, getting the ball rolling on the civil rights movement.

47:15

Um, it was still really just in this 20th century liberal tradition. And that's what James Lindsay doesn't want you to look at.

47:22

Yeah, no, that's a great point. Uh, it reminds me a little bit when you were talking about the different terms that are being thrown around that are new and you have to keep up.

47:32

It's hard to keep up. It reminds me of when I was younger and, uh, you know, you had the ska scene and then like all, you know, pop punk and there was goth and there was metal and there was like, and I had a roommate,

47:44

I remember who I would ask, you know, what are you listening to? Is that like screamo? And he'd be like offended. No, that's not screamo.

47:51

And then he'd like, he'd rattle off like three or four terms that all define the kind of music he's listening to.

47:58

And I'm like, yeah, I don't even know what you're talking about. You know, I'm a big, I'm a big metal guy, so I can relate to this a hundred percent.

48:04

I would never be rude if you, if you, if you confused, you know, like blackened thrash metal with like thrash death metal or something.

48:12

Yeah. That's mumble rap, man. We mixed with it. Like what are you talking about? So you and Aaron McIntyre, I guess you guys share that in common.

48:18

Yeah. So, uh, uh, I don't know a lot about metal. I, I kind of like Sabaton and that's like all

48:24

I know, but, uh, cause I'm a history guy, but, um, it reminds me of that with all these new terms and some of it,

48:30

I remember back in the band days that came off as so pseudo intellectual to me. It's like, oh, you're, you're gate kept out of this conversation because like you haven't done the necessary work to understand really this music and, and what it's communicating and stuff.

48:45

And, and that seems to be in my mind, what's going on here in a way, like, you know, woke, right.

48:53

Is this new terms, innovative, uh, term that is how old is this?

48:58

Two years, maybe tops. And you're supposed to understand what that means. And you need me to explain it to you because I'm the one that came up with the term.

49:07

And, um, and then when you find out what is being described, it's like, oh, that's just what traditional

49:13

Christians have believed for a long time. You're just slapping this label on it and making it highly technical. And, um, and, and, and this reflects to me a problem we have with leadership and elites and the fact that the right is somewhat leaderless.

49:29

Like the left has this very, uh, well now democratic party. I'm not so sure anymore, but the left as a whole has for years had a very, uh, sort of maticulated hierarchy with, uh, you know, their, their foot soldiers or their activists, uh, will be protected.

49:46

The guys at the top have their back and they take their marching orders from them and they have their, they capture the university.

49:52

So they have their intellectuals there. I don't know that we have that. And, uh, you know, I'm wondering what your thoughts are on this.

49:59

Do you think that online activity, the podcast world, that kind of thing is, is this, are there attempts to be the

50:06

King of the Hill here and try to persuade people? You're the intellectual, you're the one that should be followed.

50:11

You have the good ideas because there's this vacuum. Oh yeah. Everyone, well, not everyone, but a lot of people want to be high priests and especially there's this real sense that there is a growing opposition to wokeness.

50:26

There are many people who are scrambling to insert their political projects as the, as the antidote, as this is what it should be replaced with.

50:36

I just want to be very clear, you know, Lindsay and these guys are, uh, you know, they're just screwing, screwing around.

50:44

Um, they're making, you know, they're attacking people. They're being annoying. It's interesting to talk about, frankly, just because it's really ridiculous.

50:51

These are ridiculous people with ridiculous ideas. And, uh, it's kind of funny to, to just make fun of them and point out why they're wrong.

50:58

Um, which is what I did in my piece, just to be clear, I ended up making fun of him on Twitter, but I wrote a very reasonable piece and he called me like wokey.

51:05

He was saying like, you are, you are stupid. He's typing like a, you know, 14 year old girl or something. And, you know, at that point it's like, all right, if you want to talk trash, like we can talk trash.

51:14

But, uh, you know, I, I, for the record, I started off in, in good faith. We were going back and forth all day on Twitter.

51:20

It was pretty funny. But the point is, is like, take a step back. These guys might be causing problems for some people in certain sectors.

51:30

Okay. But at the end of the day, like what they're selling, there's no real constituency for, for what they're selling.

51:37

Um, and they just don't really have like a huge audience. Lindsay has half a million followers.

51:43

Okay. Well, I'm, you know, I'm quote tweeting and making fun of him and I'm getting hundreds, thousands of likes on these tweets.

51:48

He's getting like 10. Um, so there are no real, there are people that might like see a James Lindsay tweet and be like, wow, that's so like low info.

51:57

People just don't know any better. Oh, wow. Yeah. Stalinist national socialism. Wow. Um, but in terms of there, this being like a political project that has a real opportunity to, uh, be implemented like in the law or something.

52:11

No, uh, it's, it just, it just isn't the case. You've got Christian nationalists that are going to be occupying high positions of government, people that are far more in line with paleo -conservatism than whatever he's about, um, with Trump.

52:23

So that's just like, it's just, he's just kind of here to cause chaos. So I think that pointing out why this guy's wrong, there's, there's merit in doing that.

52:31

But I also think that you shouldn't be giving too much attention. It's not like he can't talk about these guys, but, um, once you start, he's more of a nuisance than anything.

52:40

That's the best way of looking at it. Um, there are other, there are other people out there that are promoting their political projects and trying to be, even if they're not like not in a bad way, but they, yeah, they, they believe that their political project is these, has all of the answers.

52:56

They want to be the guy who's giving it to you. Yeah. There's, there's tons of that. And it's not always a bad thing, right? If you, if you should, you know, if people are operating in good faith and what they're advocating for is, is, uh, you know, mostly good, then okay.

53:08

They're, I mean, it's their rights to do that. Right. You have someone like Bronze Age Pervert on Twitter, who has like Nietzschean vitalism is, is kind of his thing.

53:15

You've got Curtis Yarvin, Neo Reaction, Yoram Hazony with National Conservatism.

53:21

Um, you obviously have the Paleocons as well. You have the Integralists, uh, I don't know, you know, there's this post -liberal order.

53:28

Yeah, yeah, yeah. And, um, so obviously, and then you have the American Reformer, you know, Christian Nationalists, Trad Cat, all sorts of stuff.

53:37

So yeah, there is that. The thing to keep in mind is some of the people selling this stuff might not really believe in it.

53:44

I'm not, not necessarily any of the people I mentioned, but just, I've known a lot of influencers over the years and a lot of them it's, it's, you know, saying whatever to advance their brand.

53:52

But these are the people that end up usually getting a lot of haters and embarrassing themselves and, uh, and just kind of, uh, petering out, uh, because eventually everyone realizes they're just scumbags.

54:05

That's good advice. Uh, I'd say in closing, I want to get your take on this. There's a lot of guys who have jumped ship from the left to the right in our political binary system here with the two parties and Lindsay's one of them, but you also obviously have very high profile examples of this with Elon Musk and, uh, even

54:25

Joe Rogan and endorsing President Trump. And, um, I just know that this is a tendency on the right to, as soon as someone jumped ship and, uh, you know,

54:35

Tulsi Gabbard is now a Republican and, uh, it's immediately, uh, try to platform them.

54:42

And I, I've always thought this instinct is reflective of some, not, not that those guys can't do good things.

54:50

I'm not saying that by the way, I think they actually can. I think RFK is probably going to do some good things, but there is this tendency to think that the left are the cool kids, right?

55:00

And the right, you know, we're kind of, uh, nerdy and we get bullied and I don't know, you know, we're just, there's this dynamic there that a lot of guys on the right are just hungry for celebrity support and favor and that kind of thing.

55:15

And so when people jump ship, uh, you could be a, uh, corporal on the left and you have, there's this great opportunity now on the right, you could be a captain, perhaps you can increase your position.

55:30

And, um, I, I think that's a dynamic perhaps people should be aware of. Do you see that dynamic?

55:36

Uh, and then the last question is a very practical one. Where do you, how do you think that the right should, uh,

55:43

I don't know if there's one answer to this, but they, they should look at gaining ascendance and leadership.

55:52

And, uh, since we don't have the institution so much anymore, how should we, uh, find leaders for ourselves?

56:01

Sure. So how do we find leaders for ourselves? I think,

56:06

I think realistically a lot is, a lot is going to be up to Trump and seeing what, what he can get done.

56:12

Um, now when it comes to leaders for people giving you advice and guidance in your, in your own life, um, just always, just always be a little skeptical of, of the motivations of people, maybe even very skeptical of the motivations of people who are selling you, you know, political projects, telling you they have all of the answers.

56:33

A lot of these people might be operating in bad faith. Um, you know, at the end of the day, the people that, especially some of the bigger names, like if you become a big name on here, it's because you've on the internet, just generally, um, you've said you're saying things that are conducive to you becoming a big name.

56:51

So some of the people are going to be doing a very cynical calculating sort of exercise to get to that point.

56:58

Other people get there because they're, you know, they believe, yeah, they believe in it. They've just, they've just done it intelligently.

57:05

Um, but, uh, yeah, a lot, I think we're very fortunate that, that we have people like Elon Musk, for example, on board.

57:11

I mean, I, I think he might have, Trump might not have won Pennsylvania. We're not for Elon, just dumping tons of money into the state.

57:17

He bought X, you know, one of these old new reactionary talking points has always been, you need elites, right?

57:22

It's good to have a, you know, mom and grand, you know, grandma on, on, on side with, you know, the kind of politics that you're about.

57:28

But, uh, ultimately at the end of the day, you need people with disproportionate amounts of power, influence and money.

57:37

And there are going to be some downsides to that. The tech people, they seem these tech elites, they, it's generally a good thing.

57:44

Um, some of them on legal immigration don't seem like they're, they're really good. You know, some of these, some of these tweets, they make it sound like they want a massively expanded legal immigration, uh, program, which is, you know,

57:55

Trump signed, he endorsed the raise act, uh, during his first term, which would have in theory, I had had probably posted about this on Twitter and people have been in my replies saying, oh no,

58:04

I wouldn't have done that. In theory, uh, the raise act would have cut legal immigration by 50%.

58:09

Um, there was, there was talk of H1B, cutting H1Bs and, you know, you didn't get a ton of progress on that, but, um, it would be, it would be a real shame if this time around with all of this, this elite tech support that we end up massively expanding legal immigration.

58:27

But, uh, yeah, I mean, I guess the best advice is just, uh, you know, a little, a little skeptical of people who are telling you they have all of the answers.

58:35

Yeah. Well, I appreciate that. And, uh, in your time, if people want to check out more of your work, uh, they can go to restoring order podcast, and that is primarily on X, I think you were telling me.

58:45

Yeah. So I put the first half up on X and then on my sub stack, which is Patrick Casey .com.

58:51

Uh, the first half is available for free there as well, but then there's, uh, you know, uh, the full half is, is for people who want to subscribe.

58:58

So, but yeah, if people want to just go to Patrick Casey .com and, uh, sign up for the free, you know, updates and so forth that, uh, that's, that's all well and good.

59:06

What's your Twitter handle? At restore order USA. All right. We'll go follow Patrick on X and we appreciate your time.