The Unprotected Class: How Anti-White Racism Is Tearing America Apart

We are live now on the conversations that matter podcast. I'm your host,

John Harris. We have a wonderful discussion set up today. Just a really quick housekeeping item that I need to share with everyone because I made a mistake on the last podcast and I apologize for that.

I said I was going to be in Wisconsin and in actuality, I'm going to be in Idaho this weekend.

Wisconsin's the next weekend. So the best place if you wanna see me in Wisconsin or in Idaho, either way, truthscript .com

forward slash conferences and you can sign up for both. This weekend's the Stand Firm Conference, which is in Middleton, that's outside of Boise.

So I look forward to seeing you there. Now that we got that out of the way, I wanna introduce today the special guest who's never been on the podcast before,

Jeremy Carl. Jeremy Carl is a fellow at the Claremont Institute. He was the

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Interior under President Trump. He worked at the

Hoover Institute and he's a really smart guy. I mean, he's got his BA's from Yale, his

MPA's at Harvard. How does that work actually, having a degree from Harvard and Yale? I mean, there's a rivalry there, but you're kind of on both sides.

There is, I think it was President Kennedy who said at one Yale commencement in which he received an honorary degree that he had the best of both worlds, the

Harvard education and a Yale degree. So I think that the rivalry is always there, but it's all good.

I mean, as in a more serious vein, of course, these schools have a lot of problems right now, as you know, and those problems were certainly not absent even when

I was there, but it's gotten much worse environment for that stuff.

But it's a shame because there's still a lot of very bright students who were kind of leading astray. Yeah, well, we're gonna talk about some of those problems.

I'm actually very excited to get into this and to take some questions. For those who are entering the chat now, if you're on Twitter, or X, I guess now, go to YouTube and you can leave a comment and I'll see it.

That's probably the best way, and I'll get your question to Jeremy. So you wrote this book, and if I can pull it up here, there it is,

The Unprotected Class, and it comes out April 23rd, which is tomorrow actually.

So we are on the precipice of this being available for everyone. I think I mentioned to you that I thumbed through a copy of this.

I have not read it though in detail, but just looking at the chapter headings, it's very interesting, and it looks very controversial too.

So the subtitle for those listening is How Anti -White Racism is Tearing America Apart, and you have to make it even more controversial,

I suppose. Kill All Whites, it's not even spelled correctly, is underneath that.

So I'll just let you kind of talk about why you wrote this, why the cover, it looks slightly provocative perhaps.

I don't know what pushback you've already gotten. I'm assuming there has been some, but someone who has your accolades, why would you do this to yourself?

No, that's a great question, John, and I should say first about the cover. The cover

I actually had nothing to do with, although I did ultimately just approve it, but there's lots of things, for those of you who publish books know this, that you fight about with your publisher as you kind of go through the process, and I'm not a graphic design expert or whatever else, or even an expert on what sort of covers sell books, and they told me this was good, and I'm like, well, yeah, that's kind of provocative, but so is the book.

It was a piece of graffiti saying, "'Kill All Whites' from California," that somebody had published, that somebody had done a decade ago, somebody had taken a picture of it.

So I just let them do that, but the book itself, I mean, I know because this is a Christian podcast,

I've sort of been wrestling a little bit with my own biblical metaphor on this. I think the kind of current one

I'm going with is a little bit like the story of Jonah, in which God told me to go to Nineveh and preach about this.

I was like, gosh, I really don't want to, for all the reasons that you just kind of implied, hey,

I've got this nice background, why would I wanna take on this kind of controversial, unpleasant subject?

It's just gonna get me a bunch of grief. And so I found lots of ways to run away, just like Jonah did, and I ran away to live in Montana, and I ran away to be in the

Trump administration and sort of do all these things other than write this book. And I kept hoping somebody else would write it.

And then finally, God sent the metaphorical big fish out, it swallowed me, it spit me back up on the beach and said that, because I have written about these subjects before.

And when I got in the Trump administration, those writings drew more attention than they had previously.

And some of our enemies did not particularly care for them. And that was really kind of my sign that like,

I prayed about it and God really wanted me to kind of write about this and let the chips fall where they may.

And so that's what I did, that I decided to go to Nineveh and preach and we'll just, we'll hope that it works out well.

I'm glad you wrote it because I think what you just said is 100 % true. People are very nervous. And it's funny how many private conversations

I have where this gets brought up by many actually non -whites. Yeah, well, absolutely.

We're very concerned about what's happening and, but everyone's kind of afraid to take this step.

So you aren't. And so I wanna get into a little bit about, what was the message, the illustration you just used?

I mean, Jonah had a very specific, important message to give Nineveh. You're gonna be destroyed if you don't repent.

So it sounds like what you're giving to us, this is important. Yeah, well, and it is kind of without, and I certainly don't take the personal comparison in any way, or am

I saying that God has spoken to me directly? But I do think that we are, as a nation, going to be destroyed if we don't repent and change our ways on this.

And I didn't just, as I write in the book, I didn't just write it for a white audience. And in fact, I've got many multiracial endorsers of this, including the longest ever serving member of the

U .S. Commission on Civil Rights, who's an African -American Republican, gave me a Peter Hearson, now give me a great endorsement.

And also guys like Tucker Carlson and Chris Rufo and Victor Davis Hanson and other, and Rod Dreher from the world.

So variety of folks have, from very different perspectives, you know, I don't even like each other particularly well, have endorsed this book.

So I feel good about that. But yeah, I think if we don't get a handle on this issue where we sort of return, or I don't even wanna say return, cause maybe we've never gotten there to be fair completely as a country.

But if we don't get to an area where we're not gonna discriminate against people on the basis of their race, whether their race is white or black or something else, in an increasingly multiracial society, it's gonna cause huge problems.

And so that was really why I wrote the book. I just, I felt it was compelled, you know, that we were kind of potentially, a lot of nations are destroyed over this sort of issue.

Well, let me ask you a question, like start it off this way, because there's an assumption here that there are such things as white people or white

Americans. And believe it or not, this is somewhat controversial. And especially

I found in evangelical circles, for some reason, there's this idea that, you know, there's one race.

And I guess in a sense, we can all agree that that's true. God created Adam and Eve. And so as the story goes, we all come from them.

And so there's this, I suppose, desire to be, to get past that, to just say there's no differences.

And you're acknowledging just in your title, actually, there is some kind of, so there's something going on that is marking a difference here, and it is significant enough to talk about.

So, you know, that's a weird, silly question perhaps for you to get this, especially the first question, but hey, do white people exist?

What's a white person? No, I mean, it's actually not a silly question. It's a great question. And I think it's important.

And one of the things I say in the book is, look, race has a biological element, but it also has a huge cultural element, okay?

I mean, because there is no true inherent, particularly when we talk about a God, kind of idea of whiteness.

I mean, the only race the Bible talks about is running the race, you know, et cetera. So I think that's well taken.

On the other hand, when you go back, even to our initial debate over the

US naturalization law in 1790, which is the first time we kind of talk about who's gonna be a citizen, it's understood that this is going to be kind of like white people of good character.

I mean, it says this sort of explicitly. Now, obviously this is not the sort of screen that we use now, but I simply mention it because it was understood to everybody at the time what white people included.

And it included Jews, it included Christians, it included people from all sorts of different countries.

Although at the time, of course, the US was overwhelmingly of British origin. Now, of course, within that category of white, there were a million different disputes and differences and everything else, but it still hadn't understood social meaning at that time.

And that's really the meaning that I've adopted in writing this book. Okay, so you're talking about,

I've heard different names floated out there. Heritage Americans is one, and I don't know.

I think people are trying to find a turn that doesn't get them in too much trouble, and it's very hard. But I think of George Washington's second inaugural where he talks about all the commonalities

Americans share despite their differences, one of those being a common lineage, basically.

We're all from the same island in general. And of course that's changed.

And since we've had, I mean, you mentioned the first Immigration Act, I guess, but we've had several looks at this issue that have changed the demographics.

Do you think this was inevitable that we got to the point where the majority, the people who mostly initially were here starting the

United States and writing the founding documents would eventually be not just diluted, but perhaps targeted because of our immigration policies?

Or is there something else nefarious going on? Because some people will say that it's just post -modernism or it's just Marxism, or they try to choose a villain.

Yeah, I don't think it is inevitable, nor do I think it's a good thing. Now, you kind of alluded to this.

We don't have perfect demographic information on US citizens at the time of independence, but a good estimate that I saw sort of by a reputable scholar suggested it was about 85 %

British in terms of the citizen population at the time, 9 % German, and then 6 % everything else.

So obviously we've changed a lot from that. I sort of start from the view that Ceteris Paribus, all other things being equal, large amounts of diversity, contra

Dan Quayle, who kind of said diversity is our strength, are actually not the strength of American society, that a degree of unity.

And by unity, I don't mean uniformity, but unity in the way that we try to get unity in the church and other things, that at least there's kind of a base that we are working from.

And even with the sort of demographic base that we had in the United States, I think it's important to know, we can talk a little bit, if you'd like, about the

Nation of Immigrants myth. I won't get into it now, other than to kind of mention it. But up until the 1965

Hart -Celler immigration bill, that bill just radically transformed the demographics of the

United States in a way that we had not done previously, even though even with different groups of Europeans, there were questions of assimilation and there were challenges, but Hart -Celler was a dramatic departure.

And I think in many ways, the legacy of Hart -Celler has a lot to do with why we're seeing so much official and unofficial discrimination against white

Americans today. So before, if you don't mind me correcting my understanding or maybe

I'm getting this right, before that 1965 Immigration Act, there were certain quotas or percentages, right?

Like if you were German, because we had Germans in the Midwest, German Lutherans and so forth, for example, like you had a certain percentage of Germans that were allowed in the country, but no more.

And that changed it in 1965, where now we don't need to keep to those percentages and it's not mainly

European, but now it's people from South America and all over the world. Is that right? Yeah, I mean, that's a basic outline.

I have a whole long chapter about immigration in the book and it's interesting. So there's like within the chapter,

I kind of lay out the book, the structure is I kind of like lay out the issue basically in the first couple of chapters. And then

I have 11 subject matter chapters and those range from the military to the church, to the business world, to Hollywood, to immigration, et cetera.

I mean, there's 11 different ones. And then I kind of close with sort of some thoughts about like why this is happening and what we should do about it.

Of those 11 subject matter chapters, I'm not an expert in all of them, but immigration is one where I really am an expert and I've written a lot on it.

So I have a very extensive immigration chapter where I walk through the entire history of kind of US immigration policy.

So just to kind of give the super executive summary, the answer is we didn't have a lot of restrictions at first because it was really mostly

British people kind of coming. And then it was sort of Northwestern Europeans coming. And then we begin in the late 19th century to get the first immigration restrictions because the demographics of the people who are coming here begin to change and people are not like uniformly comfortable with that.

Even if they are comfortable with it, they say just like now, gosh, the volume is really high. We'd kind of like to slow it down.

So that ultimately culminates after a whole series of debates in by far the strictest immigration policy that we ever put in in the

United States. In 1924, we passed the Johnson -Reed Act. And that basically does just what you touched on.

I mean, there are various quotas for national origin and it's based on the 1890 census with an explicit goal of kind of preserving the demographics of the

United States as it pretty much had been in 1890. So it's not saying that we can't have immigrants from other places, but it's saying that we're gonna try to preserve where we were.

That was basically where we were until the Hartzeller Bill of 1965, which just opens up everything.

And you begin to get for the first time, massive amounts of non -European immigration to the

United States. Of course, things like the Know Nothing Party and the Chinese Exclusionary Act.

And so they're vilified today as these were horrible things from the ancient dark ages where we were all bigoted and that kind of thing.

And I wondered if you could just steel man that though for us for a moment, just to show that, okay, it wasn't perhaps whether bigotry was part of this or not in a negative sense.

Like, was there some kind of homogeneity that they figured contributed to stability and we were gonna lose that and it would be bad for us?

Well, very much. And I mean, I'm not, again, in no way would I suggest that racism, which is to me a universal kind of human characteristic.

And I think for those of your readers, I talk about him a lot in the church chapter who have not read

Votie Baucum, I would really recommend his book, Fault Lines, which really is the best treatment of this issue within the church.

I can lean on it heavily in my own chapter. And he talks about kind of racism as a universal human sin and not something, of course, that just applies to white people or black people or anything else.

But it's a kind of, so, I mean, racism was there. And again, I'm not trying to minimize that. At the same time, if you look at the debates over the

Johnson -Reed Act, there was even a kind of, there's one particularly memorable one. I don't quote it in the book, but where this guy basically says, hey,

I'm not even saying that we're the best people. I'm just saying we are our people and we don't wanna change who we are.

And he kind of goes through all the ways in which he argues like, well, the kind of current American stock is actually inferior to, in a lot of ways, to these other areas.

But he said that I don't care because they're us, right? And so I think that that was a real, and I think it's a valid way for any community to look into themselves.

And again, that's not to kind of defend everything that went on in those debates or to say that everything that resulted from those debates was correct, or for things like the

Chinese Exclusion Act. I mean, again, not something that I'm endorsing, but that didn't come out of just like people deciding, hey,

I'm gonna wake up and be mean. It wound up because American labor was being brutally undercut by a bunch of robber barons who wanted to bring in very, very inexpensive and whose lives were treated inexpensively,

Chinese migrant labor. And so, of course, people who were working in some of these dangerous blue collar jobs who had their wages undercut by that were not pleased by that.

And I think this is a totally valid and reasonable way for them to look at the world, even if we don't necessarily approve of kind of where that wound up or some of the racial rhetoric around it.

I mean, again, these are sort of universal human problems. They're not kind of unique, horrible things about white people in America.

Well, let's talk about the problem. We're kind of dancing around it, I suppose, but you're writing the book because you're responding to something that's happening.

And you'd mentioned the 1965 Immigration Act, I'm assuming, perhaps you get into the

Civil Rights Acts and then DEI today and the open border and all of that.

So we're at a point now where presumably white people are under attack.

They're viewed, I think I saw recently, I was at Bloomberg that said like,

I think since 2020 corporations, the top 500 corporations or something, they only hire 6 % whites, which is dramatic.

So we're at this weird point, I suppose, and this seems to be a problem.

I guess first, how do we, well, first, I guess we should say, why is that a problem? Why do you say that that's a problem?

And then like, how did we in the last 50, 60 years get to this point? Sure, and I mean, you mentioned the

Civil Rights Act and I don't shy away from dealing with that. And it's actually funny, I was attacked over the weekend by the Biden campaign directly for this book, along with Charlie Kirk, who

I was doing an interview with, who's also, of course, a strong Christian. And they were saying, oh,

Charlie Kirk, and possibly me, because I'm talking with him, wants to repeal the Civil Rights Act, which is not even true.

I mean, if you listen to the actual video that they're posting, I don't say any such thing.

Now, I have said that I think the Civil Rights Act was something that was a blunt instrument.

I don't see a need to kind of relitigate the, I mean, there are people, including my colleague, Christopher Caldwell at Claremont, who's written a very good book and kind of does relitigate the

Civil Rights Act a little more. I think you can look at the Civil Rights Act of 64 and say, look, there were very serious problems around race in America at the time that act addressed those problems.

Again, maybe it was a blunt instrument, but I think there's a lot of ways that you could justify it. What I simply say is, look, a lot of water has passed under the bridge since.

We are as far away from when that act was passed as they were from the Wright brothers. And we have a totally different set of social conditions, social problems we're dealing with in this country, and we need to very dramatically rethink our

Civil Rights Acts from a place where we're not worried about people getting served at lunch counters, but what we do have is a lot of things.

And you actually just saw this. There's a case literally that came out yesterday of some grocery store chain that was doing criminal background checks on its employees, because they basically didn't want to hire felons, not an unreasonable thing, and is now being sued by the

Biden administration. And the Biden administration will likely win this under the current law, because this is what the law says, because that has a racially disparate impact.

There'll be more African -Americans and Hispanics because more of them by percentage are involved with criminal activity, although obviously not most.

So more of them will be involved with crime, and so this is illegal under the Civil Rights Law. That's the sort of stuff that I think we just need to be changing, okay?

And we just need to fix these sorts of things. By the way, there's no imputation on the part of the

Biden administration that this was done by, I think it's Sheetz is the name of the company, if that makes sense.

It's a big chain, that it was done for racially discriminatory reasons or that they were trying to secretly carve out certain people, but it doesn't matter.

So that's the type of stuff that is out there that I'm trying to deal with. Yeah, I think Sheetz is the gas station, if I'm not mistaken.

Yeah, yeah, I think that's right. So they're being sued, and they'll probably lose. I'm almost certain of that.

That's crazy. Well, people who are listening right now, we're talking to Jeremy Carl about his latest book, and you can get it, actually.

If you wanna get it, you can go to amazon .com. It's called, The Unprotected Class, How Anti -White Racism is

Tearing America Apart. And I'll take questions in the next few minutes. You can leave comments on YouTube.

Okay, well, Jeremy, we're at a point now, I think, where since 2020, people have largely seen what

DEI does, and critical race theory, and the Black Lives Matter movement, and they see the anti -white prejudice.

In fact, I turn on my television to watch anything, and the commercials, I noticed this,

I suppose, a few years ago, but it got annoying, where if it's a white guy, especially if it's a guy, always in the background, always the villain, like, and you're never the good guy in a situation.

And so, I think, as I'm having kids, this is kind of where it gets real for me, is like,

I'm thinking, okay, my son or daughter is gonna grow up in a world where this is the way it is for them.

What do I do about that? And people are moving to other states, and they're trying to figure out a way to escape the consequences of this.

What advice do you have for families in that situation, where they're concerned?

I mean, do you predict that this will fizzle out? Do you think that this will get worse? What's gonna happen? Right, well, a couple things.

And first of all, because you mentioned this TV issue, and I have five kids myself, so this is a very real issue.

And I think it was one of the, I mean, I dedicated the book to my kids. I mean, I think it's one of the things that inevitably sort of sharpens your thinking about the stakes of these sorts of matters, right?

But I will point out, there's actually, I talked about this in the

Hollywood chapter, there's an entire Twitter feed called White People Are Stupid in Commercials, I believe. And it's entirely dedicated to this thing, which is even a trope within the advertising industry of the dumb white guy who messes everything up, and then they're saved by the enlightened minority.

I mean, this is such a, it's a cliche at this point within advertising. So, well, what can we do about it?

I mean, I think part of why I wrote this book is that I'm not trying to whine to the refs or complain or say, oh, woe is me.

It's like, we need to stand up. As Christians, we need to stand up. As people of all races, we need to stand up.

But I think it's particularly incumbent on white people, because if you don't respect yourself, nobody else is likely to come in and respect you either.

And I think there's a lot of fear, and look, I understand that, I didn't wanna write the book. But we just have to say, this is not tolerable.

We're not gonna be treated like second -class citizens in a country that was largely founded by our ancestors.

And that's just simply like, that's it. So I think that is probably the biggest thing we can do.

Beyond that, you try to move into counter -cultural institutions. So you pay attention to the type of media that your kids are consuming.

That's obviously a part of it. I mean, I think that's always a delicate dance because the world is out there. And I think there could be dangers of sheltering your kids too much.

I mean, we send our kids to public school. I mean, it's not some crazy radical public school, but it is that.

And in our church, most of the people don't do that. They either homeschool, or they send those kids to private

Christian schools. But it's sort of a balance of like, we have our very strong church community to just sort of give counter -programming, right?

So they're sort of seeing what's out there, but they're also getting a strong message about what we believe. So I don't think there's a kind of hard and fast formula, but I think you can also talk to your kids about it if you have kids, right?

Like, and talk about what they're seeing. And I certainly, without trying to kind of put too much of this weight on my own kids,

I just certainly talk about it. And my older kids are kind of, I think, very alert to it because even in Montana, which is one of the most uniformly white states in the country, other than a significant

Native American population, we don't have kind of the same depth of these racial problems that I think we had in California where I had lived previously.

But, you know, these are issues everywhere, and there's no erasing them. There's no getting away from it.

And so I think the fundamental first part of the solution has been, has gotta be to sort of stand up.

That's at an individual level. And on a policy level, I've got lots of stuff in the book about things that we should be supporting.

And, you know, folks buy the book and read it. They'll get some of that. Questions are coming in, and they'll continue to come in, keep bringing those.

One question for you, Jeremy, that I had, why don't the civil rights and anti -discrimination policies in universities, et cetera, why don't they apply to white people?

Like, why, aren't they supposed to be across the board kind of equal and apply to everyone equally?

Yeah, well, actually it's good, and I'm glad you said it, because technically they do. So the name,

The Unprotected Class comes, it's a little bit of a more nerdy name. I was originally gonna call it,

It's Okay to be White. That was, the editors actually loved it.

It was too spicy for the sales team. They said, we cannot sell that book into Costco and Walmart, which

I think is revealing in and of itself, right? Because there's nothing that should be, it's okay to be black, it's okay to be

Asian. I absolutely believe all those things. It should be okay to be any race. But if you say it's okay to be white, that's seen as this very aggressive, racist statement.

So I think that in and of itself kind of illustrates a lot about where we are right now as a society.

But The Unprotected Class, what I did actually call it, is a term that comes from civil rights law.

We have this idea of protected classes, and that can include everything from your sexual orientation, to your sex, to your disability status, to whatever.

But the biggest thing in that is race. And technically white people are a protected class.

And I'm sure that a lot of the critics of the book, on the left will be like, why are you saying that? In reality, functionally, that's never been the case, or at least it hasn't been the case in decades.

And you can point to some isolated cases, and I mentioned them in the book where this has happened.

But really, white people have not traditionally fallen under this, and there are groups like America First Legal, which is

Stephen Miller's shop. Stephen Miller was the head of domestic policy under Trump, has started out, and he's actually beginning now, and as are other groups,

Harmeet Dhillon and her, from the RNC, people who are beginning to actually litigate on behalf of white people who are being just completely, obviously, illegally discriminated against.

But the reality is, this sort of illegal discrimination has been going on in plain sight for decades now, and people have not really raised their voices or done legal challenges to nearly the extent that we need to.

Yeah, do you remember, I mean, you were probably, I don't know, would you be alive? I think you were alive for it.

I wasn't, I don't believe, but in North Carolina, I think it was Jesse Helms, the Hands ad. Yeah, I grew up in North Carolina when that ad ran.

Oh, okay. I was born in 1972. I think that was the 1984 race he did against Jim Hunt, if I'm, or no, it was

Harvey Gant, so it would have been 88 or something. Yeah, and that's now looked at as one of the racist ads in American politics and catering to our inner demons and so forth, but you look at the ad, and I don't know the background,

I wasn't around for it exactly, but it just seems like it's an obvious kind of reaction to what some of this affirmative action policies, what they were doing, and now that's viewed as like, it's just weird to me, like that's, it's like, because what he seemed to be implying is that we should have a level playing field when it comes to the workplace, like a meritocracy, and that's viewed as white supremacy now, and it's like, you're gonna be viewed by some as a white supremacist just for saying that we should have, we shouldn't discriminate against whites in these ways.

Oh, absolutely. I'm sorry, go ahead. No, no, no, go ahead. Yeah, I mean, I think the reality is if you're not, if I'm not being attacked by the

Biden campaign, if I'm not getting all those attacks, you're not really making a difference at the end of the day.

Like if the regime is not turning its fire on you to a certain degree, and obviously we all have different profiles, and there's plenty of people who are higher profile than me and vice versa, but like if they're not kind of calling you names and really going after you, ask yourself how effective you're being.

The sort of white hands ad that you're talking about, for those of your listeners who are younger, was an ad that Jesse Helms ran in his

Senate campaign against Harvey Gantt, who was the Democrat in North Carolina in the, maybe it was 1990

Senate race, and it sort of showed this white guy losing a job because it went to a minority under affirmative action.

And of course the left has done everything they could to demonize this, because you know what? It was effective and true.

It's just like the left has tried to do the same thing on the so -called Willie Horton ad that President George H .W.

Bush ran, which was an ad that the left absolutely screamed about where Michael Dukakis, who'd been running against George H .W.

Bush for president, had furloughed, meaning like let out of prison on kind of weekend passes, this violent murderer,

Willie Horton, who happened to be African -American. And it wasn't even the Bush campaign, but like a super PAC equivalent or something ran an ad about this and it was incredibly effective.

And of course the left shrieked about how racist it was, but of course it was just trying to show very effectively, and Ann Coulter wrote a couple of great columns on this, that like anybody who would do this is obviously not somebody we want to be president of the

United States. So you can be sure that the more they are shrieking about you being racist or a white supremacist or whatever, it's the more effective you're being.

And again, God knows my conscience. So I'm not really worried other than in a practical sense with my family about like what the left is saying about me.

I kind of wear their slurs as a badge of honor. Well, there's some questions coming in. I wanna let people ask these.

So the first one is from Sabaton288. Why do people separate the religious component from what a nation even is?

Much of the problem with immigrants isn't biological, but cultural and cultural is just religion externalized. I mean,

I think that's a good question because I was gonna ask this.

Are you talking just about genetics or are there other things? Like I think of ancestral things, like does it affect my white kids today that Thomas Jefferson and Robert E.

Lee and whoever else, heroes from the past are ripped down. And it kind of does, but they're attacking a history, a heritage, they're attacking religion,

Christianity especially. Are these things all tied in? How close are they related? That kind of thing.

Yeah, again, another great question. And I think the answer is it's all of the above depending on the circumstance.

And I've had other hosts ask me, to what extent is this just a proxy for an attack on Christianity and particularly white

Christians that they don't like. And I think sometimes it is, but sometimes it's not, but sometimes it is.

But a lot of what you're seeing with all of these statues coming down. And again,

I write a lot about this in the book, which of course started with Confederate statues, but quickly moved to Thomas Jefferson and even

Abraham Lincoln and George Washington. And Christopher Columbus, where I am. Columbus, right? Yeah, I mean, just like totally predictable.

Like those of us who kind of knew where this was gonna go. You always start with the least sympathetic target.

That's how you do it, right? And then you move on. Once they've conceded the principle, then you just start asking for more and more.

So you don't concede on an incorrect principle. But yeah, very much. And by the way, some of this is totally understandable.

It's not even malevolent, right? You come in, you're from a totally different culture or ethnic or whatever background.

And you're coming into this country. Of this country. And again, this is a universal thing.

It doesn't even apply to the US. Doesn't mean people who are doing it are badly. And you're like, huh, my story isn't here.

The early heroes of this country are not my people. Or this is not, I'm not saying everybody thinks this way, but it's a natural human tendency to think that way.

So what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna denigrate them and say they were really bad. They were white supremacists, they were racist.

And I'm gonna recast a new history of America in which kind of my forebears can have a better starring role.

And so you see that. And again, it's a natural human instinct, fortunately not universal, but that a lot of people are gonna think that way.

And it's one of the reasons why excessive diversity is such a problem for any society.

Which is not to say we can't have any diversity, but the level to which we've cranked it up, I think is a problem for any society.

Michael has a question. He asks, what do you do with whites who also seek to erase their own heritage? Yeah, again, great question,

Michael. I think my followup book to this is going to look particularly at the problem of leftist whites because they are, while I'm not trying to absolve or take away the agency of a lot of minority political leaders who have not necessarily behaved so well in this context, the reality is that arguably the most powerful group that has pushed this is leftist whites, they just are.

And there's kind of a long and fascinating history that you could talk about and question the origins of like why this happened.

But I think we can see it really clearly in the survey data. And in fact, there's been some really good, interesting recent survey data, again, not by advocates, but just sort of like general social science surveys where they take questions.

And if you look, people tend to have what's called an in -group preference. So if you look, regardless of ideology,

African -Americans have a preference for African -Americans, Asian -Americans. And this is true, again, regardless.

And as long as that preference is not out of control to the point that you're really hating other groups, this is not some huge problem.

This is a universal in human culture, just like you prefer your parents and your family to the guys down the road.

I mean, this is not a problem. The one exception to this is liberal and leftist whites.

I'm not even aware of any precedent for this in any country in the world. Liberal and leftist whites have an active out -group preference.

They dislike white people. They think they're more criminal, they're stupider. You kind of name down the board. And this is just really, really bizarre and sociopathic behavior.

And again, we can talk about why, and I could offer some speculative ideas, but your questioner has asked, well, what should we do about it?

And I think you just have to really get in their face and say, you know what, you don't speak for us. What you're doing is wrong, it's immoral.

You're not allowed to kind of bring yourself up and make yourself look more normal by tearing down perfectly decent other people and accusing them of being racist or terrible in lots of ways.

And you just need to call them out and have self -respect. Yeah, and you went to Harvard and Yale, so you were in the

Northeast. I don't know how long you lived in the Northeast, but I'm sure you noticed the difference between the

Northeast and North Carolina. Sure. And I lived in North Carolina, I lived in Virginia for a bit.

And I noticed even the way history is treated is different. I think of like Elizabeth Warren with really grasping to try to find that native ancestry that she could,

I guess, use politically, but also have something to be proud of somewhat. There seems to be like a separation in the

Northeast between history and who we are now. Like they really are, when they look at history, it's like this novelty that they're studying in a very detached way.

Whereas in the South, I noticed people tend to think like, that's my people, that's my, there's more of a similarity and a closeness.

And I've wondered, I think that is kind of the same thing you're describing, or at least it goes along with it, where I don't understand it myself, like I don't get it.

And so I would be happy, I know we got other questions, but I would be happy to hear you say an explanation on why that might be, because it's the weirdest thing to me.

Yeah, it's interesting. And you certainly do see this in the South where there's a deeper attachment to heritage that probably has something to do with the very visible and painful loss for Southerners of the

Civil War. And again, not doing that to claim the Confederate cause, but that's just the reality is that these people's ancestors, if they were white, they were defeated and they had their property in many cases of all types destroyed.

And it was obviously very psychologically painful and incident for the entire country, North and South.

But I think the losers inevitably felt that more. But there's, I think probably always just been a more traditional element within the

South. And I think various political scientists have written about the sort of greater traditionality of Southern society and the greater continuities that exist.

And I think that's honestly something that has positives and negatives, because I think the sort of lost cause mythology of the

Civil War and the excessive kind of dwelling on things like that has maybe not, was never the best thing for kind of us moving forward as a unified nation.

And you began to see that in the early 20th century with a lot of these New South kind of proponents in North Carolina, among other places, and also in places like Atlanta, who kind of wanted to move beyond some of those, those sorts of wounds that had, you know,

Lincoln talked about binding up the nation's wounds, right, I think, which was very, very relevant. So I think, again,

I don't know that it's better or worse. It's just, it is a feature of Southern life with positives and negatives.

And it's one that we have to reckon with when we look at the South as an area of the country. Well, I was asking more about the

Northeast. That was the weird part. The absence, yeah, well, the absence, I mean, again, I think maybe to some degree, greater immigration, certainly just a more cultural liberalism.

And there are certainly, although there are people who, and I think this is actually a sophisticated argument that has a lot to it, who would argue that a lot of wokeness has its origins in the extreme liberal

Protestantism that kind of flowed out of the kind of Unitarianism of the early 19th century preachers at Harvard, right, after Harvard had been totally lost to religious orthodoxy, that you could actually see in wokeness the kind of extreme end of a certain type of very liberal

Protestantism. And certainly you see that in the mainline church. Again, I talk about the mainline church in my book. And so I think that probably that is some of it.

I don't think that's all of it, but it's an interesting element of it. Yeah, yeah, I guess my theory, and you're much smarter and more studied on this than I am, but I've thought that maybe there's this sense of ideological alignment for more progressive whites, especially who reside in the

Northeast, then there is a heritage kind of component, which seems to ground other regions more in identity and in -group preference.

So their in -group preference is more ideological. That's what I thought. So they're not, yeah, okay.

It's totally plausible. I mean, there's a lot of this stuff that is what a social scientist would call overdetermined.

In other words, that you've got far more really plausible explanations for like what's going on than you could actually even explain the data with, right?

So like what you're saying is totally reasonable. I don't have a crystal ball. All right, that makes me feel smart. So that's good. All right, so we gotta get to these other questions.

We're almost 45 minutes in here. If anyone has more questions, please leave them. Squidward, apparently

Squidward is in the chat today. Why do many Christians assert that Jesus, this is kind of a theological question.

I don't know if you want to pass on this. Jesus' humble sacrifice on the cross directly correlates to a rejection of power in politics and white apathy for its own people in history.

I frankly don't understand that question. I'm not sure if you do. Yeah, well, I can give some of it, particularly the first part of it, because I do think that the church in general, even though I'm certainly, again,

I would not want to ever represent myself as a theologian, but there is a sort of extreme Anabaptist politics.

Folks like Stephen Wolf have critiqued this pretty extensively in his book, The Case for Christian Nationalism, but I don't think you need to be a

Christian nationalist to embrace this, that we've kind of moved to this extremity where the only true politics can be practiced within the church where it kind of doesn't even matter.

That's like the true community. And that the real community, we can't really Christianize in some way, or it's seen as aggressive.

And I reject that view. I mean, I think that we absolutely are not, I'm not saying we're justified by works or that we're in control or anything, but I do think that God does want to use us instrumentally to make change in society as best we can, according to our understanding of his word, and that we shouldn't shy away from doing that.

But I think it's, these conversations are uncomfortable, not just outside the church, but inside the church.

And often it's a lot better to sort of abase yourself. I mean, it feels better or to not challenge.

I even see this in my own church. My own church is a very theologically Orthodox church, but not one that the pastors like to involve themselves in politics.

And they don't, to be fair, they don't do that on either side. There's no wokeness in my church either. So that's like acceptable, but sometimes

I think it's really good if we lead a little more with our views and understand that as Christians would have historically always done, that Christianity does have a bearing on our politics and we shouldn't run away from that.

Good word. Michael asks, what advice does Jeremy have for a white Christian who works at a job where anti -white policies are the norm from promotions to hiring policies?

Yeah, great. And again, a good question. We were talking before the show about New Founding, which is a great group that's led by some strong Christians that I know that,

I mean, this is not the kind of universal solution for everybody, but I would encourage folks to check it out.

It's an organization for kind of talented people who might be in a organization that's not particularly aligned to find matching with aligned businesses.

And I mean, they keep that vague because they're not trying to get into religious or other types of discrimination. But I think if you're looking for a non -woke business, at least let's put it this way, like that would be good.

Beyond that, I think there's a few things you can do. You can know your rights, right? Like there is a lot of stuff that these corporations are doing that is just not legal.

And when they're challenged on it, they'll actually fold. Now, again, that involves getting involved with HR to a degree.

And I understand, again, particularly for white people, why you may wanna, you're wary of that, but sometimes you can make a big difference, not just for yourself, but for everybody by challenging it.

And then I think the other way is to just talk to your coworkers. If there's legal action that you do need to take to not be scared to take it, because if you have actual evidence of discrimination by race, it is not legal.

I mean, we've just accepted it. We're sort of so spiritually beaten right now as a group that we've kind of accepted that this is the way things are, but actually it's not.

This is not the law. The law does not say that they can discriminate against you for being white and certainly not for being

Christian either. Although of course we're now contesting what that means in terms of certain views on sexuality and gender, et cetera.

But you do have rights and you should not be shy about vindicating them. Well, one more question.

And if anyone has another one, I better get it in now. How much of this is judgment of God for forsaking our fathers, despising our heritage?

Well, that's another theological question there, I guess. Yeah, well, I will happily say I don't know on that one because I definitely do not.

God is not talking to me like he talked to Jenna or anybody else. But again,

I mean, is it plausible? Absolutely, I mean, I think we as a nation will be judged, we as people are judged.

The U .S. is not, I am not one of these people even though I think the city on the Hill stuff is all very interesting.

I don't think that God has a special love for America that he doesn't have for our other human beings.

And certainly I think the way in which we've failed to stand up for ourselves, stand up for our heritage and history is in a graceful, non -aggressive way that doesn't denigrate others, but just says that we respect ourselves and our rights.

It's worthy of judgment because it's not honoring our past. And so if God were judging it,

I certainly would not tell God in this or any other situation that he would be wrong to do so. Yeah, it's a scary thought to be honest, but yeah,

I'm in the same boat and I've wondered that myself but yeah, I don't have like a word from God directly that this is why things are happening the way they are.

Tim Miller for 199 says, thanks for doing what you do, John and Jeremy. Thank you, Tim. Well, I'm gonna let you go,

I think, because I know you're a busy guy. You have a book coming out tomorrow and I want people to go buy that book.

Oh, I had it up. I don't know where it went. Thank you, here it is. The Unprecedented Class, it's on Amazon.

Hey, is there gonna be a Kindle version of this? So there is, if you look, the hardcover is highlighted, but the

Kindle version, just due to economics, is only 15 bucks, hardcover is 27. So if you're -

Okay, oh, I see it right there. If you're super, if you're budget conscious and don't mind reading on Kindle, you can do that.

It's all the same to me. I just want you to read it. I also actually, although it's not officially announced, like in the next one to four days, we'll be having an audio book available.

I was supposed to be - Oh, thank you. Thank you so much. I was supposed to be available at launch. I'm still trying to find out, waiting today for the publisher, whether it's gonna be here or whether it'll be a couple of days late, but that is available for folks as well.

And I would say the final thing, I mean, I certainly just to kind of, well, I'll do a few things. First, if you're interested in anything that I've said today

I'm on Twitter slash X at Real Jeremy Carl. I also have a sub stack called

The Course of Empire. You can sign up for that for free. I have stuff on there every week and it's a great way.

Those two things are great ways to kind of follow the book and what I'm doing. But if I could also make just a particular plea on the book, if you know about the economics of books,

I am not going to get rich on whether you buy a book of mine or not. And that's not why you write a book unless you are like either

JK Rowling or you're an idiot. What you can do, it's incredibly meaningful, is to, it sends a signal if you buy this book to publishers that this is a worthy subject.

It's something that other people should write about and that they should publish books about. As you could imagine getting this published by a mainstream publisher, which

I did, not necessarily a trivial undertaking. And I actually just heard from my publisher today.

They said, wow, you know, your pre -order sales are showing so great. We're going to order a second printing. So, you know, they're seeing that there is demand out here for that.

And it makes a really big difference if you can support the book in that way. And I hope you read it and like it.

Well, and you can give it to your pastor. You can, I mean, community leaders. I'm thinking, especially for churches, which probably a lot of the people in this audience go to church, so they know a pastor.

So many pastors kind of went woke in 2020 or half woke and wanted to go along with that. This is kind of an antidote to that in a way.

This helps them see what they've participated in and how it has negative effects and maybe get under the hood of why it's bad.

Absolutely, and they've had multiple people say that they're buying for their pastors or their group at church and that's wonderful.

Yeah, yeah. Well, Jeremy, I appreciate you giving me your time. I know you don't have much of it and God bless on the sales and everything else and talk to you later.