Warriors, Capitulators, and Reconcilers With Stephen Wolfe

All right, welcome to the conversations that matter podcast, my name is John Harris and I am pleased to be joined today. With Stephen Wolfe I have with me who writes for sovereign nations and actually Stephen I found out about your material just from Facebook.

I want to say like a year two years ago something like that. Somehow we became friends I don't know how but I appreciated a lot of your articles and I think you helped me understand better. Especially to Kingdom theology and reform theology as it pertains to political theory.

So Thank you for for being on with me. I appreciate it. Yeah. Thank you for having me on. So Stephen the reason I wanted to have you on specifically other than the fact that you're smart and I think you have a lot to share is you wrote an article recently and I Found out about it through cross politic, but it's called the evangelical Evangelical reconcilers how evangelicalism reconciles itself with modern liberalism and The title of that just kind of captured me and I thought what are you talking about?

Evangelical reconcilers and I thought I knew and then I read it and I thought this is a brilliant piece and everyone Needs to understand the argument or the points that you're bringing out here. I want to start if I can by reverse engineering this.

I want to start with the conclusion and then work backwards. So because I think you bring out some of the implications of why this is important in the conclusion. But then let's explain who are the reconcilers.

Why why is it important that we understand what they're doing and the The effects that their work can have on Christianity and the political situation in our country in the Western world. So I'm gonna read this is a little lengthy, but just just hold on with me.

You say the evangelical Reconcilers are orchestrating a neo and a Baptist turn and they're merely doing what the prevailing ideology has exalted them to do. Few will notice. However this subtle reformulation of evangelical thought despite its opposition to classical Protestant political theology many will miscategorize it as just another reiteration of the old liberalization of the Christian faith after Demonstrating their theological orthodoxy.

The reconcilers will continue unabated to eliminate the evangelical threat to modern liberalism. They will continue to socialize people into the new evangelical discourse dominated by catchy phrases lines tropes and mantras and appropriate terms such as threat witness and political to new ends, I Think you meant appropriated there if I.

Okay, they will continue to Christian eyes popular sentiment and delude people into thinking that harmless Christian practices can disrupt secular ones. They will reduce political activity to moral witness into securing walls of tolerance or religious liberty for a small space of distinctively Christian norms, but despite appearances their orthodoxy and perhaps their own consciousness.

Consciousness.

Their reconcilers are agents of the liberal ideological regime Legitimated by it and for it and we ought to identify them as such. So that's the conclusion that you reach. And I think you do a good job explaining why?

There's this group of evangelicals out there who are serving a purpose whether we see it or not to disrupt actual Protestant Christian political engagement and kind of neutralize. What's going on? And and I think there's a confusion and you nail this in your conclusion that some of us will say well Just that they're being liberal and I want to put names with this because you named some names.

But but they're actually not necessarily being liberal because they're trying to hold on to an orthodox Christianity While neutralizing it. So I'm gonna give you the floor now who are the evangelical reconcilers?

Modern Liberal Ideology and the Three Christian Responses

Alright, well This might this could be could be a long Explanation. So stop me if you need any clarification or make it simpler but I think I think you have to start with the idea that that that we live in a time with a with a modern liberal ideology that is not.

It's actually extremely pervasive within society. It's but at the same time it doesn't enforce itself. So much with sort of brutality. So if you look at old forms of enforcing a political ideology, it was often a form of physical brutality.

So you don't conform well. Then the law is going to force you to conform or it's going to be very physical and it's a forcing to to to conform whereas this one's Modern liberal ideology operates very much on the realm.

It's like psychological. It's it's enforced rhetorically and you have these various social media. Social media helps enforce this as well using I think weaponized a lot of weaponized terms. So, you know being accused of racism's one homophobia xenophobia.

All sorts of these terms and and what happens is it becomes socially damaging? And you're forced to be on the rhetorical basically rhetorical defensive. So you have so this is something where we're enmeshed in this environment.

Where we are dealing with and contending with a lot of these power terms power words weaponized language that then Has a lot of force to it. Yeah, and what's actually interesting is is a lot of these terms like the accusation of racism Is is actually very vacuous and what it actually means in itself.

It's one of the absurdities of our age where you have these weaponized language that actually in themselves don't mean a whole lot. But they're extremely powerful so I say that then to say when because evangelical Christianity is actually very antithetical to modern liberalism not only in social norms, but also just in.

It's just the general view of reality in the world. You're going to have Some kind of split between it. You're gonna have some kind of antagonism between the dominant ideology and Christianity and so what this article is trying to show is that there's really That because of that because of that divided divide between the prevailing ideology and conservative Christianity.

You're going to have these different groups form and so identify three groups the warriors.

The.

The capitulators and the reconcilers those those three groups. So what's gonna happen? It's gonna this is this actually the the outgrowth of these groups should be very natural should actually make sense to us that this would happen.

So you have this social force that's trying to get us conformed to liberalism. And what is it? They see Christianity as a threat because historically Christianity within the West actually was a dominant force within society to Norm to create norms and to implement legislation and there's actually the prevailing, you know System of belief was Christianity for a long long time until fairly recently.

So very reasonably if you are a secularist person or modern I call monoliberalism Then they will see you as a threat. They will see you as a threat. Why will because you at one point were a Dominant force within the West and you're antithetical to modern liberalism.

So what's gonna happen from this is that Chris the different Christians are going to divide you're gonna have the what I call the capitulators. Capitulators are people so I would say Jonathan Merritt is one of them.

He's very active on Twitter and Atlantic I believe. They're going to just abandon orthodoxy. They're going to abandon basic especially moral orthodoxy. So they're gonna affirm homosexuality that sort of thing and and probably certain aspects of theology probably aspects of like atonement theology they very much look like the old liberalizers the the sort of people who wanted to shift conservative or you could say traditional Evangelicalism or Christianity into kind of the modern age and that ended up throwing out a lot of essential doctrines.

Especially you can see it in.

Certain doctors the atonement and that sort of thing. So this would be sojourners probably or yeah, I think that would be a good group.

Yeah.

Yeah, I think that would be a good group to think.

Yeah, and the mainline denominations and what they have.

Would be good example as well, right? So it would be mainly you think of like mainline denomination. That's that's a good example of it and a large part evangelical you think of Evangelical Christian today.

A conservative evangelicals is in some sense a reaction to that old liberalization so we as like a tribe you and me and a lot of other people can see ourselves as Conservatives who want to don't want that to happen again.

We do not want that Orthodoxy to slip again. We want to maintain that orthodoxy within evangelicalism and don't slip in the old liberalization.

Stop you're right.

What that means it is. We're very wary of that sort of thing where people start become moving away from orthodoxy.

So so I just I you know, I thought of the story. From when I was in college. I remember I had it was a secular university and I was the For all effective purposes the one leading the Christian group on campus and we had all sorts of problems with our administration I mean from getting equal access to student funds and being able to promote our club on campus.

I mean just just a whole bunch of stuff I had to call ADF at one point and just find out what our what our rights were. I remember the Gideon's came and they made them like stand out in the parking lot.

So it was very antagonistic but I remember I was in a music group there and the they They held this is for their entire like music department. They held their concert in it was a Believe it was an Episcopalian Church.

They for the secular university. They went to an Episcopalian Church and the The the pastor I guess there was very involved with this and there was this joint effort and they had this Concert called live earth or something.

It was affiliated with that to help save the planet and there was no problem there. No problem with you know, separation church and state kind of issues which we were having with our evangelical group.

And so I think you just beautifully described kind of like that's the that they don't see that as a threat. They're capitulating. So it's like they believe the same things we believe. They don't really believe the Bible is true and they and furthermore on all the social issues.

Of course, they're pro-homosexual and all the rest. So anyway, I just thought I figure I'd write it out there.

The important thing to view these guys in relation to the ideology is that they are basically the open Christian arm of the ideology. They say hey look. We're kind of part of this.

We.

That wouldn't say they're part of the ruling class, but they're very comfortable with being around. Those sorts of people and they are the Christian face of it and they're trying to get you and us to actually be like them.

So actually abandon these these core tenants and actually kind of move towards so they're actually trying to in some sense. Trying to proselytize us into the modern Ideology, so that's that's a capitulator.

I don't talk a lot of talk a lot about them. Yeah, then I'll just say the Warriors would be someone who's okay with the fact that we're a threat want to be a threat. Want to assert us, you know themselves within society to try to change things can conform them to.

Maybe if not Christian norms at least human ones so that we could all be Equal in certain sense in the public square that we can we don't you know, there's no sort of prevailing ideology that excludes us.

So they're the Warriors who want to be more self assertive and are not so much afraid of political power. Okay, that sort of thing and there's there's a wide range. I think people who could be considered warriors.

You mentioned Doug Wilson as one example in your article. I think he was the only one. Is there anyone else that you can think of that you would put in that category?

The Warriors and the Fear of Political Power

Well yeah, I.

Think people when first first for it comes a mile would be something like I don't know a hunter baker. He's a I know him through Facebook. I don't know how far he would want to associate with all this but He would represent I think in part or a lot of people so Doug Wilson would represent kind of the more militant not violently militant but more like the more more kind of a More very self assertive.

What's what's kind of Christian eyes?

Joseph's Virgin maybe or Matt Truella would they kind of be in that vein? They're very counter cultural very.

You know, I mean you can see some people would be like maybe like like Jeff Durbin might be as well. He's I think he'd be one as well. But I think another group I think within the warrior class with people who See the public square not necessarily as one that has to be kind of Christian eyes.

But one where hey, we should be able to allow to contend in politics and be agonistic. Just like everyone else. And there shouldn't be this this like presumed. You know negativity when we enter the public square and and try to formulate things And push things and shape things so that would be more like a almost like a neutrality or common ground argument.

I think those people can be war as well. I I know people would disagree that but I think that could be the case.

Well, that's like you just said because there is a certain sense of shame that I and I've heard this. Even when I was in Seminary, I heard this all the time that Christians, especially especially the more they align themselves with the Republican Party.

They just want power and that's all they're after and. It was almost like I don't want you know I remember having this thought like I don't want people to think that I'm just like after power and and so that.

The warrior class just doesn't care about that kind of pressure coming from the greater evangelical world. They're just gonna go full full, you know ahead and they're gonna do what they need to do to implement the law of God.

You know, I I think at their best I think the warrior people are gonna be the ones who recognize that we're all in some sense infected with this modern prevailing ideology. It's in our heads. We're drawn to it.

You see some of the people who have Kind of deconverted when they and like Joshua Harris and other guys the way they talk about the conversion is that now they're at peace. They're had there's a certain peace about it, which is really interesting.

We had talked about it. And I think that the warrior people realize that it's not only a battle in the public square. It's also one in your mind because in some sense we can we can get drawn towards the peacefulness of just being of just kind of Melding into the collective.

And yeah, yeah exactly there's something peaceful about it so I think the at their best the words realize That you that you you have to resist That psychological pressure that's inside you to seek after that easy route of peace and tranquility.

There's there's there is a certain cognitive tranquility with just kind of joining the masses in there in their sentiments. And that's and actually just watch the deconversion narratives and they talk a lot about this idea of becoming This happiness and peace almost like this euphoric that they can release from that tension that they had to before had to contend with and just dive straight into The modern mindset and just watch for that that idea of peace.

So anyway, that's why I think warriors are self-aware in that sense and they resist they're not resisting. It's not a like a resisting truth and like oh, maybe they're right it's more like just that that that I think we all have a desire to be kind of tranquil in our Mental, you know in our life.

Not only you just just you know, and we're so we're gonna be drawn towards that. But it's like the part of being part of having a like a I find it kind of an this effeminate aspect to deconversion. Well, I'm just saying they've failed to resist.

They failed to resist that this this the promise of of tranquility from the world and So I think that's something that everyone should should make sure that they are self-aware of that.

So, yeah, you know, it reminds me of it's not like the man who divorces his wife or something and it's like, you know They were fighting they didn't get along and then he's you know, he makes this decision and then he's saying well I'm at peace now.

It's just me and You know, I don't have to deal with all of that that that strife anymore and and anytime there's friction, you know I think weaker men, especially men who don't want to deal with conflict and play the part of a man.

They're going to retreat for the sake of peace pursuing their own, you know, the set of their own agenda that's not going to be a conflict with. Some of you know the external realities in their life. So, you know, I think this is just so important and I see these two groups and It seems like there's a temptation to just see the two groups.

With some of us at least like there's there's the good guys. There's a bad guys, right? And and of course in my mind the good guys are the guys that wanna they want to go and Exercise the Great Commission and if there's any limitation on free speech, they're gonna fight that they're going to take the battle to the world.

And the gates of hell will not prevail against Christ Church and then I see the bad guys as okay, these are the guys who they've just created a truce with the world and They're basically giving up orthodoxy, but there's a group in the middle.

Which I want to spend the majority of this on explain the group in the middle to us and why this is important.

The Reconciler Class and the New Anabaptist Turn

Okay. So like I said before that we are as evangelicals are kind of wary of this liberalization. And so when we think when we think people look that liberal they think all they're the old liberals gonna liberalize us.

But but if you think about if it's true that that this prevailing ideology of the modern liberalism sees us as a threat but at the same time We are gonna be resistant to becoming all capitulators. Well, what who is then going to rise up among us?

That's going to then nullify us as a threat to the prevailing ideal. Well, what is it? What is the ideology that's kind of almost infects all was going who's gonna be elevated among us. Well, I think just from observation that that we have something called a reconciler group class.

And they are the most powerful people in evangelicalism at least in concert, you know in conservative evangelicalism. They're the most powerful group because they have this sort of Legitimacy as wise one there's political sages despite being wrong about so many things.

And they get all the they get all the conferences. They get all the book all the all these things all the book contracts articles. And you can see it and this isn't Christian today gospel coalition and associated groups.

These guys will all be reconciled. So the idea behind reconciler is one. They are not capitulators because they hold to a you know, they objectively hold to basic orthodoxy. So I think Danny Aiken think it's how he says Aiken When when he was Responding to some of the social justice Accusation that there was a lefty or social justice stuff.

What did he do? Well, he ran through his orthodox credentials even even substitution atonement even, you know penis penal substitute Imputation all that stuff. He all that stuff where the old liberalizers Would reject he affirmed and said I'm not I'm not really know some sort of lefty.

But what these guys are is what they do is that they affirm that they affirm the Distinctives that make it so that they can remain in our camp, you know Objective identifiable is one of us but the same time.

They.

They have I'm not saying that they have like nefarious purposes or some conspiracy. But they the reason they are elevated up is because they can find legitimacy. Because they propose an idea that they propose Theology that nullifies Christian evangelical as a threat to modern liberalism.

That's what a reconciler is. It's they have they remain in our camp because they affirm our distinctives, but then they shape the way we think.

And.

And who we affirm and In order to the nullifies as a threat. In other words, and this comes out mainly in political theology. Well, not mainly but one big area is political theology. It's what I called in the article in you and a Baptist turn and that's this attacking.

Attacking political power. They say that it's it's we shouldn't be obsessed with political power. What what they specifically mean by that is often kind of lost. There's not a whole lot of political theory among these guys, which is very frustrating for a guy like me.

But really it means that we are criticized for any kind of action that the self assertive trying to seize or Have some serious influence in politics through law. I think this also means culture as well so that there's a Consistent critique of cultural Christianity by which they really just mean I think Christian culture outside of the church I think there means more there's more than that so in other words in other words that they want to make it so that we do not assert ourselves in Society as people who bear the truth and want to then shape and norm society and politics and government and law with.

With our our, you know Christian perspective. So it's in Keller and see in this group. I.

Would say Yes, he would be in this group as well. Yeah, so he would. This is where that the Neil the neocalvinists are are an interesting group because the neocalvinists want to engage the culture, but they're really basically just.

They're in a large part kind of like old modern liberal political liberals. They don't want any. They talk about transformation. But it's really it seems like it's really. Their public engagement is really a matter of witness and evangelical like evangelism.

It's making Christianity look attractive to people outside of it rather than actually a means of.

Asserting and kind of securing power and Christian influence. I know when I was at Southeastern.

The.

Terms like gospel issue and cultural engagement became really popular like right after Trump's election and I didn't really hear those terms before but they became big and a lot of the time they were applied to the arts.

So, you know getting Christian film and even you know If you have a talent to paint you should paint as a way to engage culture. But a lot of the time it was presented it wasn't as you know, the the thesis antithesis like show Christianity in You know diametrical opposition.

Offer a better way it was. It was more like well, you're gonna offer a better way but you're gonna do it by kind of like.

Wooing.

The world in showing them how beautiful this is. I mean to men who are in darkness. They're just gonna see and of course God can can use things like that. But it was a different kind of. I mean you just mentioned being a witness and I think you mentioned Alan Nobles disruptive witness book and.

And and I see a little bit of a difference with the way that they're approaching it. It's. They don't want to offend the world. That's that seems like it's something they they're really against.

Witness, Cultural Engagement, and the Marginalized Church

Yeah, I think that the way to the way to see it is that they want that they. They are very comfortable and actually would Desire and see as a default for for Christians to be kind of the marginalized group in society.

So.

Within that marginalized community. You can then show forth, you know various art and and and do Christian movies or Christian. Well, what our film. Chris you can do all sorts of you know. Yeah arts I art activities within that.

And.

And and that's I think that that's our perspective is is that that we're marginalized community and then then we show forth All this creativity that we have and in that in that that's fine. But what my point what I was arguing though is that they are comfortable with that Marginalization that they think that that's the default position and that Marginalization despite all those other efforts to be to do arts and all that sort of thing.

It that's really not a matter of saying hey we have a better way and by the way. This is the way it should be, you know out there, right? It's really just a kind of a showing forth of of the gospel within a Their own marginalized community whereas and what I'm saying is that very perspective is the reconciles perspective.

It's saying hey, you guys should tolerate us or they call it religious liberty. It's really taught There's a difference between religious liberty and toleration. We won't get it happen, but they're being you know, tolerate us and then show we'll show for the gospel these arts and crafts.

But we won't actually go out into the world to do something about our marginalization. We won't demand equality in the public square. We won't contend do like a harsh can. Harshly can you know harshly I'm saying like very self assertively contend in the political realm.

We're not going to be a threat Lee. We're not going to be if we're not going to be a threat to your order your political order. But we just want to be tolerated so that we can kind of do our own thing in our isolated Marginalized community and that's exactly what I mean.

If you look at the political theology and the way they talk about moral witness where they talk about gospel issues all the rhetoric and the subtle political theology the new Anabaptist turn is designed to make Christians think of themselves as by default and It's even preferable that we are a marginalized Unthreatening community to the prevailing ideology of the land.

That's very interesting. That's reconcilist. But again, they're the Orthodox in right and strict way in certain.

So the interesting thing to me is because you're helping make sense and put some pieces together that I thought I kind of understood. But you've clarified there's this this Sense in which all the gospel issues are issues that do not directly oppose the prevailing ideology.

So a gospel issue is, you know, welcoming refugees. That's a gospel issue and it's like well, I'm not against it. You know, the church should be welcoming to everyone right but that they make that that's the flag we need to raise and that happens to be something that won't get us in trouble with the media or academia or any of the elites in the culture and and so.

That's fascinating to me and I'd like for you to just give me your opinion on this. I you may not have been prepared for this. I don't know but uh, I'm gonna pick your brain here. One of the confusing things I think To myself, although I thought about this and I think I might know but to a lot of others is how did we go?

From moral majority religious, right in a sense like like Your Jerry Falwell's and your Pat Robertson's obviously there the two there was others. But you know, they're very much Roe v. Wade happens in like we're going to now Be salt and light in the political sphere, and I'm not saying they always did it, right?

But but there was this attempt Francis Schaeffer, you know to to get out there and to stop moral evil outside the Christian ghetto and and and now we have Completely abandoned that it seems like at least with the institutions and evangelical Christianity and we're saying hey our ghettos the best ghetto you should come because we've got and then it's like a list of things that we have that are Preferable to the outside world and we're trying to you know, woo them in.

So, how did how do we make that switch?

From the Moral Majority to Attractional Ghetto Christianity

Um, I.

Can't say I'm an expert with kind of the old religious, right? But I think in part they're kind of well, you could say in some ways that. It's it's we're very similar. That the that these that are our evangelicals today are kind of the same thing but look very different.

I think the old religious right. Saw political activity as a way of filling pews.

And.

This might just be one aspect and not the actual principal part of it. But there was a sense in which if you preach a lot of politics from the pulpit It would get a lot of people to go to church. Including men, so I think there was a if you preach politics from the pulpit a lot of men will go to church so I think there was something aspect of that of like a trying to fill pews that I Don't mean to say that that's the intent of the whole movement but I think today there is still the sense of well instead of doing self assertive political activity we're going to then have our isolated communities make it attractive to Different people and have them come in to church.

So it's kind of in very similar. But but how we how we got from there, I I don't know. I don't think I don't have a solid narrative but I do think that that That that that these the people who think marginalization is the default the reconcilers they do think that what's hindering people from coming to faith or come coming to church and by was that they I think they mean like Coastal elites, by the way, I think most of this theology assumes a coastal elite Attractional model but the the marginalization is What it does is it?

Lets you present it's basically a way of presenting making the church attractive. But you making a church attractive by affirming but but just going just far enough in your affirmation where you're still affirming orthodoxy.

So take me so they'll they'll say that homosexual acts for example are wrong that they're immoral. They're against biblical standard, but they'll go as far as possible. Many want many people in affirming aspects of homosexuality or same-sex attraction or whatever just to make just to show that they are not the old kind of You know dismissers that they're not gonna they're not part of the old oppressive regime.

So that they're really kind of showing that hey the church is this place where yeah, we don't affirm all this stuff. But at the same time we will recognize affirm that the new elevation of celibacy is an interesting thing in evangelicals.

That's really typically kind of a Roman Catholic thing but now this sudden affirmation of the Vocation of celibacy is an interesting development. I think that again, it's affirming. It's it's it's showing forth this attractive Ecclesial community to the world to to try to get them to come to church in itself.

It's not wrong. But what my analysis well, I mean there probably things wrong with it, but my point though is really what what function does this play within our society and my argument is that really these people who have elevated to do all these things are really elevated and Because of it it nullifies Christianity is a threat to the prevailing ideology.

So it's again, that's my my central point. That's one point of analysis to understand these people.

Self-Awareness, Peace, and the Pressure to Conform

Yeah.

And I have so many things in my head that I'd like to discuss with you but I want to get down to the kind of the main point here because I you beautifully articulated these three groups and for someone like you and I who see this we see the reconcilers as kind of a threat because we know that This is at best.

This is a temporary Movement because they will either be I mean that you can't really be In that state forever. You're going to be sucked to one side or you're as the state grows and the prevailing ideology which opposes Christianity is Set into more of a kind of like a hard national orthodoxy.

Those guys aren't gonna have the influence. They're not going to be a force at all for anything and so What do we do with that like How do we view them. Because because that you pin the difficulty that there's an orthodoxy that they will affirm.

But yet at the same time they are making there They're neutralizing any threat that the prevailing anti-christian ideology has. So I mean, how do you navigate this in your own life?

Well, I mean for me in particular like I said earlier I Just I'd say again just be very self-aware. That we're all infected. It's almost like a disease my ideology works that way. Especially nowadays visit we're bombarded with from from the moment.

We're born were bombarded with media. And it's it's stronger that ideology is stronger now than then it's ever been. Because before you you were isolated you were distant before all this media. You just had kind of a small social circle, but now it's it's.

It's the control of it is is a tremendous. Yeah. So be very self-aware of the ways in which you're drawn towards. I'd say train cognitive tranquility be willing to do things that seem uncomfortable. You know.

Sometimes you'll say something or say something on Facebook or say something out loud and you believe that what you're saying is true. But the same time that you have that feeling of do I really want to say that?

Yeah, and more than that, it's it's almost like it's like being so you're socialized into ways of thinking and action. So I'm from California. So, of course, I'm all about recycling. You know and from kindergarten we were talking about recycling.

I remember that. And we're just driving down the road. Imagine you finish a burger and you throw out the package out the window. That would affect you. To me I'd be wow that was like wow, what did I just do?

I'm gonna be a very a feeling of almost like self-disgust. And and of course, that's good. Don't throw burger wrappers out the window, but but there's also Aspects of thought that if you say something you can know what I'm saying is true at the same time that you have a Subtle almost like self-disgust for saying it.

Maybe that's too extreme way to put it, but there's a certain self. There's an emotion you say emotional psychological reaction to your own statement as if like you've made something public and You're like offended by your own public statement in some ways and but we have to be willing I mean want to be prudent and wise.

I'm not saying be jerks or be dumb. But but we have to but at the same time be willing to state what is true. Despite your own. Just despite the own sort of cognitive dissonance discomfort it it'll lead you through that because that's I Think that's really important because what and I say that because the people who are reconcile I mean, I'm friends with people who I'd consider reconcilers.

So I actually want to clarify something about that a little later. But yeah, I think with the draw for them is their intellectually Convinced by Christianity, but they at the same time are deep down I think enmeshed in modern liberalism that that's my I think psychologically they are drawn to it.

And that's one reason why I think that they are the ones and I think they're many of them are very intelligent I you know as much as I beat up on Alan Noble. I think the guy's very intelligent. Yeah. And but but because they have these like I would say monoliberal sentiments.