How the Right Started Critiquing Nazis Like the Left

Hey, what's up? Everyone? Hope everyone's doing well out there. Welcome to the conversations that matter podcast

I wasn't sure if I was gonna have the time to get another podcast in before the

Memorial Day weekend I guess it's already upon us, isn't it? So I figured I would put one out today I'm actually fighting a cold a little bit.

So my apologies if I cough a little bit during the podcast Hopefully that'll get better.

I think thankfully I'm sleeping which is good That's the best way and taking tons of vitamin

C and zinc and all the rest of the stuff you're supposed to take Anyway, it's a beautiful day out there

And the roads are just jammed with people going to the mountains and to the beaches for Memorial Day Maybe some of you are out there traveling right now listening to this podcast

And if you are, I hope you have a wonderful weekend And I hope you have a church picked out if you're traveling for the Lord's Day That has like -minded saints that you can worship with I There's a couple things.

I want to talk about the main thing. Of course is in the title. I want to talk about this shift that's taken place over the last 60 70 years on How conservatives or I should say people on the right politically in the

United States? think of Nazis and Critique Nazis and where they see

Nazism being manifested now This is something that I I'm sure other people have thought about this

Did I say Memorial Day someone's correcting me Labor Day if I said Memorial Day my apologies Labor Day.

Yes Which is we won't go into the origins of Labor Day today. That would Enjoy it.

I still think you should enjoy it. Even if the the origins of it maybe aren't it's it's a fake holiday to me

But anyway, I let it out. I let it out. Okay The reason

I think it's important The the subject at hand is because I have noticed a lot of people on the right critiquing conservatives paleo conservatives

Traditional Christians Christian nationalists cultural Christians People supposedly on the right mind you and using the same kind of smears the left uses

And this got me to thinking and I thought I'm sure Other people have delved into this and studied this.

I just don't know where I don't know who did it and where they did it Maybe there's an article somewhere, but I figured since I couldn't find one

I would write my own and so I'm hoping to get this published at I don't know

Please somewhere that would be willing to publish it somewhere like American Reformer or Chronicles magazine If not,

I'll just self publish it but I wanted to discuss the contents in that article and I took about a day earlier this week to To write that and and so that's the the main main thing we're gonna talk about today, of course, though I also have other things.

I want to talk to you about a Richard Dawkins clip I just saw like an hour ago that I said,

I got to share this with the podcast audience This is really your brain on classical liberalism. It really is. It's it's really crazy what

Richard Dawkins proposes and it's consistent though with I think the

The overriding philosophy that even people on the right in the last 20 years 30 years

Have just taken for granted and it doesn't work anymore. And so I'm gonna show that to you and And then we'll talk a little bit about God's law.

I know I put some Twitter posts out there that people are Commenting on and some people

I think are perhaps confused or misunderstanding or maybe I'm just not being clear So I'm gonna take a few minutes to just probably cause myself more grief and controversy, but it but it's worth it.

It's worth it We're gonna talk a little bit about the application of God's law to modern Times modern situations, so I don't go into detail on that I actually have an episode brewing in my mind on that entire subject where we'll talk about how theologians have looked at that subject

But I just want to give you my two cents on it my my opinion where I'm at So there's no misunderstanding.

So hopefully that sounds good to everyone Before we get in all that though. I have a little video to share with you

This is an invite from chef Lance Nidihara, and he's a friend of mine

He's gonna be speaking at the men's conference in the Adirondack Mountains September 21st through 24th if you can make it overcoming evil conference calm overcoming evil conference calm

Here's a little clip of him Lance need to hire here Lance in the appetizer round He's shown an amazing amount of creativity my philosophy on evangelism became such that I know now that I have to speak up I have to go out and I have to warn those of the wrath that is to come and I am

Excited and privileged and honored to be a part of the annual men's conference that we'll be doing up at Camp of the

Woods In the Adirondacks. I will be there and I am privileged to be speaking about Battling evil in today's present dark culinary industry as well as Equipping young people to be able to do the same

Through the Bible through scripture through Christ And it's gonna be a really great time in fellowship and learning

And I'm looking forward to meeting you all looking forward to this entire thing. Well, there you have it so Follow Lance's lead.

I hope you can be there I hope you can come if there's any questions info at truth script comm is probably the best place to ask those questions

And I will be sure to get back to you and answer them It is coming upon us pretty quick though, but there are still openings

So looking forward to seeing all the men who are gonna come out to that. Um Let's there's there's some comments coming in.

So let me just acknowledge those Yeah, Quiana Shaw is on most holidays are fake.

Yeah It seems like in the last. Yeah, I don't know a hundred years I mean a lot of the holidays have not been organic.

They haven't arisen from natural tendencies Traditions in regions that kind of thing.

It's it's more of like a an abstract kind of like this is what we in fact,

I should say that even the holidays that did arise from Certain occasions that were celebrated in local areas and so forth have been turned into abstract holidays, so everything's kind of becoming this but it becomes a celebration of like, you know blanket freedom or you know,

What is labor? Do people even know what Labor Day is, right? it's

I Mean Union should be all over that I suppose but we don't even associate it with that. It's just like taking a break

It's like the weekend of the year kind of thing the last hoorah for summer So some of some of these holidays, you're right.

They they're there they become so meaningless It even gets past the level of abstraction into just that it really means almost nothing but we get a break and I think

Juneteenth is actually kind of on the The social justice warriors are using it to try to forward their agenda, but I actually think it's being fast -tracked

Not not because it's their intention but just because it's the way that people who didn't cultivate that habit

It's a foreign thing to them. That's how they're gonna treat it. They're just like another day off There's no traditions associated with this, but I'm glad to have a day off So anyway, it's it does devalue the the celebration of holidays, which are supposed to as the name implies

Holy Days Contra talk with Pastor Richard is on. Happy Friday Pastor Richard He says that his 11 year old daughter keeps thinking

Labor Day has something to do with having babies Actually, that might be a better a better holiday

Anyway Ad Robles is with us. Hey ad. Hope you're doing well

Let's get into some of this So I want to share with you guys this video first because this blew me away check this out

This is Richard Dawkins now for those who don't know Richard Dawkins wrote the God delusion He's a big neo -atheist thinker maybe the biggest one

I mean, I think he probably sold more than Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris and and he is

I would say from like 15 years ago I was very used to like talking to his proteges at college campuses and trying to reason with them and witness to them.

I Remember and I was in a deer stand Maybe it was about that long ago with his book on my

I had an iPod at the time so it was that long ago and I had his book and I was

I had a PDF somehow that I was able to read and I was reading it and trying to figure out what he

Believed because so many people followed Richard Dawkins. Well, Richard Dawkins has kind of fallen from grace

At least with the left because the left They embraced atheism. In fact,

I forget which year it was Within the last though ten years, I want to say

I think it was 2016 or 2012 I can't remember which one but the Democrat Convention I remember had basically booed

God there was a or at least the inclusion of language honoring God in their party platform and So this this was and and it's still to some extent is the

Democratic Party there they're atheistic, but they're pagan more than they are even atheistic and Richard Dawkins He would have been a champion a hero to a lot of those people and now a lot of them have turned on him because he's not woke enough and and the thing that strikes me about all this is, you know conservatives are very hungry to Have some people on our side with a platform and with some some good speaking skills and people who are liked and Richard Dawkins has been liked by at least a sizable group of people for a long time and There is

I have seen it even with Richard Dawkins. There is sort of this Desire Even even with the past experience of him going after religion really hard and going after Christianity in particular

There is this desire to kind of include him on our side Right others who have not been as publicly

At least popular for doing the same kinds of things Are included now on the conservative side

James Lindsay's a perfect example I would say of this but you could also look at Bill Maher because another atheist who

Has said many things against religion and Christianity and yet now he's included So so so I'm gonna play for you a clip of Richard Dawkins and and I think knowing that context is helpful to know he's on a left -leaning show, but look where the the

Host is trying to push him on the transgender issue and look the at the fence the flimsy defense that Richard Dawkins gives for why he he doesn't even really give a reason but for why he objects to transgender surgeries for children

But not for adults. Here's Richard Dawkins out for example things like arresting doctors who provide certain

Gender -affirming care as it's called. Maybe you have an issue with the term or not But what about the arresting of doctors, for example, does that not start to bite a little bit?

Doctors have doctors been arrested for that. No, these are bills that have been proposed in the

United States It has not happened to my knowledge, fortunately Children or adults we've seen both in different states

Well, I would have I would have strong objection to doctors

Injecting Minors children or Performing surgery on on them to change their sex and as far as adults you have no issue.

Well, I Think if it's if if they've thought about it properly like some like Jan Morris, for example who

I read years ago one of the first of the trans people that I read and greatly respected her

Her struggle that she went through in order to Change sex from male to female.

She really really put herself through it and clearly sincere clearly suffered from from gender dysphoria No doubt about that and and and I take my hat off to her and to the doctors who helped her

But I fear that what we're seeing now is a fashion a craze a Mimetic epidemic which is which is which is spreading like an epidemic of Measles or something like that I'm trying to make sense of that.

I mean, it doesn't really make sense. He's struggling to he's pausing He's having to think about it.

There's nothing wrong with that if you haven't thought about something But this has been a hot -button issue for a few years now at least since 2020 and Especially in Britain and he's clueless on how to navigate this

It's it's really sad to me in a way because he has Darwin in the background as someone just pointed out he's got a bust of Darwin and He claims to be this

Rational thinker he believes in reason that's one of the things if you read Dawkins you're gonna see over and over and over is the supremacy of reason over the superstitions of religion and the bigotries of Tradition and and reason is going to be the thing that really advances us and we should throw away all those antiquated notions of tradition religion and ties to the past and embrace

Embrace our evolution, but also embrace the what makes sense to human beings and So he's he's a bit of he's a rationalist.

I guess there's no other way to say it and And he's also a materialist and Which doesn't really jive because you know rat

To him it would be in your brain things sparking off things chemical reactions that are actually causing this reason in the first place, so There isn't the the intangibles don't have a way to even exist in the materialist world that Richard Dawkins believes in but but the whole idea is that Things can be like a mathematical equation.

We can approach almost every problem that way things can be approached in this rational way So so where's the rational way?

Where's the evolutionary? Biological way to approach the issue of transgenderism, right? You would think that if you were at least trying to be consistent you would look at that as an

Inhibiting mutation right like people who claim to have this they're not procreating

There I mean if they are I don't know exactly what the numbers are But but if they are procreating it certainly is not to the degree that heterosexual couples are

They have higher suicide rates. There's It's a very costly on society to transition them and there's a lot of drugs that they have to take for the rest of their

Lives most of the time when this happens. I mean, there's so many Drawbacks to it you would think someone who's a rationalist who's a materialist like Richard Dawkins Would object to it on those grounds

He doesn't though And and I'm not even saying that would be a completely rational objection

I don't think his understanding of reality his philosophy of life makes sense. So There's gonna be problems with it

But but he chooses not to go that direction which that would be I would think the low -hanging fruit for him It would also give him a lot of blowback.

It would be you have to actively be against Transgenderism in order to take that stance and you know,

Charles Darwin would have probably said I mean he didn't face these same things But you know, he would have done something like that, right?

We're in a new era though and Richard Dawkins decides to make this separation and I've seen others make this separation and I think this is going to be in conservative elite circles.

There's there's gonna be a split on this There are those who want children to be exempted from this that don't don't hurt the children and This the whole idea of don't hurt the children, which is a appropriate idea.

We should understand that children are There's less wisdom there They're less able to make the decisions that they are being trained for that They will be able to make at a later point in their life.

There is development, right? Even Jesus it says grew in wisdom and stature in favor with God and man so so children

Are to be protected if you make one if you cause one of them to stumble better that a millstone were hung around your neck

So he's detecting something that is true Alright, and so there is this category of of protecting kids

But at the same time he objects to transgender surgeries

He because I guess they they harm children somehow they're Innately it's going to do damage.

It's he can't condemn the doctors outright even though that's what he's being asked to do but he can at least

Kind of give this whimper of a a lame response to say we should protect the kids from that Okay, protect them from that.

Why though right and and this is the question I could I could look at something like firearms and I could say well, you know a child

Who's three -year -old shouldn't be left in a room full of loaded firearms. Why is that? They don't know how they work

They haven't been taught responsibility. They're not it's not a tool that they can use effectively The they have there's great potential for damage there, but our firearms wrong.

No firearms aren't wrong in fact firearms are useful tools and I could say the same thing about a

Vehicle or heavy machinery or anything that would be dangerous in the hands of Someone who's untrained or a child but is is right and good in the hands of an adult when it comes to Sexuality I can say that Children do not have the capacity for that yet God has not wired them in such a way as to take part in that and So because I believe as the

Bible teaches that sex is for marriage itself and Someone who is not eligible for marriage and someone who is not married should not be participating in that Should they have knowledge about it?

I don't want to go on a whole long thing here, but but I'm getting to the point. The point is that They they don't there are certain phases of development in which we

As as parents as members of society We give new responsibilities like the right to vote.

Some of these are based on tradition But there's this understanding that there is a development that that proceeds forward now

Is that though is the question in the same category as something like transgenderism? so it's

It's wrong to it's dangerous, I guess to Have a transition for children.

It's dangerous for doctors to perform those surgeries on Children, but yet for adults is perfectly fine.

It's even brave. It's even something to admire Well, that's what

Richard Dawkins does at the end of the clip He turns it into something to admire if you've thought through it and you really feel that you're a woman even though you're

We're born a man and that's who you really are then You should be true to what?

to That experience you say you have that experience living in society and feeling like a woman to quote

Shania Twain If you can sing that song as a man and you really mean it that consent that belief makes it so and and and there should be a

Recognition of that and part of obtaining the social recognition is perhaps performing a surgery

Now if that's a good thing in and of itself What why is it that it's bad for children, but it's good for adults

Like at what point does it become because with these other issues like like guns for example, or other, you know safety issues or even?

heterosexuality, I think it's it's fair to say that We are looking at something that's good in a in the right context and and and there's someone who is just unable to navigate that Context because they're they haven't developed to the point of being able to have the wisdom and knowledge, etc but in this case with transgenderism it's

Dawkins has to has to cram this into this kind of format where it's the same thing as that.

It's like guns so it's like something that's good and right and heroic and worthy of admiration and You know, of course, no doctor should be punished for performing these and we should

I mean why not taxpayer money going towards it? If it's so good we we should champion this

But yet just not for kids not for kids because they don't know how to handle it yet or something that's that's what's happening and I think that's what the conservative movements doing and This is so different than even

I would say and I want to say conservative movement I'm saying it's it's now maybe on the fringes But I think it will become mainstream because you already see this bifurcation with homosexuality and transgenderism where quote -unquote conservatives think it's okay for homosexual couples to Use surrogacy to become parents.

They think that it's okay for Homosexuals to get married the government shouldn't be involved in that It's but they they don't like the transgender thing in sports, right?

There's already the separation and I think the next logical step is well Transgenderism is fine, but not the kids right?

The kids are the last the the last spark of I guess moral decency the last

Thing to go in the we value our children in the United States, but in the Western world in particular has been

Uniquely, I would say values children and wants to preserve their innocence That's the last thing to go and we have no real reason

It's it's this flimsy consent thing that's holding the whole tidewater back we have no reason to Expect that that's going to hold

Because it's built on nothing less than our choice and in this idea that making choices are good

If you make a choice, you just have to be able to handle that choice you just have to be able to make that choice and have it be your own choice and not with the influence of someone else's as children are apt to be influenced and so So is it 12 years old?

Is it 18? Is it is it 3? I mean, what's what's the choice here? I mean the same thing could be said about pedophilia when when does the consent enter the picture what's missing though?

Is the idea of virtue and tell us that there's actually purpose baked into creation there's expectations and responsibilities and obligations we have and so the growth period is to be able to fill those obligations fulfill them to Benefit your fellow man to live in the order that God has established, right?

I'm not talking about the gospel I'm not talking about any of that yet. I'm just saying the way that God set up from creation that is there's a purpose in that and so that and that's how traditionally we've

I Mean everyone really up until pretty recently in the Western world would have viewed the difference between being a child and being an adult and And now that's that's all changing it's not about developing into something that's

Rooted in God's creation. It's just about Like passing an exam so that you can go and fulfill whatever desires you have that's all it is and and so when you're 18, you can vote and when you're 21, you can drink and You know, there's all these different ages that you can do different things at and it's it we're saying now that sexuality is is is just like this in the sense that it it also

Is is good in and of itself no matter what choice you make sexually You just have to prove at a certain age that you're able to handle that.

Why? Why? Why not why one age and not another what what is the damage if you?

If you have this desire, let's say at 12 or 13 Why is that not brave?

How come this person who's 25 is brave when they make that transition but not the person who's 13 and we need to protect them

What are we protecting them from exactly? right The only thing that's holding this back is well, they're just not capable

I don't know. There's some 13 year olds who seem pretty capable right once once that argument falls and You have a smart 13 year old or something.

You just open the floodgates for kids. There's no there's nothing Holding it back So that's just my two cents on it

I just think it's silly and it's just not something that we've heard really before but we're gonna hear it a lot

I think in the coming years and it's the big mistake. I think that conservative

Politically conservatives and I suppose Christians to some extent too. It's a mistake that they've made in platforming atheists and and people who are just so they're

They're so antithetical To a Christian understanding of reality not that you can't be cobelligerence on things, but There's this is where it leads

This is your brain on classical liberalism Richard Dawkins isn't woke. Remember Richard. This is not a guy who's supposedly woke

He's anti woke and the woke people don't like him and yet he's saying that it's it's a brave It's it's a really noble thing for someone who's an adult at least to pursue changing their gender.

I He's he's he his his whole idea is based on though consent and looking at individual humans as Autonomous and able to make these decisions.

So I think it's more in a classical liberal framework And so I wanted to share that with you.

I thought that was pretty crazy Let's get into the main topic. I think that's yeah Oh, no, I had one more thing, but you know what let's save that because I've already been going about 26 minutes

So let's get into the main topic Lots of comments coming in Yeah Richard Dawkins does go wobbly at times as we see in the video.

We need Christians to stand on the word without wavering That's very true. You know, who else is Joe Biden? I just saw Joe Biden. The other day is going pretty wobbly as well

No Joe Biden and Mitch McConnell Mitch McConnell is actually who I was thinking of I get now I see I'm getting him confused now because They they're acting the same exact way.

It's crazy All right, let's get into the Nazi stuff Alright one more comment

John Philip Brooks is okay So why do conservatives criticize male to female transgender people so much more severely than female to male transgender people?

I don't know. I haven't noticed that you know Do they do that? I Guess so,

I guess so. Yeah, it's It seems more prevalent to me. Maybe I'm wrong on that, but it does seem more prevalent to me.

I Don't know Maybe someone else in the chat can answer that question. Okay, let's talk about this

I have this on a word perfect document, that's the I'm kind of weird.

I don't really use word I've I've been trained on this program called word perfect and so I keep using it, but it's about Double -spaced it's it's like nine and a half pages so I'm gonna read some of it to you and Just talk about this because I think it's fascinating and it's important for us to understand

So I start off I say it goes without saying that the modern left use their political opponents as proto Nazis This of course puts them in the enviable position of wearing the white hat regardless of the strength of their arguments

The sheer volume of media attacks on Donald Trump for somehow gleaning from Adolf Hitler is overwhelming just recently

Vox carried the subtitle Trump isn't Hitler, but when it comes to the courts, he successfully is borrowing from the

Nazis playbook The association this time is that in the same way Hitler used his arrest for the

Munich Beer Hall pooch To promote himself. So Trump is also using his arrest for election interference to promote his candidacy

Okay. So in other words, there's this very loose tie that you could try to make and say well Hitler was elected for trying to overthrow or Arrested for trying to overthrow the government and Trump's also being arrested and therefore they must be the same person

Of course modern leftists fail to see the parallels between their leaders and Nazis on things like race obsession health care and environmental policies

Only conservatives are guilty of adopting Nazi beliefs. I mean, it's just so obvious I mean, you're not seeing articles from the left paralleling

Hitler with their own heroes. He's not like Gramsci He's not like Nelson Mandela, he's not like Martin Luther King jr.

All these guys were in jail cells writing stuff Because and that's how you know about them because that's where they wrote their stuff is in jail cells and From these jail cells.

They were able to acquire an audience and It was because they were threats in very in different ways, but threats to the government

Ironically modern conservatives foolishly seem determined to appropriate this lazy smear for themselves as a defense mechanism as a way to convince their voter base

That political progressives are the true Nazis and thus when the moral high ground before adopting this tactic

It is wise to consider when it can't where it came from who benefits from it and how conservatives traditionally critiqued

Nazism so This is I think foolhardy from the beginning and I I'm sure that I've fallen into this before Probably not recently, but I was influenced to some extent from some neo -conservatives

I mean I read Jonah Goldberg's book liberal Fascism and thought it was like one of the best things when I wrote when I read it and there are some interesting things

In it, but it's overall. I think it's probably I wouldn't recommend it at this point. I'll put it that way and I I really thought that Conservatives would politically win if we were able to show that the left were the true

Nazis because we all know the Nazis are Bad, right? We all grew up with the World War two movies and video games and we know the

Nazis are bad In fact, I was talking to a friend of mine the other day and we were talking about first -person shooter video games and we were talking about how like you don't have like war of 1812 or French Revolution or Napoleonic Wars or You don't really have a lot of World War one stuff even certainly not

Civil War Revolutionary War first -person shooters. Why is that and There's like tons of World War two like we just keep

Killing Nazis in in video games and and so it's just part of what we're used to and and so If if that's the big villain if that's the the worst imaginable thing

Is to be a Nazi then whoever gets to paint the other side as the true Nazis will gain a political advantage and and so the left has cultivated this and Of course, you know they have their reasons for being anti -nazi because the

Nazis were national socialists and they were international socialists so they were sworn enemies in Germany and They have continued to be sworn enemies in fact, you can see even remnants of this playing out in the

Russia Ukraine struggle because Ukraine there's regiments that have

Nazi esque neo -nazi sympathies. They use Nazi symbols, etc fighting

Russian units who while they're not Soviets now, there's still a history there and so So this hasn't really gone away, but that's not the only critique of Nazism.

In fact, it's not even the strongest critique of Nazism and It's kind of insane

I think for conservatives to just buy into that moral framework that the Nazis are of course the worst thing that could ever be

There there's all kinds. In fact, the current threats are Our Totalitarianism from globalists who you know, maybe you could say they resemble the

Nazis in some ways, but they really more resemble kind of like a Really more classical liberal to be honest that's formed a totalitarianism.

There's there's threats, of course from the the actual communist world as well there's threats simply from moral degeneracy and You know, the left is like someone told me this years ago.

I thought it stuck with me So why do you keep calling the left Nazis? They're basically a suicide cult.

They're like Jim Jones. I mean compare them to that I mean, that's that's really what they are. And I'm like, yeah, that's actually I mean, that's much worse in a way it

I mean It's not to say Nazis are good. It's just to say that they're they're not the big threat right this second and It's easy to take an already defeated threat from years ago to recycle it and to just keep

Rehab keep trying to smear today's opponents as part of that same threat to categorize them that way

Because you don't have to think really you don't have to do any philosophical work You don't have to understand the roots of a particular ideology.

You can just say it's that same old ideology. We've always hated So when the left starts doing crazy stuff,

I would just say let's suppress that urge to call them Nazis or even You know racists or even, you know

Klansmen or whatever the Democrat Party's the real racist that it doesn't faze them at all And it just all it does is teach our side that that's the worst thing imaginable

So we buy into the left's framework when we do that very foolish thing to do, but we've been doing it.

Unfortunately for I'd say it got mainstream probably within the last 15 years, but it's been going on in conservative intellectual circles for longer so during Well, let's start actually here

The first thing that I talked about is the Frankfurt school psychologist Theodore Adorno and in 1950 he wrote a book

Called the authoritarian personality. This is only three years after the Paris peace treaties were signed and he suggested things like parental authority traditional gender roles family pride preserving heterosexuality

Defending American culture and Christian beliefs signaled implicit pre fascist tendencies

So you're not quite a fascist But you're you're getting there if you hold to these things these things and this isn't there was more than just that But but these were things that he thought were threats and You can see the modern left using all of these of course university programs use these in their psychology departments

Now two years after this point after this book was published. You can see this already playing out in the 1952

Democrat campaign for the White House President Harry Truman He wasn't running.

In fact, I'm trying to remember the name of the guy who was running at that time I should probably look it up. No one remembers the losers of these things if they don't have a future in politics it was a guy by the name of Adley Stevenson, so Adley Stevenson and he he did not we could probably call this a landslide.

I mean Eisenhower really did beat him He only got 89 in the electoral vote 89 electoral votes and then

President Eisenhower got 442 So but I mean look he had forty four point three percent of the popular vote and Eisenhower at fifty five point two percent

So, I mean there was a split like the big part of the country liked Stevenson but President Harry Truman, of course was the outgoing president during this time and President Harry Truman Campaigned for Stevenson and campaigned against Eisenhower and the

Republicans now, how did he do that? Let me give you an example of what he did He blamed

Republicans for things like opposing civil rights Yes, even in 1952 that was already a discussion

Restricting immigration was another thing that they were they were bigoted on this That the

Republicans promoted the belief that Soviet subversives had infiltrated the State Department. You remember McCarthy And he called that the big lie that that's been recycled the big lie and he said that it was deadly to the

American tradition of Liberty and the kind of weapon used by the Nazis the fascists and the Communists Okay, so the communists are also kind of bad guys, but the

Nazis are the chief bad guys He warned the National Jewish Welfare Board that Americans should be vigilant to oppose the philosophy of racial superiority

Developed by the Nazis from re -emerging in the United States under the guise of anti -communism

He even linked Republicans opposition to government subsidized jobs programs to an unwillingness to defend ourselves against the aggression of the

Nazis and the fascists and do business with Hitler instead and Ironically all of this was aimed at Dwight Eisenhower who defeated actual

Nazis But was now guilty of accepting quote the very practices that identified the so -called master race unquote

So as early as 1952 five years after the Paris Peace Treaty You already have this going on You already have

Democrats using this playbook to smear their Republican rivals, okay So don't think that this was something that was concocted for Donald Trump or George W Bush or Ronald Reagan No, it's been going on much longer than that Now the critique of course of this is you have to understand what it was to understand why the modern critique

People on the right are using is also bogus Their critique used was that basically

Eisenhower who did had defeated the Nazis was too into Preserving his own people.

I mean he just he really wanted to keep that the immigration down and he really just I mean

He was racially insensitive on Civil rights issues. I mean this is before the Civil Rights Act, but he was he was to be

I Guess suspected because of that He was supposed to be suspected because he was in the same party as someone who was claiming there were

Communists all over the place and we all know that if you oppose communism too hard That must mean you're a Nazi because they opposed communism, right?

It was these kinds of things that were tangentially related that Someone like Truman was able to connect to Eisenhower and the

Republican Party and he wasn't successful Eisenhower won Which you know you would think it

Republicans tried that and they did it didn't work They would go back to the drawing board and they would trash their former plans But Democrats don't do that because their ideologues

Republicans are becoming that way more but Democrats Just hammered, you know the next year the next time they were around.

Let's use the same smears Let's so they've been doing this for a long time Today's American left increasingly destroys more and more cultural artifacts organizations and people through this strategy to Everything from MAGA Republicans to Moms for Liberty are smeared as Nazis or part of a growing list of supposedly repackaged

Nazi beliefs like white supremacy kinism Christian nationalism and Confederate sympathizing such has always been the post -world war two lefts undeveloped understanding

So they're not actually critiquing Nazism. They're just calling things Nazi. They don't like that's a difference, right?

They seem to think that anything with a hint of concern for the preservation of European heritage tradition or culture will produce another

Hitler and Holocaust Being anti -nazi now requires one to purge Western societies of their very identities and that's 100 % true the left has for years been making since you can see it since Truman the claim that Conservatives are trying to stick up for white people for Americans For Now it's for Christians for for for the people that really you could say settled pioneered colonized founded the place we call

United States of America you have those people and their their descendants are to be shamed are to be marginalized are to be

Deplatformed and anything short of that is Nazism That's basically where we've ended up.

And so it's it's this commitment to people in place That is the problem with Nazism it's the blood -and -soil thing.

That's the problem. That's the critique. That's the the issue That's why Nazism was wrong to the left

American political conservatives have long pointed out the left's hypocrisy though on this point James Burnham expressed concern in 1961 that the

United Nations exclusively focused on racialism from Western whites as Nazis and Klansmen while ignoring the anti white outrages of The black

Congolese the anti -semitic activities of North African Arabs the Mau Mau terror and other examples and a lot of the examples

I'm going to give you are coming from National Review magazine in the 1950s back when they still had some actual conservatives writing for them before Jonah Goldberg and you know

David French and all those guys and National Review Carry guys like James Burnham James Burnham.

I talked about managerial elite theory James Burnham's the guy who really started that and Came up with that and and so they carried articles from people like that and and they were expressing their concerns even back then with this double standard

Currently the United States Department of Justice is suing SpaceX for employing American citizens instead of asylum seekers and refugees

It is a modern sin to prefer one's own people if they are white and this is somehow proven by the fact that Hitler preferred

White people and committed genocide, of course Anglo American conservatives have always opposed

Nazism But on different grounds Early post -war conservatives believed Hitler's problem was not that he loved his country or his people too much

But rather that he twisted natural affinities for blood and soil into loyalty to italitarian ideology

In other words, the slogan blood and soil was just a slogan Didn't really mean that The at least the upper echelon that they really cared about blood and soil.

They cared about an ideology they had They were willing to violate sovereign borders they were willing to jail their own people for political crimes that were

That were not political crimes before the Nazis had arisen just just blaspheming the state you know, they they were willing to kill even parts of their own populations within their borders in order to Purify their race quote -unquote

They were They demanded allegiance to this abstraction and Hitler became basically an abstracted person in the minds of many

They saw little difference between not the conservatives saw little difference between Nazism and Bolshevism on this point

So communism neither fascism or communism were capable of achieving their ideal world and thus produced Rulers committed to fantasies that destroyed the lives of the people they claimed to love

Gerhardt Niemeyer asked Does it make sense when people in the name of the good life?

Initiate wholesale purges liquidate entire classes of a population Insist on prescribing the detailed structure of a faraway society maintain an army of spies and spy against those spies

The obvious answer is no and this was written that particular quote. I believe is from 1957

Think about where we are today. Does that does not some of that describe the United States today?

An army of spies that spy against those spies. I mean insist on prescribing the detailed structure of a faraway society

We're kind of there's some parallels you could draw if you wanted Hitler did not love his own people as much as he did a certain abstract construction of societies people's lives were made to fit into so The main thing was this vision and everything got sacrificed to this vision

National Socialists work to achieve what Eric Vaughn and I can't say this guy's name, but Kuhnelt Leiden Called an irrational mixture of biology and collectivism and conservatives critiqued them on both counts

Now this is a gentleman who he wrote for National Review quite a bit They objected to the way Nazis declass and denied many privileges to non -aryans which forced upon society a new disruptive hierarchy

They disagreed with the novel ways Nazis imagined Jews to be less than people They pointed out how

Nazis developed a welfare state which suppressed individual freedom to live think and work This was the opposite of conservatism which sought to preserve traditional arrangements formed by Providence over time through experience so so so this is like the difference between ideology and Tradition when ideology comes in it is a one -stop shop one size fits all immediately now

Everyone must conform to this new plan. That's been That that's been concocted in the political laboratory, right?

We found the secret to how society's supposed to function. We found the mathematical equation

We've discovered it and now we're going to impose it on everyone that that's ideology.

So that's why I say abstract It's like conceived in the mind and then it's imposed Whereas tradition is from the bottom up.

It's more of a this is how people have lived together for years and bonds They've formed as they've shared

Their own griefs and sorrows and joys and victories and They have it's not a perfect world, but they have figured out ways in local regions to Live without killing each other and to form bonds

And and it's a society that you're born into and you have obligations to and those are good obligations

That's that's how tradition works. So it's two different ways to approach the social arrangements

And this is why conservatives critiques Nazis and Communists and other ideologues and classical liberals, by the way

National Review was still doing that in the 1950s In the concert I should back up here

Leiden said that national socialists always belonged to the left and the idea that they were of the right was one of the most successful hoaxes in history in the conservative mind

Russell Kirk echoed this point if you haven't read that by the way conservative mind is one of the preeminent conservative books

Kirk wrote the Nazi and fascist parties were Destructive instruments made possible by the hysteria and loneliness of the masses who enthusiastically supported them

Though now and again these ideologies might endeavor to disguise themselves by talk of family and tradition This was no better than sham their nature and object was revolutionary.

What he's saying there about loneliness This is a common thought about Nazism about communism from conservatives

They've noticed that these totalitarian ideologies destroy the erase And in classical liberalism is also part of this by the way who the

Weimar Republic would have been part of this They they undermine the voluntary associations and local communities

So public trust is is broken. I think 2020 we saw a really big

Example of this Where people don't trust each other as much as they did before and You're suspicious of your neighbor you might spy on you you might tell the government right there's

There's there a threat. Don't go around them. They have a disease and And of course technology facilitates some of this but there's a loneliness that comes if you're just on social media

That's your only connection. You're gonna be lonely. If you don't have human connection, you're gonna be lonely and if you're lonely

What can fill that place or at least promise you that they're going to fulfill their your needs and give you a sense of identity and purpose well a

Far -off political party is going to appeal to you more than even the local surroundings that should be in place and working effectively

But they're not because the family's broken down communities broken down, etc. So Their object was revolutionary conservatism and Nazism were mortal enemies by nature

One way to show this clearly is to examine the way national socialists viewed religion Nazi leadership believed

Christianity competed with their ideology. So Hitler mocked Christianity as a Jewish belief He said quote

I will not tolerate it if a parson metals and earthly affairs the organized line must be broken so that the state is absolute

Lord Unquote and you wonder how some of the more

Pietistic leaning Christians today would deal with this we can see an example in history how they dealt with Hitler.

It wasn't good Heinrich Himmler said we shall not rest until we have rooted out

Christianity As a result the state agents seized most church property routinely accused ministers of financial misconduct or sexual perversion eliminated parachurch ministries and information outlets and arrested thousands of clergy when jurist

Hermoth James von Moltke was condemned to death in 1945 for consulting with clergy on the practical ethical demands of Christianity He said

Christianity and we national socialists have one thing in common and only one thing

We claim the whole man This aggressive opposition to Christianity resembled what took place during the

French Revolution And this is another good way to look at ideology right ideology

Claims the whole man. It's totalitarian by nature it's It's every part of you must be chained into this common pursuit of some kind Tradition doesn't do that Christian civilization

Christian tradition doesn't do that It assumes that your life should be for the glory of God but it doesn't formulate that in in a church or a state or really any institution that unit must now a human institution that you must give all your allegiance to and There's purpose and there's telos but it's not subsumed and organized by some human institution

There's what we call Providence that directs things over time and in a more gradual fashion

Russell Kirk applied Edmund Burke's critiques of the French Revolution to 20th century tyrants who religiously

Prioritize the will of the modern state over people's natural interests in both communism Jacobin ism,

I guess not communism, but Proto -communism marks was it was before Marx, but it was

French revolutionary thought and socialism the state subordinating every social impulse

Unlike leftists who share their anti -nazi enthusiasm with communists anglo -american conservatives saw their own disagreements represented more in the

German states religious opponents Friedrich Augustus Voigt wrote the people who did most against the

Nazis were not the communists not even the socialists but the active Christians and the conservatives the

Jesuits the ministers the junkers the colonels and the aristocrats and this is from National Review 1956

So he's saying look, it's not the communists who are the the major enemy here. He's like the Christians were the major enemy

James Donahue recounts in a book called Hitler's conservative opponents in Bavaria the way that many

Bavarian Christians believe the new Germany had departed from values and traditions of which Germany had once been so proud and And this book

I believe was written in 1961 so not not long after I mean the generation who fought

World War two is still around and Donahue writes that most of those who are actively opposed to Hitler in the years after 1933 were equally opposed to the old -fashioned 19th century liberalism as well as Bolshevism So these people weren't classical liberals.

They weren't communists. They weren't fascists. What were they? They opposed national socialism the way

Edmund Burke opposed the French Revolution by appealing to Christianity Traditional social hierarchy and private property they defended the liberty of the church because they believed their religion was true

Not because they prized the freedom to worship in a neutral society This is what today is being called

Christian nationalism Just so you know the most ardent Opposition to Hitler were people that today would be totally branded

Christian nationalists This is who conservatives said in the 1950s were the main opponents of Hitler They would be branded

Christian nationalists today. They weren't classical liberals. They weren't fascists. They weren't communists They were Christians and they wanted

Christian civilization This has been lost somewhat and and I'm afraid the way the way things are going in elite circles

It will never be regained as long as well. I shouldn't say never God God can do anything and Stranger things have happened.

There is an undercurrent with young people who are interested in this. They want a return to Christian civilization

I would say though that there's a huge failure going on and and unfortunately I think most of these people can't see what that they're they're failing in this regard

Among those who are older who should have more wisdom some do but a lot of them don't and they're not encouraging this

They're committed to a classical liberalism and they don't see how it Undermines their

Christianity. In fact, sometimes they fuse it with the Constitution or their conception of it with Christianity it's really their conception of it because the

Constitution I Are there maybe some classical liberal things? I mean, it's not even you could you could make a better case of the

Declaration of Independence had some maybe classical liberal themes Constitution though It's a governing document.

That's more of you know, here's how things function. Here's how we're gonna organize The way that government operates so it's an operational document more than anything else.

It's it's And there is wisdom there is wisdom behind it. Mostly though. It's biblical references that were being discussed in the

Constitutional Convention anyway in modern America These opponents of Hitler would be classified by the media's

Christian nationalists Yet their instincts are similar to older generations of Anglo American conservatives who rightly detected

Nazism the innovations of modernity and rejected them They also rejected progressivism and any ideology people sought to make the yardstick for all political decisions

Gerhard Niemeyer observed those conservatives who fought militantly both Nazism and communism and have seen the destruction wrought by these

Totalitarian ideologies have acquired a certain primordial fear of all ideological thinking

But wisely they recognized the political reality that National Socialism had collapsed and was at most a historical reminiscence

New threats demanded their attention, which is why they spent little time rehashing their critiques to warn about an enemy already defeated

This is why conservatives don't haven't talked about Nazis as much as the left. They're not obsessed with them

They they view that as that time came and went in fact, even people today who say they're neo -nazis

They're not Nazis. They're not, you know, you'd have to live in the Nazi regime of 19 in the 1940s 1930s and 40s to be a

Nazi Then they might have some similar ideas and so forth, but these aren't that these people are not the major threat to our civilization

Leftist fall anyone who falls short of sharing their obsession to smoke out Nazis is somehow harboring knots pro -nazi sentiments, right?

I might even get comments in this video which is the funny part by people who think that I'm defending Nazis or I'm Because as a conservative

I don't critique it hard enough or I'm telling you not not to worry about it Because it's not a huge threat or anything that I'm the problem that that could be

And by the way, I should say there might be some of you who maybe maybe you do have a son or a

I? Say a son because more likely young men probably but maybe you do know someone who is being attracted to some of these

Neo -nazi type beliefs and maybe this is something that you need to look into a little more, but I I'm just saying overall

When you look at the big picture Not the threat not not anything close to what the left makes out

It does not matter how often former President Trump denounced neo -nazis white supremacists and Klansmen the media still constantly subjected him to renewing this disavowal

The ritualistic purity tests are perhaps what led to the modern political right seared conscience on this whole issue

There's a good example of this from a few years ago at a large gun rights rally in Richmond I lived in Virginia at the time.

So this sparked in my mind There was a conservative blogger who noticed the event did not seem to be about guns at all

Instead the goal was disproving the leftist narrative that Nazis and Klansmen are the only ones who care about gun rights and instead painting then governor

Ralph Northam as the true Nazi and Klansman which Granted Northam made pretty easy because his yearbook had a picture of him.

I guess in a Klansman attire or a blackface I'm not sure which this of course is the same

Ralph Northam who thought it was acceptable to do things like raise monuments and kill children after birth yet the message the crowd emphasized with their signs and slogans was how racist he supposedly was as if That was relevant to his attempted gun grab

So I saw this firsthand. I saw how people painted Northam as this horrible figure because he's he's a

Nazi. He's like Hitler He's and I thought this is what the left did though Wait, not long ago.

Why are we doing this? Now political activists on the right are starting to adopt the left's moral framing

Nate Hochman or Hokeman, I guess an aide working for Ron DeSantis campaign was immediately fired from his position after retweeting an exaggerated political video that briefly featured an obscure symbol apparently used by Nazis Yet Christina Pusha the campaign's rapid response director a little little higher up Defended congratulating a homosexual father who had twins through surrogacy the same month

It's on the Ron DeSantis campaign this is back this is in July we're talking a little over a month ago last year a

Historian on the Virginia Board of Historical Resources had to resign from Governor Glenn Youngkin's administration for simply supporting monuments to Confederate soldiers

Yet again, this was the same administration that hosted a series of Pride Month events The left's long cancel culture tradition now adopted by the right is starting to extend to groups like traditional

Christians And we just interviewed Lizzie Marbuck from Ohio right to life and I showed you this that just believing in the exclusivity of Jesus Christ She said there's no hope for any of us outside of having faith in Jesus Christ alone that offended

Republican Congressman Max Miller and he called it one of the most bigoted tweets ever and she loses her job it's the same play that's being run that there's there's bigotry on the right and We can adopt all the sexual anarchy we want and we will never be held accountable for it

And it's acceptable now, even if you're on the right politically to adopt that sexual anarchy to some extent and you will not be called out

For it, but the moment you and I don't know what with with Hochman, you know If he was aware of this symbol,

I did when I saw the symbol. I didn't even know it was Nazi I mean, I don't even still know if it's Nazi. Maybe it's associated with Nazis, but you know, it doesn't matter

It does not matter that you get fired right away There is no room for error on this, right?

We could talk about all that, you know similar things. You're there's there's blasphemy laws that the left has put in place that we abide by but where there should be separation and regulation and Acknowledgement of evil when it comes to transgender and homosexual and things there isn't

We've lost that and So we are I believe operating now within the left's framework.

Even the right is operating within the left's framework These representative examples of the political right policing themselves are happening during a time when conservative industry leaders seem more concerned with normalizing homosexuality

Than responding to the left's constant attacks on white people. They conceive of America in ways only progressives used to America is more the abstract ideas of freedom and equality than it is a tangible place filled with tangible people as Egalitarian sentiments increased right -wingers follow in the footprints laid down but for them by radicals

As a result gatekeepers and politically right circles are conditioned into suspecting Nazi sympathies simply because someone values a sense of people in place

So we come for full circle now The right is now saying the same thing Harry Truman said in the 50s

That guy likes people in place too much wants to make America great again, right now that Trump Trump is kind of Trump Trump has his

I Guess contradictions on this in a way but Trump one of the things the left had a problem with Trump about was his border policy and the fact that he looked at America not as an idea of it as people and this is in a place and and this is one of the things that now is being critiqued from the right that there's

That that if you have that sympathy for people in place, you know, be careful of that I mean that's that could lead to Nazism or that might be

Nazism This became more clear to me recently as I watch conservative and evangelical

Christian outlets try to eviscerate Stephen Wolfe's book the case for Christian nationalism though legitimate critiques exist and and I do believe that I it's

I've read probably most of them and That most of them are cheap shots most of them aren't well argued they're lazy

I think Stephen told me there was one that I had yet to read that was actually a good critique

But I'm very open to critiques in fact one of the things that I thought when I was reading that book is seems really focused on New England and and I even kind Of nudged

Steve in this way when I was with him at an event Month or two ago and just said or my guess was in April So it was more than that, but I guess you know, what

I said was that uh, you know, what about you know the South? What about what was going on in Virginia? Because you know,

I'm I'm doing this Virginia first documentary right now and they're Virginia really is the the headwaters for America the

America that we have today and And there's differences between Virginia and New England and and I would say that the the

Puritan model actually turned into if you look historically it turned into Unitarianism transcendentalism and it's went off the rails and now is the current

Northeast of today I mean there's and the Bible belts in the south. You got to figure out why that is what led to that and so I don't even know if I would agree with you know,

I don't know where Stevens even at with all of this but the New England centric approach that Looks at Everything kind of must serve the common good or at least they have let's just put it this way

They have a they had a larger role the government played in society in regulation in conforming people

I have a Jeffersonian instinct. I don't care for that. So so I could see another

I'm just saying that I could see critiques being made along those lines That those haven't been the critiques though Steven said what many

Christian thinkers before him including Augustine and Calvin believed that blood relations and this is a quote Matter for your ethnicity because your kin have belonged to this people on this land

That was enough guys. That was enough. I mean these would be this was obvious to Christians in previous generations

It did not matter that wolf clarified. He rejected modern racialist principle and was not making a white nationalist argument

He said that but Paul Matsko and reason magazine, which is a libertarian magazine wrote that wolf has composed a segregationist political theology

Kevin de Young wrote in the review for the gospel coalition that wolf's arguments bore resemblance to certain blood -and -soil

Nationalisms of the 19th and 20th centuries wonder what they could be Virgil Walker wrote for g3 ministries that wolf's version of nationalism maintains

Consistency with the kind of German volkism that paved the way for ethnic German nationalism Intent Stevens a

Nazi or at least he's on his way to becoming one This of course was never the problem political conservatives though had with Nazism until very recently

In fact, some of their critiques were that national socialists did not value people in place enough They violated sovereign borders persecuted their own countrymen and destroyed sacred traditions

They viewed the blood -and -soil slogan is merely a slogan to whatever extent they had affinity for their own

It was not the Nazi instinct to replace natural affections with a love for power and ideology What modern political conservatives fail to see is how their willingness to cancel others for violating?

Egalitarian principles shares more in common with the ideologues they claim to oppose than it does their conservative heritage

And I mean every word of that the conservatives today who are Critiquing using the rehashed leftist critiques from the 50s that leftists are using against them

But they're taking them and using them against their right. They're punching right using them they are they are making a grave mistake and They they're they're hypocrites in a way they don't see it maybe but they're hypocrites

Authentic conservatives have a much stronger argument against national socialism, but it is not one

They need to deploy seeing as how busy they are actually they actually are fighting real threats

Younger members of the right are starting to see the failures of the late stage post -war conservatism The question is whether they will have the opportunity to conserve conservatism by restoring a

Christian moral framework that values people in place while rejecting newly adopted ideology, so That's just working through that piece because we've been going over an hour

I'm not going to have time to talk about the modern application of God's law. That'll just take too much time Maybe we'll get to it next week but But yeah, this is where we are

This is the world that we live in if there's any questions, by the way or comments get them in now So I can focus on them before we end the podcast.

This is probably going to be the Labor Day podcast. So So get those in I'm looking at the comments right now a number of you have

Huh Trudell says that Eric von Kuhnelt Leighton came up twice now for him in this week.

That's interesting. I wonder where he came up free I mean, it's the first time I was reading him I think was was this previous week looking in the archives of National Review and I'm like, who is this guy?

Trudell also says he says I've had a similar realization before the left doesn't actually care that the

Nazis were murderous They just disliked the Nazis were loud energetic and appealed to a populist sentiment Yeah, well,

I think that they Yeah, the murders that's the thing with any totalitarianism.

That's why Charles Hayward thinks we're going to get violence I don't know if people saw that but a Few days ago, there was a big kerfuffle on Twitter between Josh Bice of g3 ministries and Charles Hayward It in my opinion.

It was pretty silly because I think Josh Bice was He was trying to take quotes from Charles Hayward And then one of the things he wanted to attribute to him was that well

Charles Hayward who for those who don't know Charles Hayward is a well, I don't even know how to describe him completely.

He reviews books I guess you could say he's a bit of a political philosopher, but he has a philosophy called foundationalism and I'm planning on trying to get him on the program to maybe talk about some of this.

But anyway One of the things that Josh Bice was trying to go after was that He approves of violence somehow and and some of the things he said were just the tongue -in -cheek.

They were jokes It wasn't really it was being sarcastic. It was obvious it was kind of like when the left looks at some of Trump's comments that are clearly him joking and they they try to write a whole article about how it's he's promoting violence and And Charles Hayward though does actually think because I've heard an interview with him where he talked about this that there will be violence inevitably in The United States more so than we're seeing now because totalitarianism always has violence

They're the people who do not conform to the state that approved Rigid standards that conform to this very narrow ideology are there they're killed

They're persecuted that that's just what happens. They're Marginalized they're put in concentration camps and things like that That's a real fear that could come up at some point

Someone's the cosmic treason said Stephen Wolfe said that white evangelicals as a group are the lone bulwark against moral insanity in America And that was critiqued by James White worth listening to.

Yes. I've heard it. I Would respectfully disagree with dr. White on his understanding of that or what that means.

I thought that was a poor critique and I Guess that's out there publicly now, but you know, that's just my disagreement and I think good men can disagree with each other on things

I did some episodes on that at the time and and I think what happened there was Stephen Wolfe And this really is off topic to be honest with you but but but I guess it's on you could relate it in the sense that that's just another quote that you can pull from Stephen Wolfe that people tried to take and then paint it as some kind of a you know proto fascistic thing and And really he's saying that there's these he was talking about political categories and People then imposed upon him these theological categories that he didn't mean so taking, you know eternal categories imposing them on this these temporal political categories and You know could

Stephen have said that differently could he have yeah, I suppose so and he probably you know now I think he probably would say that yeah, maybe

I could have said it better But as soon as you're being called out in those ridiculous ways, you don't there's no reason to back down or apologize

Because he didn't do anything technically wrong He's looking at voting patterns and saying

Yeah, it sure seems like white evangelicals tend to vote for conservatives more. Guess what according to some polling agencies black

Evangelicals have a tendency not all of them, but the vast majority tend to vote for pro -abortion candidates pro -homosexual candidates

Democrats Why is that they have? Similar beliefs on some things and they're even categorized as evangelical in some of the polling data most of the time they're not

But but I did see one recently where they it actually Separated white evangelicals and black evangelicals and their voting patterns were very different So so so it's looking at general trends and politicians have to take those things into account

But but it then framed that as well he's denying that there's unity at the communion table or that we're all one in Christ or that You know, my racial minorities don't matter or something like that is completely ridiculous not the point he was making at all

So anyway, um, yeah, Keanu Shaw says Stephen was right. It's factually correct. And I agree it is it's just a fact

I don't care really what people show me or Think of me for that, but I don't know what else to say

I mean it this is like the level that we're the level at which we're dealing with these things

It's sad to me because we're talking about surface level things and we could be talking about some root issues But I thought it was worth pointing out to you

And I thought hopefully this was educational for understanding when you see that critique coming from so -called conservatives

That is not a conservative critique Conservatives love people in place. We want to preserve things and we want changes to be gradual we want to preserve identity and social trust and we want people who have lived here of And and grown up in certain areas and develop trust with each other and forged bonds to be able to maintain those without them being totally disrupted and To to say that people who are concerned about that kind of thing because maybe they don't want mass immigration or something

Are you wow, that's kind of I don't know I'm a little little Hitler there a little bit of a fascist there or they're there somehow racially whatever

It's just It's not that's a leftist critique. That's something that's coming from a leftist at least in on that issue

Maybe there's other issues. They're not leftist on but they're there They're being a leftist on that issue and I think it's because a lot of the people on our side

Who were against social justice at least the previous iteration of it? They had adopted even earlier forms of it and and forms that were consistent with classical liberalism

They just didn't want full -blown Marxism So we're gonna have to spend probably more time talking about classical liberalism I'm actually listening to an audiobook right now, which is fascinating just a recommendation for everyone out there

I don't usually give book recommendations. I'm halfway done with this though. Why liberalism failed by Patrick Dineen. It's a fascinating read

Another one is the demon in democracy. Those are those are two books that I would just say I Don't know if I agree with everything in them, but they they certainly will give you a different perspective and show you how yeah

Okay, that that's what I'm seeing That's why when I look at even you know People on the blaze in the Daily Wire sometimes they say things that I think that seems a little leftist

But but I know they're not leftist well, there might be an attachment among some of those figures to a classical liberalism that does value basically

Thinks that you can do whatever you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone it values the decision -making

Ability that people have and the consent. That's what we saw with Richard Dawkins at the beginning of this podcast Places that is preeminent.

That's the decision maker. It's Dineen makes the argument that actually valuing individual is

Individualism like this that kind of individualism I should say Leads to totalitarianism that there's a symbiotic relationship there, which is an interesting perspective and an interesting argument that I don't have time to get into but but the idea that you know, the diversity is our strength that we're just one big melting pot that You know the

America is just an idea That you can do whatever you want with your body as long as it doesn't hurt anyone

I mean, these are all kinds of classical liberal slogans that we've all been immersed in from a young age and they undermine

Christianity actually they undermine our civilization and yeah, maybe they're not woke Completely but there that was the road that well, there was a stepping stone you needed to get to woke