To start off this “Earth Day,” Charlie unpacks whether or not Earth Day is helpful to society and why the Left clings onto it. Does it push their agenda? Does it help distract the masses? Charlie also plays the tape back on Dr. Fauci's recent interview, upset that the courts have ruled the CDC's mask mandates a government overreach. Did the Founding Fathers intend for unelected bureaucrats to usurp Congress in times of emergency? Charlie dives into why the Regime would want the CDC and Fauci to theoretically be in charge of everything—even defying court orders—while handing over even more power to the federal government. Finally, Charlie reveals a little talked about World Health Organization treaty that would move even America closer toward a one world government response to the "next pandemic."Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/supportSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Earth Day and The Great Reset00:10:43
Hey everybody, today on the Charlie Kirk Show, we examine Earth Day first and then we talk about Fauci and some comments he's made about the Constitution and courts.
A little more of a philosophical episode.
So if you're interested in kind of diving deep into how we got here and what's been motivating decisions, I think this episode will be for you, but we tie it into the news of the day.
Email me your thoughts as always freedom at charliekirk.com.
And if you want to support our program, go to charliekirk.com slash support.
That's charliekirk.com slash support.
I want to encourage you to go back into the archives of the Charlie Kirk show.
It doesn't take a lot to go back.
It's just a couple episodes prior, but I'm afraid that it got kind of just lost in the flurry of episodes we've been posting, which is our conversation with Dr. Malone.
It was posted on Wednesday.
The only three things I can save America from mass psychosis.
Listen to it.
It's an important episode.
It really is.
And I think it will bless you.
If you want to get involved with Turning PointUSA, go to tpusa.com.
Come to our young women's leadership summit at tpusa.com slash ywls.
That's tpusa.com slash yws.
There's a young women's leadership summit, and you will love it.
June 2nd, 3rd, and 4th in Dallas, Texas.
I will be there.
So Alex Clark, Kaylee McInnie, Candace Owens, and more.
tpusa.com slash ywls.
If you want to support the Charlie Kirk show, go to charliekirk.com slash support.
Buckle up everybody here.
We go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campuses.
I want you to know we are lucky to have Charlie Kirk.
Charlie Kirk's running the White House, folks.
I want to thank Charlie.
He's an incredible guy.
His spirit, his love of this country, he's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organizations ever created, Turning Point USA.
We will not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries, destroyed lives, and we are going to fight for freedom on campuses across the country.
That's why we are here.
Brought to you by Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage.
For personalized loan services, you can count on.
Go to andrewandtodd.com, the wonderfulandrewandodd.com.
There's something happening worldwide, and we've been talking about this theme, and I really want to focus on this theme as we kind of get kicked off today, which is the theme of the big trying to crush the small, or the few trying to crush the many.
We're seeing this play out on a global stage.
In one month, the World Economic Forum will be meeting in Davos, Switzerland.
The World Economic Forum, of course, they are the authors and they are the attempted implementers of the Great Reset.
We've talked at great length about the Great Reset.
And it's interesting, as I was having dinner last evening with Pastor Frank and Shawnee, the wonderful pastors here at Calvary Chapel, Chattanooga.
We got to talking and they asked me, what percentage of Republican office holders could tell you what the Great Reset is?
And I'd say probably less than 10%.
I want you to think about that.
Less than 10% of people that we send to Congress could tell you in any detail what the Great Reset is.
However, a vast majority of grassroots activists and the base of the party could tell you what the Great Reset is.
They could tell you at least some of the goals of the World Economic Forum, that they want you to own nothing and be happy, that they want to keep borders completely wide open, that they want to bring Western values to a breaking point, that meat will be a delicacy that will no longer be enjoyed daily, that it will be basically will be a meatless society.
All these are different types of promises.
Some would say they are predictions.
I would say it's a little bit more of a goal of the World Economic Forum.
But I was thinking about this late last night, which is if the base of the party knows more than the leaders, what does that tell you?
Now, on its surface, that's a very troubling development or a very troubling fact that the base of the party knows more than the people they actually send to Washington, D.C.
But I actually look at it differently.
I actually think there's something very positive.
I think it's very promising.
It might not be promising immediately, but it means eventually we are going to get people into leadership that understand the global implications of what is happening all around us.
Now, one of the agenda items that kind of transcends all the other is the agenda item of energy.
Now, today is Earth Day.
That's what they tell me.
Earth Day.
I love the environment, and you should love the environment.
I love people, however, more than I love the environment, and you should too.
The environment is there so people can flourish.
Now, we want the environment to be sustained.
We want it to be protected.
We want it to be passed down to future generations.
But if you had to choose the survival of humanity and the flourishing of people, or the survival, not even the survival, or the unnecessary protection of a tree, it should be a no-brainer.
Now, Earth Day is fine.
I mean, the founder of Earth Day was kind of a very creepy, weird guy.
The founder of Earth Day, Ira Einhorn, the Earth Day co-founder, killed and composted his girlfriend.
Nice guy.
But at least he composted his girlfriend, right?
It's not like he just killed her.
At least he composted it, right?
Sustainable murder.
I don't think that's what they mean by sustainability, but we'll leave that as it is.
Earth Day, though, can go wrong very quickly.
I'm all for having a day to honor the environment.
Okay, sure.
Not a huge problem with that, philosophically.
However, the forces that are trying to push the great reset pervert people's appreciation of nature and the natural world immediately into an anti-fossil fuel, green energy takeover.
Now, the problem with the tyrannical green energy types is they use energy as a means to the end.
They use the energy topic as a way to try to control your life.
It's all about control.
And so when you start to hear the people in charge be insistent about an acceleration towards a green economy, we should take a step back and say, why is it that you want a green economy?
What does that actually even mean?
Now, of course, some of the more sustainable options for energy in our country, nuclear power, natural gas, which is very abundant, geothermal energy, where a lot of oil wells can be converted to geothermal energy because of how deep they go to the Earth's surface, which is abundant, near unlimited source of energy.
You don't hear that from the environmentalist types.
It's that it's always wind or solar, and that's it.
In fact, it's less about energy, and it's more about the eradication of private property, the stunting of entrepreneurship, or the remaking of the West as we know it.
So the Biden spokeswoman, Corine Jean-Pierre, says that Biden is committed to do everything he possibly can to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and speed up and not slow down our transition to clean energy.
However, but Corine Jean-Pierre should be asked, what is clean energy?
What do you mean by that?
Because natural gas has actually played a major role in lowering greenhouse carbon emissions over the last couple decades.
We are closer to the aims and the ambitions of the people that want to make the air cleaner, allegedly, and our environment safer, yet they don't want us to focus on natural gas.
In fact, they're trying to stop the exploration of oil and natural gas.
Why is it they're trying to prevent nuclear power?
Why is it that they're trying to prevent other sort of sustainable, long-term, cheap energy sources?
Is it all just about solar and wind?
Play cut 100.
But look, the president is committed to doing everything he can to address, you know, to reach his climate goals, taking executive actions that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
But at the very same time, we must speed up, not slow down, our transition to clean energy.
So we are.
It's central planning, of course, but we must understand that the energy push plays directly into the great reset aims and ambitions.
And if you have Republican lawmakers and leaders that do not know what the great reset is and talk about it regularly, then you need to challenge them on that.
If they are virtue signaling today on Earth Day and trying to say it's time for us to pass the Green New Deal, you need to ask, is it really about energy or is it about remaking the society as a whole as we know it?
An unpopular opinion, but a necessary opinion, is the ability to have access to cheap and abundant energy has allowed human beings to progress technologically, medically, and otherwise, civilizationally, quicker than anything we've ever seen.
The ability to have energy, which literally is what fuels your society, is a moral imperative for human beings to flourish.
And every single time you will confront a green energy type, an activist or environmentalist, around this idea of being able to have access to abundant and cheap energy, they'll scoff at it.
They'll say, oh, no, natural gas is not what I want, even though we have more natural gas than we'll probably ever know what to do with.
We are the world's leader in natural gas.
Remember, the great reset depends on scarcity.
In order to execute the great reset, they need emergencies.
They need crises.
So the great reset needs to try to create scarcity of food and energy, which will then allow the consolidation of control and power.
It will make you have to obey because you'll have no choice to then be able to control society.
The great reset hinges on you not being able to travel, not be able to have autonomy, and energy decisions are a major factor in that.
And unfortunately, a very small percentage of Republicans can even tell you what the great reset actually is.
Look, inflation is out of control.
One area we see it more than ever is the grocery store.
Even though grocery prices feel like they've doubled, Good Ranchers' prices have stayed low and affordable.
Once you subscribe, it's locked in.
The price never goes up.
Your best price is locked in for life.
They sell 100% American meat and deliver it to your door for a great price.
Good Ranchers help solve your meat problem.
And the problem is 85% of the grass-fed beef in stores and online is imported.
Shop Good Ranchers for all your beef, chicken, and seafood needs.
Good Ranchers: American Meat Solution00:04:54
Their pre-trimmed and pre-marinated chicken breasts are absolutely delicious.
I love Good Ranchers, and you guys should too.
Their animals are ethically raised and they're beautifully sourced.
They do the things the right way and it shows in every box.
Good Ranchers takes the guesswork out of the meat aisle and grocery shopping.
Get a steakhouse quality at home with Good Ranchers.
Right now, go to goodranchers.com slash Charlie and do it right now.
It's Good Ranchers, American meat delivered.
I love Good Ranchers.
When Good Ranchers gets delivered to our home or to our office, it's something incredible.
If you don't buy the meat in your house, tell the person who does to check out Good Ranchers.
Support the Charlie Kirk Show.
Support America.
GoodRanchers.com slash Charlie.
If you spend some time and read the literature of the progressives in the early 1800s and early 1900s, you will see a constant peppering of a reference of science.
Now, in the late 1800s and early 1900s, that must have been a very exciting time to be a progressive because there were, at the time, incredible scientific breakthroughs occurring, industrial breakthroughs.
We saw in a very short period of time the airplane, the assembly line.
You started to see what they figured to be phenomenal vaccine technology start to be introduced in the early 1900s.
Science was spreading with massive momentum throughout the industrialized world.
The Germans in particular were people that put this forward.
Not put this forward, but the Germans were, they blended scientific breakthroughs with progressive philosophy.
And I'll unpack that because it's really important, the significance of it, and applies to what we're living through today.
Science, we've gone through the different types of how people describe science and what science actually is, the scientific method and the conjecture of it, but in the late 1800s, early 1900s, kind of piggybacking off of Hegel and a lot of German thinkers, there was this movement that ended up taking over the entire German government in the 1930s, the National Socialist Workers' Party,
otherwise known as the Nazis, that believed that science was a pinnacle, was a zenith, was an irrefutable principle, if you will, of industrialized society.
Now, it wasn't just trying to make pharmaceutical breakthroughs or military technological breakthroughs, but the Germans were unable to resist the temptation of trying to actually engineer the man.
Now, Woodrow Wilson believed this as well.
Woodrow Wilson was a progressive.
He was a college professor at Princeton University and then a college president, the governor of New Jersey, and then president of the United States.
Woodrow Wilson won the presidency without winning a majority of the votes.
He won the 1912 election in a three-way election against Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and then, of course, Woodrow Wilson.
And Howard Taft and Teddy Roosevelt split the vote, which then allowed Woodrow Wilson, the most radical president to hit to date, to take office and to declare war on the founding fathers.
Not total war, that's not totally fair, but he certainly rejected and repudiated a simple principle.
And the principle was that we now, since we have planes and we have trains and we have automobiles and technology is progressing, then we are now able to change the framework of the system of government.
And this very same debate is unfolding today, which is do you believe human nature changes over time, or do you believe human nature generally stays the same?
Do you believe it's a constant?
The founding fathers and the framers, because they studied history and they believed in the laws of nature and nature's God, as Thomas Jefferson beautifully put in the Declaration of Independence, believed human nature does not change, that the constant you're dealing with is human nature, and technology might change along the way, which might make it easier to do what human beings automatically want to do.
But the human spirit, the raw material of human beings, it doesn't change.
Now, understanding this is very significant because we're starting to see the very same debate unfold now in the political and the public health arena.
The founding fathers, when they designed the structure of government, specifically Madison, Hamilton, and John Jay, which they articulated beautifully in Federalist 51, Madison wrote, he said, if all men were angels, a government would not be necessary.
He knew that human beings were broken by nature, a belief in original sin, which is a biblical concept, and that therefore power should not be consolidated in one person, and you need a system of checks and balances.
CDC Checks and Constitutional Balance00:15:15
Checks and balance is something we take for granted.
And thankfully, this last week, we've seen checks and balances play out, that the CDC is not supreme.
Now, the CDC is just an American example of the very same sort of German historicist, progressive, scientific philosophy that science and scientists must be supreme.
They must be elevated.
They must have power over others.
Thankfully, we still have a system of government, albeit in shambles at times, where the courts have an independent judiciary to check and balance the scientific community's push to restrict freedom and liberty.
Hey, everybody, towels just don't seem to dry you anymore.
They feel soft and lotiony in stores, but you get them home and they don't absorb.
Well, Mike Lundell at MyPillow found out that around 2006, towels changed forever.
They started importing them and adding softeners and other things to the cotton that made them feel good, but they didn't work.
He found the best towel company right here in America.
They have proprietary technology to create towels that feel soft but actually work.
They are all made with USA cotton and they come with a MyPillow 60-day money-back guarantee.
It's a six-piece set, two baths, two hand towels, two washcloths made with USA cotton.
They're soft yet absorbent.
Regularly, $100,999, not $39.99.
Just go to mypillow.com and click on the new Radio Listener Specials and get deep discounts on all MyPillow products, including the towels.
Enter promo code Kirk.
Call 1-800-875-0425 for these great radio specials.
That's mypillow.com and click on the new Radio Listener Square, mypillow.com.
The Founding Fathers created a system where, in order to do something dramatic or personal to the citizenry, it would require congressional consent.
You see, the progressives, though, the tricksters that they are, in the late 1800s and early 1900s, they designed a loophole, a workaround.
You see, the progressives said, you know, we've got to start to do things faster because we have all these great ideas.
We have science on our side.
And this little annoying Constitution keeps on getting in our way.
Like, the Constitution slows things down.
By the way, that's not a negative of the Constitution.
That's a positive characteristic.
It was an intentional design.
You see, Woodrow Wilson thought it was a design flaw.
Those of us that actually love liberty think it's a good thing that it's difficult to get stuff done in the United States Congress, especially the forsaking of freedom and liberty and things that are personal.
So when it comes down to mandates or when it comes down to getting into the personal business of a human being, it's not to say that Congress can't do that.
It's that it should be difficult to do it.
It has to be done intentionally.
You've got to win over the representatives themselves.
But in the early 1900s, we saw a diversion from this.
Teddy Roosevelt, I think, gets wrongly blamed.
I'm a big Teddy Roosevelt fan, and I'm happy to explain that in a future episode.
Teddy Roosevelt was one of the main reasons why a legitimate communist, Marxist-style revolution did not actually take root in America.
Teddy Roosevelt was a bridge, a good bridge, during the most unprecedented economic change.
Not just unprecedented, the most dramatic.
That's the word I'm looking for.
Economic change in history.
Now, we're living through another one of those.
But the farms to the factories transition was mismanaged by Russia.
The farms to the factories transition was mismanaged by Germany.
But it was actually managed very well by Teddy Roosevelt.
Now, I don't support everything that he did, but he understood that if you are not able to have some sort of a framework to all of a sudden go from an agrarian to an industrial economy, people like Vladimir Lenin are going to start to become really popular.
It's one of the main reasons why a Marxist revolution never took root here.
But Teddy Rosa gets blamed for part of this, and I think that's fair to blame him for a little bit of it.
But the main guy, the villain, is Woodrow Wilson.
And Woodrow Wilson was annoyed by the structure of the U.S. Constitution.
So all of that is now a lead up to what we're living through right now.
What we're living through right now is the very same debate 106 years later or 105 years later.
So Anthony Fauci in Cut 95, he insists that the CDC should be above U.S. federal courts.
What he's saying is that science should be unquestioned.
Who is a judge to tell me what I should be able to do and not do?
Play Cut 95.
Both surprised and disappointed because those types of things really are the purview of the CDC.
This is a public health issue.
And for a court to come in, and if you look at the rationale for that, it really is not particularly firm.
And we are concerned about that, about courts getting involved in things that are unequivocally public health decisions.
I mean, this is a CDC issue.
It should not have been a court issue.
Anthony Fauci would have been a perfect German historicist doctor.
Perfect.
Who's to say that a check and balance on me?
I'm a scientist.
You see, post-Darwin, there was this very dangerous philosophical movement that was implemented in the National Socialist Workers' Party of Germany, which was that if the science says it, don't question it, just do it.
Post-Darwin, the application of scientific supremacy led to eugenics movements, eugenicist movements.
Scientific supremacy led us to the forced sterilization of women post-Jacobson v. Massachusetts, where idiot women in the 1920s, well over 50,000 of them, were forcibly sterilized.
Now, that's their term, not my term, idiot women, because their IQs were too low, and they were forcibly sterilized because public health demanded it.
You see, what Fauci is saying there is that this is a public health issue.
However, somebody should say, you know, Mr. Fauci, under the guise of public health, more people have been intentionally destroyed over the last 100 years than under any other excuse.
It was a public health concern to try to set up concentration camps.
It was a public health concern to sterilize women.
That's why we have the structure of government that we have.
And Fauci doesn't have any sort of appreciation for the U.S. Constitution.
In fact, he has disdain for it.
He doesn't want to live under a structure where he could be checked and balanced.
He wants the unquestionable authority of science.
He is a despot bureaucrat.
And thankfully, the founders, all the way back to 1787, we are now living still through the blessing, the intergenerational blessing, where they knew someone like Anthony Fauci would come up at some point.
Now, mind you, the loophole they didn't anticipate as much, and who am I to criticize the founders?
That would be a huge mistake.
But it's well kind of, I think, agreed upon in constitutional circles.
Larry Arn and many others would say that the one thing the founders would have been a little bit surprised is like, you're creating this entire new fourth branch of government, this unelected branch where Congress doesn't even do their job, where you have the rulemakers actually be the agencies themselves, where the CDC doesn't have to go to Congress.
The CDC can just do it unilaterally.
That's been unconstitutional for well over a century.
It's definitely immoral, and it leads to these sort of measures.
But this judge, praise God, rose up and said, this is not constitutional.
This is not going to work.
So the Biden regime doesn't like this.
The Biden regime hinges on the ability to be able to micromanage your breathing, your decisions, your livelihood outside of Congress and through regulatory rulemaking.
An example of this is Cut 98.
Biden's COVID advisor, Ashish Ja, says a major goal of the Biden administration is to, quote, make sure the CDC has the authority to unilaterally implement mask mandates.
Play cut 98.
First is that public health decisions like this should be made by public health scientists.
And CDC had made a decision that masks were useful.
And it was deeply disappointing to see a federal judge step in and take that decision away from public health scientists.
The appeal, no question, a major goal of the appeal is to make sure that the CDC has the authority and the ability to protect Americans during health crises like this.
You are experiencing, you are witnessing, you are living through a multi-century debate of who's actually in charge.
Are the people sovereign?
Or is some sort of weird, creepy scientist like Fauci, who's been wrong about everything, is he in charge?
You see, laced into that remark from Ashish Jha, who is not my favorite person, is this comment, look, it must be done by public health.
The way he says it, right?
So the way he says it is he acts as if public health must be elevated above constitutional liberty.
The way he says it, he expects kind of to win people over, like, well, if it's public health, then just so be it.
I mean, if it's public health, then why would I even question it?
Well, of course, we now have seen over the last two years how public health has been against public health, the saddest, most oppressed, alcohol-addicted suicidal generation in history, thanks to public health decisions.
But even beyond that, even if all the public health decisions were being made beautifully and wonderfully, let's pretend masks are the greatest thing ever and they're epidemiologically sound, the rulemaking itself must actually go through a constitutional process.
Now, of course, we know these rules are anti-science.
They're anti-what is best for the human spirit, the soul, and the individual.
The Biden regime doesn't even mention how you could still wear masks if you want to.
No one's preventing you from doing that.
But instead, it is about the centralization of power.
It's the precedent to be able to make rules without that simple and necessary check and balance.
We see here in this clip, Ashish Jha says masks should be on.
Play cut 97.
You know, I think in terms of legal strategy, that's really being sorted out by the Department of Justice.
But from a health perspective, do you want the masks back on?
Yeah, look, the CDC scientists were very clear that masks should be on right now while they're doing an evaluation.
And I think that assessment is right.
And so I think that that is what should be happening right now.
This Hashish Jah guy is the White House coronavirus response coordinator on short-term leave from Brown University School of Public Health.
The very same type of person that would be in this entire German historicist progressive team, where I have a bunch of degrees.
I went to Brown.
Therefore, I should have more power than anybody else.
And not a judge, not a voter, not a member of Congress should be able to check and balance me.
No one should be able to interfere with what I want to do.
And so what you are seeing play out is a stress test of the structure, we use that word a lot on this program, of the Constitution.
And I'll say this time and time again.
The Founding Fathers were brilliant.
They knew exactly what they were doing.
So how is it a bunch of people in 1787 designed a system that is so incredibly applicable in 2022?
I thought that we're supposed to believe that things are old, are bad, and outdated.
It's because they didn't design the system based on the technology around them.
They designed the system on people.
When you study the Roman Empire, the Greek Empire, when you study the British Empire and the Chinese Empire, you realize the people themselves never change.
They act in a pattern because we all want the same things regardless of the technology around us.
Just because we have planes and faster cars and Twitter doesn't mean all of a sudden that you're dealing with somebody different.
Fauci doesn't believe that.
Ajish Jah does not believe that.
They think as medical technology advances, you've got to give them more power to try to accelerate the changing of the human being itself.
I want to get into this here.
It kind of connects to what we're talking about, which is the WHO, the World Health Organization, wants to be like a global CDC and call all the shots in the future.
So essentially, they want to try to have a global regime over American sovereignty because there is this annoyance that the CDC can be checked by federal courts.
So we must understand that global health emergency declarations are necessary for the great reset.
We have a clip on this to kind of explain it further.
Play cut 108.
To name it, to give the new disease or whatever a name, to decide what quarantine measures are needed.
And it's a one-health approach for every country around the world, a global approach to every disease.
It gives the WHO the control over who gets to develop the new treatments and what they are and how long they take and whether they're safe and so on.
So absolutely centralized control.
It's Dr. Tess Laurie from the World Council.
The WHO would reserve the right to decide what constitutes a pandemic and what have already changed the definition of the term.
It could be the flu.
The treaty could give the World Health Organization the power to name new diseases and decide what quarantine measures are needed on a global scale.
The World Health Organization controls over who gets to develop new treatments and decide whether they're safe.
The World Health Organization would then be given authority to determine who gets quarantined or locked down, usurping American law.
There'd be no more Sweden or Florida examples.
All the decisions would be centralized in the World Health Organization, the same World Health Organization controlled by the Chinese Communist Party.
The World Health Organization would decide over vaccine mandates for each country.
So how do they crush states' rights?
How do they crush this idea that judges can come in and check and balance?
Immune America Against Imperial Health00:01:39
You go above it.
You see, domestically, thankfully, the founding fathers gave us an ability to check and balance power here.
But what we must be vigilant is to make sure America is immune, to make sure America is not able to be interfered with an imperialist world health organization that wants to determine public health for our country.
And I will finish with how I started.
Very few Republicans know or have any idea what is going on with the Great Reset.
They better wake up and they better get the memo soon because there is a concerted effort to squeeze and suffocate America as we know it via public health declarations and yes, energy policy as well.
And we see that with this new WHO effort to be able to dictate all the health decisions for a country.
There'll be no more open Florida, no more open South Dakota.
Instead, some would call it a progressive Trojan horse for their quote-unquote totalitarian utopia or dystopia.
Republicans better wake up and we as voters better start to demand from them: if you can't tell me without looking at your notes what the great reset is or who Klaus Schwab is, you shouldn't be running as a Republican.
It's not just a issue, it is the issue.
Thank you so much for listening, everybody.
Email us your thoughts as always freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thank you so much for listening.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk. com.