All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
March 5, 2023 - The Charlie Kirk Show
01:13:45
The Live Free Tour Santa Barbara—LIVE from UCSB with Q&A

Charlie took a trip to Santa Barbara to speak live to an audience of brave conservatives, as well as some brave liberals who didn’t shy away when provided the opportunity to combat Charlie. Listen to the shocking questions he gets asked, his insightful answers, and the bold charge he gives to the student body.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
Defending Conservative Worldviews 00:06:45
Hey everybody, happy Sunday.
No advertisers in this episode.
All of this is brought to you by Turning PointUSA, tpusa.com.
God bless Turning Point USA.
And if you are not yet supporting Turning Point USA, you should at tpusa.com to help our education movement to save America.
My unedited remarks at University of California, Santa Barbara.
A lot of back and forth.
I think you're going to enjoy it.
Support us at tpusa.com and enjoy this dialogue.
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 is 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.
Thank you, everybody, for being here.
And we actually had to turn people away, and that's a bad thing.
But honestly, you know, they say there's no conservatives on college campuses, but we've got to get a bigger room next time.
So that's a big deal.
I want to thank the university.
I make, let me just put it this way.
I have a tendency to be rather harsh on colleges.
And UCSB has been welcoming and has been helpful.
And they deserve, well, I'm being very fair.
And thank you guys for the help that you've offered.
And we're here tonight.
So they deserve applause for that, okay?
And the second thing, before we get to my main contention, and we can have fun, and anyone who disagrees can go to the front of the line, and we'll have lots of questions, and it'll be great.
I want to comment on the time I spent out in the main quad area today.
I appreciated the respect of most of the students that were there.
For those that don't know, set up a table there for two hours, talk to students.
Very smart kids, I have to say.
Some of the smartest actually that I've had a chance to talk to.
Misled on a lot of topics, and maybe that'll manifest tonight, but generally very respectful.
It gave me hope that people can see the world completely differently.
Started a little bit heated, and then from there, it was interesting to kind of explore a lot of different ideas and topics, especially things you're not allowed to talk about.
And my goodness, you know, you got the apparatchiks outside.
By the way, they're more than welcome to come inside and ask questions and have dialogue.
But it's really interesting as they, you know, heckle at themselves and make themselves feel good while we actually are trying to find things we agree on or at least have clarity over agreement, right?
Clarity would be nice.
The way what they want for America, yeah, that's going to destroy the country.
Speech, even albeit with disagreement, this is what makes America the greatest nation ever to exist in this world.
And isn't it telling?
It's, you know, they say fascism and all that stuff.
It's hilarious.
You know, the last time I checked, the people that are a fascist are usually the ones that spend their evenings trying to prevent other people to speak.
If our ideas were so terrible and did not resonate and were so bad, why do you have to spend your time screaming like a crazy person outside?
Maybe you should just pull up a chair and you might learn something.
But obviously, at the root of radical left-wing activism, at the root of radical left-wing activism, albeit at age 18, 19, or 20, is complete confidence you figured out the world.
And that's what they have, right?
They have figured it out.
I know right from wrong.
If there isn't even right for wrong, I'm right, and this person's totally evil.
And that actually creates, that robs you of all joy.
Now, there are things that are true.
We're going to talk about them tonight.
But you should also just be immensely curious in life.
And American colleges have gone away from this in some sense.
And I think it's still a fringe minority.
I sure hope so, because I have a lot of hope, especially based on the conversations I had today.
But when you're 18, 19, 20, or 21, obviously it's predominantly liberal with the professors and the curriculum and all that.
But if a conservative comes on campus, if your default position is to go get a microphone and just scream, then that is the death of all curiosity.
Maybe you aren't as smart as you think you are.
Maybe.
There might be something you hear, and if not, then you'll be only reconfirmed how smart you actually are and how much you figured out the world.
But it's very interesting, and I want to just shout out our amazing Turning Point USA students because, and they deserve so much credit.
They really do.
Our Turning Point USA students, they have to go through something every day that most liberals do not have to do.
They have to actively defend their position as being an ideological minority in a hostile environment.
Some liberals have to do that to their credit.
Not all.
Most do not.
Most are able to be comfortable in their arrogant political positions.
What I have found is that young conservatives, because they're in the ideological minority, they have to be really good at defending their arguments.
They have to know the counter-arguments.
They have to know the nuance.
They have to be able to cite the studies.
And I actually think that is a really good thing for the health of the long-term conservative movement.
Now, minus numbers, like, okay, there might be more young people on the left, totally.
But I can say this: that the young patriots of Turning Point USA, or just young conservatives in general, you are more prepared to be able to defend your positions, to be able to go into a world where you're not always going to be accepted for your worldview.
That means you're tougher.
And that's a good thing.
If you graduate college as a tougher person than you entered, then that's great.
But the question should be: are the people outside going to graduate tougher than they entered?
No, they're going to graduate more fragile.
And if you allow young people to stay fragile, they will not just be unhappy, but they're constantly going to be looking for somebody to shut up and somebody to blame, or some institution, some movement, some ism to blame.
And there is some people to blame in society for sure.
However, the most important lesson, and I wish it was taught in every college repeatedly, is the biggest person to blame for your problems is yourself.
The Delusion of Fragility 00:15:19
Is that it's your decisions, your agency.
Yes, things, bad things can happen to you, but you will end up leading a much better life and flourish if you end up realizing that I am going to take responsibility for my own actions.
If I'm not happy, it's because of something I'm doing.
It's not because of capitalism or whatever nonsense.
Okay, so the sign I had out today was interesting.
It definitely attracted attention.
It's true, and I believed it, and I still believe it.
But it got me thinking of what do I want to talk about tonight.
And the sign I had is that transgenderism is a delusion.
And that was my sign.
And do we still have the sign somewhere?
I'm happy to sign it, by the way.
And it's totally true, obviously.
I mean, just thinking you are something because you wish it to be does not make reality change or comport to your will, unless you're an unbelievable egotistical narcissist and you think everything should realign because you suddenly wake up and think, I want nature to change.
Like, yeah, you actually didn't create nature, and maybe you should get back in alignment with biological reality.
Despite that, though, I was actually really curious of what is the Merriam-Webster definition of a delusion.
Because I use that word, and I think we could all kind of come up with our own definition.
A delusion is a false belief or judgment about external reality held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, occurring especially in mental conditions.
And I think we have a lot of delusions in America right now.
Not just delusional people, that is true, but delusions that we are believing, where despite incontrovertible proof, despite what is in front of us is so clear, we believe something that is the opposite.
Now, there's a lot of reasons why that happens.
And the number one reason why this happens, which is why I decide to go to places that I'm not always welcome, is one of the reasons why we are allowing delusions to be institutionalized is because people who know different do not speak out against this obvious mirage, this veneer, this falsehood.
Is that one of the things I hope to do tonight is to inspire you to be able to say that's not true.
That's not true.
This is what is true.
I believe at my core, a vast majority of Americans think it is preposterous that men can become pregnant.
I know that most Americans don't believe that.
Now, most kids that you see at this school, I have no idea.
I bet it would be a coin flip probably in one direction.
They say, well, it depends if it's translated.
Honestly, you're overthinking it, okay?
Way overthinking it.
College, where you go to pay a bunch of money and go into debt to overthink the obvious.
More wisdom in the American plumbing community than most PhDs in America.
That is true.
Not knowledge, wisdom.
Big difference.
What is the difference?
Knowledge is a bunch of facts.
Wisdom is the knowledge of things that do not change.
Wisdom is how you build a decent and good society.
Knowledge, you can have all the knowledge in the world.
Really evil societies have a lot of knowledge, but they generally don't have a lot of wisdom.
The most important thing of wisdom that I think you can have societally is that there is a God and you are not him.
Pretty simple, pretty obvious.
You could build a whole civilization around that.
So, under this premise that we're living under a false belief or judgment on external reality, held despite incontrovertible evidence, to the contrary, occurring especially in mental conditions.
What are some delusions that we should talk about?
I mean, I'll talk a little bit about the trans one if you guys want.
It seems to really animate people.
It's very simple.
I don't think we need to overthink it, but I'm happy to.
But one that caught people's attention today that I think is really important is this delusion, this lie, that America is somehow systemically racist.
And we've allowed this cancer, this idea pathogen, to go so far into our institutions.
Not only is this not true, the opposite is the truth.
We are the least racist country ever to exist in the history of the world.
And the evidence is so over, again, incontrovertible evidence.
Well, Charlie, what's your evidence?
If America was so unbelievably systemically racist, why do so many racial minorities want to do whatever they possibly can to come into this country?
There are more blacks that have immigrated to America since 1980 than were ever brought immorally in the slave trade, just since 1980.
If you have a question, there will be an ample opportunity for you to speak your mind.
And I didn't understand a word you said, but I'm glad you're here tonight.
You might learn something.
Thank you.
So which is America is the only, this is so important, we're not the only multiracial, multi-ethnic, multilingual country.
We are the only one that has a core idea that the melanin content in your skin does not determine your moral worth.
And in fact, and in fact, there are people trying to change that.
The people trying to change that are largely, they have infested our major institutions and come from college campuses.
And you could call it critical race to code whatever you want.
We could talk about that later.
However, the promise of America as being fulfilled when I was a kid, and many of you remember a country, we didn't talk about race all the time.
And here's the one thing that I do want to just mention on this whole race topic that I think is so important.
Again, not only are we not systemically racist, we're the least racist country ever to exist in the history of the world, is that the people that are doing a lot of damage to our society would love nothing more than for us to talk about fringe racial ideology all day long, rather than why is it harder than ever for college kids to be able to own homes.
That's a serious question, right?
The reason is that there's a legitimate class war happening in America.
And this should resonate with some of the lefties if they're honest in this room.
But they want to try to throw a smokescreen grenade to have you talk about race all the time instead of the fact that BlackRock is going and purchasing single-family homes to rent it back to you.
That's not good.
In fact, it is not just a distraction.
It's an excuse for these corporations to get away with it.
BlackRock thinks they're untouchable because they have 300 black lesbians in some diversity, equity, inclusion department or whatever they have, and they give money to the right social justice warrior causes when in reality, they're making anybody under the age of 30, it will be nearly impossible for you to achieve the same American dream of owning a home and building material wealth.
They're not the only one to blame, but boy, I would love to have bipartisan hearings on that instead of systemic racism, police brutality, nonsense.
How about this?
The fact that young people can't own stuff anymore, that's a crisis.
Systemic racism is numbered.
And it's so bad because when you actually dive into it, it comes down on a lot of different ways where it tries to disempower people from either taking responsibility for their own actions.
And you're talking about the fact that fathers are no longer present in many black homes in America.
75% now are in single-family homes or single mother homes, which is a tragedy.
And instead, we talk all of our time talking, we spend a lot of our time talking about, at least in the propaganda networks and social media and the corporations, on things that actually disguise us from what keeps America bound together.
And this is really important.
Like, I mean, Klaus Schwab from the Great Reset says, you'll own nothing and you'll be happy.
And I just want to make sure I emphasize this, that America will cease to be a country that you want to live in when you no longer have a middle class that owns stuff.
And I know it sounds so materially obvious, but they're trying to get away from self-ownership of goods and into rideshare services or communal living.
And what that really is, is a permanent corporate oligarchy under their fake woke pagan religion where you no longer have the autonomy or the agency to build intergenerational wealth.
And instead, we have to have non-stop narrative, non-stop narrative, because these corporations love it.
And by the way, the CCP loves it too, because then we take our eyes over the fact that we're actually being taken over by a foreign adversary.
Separate issue, but actually equally important, which is that young people right now, whether it be this bitter lie that you must go to college to succeed, it's not true, that you have to borrow all this money to go to college to get a job.
There's a ton of response that I have in my book, and I'm happy to talk about it.
But despite all that, obviously, you guys are in college.
I don't want to bash the college thing too much, but good luck.
So, yeah, is they're using these delusions to distract us.
And any one of the young people, either in this room or outside, that are actively promoting these delusions are not just doing harm to America, they're doing harm to themselves.
And that's where I actually have a little bit of compassion: is that, and look, driving around Santa Barbara, I can understand why kids get so into these kind of like really weird liberal ideas.
You kind of, if you live here for a little bit, I bet you can start to think that this is heaven on earth.
This is amazing.
It's a brave new world.
And it's so naturally beautiful and it's sunny every single day.
I mean, people are complaining about the weather today, like, really?
Like, it's 55 and it's raining.
And wow, that's Santa Barbara privilege, not white privilege.
That's something.
Jeez.
But I do have some compassion, which is: look, life is harsh.
We know that.
Life is tough.
We know that.
And if we're honest about actually passing down a good country to the next generation, this ideological subversion campaign that is happening in real time in our country and the people that are pushing it need to be confronted.
And the corporations know this.
Not all of them, but most of them.
It's definitely Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna, Goldman Sachs, BlackRock, all of them.
They know that there's actually a populist movement, probably in both sides of the political spectrum, that is ready to bubble up and ready to actually hold these people accountable and say it's probably not a good thing that we're about to enter into economic collapse.
People own nothing and are owning less and less.
Young people are in this kind of form of indentured servitude to their college.
And the biggest thing that we have to focus on is one or the other is systemic racism or the trans thing or environmentalism, right?
We talked about this today.
Happy to take questions on this.
Look, you could believe that the world is ending because of climate change.
If you do, you're more religious than I am, because that is a fascination with the unknown.
That at least I have a Bible to base my beliefs on.
Geez.
The idea of a looming apocalypse is a perfect recipe for a dictator, a despot.
Think about it.
The world's about to end.
Give me a bunch of power.
World's about to end.
Give me a bunch of power.
Remember, bad people need a crisis to be able to take your liberty away.
We learned that during COVID.
And you can believe that.
That's fine.
We'll talk about it.
97% of scientists agree.
Yeah, that's great.
And I'm curious about the 3%.
You could believe all those things, but you must equally admit, you must admit with equal time and equal footing that there's a cost to all things in life.
And if you decide all of a sudden to shut down something that works, which is the extraction and utilization of hydrocarbons that have lifted more people out of poverty than any other energy source in human history, then you're more worried about an environmental green pagan agenda than actually helping people that are in poverty and need to be able to flourish and succeed.
And that's fine, if that's your position.
They're distractions, they're delusions, and I understand people believe them with a lot of fervor.
Okay, here's what we're living through in a couple nuts and bolts, and then we'll get to some questions: is that ideology is very dangerous.
Alexander Solshenitsyn wrote the Gulag Archipelago, which was the book that brought down the Soviet Union, and he said that the atrocities, the horrors, the murders, the concentration camps of the Soviet Union was, quote, all thanks to ideology.
Bad ideas must be confronted, and they must be confronted clearly and passionately and publicly.
This is not the time to shy away from it.
I am not exaggerating or engaging in hyperbole when I say that these idea pathogens will do far more damage to America than COVID-19 ever could.
It will destroy everything that we love and that we care about.
So these are delusions.
So one of the ways that we must do it is we must confront it.
Okay, so I kind of bounced around here a little bit.
We'll get to some questions, but let me say this in closing.
I'm thankful for the ability to have dialogue and discourse.
As we get to questions here, we obviously have a fair amount of conservatives here, which I'm really pleased to see.
And Santa Barbara, I'm really pleased to see that.
But let me ask something out of the conservatives here.
If somebody who does not agree with you comes up to the microphone and says something you would deem to be preposterous, outlandish, do not boo them.
Do not throw scorn at them.
Instead, thank them for coming to an event where they can have their question hopefully answered, and hopefully do so respectfully.
I get angry when the left treats conservatives, let's say, not so well, or they act like infants, of which is a leftist, so I repeat myself.
Don't do that instead.
Instead, allow them to ask the question, thank them for being here, and maybe their mind and somebody else's mind can be changed.
The final point I'll say is this: as somebody asked me earlier, they said, Charlie, do you think you are being the most persuasive that you can be by saying transgenderism is a delusion?
I say, I don't know.
Time will tell.
But I don't just say things to be persuasive.
I say them because the spoken truth is a moral good for all to hear.
Beyond Skin Color Disparities 00:07:20
And I believe that over the last decade, watering down, cutting corners, taking the easy way out, trying to compromise with absolute institutional insanity has not brought us closer to a free society or a decent society.
In fact, I think the truth tellers having to self-censor themselves over the last decade has brought us further away from that.
And that's exactly why I'm here.
And based on the murmurs, the smirks, the condescending elitism from 20-year-olds that think they know everything, I can't wait to hear what they have to say.
Let's do some questions.
Okay, so if you have questions, line up here.
If you disagree, go to the front of the line.
Based on all of that, you guys, welcome.
You know, the most brave one of you, come to the front of the line.
Act as courageous as you seem to be.
Okay.
Okay, what's the first question?
I'll start you off with an easier one.
I just want to know: like, since you've become a father recently, has this changed at all what you are most passionate about promoting to the turning point organization and the public?
Well, first of all, thank you for mentioning that.
Yes.
And by the way, if you disagree, go to the front of the line.
They'll work on that.
So, yes, I mean, becoming a father has radicalized me.
And in the best way possible, by the way.
And it's made me, first of all, understand that what I'm fighting for is beyond even yourself, which is so important.
Secondly, it also makes me very fired up at anybody, any institution, any movement that would dare try to corrupt our children.
And it's a source of immense joy and meaning and beauty.
And it's also a source of motivation and purpose.
I encourage more young people to get married and have kids and reject hookup culture.
You'll be happier because of it.
The next question.
Hey, Charlie, how you doing?
Good.
How are you?
Good, good.
I kind of have two questions, if that's okay with you.
So the first one, I don't know if you heard this, a Florida state legislature just introduced a bill to completely cancel the Democrat Party in Florida.
I kind of want your input on it.
And second, as a film student at Cal State Long Beach, I'm kind of having thoughts about working in the film industry in Hollywood because they're all woke and stuff.
So what advice would you give for me as a film major?
So I'm not familiar with the first bill.
What was the specifics of the bill?
I just heard about it last night.
A Florida state legislator introduced a bill to completely cancel the Democratic Party in Florida.
Well, I think they're doing a pretty good job of canceling themselves in Florida.
They're in the vast minority and can't win a statewide election and seem increasingly irrelevant.
So I don't know if that's necessary, albeit comical.
As a film student and as a film student, we need you.
We need more conservatives who love America to get into the arts.
And we do.
One of the young people that have an appreciation for beauty.
And beauty is that which is perfected in being.
And one of the things that is unfortunately taught in colleges and is believed is that beauty is subjective.
Some beauty can, but there is such a thing as objective beauty.
And objective beauty, in my opinion, and in the opinion of any thinking and reasonable person, is the celebration of the divine.
It's a celebration of the abstract of love and justice and mercy and grace and forgiveness.
The best art has come from somebody realizing there's something more powerful than they are.
The worst art has come since the 1920s when secularists are either angry or ignore God.
So keep that in mind.
Thank you.
Hey, Charlie.
First of all, I want to thank you for speaking here.
I think it's important to be exposed to differing ideas, even if you don't necessarily agree.
I think that's how consensuses are reached.
So moving into my question, you mentioned that you don't think there's any institutional racism left in this country.
And I think that's a pretty strong statement that I don't necessarily agree with, especially in our justice system where the United States Sentencing Commission actually contends that black men are 19% more likely to be sentenced, have longer sentences for similar crimes.
And that's when every other demographic factor is accounted for, like age, income, I guess, area within society.
So I was wondering what you think about that, particularly because there is that imbalance, and I would regard that as institutional.
Is the quality of their legal representation factored into the study?
I'm actually, I can't speak to that because I don't know.
It's not.
So for example, if LeBron James committed a crime, he'd have pretty good lawyers, right?
Most likely, yeah.
Yeah.
So maybe it's an income and or legal quality point, not a race point, right?
Here's my contention.
My contention is the following: there are other reasons to blame disparities other than discrimination a lot.
And one of my biggest learning moments today on campus is how almost everything gets attributed to racism or discrimination.
There's a fabulous book I encourage all of you to read, it should be required reading by black economist Thomas Soule called Discriminations and Disparities.
It might be the other way around.
Disparities, whatever.
I think it is discrimination and disparities.
And he makes the argument there are hundreds of other potential explanations for not just racial groups, but smaller than racial groups, how you go locally, linguistically, and all this.
So I encourage you to look at that.
And you have to factor that in.
I don't think for a second, then you wouldn't either, that Oprah Winfrey, who has a house right down the street, if she committed a crime, that somehow she would not be able to get the best legal help.
It's not about skin color as much as it is income, which is not about race.
It's about other choices, such as is there a father in the home?
For example, if a black has a mom and a dad present, that family and that child has a higher chance of all objective facts of success, college attendance, low likelihood of committing crimes, than a white child that has just a single mother.
You see, fatherhood transcends color lines.
And what we have learned through massive macroeconomic studies is that when blacks have fathers around, not only do they succeed as much, they succeed even more sometimes than white families.
And that is my contention.
Thank you for being here.
Climate Change Human Activity 00:05:23
Thank you.
I recognize you from earlier, right?
Yeah, yeah.
I kind of want to continue the conversation about climate change.
First of all, thanks for coming to UCSB.
And I was just wondering: given that you believe human beings are exacerbating climate change, shouldn't you agree that we ought to transition away from fossil fuels?
Well, no, I don't agree with that.
My contention is I don't know.
I do believe global temperatures are rising.
I'm not willing to say definitively it's anthropogenic, meaning it's human activity.
But if you connect the two, I asked the question I asked earlier: how much?
Are there any other contributing factors to rising global temperatures other than human activity?
If so, what are they, and to what degree do they factor into rising global temperatures?
But sure, you want to follow up on that?
Yeah, I was wondering how you not know whether climate change is happening when a recent survey of 88,125 climate-related studies done by Institutes of Physics cites that more than 99.9% of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree that climate change is caused by human activity.
How much?
So, how much of the global temperature rising is because of human activity?
No.
What percentage?
Is it 70%, 80%, 85%, 5%, 1%?
Because that's not what the study said.
They're saying that human activity is contributing to part of the increase.
What part?
They don't know.
That's debated.
Can I add to that?
Sure.
So, like, there's actually a statistics or a study done that suggests that climate-related disasters are eight times more likely than in the 1980s.
Well, hold on a second.
You know that we have less people dying because of quote-unquote climate-related disasters thanks to fossil fuels.
We have less people dying because of extreme exposure to cold, hurricanes, because of the advancements we have thanks to fossil fuels.
You know, this idea, it's very interesting in modern society.
We take for granted the idea of having widespread shelter, heating, or air conditioning in extreme climates thanks to hydrocarbons.
We take for granted that used to be a leading cause of death of human beings up until the 1850s.
Now, if I posit your contention, climate-related catastrophes, even though, according to peer-reviewed studies, that climate-related catastrophe death is actually at all-time low, the question is then for you, which is what would you get rid of when and what would the cost of that be?
That is the question, so please answer that.
Well, I was just wondering, like, you know, you didn't really answer my question, but I was, obviously, I can't give you like exact percentage of numbers, but I do think that we ought to transition away from fossil fuel, right?
Like, I'm not against growth or development.
I obviously agree with you that, you know, the Industrial Revolution, like, economic growth is good.
It's lifting people out of poverty.
That's obviously good, right?
But in developed countries today, where we have the ability to not damage our economy, but also benefit the environment, shouldn't we do that?
Okay, so give me an example.
What specifically would you ban?
You're king for a day.
What would you ban?
Would you ban liquid natural gas?
Would you ban nuclear?
Would you ban fracking?
Would you ban what kind of hydrocarbons would you ban?
Give me the examples, and you're king for a day.
What would you do?
Well, see, I wouldn't like straight up ban something, right?
So I'm not advocating for like, you know, just like fossil fuels.
We end fossil fuels like immediately.
That's a mature answer.
Good for you.
No, I mean that.
Because the radicals don't always say that.
Please continue.
Right.
So I'll argue for like market-based solutions, a transitional way.
Like, for example, I think in 2020, like the government funded $5.9 trillion to fossil fuel companies.
I would say that instead of investing this money, $5.9 trillion to fossil fuel companies.
That doesn't sound right.
But you might be in tax credits, maybe, or tax breaks.
That doesn't sound like it.
Subsidies.
Subsidies.
No, that's $5.9 billion, probably not trillion.
There's no way.
It's trillion.
Yeah, well, the federal budget was $3.8 trillion.
So there's no way we spent more than our federal budget.
But I'm going to help you out.
It's probably billion.
Did you say trillion or billion?
It's trillions.
Done by the International Monetary Fund.
And probably it's not...
It's not possible.
I mean, I'm sorry to...
I'm not saying just in the United States.
Oh, okay, worldwide.
All right, then that might be conceivable.
So, I mean, yeah, but anyway, so I would say instead of subsidizing these fossil fuels companies, I would say that take these subsidies to renewables and other forms of cleaner energy that would be beneficial to the environment while still pertaining to the coalition.
Fair enough.
Last question.
So where do we get the cobalt to make the batteries and what do we do with them?
No, I'm asking, where do you recommend we get the cobalt to make the batteries?
Wait, can I answer?
So like your argument is about this mining argument, right?
Like no, I'm not making, I'm asking a question, dude.
Like where do we get it from?
Yeah, so then how about this?
How and where should we dispose of the incredibly acidic, sometimes radioactive batteries that electric vehicles use?
Where should we dispose of them?
But that argument, you see, it's a straw man because you can't.
Answer the question.
I am answering question.
I am answering.
I am literally answering your questions, right?
So you're arguing about this renewable energies and their batteries and how they cause environmental harm, right?
I've asked a question.
I'm not making an argument.
What should we do with the batteries once we use them?
That's a straw man because you can't.
Strawman question.
When Does Life Begin 00:08:50
That's a first.
I've never been accused of a straw man question.
You have an underlining premise in your question that renewable energies exist in a vacuum, but you can't do that.
That's not comparative analysis.
You have to compare renewables for fossil fuels with fracking effects.
All right, pal, how about this?
How about this?
You can't answer the question because deep down you know that cobalt-powered batteries are worse for the environment than liquid and natural gas and nuclear power.
So, you come up on here to try to virtue signal.
I love the environment, but as soon as you ask me about the incredibly environmentally inefficient, destructive, animal-killing, acidic-producing batteries, you're a strong man.
You're out of time.
Thanks for being here tonight.
Next question.
Hey, Charlie.
Hey, Charlie.
How are you doing?
I just wanted to reiterate: I think it's good that you're on campus.
I think dialogue and discourse is sort of the only way we move forward in a society.
So, before I ask my question, I just wanted to know your stance on abortion.
Yeah, life begins at conception, and that life should be protected.
So, a little bit about myself.
I'm a first-generation immigrant to America.
Welcome to the India, and in a lot of ways, considering civil rights and civil liberties, I think our constitutions speak the same.
We believe in giving people the power.
Regarding abortion in America, and you and I can disagree about when life begins.
And frankly, I don't care when you think life believes, when you think life begins, but taking a woman's right from her to choose what she wants to do with her body, when you go around campuses with the live-free banner, how guys, please, I warned you about this.
Be respectful.
Please continue.
When you tour around with a live-free banner, you are taking one of the most essential freedoms of a person from them.
And how do you respond to that?
Yeah, the baby is not free if it's murdered.
So every human being deserves a right to live free, and therefore, stronger, more developed people should use their power to protect the pre-born so that they're able to live.
But please respond.
So, my interpretation of when life begins and what life is, is the experiences that people live through.
Is it not a burden to bring a child into this world when a parent or a single mother or an expecting mother is not ready for it?
I don't think it does society any good.
I know I don't have any religious baggage to support a pro-life sort of stance, but how do you think society can benefit, can in any way benefit from bringing a child into this world who has no one to look after, who doesn't have teachers to look after?
If you were to guess, I don't want to put you too much, you're coming from a good place.
How many abortions do you think there are in America every year?
What do you think?
I go 20,000.
Yeah, about a million.
Right.
A million abortions.
So, just so everyone understands the scale of what's happening, and that's okay.
How many people are currently on the adoption waiting list in America?
You can go ahead, Anne.
Two million.
So, there's twice as many people waiting to adopt than abortions we have every year.
So, the idea of an unwanted pregnancy is not true.
Is that there's two million families waiting to adopt right now a baby that unfortunately is going to be terminated in an abortion zone?
Does that make sense?
I mean, we could stand here all night and disagree, but I think a woman or a man, I think everyone's right to choose what to do with themselves and their bodies trumps anything and everything.
So let me add, but do you admit that the baby is not her body?
It's not like getting a haircut or getting a cosmetic improvement.
There's a separate being involved, yes?
And that boils down to your and my interpretation of what that separate being is and when its life and when its life begins.
The child is inside the mother's body, and the mother needs to have the right to choose whether she wants to go through.
Why does the location of the being matter to its moral worth?
We're not going to get anywhere if we can't agree on when the being comes into existence.
You believe that the child is born when it's conceived.
I believe a child is born when it's born, when it lives experiences.
That is a.
Lives experiences.
Wait a second.
When my baby was 26 weeks old, it would kick in familiarity to my voice, listen to music.
So experiences, I mean, and why would you draw that line?
Why not at the creation of the deoxorbonucleic acid, the DNA, when the new being's process into full and complete adult human development begins?
I wouldn't like to say that you got me dumbfounded, but I think this conversation is essential to what America is.
I agree with you.
And to see what's happened at the Supreme Court and to see how it's affected young people on my campus, young people around America, young people around the world who resoundingly disagree with what you say.
So I believe I'm not going to stand here and change your mind about this issue, but I think we're going to have to agree with you.
Yeah, just so we're clear, the Supreme Court sent it back to the states.
So how the heck did it impact anybody here at Santa Barbara?
I didn't.
I mean, abortion is not just legal, it's now a constitutional right in California.
So I'm not really tracking on that.
Secondly, I'll just say this.
You're right.
A lot of people think abortion should be legal.
Just because a lot of people think something does not make it right.
God bless you.
Thank you for being here.
I remember, is that my scene correctly?
Were you there earlier?
Yes, I was.
Welcome back.
Smart kid.
Thank you.
So I have two questions.
So I guess we'll start with the first one.
And maybe this clip was taken out of context.
Probably, but go ahead.
Like a clip on Twitter that I watched.
I actually watched the clip because most of the people who talk about it just usually they just like see a screenshot of it and then the description.
But so what you said, so you were talking about Leah Thomas undressing in a locker room in front of other swimmers.
And you were talking to one of the swimmers who was there.
Yep.
And one of the things you said was someone should have taken care of it like in the 50s or 60s.
I did say that.
To me, it kind of sounds like an incitement to violence.
Maybe that's not in the 50s or 60s, the sheriff would have gone in and arrested that pervert.
It's not a call to violence.
I don't support violence.
People decided to lie about my words.
In the 50s or 60s, the men, the fathers of those daughters, wouldn't have been able to get there fast enough because the local DA would have already indicted that philandering person for exposing himself to women for his own egocentric narcissism, weird fetish, to pretend he's something he's not.
Do you have a follow-up?
Yeah.
No, I think that's fair.
Voter Fraud and Interference 00:05:26
So, can I go to my next question?
Really quick, because we got a voter.
So, in relation to the study at the beginning, someone was saying that you were saying that it didn't control for quality of representation.
But if it controlled for income, which he said that it controlled for income, shouldn't that by consequence also?
Potentially, that's a good counter.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Charlie.
Welcome.
So my question is a pressing matter.
What even is a clitoris?
Is this something proposed by the liberal media?
A fallacy.
Could you just let me know?
You represent your university exactly like I thought you would.
You've held up the reputation.
Next question.
Cocky, arrogant, and not very funny.
University of California, Santa Barbara.
Lacking wisdom, but a lot of gusto behind it.
Next question.
Hey, Charlie.
So in December.
Oh, by the way, you'll be very famous on the internet very soon, my friend.
Next one.
Thanks.
Ready?
So, in December of 2020, you tweeted that the amount of evidence is overwhelming to show the 2020 election was stolen through voter fraud.
Yep.
Now, given that Trump's own Attorney General, Bill Barr, said that the DOJ was unable to find any evidence of widespread fraud and that Trump's claims were, quote, bullshit, do you still stand by that claim?
Yes.
Why?
Well, which category do you want to dive into?
How about this one?
We know the FBI was meeting with Twitter actively to suppress stories on the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Is that the way fair elections are conducted?
The word stolen implies an injustice, and I will stand by that.
Let me ask you the question.
I would like your thoughts.
Is it fair when the Federal Bureau of Investigation meets with the largest social media company, not the largest, one of the largest social media companies, to actively try to suppress a story that would hurt the Bidens and your answer?
Charlie, I'm asking you a specific question about a statement you made.
Yes.
You said the 2020 election was illegally stolen through voter fraud.
Is that true or is that a lie?
Yes, it is.
Voter fraud via social media companies, Zuckerboxes, $400 million from the Center for Technology and Civic Life, mass mail-in ballots, relaxed signature verification thresholds, an unconstitutional change to mail and balloting provisions in Pennsylvania, Maricopa County taking eight days to count ballots, Georgia having a suspicious, leaky faucet to count ballots.
Yes, I stand by the contention, and I could go deeper if you wish, but please continue.
Bill Barr, Trump's attorney general, Trump's cybersecurity chief, 42 out of 50 Republican senators, multiple conservative Republican governors, all certified Biden is the winner.
Are they all in on the conspiracy too, or are you lying?
Well, it's interesting.
I think some of them are cowards.
I think some of them hate Trump, but that actually doesn't prove or disprove your argument.
What I'm trying to get at is that the 2020 election was a drive-by shooting of the United States Constitution.
Period.
End of story.
We decided to upend traditional, bipartisan past election standards because of COVID, where we did mass mail and balloting.
We relax the singer verification thresholds.
And then, on top of that, Mark Zuckerberg illegally funded $400 million of ballot drop boxes in key battleground states that has now independently been shown that it was in 87% Democrat-controlled areas.
On top of that, we were not allowed to talk about on social media, myself included, about the smoking gun of a story that, oh, yeah, by the way, Joe Biden's own son is not just doing business with the Chinese Communist Party, but also with Ukraine, does some really weird personal stuff.
I'll just leave it at that.
That's direct election interference.
You could use every word you want.
Stolen, injustice, not fair.
Yes.
Final thought.
The media not covering stories you do not like is not voter fraud.
You made specific claims.
No, hold on.
That's not the media not covering it.
That's Twitter not allowing you to say it.
That's a completely different thing.
Just to be clear, you agree that all of the Republican senators who voted to certify the election are all in on the conspiracy?
Not in on the conspiracy.
I think some of them are gutless wonders.
I think some of them are cowards.
Some of them don't even know what they're voting for.
Look what they're doing half the time in Congress.
Here's what I will say: the American people, especially the American right, know what happened in 2020.
There was a grassroots movement that was bubbling up in the key battleground states despite COVID and all these measures, and they needed to try to put as many mail in ballots as they possibly could through the system.
They had an infrastructure due at Center for Technology and Civic Life.
And the final thing is that well over 20% of Joe Biden's swing voters said they would have changed their vote if they would have known about the Hunter Biden laptop.
You can thank Yo Roth and the Federal Beer of Investigation for the fact that that never happened.
Thank you for being here tonight.
Thank you.
Hi, thank you for being here tonight.
First off, I told my dad I was here and I told him I would tell you hello from Bakersfield, California.
Duty to Student Leaders 00:15:35
Secondly, what advice would you give a student who is considering possibly dropping out of school?
So I'm not, look, I, as not a fan of college, you be careful because if you are you going to drop out with debt?
Are we talking about you or somebody else?
In general.
Okay.
Well, be careful because it could be the sunk cost fallacy.
But at the same point, if you're a junior and you're that close, you've already dedicated all that time.
So might as well get the piece of paper and hope it works for you, right?
So, but look, just be careful.
I'm not here to give specific advice to specific people, you know, because everybody's career path is different.
But also, if you're not studying something that you think is going to be, you know, have a lot of market viability, and if you're a freshman or sophomore, then that might be the right choice, it might not be.
But if you have a lot of passion and a lot of zeal for a very specific, you know, for a very specific industry or a very specific thing or a skill, then go for it.
College is not for all people, but it is for some people.
Thank you.
Hello.
Hi.
Mr. Kirk.
I am welcoming Booze as saying I am a Marxist.
I'm very left-leaning, but I'm here to find some common ground with you.
Your critiques of the monopolistic tendencies of multinational corporations align very closely with my beliefs as viewing the world through a class lens as being the major axis of inequality in this country.
My question is: as a member, a leader of a conservative organization that really condemns large government, how do you address this ever-growing power and these monopolistic tendencies without using the federal government and big government?
I just would love to hear that.
That's a good spirited question.
You have read your marks.
Good for you, because some people say they're Marxists and they haven't.
So, look, I think the Marxists are wrong on a lot.
We could talk about that in a second.
But the Marxists, their fascination with class is not wrong.
And there is a place where class warfare is legitimate and ugly and cruel, and that powerful people are trying to stomp on people that don't have as much as they have.
Do I think it's as plain and simple as Marx and Engels put out?
No, obviously.
That's not my position.
But I do think that a bipartisan diagnosis of kind of class issues is something that's very interesting.
I'd be curious to get your thoughts as a Marxist of why we talk about race all the time, because that will tell me what kind of Marxist you are.
But not right now.
So to answer your question, the answer, the answer needs to be to try to pursue market-based solutions.
Not be afraid to use the government to break up big monopolies like Google.
Not be afraid to use antitrust authority.
However, understand that sometimes more regulation can actually be a boon and a gift to those mega corporations.
For example, when Facebook goes and they say, hey, we want more regulation for data privacy.
No, they don't.
They want regulation that only they can afford.
So the next social media company like Rumble is not able to pay the same that they're able to pay for that sort of data hosting, lawyer fees, and all that sort of stuff.
So look, I think we can both agree, though, crony capitalism or cronyism is awful and wrong, and that entrepreneurial, bottom-up focused solutions is a beautiful thing.
Where we will disagree, though, is that if you are a Marxist, and you seem too sweet to be a Marxist, so I'll put that aside.
But is do you believe by definition in the entrepreneurial activity will result in exploitation and will result in the concentration of one person benefiting from the other?
This is where I disagree.
I think a portion of American economic activity, yes, is big companies exploiting or lying to people.
But the vast majority of economic activity happening in America is beautiful.
It's voluntary exchange of both parties benefiting.
It's the local small business serving a meal to somebody in Santa Barbara.
It's the local hotel that is able to have somebody with a great experience.
It's somebody that starts a taxicab company to be able to provide for their families.
So I think that we bash markets way too over generally.
And I would love your thoughts on that.
Do you agree that most economic activity in America is probably done voluntarily and is actually beneficial?
Not anymore.
I think because so much industry has gone overseas with certain trade agreements, usually like very large corporations that dominate employment in America.
So I don't think small businesses are doing very well, especially after the pandemic.
No, that's true.
I don't think they're doing well.
But I think still the volume of economic activity is largely not rooted in exploitation right now in America.
What do you think about that?
I agree to disagree.
Okay, got it.
So think about that, because I do think that exploitation happens, but largely, I think that there still is this amazing foundation of goodness in our markets of most people that are not trying to game somebody, but instead offer a service, and most people that are willing to trade their value, their time for that other service.
And I don't want to lose that.
And the Marxists, in its most pure sense, at the eradication of private property, we would lose that.
So let me just ask: can we agree on one thing as we close this question out?
Break up Google.
Yes?
Definitely.
All right, we got an agreement.
Thanks, Arby.
Hello, Mr. Kirk.
How are you doing?
I was going to start by saying I am in my early 20s.
I don't know everything.
You're correct about that, but I know a little bit about some things.
One of those things is the climate crisis.
And so I know that commonly you want to talk about the climate hoax.
And so.
I don't know if I used that word tonight, but I probably have previously.
Yeah, I heard it tonight, but I've seen it previously for sure.
Okay, fine.
All right.
Anyways, what I was curious about is the varying studies that you refer to.
You name a lot of studies, not by name, but you reference them, saying that a lot of things show that climate is not related to anthropogenic results.
I was curious, because I know a lot of studies that are related to that, do you think that more should be looked into?
Like, we should maybe focus on this a little bit because the climate is changing.
You know, we're getting forest fires, places where there's rain.
You know, Europe's starting to cool down with the AMOC slowing, et cetera.
Yeah, I mean, we should have research in the pursuit of truth always.
But let me tell you my concern.
My concern is that people that are quote unquote in the scientific elite community, they have a pretty bad track record the last couple years.
And the people that told us that it was science to go jogging outside with a mask, or that it was science to lock kids and not put them in schools, or that it was science that the mRNA gene-altering shot they call a vaccine was safe and effective.
So that's my concern.
Maybe you can relieve me of that concern with robust, peer-reviewed, actually transparent studies and people disclosing their government funding that might be conflicting, right?
But no, and I mean that non-sarcastically.
But I do not profess to have comprehended every study out there.
I will ask the same question I asked earlier: what do you think should be done?
My answer is more exploration of hydrocarbons and more using of them, not less.
So I just asked that question.
What do you think should be done?
First things first, I would like to reference what you just said about the running with Max, et cetera, like that.
Sure.
Those are different fields of STEM fully.
I'm talking about geophysics.
Well, that's interesting because, at least from what I've seen, this kind of protection of the elite seems to have infected the entire body politic of science.
So maybe you're right, but please continue.
Meaning, it seems to have gone from epidemiology to psychology to any part of the sciences seems to kind of be in harmony of the same sort of mantras, if you will, of what I would call wokeism.
But please continue.
Yeah.
Wokeism aside, I was more just focused on the principles of physics.
If I put my hand in front of my face and I blow on it, I can feel it coming back.
And that's the same thing that fossil fuel do when they burn, release the greenhouse effect, you know.
Cause and effect, sure.
Cause and effect, exactly.
That's what I'm saying.
Anyways, as to what I think should be done, I'm 22.
Yeah.
I really respect your humility.
I wish more people had that.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Hi.
We have a joint question.
Okay.
Where is they continue to uphold the reputation of UCSB, which is to publicly make fools of oneself in front of millions of people on YouTube?
Yanks.
What did they say?
They said something that shouldn't be repeated.
But it just goes to show the juvenile, narcissistic nature because they know they can't win a debate.
So they got to go straight to sophomoric tactics and try to go to all of that.
Next question.
Hey, Mr. Kirk, hope you've enjoyed the beautiful scenery we have at Samuel.
I am enjoying it.
Yeah, thank you.
Mine isn't really a question.
Mine really isn't really a debate.
It just is a question to see what type of man you are.
I just want to know what your top five values in life are: like God, money, success, family, friends, all that.
Yeah, God, marriage, family, country, and from there, I mean, that's four or five, right?
And then probably duty, duty to other people, community would definitely be in there.
Yeah.
Okay, and following that, you said duty to your country is pretty important, and you have a pretty big following here and all around the U.S. Do you ever have any intentions of going into office with that?
No, not right now.
I'm having way too much fun doing what I'm doing right now.
And I'm told when you run for office, you have to watch your mouth, so I'd be terrible at that.
Thank you.
First of all, Mr. Kirk, thank you for being here tonight.
It's great to meet you and see you.
As a student, as a student leader here in this community and a leader with something big, and I think this is a good question for a lot of other people here.
What do you, Mr. Kirk, think the best way to practice leadership and do leadership is?
It's a great question.
Be open to criticism, which obviously you could say whatever you want to me tonight, and I think that's important.
And work harder than the people that you are trying to work harder than the people you are leading.
So be the first one in, last one out.
Try to lead by example.
George S. Patton said, lead, follow, get out of the way.
For those of you in leadership positions, the best way I had leadership described to me is the ability to effectively judge is the wrong word, but effectively be able to read people and organize them effectively.
That's what a leader is able to do.
And then tell the truth.
Tell the truth.
God bless you.
How's it going, Charlie?
Good, thank you.
I'm going to read this to you if you don't mind.
It's a question.
It seems this event is fueled on polarity on a polarity planet, which I'm a fan of.
But this question is about your intent towards the trans narrative.
I'm curious your take on the theory that the rise in gay and trans communities might be associated with the great poisoning of our physical environment, which has systematically created imbalances in testosterone and estrogen.
The chemical astrazine has been proven to turn male frogs into female frogs.
Could it be that we are intentionally being polarized and weaponized when the actual people, politicians, corporations, and institutions that have profits and toxins on their hands are laughing at the theatricality of this distraction between the religious right and the woke-wing left?
Can this divide ever be bridged?
Yes, it can.
I don't know if there's an intentional poisoning campaign going on.
What you have said is true, though, is that testosterone rates are down 80% over the last 30 years.
And to dismiss toxins is foolish.
The food we eat is not the food we ate 30 years ago.
The clothes we wear is not the clothes we wore 30 years ago.
The shampoo, the deodorant, there's a lot of toxins, aluminum, mercury hidden in our products that would just blow people away.
That shouldn't even be a political issue.
And yes, the water too.
So I don't know.
We do know that a new study just showed that blue-collar workers have 50% higher sperm counts than people that work desk and office jobs.
That's interesting, right?
So that goes to solve the fertility crisis in some ways.
So your question is: how do we go about healing it, right?
Or I'm sorry, what was your specific?
You made a smart point, but what was the question?
The question is: this polarity that's created, it doesn't seem to heal.
Polarities, you mean polarity?
Yes, not plurality.
I'm sorry.
I misheard you.
The polarity that's being built to the forum, the polarity between men and women, the left and the right.
Could this revelation of environmental toxins build empathy?
Oh, interesting.
Yeah, I mean, I think it should build anger, though, man.
Like, if we find out that there has been a campaign of not telling the truth and producing products to young people and all people that have incredible damaging effects to your hormones, empathy, sure, let's get mad at the people that did it.
Follow-up?
Yeah.
Yeah, basically saying that would that direct some of that anger away from the trans people who are screaming outside towards the actual people who are committing the atrocities.
Yeah, look, again, you got quite a theory here.
It might be right, might not be right.
Here's what I do know: we have to find points of widespread agreement against people that are treating us very poorly.
And I think that, I don't know, the idea that you should be able to own a home in America by the time you're 30 is something that I think 80 to 90 percent of Americans should be able to agree on.
That's what I kind of said with the BlackRock example.
But I'd have to think more deeply about your theory.
Thank you.
Appreciate it.
Hello, Charlie.
I just want to say, before I say my question, thank you for being here.
Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak.
Sure.
You mentioned BlackRock has caused a housing crisis.
What is your solution under a conservative perspective, and why do you think liberal ideologies threaten the solution?
Without mentioning the issues of transgenderism, race, or climate change.
Okay.
So without mentioning those.
Okay, yeah.
So why do liberals threaten that?
No, what is the conservative?
Oh, yeah, okay, sure.
I think a prudent, moderate law should be if you're managing over a trillion dollars in assets, you shouldn't be able to buy single-family homes.
Like, that's pretty simple.
I mean, BlackRock controls $10 trillion, so they have purchasing power that nobody else has.
Liberals Threaten Homeownership 00:04:38
So they swoop into communities like Santa Barbara or into Oxnard or they go into Scottsdale, and they don't just buy 10 homes.
They'll buy 5,000 homes.
And it immediately increases the price, which increases your real estate taxes.
But yeah, it might increase your property value temporarily, but that also makes it harder for everybody else to go buy homes.
And then they'll rent them back.
Like, well, you might not be able to afford a mortgage or a down payment, but we'll rent it to you for $3,200 a month.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Or $5,000 a month.
Yes, thank you.
Sorry.
Got it.
Get my talking points.
Afflation adjusted.
Yes.
Hi, Charlie.
So I have a question on infrastructure.
Sure.
What are your thoughts on urban sprawl and failing infrastructure?
Is urban sprawl sustainable?
Or do you think roads and pipes will continue to fail and drain our city's budgets?
Is there a pattern of development of cities that you endorse?
Great question.
Thank you.
I got mocked and ridiculed last year when I said that we should stop building tall, tall buildings that are cloistered in urban centers and that we should encourage young people to go out into the farmland, into the rural areas, and build a life.
I was mocked relentlessly by the left where they said the cities are the best thing ever.
I disagree.
I think city life might be for you.
It isn't for me.
But I think stuffing people into urban cities actually, we do know it does increase depression.
We know that.
We know it increases anxiety.
We know you're less likely to own.
We know you're less likely to actually build equity in a home.
And I actually think it makes you further disconnected from the land.
And so three things that are kind of my politics that are really simple, which is more young people should get mortgages, get married, and have kids.
I think those three things would make America a much more conservative country.
And if you live in downtown LA or downtown San Francisco, yes, you can buy a home, but most young people, young professionals, they're not able to build together the down payment necessary for that, let alone the mortgage payment or the cost of living.
Their paycheck effectively disappears.
Delayed gratification and wealth creation is a moral good for all of society.
My fear is this generation is going to be the first one in recent memory that is going to be so out of grasp, and they are going to be a nation of renters, not a nation of homeowners or property owners.
And that creates a lot, creates bad politics, bad economics, and in some ways it paves the way for really, really radical Marxist ideas.
Because if you have a generation that owns nothing, they're not going to feel very guilty about taking everything away from people that do.
And I'm really afraid of that.
Thank you.
Okay, we'll do a couple more.
So the chancellor put out a call for people to inform on someone who would have written some statements on a blackboard.
And I know you're very, very pro-Israel, and these statements were critical of Israel.
Not only am I pro-Israel, I'm pro-Jew.
So I'm both.
But yes, go ahead.
Well, I can find you Jews.
I can find you Jews who are pro-Jew who would also share these same, or some of these statements that were written, from the river to the sea, meaning equal rights for everyone between the Mediterranean and the Jordan, not a faith-based theocracy that was founded on top of Christians and Muslims that were indigenous.
So that's an opinion.
Just the question.
But we don't have to agree.
No, I know, but do you know?
My question is.
You know the second part of the phrase, though, from the river to the sea.
Palestine will be free.
Yes, their idea of freedom is the obliteration of Israel.
Well, so it's not exactly free.
If Israel is an apartheid state, yes.
Equal rights for everyone.
But that's a side issue.
You can talk Israel if you want.
That's the side issue.
The question is: the chancellor asked people to inform if they knew who wrote these statements.
And whoever wrote these statements on a bullet whiteboard in a classroom, which I consider chilling.
And the sheriff's office asked for information about people passing out leaflets that were claimed to be, they were never claimed to be threatening in any way.
Like they were claimed to be hateful.
But again, who gets to be?
But hold on.
Just so we're clear, that statement is largely repeated by Hamas during death campaigns against Israel.
It's not some sort of benign slogan that is on a bumper sticker.
Just so we're clear, that Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, is a corrupt thug.
They train this to their children and they train this to their suicide bombers.
And so I see it both ways.
I understand the free speech element, but you're just...
Self-Love vs Self-Respect 00:03:44
Please ask your question.
I want to get to it.
Yeah.
Well, I can't.
Please don't flick me off.
It makes you look bad.
Don't do that.
I'm not doing that.
Not you.
She did that.
I'm not doing that.
You're welcome to ask the question.
I can find you rabbis who agree with that statement.
Yeah, and I can find you pastors that don't believe in the divinity of Christ.
That doesn't mean anything, all right?
So you're generalizing.
We're generalizing based on someone you don't like in your characterization.
And Netanyahu is a very nice man, I'm sure.
But the point is: is this not chilling if they don't like the position and then they call for students, faculty, I don't know enough about the situation, but you have not won me over because that particular phrase is an incantation of direct Jew hatred that is used repeatedly of violence against Israel.
So you have not persuaded me to the contrary.
You just haven't.
If I concede your point, which I don't, but if I gave it to you, is it okay then for the university?
I don't know.
I don't even know the situation.
It sounds like an overreach, probably, like, but I don't know the situation.
But you haven't won favor with me with that statement because I happen to know that when rockets are descending over the Holy Land, that is repeated time and time again.
Thank you for being here tonight.
Thank you.
Well, we'll get to the next question.
Last question.
Hi, Charlie.
How are you?
Good, how are you?
You discussed this at last year's Western Regional Conference, but I haven't heard you talk about it since.
You gave a refreshing eye-opening take on self-love versus self-respect.
Oh, yeah.
Can you reiterate what you said?
Because I think we'd all benefit from it, especially being part of a generation culture that's immersed in the self-love mantra.
I wish they would stick around for this.
It would be so helpful for them to hear.
Yes, the fascination with loving yourself is Gnostic narcissism.
You should have respect for yourself, not love for yourself.
You should have love for your God and love for your wife.
This idea, I read these self-help phrases sometimes where they say, my imperfections make me perfect.
Like, that's the silliest.
I mean, if you actually go through Pinterest and you read some of this stuff, instead it should be, I'm not all who I could possibly be.
Maybe it should be a challenge to oneself, not a non-stop romantic love campaign with yourself.
In fact, I think it creates more misery and more depression the more people think that they're in a romantic relationship with themselves.
You should have respect for yourself, but you should have respect enough to say that I could be more than I am today, and I'm going to delay my own immediate gratification.
And you should have love instead for the divine or for the creator, more specifically, in my view, the creator that took human form, Jesus Christ, that allows you to live forever.
And so there are, let me be clear, there's a lot of good people that are into the self-help, self-love thing.
I hope it works for you.
I have seen it do great damage to a lot of young people.
I'm going to tell you why.
When I was in seventh grade, I saw a sign that was posted all throughout our school, and it said, you are perfect the way you are.
And I asked my teacher, then I said, then why am I in school?
Why would you go to school if you were the perfect the way you are?
Instead, it should be, you have great potential.
It's a much, much better message to tell a young person.
Because as soon as you say you're perfect the way they are, they know they're not.
They put more pressure on themselves.
They're harder on themselves.
Instead, it should be a pursuit and a journey towards development.
That I am not there, but I'm going to keep on trying to either lose weight or improve my diet, stop lying, get better friends, find faith, and then maybe I can be a better version of myself.
The Mayflower Compact Myth 00:00:40
The West was built on that.
The West was not built by a bunch of people on the Mayflower Compact saying I'm in deep love with myself.
The Declaration of Independence was not signed by 56 people that were into self-love.
It was signed by people who loved the Lord, loved their family, and loved their country.
I encourage you to do the same.
God bless you guys.
Thank you for having me here tonight.
Thank you.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email us your thoughts as always, freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thanks so much for listening, and God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk.com.
Export Selection