All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Dec. 21, 2023 - The Charlie Kirk Show
51:06
The Great Replacement is Real, and Here's the Proof
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Noticing Leads to Opposition 00:08:06
Hey everybody, my conversation with Professor Michael Anton, professor from Hillsdale College.
You're going to love this conversation.
We talk about higher education.
We talk about a lot.
I think you're going to love it.
Email us as always, freedom at charliekirk.com and subscribe to our podcast.
Open up your podcast app and type in Charlie Kirk Show and become a member, CharlieKirk.com and click on the members tab.
That's CharlieKirk.com and click on the members tab.
Email me as always freedom at charliekirk.com and subscribe to our podcast and get involved with TurningPointUSA at tpusa.com.
Buckle up everybody here.
We go.
Charlie, what you've done is incredible here.
Maybe Charlie Kirk is on the college campus.
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 the Loan Experts I Trust, Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage at andrewandTodd.com.
Professor Michael Anton, welcome to the program.
Thank you.
I love taking the course with you this summer on Machiavelli.
It was excellent.
Thank you for that.
Appreciate it.
With the Claremont Institute.
So is it fair to say you're a classicist?
Not really.
I mean, in the academic context, that means somebody who teaches the languages.
Okay.
I just read the books and try to get the lessons from them.
So I'm actually formally trained in political theory.
You are incredibly impressive.
Anytime you publish anything, I read it.
In fact, I was referencing you recently here in front of an audience where Vivek Ramaswamy was saying, you know, I was on CNN and I talked about the great replacement theory and I mentioned all of these pieces of evidence.
And then CNN said, well, what?
It's probably good that it's happening anyway.
Yeah.
Which is a piece you wrote, which is one of the most incredible things.
It's not happening.
And it's good that it is.
And it's good that it is.
Yeah.
And it's a rhetorical tactic that the left has come up with.
You know, if there's something bad that they don't want you to notice, because they don't want you to stop it, their first go-to is, oh, you're imagining that, right?
So like, that's not happening.
There is no, the border is secure, is that kind of thing.
There's the border is not being overrun.
Or, you know, transgender athletes won't have any, you know, of negative effect on women's sports and so on and so forth.
And then once they get to a point where the evidence is overwhelming, they can't deny it anymore.
They pivot to, no, this is a, this is great.
This is wonderful.
It's actually good that, you know, we need lots of immigration, legal and illegal, because if we don't have it, we won't have a large enough workforce or we won't have enough people to pay into Social Security.
They come up with these reasons.
But what they don't want, they don't want us, our side, noticing these things and talking about it because noticing and talking leads to opposition.
And they don't want opposition.
They just want to run the table.
That it seems to be the people that are in the most trouble right now are the best at noticing.
Yeah, that's probably true.
I mean, it becomes hard to notice.
So, you know, I think the immigration problems in particular, they kept a lid on that for a long time.
It's now hard to keep the lid on it, right?
It's, I mean, I have said, I have used the phrase great replacement theory in print, I think, two years ago, and nothing happened.
That is to say, people point and they yell and they get mad, but at the end of the day, like, I'm still here.
So, let's intellectually build that out.
What is the great replacement theory?
I don't, I can't remember who coined the term.
I think it was some French intellectual.
Now, someone, you know, some lefty is going to prove that whoever this guy was, he had some nefarious ties to somebody, which ties me to that person, but whatever.
The point is, the point is that, like, you see it happening.
It's demographic transformation.
It's overwhelming the existing population of a given country or region with migrants, legal and illegal, to basically create a new population for voting purposes, for cultural purposes, and for economic purposes.
Why do they get so ferociously aggressive when you mention all the things I'm attacked?
Whenever I bring up great replacement, it's five articles, advertiser boycotts.
It's 10 out of 10.
Why is that?
I think at least two reasons.
Number one is just the incredible sensitivity on any topic that even glancingly touches on race.
That immediately sets off the left's, you know, every single rate army.
Yeah, they just go crazy.
But the second is, right, their power is enhanced by mass migration into the United States or into the West generally or into Europe, right?
And so, as I said, noticing leads to discussion, which potentially leads to opposition.
They don't want opposition.
They want this to be able to continue until it's essentially a fait accompli and nobody can do anything about it.
And then you, so here's a great example, right?
I grew up in California.
A friend of mine joked with me the other day because I recently moved to Texas.
So I moved to a red state after never having, well, and he said, well, how do you like?
This is another California friend of mine who lives in another red state.
We both grew up there.
And he said, well, how do you, you know, what's have you ever lived in?
That's right.
He asked me, have you ever lived in a red state before?
And we both joked.
When people ask us that, we tell them, we grew up in one, right?
So California, let's forget, we can leave out the 64 landslide, okay, because everybody, you know, I can't remember how many states Goldwater won, but I won many, right?
Just after that, it's Nixon, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Reagan, Bush, six in a row in California.
And if you go back even further, okay, the streak is even longer for Republican presidential candidates.
And because of, now this is different, because this is just a state, this is not the nation as a whole, but largely because of demographic transformation, right?
California is not, it's the most liberal state and the bluest, it may not be technically the bluest state in the nation.
I don't know exactly how you would gauge that.
Maybe Massachusetts is bluer or whatever, but it's just a different place.
And so while this was happening kind of throughout the 90s and the 2000s, it was forbidden to talk about it.
If you talked about it, you either could be celebrating it, you could trumpet it and say, isn't this great?
The demographics of California are changing and soon there'll be a permanent Democratic majority.
And if you were like, rah, rah, this is awesome, you could talk about it.
If you said it from the conservative, the Republican side, you know, the demographic transformation of California may actually lead to a permanent Democratic majority.
Then conspiracy theorists, you can't talk about it until it became just a completely done deal.
And then you get, you know, LA Times columnists and other, you know, senior grandees who write about California essentially spiking the ball in the end zone, going, Republicans, you're never going to win here again.
Ha ha ha.
You have it coming.
So once it's a done deal and there's no possible path back, or at least it looks that way, then they'll start talking about it and let you talk about it.
But while anything is in the balance, and I think the left right now is in a position where they feel that as much progress as they've made, they may be on the cusp of losing a lot of it and maybe of the tide turning, right?
They don't feel secure.
They don't feel like they've won completely.
No, and that's, I mean, just, again, I'm far from as well read as you and study this stuff, but they're not acting like a confident bunch of people.
No, they're acting like they're not.
Clearly, they're whether they're clearly not as heck.
Now, whether they should be or not is another debatable question, but they're nervous as heck.
And they sense that, like, since they don't have the deal sealed, they haven't fully and finally won.
What they need to worry about the most is us talking about it and actually mustering effective opposition.
So, one of the things that, you know, because I worked in the Trump administration, I get asked to talk about it a lot.
And a certain cast of reporter likes to basically say, well, won't you admit that his administration was a failure?
Like, he didn't finish the wall.
Healthier Cells Mean Better Outcomes 00:02:53
He didn't do this.
And then, okay.
When I'm asked, how do you grade him?
I always say, well, I'm a college professor.
So I get to not only give letter grades, I also get to use this other letter grade that people forget about called an I.
It's an incomplete, right?
Right?
He did a lot of stuff.
Yeah, he didn't get the full wall built.
I wish he had done it in four years.
That's a great framing.
But if you actually go back and look at the numbers of migrations, people caught at the border, people turned away, the deals with Mexico, the remaining, all of this stuff, the numbers went sharply down.
Yes, sharply down.
It was directionally a successful.
Under the four years of Trump's administration, right?
He didn't get it to zero.
I'd have loved zero, but whatever.
Less is better than more when it comes to an invasion at the southern border.
So that experience showed them maybe this is not completely a done deal yet.
Maybe it's reversible.
Maybe there's still something left that they can do.
So we better scream bloody murder when they talk about it because talking about it leads to action and we don't want action.
Okay, Kirk fans, I need you to stop and pay attention to this.
If you deal with exhaustion, brain fog, mood swings, or food cravings, if you're constantly getting sick or simply lack the zeal you used to have in life, then I have some news for you.
While back, I found a liquid supplement called Strong Cell, and it changed my health in a very profound way.
I take it every single day.
Look, I knew I had to partner with them.
I did the research.
Google and look up online what happens when you mix NADH with CoQ10 and marine collagen.
It's simple.
Every area of your body has cells.
So if your cells are healthier, then you will also be healthier.
You don't have to take my word for it.
Listen to one of these testimonials.
After taking Strong Cell for six weeks, I found improvement in many areas, less shoulder pain, improved mental clarity, increased natural energy, and so much more.
I'm thankful that Charlie Kirk recommended this to his listeners.
Rebecca says, I absolutely love Strong Cell.
At first, I didn't think it would make much of a difference for my chronic fatigue, depression, and anxiety, but I thought I'd give it a chance.
I've tried to find depression meds for 10 years, and since you Strong Cell, I'm feeling better than I ever have on depression medication.
Customer for life, thank you, Charlie Kirk, for recommending this product.
So there it is.
You've heard from me directly and some of the users who have seen their lives changed by Strong Cell.
I personally recommend taking it every day for at least 30 days.
I take it every day before I go on the air, and it's helped me in more ways than I can even name.
Each of our bodies is very different.
So I would recommend you give the supplement at least two to three months to see the changes in your body.
Go to strongcell.com and learn more for yourself.
That's strongcell.com forward slash Charlie.
And don't forget to use discount code Charlie at checkout to get your special 20% discount for Kirk listeners.
Or you can call 888-596-0155 to order over the phone.
That is 888-596-0155 or visit strongcell.com forward slash Charlie.
Legal Immigration and Global Citizens 00:13:28
So if I hear you correctly, they know that there's only so much time they have to allow the demographics to change in this country before we notice.
And we might be right on that precipice.
Yeah.
I mean, look, we've noticed that that ship has sailed.
The noticing is over, right?
It's been noticed.
So now they've got to move to other parts of the world.
What is the next step then?
Well, right now it's just demonization.
It's terrible that you talk about this.
You must be a racist if you're concerned about the southern border.
And literally, only Nazis care about the southern border.
I mean, it gets that bad, right?
Whereas you go down to the southern border, why did the Rio Grande Valley, these Hispanic communities in South Texas, which, by the way, are not heavily immigrant, or that is to say that have been Hispanic for generations.
You're talking about like multi-generation.
They're American citizens of Hispanic descent.
And they went red because they're not in love with this border non-policy, right?
To say the least, right?
So starting to worry about it.
Now, look, I probably don't look at polls as much as other people here, but I've seen some of them.
And I heard some of the speakers here today.
And like the numbers in constituencies that the Democrats have been able to rely on for years and years and years, and that they need to not only vote in huge numbers for them, but to turn out in huge numbers for them, they're not looking great for them at the moment.
And this is partly due to their, must I say, their border non-policy, or non-enforcement of the law is in effect a policy, right?
It's just, well, we're not going to do anything.
And we're going to tell you that the border is secure.
So, you know, I think they look at this and they go, God, we don't have this in the bag yet, right?
It's the fourth quarter and we're up.
We're in the lead, but there's enough time that maybe these other guys can put enough points on the board.
And that makes us nervous.
So it's time to start screaming.
So using the California as an example, and I know this is a very difficult question.
It's more kind of a feel than it is a number.
But when do we reach the point of no return where they have enough third world people and they have successfully placed the Democrats?
I know it's a tough question.
I don't know.
I don't think anybody knows because I think the answer is we're not there yet.
Well, here's one answer.
I hope so.
So two guys, you know, left of center, center-left Democrats, in 2002, I think it was.
Anyway, close to 20 years ago, wrote a book called The Emerging Democratic Majority.
John Judas and Reed Texera.
I hope I didn't mispronounce his name.
And they said, they basically made the demographic case that, look, eventually because of legal immigration, the 65 Act, amnesties and so on and so forth, and also the way college educated and blue urban centers are going and certain suburbs are going, the Democrats are soon going to have a pretty much an electoral-proof majority.
They wrote this 20 years ago.
They have been back more recently since to say, you know what?
We might have jumped the gun on that.
What we predicted, maybe it'll still happen.
But when we were writing in 2002, we would have thought it would have been completely sealed up by now.
And then we're not seeing that.
And in part, we're not seeing that because constituencies that we predicted would remain solidly in the Democratic camp seem to be drifting away.
And that is still to me a big unknown, whether they will fully or substantially drift away and stay away and find a new home in the Republican Party or not.
Yeah, I mean, Hispanics are getting close to a 50-50 voting block, which throws a wrench into some of their predictions.
That would be a great thing for the Republican Party, and I think for the nation.
Either way, whether that happens or not, you still got to get control of the border.
I mean, you just absolutely have to control the border.
And I go further than that.
You know, I'm kind of tired of and bored.
I'm bored is too mild a word.
Sick of and frustrated with the old Republican line.
Well, of course I'm against illegal immigration, but I'm all for legal immigration.
Well, okay, I mean, how much, right?
That's the question.
How much legal immigration?
How many million a year are we going to let in legally?
And what, you know, in what economic sectors and so on will be most affected?
And we need to have that national conversation.
I'm of the view personally, and I've said this in print too, so I can say it again now.
I mean, didn't cancel me when I said it in the Washington Post.
You're not going to get me over it now.
That, you know, at three, whatever the number is, you know, I think the census says we're a country of 330 million.
That is to say, people living within the United States, not all of whom are citizens.
We don't know how many non-citizens live in the United States.
In any event, whether it's 330, 335, 340, 350, I don't know, but that sounds full to me.
It sounds pretty big.
And with devastated heartland communities, devastated industries, jobless and all kinds of domestic problems, I just don't think we need immigrants at all right now.
I think we should be at zero for a year.
I think we should be at zero for a while.
We need a cooling off period.
It's like after eating a big meal, you need time to digest it.
And do a lot of things in the meantime.
So I've got a lot of people.
Well, we need mass deportations.
I mean, the Biden wave, you know, what I've need to undo the Biden invasion.
Nobody knows what that number is either.
It's between 10 to 15 million.
Minimum five.
Once you know that when the government admits to five, then you know it's but by the end of the term, it'll be 10 to 15.
It's got to be more than five.
It's like for the longest time, you know, there was some Yale, I think it was Yale Pew Research, but whatever, it came out 15 or so years ago.
And they said, Well, we think there are 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
This comes out, you know, around 2010, 2011, or something.
I thought, okay, that's very interesting.
And every year would go by, and more would come, more.
And that number was quoted over and over again.
Well, how can 11 years later it still be 11 million?
Did we stop everything?
And I'm like, no, there's no way.
It's got to be higher.
And I think you're right that unfortunately, some way has to be found, obviously, lawfully, humanely, to reverse the effects of the Biden wave, which is a policy of deliberate neglect for the Democratic Party's electoral interests and that corporate America is happy to go along with because they see it as a source of labor.
But let's cheap labor.
Let's tell the truth that there are major parts of the Republican Party that want unlimited legal immigration and they're passively against illegal immigration.
They're not even like it's kind of like, oh, well, it could be better organized.
I mean, in a way, though, I don't know how true that is anymore, just in the following sense that it was always those Republican corporate interests who took that line.
But as you know, as well as anybody, right?
The corporate interests are not really Republican anymore.
They drifted completely to the left.
Yeah, that's.
I mean, I worked for three different Fortune 50 companies over a period of about a dozen years.
And yeah, you'd meet a Republican occasionally.
But I can tell you the corporate culture in the C-suite and around there was very much, you know, had drifted Democrat.
Yes.
And is now overwhelmingly Democrat.
No, it's the orthodoxy.
That's right.
So it's not like the 80s anymore where you could kind of count on.
Is that a good thing?
Do you think that's a good thing?
If you were to go to the bottom of the bar, I mean, it's good and it's bad.
It means it means on the one hand, on the bad side of the ledger, it means, you know, you lose out on the donations.
You lose out on the influence that you would have.
You want any political party needs to have elites supporting it, elites on its side, because you just can't get anything done, not only in this country, but in any society without any elites on your side.
On the other hand, to the extent that these people, these business bigwigs and so on, formally abandon the Republican Party and adopt the Democratic Party, it means they have less of a hold on us, right?
Which is great, which has allowed us to have intellectual freedom.
Yeah.
So that's good.
But I'd like to see them replaced with some different elites.
I'd also just like to see somebody in big business in America step up and say, first of all, there's got to be some industries that don't benefit from illegal immigration.
I'd like to see them step up and say so.
Like, I don't benefit from this.
And I see how it's harming my country.
And so I'm going to side with you guys on this.
But then the other thing I'd like to see, this is an even bigger stretch, but it would be great, is somebody, some business leader say, you know what?
Even though my company might benefit from lax border policy or high legal immigration, because it means that it pushes down wages or it expands our market in a given sector.
Like Walmart.
And we get, like, even though we benefit from it, I still see that it's bad for the country.
And so I'm against it.
And I'm willing to, I am willing to sacrifice some portion of my company's bottom line.
Like, not go broke, not, you know, go into the negative territory.
I always say to people, they say, well, you know, if you, if you, what, what happens to certain products and things?
Like, what happens to food and produce if you don't have legal immigration?
You're going to pay a lot more for like an apple.
To which I say, by mean the fruit.
You know, they're not talking about the computers here.
Okay, I'll pay more.
How much more?
Right?
5%, 20%?
I don't know.
I'll pay that to have a secure border, to have a country in which totally pay that.
In which my fellow citizens can work and earn a living, in which they're not continually undercut by wave after wave after wave of cheap labor.
Like, yeah, I'll pay more.
But we, it's also a lie because we end up paying more in taxes for social services.
I'm sure I know that's true.
I read the studies.
I know that's true.
But even on its own terms, the argument is dumb.
Yeah, of course.
Is all we care about?
The money is all we care about is the lowest.
This is one of the arguments that they like to use.
They say, well, pivoting slightly from immigration to trade, they're like, oh, Trump's trade policy is terrible.
It's going to drive up the price of consumer goods.
Like, nothing has ever been cheaper.
You know, buying stuff at Walmart and Best Buy or wherever.
The box stores has never been cheaper.
And that's great for the consumers.
Like, oh, that's, I totally, that's great.
However, if the consumer doesn't have money in his pocket to go pay that bill, what good is it?
Right?
He's got to have a job.
He's got to have an industry that he can work in, that his family can work in, that his children can work in, that supports the town he lives in, right?
If the town just gets kind of hollowed out and gutted and the mill closes and everything closes, but there's a box store out there you can buy stuff on with what money?
Either nothing or some kind of government support.
So there's a trade-off somewhere between lower prices and consumer goods, but also industries that support jobs and put money in people's pockets.
And I don't, and I think we just tipped the balance completely over on this notion that, well, cheap goods are everything because that serves certain interests, but it doesn't serve the interests of the country over the long term.
You mentioned that you want to see more elites or people of power start to put country over profit.
You know, we see a little bit of movement in Elon Musk.
We see other going back 100 years ago, Rockefeller, Mellon, you know, they get demonized, but they love the country.
They gave back.
Is this, I mean, you know, American history very well.
Is this the first time we've had the wealthiest, best connected actively use their resources, their donations to actually go against the country, a top-down revolution?
Have we survived something like this before?
No.
But can we?
They don't see it that way.
What they think is that, you know, they're all global companies.
I'm sure that's not how they see it, but they may have been founded here, but we have to think about our global responsibilities and our global customers and our global employees and all of this.
And the other thing, I do think that they're very short-sighted that in what is going on in the country right now is not sustainable.
And that if it goes on and it has the results that I think that would have to have, these people are going to suffer.
And I wonder, like, if I can see it, why can't you see it?
You guys are all much richer than me.
So that's interesting.
So, Tucker has a different twist on this.
He's like, oh, they're just going to go to Auckland or Zurich and they'll be fine.
You're like, no, actually, they will.
Is the whole elite class?
Is like all of Wall Street going to go to Auckland?
No, but I mean, you know, I'm sure there are some people who think Larry Fink will go to Auckland.
Yeah, but the next 10,000 employees might not.
Listen, this is using an example.
We're before a live audience.
I will mention, feel free to boo and hiss at what I'm about to say.
I actually worked at BlackRock, so I know something about Black Rock.
How dare you, corporate raider?
I know, I know, I know.
Listen, Larry Fink will not be happy if he has to up, you know, do a mark rich and flee to Zurich, right?
Larry Fink is happy running the world's largest asset manager.
Yeah, $10 trillion man.
And that's only possible in a functioning financial sector in the United States.
And so Larry Fink is obviously not a dumb guy.
This company did not exist until he founded it in 1988, and now it's the world's largest asset.
You don't do that if you're stupid.
And yet, I wonder, like, are you so short-sighted that you can't see?
Then explain the psychology then.
I mean, I've had this conversation so many times, including with friends of mine from BlackRock or formerly with BlackRock.
You know, I don't fully get it, but I think it comes down to this desire.
It's like, it's not good enough for a guy like Fink to, you know, to have the first line in his obituary, you know, Larry Fink, who founded BlackRock, the world's largest asset manager, which within a couple of decades, that's a momentous achievement for anyone.
It's not good enough for him.
He needs to be remembered as a good guy who made positive change, right?
And he knows that the only way you get those kinds of accolades is you got to get behind causes the left cares about.
ESG.
Yeah.
He is kind of the well, he was.
He seems to be backing away from it.
I don't know how to be unapologetic.
A couple years ago, he was.
He was mean about it.
Don't know if the backing away is sincere or how far it's gone.
Or maybe he wants to still control West Virginia Pension Fund and ESG's.
Yeah, it's a problem for that.
Yeah.
It's just, it has caused some money out.
You know, exactly.
But you and I both know, everybody who's listening knows that like you do not get any acolytes from high society in Manhattan or Washington or San Francisco or LA or anywhere else where the elites congregate by pushing these kinds of nationalist conversations.
No, the opposite.
You don't get points.
You get ostracized, you get attacked.
Whereas you get lionized for, I mean, I just today, you know, I noticed this.
I thought it was weird, right?
I got here a little early.
I went to the hotel gym.
NFL Games and Liberal Pressure 00:15:48
They have a big TV on.
They're showing a lot of NFL games and they're kind of cutting from this game to the other thing.
And I noticed that in the end zone of every game I saw, there's some woke slogan.
And I thought, that's interesting.
I know they were all doing this in 2021, like right after the summer of Floyd NBA went really all in, but I thought it had kind of peaked and passed.
And I sent some texts to some friends.
I'm like, what's going on?
They're like, eh, you know, it's a little, it's down from the peak a little bit, but it's still out there.
And it's kind of more up to the individual teams if they want to do it.
But it seems like, you know, and when we talk about, I mean, the NFL.
End racism.
Right.
The NFL.
Okay.
So not that I know a great deal about it, but this is a pretty masculine, testosterone-driven, you know, bone-crushing game.
You think this is kind of one of the least likely places where they'd be like, yeah, let's go all in with a kind of Nambi-Pamby left-wing agenda.
And yet, but it's also the biggest sports business in America by far, right?
And big business knows they got to be all in.
Or they feel.
Advertiser dollars for all.
And I doubt anybody in the stands gives a damn.
I bet the stands are like 10%.
I'm all for that.
Maybe 20, 30% wild guests are like, I hate this stuff.
And then the rest are just like, I just want to watch a game.
And the same with the TV audience.
So it's not like they feel like, well, we have to do this because 90% of our fans and our viewers, or even 50%, are into it.
Or when NASCAR does it, like it's like there's a really vocal 10%.
But then there's the people who aren't even fans who can put pressure on your business and determine how you are viewed and what your reputation is and your stature in the elite community.
And they go, wow, we got to pander to those people because they actually have power.
This Christmas, the new film from director George Clooney arrives.
It's a rag to riches, absolute crowd pleaser based on the number one New York Times best-selling book, this inspirational true story about one of the most difficult sports in the world and the 1936 University of Washington College rowing team that competed for gold at the summer games in Berlin.
Will inspire you.
This team rode out of need, need to eat, need to sleep, and it gave them an edge that captures the power of working together to overcome all odds while rowing for America.
They don't make movies like this anymore, and it's filled with wholesome content that makes it an ideal multi-generational movie for Christmas.
Joel Edgerton and Callum Turner star in this exciting and incredible story of courage, hard work, and determination, showcasing America at its best.
Believe in each other, believe in the impossible.
The Boys in the Boat open Christmas Day in theaters only.
Get tickets now, boysintheboatmovie.com.
And so do you see an attitude change amongst the quote-unquote elites?
Is there hope on the horizon there?
Well, so I left BlackRock to go work for President Trump in 2017 and surprisingly have not been invited back into the C-suites of corporate programmes.
He teaches at Hillsdale now, by the way.
So now I'm a college professor.
So I'm a little bit out of touch with the elite that I used to hobnob with when I was a Manhattan corporate drone for 12 years.
So I don't know.
I see them backing off what I guess what I don't, at least from what I read in the headlines, what I don't really know is, is it just a tactical like, hey, let's lay low for a while until this blows over and then we'll get right back on it?
Or is it like, ah, we actually kind of got burned and we learned a lesson?
It's hard to say, right?
Like, I don't think Disney has decided that it's going to change course.
They're dug in and they want to fight.
Anheuser-Busch apparently really does feel stung, and they just can't figure out how to fix that debacle.
Yeah, it just is ongoing.
It's like the remedy is worse than even the.
I mean, I can tell you this from what I can tell from the numbers and the viewership and everything.
Like the NFL is not suffering from this at all.
They're not paying a price.
You remember when Nike, you know, they went all in on Colin Coward.
Colin Kaepernick, who was like a mediocre quarterback from my hometown football team in San Francisco, 49.
And then got cut.
And it got cut.
And he went on.
And we all thought, and then, you know, Nike launched this huge ad campaign just around him.
They were going to, Nike was going to put out like this patriotic shoe with the Betsy Ross, you know, stars on it.
And he objected, saying, I don't want anything patriotic in American because America is slavery.
And Nike canceled the shoe just because this one guy mouthed off.
And many of us thought, oh, that's it.
You know, that's Nike's going to go into decline.
It hasn't.
So the phrase was, I think, a hopeful phrase, like, go woke, go broke.
And for a long time, you could go woke and you suffered no consequences.
What we saw in 2023, really, for the first time, is companies actually paying a price because conservatives are wonderful.
But so, Mike, I have to press pause here because remember, you said, I want one person who runs their business to put the country above profit.
But what we see at some of these companies is they're putting something above profit.
Yeah, that's true.
So help me understand that.
I think it's both a combination of true belief, just, you know, you don't get to anymore, I don't think you don't get to be a CEO in America in a big company without maybe there are certain exceptions, but they're overwhelmingly Ivy League.
They're overwhelmingly from the Blue Coasts.
Or if they're not, they're some talented kid from the middle of the country who then went to the Blue Coast and then got completely indoctrinated into the Blue Coast way of thinking.
And by the time you're, you know, you're made a CEO, like you've been swimming in that pool for 20, 30 years, and you just believe.
You also know that there's a lot of activist pressure on you to do this kind of thing.
And there's really very little activist pressure on you to be anti-woke or neutral.
You also, this is a part of it that I think people insufficiently appreciate, the extent to which, you know, 50, 55-year-old CEOs making $10 million, $20 million a year are afraid of their 20-something most junior most employees in the HR department.
Yeah, the same or just everywhere because they'll Twitter mob you.
The same way, you know, every college president is deathly afraid of under, I mean, not Larry Aaron, just to be clear, but every other college president in America, he's the president of Hillsdale, is afraid of undergraduates.
Like, you know, what's going on when you're the president of Harvard or whatever?
Yeah, well, that's a perfect segue.
I was going to go there.
So here's President Gay.
She's obviously not very smart.
She only has the job because she's black.
She's a plagiarist, all this sort of stuff, right?
So she's at this hearing and she had to make a decision, a conscious decision.
Whom do I fear most?
Yeah.
This is like kind of the subtext, the buried lead of this whole hearing, right?
So she had to make a choice because she obviously had the best law firm in D.C. that preps for this stuff, you know, $3,000 an hour.
And I'm sure at some point, so who do you fear most?
Do you fear the students?
Do you fear the administration?
Do you fear the professors or the donors or the alumni?
And she chose, I fear the radical students and professors more than the alumni and the donors.
Help me understand that.
Well, okay, first of all, I think that she was chosen to be president of Harvard, not because she was susceptible to pressure, but because they knew the Harvard, can you believe this?
I think they're still called the Board of Overseers.
I wonder.
They have all these, think about that one.
Brown is like a corporate board.
Board of Overseers.
How long can that possibly last?
Well, anyway, it's still there.
Harvard, I think they chose her because they're like, well, she's a true believer.
Like, we don't, we're picking her because she's completely all in for this agenda.
Second of all, when you have, I think Harvard's endowment, you know, with very market, it's $49,500 billion.
Like, okay, so one Bill Ackman walks away, you're like, well, all right, there's more where that came from.
And in fact, if I don't get another donation for the next 12 months, I'm going to be fine.
In fact, you know, others have proved Harvard could run itself completely just on the money without taking tuition, just on the money that the endowment throws off.
It's a hedge fund with a university attached.
So she doesn't feel that much pressure there, right?
And in fact, there hasn't been, look, don't get me wrong.
I'm enormously encouraged by the donor reaction against Harvard, against Penn, against all of these schools, right?
But there hasn't been a cascade away yet, right?
Bill Ackman's making a lot of noise.
A lot of other people are making noise against Harvard and against certain other schools.
But I will bet you right now, there are people in the giving or whatever they call those offices, the development offices and the people that run the endowment.
They're looking at the numbers and they're probably telling her, don't worry, we're still okay.
So it's not time to be afraid now.
And let's say that the revolt got to a fever pitch.
It would be interesting to see actually what she would choose.
But I think there is some truth to that she really fears the radical student body.
Is it that she fears them or is it that she fundamentally agrees with them?
I don't actually.
I lean toward the latter explanation.
Yeah, I mean, I guess Mary, maybe Larry Summers would have feared them, right?
Well, you know, that's a great.
So what happened to Larry Summers?
This was either 2005 or 2002.
Former Treasury Secretary, I'm pretty sure a Harvard alum.
He definitely had been on the Harvard faculty.
And then, you know, Harvard.
Time in government is over.
He goes back to the economics department, eventually becomes president of Harvard.
And he basically makes a pretty banal anodyne observation, you know, on the question of, well, why don't we have more women in like the, you know, theoreticals, you know, as theoretical physicists or high-end mathematicians.
And he basically said, well, you know, women's academic interests tend to be different.
And he made a comment about where the, you know, to be a theoretical, I mean, my, just my wife, I'll just mention this, went to Harvard and was a physics major.
So I know something about Harvard and physics and women, okay?
To be a really successful theoretical physicist, you got to be way over in the crazy, you know, what they call the Pareto principle curve.
Yeah.
You know, the right tail, where it's like IQ is so high that they're just, they're just so they deal in abstractions more than anything else.
And Larry Summers just said, look, when it comes to this category, like there's more men, and there's still, like, you're still talking about like a couple of the hundreds or whatever it can be done.
We're talking about a tiny, tiny population, but there's just more men than there are women in that.
And they lost it.
And Larry Summers, who's a, remember, he was in a treasury secretary in the Clinton administration, right?
Lifelong Democrat.
Not a far left guy, but a liberal, right?
And I think he thought he was saying something that was just sort of whatever, a normal observation, and everything blew up.
That's right.
And he was forced to resign.
They ran him out.
So I want everyone to understand, time out.
They ran out a university president over a vanilla factual comment based on just sex differences between male and female.
And they won't run out President Gay when she did what she said.
You know, although it's kind of fun to watch Harvard squirm.
Yeah, like Summers has said as a former president that he's appalled at what he has seen.
Yes.
I appreciate him saying that, right?
I mean, look, to which I appreciate him saying that too, although the flip side of that for me is, well, President Summers, let's talk about the policy, your own admissions policies that have led you to a student body that's like this and the policies that Harvard has supported throughout the years that has led the university to go so far to the left, which some of that happened on your watch.
So yes, I support, I'm glad you said that, but you need to own up to the extent to which you're partly responsible, which is not trivial.
This is a great segue to a topic I want to kind of close on.
I don't know how we're doing on time though.
Let me know.
You teach at Hillsdale.
Hillsdale is America's greatest college.
They are a huge supporter of ours on the Charlie Kirk show.
People go to charlieforhillsdale.com.
We have directed tens of thousands of people to take the online courses.
I've taken half of them.
Talk about what Hillsdale is, what college ought to be.
This is something I think we have to do a better job explaining.
So, Hillsdale, first of all, it is a college, a real college that was founded in 1844.
It is a private Christian non-denominational college.
It was founded by Free Will Baptists.
And I don't know exactly the year I should know this, but when they decided to kind of make it more open, like it's still a Christian college, but not non-denominational.
It famously became, I want to say in 1974, the first college in America to not take any federal money and not even to accept a federally backed student loan.
That's the key.
Because you could say, well, I'm not going to take any of your money.
I'm not going to take a research grant or whatever.
But if one kid there has a federally backed student loan, then all these federal regulations apply to you.
And Hillsdale said, we just don't want you messing with us.
So we're going to find a way to do this on our own.
And they raise a lot of money.
And, you know, they're obviously not nearly as big as Harvard.
And I think the endowment is about $1 billion as opposed to $50 billion.
It's still a big number.
It's a big number, and it allows the college to be completely financially independent.
Now, the federal government is going after the college right now on Title IX.
I don't think the lawyers at the college really want me talking about it, but you can read about it.
And there was a good, I will point you to an article by, oh, I can't remember his name, but anyway, it was an article in the Wall Street Journal from about a month ago that went into the issue and quoted the president of the college and the general counsel of the college extensively.
But look, aside from being Christian, non-denominational, it's basically, I mean, it's a full-blown liberal arts college.
That is to say, it's got every department.
It's got humanities, it's got social sciences, it's got the hard sciences.
If you want to go to Hillsdale to be a chemistry major, you can do that.
There's a chemistry department, there's a math department, there's a biology department, there's all that stuff.
It's known for its politics department, I would say above all, maybe politics, history, English.
It's been very strong in those categories for a long time.
And it just teaches you the basic stuff, like without any kind of woke admixture.
The president of the college, who I've known for 30 years now and who is a conservative, a self-avowed conservative, has said, you know, there are a lot of faculty members here.
I don't really know what their politics are.
And I don't care.
As long as I know they're teaching their subject matter in a straight up way that conveys information to students and develops their mind, it's fine with me if these guys turn out to be a little bit left of center or even significantly left of center.
Now, Hillsdale is unusual for a college in that it really conservative.
I mean, you go to the school, you meet the kids, you meet the faculty, right?
There isn't, it's the opposite of that overwhelming liberal atmosphere that you get almost anywhere else.
But it's not like you can't be a liberal at Hillsdale.
It's fine.
There's a campus Democrats club.
I've had some of the kids from the Democrats Club in my classes, and they're just as good a student as the other kids, you know?
And I try to treat them, I absolutely treat them the way I feel that I was treated in college.
So I went to a liberal college and I became a conservative in college.
And, you know, I took on my professors and papers and in classes sometimes.
And I don't feel like, this was a long time ago, probably wouldn't happen now, that I ever got a bad grade for that.
And if some kid, I always say to them, hey, take me on.
You know, if you think you know what I think and you want to argue that I'm wrong about something, I usually give you, just for the, just for the chutzpah of making the attempt, you get an extra third of a grade.
You know, go for it.
And many of them do.
And I appreciate that.
MyPillow is excited to bring you their biggest bedding sale ever and just in time for Christmas.
For a limited time, get the Giza Dream bed sheets for as low as $29.98, a set of pillowcases for just $9.98.
And rejuvenate your bed with MyPillow Mattress Topper for as low as $99.99.
They also have blankets in variety of sizes and colors and styles.
They even have blankets for your pets.
Get duvets, quilts, down comforters, body pillows, bolster pillows, and so much more.
All the biggest discounts of the year are happening now.
They're extending their money-back guarantee for Christmas until March 1st, 2024, making them the perfect gift for your friends and your family and everyone you know.
So go to mypillow.com and use promo code Kirk or call 1-800-875-0425 and you get huge discounts.
Get big discounts on all my pillow bedding products, including the Giza Dream Sheets, for as low as $29.98, and get all your shopping done now while quantities last.
That's mypillow.com, promo code Kirk.
Now, a couple thoughts on Hillsdale, though.
Sense of Community at Berkeley 00:06:57
The actual constitution of Hillsdale and what success looks like at Hillsdale is a lot different than the modern college.
It's about developing people of good character.
It's in the classical model.
It's a lot different than the administrative state model that has really infected most higher education.
Can you elaborate on and explain it?
Yeah, part of it is that it's small.
It's a liberal arts college, so the student body is usually about 1,600.
You get a real sense of community there that you probably don't or can't get at a big university, much less a big state university.
Nothing against them.
I went to one, but it's different because it is Christian.
There's a sense of community there.
The college, say recently, I should know off the top of my head exactly what year, but within the last five years, built a brand new chapel.
Yeah, it's beautiful.
It's beautiful.
It's one of the most beautiful.
It shows you that building right in the center of campus.
Right.
Demonstrates that architecture doesn't have to be terrible.
It doesn't have to just be glass boxes and steel beams or Frank Gary monstrosities with curved walls.
They built this chapel, and you look, if I didn't tell you that it wasn't part of the college from the beginning, you wouldn't know.
You might be able to tell just by looking at it, like there doesn't seem to be much wear and tear here, right?
As opposed to Central Hall, which goes back to the 19th century.
But the style is the same.
And the whole college can convene in that chapel, and they do often.
So there is a real sense of community.
I'm certain also that there's a self-selecting effect among the students, right?
They know what they want, or their parents definitely do.
And they know what they're kind of getting in for.
And, you know, they know that it's not going to be a kind of place where you go and you live over here and you just take your classes and you have no interaction with fellow students or with faculty or with the administration.
I mean, I go to teach sometimes.
And, you know, like I said, I've known the president for years.
The last time I was there, I got in touch with him and said, I'm going to be in town.
Let's get together.
He says, okay, just come have lunch with me in the dining hall.
And the two.
He sits with students.
Tudors just sit down at a big table and they're all walking by going, Hi, Dr. Arn.
Hey, how are you?
Can I take this chair?
I'll stop and talk to him.
He said, he's there.
I mean, he's on the road a lot because he's a busy guy and he raises a lot of money.
But when he's there, he's there.
And he teaches.
You could take his classes.
It's an Aristotle course.
He's just not, he's not the detached president.
Like, he wants to keep that alive.
And so he, every semester when he can, he teaches the class.
So here's my theory, which, and this is my theory.
This is why I don't think Hillsdale can be replicated.
Yeah.
Is that it's as much about Dr. Arne as it is Hillsdale.
Well, my thing, look, remember, the college existed.
He teached.
No, no, but it wasn't excellent.
He took over in a big scandal.
I don't want to get into that.
Yeah, okay.
The college had been around for 140, 56 years before.
It was similar to other liberal arts schools.
There's no question that he made it better, but I think he would be the first to push back on that notion.
He was humble.
The college is bigger than me.
The college is going to have to be able to.
But here's my theory, though, is that the faculty respect him.
They do.
Whereas other college presidents, they might be from the business world, like Larry Summers or whatever.
Like, what's their dissertation on?
You know, what do they Larry Arn can play ball with almost every department?
For sure.
I would say that the hard part, in my estimation, I'm not speaking for the college here, of replicating Hillsdale is: okay, where are you going to find 200 faculty that good?
That's right.
It's hard to do given the poor quality of graduate education over the last generation.
We're not, you're not, you know, even if you just focused on the Ivy Leagues, the most prestigious universities in America, or the top, you know, five public universities, Berkeley, Ann Arbor, Chapel Hill, Virginia, and so on, right?
And they're turning out tons of PhDs, right?
How many of them are good enough or just have the right foundation to teach at Hillsdale?
Some of these people are actually pretty good in their very particular, you know, hard science or STEMI thing.
I mean, I wouldn't trust any, though, you know, historian or social scientist or English professor, let's say, coming out of the Ivy League right now to teach at a place like Hillsdale.
I shouldn't maybe be so categorical.
There could be somebody.
But let's imagine trying to be that person.
So let's say, you know, I think the number one English department in the country, according to the rankings, is still for Williams?
Oh, okay.
No, I mean for graduates, for PhDs.
Got it.
Okay.
So you get a Berkeley PhD in English.
You can kind of, if there's academic jobs, you're going to go right to the top of the list in terms of consideration, right?
How many of those people like know the kinds of books?
Hillsdale is going to say, okay, guess what?
You're going to be teaching Milton.
You're going to be teaching Chaucer.
You're going to be teaching Shakespeare.
In America, it's going to be like Melville, Twain, Hawthorne.
Austin.
How many of these people know that stuff?
I, you know, I've been interested in Berkeley for a project I'm working on.
I'm just kind of like browsing the websites.
And I like, let's look at the English department, the roster of grad students.
I think there's currently like 50 or 60 working on their PhDs.
And you look at like, they'll have in the student profile page, like, what are they working on?
And it's always like gender studies and the intersection with blah, And like almost none of them just say, I'm working on the Canterbury Tales or I'm studying, you know, Shakespeare's history plays or something like real old-fashioned, traditional, like what you want an English professor to be.
And Hillsdale is just not going to hire somebody just because they're from an elite school who did some dumb woke topic.
So you can answer this question personally or broadly, if you so choose.
Should parents send their kids to college in its current form if it's not Hillsdale?
Okay.
It's totally a decision for every parent and every kid to make.
And it's a really hard question to answer.
I don't want to give you a blanket no and I don't want to give you a blanket yes.
Just walk us through it then.
There are places you can go.
I don't think there are no colleges where the totality of the experience are going to be what Hillsdale offers.
There might be a few.
A little small Christian.
There's a great books college out here.
There's great books colleges.
There's Thomas Aquinas College, which is really good.
And now has two campuses, one in California, one in Massachusetts.
There's Grove City, there's Patrick Henry in Virginia.
So there are some out there.
It's not a huge group, not a huge network, but there are some.
Then there are also still colleges where even if the overall university isn't what you'd want it to be, there are really good departments and programs and there are three or four professors.
You go in and you know, I'm going to study X and there are these four people that I need to be taking classes from and you do the requirements on the rest and you don't get sucked in.
Okay.
That could be worth it.
I'm not going to rule out for some parents.
Like if you can, if your kid is ambitious, you can get your kid into an Ivy League school and you think they can navigate it without getting corrupted.
That's the key.
Look, I hate what the Ivy League has become.
Great Books Colleges Across America 00:03:51
It's a tragedy for our country.
And yet the elite is still overwhelmingly drawn from these schools.
And if we decide to say we're never going to send any of our kids there again, we're leaving potential on the table, sadly speaking.
Sad as that is.
No, but the Harvard pass gets you into rooms that you would never be able to get into.
It's a credential.
It is a credential, and it's still a powerful.
I mean, we'll see how much of it gets chipped away by recent events.
I think the reputation took a hit.
I mean, it didn't zero out.
Harvard has a long way down to go before it zeroes out, but it took a hit, and that'll hurt.
In closing here, Michael, you came on our program before, and I've seen your public writings where you say, I love President Trump, love what he's done, but I have some concern.
You don't see it coming to him to be able to win in 24.
Do you still feel that way?
Yeah, I do.
But if I'm summarizing incorrectly, keep in mind, I'm a total doomer, so I could be wrong.
I just think that what I fear, and I wrote all this up, I'll plug one of my own pieces.
This was in Compact, an online magazine from I think August or anyway, the summer of 22.
So it's about 18 months old now.
I just think that the forces against it have so many high cards to play in the deck that they've got a lot of options as to how to make this thing not happen, right?
You look at what they did in 2020, the Zuckerberg, before you even get to voting night and whatever the heck happened on voting night or with machines and all of that.
The Zuckerbucks, the tech censorship, stifling the Hunter Biden, you know, the ballot harvesting, the rule changes, all this stuff.
All this is detailed, by the way, in Molly Hemingway's very fine book called Rigged.
And what she means, she does stop talking about rigged like people want to think, well, here's a box of ballots that's pouring in there on election night.
She's like, no, it was already rigged before that.
And I think she proves her case reasonably well.
So I look at that and I go, gosh, that's a hard, that's a tough hill to climb.
How's he going to get over that?
And then I look at, this is where I get a little bit crazier.
I look at what people in charge of the United States have said.
And they basically said, under no circumstances can Donald Trump be allowed to be president again.
Now, you know, when I hear under no circumstance, I think you're kind of willing.
That means you're willing to stop at nothing, right?
And that's what they seem to be saying: that like we would be justified in doing anything to prevent this.
And I look at that and I go, okay, well, including assassination?
Well, assassination.
I, I, I, assassination.
No, I doubt.
I mean, there's anytime you say something categorical, there's always an exception.
No, I know.
I'm just.
There's always somebody who would go that far, right?
But I'm just, I'm just that the blanket term, under no circumstance, right?
Some kind of, you know, legal, some kind of invocation of, let's say, the insurrection clause and the 14th Amendment, get the courts involved, maybe get some security state involved, and just say, we're not going to let you take the oath.
And then when they control the government, how does the president overcome that?
I just don't think we're in normal times.
Like what happened in 2016 is they were utterly shocked and unprepared.
And the whole thing, you know, they learned a lesson from that is we're not going to be shocked and we're not going to be unprepared again.
And so I really, I do, again, I'm a doomer.
My very best friends think I'm insane.
So factor all that in.
I mean, they still talk to me.
They are my best friends, but they think I'm crazy.
They think it's kind of funny.
But I just have a fear that 2024 is going to be a fairly tumultuous year.
And the month of November is going to be exceptionally tumultuous.
And if I may give anyone advice, like there are a handful of places you really don't want to be on election night 2024.
And D.C. is one of them and Manhattan's another.
Michael Anton San Francisco.
How great is Michael Anton?
Wasn't that great?
Thank you so much, man.
Thank you.
Thanks so much for listening, everybody.
Email us as always freedom at charliekirk.com.
Thanks so much for listening.
God bless.
For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to CharlieKirk dot com.
Export Selection