Woke Leftism BACKFIRED, White Guilt IS OVER, Shiloh Hendrix Raises $660k ft. Carl Benjamin
BUY BOONIES BOARD - https://shop.boonieshq.com/products/28th-amendment BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO SUPPORT THE SHOW - https://castbrew.com/ Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com Host: Tim Pool @Timcast (everywhere) Guest: Carl Benjamin @Sargon_of_Akkad (X) My Second Channel - https://www.youtube.com/timcastnews Podcast Channel - https://www.youtube.com/TimcastIRL
But in the Democrat mind, they view them as congenitally inferior.
And if they don't pander to the worst aspects of this community, then they have in some way done something wrong themselves.
Whereas actually a sensible reading of this would suggest that the black community ought to be held to the same standards as the white community, and this would have a morally improving effect on the black community.
And as the story goes, this lady was on a playground, was accused of calling a baby a racial slur because she says he was going through her stuff.
The man then is yelling at her.
She tells him F off.
She throws some slurs at him.
After this incident went viral, you'd expect this woman to have been canceled.
Lose her job.
Instead, the opposite happened.
Give, Send, Go dot com.
She launched this page, Help Me Protect My Family, and has so far raised $663,111 of a million dollar goal.
This is a big story.
Because something is changing in the cultural zeitgeist.
Something is changing.
People are fed up with the, you know, you've got minorities that will insult and use racial slurs against white people.
And we're told that's socially acceptable because it's punching up.
But that is a leftist precept.
That's a leftist idea.
With the Democratic Party trying to go this route and losing younger voters and white voters, not to mention they've lost basically every demographic.
How are they going to claw back when they stand firmly on the side of racism every day?
Now, some may say, but Tim, this story is about a lady being racist.
Sort of.
It is on the surface, but the fundraising is largely about people being fed up with the racism, and this is the recoil.
This is the blowback on DEI.
If you are going to have a persistent and consistent culture where comedians are allowed to use racial stories against white people, but white people can't say anything back, they're allowed to just say, ha ha, yeah, I guess you're right.
Eventually you get people who say, I've had enough of this.
I don't want to live in the world where anybody is racist.
And what happens?
The people who don't want racism end up supporting this woman out of spite and anger over the racism directed at them.
And then, of course, the core of actual white racists join in and say, we were always here.
Where this goes, I'm not entirely sure, but there are two big questions.
How is this going to impact the Democratic Party that largely wants to maintain these DEI and racist ideas?
And why is it really happening?
Maybe I'm right.
Maybe I'm wrong.
But I do think that my good friend Carl Benjamin has a good idea about all this.
So let me see if I can grab this feller here, if we're loading.
We are booting it up.
I see, Carl.
Now let's see if we can get this set up and get it rolling.
There's a kind of implicit bargain in the Civil Rights Act that has never really been properly acted upon, which is black people will be given access to the full spectrum of spaces in wider society, primarily white society.
And that was fulfilled.
But the other side of that is the implicit assumption that black people won't nurture a long-standing grievance against white people.
And that hasn't been fulfilled.
And we saw this with the Carmelo Anthony case, where he probably murdered someone.
And the black community decided to raise more than $500,000 for him because...
A lot of people perceive that it was because he murdered a white person.
And a lot of the comments that came in on that, on the donations, were, we hate white people and we're glad you killed a white person.
And this is just not an acceptable thing to do.
And this is hardly the first time that this was done.
I mean, I'm personally of the opinion that the chap who killed George Floyd, whose name for some reason escapes me.
I think that George Floyd was dying of a fentanyl overdose.
But the charged atmosphere because of the nurtured race grievances meant that Derek Chauvin essentially had to go to jail.
No matter what happened in that case.
And that means that what you have is a racial element of your society holding the rest hostage, saying, look, we're going to keep doing this because it's profitable for us, and there's no reason that we give this power up.
And I think that in the case of the Shiloh Hendricks event, in that she, don't get me wrong, I don't think you should be calling children racial slurs, but it really wasn't nearly as bad as some of the other things that have been done in the name of race grievance mongering.
And so I think that a large number of people online, and I think it's predominantly sort of, I guess what you call a white separatist community online, decided that they'd had enough and they were just going to give her money in the same way that the black community gives its martyrs money, purely on the basis of race.
And I think really, and I think people like you and I have been warning about this for a long time, if you allow one side to...
Do this kind of thing.
And it's not addressed.
It's, in fact, in many ways encouraged.
The other side will eventually say, right, that's how the game's played then, and we're just going to play this game.
And actually, it turns out there are a lot more of us than there are of you, so maybe you won't like it if we play it this way.
And I think that's what's really driving this issue.
This is where the left claimed a black man was jogging and was lynched by three white men, Travis and Gregory McMichael, as well as William, what do they call him?
What was his name?
William Bryan, I think his name was.
I could be getting his name wrong.
In both of these stories, people who are completely uninvolved, I should say figuratively uninvolved, I don't know.
You're in the UK, obviously.
Do you guys have similarities to that?
Obviously, I think there are some.
But how did we, or how do you think we in the United States got to this point where you literally have a felony burglary suspect who attacked people be the victim?
So in the United Kingdom, we don't have anything quite this similar.
And this is a product of the American unique narrative surrounding slavery.
And the historic wrong that was done to the black community that was trying to – they tried to pay some sort of restitution for it with the Civil Rights Act.
And the issue is that there were two narratives in the Civil Rights Act, the liberal narrative and the separatist narrative, which is predominantly a Marxist one.
It frankly failed.
It was the liberal narrative of integration and the sort of liberal view of equality that predominated.
But there are many segments of the black community that just simply don't agree with this and actually don't want to collectively forgive white people and nurture the grievance because it has an advantage for them in daily life.
And this is what white guilt is.
It is the perennially sort of liberal perspective that the blacks...
aren't equals to the whites because all of this is predicated on the idea that the black community is in some way in a kind of socially inferior rank to the white community and it doesn't matter what any individual black person achieves by their status of being black in the liberal mind and I really don't think MAGA holds this opinion at all actually but in the democrat mind They view them as congenitally inferior.
And if they don't pander to the worst aspects of this community, then they have in some way done something wrong themselves.
Whereas actually a sensible reading of this would suggest that the black community ought to be held to the same standards as the white community.
And this would have a morally improving effect on the black community.
Because I think...
And this is one of the difficult things for Americans to really tackle, I think, is I think the black community in America is kind of riddled with poor ethics.
There just is a real spate, a really, really, really difficult thing to talk about, which is that...
There's just a widespread acceptance of really, really bad behaviour.
And it's not on.
You would think it would not be on.
But the problem is the Democrats have turned these into kind of personal fiefdoms by simply doling out handouts.
They can just continue to essentially pay these people to forever vote Democrat, which means that the Democrats have control over the area and they have no interest.
In improving the ethics of that community.
In fact, it's to their advantage.
It's how they maintain their power over these communities by keeping them immiserated as they are.
I'm sure, like, the average black person has got no interest in reducing the number of police in their community.
And, in fact, when, you know, you see the polling, the average black person in the average black community is like, God, no, why the hell would you think about doing that?
But the activists, the race grifters, the race hustlers...
They know which side their bread is buttered on and they know how to maintain this forever.
It's fascinating because if you go to your average Trump supporter and say, if you took, you know, a random white guy and a random black guy and put them on the same job site, like a construction facility, which one would do better?
The average response is going to be like, I have no idea.
What do you mean?
Like, how am I supposed to figure that?
But predicated in the argument that we see from wokeness and the left and these race ideologies is that...
As you mentioned, congenitally inferior.
They call the right white supremacist because on the right is typically the idea that merit is what matters, and most people think hard work and perseverance is going to bring you success.
On the left, we learned this from the Yale study, they intentionally reduce the, I guess, the verboseness, the degree of their vocabulary to sound stupider.
And that's how they treat black people.
So it's funny because within them, their entire argument is predicated upon they believe they are socially and even as a race superior.
And people on the right largely are like, just work hard and stop committing crimes.
And everybody can succeed.
How does the Democrat, like, I know you're a UK guy, but considering you've obviously been one of the, I follow it closely.
You follow closely, but I mean, back during the launch, like the beginning of Gamergate, which I was reading this interesting thing that this was like the first time millennials had a major political moment that was largely ignored by the large political class.
And now what emerged from Gamergate was this politics of wokeness, which has permeated the Democratic Party.
It has a major foothold that, you know, Stephen A. Smith says you've got to purge the extreme left.
How do you see that evolving politically for a party that's losing every category of race and class?
I mean, if you were a Democrat strategist, purging the extreme left would be exactly what you would do.
Woke ideology is a product of Democrat liberal ideology.
It works within it, and it knows itself inside out, because actually it comes from the Marxists who lost the civil rights debate.
It actually comes out of this philosophy.
And so these people spent 30 years in academia.
Wondering, why did we lose the argument to the liberals on civil rights?
And so they spent a lot of time essentially manipulating definitions, expanding the definition of racism and merit and various other important keywords to mean the antonym, to mean the opposite.
And so we consider racism to be poor treatment, inequality of treatment, right?
And that, if we have an equal treatment of different people...
We will get unequal outcomes.
And we completely agree to this because, of course, if one person works hard and if the other person doesn't work hard, it is preposterous that they should end up in the same position to the average person, to a normal liberal-minded person.
But the Marxists say, well, we consider that to be a form of racism because the unequal outcome is not evenly distributed among the racial groups.
And honestly, the liberals are very weak to this.
The liberals, with their guilt complex...
are very weak to this argument.
And so a normal person, a MAGA type, might say, well, then they need to get to school.
They need to get to work.
They need to improve things.
If they want the same standard of living as other groups that they're comparing themselves to, they need to crack on and actually get those because there are no legal barriers preventing anything at this point.
And in fact, most social barriers, I think, have also been knocked down by and large in the United States.
And so the thing that's really holding them back is honestly...
It's the belief.
Because, I mean, you see this in black circles where they'll say things like, you're acting white.
If you get up, get on time, you know, wear a nice suit, do a hard day's work and get paid good money for it.
That's acting white.
And it's like, okay, in a way, you can see what they're saying.
As in, that's what most of the white community does.
But that then suggests that sort of...
Blackness is merely the antonym to whiteness.
And when they, the critical race theory say, well, whiteness is hard work, you know, being well-spoken, making sure you turn up on time, making sure that you file your taxes, making sure that you do things that are productive, that are the classic productive behaviours that in a capitalist system lead to wealth and success, then blackness is always left undefined but in opposition to whiteness.
If it's just the antonym of whiteness, then what that means is blackness is being criminal.
It is being lazy.
It is taking benefits.
It's all these things that don't live to a happy, prosperous life.
And the critical race theorists encourage the black community to try and embrace that.
Now, I don't think that's fair or good to do to anyone.
I wouldn't want some super intelligent people and a massively funded activist complex telling me that if I act like this other group...
And get the success this other group gets.
Then I'm somehow a race traitor.
I think that's really unhealthy and really damaging.
And a way, in fact, that they keep the black community in an inferior position by making it so that people in there just don't really feel they can get ahead.
And so why would they even try?
And I think that secures their power going forward.
You know, what's funny is the way you're describing it, I can imagine this for literally any grievance-based group, right?
So, you know, during Occupy, you had the class-based.
It's the 1%.
They're holding us back.
If they weren't in power, it's this politics of envy.
I suppose maybe demagoguery, whatever you want to say, like this person is your enemy.
And it can be weaponized against anybody.
I suppose if you grow up in the United States in the black community, it's really easy to hear the history of the transatlantic slave trade and, you know, the history of Jim Crow and all this stuff.
Slavery, obviously.
And then say, these people are your enemy.
But if you live in a world where you constantly blame everyone else for the way you live, you're not going to succeed and break from it.
And I think the best example of this, not perfectly, but a really great example of defining this is how Native Americans have sort of weaponized the vices of Westerners against them with the launching of all of these casinos, making themselves wealthy.
Not every tribe, not everywhere, but with the beginning of—it was a seminal tribe in Florida, creating bingo halls, resulted in this wave of casinos all across the United States, where instead of being like, the white man is evil and is bad, they said, let's just sell them a product they want.
And they've made themselves, many different tribes, very wealthy off of this.
And actually, some of the coolest places to go ever.
So they've— You know, they've sort of created something great out of this negative circumstance.
For the Democratic Party, however, you've got AOC.
She's being heckled over Israel-Gaza.
I don't see, you know, they're saying she's the frontrunner right now.
I don't see how her or anyone else is going to be able to break out of this narrative moving into 2026-2028 because they're addicted to it.
So who do you think is going to be in front of this?
So you've got a bit of a problem because I saw just now, actually, Gavin Newsom had done an interview with the BBC where he was on the right of the Democrat Party arguing that actually we need to get rid of the woke stuff and get back to something akin to sort of Bill Clinton democratism, which might actually be something the electorate wants.
And to be honest with you, that's all Trump's selling as well.
Honestly, it's really obviously a popular position in the United States.
The problem is AOC, I don't think AOC can win because I think what she is essentially doing, selling, it is very popular with a very small slice of the electorate, right?
The Bernie Sanders wing of the Democrat Party.
And that's probably 20% of the entire American population or something like this, which...
It's a large number of people, but it's not nearly enough to get any kind of majority.
And the problem is, it's very much like Jeremy Corbyn over here.
There are a large number of people who are into it, but an even larger people who find it utterly repugnant and view it as a kind of civilizational chloroform.
They view it as communism, right?
They view it as communism and they don't want it.
And one of the problems that Jeremy Corbyn had here, which will be the same with AOC, is that...
When the activists are going door-to-door, they'll find people who say, look, I'm not even necessarily against your party, but this person, I don't trust them.
They come across a communist.
I'm not having it.
So they'll have millions of people who are on their side, but they'll have tens of millions who are against them.
On that ground, I don't think she'll be able to win.
So if they were smart, they'd go for Gavin Newsom.
If Newsom does win a primary and basically the party rejects all of the cultural Marxist stuff or woke whatever, going back to a smarmy lizard person in human skin who's trying to sell you snake oil is much better than the woke cult stuff.
Kind of just jumping to an aside, going back to where we were before.
I'm curious your thoughts on the civil rights movement.
Do you think the Civil Rights Act?
I've created these circumstances, and one thing that I've heard from a lot of people is that the inevitable result of the Civil Rights Act basically creating a law saying you can't treat people certain ways based on how they appear or look or where they're from, the end result is going to be wokeness.
I don't know if I would say it was strictly necessary, but I think it's probably very likely.
And the issue is whenever...
So what the Civil Rights Act was, was a modification to the American social contract, right?
And whenever you have some sort of social contract like this, the problem is there are always a set of duties that come along with the rights.
And none of the duties were imposed upon the black community out of guilt.
But you're going to have a series of things that you have to do to uphold your side of a contract.
The contract is always two ways.
And if that's missing, and in fact it becomes an Achilles heel for the society because the Democrats and the race grifters in the black community can weaponize this against the wider society, well then it does become a sort of perpetual wound that can't heal.
And if nothing is expected of the community to which things are given, then that creates a certain kind of mindset in at least a portion of them that I think has metastasized and developed into the...
I mean, it's genuinely insane that it should be allowed and should be normal that huge amounts of people in the black community...
I'm just genuinely hateful towards whites.
That is insane and shouldn't be allowed to fester.
And it shouldn't be allowed to fester the other way either.
So on this, right, the question goes a bit beyond social contractism.
It goes into the sort of sentimental nature of a society, right?
If America wants to be a racially integrated society, that's fine.
That's totally fine.
That's totally great.
And I can completely see why you would want this.
But that means that...
One side isn't allowed to nurture a long-standing racial grievance against the other, because that's the barrier against integration, whether that's the majority or the minority.
That's got to be the thing that's prohibited.
And for some reason, the left and the leading figures in the black community just don't prohibit that.
They, in fact, encourage it and make lots of money out of it.
And so, you know, you're undermining the project of racial integration entirely.
And I kind of noticed that when I was in the South, I've traveled around the South of America a bit recently, and I didn't feel any racial tension at all.
Whereas in the North, I don't know, man, it's just the thing's a bit more just tense.
I can't prove it or anything like that, but you know what I mean?
There was a bill in California, it was a referendum, that would remove the civil rights protections for college applications.
And government contracting.
The Constitution says you cannot discriminate on the basis of race.
So my progressive friends, and this is years ago, of course, so I unfortunately have lost contact with a lot of these people as things have gotten more intense.
But I remember talking to this woman.
She's really well-known in Hollywood, advocating for the removal of his protection.
And I asked her, I was like, honest question.
do you believe that white people tend to be white supremacists?
And she says, yes.
I said, okay, do you believe that the institutions of power tend to be controlled by white people?
She goes, absolutely.
And I said, okay, do you believe that And she went, uh, no, wait.
I think the point I was making was, you are correct.
I think if I was actually having a real debate with someone perhaps more learned on the issues like you, we both immediately understand that point.
My point was just to highlight her...
Her justification for this was rooted in this idea that all white people, except for her, are secretly racist white supremacists who are going to hold back the minorities.
So we need to eliminate this constitutional amendment in California so that we can intentionally be racist against whites and then help minorities get into contracting in schools.
Of course, California voted against this measure.
We got like a minute left, and we'll try to make this quick.
One of the things with the civil rights movement...
That has come up a little bit from the left is when we ended segregation and they said you can't have separate bathrooms for black and white people, they're trying to argue that's the same thing for the sexes.
Civil rights movement says you can't have discrimination on the base of sex, so then how can you have a men's room and a women's room?
I'm curious how you would rebut that in about a minute if you can.
But in a way, they're kind of correct, because the problem of the civil rights movement and the liberalism broadly is it assumes a universal, a historical human being.
And actually, we know that human beings are not a historical or universal.
They're actually particular and very, very different to one another.
And so actually, logically, it is...
Probably contained within the civil rights movement that there can't be men and women's bathrooms.
But that is really a failure of its time and honestly could be updated to be more reasonable.
Super grateful and excited for everything that Carl does.
Super grateful for, you know, back in the early days when he gave me an opportunity to produce a video for his channel, and now here I am having him on mine.
And he makes some really great points analyzing all this.
You know, he's a very liberal guy.
The OG classical liberal, now more post-liberal, because we're all starting to recognize we don't want people to be mistreated based on their race.
Like, I don't care what your religion is.
I care about how you function in our society.
If your religion is a backwards, awful religion, but you're not using it to cause harm to people, you keep it to yourself, that's fine.
But if you take, you know, religious beliefs and then start performing weird surgeries, sacrificing people, doing really awful things, killing people in the name of your God, like, all of these things I think are bad.
We want a society that is based on merit.
Instead, what's developed out of the left has been racism, sexism, all of the different phobias they claim, they are fomenting.
So my friends, we are going to throw it to Russell Brand, who I believe is gearing up right now.
He is just about to go live.
We're going to initiate that raid for everybody watching right now.
Smash that like button.
Share the show with everyone you know.
You can follow me on X and Instagram at TimCast.
Click the link in the description below.
Pick up that Booney's 20th Amendment skateboard.
And we're back throughout the day with more segments.
And then, of course, we are going to be live at 8 p.m. with TimCast IRL.