All Episodes
Previous Next
June 5, 2023 - Dinesh D'Souza
49:28
MADE IN CHINA Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep593
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This episode is brought to you by my friend Rebecca Walser, a financial expert who can help you protect your wealth.
Book your free call with her team by going to friendofdinesh.com.
That's friendofdinesh.com.
Coming up, it's the anniversary of Tiananmen Square, and I'll talk about the significance of that.
Author Frank Gaffney joins me. We're going to talk about whether China can be held accountable for its crimes against humanity.
I also want to ask whether social media is really opening up to the question of what really happened in the 2020 election.
Hey, if you're listening on Apple, Google, or Spotify, or watching on Rumble, please hit the subscribe button.
and I'd appreciate it. This is the Dinesh D'Souza Show.
The times are crazy.
In a time of confusion, division, and lies, we need a brave voice of reason, understanding, and truth.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast.
It is sometimes said that there is within human nature a love of freedom that cannot be fully shut down.
Certainly the American founders believed it, and they believed it kind of in the face of enormous evidence to the contrary.
because think about it, before the American founding, for many centuries, most countries, in fact all countries, had lived under various forms of tyranny and monarchy and oligarchy, but there was no such system that had been set up to ensure the maximization of human freedom and human fulfillment. And yet even today, we have
countries that have shut down human freedom, the most notable example of which is China.
Now, in the 20th century, probably the great symbol of unfreedom in the world was the Soviet Union.
But in the 21st century, it is clearly China whose tyranny stretches across Europe.
Over a billion people.
And because of China's wealth and China's technology, they're able to establish systems of surveillance and social control that even the Soviet Union couldn't have dreamed of putting into effect.
And yet, now, we remember, this goes back to 1989, the magnificent expression of human freedom in Tiananmen Square, followed by a ruthless crackdown by the Chinese Communist Party.
This was a student movement.
It actually began almost as a kind of Woodstock people gathering and smiling and laughing and eating in Tiananmen Square.
And it all looked like this was a display of human aspiration, but also human fearlessness.
And then the Chinese brought out the tanks.
The tanks rolled into Tiananmen Square.
There's kind of an iconic picture of these tanks rolling in.
An even more iconic image of a single individual.
I don't even know his name.
I tried to find out.
But we can just call him, you know, Tank Man.
a single solitary guy standing there in front of a tank as if to defiantly signal I will not back off. I'm standing here because I represent freedom and you, the Chinese Communist Party, represent tyranny.
Now...
We haven't seen anything like it since.
And the Chinese have done their best to shut it down and to shut down not only discussion of Tiananmen Square, but even the mention of it, even the knowledge of it.
I'm somewhat reminded here of the way in which we have censorship now in this country that tries to make us forget certain things.
Oh, forget about all the things you saw about the 2020 election.
In other words, you can't openly discuss it.
Now, I'll be talking later in the podcast about how YouTube has modified its kind of election fraud policy.
But the Chinese have been so successful, and they are successful partly because they control everything that happens in China.
Today, most Chinese, and particularly young Chinese born in the 21st century, let's say Chinese who are in their teens or early 20s, they don't even know about Tiananmen Square.
They don't even know that there was such an uprising.
It's all the more important that we remember.
Because memory is one of the ways in which we preserve things that the bad guys would like to have erased.
These things live on in our memory, and we pass them down so that other people who might not otherwise know about them would know about them.
About Tiananmen Square.
And that's partly, I think, because the media in this country is, by and large, trying to erase not only the crimes of the Biden administration or elites in this country, but China.
It's almost like the media in this country recognizes there is a sort of a Sino-American alliance, an alliance between the Biden regime and And let's call it the Xi regime.
And the significance of Tiananmen Square then is purely symbolic.
It is that there was a time going back some 30 or so years when a group of people stood against all this.
They lost, but their ideals, let us hope, live on.
The debt ceiling crisis has come to a head.
This administration is doing its best to force more government spending.
They've reached a settlement to get this deal done for now, but our national debt continues to skyrocket.
Well, how are you protecting your savings?
Times like these are when concerned savers like me turn to gold.
And I, like thousands of similar-minded people, buy my gold from Birch Gold.
Here's the easiest way to do it.
Birch Gold will help you convert An existing IRA of 401k into an IRA in gold.
You don't pay a penny out of pocket.
As BRICS, that's Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, band together against the dollar, more and more central banks are diversifying.
And you know what they're buying? Gold.
Follow their lead. Text Dinesh to 989898 for your free information kit on gold.
There's no obligation, just information.
Birch Gold has an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
Thousands of happy customers.
Birch Gold can help protect your savings too.
So get started. Text Dinesh to 989898 today.
I've been talking, guys, about China, and I wanted to have on the podcast a guy who understands this topic in all its depth and detail.
And I'm fortunate to have Frank Gaffney.
He's the executive chairman and founder of the Center for Security Policy.
And his new book, The Indictment, Prosecuting the Chinese Communist Party and Friends for Crimes Against America, China, and Frank, thanks for joining me. I really appreciate it.
We are, gosh, I guess this past weekend, the anniversary, what, the 37th, I believe, anniversary of Tiananmen Square.
It was a powerful, inspiring, in the end heartbreaking to watch the spontaneous resistance of the Chinese Communist Party and yet they crushed it and we haven't seen the likes of it again.
So is the true significance of Tiananmen Square that that was, you could almost call it China's last gasp, and the Chinese have now just tightened the noose so that that kind of event is now impossible?
Well, I certainly hope not.
Dinesh, first of all, thank you for letting me talk a little bit about what's going on there and as a result here.
The people of China I believe, continue to be very angry with the Chinese Communist Party and desirous of liberation from its oppression.
We know that because there's an ongoing, if not actually incessant upheaval taking place as a result of, you know, the collapse of the real estate market and banks and the demographic disaster bequeathed from the one-child policy and any number of other things that are creating
difficulties for the people. And the Chinese Communist Party is basically indifferent to.
And this gives rise to one of the first and most important of the crimes that we believe the Chinese Communist Party must be held accountable for.
And those are the crimes against humanity.
Particularly the people of China.
Tiananmen is just one example of it.
By some estimates, and I think they're probably conservative, Dinesh, 100 million people, the vast majority of them Chinese, though some are the people they've enslaved, have been murdered by the Chinese Communist Party since it came to power.
And that doesn't include, by the way, 400 million that they have boasted of murdering in the womb.
Infants as part of that population control exercise.
Some say it's 500 million, whatever it is.
There's never been in the history of the world anything remotely like the monstrosity that this party represents.
So I think that Tiananmen, sadly, was suppressed.
And worse, we talk in the book about China's friends.
The George H.W. Bush administration made it abundantly clear to the Chinese that there would be no consequences arising from that murderous incident.
It's probably not just the 10,000 people, by the way, who were in the square who were finished off by the Chinese, but maybe as many as 50,000 total across the country just in this one episode.
But the point is this, that George H.W. Bush sent his national security advisor to China shortly after the unpleasantness there and said, it's business as usual.
We're going to need to denounce you a little bit, but it won't interfere with our desire to bring you into the World Trade Organization and to otherwise put you on the path to great riches and along the trail, of course, enrich our elites.
And that, I think, contributed to the problem that we continue to have, that the Chinese people's desires are not allowed to be expressed in China.
Yeah. And do you think that that's because George H.W. Bush was really obsessed and focused with the Soviet conflict, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and didn't see that China would over time become just as powerful, just as tyrannical, and just as dangerous?
You know, I don't know what was his motivation.
I think the Soviet Union, of course, was coming unraveled at that point.
The old argument that, for example, Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger used that we needed to play the China card to take on the Soviets really didn't apply at that point.
I think probably operating more was...
George H.W. Bush's time as ambassador to China and his belief that we could do business with these guys and that they would get rich and they'd be more like us and other nonsense, frankly.
But he was played, as was Brent Scowcroft and others in their circle, Jim Baker, by the Chinese to great effect.
Deng Xiaoping, the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, said a few years after Tiananmen that the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union is over, a new Cold War has begun between the United States and China.
The Soviets lost.
China will win.
And they adopted something called the Hide and Bide Strategy to try to persuade the Bushes and others in our elites to not only help build them up, but also...
To get rich themselves in the process.
And large numbers in our elites, yes, in the political system, to be sure, but also the financial sector, business more generally, the media, as you know, academia, Hollywood.
Across the board, basically, the sports industries, they've been captured by the Chinese Communist Party.
And that has contributed, again, to a failure to tell the American people the truth about the unrestricted warfare the CCP has been waging against us for decades.
Let's take a pause when we come back more with Frank Gaffney, the book, The Indictment, Prosecuting the Chinese Communist Party and Friends for Crimes Against America, China and the World.
Debbie and I made a New Year's resolution to lose some weight, and thankfully, PhD weight loss came to our rescue.
Debbie has already lost 22 pounds, just a few more to go.
I'm now on maintenance, having lost a whopping 27 pounds.
The program is based on science and nutrition.
No injections, no pills.
No long hours in the gym, no severe calorie restriction, just good sound scientifically proven nutrition.
It's so simple, they make it easy by providing 80% of your food at no additional cost.
They tell you when and what to eat.
And guess what?
You can do this without ever being hungry.
The founder, Dr. Ashley Lucas, has her PhD in chronic disease and sports nutrition.
She's also a registered dietician.
She helps people lose weight and most important, maintain that weight loss for life.
So are you ready?
You want to take the step of losing weight like Debbie and I have?
Call PhD Weight Loss and Nutrition today.
Here's the number 864-644-1900.
You can also find them online at myphdweightloss.com.
The number to call 864-644-1900.
It's time.
I'm back with Frank Gaffney, Executive Chairman and founder of the Center for Security Policy.
We're talking about his new book, The Indictment.
Frank, you mentioned this phrase about Americans believing or American elites believing hate.
We're going to rub off on China.
China's going to become more liberalized.
They're going to become more like us.
Isn't the terrifying reality that we are becoming more like them?
And by that, I mean that we're seeing increasingly elements in this country that resemble China.
Now, you mentioned that there are Americans getting rich off of China, but could it also be that China is to some degree, for some people, almost a model of Totalitarian society.
And I say this because China is able to offer something to its citizens that the Soviet Union never could.
And that is continually improving standards of living.
So the Chinese are able to say, we know how to do totalitarianism right.
We can have a high degree of social control, censorship, a digital credit system.
We can tell people where they can live and how to live.
And a lot of American leaders who go, wow, we wish we were in that position.
Well, those are two really important questions.
And they're related, of course, Dinesh.
I think that the true purpose of the Chinese all along...
like them, not the other way around. They may have, you know, encouraged delusions, to the contrary, but the idea, both in terms of their external activities, and what they have been doing inside our country, with our friends, yes, the captured elites, but also with their front organizations, their influence operations, their, well, students, Confucius
I mean, you go right on down the list.
This has all been about promoting TikTok, the idea that America and its model is fatally flawed.
China and its model is the wave of the future.
And look no further than how it was embraced.
With the help, to be sure, of their proxies at the World Health Organization, with the adoption of the China model, as it was called, for responding to the China virus, the Wuhan virus, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, whatever you want to call it.
It was...
Perfectly, you know, presented as the means that we had to adopt, the lockdowns, the mask mandates, the vaccines, the vaccine passports, the whole nine yards as the response to that pandemic.
And along the trail, we took a huge leap forward, if I can, a great leap forward, if I can use Mao's term, towards becoming China with the adoption of controls that were anti-constitutional on the one hand, and also frankly, were conducive to slip streaming behind them, the rest of the China program,
specifically the social credit system, a means of exerting, as you say, Dinesh, unbelievable control.
And yes, there are people, certainly in the World Economic Forum and in other globalist centers, Wall Street among them, who think that would be a lot more efficient if we just ran things the way the Chinese do, and never mind freedom and that nasty, inefficient, messy business of democracy.
It seems that the Chinese, in a way, have hit upon a more effective way to buy influence around the world.
I mean, America seems to go around the world telling the Ugandans and the people in Asia, hey, listen, we want you to fly the rainbow flag, and we want you to ideologically align yourself with us, and hey, we think you should make a strongly worded statement about Ukraine.
And the Chinese go, we don't care about any of this.
We're going to move. We'd like to come into Uganda and rebuild your parliament building.
And then we also want to build some roads.
And we'll lend you the money to do this.
And we just want to essentially have deeper economic ties with you, which make you more economically dependent on us.
Haven't the Chinese been playing this game in, honestly, a more effective and sophisticated way than the United States?
It's more cynical, too.
As you know, Dinesh, what they have done in a number of cases and what they will be doing more of in the future is they have been foreclosing On those payday loans that finance the fixing up of your parliament or the roads and the railroad networks and the ports and the airfields,
the access to your mining resources and so on, all of which have, in fact, benefited a kind of colonial build-out for the Chinese Communist Party.
But more to the point, I believe their ultimate purpose is to turn those Nations and those assets into power projection instruments for the Chinese Communist Party's global ambitions.
And, you know, the prospect of a shooting war is now decidedly in sight.
I talked about the unrestricted sort of pre-kinetic But they're now looking at the old-fashioned kind of shooting war.
Those assets around the world would be weaponized, I believe, to turn it into a global shooting war, unlike anything we've seen before, even World War II. Let's take a pause when we come back more with Frank Gaffney, author of The Indictment.
I gotta say, when it comes to towels, nothing compares to MyPillow towels.
Mike Lindell has really hit a home run with his towels.
Imagine having towels that actually work and actually dry you.
Now, the MyPillow towels are soft to the touch without the lotion-y feel.
They have proprietary technology, which makes them highly absorbent.
Other towels feel good, but they don't absorb.
MyPillow Towels are available in multiple styles and sizes.
They're made with 100% USA cotton.
They're machine-washable and durable.
10-year warranty, 60-day money-back guarantee.
And Mike Lindell is running a flash sale on the MyTowel 6-piece set for $25 with promo code Dinesh.
These towels were regularly $99.98, so an amazing offer, which includes two bath towels, two hand towels, and two washcloths.
So go ahead, call 800-876-0227.
The number again, 800-876-0227, or go to mypillow.com.
Don't forget to use the promo code D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
I'm back with Frank Gaffney, Executive Chairman and Founder of the Center for Security Policy.
We're talking about his book, The Indictment.
Frank, it seems I think you'd agree that because of its economic power, China is in many ways more dangerous than the old Soviet Union ever was.
And now you've raised the possibility that we might go from a cold war with China to a more hot war, maybe something that is triggered by Taiwan, but then spreads much more broadly.
My question is, is the United States ready for this?
It seems like this is coming at a time when we couldn't be more internally divided, when the military here has gone woke, at least to a degree, when we don't seem to be having a lot of strategic discussion about how to handle a situation like this.
Do we have the preparedness to deal with what China has in store?
The short answer is no. And for all the reasons you've mentioned, among others, not least, and it must be said that the preeminent example of the elite capture, which we spoke earlier, is the commander-in-chief of the United States military is a controlled asset of the Chinese Communist Party.
So I think on top of these various other factors, all of which have to some degree, at least, I think Chinese machinations behind them, we are looking at a remarkably dangerous alignment, a perfect storm, if you will, of things that almost certainly incentivize the Chinese to believe that a shooting war will be one they can wage
decisively and with essentially manageable, if not negligible, costs.
And I don't mean simply by going after Taiwan and us staying out of it.
I think it almost certainly entails going after Taiwan and they act against us here at home as well.
Frank, you've outlined, I mean, a sobering and bleak scenario.
Talk about some things that you say in the book we can and should do.
You have a pretty long list of this is what we should do and this is what we should do.
Give us a few highlights of what are some things we can do.
Sure. Well, just to share the structure a little bit further, we talk about nine different charges of crimes that should be prosecuted, at least in the court of public opinion, as they say, to ensure that the American people understand the threat we face from the Chinese Communist Party, a transnational
criminal organization, properly understood, the greatest mafiosa operation in history, and the various ways in which it has already done incredible damage to us in what we call a series of eight different crimes, war crimes.
We also have 20 specific recommendations as to the sorts of things that need to be done now, starting with just, again, understanding the nature of the threat, that we are in fact at war, not because we want to be, but because the Chinese communists are determined to take us down and have been at it for quite some time.
Then we talk about the need to remove these elites that have been captured.
You know, the prospect that we're going into a shooting war with, as I say, the man in charge of our military playing for the other team is simply intolerable.
So whether it's forced resignations, whether it's impeachment, as appropriate, whether it's prosecution for those who are aiding and abetting the Chinese communists' crimes against them, We need to clear out people who are not, in fact, on our side if we are to have any chance of surviving.
We need to fix a number of other things, of course.
We need to get off of supply chains that are insane for us to be dependent upon, including for medicine, for heaven's sakes.
We need to fix our energy security posture from one that, you know, It was bequeathed to Joe Biden of energy dominance, or at least in simply energy dominance, certainly energy independence to one in which we are now again dependent and desperately in need of reliable energy sources.
These are the sorts of things that along with defenses against biological warfare attack, we've had one already, we must be better prepared for the next one.
And rebuilding our military, not least, are just examples of these 20 that I think are the kinds of things that every American should get behind because at the end of the day, if the Chinese do come after us, and I think they will, unless they're deterred, and that's the key point, we need to deter them.
It isn't going to matter whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, you're an independent, you're a leftist, we're all in mortal peril.
And lastly, I would just say that, you know, we need ultimately To invoke God's grace on our country.
He has blessed this nation more than any other, I think, in history, with the possible exception of Israel.
And we need his help now if we are to overcome, I think, the mistakes of the past and preserve for our posterity the freedom that was bequeathed to us and that is now in extreme jeopardy, I'm afraid.
Folks, the book is called The Indictment, Prosecuting the Chinese Communist Party and Friends for Crimes Against America, China and the World.
Frank, as always, thank you very much for joining me.
It's been a privilege. Thank you.
If aches and pains are your problem, ReliefFactor is your solution.
Debbie and I started taking ReliefFactor a couple of years ago.
The difference we've seen in our joints, nothing short of amazing.
Aches and pains are gone, thanks to this 100% drug-free solution called ReliefFactor.
Now, how does it work?
ReliefFactor supports your body's fight against inflammation.
That's the source of aches and pains.
The vast majority of people who try ReliefFactor become regular customers.
They order more because it works for them.
It's worked for Debbie.
She can now do exercises that she wasn't able to do.
ReliefFactor has been a big game changer for her, her aunt, other members of our family, Mike here in the studio, and for many other people.
You too can benefit.
Try it for yourself.
Order the three-week quick start for the discounted price of just $19.95.
Go to relieffactor.com or call 800-4-RELIEF to find out more about this offer.
The number again, 800-4-RELIEF or go to relieffactor.com.
Feel the difference. I want to talk about some new developments involving the election software company called Conic.
Now, Conic, which is K-O-N-N-E-C-H, It has provided election software services to a whole bunch of places in the United States.
In California, to Alameda County, Contra Costa County, in Colorado, Denver County, in Michigan, Detroit County, in Virginia, Fairfax County, in Missouri, St.
Louis County, Travis County, Texas, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.
So this is an election software company with its tentacles in a number of parts of the U.S. And Konick evidently has been also...
We're collecting data on poll workers and election officials, a lot of data that involves their names, their addresses, their social security numbers, and so on.
And this data, it was revealed several months ago by True the Vote, Catherine Engelbrecht and Greg Phillips, is stored on servers in China, which means that it is available or that the Chinese government, the Chinese Communist Party, has access to it.
Now, think about the absurdity of this.
Officials have access to sensitive U.S. election data.
Now, True the Vote blew the whistle on this, and there was a notable arrest of the CEO of Connick, a guy named Yu, by the L.A. DA, George Gascon.
The L.A. authorities seized a bunch of hard drives and digital evidence, and then mysteriously, the case against Connick was dropped.
In fact, at the same time, Connick filed a lawsuit against True the Vote.
This lawsuit was before a judge, U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt.
He demanded that True the Vote turn over their Connick files, their Connick sources, to him.
And Catherine Engelbrecht and Greg Phillips said no.
They said, look, we can't tell you our sources because we have promised them confidentiality.
We are obviously willing to share the data.
In fact, we have been sharing the data with the FBI. But the judge goes, if you won't turn over the sources to me, I'm going to jail you.
Wow. And in fact, he did.
Catherine and Greg were in jail for 10 days for the offense, I put that in quote marks, of not turning over their conic source.
And then the appellate court ordered them released.
Now, interestingly, Catherine and Greg decided to put this conic information that they had on the web, and they did.
They put it up on a site called open.ink, and the very next day, Connick dropped all charges against Greg and Catherine.
It's almost like Connick realized, oh, they've got the goods on us.
This suit is going to go nowhere.
We're accusing them of something.
And they can prove that they collected legitimate information through legitimate sources.
And we don't want this to be going to court because all of this is going to come out in open court.
That's going to be media coverage.
So Connick basically decided, let's turn tail and take off.
And that is, in fact, what they did.
But the new development...
And it turns out that Catherine and Greg were working with local officers of the FBI in Texas and a couple of other places.
And the FBI was very interested.
They were cooperating with Catherine and Greg.
Catherine and Greg have, in fact, released emails with a number of FBI agents where they're asking for more information.
They're following up on leads.
And then guess what?
The FBI case was turned over, or maybe it was pulled in, by the Washington D.C. headquarters of the FBI. And this is where everything changed.
We know that the Washington office of the FBI, by the way, is thoroughly corrupt.
This is the same office that has been doing one-sided investigations of Trump, yes, but letting Biden off the hook and covering up for Biden.
So it seems like what happened is that once the corrupt people at the top of the FBI got a hold of this case, they spun it around.
And suddenly FBI agents were calling Catherine Gregg saying, we think you broke the law.
How did you get this information?
So initially, they were using the information to try to track down what Connick was up to, and then they turned the whole thing upside down and began to examine or you can say investigate Catherine and Greg as if they were in fact the true malefactors and the true lawbreakers.
What we can conclude from all this is that the FBI, and this is Washington, D.C., knew about Connick.
They knew about Connick's ties to Chinese officials and the Chinese Communist Party.
They dropped the investigation into Connick.
They tried to go after Catherine and Greg.
And so this just shows you the extreme lawlessness at the top of America's top investigative agency.
This investigation Ultimately, the most lawless guys around may not even be, certainly are not Catherine and Greg, and may not even be Connick.
it's actually the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
We're nearing the end of my annual campaign to support the non-profit Prison Fellowships Angel Tree Camp program.
It blesses boys and girls who have a mom or dad in prison with a week of fresh air and healthy fun and the gospel all made possible by your donation at DineshD'Souza.com.
Thank you.
And stigmatized at what should be the joyous summer season.
By joining my other listeners, you can make an eternal difference in the lives of these children when you support Angel Tree Camp.
The cost to help bless one precious child, which with Angel Tree is only $200 or $400, will help reach two children.
You do the math. See how many wonderful kids you can bless by going to DineshD'Souza.com or you can phone your tax-deductible gift to 888-206- Are we beginning to see a thaw or glass-nosed opening?
of social media companies when it comes to free speech.
Are we beginning to see that censorship policies are slowly being pulled back and repudiated?
Well, I'm not sure.
Twitter, of course, has become largely a free speech platform.
Admittedly, there are some people still say, well, there's a lot of What is a woman?
Which came with the endorsement of Elon Musk, has been seen by tens of millions of people.
And this was in the face of intense opposition by the LGBTQ and trans community.
Even the head of Twitter's so-called Trust and Safety, obviously a residual ideologue from the old regime, resigned over this.
So all of this is very good news at Twitter.
But is it having an effect on YouTube and on Meta?
Now, I noticed that Meta, after restricting Robert F. Kennedy, has decided to do a U-turn and allow Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
to get back and post his material on Meta.
More significantly, YouTube just announced that we can now discuss the issue of election fraud.
What happened in the 2020 election pretty openly on YouTube.
Now, this in itself is very striking because YouTube in December of 2020 said, you can't do this.
And they would just ban people who did it.
And this was a real problem for me and a real problem for 2000 Mules because we had a film that...
We've legitimately investigated the issue, and yet we were in flat violation of YouTube's policies, couldn't buy ads on YouTube, couldn't advertise the film in any way, couldn't put clips on YouTube.
And this also applies to things that I say on the podcast.
I'm very careful what clips I put up on YouTube precisely because they have policies forbidding discussion of many legitimate topics, not just election fraud.
But COVID and climate change and, to a degree, abortion and the trans issue.
And all of this is done in the bogus name of, quote, protecting the community, as if to say that open discussion is somehow a threat.
discuss abortion, you, I guess, threaten abortionists or maybe women who want to have abortions. And if you talk about the trans community, you place the trans people in danger. Even though the trans people are mainly in danger from themselves, suicide rates in the trans community are high and it's not because of anything that you or I are saying on social media. Now, YouTube says that they're changing this policy because, well, they don't really say
why. They just say in the current environment, we find that while removing this content does curb some misinformation, it could also have the unintended effect. And here I throw YouTube says that they're changing this policy because, well, they don't really say why.
They just say, in the current environment, we find that while removing this content does curb some misinformation, it could also have the unintended effect. And here I throw in a guffaw or a laugh as if to say it's an unintended effect of curtailing political speech. No, this was always the intended effect. They wanted to shut down political speech. They wanted to, by and large, put the 2020 election beyond reconsideration.
And to be honest, they have been successful. They've been successful to the degree that the 2020 election is now kind of a done deal and cannot really be meaningfully reopened in any way.
So it's almost like YouTube has concluded, and Debbie was asking me before I started the segment, she said, I'm really interested in why they would do this and why they would do it now.
And my answer is this.
The crime is done.
The perpetrators have gotten away with it.
And it's safe now to let people speak about it because it's too late to do anything about the heist.
There's a second possible reason that I think is also worth thinking about, and that is that by and large, a lot of people have just moved away from YouTube.
They've realized, what's the point of trying to debate things on a platform that doesn't even allow debate?
And so, for example, I would promote my podcast on YouTube, and I still post the podcast on YouTube, but you know what?
I don't even look to see who's watching it because I know that they have algorithms that suppress me.
I'm really focused on building up the podcast on Rumble, which is an alternative and a far better video platform.
I encourage you to watch the podcast on Rumble.
And then, of course, on the audio platforms, which are Apple and Google and Spotify.
By the way, if you watch the podcast, make sure you subscribe to it.
It makes a big difference to a podcast and a big difference to our advertising if you do that.
Now, so I'm not giving you too much credit or too many kudos.
I'm glad they're doing this.
I've actually been giving some thought to the idea of following the, let's call it the Matt Walsh precedent, and And offering 2,000 mules to be seen on Twitter.
I don't want to put it up. I guess I can now put it up officially on YouTube because they're allowing discussion.
I could almost like, let's test them.
Let's put 2,000 mules up on YouTube.
But I just don't want to give YouTube the views.
And so I've put it out on Twitter, and we'll see how Elon Musk responds to this, that I would be open to considering releasing 2,000 Mules on Twitter.
And this would expose it to a very wide audience.
I'd have to, of course, get this approved or checked with Salem Media, which partnered with me on this project.
But my point is I'm trying to move the wheels into motion.
The basic idea here is to break the back of censorship.
By getting information out on these so-called taboo topics, not so that people get misinformation, but so that they get accurate information, can engage in legitimate debate, and can make up their own mind.
Hey guys, I'd like to invite you to check out my Locals channel.
I post lots of exclusive content there, including content that's censored on other social media platforms.
On Locals, you get Dinesh Unchained, Dinesh Uncensored.
You can also interact with me directly.
I do a weekly live Q&A every Tuesday.
No topic is off limits.
I've also uploaded some very cool films to Locals, both documentaries and feature films, both my films and also films by other independent producers.
2,000 Mules is up there.
And my new film, which I'm working on, just got back from Florida doing a last round of filming.
I'll be giving you the inside scoop on Locals.
And if you're an annual subscriber, you can stream and watch all these films for free.
So check out my channel. It's dinesh.locals.com.
I'd love to have you along for this great ride again.
It's dinesh.locals.com.
I'm beginning today a new chapter in What's So Great About Christianity.
And this is a chapter that explores the true motives For skepticism and atheism.
The chapter is called Opiate of the Morally Corrupt, Why Unbelief is So Appealing.
And you get a clue, really, in the opening quotation that leads off the chapter.
I'm going to read it to you. It's wonderful not to have to cower before a vengeful deity who threatens us with eternal damnation if we do not abide by his rules.
This is from Karen Armstrong's book called The History of God.
Now, in the last several days, I've been talking about secular morality, and I've talked about how secular morality, it marches behind the banner of autonomy and self-fulfillment, but it can also provide a cover for some pretty selfish and irresponsible behavior.
But now I want to ask this deeper question, is unbelief itself necessary?
Driven by similar motives.
Now, when you listen to prominent atheists, you get the idea that their sole cause for rejecting God is that he doesn't meet the requirements of reason.
Here's philosopher Bertrand Russell.
He was once asked, you know, if you die and you find yourself before God and, you know, whoops, God does exist, what would you say to him?
And Russell Pompas, he said, I would say to him, God...
Sir, you did not give me enough evidence.
So this is the pose of the self-satisfied atheist.
And of course, I've taken in the course of this study or this book the rational objections of the atheist and the skeptic seriously, but I don't think that reason or the absence of reason is the sole reason that these guys are on the warpath against God.
Especially when you consider the belligerent tone of people like Russell or Richard Dawkins or Hitchens, this does not seem to be merely following the evidence where it leads.
Rather, unbelief of this sort seems to require a little bit of a deeper psychological explanation.
Let's remember that atheists are frequently trying to psychoanalyze and give psychological explanations for the religious commitment of believers.
Here are some examples.
Well, maybe the most famous is Karl Marx, and in his commentary on the works of Hegel, Marx says religion is the, quote, opium of the people.
Now, what does he mean? Religion is a kind of escapism.
It's a mode of wish fulfillment.
In Marx's view, people sort of take religion sort of the way they take a drug.
To numb themselves to the pain and grief around themselves, to give themselves the illusion that the injustices of this world will somehow be corrected in the next one.
Sigmund Freud saw religion as providing a cowardly refuge from the harsh realities of life and the inevitability of death.
So Freud says, this is in his book, Religion, the Future of an Illusion.
He says, we console ourselves by thinking there's another world in which is insulated from the hardship, injustice, and confusion of this world.
And so we get a lot of this kind of attempt to note that religious belief is a kind of diversion.
It's a wish fulfillment.
It's the way people want things to be, but not the way things really are.
But I don't think these explanations really work.
Why not? Well, they don't work for this reason.
The theologian R.C. Sproul made a telling point.
He goes, Here's what he's getting at.
The God of the Old Testament, the God of the Abrahamic religions, is a pretty demanding fellow.
He wants us to have purity, not self-indulgence.
He wants us to have virtue, not just convenience.
He wants us to do charity, not just self-gratification.
And there are penalties attached to failure.
In other words, if you have this sort of ultimate failure, death may be scary, but guess what?
Eternal damnation is even scarier.
So, if you're truly trying to invent a God that's wish fulfillment, well, you'd invent a God that looks a lot more like Santa Claus.
He's always handing out presents, but he's not ever handing out punishments.
Notice Santa Claus doesn't hand out any punishments.
Wish fulfillment can explain heaven, but it can't explain hell.
And so, the point here, it's not so much that I want to dispute the atheists about the psychology of religion.
I kind of want to turn the camera around.
I want to pose the same issue to atheism itself, which is who benefits from it?
Why do people find unbelief attractive?
Why are influential people in the West drawn to rejecting God?
If Christianity is so great, it's wish fulfillment, it gives you sort of this consolation, why aren't more people rushing to embrace it?
There are a number of atheists who, when you read them closely, you realize that they kind of let the cat out of the bag by saying that they would prefer a universe in which there is no God, no immortal soul, no afterlife.
I'll give a single example and then pick up on this theme tomorrow.
Here's just Nietzsche. If one were to prove this God of the Christians to us, we should be even less able to believe in Him.
What does he mean? He means, I don't believe in God.
I don't see the evidence. But guess what?
If you provide me the evidence, I'm going to be even more reluctant.
Think about why that would be.
It's not because Nietzsche doesn't have proof.
You've just given him the proof.
▲
Export Selection