All Episodes
Aug. 17, 2023 - Dinesh D'Souza
47:49
THE COST OF DIVERSITY Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep645
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Coming up, I'll review some hopeful developments around the country that suggest that woke corporate policies and diversity mania are costing their practitioners big time.
I'll examine the case of former Georgia GOP Chair David Schaefer to expose the absurdity of Fannie Willis' conspiracy allegations in the Georgia case.
And CNN offers its readers a guide to pronouns from A. This is A-E to Z-E. From A to Z. I can't stop chuckling.
You've got to hear this. Hey, if you're listening on Apple, Google, or Spotify, please subscribe to my channel.
Also, if you're watching Unrumble, and Unrumble, there's a little red button at the top.
It says Join. If you click on that, you can explore my Locals channel.
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.
I've been looking more closely at the Fannie Willis indictment in Georgia.
And it seems that this is a conspiracy being alleged.
But a conspiracy to do what?
Well, a conspiracy supposedly to rig the election result.
I mean, think of the irony of this.
You've got Democrats who rigged the election result in Georgia and other places, accusing Trump of trying, unsuccessfully or admittedly, to rig the election result in Georgia.
And they do this by alleging that lots of people were part of this organization, a kind of criminal conspiracy, to achieve this result.
So that even if the individual actions of people were by themselves legal, nevertheless they were part of this larger effort.
And I want to zoom in to one particular defendant.
I'm indebted, by the way, for this discussion to Byron York, an article in the Washington Examiner which gives me details that go beyond the indictment that I didn't know about.
And this is the former Georgia GOP chair, a guy named David Schaefer.
I know David Schaefer not well, but we've communicated a couple of times.
I can't remember if we've had him on the podcast or not.
But in any event, he's one of the defendants, along with Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Mark Meadows, Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, Jeffrey Clark.
There are even 30 unindicted co-conspirators.
Now, all of these people are facing these RICO charges.
And the RICO charges are kind of severe because if you get convicted, there's a mandatory five-year sentence.
Wow. I feel bad for these people because I know how it's going to kind of...
Put pressure on them.
Be a burden they're going to have to carry for weeks, if not months.
Obviously, it's very expensive.
You have to raise money to fight these cases.
By the way, I've been sharing some links for ways that you can support the effort to help these cases.
This is such a preposterous situation that these people find themselves in.
Many of them are doing nothing more than trying to further the objective of doing what they honestly believe.
Trump won the election.
Let's try to prove it. Let's take the steps that we need to to vindicate Trump if he's able to successfully navigate through the courts.
So, the key criminal act alleged here is a fake elector scheme.
But was there really a fake elector scheme?
Let's look at David Schaefer.
Now, Trump filed a bunch of election lawsuits, and one of the lawsuits was challenging the election result in Georgia.
December 14th was an important day because that day, the Electoral College is required by law, by Georgia law, to come together and approve the slates of electors.
So the Joe Biden electors get together and they vote to formalize their votes.
But the Trump electors say, hey, listen, we have an ongoing lawsuit.
That lawsuit may fail, but it may succeed.
Well, what if it does succeed?
And if it does succeed, we haven't complied with the law, which is the electors need to get together and formalize their votes.
So we need to do that.
The point is not that these electors thought that they were somehow tricking the process or creating fake electors.
They were saying, listen, if we prevail in court, we're going to need our own electors.
And so we need to follow the law and meet in the event that our lawsuit is successful.
So having sought both legal advice and campaign advice, the Trump electors get together and they formalize their votes.
Now... David Schaefer at no point presents these as sort of, these are the real electors and not the Biden electors.
He basically says, look, these are sort of contingency electors.
And in fact, when he had the meeting for these electors to come together, he tweeted about it.
He invited the press to come.
The Washington Post wrote an article about it.
In fact, They say, quote, as the electoral college formalizes Biden's win, Trump backers hold their own vote.
This is in the Washington Post. There's no effort here to do anything underhanded or to hide what's going on.
David Schaefer was asked about it, and he says, quote, had we not met today and cast our votes, the president's pending election contest would have been effectively mooted.
Our action today preserves his rights under Georgia law.
So what Schaefer is saying is, look, if we end up winning in court, we need these electors.
We follow the law. Otherwise, they could say, the Democrats could say, well, even though you won in court, you didn't follow the rules and formalize your electors on the date prescribed, December 14th.
So too bad. This is now all irrelevant.
Now, as a result of what David Schaeffer did, which is nothing, or to put it differently, everything completely legal, everything making good sense, complying rather than trying to go around the law, he's charged with the following.
Violation of the Georgia RICO, Racketeer Influence on Corrupt Organizations Act.
Impersonating a public officer.
In other words, just by simply having the vote, he's impersonating a public officer.
Forgery in the first degree.
Just by signing his name, he's supposedly been guilty of forgery because he should be signing the other person's name.
False statements and writings.
Criminal attempt to commit filing false documents.
Three additional counts of forgery and false statements.
So, this is prosecutorial overload.
This is actually prosecutorial abuse.
And yet this is the kind of abuse that's going on.
It's going on with impunity because the Democrats feel, listen, we own the place.
We can get away with it.
The Republicans have neither the will nor seemingly the ability to do anything about it.
And so corruption reigns supreme in Georgia as it does in the other place with the other indictments as well.
By now you've heard about the Durban Accords.
This is the greatest threat to the U.S. dollar's global dominance in the past 80 years.
Now, later this month, August 22nd, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa are expected to announce the launch of a new international super currency, fully backed by gold or other commodities.
It's part of a long-term plan to supplant the US and the dollar as cornerstones of the global financial system.
Well, how can you protect your savings, your IRA, your 401k, from the fallout from this landmark global shift?
Well, you can diversify with gold from Birch Gold Group.
Historically gold has been a safe haven in times of high uncertainty and hey that is right now.
Get a free information kit on gold IRAs.
Decide for yourself if a tax sheltered retirement account backed by physical precious metals is right for you.
Text the word Dinesh to 989898.
There's a monumental shift happening among nations that control one third of the world's GDP starting August 22nd.
So protect your retirement savings.
Text Dinesh to the number 989898.
Continuing my discussion of the Georgia indictment but I want to broaden it to include all the other indictments.
And the point I want to make is that the process here is a large part of the punishment.
Democrats aren't sure where these indictments will go.
I think their hope is, hey, listen, we're throwing a blizzard of accusations.
We're hopeful that something is going to stick.
So if we don't get him in New York and that somehow gets thrown out, we'll get him in Georgia.
Fulton County is heavily Biden territory, and so the chances that we'll find we'll get a guilty verdict on something with multiple indictments.
Jack Smith, the same thing.
He's got two separate indictments.
He could add more charges.
I mean, 91 charges in total already.
And Jack Smith's point is, oh, look, I filed in Southern Florida on the Mar-a-Lago raid and on the classified documents case.
I got a Trump judge.
Maybe that won't go so well for me.
So guess what? I'm going to file the second case, the January 6th election fraud case in Washington, D.C. I've got, what, 90% plus of Biden voters here.
My chances of getting a very hospitable jury that's going to hate Trump.
Want to vent and sort of exercise their Trump derangement syndrome.
Very good. So I'm going to get something out of this.
But let's say I don't.
In other words, let's say that these prosecutions, and I think the odds are against it, but let's say they all fail.
Let's say, for example, that you got at least a few jurors in Georgia that go, nah, the New York thing is too preposterous to get anywhere.
Let's say, for example, that the Trump judge in Florida throws the case out.
Let's say, for example, that in Washington, D.C., there is a conviction, but it's overturned on appeal.
Well, nevertheless, what have the Democrats accomplished?
And I think this is really why they feel like there's no downside for them.
This is why they are pushing ahead.
They feel like this is a no-lose proposition.
Because in the meantime, they get to inflict tremendous damage, not only on Trump, but also in the Georgia case, for example, on the other defendants.
I mean, think about people like Rudy Giuliani.
Rudy Giuliani has been Facing legal attacks and legal hassles for now some years.
I mean, more than two years going back to the 2020 election.
And this is a guy who is, you know, he's a guy of reasonable means, but he's not a super wealthy guy.
Trump at least is a billionaire.
Trump has the ability, although even for Trump, we're talking about legal fees now, not just in the hundreds of thousands, but going into the millions, maybe the tens of millions of dollars.
But Rudy Giuliani doesn't have that kind of money.
So as a result, he's under legal pressure.
I just read somewhere that he's putting up one of his apartments for sale.
So these people have to sort of—and think of the ordinary defendants.
I mean, I think of people like Jenna Ellis, for example.
You've got a young attorney trying to kind of cut her away.
And get ahead in life.
And she's been doing well.
But think about it. You're facing lawyers who are charging $300 and $400 an hour.
They often want a retainer of $100,000, $200,000, $300,000 to even take your case.
They know that you're desperate, so you're going to try to get the money.
Where do you get the money?
Well, you can set up a GoFundMe.
You can talk to your friends.
But it's not easy to get people to donate to a legal cause.
And so this is a...
The left knows that they're putting Trump and Trumpsters in a very difficult position.
And not to mention the fact that the government has unlimited resources.
I mean, I experienced this a little bit myself.
And of course, I don't have Trump's means, but I had considerable means, so I had a very good attorney.
But nevertheless, when I walked into that attorney's office, this is in my campaign finance case, he's like, listen, for starters, you need to write me a check for $250,000.
That's to get things going.
And so, again, what if I didn't have it?
What if I'd been a think tank guy and not had successful books and so on?
This would be a tremendous, I'd have to, what, put another mortgage on my house.
So, this is what the left wants.
They want to sort of disable you financially, and ultimately, they want to break you down psychologically.
Now, Trump is a man of extraordinary resilience and tenacity.
He's not a normal person in the sense that I think normal people would have run away.
They'd be like, okay, I I promise I'll never run again.
You'll never hear from me again.
I mean, I think a lot of the typical kind of GOP leaders and what kind of weak-kneed characters they are, they're not up to this kind of attack.
And so the Democrats kind of know this and they're like, look, we're going to make these people miserable.
The process of arresting them, you could see the sheriff and...
Fulton County is like, yes!
We get to put this guy, Trump, in handcuffs.
We get to take his mugshot.
Now, politically, this all might go wrong.
It might backfire on the left.
Independents could look at it and go, wait a minute, something has gone deeply wrong in America.
I certainly hope that happens.
But in the meantime, you've got these sadistic Democrats...
Who are enjoying this.
You can see the kind of social media glee every time there's some additional charge, some additional humiliation, some additional form of attack.
They're enjoying this immensely while it lasts.
As most of you know by now, Debbie and I love the MyPillow products.
We have them all over our home.
Just the other day, Debbie is like, hey, we need some kitchen towels and wouldn't you know it, MyPillow's got a deal on them.
They are four and six piece sets, come in a variety of colors.
And if you use promo code Dinesh, you get 25% off on all of them.
Hey, you can't have too many kitchen towels, so now is your chance.
having sales on all the products.
Go to the website MyPillow.com.
You can check them out. Use promo code Dinesh.
You'll get 25% off the MyPillow kitchen towels and discounts on all the other stuff.
You can also call the number 800-876-0227.
That number again, 800-876-0227.
Or go to MyPillow.com.
Make sure to use the promo code.
It's D-I-N-E-S-H, Dinesh.
I'm beginning to notice that diversity, the whole DEI business, diversity, equity, inclusion, all of this woke policy is starting to get slapped down.
And it's starting to get slapped down from different quarters.
Different organizations and companies and institutions are getting chastised for their overenthusiasm in this area.
And you may say that our side is beginning to fight back.
Now... This is very encouraging.
I'm going to look at several specific examples of this.
But I want to say more broadly, it's encouraging because it seemed for quite a while, in fact, all of this stuff goes back more than 30 years.
It started out in a very benign way.
Affirmative action.
And affirmative action meant nothing more than taking positive steps.
To make sure that minorities were included, that they had a chance to compete, that they were encouraged to apply, that they didn't miss out on jobs because they didn't even know about those jobs.
But very soon, affirmative action kind of metamorphosed into something a little different, racial and ethnic preferences, and then later gender preferences or Preferences based on sex were added.
And so now you had a black guy and a white guy apply for a job.
The white guy is better qualified.
The black guy gets the job.
And this is somehow supposed to correct for past discrimination and fight against institutionalized racism that is embedded in society.
And all of this in the 80s and 90s was bad enough.
A lot of my early book and some of my early books Work was devoted to exposing this.
I wrote a blizzard of articles and my first book, Illiberal Education, and also followed by The End of Racism.
But all of this just got worse.
It got worse because racial preferences, which by the way, were mainly focused on university admissions, but even in universities, there was no talk about basically giving black kids a break on grades.
And similarly, there was affirmative action in jobs, but there was no talk about promoting people based upon race.
There was no talk about the fact that every level of management had to be sort of racially balanced.
And so diversity, equity, and inclusion, this DEI business, took things to a whole new level.
Now, where was this DEI pressure coming from?
The answer was coming from a number of different directions, not just one.
It was coming from the Biden administration using the levers of law.
It was coming from university professors who are basically promoting this propaganda about, oh, we've got to fight institutional racism.
No, the institutional racism, where's the institutional racism?
Show it to me. No, we can't see it, but guess what, Dinesh?
That's because it's really so subtle.
It's embedded in merit itself.
You see, the admissions tests are racist, and the firefighter's exam is racist, and the police sergeant's test is racist.
Racist? How can it be racist to carry a hose and run for 50 yards?
Well, you know, not everybody is equally strong, Dinesh.
You know, men and women don't have equal strength.
So, on and on it goes.
And so, university professors create the intellectual...
If you will, substructure.
Then the media amplifies what they have to say.
Then indoctrinated young people enter into these corporations and they go, yes, we've got to have diversity.
So they put pressure on management.
In fact, some of them threaten to leave.
We'll leave this publishing house if you publish this book.
We'll leave this publishing house if the publishing house itself and all the editors aren't racially balanced.
So all of this madness is going on.
And it looked for a while to be unstoppable.
It's unstoppable because...
After all, even these corporations don't really have anything pushing on the other side.
Even financial capital firms that are investing in companies like Bud Light and like Target, these financial companies are now captivated by ESG. And ESG covers climate, but it also covers diversity.
And so these financial capital firms are like, listen, if you don't get a high ESG score, then we're not going to put money in your corporation.
And so the companies, again, now not only have a sort of internal pressure from their employees, not only do they have the Biden administration trying to cajole them, but they now have a financial incentive.
So talk about an irresistible force.
And if you want to know why so many companies, companies that probably don't care about any of this, nevertheless go along with it, it's because it seems like there is pressure coming from all directions and critically, no counter pressure coming from the other side.
Well, happily now there is counter pressure and the counter pressure is coming from not just one source.
You may think, well, it's coming from the consumer and this is very important.
The consumer, the ultimate sort of, the person who buys the product, can push back.
The problem has been that consumers are not organized.
They don't know how to push back.
They say, well, I won't shop at Target, but Target doesn't even know about it.
So if one guy decides to do that, it doesn't matter, unless you can organize a movement that goes, none of us are going to shop at Target, and Target is going to feel it at the...
At the cash register.
But I'm going on to argue in the next few segments that it's far more than that.
This is not just a matter of consumer action.
It's also a matter of legislative action.
It's also a matter of governors like DeSantis moving in and taking responsibility and pushing back.
And it's also ultimately a matter of organizations and law firms that are challenging these policies.
So in other words, our side is getting smart.
And the pushback is turning out to be pretty effective.
Debbie and I on a really good health journey, we still struggle to eat enough fruits, veggies, and fiber.
Now, lucky for us, we discovered Balance of Nature.
And what better way to get all your fruits and veggies plus fiber than with Balance of Nature?
This is Balance of Nature's fruits and veggies in a capsule so easy to take, made from fresh whole produce.
The produce is powdered after an advanced vacuum-cold process, which stabilizes the maximum nutrient content.
And this is Balance of Nature's fiber and spice, a proprietary blend of fiber and 12 spices, Welcome to my show!
I'm continuing my discussion of the pushback against diversity, the pushback against woke initiatives in corporations and in institutions.
And like I mentioned, we're starting to see some really encouraging signs.
Let's look at some concrete examples.
Here's one.
S&P drops ESG scale from its debt ratings.
This means that the S&P Global was using ESG as a way of rating the debt qualifications of companies.
In other words, if you don't go high on ESG, you are considered to be a debt risk.
Now, this, you can understand, would put a lot of pressure on corporations to comply, to buy into the ESG. And ESG is nothing more than a form of leverage, a form of taking companies that want only to sell to consumers and pressure them to go along with environmental stuff, to go along with racial stuff and gender stuff, to make sure that you've got a balance of blacks and whites, men and women on your board, and all of this.
So, in other words, move away from qualifications, move away from financial criteria, and replace it with ESG criteria.
But, for the first time, Republican officials across the country are challenging the S&P.
And they're basically saying, and there have been a couple of big states that have decided, hey, listen, if the S&P goes with ESG and if corporations go with ESG, we're going to take, pull state funds away, by the way, huge pension funds on behalf of the state, state employees and so on that are invested in these corporations.
So it turns out that the states have considerable leverage.
And Republican states have basically said, listen, this is pernicious.
You are bullying these companies into submission using the ESG kind of battering ram.
And we're going to hold you accountable for this.
So the S&P has decided this is kind of getting a little hot in the kitchen.
And so guess what?
Let's just kind of drop this ESG business.
And so ESG is now taken off the S&P website.
The S&P website had this, quote, the ESG advantage.
Now there's no advantage.
Everybody knows this is like saying there's the diversity advantage.
No, colleges that take kids who are not qualified have no advantage.
The average intelligence of their student body goes down when they do this kind of stuff.
But this is all a pretense.
We're going to force you to do this, but guess what?
It's really good for you. It's a kind of medicine.
Anyway, the S&P decided that there is no ESG advantage, or at least that they're now getting countervailing pressure, and so they've dropped the ESG scale from their debt ratings.
So, let's go to example number two.
Veto overridden.
This is from NBC News this morning.
Ban on gender-affirming care for minors takes effect.
And NBC put out a tweet today basically saying, you know, transgender youth are going to lose access.
This is one of their favorite phrases.
Lose access to gender-affirming care.
Now... Let's look at these euphemisms that they use.
First of all, who's losing access?
It's not really the transgender youth.
It's the medical industry that is making giant profits through, essentially, the ruthless exploitation, the sexual exploitation of young people.
That's the access that's being lost, but no mention of that in the NBC article.
Transgender youth are losing access.
The second thing is gender-affirming care.
We're talking about sexual mutilation.
We're talking about abusing people's bodies in such a way that they have a higher tendency to have depression, low self-image, look upon themselves as hateful, attempt to take their own life.
All of this is gender-affirming?
No, it's actually a degradation of humanity.
In a sense, it's an effort to twist nature in a manner that nature can't really be twisted.
Why? Because, after all, our biological identity is a given.
We can change it in certain ways, and we do.
And there are benign ways to change it.
I mean, if I wear glasses, I'm obviously improving upon nature so I can see better.
No problem with that.
But there are other fundamental ways of abusing your body with the cooperation, by the way, of therapists, the medical industry, and so on.
So guess what? In North Carolina, the governor, Roy Cooper, had vetoed a bill that bars medical professionals from providing hormone therapy, puberty-blocking drugs, surgical gender transition procedures to anyone under 18.
Can't do it. And the governor, by the way, this guy, Roy Cooper, very bad news.
He pretends to be a moderate.
He's like, oh, I'm very sensible.
No, he's not. He's a left winger when it comes to votes.
And then he backs it up with rhetorical moderation.
And guess what? The good news here is that the Republicans were able to get Democrats.
So, in other words, they've got enough votes.
To overturn the veto.
So you need usually a supermajority to do that.
A normal majority won't suffice.
And typically for Republicans, that's a problem.
If you have a Democratic governor, as you happen to in a couple of these red states, they have enormous power because Republicans can't override the veto.
The veto was overridden here, and so North Carolina now becomes the 22nd state to have legislation that restricts or bans the so-called gender-affirming medical care.
But what I'm getting at here is, again, this isn't just consumers who go, I'm not going to drink Bud Light, or consumers who go...
I'm not going to go to Target.
This is using the power of legislation.
And in the earlier case, using the power of the states exercising leverage on the S&P in both cases, this is conservatives finally deciding, listen, we also have power if we will only use it.
If aches and pains are your problem, Relief Factor is your solution.
Debbie and I started taking Relief Factor a couple of years ago and what a difference we've seen in our joints.
Nothing short of amazing.
Aches and pains are totally gone thanks to this 100% drug-free solution.
It's called Relief Factor.
Now how does it work? Relief Factor supports your body's fight against inflammation.
That's the source of aches and pains.
The vast majority of people who try Relief Factor love it.
They order more because it works for them.
Debbie's a true believer. She can now do all these exercises, planks, push-ups, and so on that for a long time she wasn't able to do.
So Relief Fact has been a real 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'm continuing my discussion of the pushback against diversity or so-called DEI initiatives, both in higher education as well as in corporate America.
And now I want to talk about the legal pushback that's coming from the right.
Happily, there are now organizations.
America First Legal is one.
The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty is another.
And these are legal nonprofits.
and they have filed lawsuits in recent years against a bunch of employers, against a bunch of corporations, also against a bunch of universities, challenging the efforts on DEI. So let's look at what this means.
Texas A&M, for example, is one target of this litigation.
Target is also a target, and so is Kellogg's.
Now, these companies, for years, were boasting about their DEI initiatives.
They would have management programs, some still do, that are only open to blacks.
No whites need apply.
I mean, think about it. We have a Civil Rights Act of 1964 that says you can't discriminate on the basis of race, and yet the Democrats, the left, they've been doing this, and they've been doing it galore, and they've been doing it openly, almost pugnaciously, almost as if Republicans are too sleepy to notice.
Or too ineffective.
Even if they decry it, write op-eds against it, they're not going to do anything about it.
Well, turns out that these legal groups say, not so fast.
We're going to bury you in litigation.
We're going to do...
This is civil litigation.
Basically, it involves fines.
It involves forcing these corporations to change their policies.
It sometimes administers heavy financial penalties.
And companies don't like that.
Their legal departments don't like it.
Companies don't like to be sued.
Universities don't like to be sued.
And now there are a series of Supreme Court decisions that embolden these lawsuits.
Think, for example, of the Supreme Court now striking down affirmative action in American universities.
Now, when you have a court decision like that, it doesn't enforce itself.
It doesn't mean the court decided so no universities are going to do this.
In fact, the opposite. You're going to find that while there are some universities, and I'm happy to say University of North Carolina is one of them, they go, listen, we got it.
The Supreme Court has spoken.
We're going to follow the Supreme Court's criteria.
We're not going to discriminate in any way.
But Harvard and other schools are like, yeah, you know what, we think we have a way around the Supreme Court.
Next time you apply to Harvard, you know, give us, write an essay about how being black really taught you to become interested in playing the violin.
Playing the violin while black is different than playing the violin for anybody else because it evokes a history of segregation.
Blah, blah, blah. In other words, wink, wink, wink.
Show us that you are a person of color so that we can, while not acknowledging this fact publicly, nevertheless discriminate in your favor.
Well, when they do that, the solution is sue them.
You need white students and Asian students to file these lawsuits, take them to court, tell the universities that they are under watchful eyes.
And so this is happening now.
Recently, America First Legal files a lawsuit against Nordstrom.
It says that the clothing retailer's goal of increasing representation of Black and Latino people as managers by 50% by the end of 2025 is discriminatory because it's race-based.
Now, why is it discriminatory?
You know, the left goes, well, it's only a goal.
It doesn't mean we're going to meet the goal.
Well, okay. Let's take the opposite goal.
How about if we decide that in the NBA or in other areas, we find that whites are underrepresented?
So we have a goal of increasing white players in the NBA, let's just say by 50% between now and 2025.
And our policies and our organization and our recruiting and our efforts are going to be oriented toward this.
This is, in other words, a priority for us.
Well, that would We're good to go.
As the basis of their DEI challenges.
And corporations are now starting to pull back.
Remember, a lot of corporations went all in on this after the George Floyd business in 2020.
A lot of them said, no, we're going to really transform our companies.
Best Buy said this. Starbucks said this.
We're going to fill a third or half of our corporate jobs with people of color.
Adidas was on board. Facebook, Google, Wells Fargo, Microsoft.
And the truth of it is, All these corporations need to be sued.
So we need a kind of powerful legal apparatus to be attacking them all over the country, driving them nuts, burying them in litigation, making it costly.
This is really what we're doing. The left understands this.
They make it costly for you to do something.
They make it costly for the Boy Scouts to be all male and the Boy Scouts buckles and decides we can't be all male.
So we're learning these tactics.
I suppose we're learning them from the left.
In the past, we were not motivated to use them.
Now I'm happy to say we are.
Hey guys, I'd like to invite you to check out my Locals channel.
Now I'm going to have a big new film coming out in October.
You're going to want to see it.
And you can see it on Locals.
The cool thing is if you're an annual subscriber, you can see it for free.
Now I post lots of exclusive content on Locals content that's censored.
Typically 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 8pm Eastern.
No topic is off limits.
I've also uploaded a bunch of other films to Locals, documentaries, feature films, my films, films by other independent producers, and I mentioned the new film I'm doing this year.
I'll be giving you the inside scoop about that on Locals.
Check out my channel.
It's dinesh.locals.com.
If you're watching this podcast on Rumble, you can go to the top left-hand corner.
You'll see a red button that says Join.
Click on that. Boom, it'll take you straight to Locals.
I'd love to have you along for this great ride.
Again, go to dinesh.locals.com.
I'm continuing my discussion of the pushback on a number of fronts against DEI or diversity initiatives.
Here is an article in AP that the Walt Disney World Governing District, which is by the way now controlled by appointees of Governor Ron DeSantis, has decided to abolish the DEI initiative on the part of Disney World.
So this is fantastic stuff.
Disney is controlled by this board.
And the board was called the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District.
And the board was kind of, I won't say bought and paid for by Disney, but kind of.
Disney controlled the group.
And the group would then dole out all kinds of benefits to Disney.
Benefits not available to other corporations in Florida.
A very cozy arrangement that Disney had by virtue of being such a large employer, having so much clout in Florida.
But then Disney decided, okay, let's take on Ron DeSantis.
And Ron DeSantis decided, let's take on Disney.
And so what he did was he got all the members of the Tourism Oversight Board fired, got them booted, and put his own guys in there.
Which, by the way, he has every right to do politically.
Most governors don't take this kind of action.
This is why I like the kind of aggression of Ron DeSantis.
He's a guy who moves the ball forward on policy, and he does that here.
And so... So not only does the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District say, listen, our diversity, equity, and inclusion statement and committee is eliminated.
All the job duties connected with it are abolished.
But it also was the case that Disney, through the district, was awarding all kinds of contracts to other companies based upon their goals of achieving diversity and gender parity.
And so the Central Florida Tourism District Now, under the DeSantis team decides, we're going to end that too.
We're not going to hold our contracting process hostage to sort of DEI good behavior.
And so, you know, sure enough, the Democrats are squealing about this, and they're like, it's illegal, it's un-American, blah, blah, blah.
But... This is a case where Ron DeSantis is implementing his philosophy.
In other words, philosophy is not just a matter of something for the seminar.
It should be put into policy, and here it is.
And my final example of...
Pushback Against Diversity is far afield from this, a little different.
Elon Musk's ex-corporation sues non-profit group that tracks hate speech.
There's a group called the Center for Countering Digital Hate.
The left, by the way, is just genius at setting up these laws.
Countering Digital Hate.
What does the group do?
Basically, they target conservatives.
They identify conservatives.
They find statements that can be seen to be hateful.
They're not actually hateful.
Let's say, for example, the statements I made earlier about gender-affirming care isn't actually affirming.
This isn't about providing access.
This is really about a highly profitable industry of genital mutilation.
Oh, Dinesh is being hateful.
Let's submit. Let's try to get him banned and canceled and so on.
So this group has now taken on X, taken on Twitter.
Why? Because Twitter is a free speech platform for the most part.
Not to say that Twitter doesn't have any content moderation.
It does. Twitter doesn't allow speech that is incitement of violence.
They don't allow speech that is illegal.
But by and large, it is a free speech, and that's too much.
And so the Center for Countering Digital Hate has been blasting X, has been blasting Twitter.
And so Elon Musk decides, guess what?
Twitter's going to sue them.
It's going to sue them because what they're claiming to be hateful...
Oh, incidents of hate speech on X have risen fourfold.
I'm just sort of speaking generally here.
But the point is they put out these bogus studies, often based upon highly flawed methodological examinations.
They put out these exaggerated claims.
They find a few examples.
Think of it. Twitter's a giant platform.
It's easy to find a couple examples.
This is typical of the kind of material that's on Twitter.
No, it isn't. And so, Twitter itself does internal monitoring to see, for example, canned statements that qualify as hateful.
Have those gone up or gone down?
Elon Musk took over.
So, the Center for Countering Digital Hate is a bullying mechanism.
It's an intimidation organization.
And Elon Musk is on to it.
So, the good news is he has the means, he has the resources, and most importantly, he has the will.
This is often what it's lacking.
Very often, I mean, think about the old Twitter.
They were quite willing to be bludgeoned by these outside groups.
Guess why? Because they shared their ideology.
It's like, okay, well, listen, we've only deplatformed, you know, a million people.
You want us to deplatform too?
Sure, we'll meet you halfway.
How about if we go with one and a half million?
So, in other words, the old regime was working in tandem with these groups.
Elon Musk is like, sorry, my crusade to protect free speech means I have to go.
After the enemies of free speech.
And that's where this lawsuit is really good.
And so, again, let's look at it.
We have an individual like Elon Musk using his influence.
We have legislators using their influence.
We have a governor, Ron DeSantis, using his influence.
And so, we see time after time ways in which we on the right Not just as individuals.
Certainly as consumers we have influence, but that influence is often multiplied if we can take ourselves as individuals, create organizations and groups and do this collectively and not just individually.
CNN is not in the humor business.
No one would say that watching CNN is an act of comedy.
I mean, it sometimes is, but when it is, it's unintentional.
And this is also true of CNN.com.
I saw this article, A Guide to Neopronouns from A to Z. But guess what?
It's not A. It's A-E. A-E from A to Z. To Z. And Z is Z-E. So, apparently this is a guide to pronouns.
And for those of us who are kind of on the out, don't know this inside vocabulary, I'm like, okay, let's find out about this.
So, here goes the article. It says, well...
You know, pronouns are very common.
He's my boss. Our dog is cute.
They have an exam today.
But they say, but the problem with these pronouns is that they're gendered.
They have an implication of male or female.
And this is apparently very troubling to, quote, non-binary and trans people.
They don't like gendered pronouns.
And so they've come up with new pronouns.
And CNN uses the phrase neopronouns.
There are neopronouns.
And there are terms like Z, Z-E, and M, E-M. I think I'm going to go see M is apparently a new way to talk.
And then, you know, they always, when they introduce something that's battingly absurd, they always think, well, let's go find an expert who will affirm it.
Sure enough, you find a guy, Dennis Barron.
He's, quote, one of the foremost experts on neo-pronouns.
So, I'm guessing that this guy's probably under transition himself.
He's clearly some kind of a weirdo.
Quote, people like to say...
People like to have a say in how they're identified.
Let's think about it. People like to have a say in how they're identified.
What does that even mean?
Hey you! Sir!
Ma'am! No, people are like, no, don't call me ma'am.
Don't call me sir. I'm not a sir.
Refusing to let people self-identify is a way of excluding them.
Excluding them from what? You go to Starbucks.
Excuse me ma'am, what would you like?
Stop calling me ma'am.
I'm being excluded. No, I'm actually trying to serve you.
I'm not excluding you. I'm including you.
I'm just trying to get your order.
So, nevertheless, and you can see videos of this all over social media, you have all these maladjusted people.
They explode. No!
I refuse to leave.
I refuse to give you my order, and so on.
And this is what is now happening in our society, and CNN, of course, is fully behind it.
Some may choose to select a noun to describe themselves like star or star-self in place of she or herself.
So, this is Debbie.
Don't call me she.
I am now star.
And don't say herself.
Star-self.
And then they have a little guide here, which is, again, to me, I mean, I can only imagine trying to do this in a classroom, for example.
Oh, by the way, you know what? CNN should try this.
Let's have this on CNN, okay?
And that is, there's XZ, which is apparently Z, pronounced like a Z, or XYR, which is Z-er.
I asked Zer to come to the movies.
Z said yes.
This is like the new lingo.
Then the Zzer or Zher, H-I-R. The teacher graded Zer paper today and Z got an A. Zee said herself that I'm her, H-I-R, favorite neighbor.
Then there's Fae, F-A-E. Have you heard of this word?
Or Fair, F-A-E-R, which is pronounced kind of like Fair.
We went to the Fair. Fae told me that Fair best friend is in town this week.
This is CNN. Then there's A, E-Y. Not hey, but A. Or also M, E-M. And then there's E-I-R, which is pronounced like air.
Air. I'm taking M to the park today.
A wants to bring ear camera to capture the garden for emself.
Apparently, all of this is necessary to maintain the brittle psychology of non-binary people.
Now, what's a non-binary person?
That's itself kind of a new word.
A non-binary person is...
Not somebody who is a male, a biological male who says, I'm a female.
Not a biological female who says, I'm a male.
Rather, it's somebody who says, I'm neither.
Or, I don't want to be classified in this way.
I reject the very distinction between male and female.
Presumably, they're saying, I'm a sort of an intermediate creature that exists genderless.
Now, again, from a biological, from a scientific point of view, this is just rank nonsense.
Why? Because there are no human beings that come into the world without gender.
In fact, broadly speaking, the sexual binary, the distinction between male and female, exists throughout nature.
It exists in the animal kingdom.
It exists in the plant kingdom.
Now, you can't reduce it all to genitalia.
It's not simply a matter of Of a penis or a vagina or having female breasts and so on.
Because certainly in the animal and plant kingdoms, you're not going to have that quite in the same way.
So the gender binary can reflect itself in different ways.
But the existence of the binary itself is a biological given.
It's given, if you want to say, by nature.
So all of this is a rhetorical, linguistic concept.
Dodge. It is an effort for people who don't apparently like nature for whatever reason.
I don't even think in many cases they're objecting to the sexual binary so much.
They're just objecting to themselves.
They're unhappy. They don't fit in.
And they interpret it as, I'm unhappy.
I don't fit in.
I must be the wrong gender.
Export Selection