All Episodes
Previous Next
June 1, 2018 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor
59:25
Stockton Pays Thugs Not to Shoot Each Other
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome to this edition of Radio Renaissance.
I'm Jared Taylor with American Renaissance.
And with us in the studio today is Paul Kersey.
Paul Kersey was referred to by one of the people asking a question as the perspicacious Paul Kersey.
I have to endorse the use of that excellent adjective.
Semi-alliteration, I like it.
The perspicacious Paul.
Yes, yes.
Well, I think I'll call you that henceforth.
Perspicacious Paul.
So, we'll welcome Perspicacious Paul, and I suspect that everyone is wondering what we're going to start off with, and we will end the speculation and the suspense right now, and we'll talk about Roseanne Barr.
What an event.
Of course, two months ago, apparently, she was really a superstar.
She had made a big comeback after a two-decade absence from her sitcom called Roseanne, and she had gotten enormous ratings on the ABC network.
They were celebrating what they thought was their strategy of appealing to wider swaths of the country after Donald Trump's election.
They were congratulating themselves on how well she, who had in fact made no secret of the fact that she had voted for Donald Trump, was reeling in people who were not on the usual lefty wavelength.
They thought they were just really seeing America and doing clever things, making money.
But it all came crashing down when she posted a tweet about Valerie Jarrett.
And I suppose I might as well quote the thing for those who haven't seen it.
But she tweeted, Muslim Brotherhood and Planet of the Apes had a baby.
Equals Valerie Jarrett.
Now, apparently she brought up Muslim Brotherhood because Valerie Jarrett was born in Iran.
And just in case our listeners don't recall who she was, she was one of three senior advisors to President Obama, and one of his longest-serving advisors and confidants, really very, very close.
At the height of her power, she had a staff of three dozen people.
That's a lot of people.
And she had full-time Secret Service protection.
In any case, having said that, she was a mix between Muslim Brotherhood and Planet of the Apes.
Zoom!
Out the door.
And what is striking about this is just how quickly and how totally the curtain fell on her, I think.
They cancelled her show essentially immediately.
And to me, it's almost like the way the Soviet Union would treat old Bolsheviks after they'd lost in a show trial.
Non-persons.
They're going on to the ABC webpage and removing all of her old shows.
It's as if she never existed.
It's funny, when Hulk Hogan got in his trouble back in 2015, the World Wrestling Federation, World Wrestling Entertainment Wrestler, when it came out during the trial that he had with Gawker, that he had said the N-word in a private conversation back in 2009, He also was non-person by the WWE's website and their network.
They actually got rid of any of the matches and they got rid of all of his paraphernalia that they sold.
All of that was gone within 24 hours of his being fired back in 20, I think that was 2015 when that happened.
So these corporations, they act very swiftly when it comes to social justice being mandated as a corporate policy.
That's right.
And this is especially astonishing because the network had just been approaching advertisers, trying to woo them into giving them $9 billion in advertising commitments.
And this Roseanne program was their central showpiece.
This was their most popular program.
18 million viewers per episode.
These days, the networks are glad to get 2 million.
18 million is really an extraordinary thing.
And it's astonishing to me that here, right in this, they are willing to sacrifice the centerpiece, the most profitable piece of their undertaking, because of this alleged racism.
Now, there's an interesting element here, because the person who is head of entertainment for the entire network, a black woman by the name of Channing Dungey, She's the first black woman to play a role of this magnitude, and she was one of the first to say that this was repugnant, that this is abhorrent.
It's always interesting to me, what's the difference between abhorrent and repugnant?
But in any case, you're really piling on the adjectives and inconsistent with our values, she said.
So, it was a black woman who really spearheaded the idea that we are just going to let the guillotine blade come down with a snap.
Of course, you wouldn't know this because you are banned from Twitter unless you had a sockpuppet account.
The vitriol was stunning in its swiftness.
They call it the Blue Checkmark Brigade.
The journalists went nuts over this and they started doing tweets at ABC, Network, at the sponsors.
I mean, this is the downside of social media when you can Just like we've seen with the whole David Hogg Parkland shooting, when you can amass an army at a speed that would make Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson weep to bring down any rebellion.
Seditious ideas.
And what Roseanne Barr said, Mr. Taylor, again, it was obviously a tweet in bad taste.
You know, she came out and she said that, you know, she was on Ambien.
She has a history of mental illness.
And one of the things that we don't have on here to talk about, I think it's important to address, is she said that, you know, look, I was on Ambien, I'm sorry.
And the company, the drug company that makes Ambien, actually tweeted out, hey, I'm sorry, racism is not a side effect of I thought that was so mean-spirited on their part.
Really, everybody, as soon as somebody is down, accused of racism, everybody lines up and wants to deliver a kick.
It is just disgusting.
Absolutely disgusting.
And, you know, there was some speculation.
I was talking to somebody yesterday in a radio interview about Roseanne Barr, who said, well, maybe the network just wanted to get rid of her for some other reason.
I don't think that's the case at all.
It is a matter of pure, pure political truckling, because apparently they had made a big deal about the idea that they've been combating racial stereotypes in their programmings.
Apparently, there is a TV series called Doc McStuffins, which is a cartoon about a black girl who wants to be a doctor.
That's no doubt heartwarming and anti-racist.
Also, a program called How to Get Away with Murder, which has been a vehicle for Viola Davis and led her to become the first black woman to win a lead actress Emmy.
And, of course, there was Black Panther that we've discussed many times before.
So they have been carving out this territory as the inclusive, the pro-black, the multi-culti.
And under those circumstances, I guess they felt they absolutely had to just chop her head off.
Well, Disney, of course, but Jones, ABC.
ABC has aired a couple other crazy shows.
A couple other shows that I think you would be shocked to find out the racial nature.
A show called Blackish, which tries to showcase this upper middle class black family.
It is an unbelievably black power type show in prime time.
And another show called Fresh Off the Boat, which is about an Asian family that just immigrated.
Obviously, one of the great reasons why this is important to bring up is because in the reboot of Roseanne, her character and her husband, Dan, played by the great John Goodman, they're in the episode, they're asleep, they wake up on their living room couch, having fallen asleep in front of the television, and Dan, her husband, says, ah, we missed all the shows about black and Asian families, he said.
And Roseanne's character responds, they're just like us, there, now you're all cut up, end quote.
Yes.
Absolutely a great joke and it's true.
That's what the message of those shows are.
However, those shows both are dripping and oozing with how black identity is a positive.
How Asian identity is a positive.
And here you have a show about a blue-collar white family where the whole time the show aired, ABC executives, Disney executives were walking on eggshells and on glass Thinking we cannot allow them to put Trump in a good light.
We cannot allow them to notice that the working class is harmed because of mass immigration driving down wages.
I mean, that's one of the underlying thoughts about what's happened since the 1980s when the show aired and was so popular versus now.
You can go to parts of the country where when Roseanne was on in the 80s, there were no Hispanics.
There were no refugees.
There was no one walking around in a hijab.
There were no Muslims.
Mr. Taylor, you can go and look at when the Mall of America opened in Minneapolis back in the mid-90s, and you can see white families as far as the eye goes, and now you look at images of the Mall of America, and you don't see one white family, but you see Somalis and women dressed up in their hijabs and their whatever the other word is for the Muslim attire.
There are no whites anymore, and it's stunning.
And as you point out, the message of all of these programs is to explain that don't worry, they are just like us.
It's the whole idea that race is an imaginary concept.
If we are being replaced by Turks or Vietnamese or Guatemalans or Whoever it is, it's really, we're just being replaced by ourselves because there's no such thing as racial difference.
And it is funny, this line that you quote, that they wake up and say, you're all caught up.
You don't have to watch those episodes.
You know, they're just like us.
That's funny.
But apparently that got a lot of criticism.
But interestingly enough, this Channing Dungey, the black woman who decided that Roseanne Barr had to go, she defended it.
She said, no, that's okay.
So some jokes are okay.
Some jokes are not okay.
I think it's interesting also that Roseanne Barr's agent also dropped her.
An agency relationship is very, very important in this business.
Agents are involved in getting people jobs, negotiating contracts.
I don't know how long that she was with this particular agent, but That is a real blow to an actor and actress, too.
So, she has really, really taken a tremendous hit on this.
This must be one of the most expensive tweets in Hollywood history.
She's really out the dough.
Not just her, but of course, Disney ABC, too.
Now, one aspect of this that I thought was really quite hilarious was that Valerie Jarrett herself, when she heard about this, She was about to appear on an MSNBC town hall about racism in America, which somehow I managed not to watch.
Well, that's what I was telling you about.
That's the one where basically the conclusion was white males are evil, white people are evil.
Oh, I didn't have to watch it to know that.
But in any case, she says, we have to turn this into a teaching moment, a teaching moment.
And then, and this is my favorite line of the whole episode, somebody asked, well, how are you feeling about this?
Oh, I'm fine.
I'm worried about all the people out there who don't have a circle of friends and followers who come right to their defense.
Like she does, of course.
She's worried about all these poor, non-whites, particularly black people who get kicked around, nobody stands up for them.
Well, who's being kicked around here with nobody to stand up for?
Corporate America, the corporate media, I mean, everybody jumped on Roseanne Barr.
Everybody.
And one of the things we have to mention about Valerie Jarrett is she blamed Donald Trump for this divisive rhetoric.
And it's like, wait a second, how in the world?
So Donald Trump is responsible for any tweet of his supporters versus Look, Donald Trump is responsible for any alleged incident of racism, any act of so-called white supremacy.
Donald Trump is personally responsible for the fact that you and I are speaking into this microphone.
Don't you know that?
He has created the atmosphere in which you and I can come out from under our flat rocks and say these things openly as if we hadn't been doing them ever before.
That's the theory.
One of the things I don't like, Mr. Taylor, and I think a lot of the AR audience is sophisticated enough also to be immune to this Look what these liberals have said.
Look what these people who are ensconced in corporate media have said.
There's a double standard at work.
No, there's not a double standard at work when Joy Reid is allowed to say things and then blame time-traveling Russians who post them on her personal blog, or when Samantha Bee on her show calls Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka Trump the C-word.
Well, go ahead and speak it.
I think we have an adult audience.
It was not just a C-word.
I'm not sure people would know what that was.
Maybe some of the younger audience listeners might.
The older people don't know, so I will just say it straight out.
She called Ivanka Trump a feckless cunt.
End quote.
Yes.
And this, apparently, as you say, was a scripted show.
On TBS, yes.
So TBS had approved this, but then this has created something of a backlash.
TBS says, oh, well, you know, we apologize.
But certainly, Ms.
B is not going to have any problems with this.
It's fortunate for her that, of course, she didn't call Michelle Obama a factless cunt.
Now, we know that.
She went out the door for that.
But there are certain people you can call such names and certain people you can't.
To wrap up the point that I was making, though, about double standards.
Guys, there are no double standards.
There's one standard, and it's not to allow anyone who has contrarian views to ever rise in power.
That's why you saw so many tweets in the 2016 election from leftist checkmark journalists saying, we can never allow a Donald Trump to rise again.
This was before the election.
There's a great tweet I've seen a lot of people retweet.
I don't remember the guy's name, but he basically said, we have to stamp down the next Donald Trump.
Oh yeah.
Start it right away.
Make an example of them.
And that's the whole purpose of what happened to Roseanne Barr, who was non-personed.
Non-personed is right.
Which leads us to something else that happened this week that had been rather celebrated for some months previous, and that was the Starbucks bias trend.
We don't really have to spend a lot of time on this because this was something that was pretty well covered, I think.
But they closed down all the stores.
There are 8,000 stores.
175,000 employees got bias training.
Now, I just noticed that they had put all their training materials on the internet.
I was quite impressed by that.
They wasted no time doing that.
So we can all look and see how foolish it all was.
They have a number of videos, some that were made in-house by people who work for Starbucks and some people they got outside talent to tell us just how bad America has always been and what it means to welcome somebody.
Just a few things that stuck out in my mind.
One of the major goals was, and I quote, being present, connecting with transparency, dignity, and respect.
I'm not sure I understand even what that means.
Being present, connecting with transparency, dignity, and respect.
Also, they said it's very important to see differences as positive.
That's another one of their primary goals.
And, and this is one that apparently, even some of the Starbucks employees, or partners, as they like to call themselves, some of the partners found a little bit confusing was the exhortation that they be color brave.
Not colorblind.
According to these materials, being colorblind is just impossible anyway.
We can't even pretend not to notice race.
I thought that was the goal of the whole 1960s.
That was the whole thing.
We're going to treat people equally.
But no, no.
I guess we can't even aspire to be colorblind, so let's be colorbrave.
And what that means is treating people appropriately under their circumstances, fleshing out our own unconscious biases and conquering them.
Oh boy.
It really is kind of a re-education campaign of the kind that we used to hear about back in the old bad days of communism.
But everybody got a 40-page workbook, and you can see a PDF of this 40-page workbook on the Starbucks site.
As I say, they have made all this remarkably public.
Maybe that's what they mean about being present, connecting with transparency.
You would think that if we actually had comedians in this country, they would be all over this.
And they would be making fun of this continuously.
I can tell you what I would do if I were SNL.
So if there's an SNL Saturday Night Live writer, here's your skit, guys.
McDonald's, since 2010, has had a website called 365 Black.
McDonald's, since 2010, has had a website called 365 Black.
They are proudly 365 Black.
It's that simple.
They promote the idea that black customers, their story, their history matters.
Not just in one month, but for all the days of the year.
And guess what?
Coffee at McDonald's, regardless of the size, is $1.
You could do an amazing skit where McDonald's corporate executives are discussing how they can go about putting out a commercial to try and entice the brothers, as they say.
To quit Starbucks and come to a place that's always been 365 black.
Because guess what?
A cup of black coffee is only a dollar.
Well, you know, to me, I think, if they were really cynical, and I don't know if this would actually work, now that Starbucks has changed its policy so that everyone is a customer, whether you make a purchase or not, no matter how long you stay, no matter how heavily you use the Wi-Fi, no matter how many cups of water you drink, you're a customer and you're allowed to stay.
In other words, Starbucks is making no distinction between a customer and a bum.
Now, it seems to me that if you're treating bums like customers, you're in effect treating your customers like bums.
And some of those customers are going to want to go elsewhere.
It seems to me that this is a potential difference that some competitor could exploit.
If they had the guts to do so.
There are a lot of great coffee companies out there.
I'll tell you one that I would highly recommend if you're a coffee drinker.
Our listeners should check out Black Rifle Company.
It was started by a lot of white veterans.
They make phenomenal coffee.
They have put out a lot of what would be called insensitive tweets over the years, which prompted me to actually purchase some of their Black Rifle Coffee.
Is that right?
I'm a proud drinker of that coffee.
It's great.
I will never, ever, ever pay For a cup of coffee at a store, when you think about the unit cost versus what it would cost going to a store.
And Starbucks, I, you know, they had such massive expansion, Mr. Taylor, over the past two decades, and it was largely in white areas.
You have to wonder how, you know, they don't accept EBT cards at Starbucks.
So you have to wonder what their growth strategy is going to be as they do as some of the more Color-timid white customers decide to go to Pete's Coffee or Caribou Coffee or even slum it to the 365 Black McDonald's to get a dollar a cup of coffee.
Well, you know, if some chain really had guts, they would say, we reserve our restrooms for customers only.
And customers are people who will actually buy a cup of coffee.
We welcome you to our refined and civilized environment.
Well, you will not be bothered by someone who is not, in fact, a customer.
You could do it in a subtle way.
We treat our customers like customers.
That's all you need to say.
Anyway, I doubt anybody in the entire United States is brave enough to make that appeal, but I hope they won't even have to.
I think Starbucks will eventually have to change its policies and have to realize that there is a difference between a customer and a bum.
But moving on, in fact, across the country to the city of Stockton.
This is a good-sized city.
It's over 300,000 people.
And it's had a checkered, perhaps I shouldn't say colored, past.
But it is a color-brave city.
Well, I don't know how color-brave it is.
It's certainly not colorblind.
But they had a murder rate that was higher than Chicago's at one point.
They had to declare bankruptcy in 2012.
Now, they have a mayor.
The youngest mayor ever elected.
I think he was 26 when he was elected.
His name is Michael Tubbs.
He's black.
He is a Stanford graduate.
He went to Stanford on a full scholarship where he got a BA in Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity.
And he stayed to get a master's degree in Policy Leadership and Organization Studies and now he is one of the most famous young mayors in California.
He has come up with a couple of plans.
They strike me as innovative.
They strike me likewise as futile and a waste of money.
He proposes something called the Advance Peace Plan and he's going to find people most likely to commit murder in his community and give them 18 months worth of counseling and $1,000 a month so long as they don't shoot anybody.
Well, as I say, that's innovative.
I wonder how many people would, in fact, refrain from shooting somebody because they're getting a thousand dollars a month.
The other question I have is, what are the criteria they're going to use?
Are they going to use one of these mass data programs that have been criticized for selecting out black people?
As potential troublemakers, you know the kinds of, you know, we talked about this in one of our programs.
Correct.
These data programs that judges might use to decide who deserves to get out on parole or not, how long the sentences should be, who's more likely to commit more crimes, and apparently all of these algorithms just are hopelessly racist.
What is Mayor Stubbs going to do when it turns out that every single one of the recipients I think I've read some articles before.
They actually break down the percentage of non-fatal shooters as suspects.
And it's, as you would expect, about 98% non-white.
Virtually no Asians or white people doing any of the non-fatal or fatal homicides in that city.
And, you know, we've seen this plan before.
I don't remember all the cities that are trying to do this David Kennedy plan.
He's a political scientist who did a lot of criminal justice reform, wrote a book called Don't Shoot, I believe, where they would try and do this method where they would pay people that they had identified as being, as you noted, they racially profiled people who had a propensity to engage in violence, who they had been tracking.
And I think that Michael Tubbs, this mayor of Stockton, I think he'll actually be gratified to know that he's helping some of these young brothers.
Brown people get the money.
That's just it.
So long as money is being paid, if it turns out that it's going into the pockets of overwhelmingly black and brown people, then that will be okay.
It's a positive.
That will not be a racist algorithm, even if the results are exactly the same as the programs that tell judges who should get out on parole or not.
In any case, that's not his only interesting idea.
He's also got the idea for a subsidy plan.
He talks about basically a guaranteed income.
And he was quoted in a newspaper article in the New York Times about saying, We get 50 constituents a week, if not more, calling and emailing us to explain why they would benefit from a $500 a month stipend.
Well, would you benefit?
I would love a stipend from the city of Stockton.
Yeah, he says it's heartbreaking that they're asking, but it's also exciting that we can do something for these people.
And apparently he has lined up some set of sucker foundations who are actually going to dole out $500 a month To residents of Stockton now.
And this is interesting too.
Apparently he's promised that taxpayers are not going to pay for this.
And he says he wants middle class residents to be eligible because lots of people, according to him, making $50,000 to $60,000 a year still struggle to get through each month.
There may be something to that.
But this is astonishing to me.
First of all, the idea of paying someone not to commit murder.
There have been efforts of this kind that go back many, many years.
I wrote about several of them in my very first book that goes back to the late 1980s.
It's not as though this guy invented them.
They've been around for a long time.
They peter out because they're just not worth it.
They're not a thing.
nice bit of money, $100 for an A on a course, $200 if you actually went to your dentist
appointment.
Paying people to do normal things.
And these programs, it's not as though this guy invented them.
They've been around for a long time.
They peter out because they're just not worth it.
They're not effective.
It's not money well spent.
No, they're not effective.
And what's crazy, though, is you have to factor in how many foundations exist that would help out these type of pilot programs in city after city after city across the country.
That's right.
There is always a new foundation cropping up, apparently stuffed with money, that wants to kick in for this kind of program.
Now, this is heartwarming.
He said that he learned about this basic income program through reading Martin Luther King.
Martin Luther King gave him this idea.
And he's determined to make it work.
So that infusions of outside cash, he wants to put that directly into policy conversations about generational poverty, violence, and education.
You know, it's funny.
The only place I know that Martin Luther King actually talked about universal basic income besides some speeches, he famously brought this up in the Playboy interview of 1965.
Where he also said that the black population at that point was 20 million and he said something along the lines of, we need to spend at least 20 billion on the black population exclusively to bring them up.
He was asked what number and he just kind of ballparked it.
I highly recommend our listeners track down.
You can find that whole interview online.
It is brilliant to read because it completely eviscerates the idea that this guy was ever a conservative.
Not just because he appears in Playboy, but what he's advocating.
It's clear, if you look into what Martin Luther King was all about, that he was very much a redistributionist.
Yes.
And he had Stanley Levinson, one of his closest advisors, was unquestionably a communist.
Yes.
At that time, there were plenty of people who made no secret of being communists.
And in his private conversations, he agreed that, well, yes, that was really his worldview as well.
So the idea, you know, the people who try to pretend that somehow we can capture Martin Luther King for the conservative cause because at one speech, in one stage of his life, he talked about judging people on the content of the character rather than the color of their skin.
Whereas, he went to his grave very much a quota man, a race preferences man.
He was, yeah, the night before he was shot, we've talked about it before, he was shot getting ready to shake down Coca-Cola and Wonder Bread in Memphis, Tennessee.
That's right, that's right.
For racial, for more distributors owned by blacks and run by blacks.
But this Stubbs, Mayor Stubbs story has yet another kind of storybook quality to it.
He's married to a woman by the name of Anna Malaika Natirwa Asare.
Now, I looked into her a little bit.
She's light-skinned black.
Her father is from Ghana.
I'm guessing that her mother must be white because she looks more or less Barack Obama tone.
But both her parents are lawyers.
She went to Stanford, again, on a full scholarship.
And, now listen to this, this is really a fairytale story.
When they met, Michael Tubbs was president of the Stanford chapter of the NAACP, and Netirwa Asare was president of the Black Student Union.
Doesn't that warm your heart?
A match made in racial hope for white people.
Oh gosh, yes.
Now, she was an undergraduate at Stanford, and then she received a master's degree in gender studies from Cambridge, And she is now commuting to Cambridge from Stockton.
Sounds like a lot of miles being racked up, but it's all part of the budget because she is a Gates Scholar.
Now, this is something that's set up by our friend and entrepreneur, Bill Gates, and he's footing the bill.
And this is what she says in her statement.
As a Ph.D.
student in education at Cambridge, I will focus on the role education has played in suppressing black women's narratives and how black women have still thrived in academic spaces despite this challenge.
As a Gates Scholar, I will use this knowledge to facilitate more inclusive learning environments and curricula.
Another thing she has said is that sexism, class oppression, gender identification and racism are inextricably bound together.
But I love this idea.
She, this is a woman who has swanned into the highest reaches of academics.
All on full scholarship, complaining about the black woman's narrative has been suppressed.
Now, I suspect she's a pretty smart girl.
She's won all sorts of academic honors and things, but for her to be convinced that she must devote her life to proving something that's, at least in her case, obviously untrue.
You get these people who are devoting themselves to the cause of, essentially, black power, black domination, black racial solidarity.
Both of them.
And they are going to be this power couple.
I'm sure we will hear more and more about them.
Unless, for some reason or other, they fail to pay their taxes, or you find that their hand's in the till, you never know about these things.
Well, we do know that there is a recall effort going on with Mr. Tubbs.
That is true.
Because it turns out that there has been some money that's been used to pay for some of these programs, to administrate these programs that he claimed were not going to have any taxpayer money.
These guys, this guy has already been promoted above his station because he had a starry-eyed view of race that a lot of guilt-ridden white people decided to subsidize to promote this guy above what he could have accomplished on his own.
And this is one of the tragedies that you wrote about in your book, Pave the Good Intentions, you mentioned.
I mean, we have spent My God, your entire life, basically, I was born, I won't say what year, but it was well into the Reagan administration, second term.
But my point is this, we keep trying and trying and trying and trying and trying to prove that equality exists naturally, that race doesn't matter, and yet every time, we begin to realize, guys, you know, why are we doing this program?
Why is it that you guys can't act like white people?
Or as Mr. Taylor always says, You know, why can't you act even more like Asians, though?
You know, the non-Asian minority that we hear so much about.
I mean, it's maddening to read these stories of these type of people who are promoted because they don't exist to help the entire city's constituents, to help the city's inhabitants.
All they care about is promoting the interests of non-whites.
I'm sorry, black and brown people.
Because even though Asians might align with them, they don't matter in the grand scheme of things in their racial grievance train.
And as you say, there's already a red flag in this young Michael Stubbs.
He is apparently subject to a recall effort.
There's a group that's organized in the city called Save Stockton.
And they say that he has a foundation, the Reinvent Stockton Foundation, according to this recall movement.
It gets $250,000 a year of city money just to administer the money that comes from outside.
So we shall have to see about what kind of guy this is.
He denies this, of course, none of this is happening.
But, yep, here we have blacks, two blacks, probably well above average in intelligence, who are dedicating their lives to their people at the Thanks to financial contributions by whites, by Bill Gates, by all the people that contributed to their scholarship.
It's really an astonishing state of affairs, but this is the world we live in today.
And this leads us to another story that you call to my attention.
This is about the congressional midterm elections.
All of Congress, of course, is up for election or re-election in the fall.
Most of the voting is going to take place on November 6th.
And now what we are in the midst of is the primary elections.
The primary elections are taking place in a quite fascinating way.
Apparently, House Republican candidates are blanketing the airwaves with television ads embracing a real hard line on immigration.
And this is a dramatic shift from the midterm elections in 2014 in which Immigration didn't even appear as the top 10 issues.
Now, according to people who track these things, immigration is the number two issue in the 14,000 or so campaign ads that the Republican candidates have aired.
It's the number two issue after just Trump-style, just supporting Trump.
Following Trump is number one, and number two is immigration.
And I think this is quite interesting that a GOP state senate who's running for Congress in Ohio, what he says, and his name is Troy Balderson, this is from one of his campaign ads, I'll end sanctuary cities to stop illegals from taking our jobs and use conservative grit to build the darn wall.
Listen, Mr. Chairman, Republicans have aired 14,000 campaign ads touting the Trump-style immigration platform.
Again, as you stated, the second most popular campaign issue after, again, pro-Trump language, you get a situation where this GOP consultant by the name of Brian Murray has actually come out and said, Immigration is probably, it might even be the most important issue for Republican primary voters.
And that's what's important is to give Trump, I think he's actually going to win the House and I think they're going to pick up a couple of Senate seats.
I think that we are going to see an opportunity for some really positive things come 2019
when this new Congress is actually seated.
And you will begin to see some younger type conservative leaders who don't fit that Mia
Love.
I mean, remember how bland and boring and the pablum that the Republicans have forced
on us before Trump came along.
Mia Love was considered the future of the conservative movement.
I mean, in South Carolina of all states, they have two clowns as senators and one of them
is in blackface.
And of course, I can only refer to Lindsey Graham there, but no, I'm joking.
Talk about Tim Scott, a guy who took over the seat from the guy who went to the Heritage Foundation.
Oh, DeMint.
Jim DeMint, yeah, which was a great mistake.
I mean, he found out how pathetic the Heritage Foundation was.
He was a useful senator.
He was a great senator.
It was such a shame that he left because he opened the door for the Tea Party movement, which again, has been such a dramatic Scam in a lot of... in every way.
Again, Trump is the authentic way... I mean, the triple down Trump effect on the GOP is, in my opinion, one of the more satisfying and white pills, if we want to do that terminology that's so pervasive among our side of the internet, that is happening right now.
And I think it's important that people Look at the big picture.
There were so many things that Trump had to do to appease some of the GOP donors in states across the country in his first year, his first year and a half, to make sure they kept writing the checks.
Because look, they can only do so much as long as they have the money to go about the lobbying, to go about getting the votes, etc, etc.
Now you've got an opportunity to do the primaries and get more Trumpian-style people in there or force the incumbents to finally embrace Trump.
Well, it's certainly true.
On the one hand, I resist the idea that Donald Trump and his presence in the White House has permitted all of this racism to flourish and bloom.
I think that's completely nuts.
I do think that it is true that he is, as you said, he has put an unprecedented backbone into the Republican Party.
And would there be anyone running for Congress now talking about building a wall if it had not been for him?
Would there be anyone even using the word illegals?
I suspect not if it hadn't been for Donald Trump.
And for, as you point out, if the number one campaign issue is supporting Donald Trump, and the number two campaign issue is immigration, in effect, I think what we have is the number one and the number two campaign issues are immigration.
And so we will see what this results in.
But, of course, this is another example of just how far apart the parties are.
Because the Democrats, during this entire period, have been bombarding voters with ads that promise to protect Obamacare, they're going to shore up Social Security, expand Medicare, and bring in more gun control.
It's hard to imagine two political platforms that are further apart.
Of course, this is what always happens in U.S.
elections.
In order to make it through the primary, you have to appeal to the people who vote in primaries, and those are motivated voters.
And the motivated Republican voters love to hear about throwing out illegals and building the wall.
And, of course, the motivated Democratic voters love to hear this stuff about gun control and shoring up Social Security, etc., protecting Obamacare.
Who knows what's actually gonna happen in the general election?
Now, one aspect of this that worries me, and I've seen this kind of poll results more than once, so I don't think it's a fluke, but according to the Pew Research Center, and this is a poll from January, and I've seen some since then, they say that 74% of Americans support some kind of permanent legal status for these so-called dreamers.
74%.
Do you think that's true?
I guess that's true.
When the corporate media is able to do what they've done to paint the issue as a humanitarian
issue, I mean, look what they did with the pictures of what Obama did with children at
the border that they tried to blame on Trump and they were able to get two or three days
of intense scrutiny and media coverage blasting the racist policies of Trump breaking up these
children at the border.
Turns out the stories from 2014 when Obama was president.
They're, you know, again, the media manipulation, I think there's, I don't think I've ever seen
a story that was so shocking in what they were trying to portray as a way we got you
Well, it is always the case that they will put on some attractive person who has done many good things and who says, I don't hardly even speak Spanish and I've never been to Honduras in my life.
I'm an American through and through.
That would be like throwing me to the wolves to send me back to this place that I've never seen.
And it's all very heart-rending.
It's all very emotional.
But, of course, these people, the way I like to put it, is they're in effect accepting stolen goods.
Maybe they had nothing to do with breaking the law.
Maybe they were not lawbreakers.
But I would turn around and ask a person like that, who's never been to Honduras, I'd say, If my parents sneaked me into Honduras, do you think the Hondurans would have any sympathy with me?
No, of course they wouldn't.
The Mexicans wouldn't.
The Japanese wouldn't.
Nobody would.
If I were sneaked in as a baby into any country in the world, I'm still an illegal immigrant and nobody would think twice about it.
This is, again, one of those double standards in which only the United States is held to this so-called humanitarian standard.
And we never hear.
I mean, occasionally at Breitbart or the Daily Caller, you will hear an article about yet another so-called dreamer who committed armed robbery or who was a rapist.
But no, no.
NSNBC is never going to tell you about them.
The main networks are never going to talk about them.
It makes it sound as though every one of them is a volunteer in his local church.
They all serve with the distinction of the military, etc., etc.
White people aren't supposed to have a backbone.
We're supposed to crumble to the ground and be willingly trampled upon so that whatever we in the past had gotten through white privilege, it can now be redistributed to the colored masses that are rising up just as the great Lothar Stoddard warned us was going to happen.
Well, that's right.
Everything we own is unjust gain that we acquired through this horrible process and exploitative process known as white privilege, as you point out.
But again, and there's another statistic here that worries me when it comes to the general election.
All of these Republicans who have been reaping the support of primary voters by being tough on immigration, if it really is the case that 74% of voters want a legal status for the so-called dreamers and 60% oppose expanding the wall, if that's really the case, when these guys meet the Democrats who have been opposing all this, it may not turn out as you suspect.
We'll see.
These polls are from January.
We're into June of 2018.
My gosh, it's hard to believe how fast this year has flown by.
One of the things I just talked about was white men not having a backbone.
White people not having a backbone.
Well, guess what?
There are positive signs creeping up every day.
And more importantly, we're seeing in those ex-Soviet Union nations, the Eastern Bloc, there are a lot of people with backbones there.
That's for sure.
You're speaking, I believe, about the Stop Soros Bill in Hungary.
I love the way they give such straightforward names to their laws.
Like, we call them No Child Left Behind.
Well, they call this bill the Stop Soros Bill.
And what they're going to do, the plan is, and it looks like this could very well pass, is that you could be punished in Hungary for up to one year in jail if you tried to help some illegal immigrant change his status or tried to help someone who was not entitled to refugee or asylum protection to try to get it.
This is extraordinary.
And of course, back in the SB 1070 in Arizona, remember that bill that Jan Brewer signed?
It actually imposed penalties on those sheltering, hiring, and transporting unregistered aliens also.
So there's been some sense of this in the United States, but the idea that these people are here illegally.
If you help them in any way, you too are committing a crime.
It's treason!
I mean, how hard is that to understand what they're trying to stop?
Stopping their fellow citizens from engaging in treason and guess what?
Punishment must be unusual or else it serves no purpose.
The great Robert Heinlein taught us that in Starship Troopers and this is what the Stop Soros Bill is trying to do.
Guess what guys?
We have the data.
We know who is the individual who is helping undermine our Who is subsidizing the undermining of our countries because there are so many willing citizens, regrettably, in places like Hungary and Poland and Germany and the United States.
Well, see, in this case, they are not necessarily targeting willing citizens.
There may be some of them, but this is also aimed at these non-governmental organizations.
Of course, NGOs.
NGOs.
And apparently there was one version of the Stop Soros Bill that was going to levy a 25% tax On any foreign donations to non-governmental organizations that back migration.
That's a form of a tariff that I really like.
I think that's great too.
That's a lovely tariff.
So very clearly they had George Soros in their crosshairs.
They know where the money is going.
They know where it comes from.
And, of course, Viktor Orban is riding high because he was just re-elected a few weeks ago by an absolute landslide.
And his major, major issue was keeping Hungary Hungarian.
Another thing that he's done is to propose an amendment to the Constitution to state that an alien population cannot be settled in Hungary.
I like that.
Again, this is the type of rhetoric that would have been impossible had Hillary Clinton been brought to office because you would have seen, I don't want to go the far way of saying a Serbia type situation, but again, we know that she has the same mindset as Merkel has of what happened with Germany.
Did you hear the great story about what happened when Obama and Merkel had their last meeting?
Yes, yes.
Merkel shed a tear at the idea that this brute Donald Trump was going to take his place.
And Obama left thinking she's all alone and trying to hold up this world that I created.
And that is actually true.
That is why Trump being in office, it gives Europe four, maybe eight years to find a sense of courage.
I mean, again, I brought this up not too long ago.
This is the 40th anniversary of Solzhenitsyn's Harvard address.
In 1978.
And I encourage all of our listeners to go on YouTube.
You can watch him deliver it.
There's an English translation because he gave it in Russian.
Or read it.
It is incredible.
It is very much worth reading.
I've challenged the great Gregory Hood to actually write something on it for American Renaissance.
Well we should probably just reprint it.
Oh, you should definitely reprint it, but I think there's so many lessons to gleam from this amazing speech that he gave, because it really was an attack on the egalitarian West.
And did we have the courage?
Do Western people, do white people have the courage to stand up and confront it, or will we be, as I stated, Crumbled to the ground and trampled upon.
Shoved aside.
And everything that we fought for, you know, as we decolonized, we become colonized instead.
And that's what he's talking about.
Well, of course, what Viktor Orban is up against is the millions and millions, in some cases billions of dollars that are doled out by the EU in these so-called development funds.
The European Union, which It really holds the purse string.
There are these wealthy countries that are corrupt, becoming Islamic, doing all the things that Viktor Orban hates.
They're the ones who have a lot of money.
But I think that even if they say, OK, we're going to stop writing the checks, I think the Hungarians are going to stand strong.
They know, they know what's important.
And I think the huge majority that elected him, that is very, very encouraging to me.
Of course, the UN Refugee Agency, UNHCR, they're saying that the idea of depriving refugees and asylum seekers of the vital services that are provided by these soon-to-be lawbreakers, that encourages rising xenophobic attitudes.
We can't have that.
We just can't have that.
Europe can become African or Asian or Islamic, that comes first.
Rising xenophobic attitudes, that is what we must avoid at all cost.
And then more good news, more good news from Europe.
That is that Austria, Austria is very clearly trying to dissuade immigrants.
Immigrants pretty much of any kind.
And I thought it was quite fascinating that they have just Monday of this week the Austrian government that has Hans Christian Streik in
it now of the Freedom Party alongside this Chancellor Sebastian Kurz who's
really doing a pretty good job. I think both of those guys are they really
are working for the benefit of Austria. They have announced plans to cut
benefits for foreigners including refugees.
Now, it was too bad that the Constitutional Court of Austria back in March struck down a local version of the government's benefit plan which required anyone claiming the main minimum benefit to have lived in Austria for five of the last six years.
Now, that would have also reduced refugees' benefits for an initial five years.
Now, the issue here is whether or not Austria has the right to treat its citizens differently from non-citizens.
And the whole idea of the European Union has been, it's something called freedom of establishment.
And freedom of establishment means that if you are an EU citizen, you can go live anywhere in the EU and you can work anywhere in the EU.
But it is not yet clear where the freedom of establishment means that you can collect handouts anywhere in the EU at the same rate.
And here is good old Sebastian Kurz.
He's saying freedom of establishment is the freedom to work in all of Europe.
Freedom of establishment is not the freedom to seek out the best social benefits payment.
So he's saying Look, you've got to have lived here for five previous years in order to get welfare.
He's saying welfare for Austrians first.
Now, we'll see how far he goes.
We'll see if there are legal problems on that.
It's an important step.
It's a very important step.
I mean, we're not going to talk about it at all.
We live in a legalese world where the law is weaponized to strike down any attempts by the right to implement new policies or to even try and showcase what's happening.
We'll briefly talk about Tommy Robinson in that respect and just say, look, we don't know enough about what's happening over there.
But again, the law, as we see in European Union countries, in the United Kingdom, It is still used to enforce egalitarian, anti-white, the leftist ideas that permeate every aspect of the culture.
We're lucky that in Austria, they fought as long as they did.
In a previous podcast, we talked about how long it took them to build up this coalition.
30 years to finally break through.
And they did.
And there's still time.
There's still time to turn the tide.
And that's the most important thing for those living in Western Europe.
In France, Germany, and England, there's hope.
There's hope, and it's very, very encouraging to see what they're doing.
At the governmental level, these are people at the top level of government saying, look, welfare should be for Austrians, not these so-called asylum seekers.
It's for us.
You've got to run before you can walk.
Yes.
I'm sorry, you've got to walk before you can run.
We'd all love to be able to run before you can walk, but at this step, it's baby steps.
But moving to Britain, you know, this Tommy Robinson stuff, just to summarize very briefly, Tommy Robinson has been a very active opponent to the Islamization of Britain.
He has taken a very strong position on these grooming scandals in which middle-aged, younger Muslims find these vulnerable, often Orphaned girls, people whose parents come from terrible families, drug them up, get them hooked and pass them around as sex objects.
It's just an absolutely horrible thing.
He's one of the few Brits who takes it personally, who says this is an outrage, this is an insult to Britain.
But he was arrested for reporting on an ongoing trial.
Just the way journalists often do.
They stand in front of the courtyard and say, well, here's this guy going by.
He's a plaintiff.
And he was arrested and he was put in jail.
He had a suspended sentence for a previous offense.
There is some doubt as to whether or not the British authorities acted legally.
It's a very murky situation.
They put a gag order on the press on this at one point, and it is easy to assume that they have done something that was an absolute outrage and an offense of freedom of speech.
Then there are lefty lawyers who've been writing detailed accounts of how, no, no, no, he was in fact violating a court order not to be recording within a courtroom.
There are many complications here.
I hesitate to draw any really Definitive conclusions on this, but I think it is certainly fair to say that the whole establishment is stacked against him and whether or not he was treated legally, my suspicion is that the laws that have been invoked against him would not be invoked against anyone who was pro-Islam.
I'll say to conclude that Mr. Taylor you put it up you put it very succinctly which which is why we didn't talk about that much but I think it's important to say this heroes are rising and there are a lot of people across the Western world especially America who had never heard about the grooming crisis who Found out about Rotterham, who found out about all these other terrible acts, who probably thought that London still was majority white, who probably had no idea what's going on in England with the Islamization.
They didn't know the racial changes transpired until Tommy Robinson was arrested.
Well, and just the other day, I saw a headline.
It was, uh, Oxford men found guilty of sexual exploitation.
And my first instinct was, Oxford men?
Are we talking about students at Oxford?
No.
Of course.
It was a band of Muslims living in Oxford who the BBC refers to as Oxford Man.
That sounds like Cambridge Man, Harvard Man, Oxford Man.
I had this sort of moment.
No.
It's a band of Muslims who've done exactly the same thing.
Just the way they portray this is disgusting.
But just on a final, almost comical note, Still in London here.
London, believe it or not, has something called a Walking and Cycling Commissioner.
I'd never heard of such a thing.
He is a white man and he has concluded that although the city has done all sorts of great things to try to improve things for people using bicycles, there are not enough women and minorities doing it.
And he is considering setting diversity targets for London's cycling population.
Now, he's the Minister of Cycling and Walking.
I wonder if there are not enough minorities and women walking?
What do you think?
We don't talk about that.
But apparently money has been spent on what they call cycle superhighway networks.
And they let people commute in from the suburbs by bicycle.
And he says this is simply a way of getting middle-aged men cycling faster around the city.
That just can't be.
We can't have that.
And so they've unveiled a number of projects that will start to address this lack of diversity, including cycle training courses, trainings in riding a bicycle, grants for community groups that do not typically ride bicycles, and promoting electric bikes.
Are they going to buy electric bikes for women or for Pakistanis?
This, this, this to me, this is, this encapsulates some of the utter insanity that characterizes white people.
I mean, here you have a program, the idea was of course, you know, well, let's stimulate bicycling.
And they spent some money on it, they make it easier to be a bicyclist, and oh my gosh,
it's only white men who are doing this, or not enough, not enough blacks, not enough women.
What, what prompts this kind of thing?
thinking. Where does this kind of thinking come from?
Shouldn't you be happy that you are increasing the number of bicyclists? Why do
you always always have to count? But that is the white man's way. Deep down there's
a sense of shame. It comes back to the fact that there's too there are so few
white people in power who dare stand when crumbling to the ground, having no
backbone, gets them promoted to positions of power. Especially in Western
Europe and the United States.
That is one of the great paths to power, is ensuring that by taking your position, you will do everything you can to promote the interests of non-whites to other It's impossible for me to imagine any other group of people.
This guy, Will Norman, he's a white guy.
He's trying to make sure that there are more people bicycling.
And he doesn't think that he's done his job properly unless he gets enough non-whites and women to do it.
Again, I'm just baffled.
This seems to be the nature of today's white man.
And why is there nobody, at least nobody that's been reported on who says, who cares?
Come on, if you want more people to bicycle, just accept the people who bicycle.
I think that's what everybody's waiting for, is someone to come around and say, who cares?
Guess what?
You have to be the first person to do it.
You'd be shocked how the chorus will become a, what's that great word, I'll make sure I enunciate it correctly, a cacophony?
A cacophony, that's a combination of bad sounds.
Cacophony is bad.
Caca is bad.
Caca is bad.
Yes, caca is bad.
Euphony, an enormous euphonious chorus of who cares.
You see, this is the kind of thing that just could be laughed down if there were enough people to do it.
Are there that many white people left to laugh at it?
We will see.
Let us be like Nietzsche's laughing lions and laugh at this wilderness.
And thanks so much for coming on and we will see you next week.
Hey, for Jared Taylor, I'm Paul Kersey.
Our time is up.
▲
Export Selection