All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 18, 2018 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor
59:09
Pow Wow Chow
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to today's edition of Radio Renaissance.
I'm Jared Taylor with American Renaissance, and with me is the incomparable and indefatigable Paul Kersey.
Always a pleasure to have you with me.
And I think we're going to start off with Senator Elizabeth Warren, otherwise known as Pocahontas in Donald Trump's derisive nickname for her.
She, of course, made big news when she released her DNA results.
That was just Monday of this week.
And apparently, her DNA is somewhere between 1,024th and 1,64th Native American.
And it's quite remarkable that she released this information as part of a very elaborate, high-production-values, campaign-style video that she clearly wanted as many people to see as possible.
This doesn't seem to have turned out quite the way she hoped.
No, it doesn't.
And again, if one of our listeners is from the Boston area, go ahead and find us a copy of the What is it, the Boston Globe issue for Monday, where it has this story splashed on the cover without that important correction, where they admitted that they got their math wrong, that the fact-checkers hadn't actually looked at it to see how it was actually between 164th and, as you noted, 1 and 1024th.
They initially tried to make it seem like, oh, wow, it's vindicated.
This DNA test shows, well, of course, you know, There's no need for... Gosh, what's it called here?
I forgot what it's called when you do... Validity?
No, no, no.
When you do... When Indians would do the... Rain dance?
Not the rain dance.
Gosh, we're so wrong here.
When they would use fire and they would do smoke signals.
They thought, here's a smoke signal to all of the world.
We got you, Donald Trump.
And then, Mr. Taylor, I know you're not on Twitter, so you couldn't follow this as it was going on.
But it was fascinating as that correction.
started to percolate and then started to be distributed and people began to realize, holy cow, this is an own goal.
What has this goofball done?
Yes, according to some estimates, the average white American has about this much Native American or Indian ancestry.
Let me tell you a quick funny anecdote.
I'm not sure that's genuinely true.
I don't believe that's true.
I remember back when I was in elementary school and there were students, might have been fourth grade, and people in my class were bragging about how they were an Indian princess or an Indian.
I grew up in almost an all-white area.
There were maybe five non-whites at my elementary school.
And I remember thinking, why are you boasting about that?
Why are you proud?
And I was only in fourth grade.
I was thinking about this when I read that study about how the average white American had X percentage and Elizabeth Warren actually had less than that.
Of Indian in them.
And I was thinking, gosh, there was a time when people would brag about having these ancestors.
Well, only if they can claim an Indian princess.
Yes, yes.
They don't claim some moth-eaten, old worn-out buck who had somehow managed to persuade a white ancestor lady to Have a child.
No, no.
It's always an Indian princess.
But it does seem that this claim has turned out to rather anger the party's black, and especially Hispanic, and certainly Indian supporters, you know.
It's all this business about, oh, she's trying to appropriate the culture of the Cherokee, etc., etc.
And actual American Indians seem absolutely furious.
And the Washington Post says that her actions has, quote, I'll go you one better.
The Cherokee Nation and others in indigenous communities frustrated about the seizure of cultural and social ties
for political maneuvering.
And the Secretary of State of the Cherokee Nation has said, Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her
continued claims of tribal heritage.
I'll go you one better.
Last night on Tucker Carlson, he had a descendant of Pocahontas herself on the program,
and she demanded an apology from what Mark Stein dubbed Pocahontas, which I believe, as you noted at the beginning, where
Donald Trump just calls her Pocahontas, which I think is far funnier.
It's just, it's incredible this has happened because we're at a point now where we live in a society that dictates we believe race is a social construct.
Right.
Over and over and over again we're told, and yet here we are And she, this leftist, who has been attacking the police non-stop for supposed racism, who has pretended to be an Indian for her entire adult career to get ahead, she then turns to DNA test to prove, well, wait, but I actually am Indian.
Well, actually you're not.
You're just a white woman pretending to be an Indian.
And race is, by the way, thank you, you've just proven the validity of what all of those horrible people have been saying for years, that race is real.
That's right, that's right.
If you look to biology to prove it, it certainly doesn't sound like a social contract, does it?
No, it doesn't.
Of course, all the laughter is just so tangled up with contradictions, if race is a social contract, and people can claim to be cross-gender, transgender, non-gender, a boy today, a girl tomorrow.
You do wonder why you can't claim to be one race or another, but it's because race really matters to non-whites.
But yeah, she has been claiming this Indian so-called heritage all the way back to 1984 when she plagiarized a recipe for what she calls Pow Wow Chow.
It's amazing that, you know, you couldn't get away with that today.
No, you couldn't.
You absolutely couldn't.
And as the originator of Pow Wow Chow, she signed her name Elizabeth Warren Cherokee.
To go back to Tucker again, this just shows you how Tucker really has the zeitgeist and he's nailing it.
He, on his program, they actually cooked powwow chow.
Did they?
Oh, it was hilarious.
What's in it?
I just saw the clip.
Possum?
Rabbit?
No opossum rabbit scalps that are not in it.
I'm not actually sure what the ingredients are, but as you noted, it was plagiarized.
I read that article in the Daily Mail.
Again, this story gets more bizarre because she continues to double down and refuses to admit that she was wrong in culturally appropriating this false identity.
Well, the Boston Globe, even if they initially got it wrong, they point out, and I'm quoting from one of their articles, they say, During her academic career as a law professor, she had her ethnicity changed from white to Native American at University of Pennsylvania Law School.
And then I want to point out that she did the same thing at Harvard Law School, where she was a tenured faculty member beginning in 1995.
And the most astonishing thing is in 1999, Harvard published something called the Affirmative Action Plan book, in which they were defending against charges of an all-white faculty, and they designated her as a Native American, and in a 1997 article, she was described as Harvard Law School's first woman of color.
Isn't that heartwarming?
There's yet more to this.
I've never heard this before, but apparently one of her claims is that her parents had to elope because her father's family were so irate at his marrying a squaw.
Correct.
But of course, as it turns out, they're married, there was a perfectly normal marriage certificate, and the marriage took place in a church.
There's a fascinating video where she's telling the story to some credulous newscaster who looks on, and you can just tell that journalist's heart is breaking as she is learning about just this This venomous anti-Indian mindset that was prevalent at the time that almost caused Warren's parents not to couple.
Have to elope.
Escape the bigotry of their time.
She spent her entire career lying.
One of the fascinating things when you think that she taught at Harvard Law School, did we know if she ever taught Barack Obama?
Hmm, now that I don't know.
Anyways, you know, just a question.
A marriage made in heaven.
But then also, apparently some members of the family absolutely and vehemently deny there was ever any talk of Indian ancestry.
It's really something else.
And one would love to know, she did not announce ahead of time that she was getting a DNA check.
I think that's very significant.
What would you have done if she discovered nothing at all?
I'm sure we'd never have heard of any of this.
No, no, no.
And if it is true that nobody in the family was ever talking about this, she must have been absolutely terrified that her DNA was going to come back absolutely lily white.
And if it turns out all she has is, if it is in fact the case, that the average white American has one one thousand and twenty-fourth or some such figure of Indian industry, she must have breathed a huge sigh of relief and then put together this slick video to brag about it.
Well, it's like you said, she put together this slick video, but again, who on her staff actually has a background in mathematics that could have looked at these numbers?
Because obviously the Boston Globe didn't have them when they initially did this story.
Again, it's that correction that became such an amazing meme and it took on a life of its own
where it's like, wow, this just completely slaughtered and embarrassed and yet she's continuing
to go on and on saying, hey, President Trump, remember that bet you made?
I just took the DNA test, you owe me a million dollars.
Pay up, buddy.
Right, right.
I don't think she's asking for that million dollars now.
I don't think she's gonna talk about her Indian ancestry much anymore, especially when all of these Indians,
including the Cherokee, who she claims to be, are telling her that she's a complete fraud.
But this is such an interesting phenomenon, the idea that white people are trying to extract some sort of advantage for claiming to be non-white.
It certainly does give the lie to the idea of white privilege, with all these people scrambling to be anything but white.
When did you first encounter that concept, white privilege?
When did you start to notice that this was seeping into academia and that it was then going to become part of pop culture the way that it has?
That's hard to say.
I'd say certainly only within the last maybe four or five years.
Do you think it goes back much farther than that?
Maybe in the obscure corners of academia they've been talking about it for 10 or 15 years, but it certainly has come out in a way that it never had before.
I feel the same way about white supremacy.
People are accused of being racist.
I mean, that's a standard thing all the way back to the 60s.
Even in the 1950s, you could be racist.
But the idea that we're all white supremacists now, they've just got to up the ante every time, every chance they get.
And now, of course, my theory about white privilege is that because it is so difficult to find white people who are in any way plausibly describable as oppressing blacks, you have to come up with some other explanation as to why we're so far ahead.
And so, on the one hand, there is this racism that we're unconsciously inflicting on blacks, but then at the same time we benefit from this undeserved privilege that boosts us while our unconscious racism forces blacks down.
Well, of course, they've also come up with the structural inequality and implicit bias as plausible concepts behind the continued Well, the chasm that exists in virtually anything that can be measured.
Implausible causes.
Sorry.
No, good point.
Good point.
It seems though, you know, you talk, you find people going back to, well, they've given up on evoking slavery.
Well, they haven't given up, but after slavery becomes an improbable explanation, Lynching becomes an improbable explanation.
They start cooking up these things about how the New Deal and the GI Bill, all of this built in somehow the structural inequality from which we suffer to this day.
The whole thing is an exercise in one threadbare excuse after another.
Well, it's as if they've read the cliff notes of Michelle Alexander's book, The New Jim Crow.
In fact, I just saw this unbelievable quote by a black player named Eric Reid, who took a knee.
He just got signed by the Carolina Panthers, and he took a knee during the national anthem, and he was asked, well, why do you keep doing this?
He goes, well, I'm never going to stop fighting for my people.
Because at one point, and he gives all these Crazy ideas as to why he's doing it.
But then he brought up the G.I.
Bill after World War II.
And you're like, what?
You know, are we going to talk about redlining next and pretend that there weren't black banks that were lending as well?
I mean, come on!
This is all part of the great black mythology.
It's the more contemporary version of we was kings.
Just the other day I was talking about this and I brought up the fact that Africans and Caribbean blacks come to the United States and they can't detect all of this massive discrimination.
They put their heads down, they work hard, and they do pretty well.
Certainly compared to Americans.
Somebody says, don't you understand the difference between voluntary immigration and involuntary immigration?
Wait a minute.
This so-called involuntary immigration took place hundreds of years ago.
Are you here voluntarily as a white person?
No.
You haven't even been born here.
Just the way all the American blacks are born here.
They're somehow supposed to be ten generations later seething about the fact that they are involuntary immigrants?
As I say, it is one silly excuse after another to try to explain this chasm that will not go away.
But something else that I hope will go away is this caravan, this caravan of Hondurans, which is working its way towards the Mexico-Guatemala border.
There are about 4,000 people now.
Honduras, this caravan that started off no more than about 200 people, apparently.
It just picked up all sorts of new hangers-on on the way.
But this is a group that is determined to come to the United States and ask for asylum.
They're copying, of course, the last caravan that showed up.
We were not sufficiently firm with them, apparently, and so they want to reproduce its glorious successes.
Now, this was news to me, but adult citizens of Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Nicaragua All they need is a national ID card to cross each other's borders.
They have a kind of a sort of a Schengen area within those four countries.
So apparently it was relatively legal for this bunch to just cross from Honduras into Guatemala.
But things change at the Guatemala-Mexico border.
And so the Mexicans are saying, look, if you've got a visa, If you've got the right documents, we're going to let you in.
And if you have a plausible asylum claim, we might let you make an asylum claim.
But if you don't have the documents, then too bad.
We're not letting you in.
And according to the Associated Press that has been covering this, nobody that they asked in this caravan of 4,000 even has a passport.
That's right.
So this is setting up what could be a very, very interesting little conflict on the Guatemalan-Mexican border.
We will see what happens.
So here's something I'd like to add, because I think you're making a very good point.
These individuals aren't even in Mexico yet.
No, not yet.
So when you read these stories that are on Drudge, we have a very educated and intelligent audience.
And when you see these stories, I think a lot of people who are reading them or hearing about them automatically assume that this caravan of Hondurans is close to the U.S.
border.
But it's imperative you understand they have not entered Mexico yet.
No.
And that's why what President Trump is doing where he's saying there will be serious consequences not just to foreign aid to Honduras to Nicaragua but also to Mexico who it's important to point out we just signed a new trade agreement with.
Right.
And we have a lot of leverage.
Our president has a lot of leverage over them in regards to this.
Yeah.
Well, it'll be very interesting to see how all this works out.
Apparently, the foreign minister of Honduras itself has said, no, no, don't go, don't go.
And how serious he is, we don't know.
But in the face of this, Donald Trump tweeted a tweet.
I think this was just yesterday.
He said, and I'll quote, In addition to stopping all payments to these countries, and apparently since 2015 we have sent more than 2.6 billion dollars in foreign assistance to Guatemala, Honduras, now Salvador.
He says, if this keeps going, in addition to stopping all payments to these countries, which seem to have almost no control over their population, I must in the strongest terms Ask Mexico to stop this onslaught, and if unable to do so, I will call up the U.S.
military and close our southern border."
Now, I'm afraid that's rather an idle threat.
I mean, closing the border, that would be nuts.
He might close the border at a particular place where these people have accumulated, but there are just so many goods, so many people, such a legitimate trade that goes across.
He can't close the border.
But I suppose he could close it where those people, in fact, show up.
The question is, though, does Mexico, do they really have the stomach to turn these people back?
My guess is they may.
They may.
And they've sent 500 additional federal police officers to the place where it is expected that these 4,000 people are going to try to cross the border.
Now, a bad sign is what the Mexican president-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has been saying.
He's supposed to take office on December 1st, and he says, we will offer jobs and work to Central Americans.
Anyone who wants to work in our country will have help We'll have a work visa.
Now, I mean, that's okay if he wants to accept them, so long as he keeps them coming into the United States.
But, so we'll see.
But the idea that Mexico, really, they have a pretty porous southern border, and the idea that they could really keep them out, we'll see.
Maybe 500 extra people?
We'll just see how determined they are.
And I thought it was quite interesting also that Mexico's ambassador to Guatemala His name is Luis Manuel Lopez Moreno.
He met with the people in the caravan and he said, hey, if you don't have the right papers, we're not letting you in.
And that was a good start.
Also, and who knows just how serious all of this stuff is, the U.S.
ambassador to Guatemala, he made a video message and he said, return to your country, your attempt to migrate will fail.
He's talking about the U.S.
He says, give up!
Well, I mean, you hear this, and not to be pessimistic, but you think, is this too little too late?
I mean, how many Guatemalans are already in the United States?
I mean, obviously we're talking about Hondurans, but we're looking here, and I mean, isn't Honduras, isn't that one of the countries that is Protected through the TPS.
We're trying to send back a couple hundred thousand Hondurans.
Oh yeah, I believe so.
I think it was an earthquake.
Yes, temporary protected status.
So that's one of the lawsuits that is going to probably go to the Supreme Court because a federal judge stepped in in California.
So you're thinking about all this and you're just wondering, I mean, how many millions of Hondurans, are in the country and how many?
Well yeah, there are two million Guatemalans and apparently when the Guatemalans see these people marching by, they're saying, go man, go!
They're all in favor of them.
Apparently some of them cook meals for them, give them a place to stay.
It's this concerted effort to send their folks to the United States.
But the Guatemalan police officers Apparently they arrested the leader of this caravan after he got into Guatemala, Bartolo Fuentes.
He's a former Honduran legislator who's some sort of rabble-rouser who got this caravan going.
They said that his entry into Guatemala did not comply with Guatemalan immigration rules and they said he's going to be deported.
These numbers, Mr. Taylor, are only going to rise in order of magnitudes.
You're going to go from 4,000 to 40,000 to 400,000.
It depends on how we react to the 4,000.
That's what it depends on.
And, you know, even if they get to Mexico, the southern border of Mexico is a long way away.
That's another thousand miles.
Yes, it is.
Before they get to Texas or California, We'll see.
We'll see.
I mean, that's a long way.
Their shoes are going to wear out.
They're going to run out of money.
Now, it could be that some wealthy Mexicans will rent buses for them.
Who knows?
Who knows what's going to happen?
Well, there'll be a lot of pictures that can be taken by the Associated Press and that can pull at the heartstrings of Americans.
We know what happened last time.
I can still remember back to June when I told you, hey, you got to look at this USA Today cover story.
Look at this family separation.
Look at what they're pushing.
And all of a sudden, four days later, this is the biggest story that all of America is forced to talk about.
This family separation situation.
That's right.
And if we don't let them in, I mean, some of them are carrying small children in their arms.
Oh, it plucks at the heartstrings.
And if we don't let them in, boy, are we cruel.
But you know what this reminds me of?
It reminds me of the children's crusade.
That happened in 1212.
Now, not much is known about it, and there may be some sort of myth aspects to it.
Apocryphal, yeah.
Yes, but something genuinely did happen.
There apparently were two such crusades, one that started in France and one that started in Germany.
And these children, and there were some adults involved as well, they were going to set off on foot to the Holy Land.
And out of pure innocence and purity, they were going to convert the Muslims to Christianity and win back the Holy Land.
Not only that, at least one of the groups believed that when they marched down to the boot of Italy, the Mediterranean Sea was going to part, and they were going to march across the dry land all the way to the Holy Land.
Now, what they were going to eat on the way from Italy to the Middle East, I don't know.
But in this case, of course, it was complete fantasy.
They were sold into slavery.
A lot of them died of starvation.
To the extent that we really know what happened, it was a complete flop and a failure.
But this idea that the Mediterranean is going to part and they're gonna walk across That's sort of the way these people are thinking about the US border The US border is going to part like the Mediterranean Sea and they will march into the land of milk and honey but the The frustrating aspect of it is there is a possibility that it could happen.
Oh, without a doubt.
It could very well happen.
Apparently when they got to Italy and it didn't happen, they were all disappointed.
Some of them accused their leaders of having lied to them.
Some of them just stayed there and prayed and prayed and prayed and somehow the waters did not part.
But the gates to America could very well part, couldn't they?
And it doesn't really need prayer.
It just needs a couple of images that are disseminated on by all the corporate media and then lo
and behold you're going to have GoFundMe campaigns to raise money to bring
these people in and redistribute them all across the country.
I mean again we are so close to I mean just look at what just happened
today in California.
The Democratic nominee for president in 2020, who I've told you this is going back a couple years, Kamala Harris, has come out and said, we need to have a family stipend of $500 a month.
No, I'm sorry, $600 a month for families making less than $100,000 because wages are stagnant.
We've got to help out the American people.
They're working harder and harder than ever.
And of course no one's going to say to Ms.
Harris, well a lot of that wage stagnation is because you have an endless supply of labor driving down wages via immigration, both legal and illegal.
It's an amazing thing.
You have these people who are wringing their hands non-stop about increasing inequality in America.
Those articles never point out that you bring people into the country with a fourth grade education, who are illiterate in their own language, who have no skills whatsoever, they're not going to be much of a success in the United States.
They never put two and two together.
But to move along to our next story, those of you who are in the listening audience who come frequently to amran.com, I urge you to read an essay.
It's in our commentary section called, See Nothing, Say Nothing.
And it's about the latest racism scandal.
The idea of a white person who sees something that a black person is doing that is suspicious, distinctly suspicious, and then either reacts negatively to that or calls the police.
This gets put up on, this gets captured in video and put on social media.
And it becomes a huge scandal, and the poor white person, who may very well have had a good reason for doing what he did, loses his job, and name is mud.
Well, the latest had to do with something that took place in St.
Louis, Missouri.
A woman by the name of Hilary Thornton, who apparently also goes by the name of Hilary Brooke Muller.
She was in one of these buildings.
She lives in a building where you have to have a key fob to get in.
And she had opened the door and then a black fellow comes up.
I don't know how to pronounce his first name.
It's spelled D apostrophe.
D'Ariane.
D'Ariane.
Okay.
D'Ariane Towles.
He shows up, and he wants to be let in without showing the fob.
And when she starts telling him, look, you live here, where's your key fob?
Come on.
He starts videoing her, and he just pushes past her through the open door.
She's very upset about this.
And she follows him up to his apartment, and she sees him go in, and she called the police because he did not prove that he belonged there.
Well, apparently he was a legitimate resident.
He did take the trouble to explain that to the police, but not to her.
Correct.
Well, she has come up for all the usual insults, racial profiling, bigotry, this, that, and the other, and she's been fired by her employer.
Something called Tribeca STL, which is a luxury apartment rental company.
But, to me, it's gratifying that Hilary Thornton, or Hilary Mueller, however she wants to be called, has come on and explained that she was doing only what their condo association always tells you to do.
If you don't recognize the person, ask the person to identify himself.
It's standard rules.
And as she says, he wouldn't answer me.
He would not show me one of his fobs.
But this is not something that ever gets discussed, the actual legitimate fears that someone might have.
As soon as a white person calls a black person on something, the black person can get as pussy and as rude and as uncooperative as can be and will be vindicated.
Especially if they videotape it.
If you have a video recording to showcase racism in a place like St.
Louis, it's a micro example of the pervasive macro problem of white racism impacting and keeping blacks from, I don't know, Procuring the American Dream.
I mean, just the other day, another video popped up that wasn't in this fantastic piece that you have at American Renaissance.
Again, I've got to commend it.
It was a great piece.
The author's name is Robert Hampton.
It was published yesterday, October 17th.
See nothing, say nothing.
I recommend everyone listening go to amren.com.
Click on that link and read that great piece because there's story after story, example after example.
The other thing is it draws the conclusion that now that blacks have figured out that an unpleasant encounter with a white person on video, everybody is automatically going to take the black person's side.
Correct.
And it's going to get to the point where no matter what you see, if what you see is a black person behaving suspiciously, you better not call the police.
And we have this slogan, see something, say something.
Because public security requires that people who see something strange or potentially threatening say something.
Well now, as far as white people are concerned, if they see a black person doing something suspicious, it's going to be see nothing and say nothing.
That's the title of our piece.
There's a black state rep in Michigan who actually is trying to put forth a bill to criminalize calling the police on another race.
And we saw that also in New York, I believe, as well.
You're going to start seeing more and more of this.
Is it any other race or just blacks?
It didn't specify.
It was promoted by one of the black supremacist writers for the Detroit Free Press.
You're going to see more and more of this because just the other day another video was taken of a white woman questioning why a black man was at a soccer game.
And I would argue, I mean this woman in St.
Louis, obviously there's a reason why these luxury condos put these rules in place because guess what?
In a place like St.
Louis it's about 50% black, a lot of crime, virtually all of it is committed by Gosh, am I going to say it?
Yes.
By blacks.
This goes for Atlanta.
This goes for all these gentrifying areas where these white liberals think they're going to be safe behind their plexiglass walls and their key fobs.
But again, if you're caught on film simply trying to implement the rules that you were told to do, you become the bad guy.
You become the pariah.
And there is no defense in our country, Mr. Taylor, against an accusation of white racism.
This is something I've been pointing out for years.
You have rules that are set up on the assumption that all the people who are—the unconscious assumption that we're talking about a white society.
And that's why, if you have an honor system at the University of Virginia or in some of the military academies, You expect the honor system to work.
But at UVA, the violators of the honor system so frequently turn out to be non-whites, Hispanics, blacks, that the honor system begins to fray around the corners.
You don't apply it anymore.
It's the same with fair beating.
People who are jumping the turnstiles in subways.
You're supposed to be arrested if you do that.
It turns out that people being arrested are almost never white.
They're these young blacks, young Hispanics, and so you stop arresting people for doing that.
It's the same thing here.
Here you have a rule, but if you try to enforce the rule against a black, oh my gosh, this is a scandal.
Can't have that.
You could say that this started with Starbucks, but the story that they really tried, the media, and again, this is, again, it's trying to show individual examples of micro white racism in a place like Oakland, where this white woman was upset that this black family was doing a cookout in an area that wasn't designated.
Right, it was not designated for cookouts.
And then so she starts to complain, said, hey, we've had fires here.
There's been damage, structural damage.
The black family starts to record.
And the story automatically is turned around.
Hey, here's this white woman oppressing us, claiming that we're violating the law.
And she's engaging in racial profiling.
What is this?
If you enforce the rules, and the person breaking the rules is black, then the rules don't matter.
They get a racial pass.
The rules don't matter.
No.
Yes.
It's absolutely crazy.
The more this becomes publicized and whooped up, The more white people are going to do nothing in the face of what could be real danger.
It's conditioning Mr. Taylor what's going on and this is a point that needs to be made over and over again.
We are being conditioned not to notice the truth.
Not just in crime stats, but in crimes that are actually happening before our eyes.
You and I could rattle off crime stats for individual cities, the FBI, uniformed crime.
We could talk about all that we want to, but when people see something that is out of place, And then they say, you know, I think there's a violation of the rule going on here.
And that person's black.
I don't know if I should do this.
So there's that cognitive dissonance going on already.
But then they actually go ahead and call the police.
But it's recorded.
I mean, we are being conditioned to ignore black criminality happening before our eyes.
And that's a terrifying prospect.
It's potentially extremely dangerous.
But now you were going to tell me about this movie.
First Man.
I have not seen it.
Apparently, it's gorgeously filmed.
You're a big fan of this movie, but tell me, what were your observations about it?
Well, I'll just be quick, because I do want to do something on what this movie kind of represents, write a longer piece.
I recommend everyone listening to put aside the civic nationalist nonsense that came out about Oh, there's no flag that was raised.
I can't believe that.
The flag is all throughout the movie.
It's ubiquitous.
The American flag.
The movie is about one... So the fact of it not being planted on the moon, in your view, is not a particularly... It's absolutely irrelevant when you see the film and the way that the director, the way that they decided to cast this as a story about Neil Armstrong played, you know, played Powerfully by Ryan Gosling.
I mean, Neil Armstrong never asked to be the first man on the moon.
It was the fact that he was wedded to the concept of duty and he always did his job.
That's the most powerful thing about these Mercury and Apollo astronauts.
It really wasn't about the celebrity in a lot of ways.
It was about duty to the job.
And Neil Armstrong was selected to be part of Apollo 11 and the story of what takes place.
I don't want to give away any spoilers but one of the things that is so fascinating is a couple years ago that movie Hidden Figures came out, Mr. Taylor, and it tried to retcon the whole concept of what happened and we're led to believe that three black women were responsible for the entire Apollo program when it turns out that all these women really did was 8th grade level math to plot the trajectory of the Apollo and there were a number of people fact-checking.
Well, there is a concerted effort by Hollywood The Academy Awards are, you know, Academy Awards are so white.
The controversy came out a couple years ago.
There's a big push for diversity in all the nominations.
And what's fascinating about First Man, they were the director, the script writer, and cinematography.
They couldn't lie about The race.
They try to make it accurate.
They try to make it as accurate as possible.
And there was this great story on Yahoo where the script writer basically says, and I'll quote from him real quick, let me pull it up here.
And at the time, it was all white men.
And that wasn't right, but that was what it was.
So if you're going to be technically accurate in part, we're so technically accurate because we're
trying to shed this new perspective on a narrative that's been sugar-coated, you've got to be accurate
and to pick the time for all its strengths and flaws, end quote.
It's like, no, wait a second.
One of the more powerful points in the movie is, Neil Armstrong is in Washington because he's
been tasked to come and meet with senators to explain why we're spending all this money to go to the
moon.
This is in 1967.
It's happening at the same time that the horrific accident of Apollo 1 took place with Gus Grissom, Roger Chaffee, and I think Ed White was the gentleman's name.
I think I got that correct.
The three Apollo astronauts died in that routine check.
So sadly juxtaposed.
You have Neil Armstrong and he says to the Senator, we've only been flying for just over 60 years.
Do you not understand what we've accomplished?
And you think about that quote where the script writer says there were flaws and there were problems.
Mr. Taylor.
We accomplished going to the moon in 65 years from the first flight.
The first flight, I think, was December 3rd, 1903.
The Wright Brothers and Kitty Hawk.
And then we land on the moon on July 20th, 1969.
I mean, my God!
Quite a leap for mankind.
It's quite a leap for mankind, but for the ruling elite now in Hollywood, they are repulsed by having to showcase reality for what it was.
And it was a bunch of white men who, their combined collective efforts.
So everybody has to hang his head and apologize for the fact that white men got us from Kitty Hawk to the moon in what, 65 years?
Less than 66 years.
Shameful.
And this movie, again, I cannot recommend our audience.
You guys are intelligent.
You're not going to be swayed by this idea that you can't see the movie because the flag wasn't planted.
The flag was planted.
There's a beautiful panoramic shot of the lunar module on the moon with the flag as Neil Armstrong walks back.
Go see this movie in theaters.
If you can see it in IMAX, it is spectacular.
Well, very good.
I'll put that on my list.
You haven't seen a movie at theaters and what?
Oh, let's see.
Well, as a matter of fact, I saw a movie in a theater just this weekend.
Just this weekend?
Well, what was that?
Well, you really want to talk about this?
Just go briefly, yeah.
It is a movie called Race War.
Provocative title?
Yes.
It was created by a black film company called Black Channel Productions and I was interviewed for it and I was invited up for the New York premiere.
I wrote a piece about this.
It is on the website.
It's called What Black People Want.
And it's a very disappointing movie in a way because it's based on the assumption that all of white society is composed of people who have this abiding resentment for blacks.
The police, of course, they're just purely in the business of arresting innocent blacks.
That the justice system is designed to control and imprison blacks.
That white people everywhere, certainly anybody who's got anything to do with Donald Trump, are just naked white supremacists.
And I'm quoted saying the things that I usually say, and they just assumed that everyone in America, every white person in America has a racial consciousness, that my thoughts reflect those of all white people, that white people cannot be trusted, there was never ever a shred of goodwill in anything that white people did for or about blacks.
I tell you, in the Q&A afterwards, I was in a panel discussion with a guy who was... They put me on stage afterwards, you know.
Was it hostile?
It was hostile, but not dangerous.
Okay.
And, you know, no white people in the room.
It's a black audience.
This theater is full of people who... They all share this view of just generalized white malevolence.
And the guy that was opposing me, his name is Kaba Kameini, or at least that's his new name.
He was originally called Booker Taliaferro, Booker T. Washington, but that's not good enough.
He wants to be an African name.
And he's one of these people who thinks that Africans populated the entire globe.
They got to the Americas before anybody else did.
That they were crisscrossing the Atlantic over and over and over.
Telepathically?
Or was it actually physically?
No, no, no.
Actually physically.
Actually physically.
Before Leif Erikson or anybody else.
Yes, they were doing it.
And on a couple occasions I said to them, look, nobody in America Or certainly if there is such a person, it must be just one or two if there are any.
Nobody wants black people to be in jail rather than working and paying taxes.
We've got deficits as far as I can see.
Nobody in America wants to be spending $30,000, $40,000 a year housing black people if they could conceivably be productive and making a living and paying taxes.
It just doesn't make sense.
Nobody wants this.
No, no, no, no, no.
That's exactly what they want.
Because they hate, they hate black people.
Then the other one, I talked about the importance of separation.
I think, you know, clearly you and I see something like Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin.
I see one thing, you see another thing.
I'm not, I think I'm right, you think you're right.
Yeah.
This is just irreconcilable difference.
Yes.
We need to go our own way.
And I said, when you people are talking about, you know, having their solution was to have their own businesses, buy from each other.
I said, think big.
You're thinking small.
Build your own Wakanda.
I got a bit of a round of applause for that.
But the reaction of the moderator and the others, this guy is dangerous.
Jared Taylor is dangerous.
And I said, look, I'm not dangerous.
I think, I think you should get off the white man's plantation, build a place where you have your destiny in your own hands.
And I said, the presumed separatists who want to build a black state like Louis Franco, in fact, they're all frauds.
Deep down, they realize that they're better off living with white people and keeping whitey on the hop with constant charges of Racism, exploitation, etc., etc.
In any case, it wasn't my plan to talk about this, but it was a most edifying experience, and it was really rather dreary to think that Here in the United States, white people in the United States, ever since the 1950s, 1960s, in some cases all the way back to the 1940s, most white people have poured an enormous amount of moral energy into doing what they think is right for black people.
And yet you have these people who are absolutely convinced that we have this vicious white supremacist system, we have a vicious white supremacist in the White House who wants nothing but bad things for black people.
I mean, what is it going to take?
It's the exact opposite.
He cannot stop touting what he's done to help blacks out.
That's all he does.
And like you said, these individuals are blinded by their animosity.
Yes, that's what I told him.
I said, when Donald Trump brags about the fact that the black unemployment rate is lower than it's been in, what, 25 years, whatever it is he's saying, is he really thinking, Tom Conant, I wish these black people didn't have jobs.
These reports are terrible.
Get these numbers lower or higher.
Get them out of jobs.
Get them sleeping under bridges.
Round them up and put them in prison.
Is that what they really think?
And of course they have no answer to that.
But just the cuckoo, cuckoo stuff they believe.
About white people, just this abiding, consuming malevolence.
I said at one point, you know, in a way you flatter yourself.
White people did not get up in the morning and think, what can I do to be bad to black people today?
No, most white people don't even think about black people.
They're too busy paying the mortgage.
They're paying the bill to get their kid's teeth straightened.
They're making sure the house doesn't leak.
That they're not even thinking about black people.
Or if they are thinking about black people, they're thinking, what can I do to help black people?
Because we've mortgaged our future on this concept of equality and that somehow it's still white people's fault that there are all these problems that are persisting.
You know, it's funny what you said.
Go build your own Wakanda.
I was thinking of a poem you should read next time.
I just wrote this.
Wakanda awaits.
Don't let The white man separates you from your Afrofuturist fate.
Yes, well, don't let him wait.
But you know, they said, Taylor is a snare and a denusial and a snake and a liar.
I kept asking, how am I a liar?
How am I a danger to you?
I'm encouraging you.
I said, I want black people to be the best possible black people they can be.
Go out and do it.
And I quoted Marcus Garvey to them.
I said, I'm more of a Garveyite than you are.
Up, up ye mighty race!
Come on, show us what you can do!
We should all be Garveyites.
May we be so honored to have that concept.
And I might be so bold to say that Jerry Taylor is probably the most honest American left in this country.
And the slings and arrows that you've taken for that honesty, even in the face of a crowd that... It's as if Wakanda is a concept that Only is going to be possible when the last white man is gone.
In their eyes.
You know, I probably should have been even more forceful.
In the movie they talk about, we just have to believe in ourselves, we have to pool our resources.
I said, look, you don't believe in yourselves.
You are not merely not thinking big.
You all are cowards.
Because you know deep down, if you got together and tried to build something, you'd end up with Detroit, or Newark, or maybe even Haiti.
That's why you think I'm dangerous.
Because I really want to put you to the test, and you know you will fail.
I didn't go that far, but that's what I should have said.
Next chance I've got, if I run into a bunch of people like that, that's what I'm going to say.
That's what they deserve to hear.
Only the truth.
Nothing less, nothing more.
But anyway, moving on to a story that we did plan to talk about.
This is something about genetics and identifying people.
Recently, as you know, we talked about this when it happened.
There are enough people now who have gone to one of these 23andme and ancestry.com places and have their DNA on record such that if you have access to that information and you have a piece of DNA, say it's a crime suspect, you can load that up and you can say, Our suspect is related to this guy, he's related to this guy, he's related to this guy.
He must be, and then you can identify them.
Correct.
Boy, astonishing!
Now, a study that came out just this week said that these days, these days, There is enough genetic information on Northern Europeans so that 75% of people in the... well, at the present time about 60% of Northern European whites can be identified just from the information that's available, not necessarily in the biggest databases, but in just small ones.
All you need, apparently, is 2% of a target population's DNA to be available to identify just about anybody.
And so they have gone, what they've done is looked at two relatively small databases, one called GEDmatch, And one called MyHeritage.
And these are open source either to police or to anybody who wants to see if they're looking for relatives.
And at the present time, just with these limited databases, they can determine the identity of 60% of the time of any random person whose DNA they upload.
I think this is extraordinary and pretty soon they're going to be able to identify, you know, 90%.
It'll be no trick at all, especially if police have access to the much larger databases such as 23andMe and Ancestry.com.
The other thing that I think is quite fascinating is now they're coming up with DNA-based mug shots.
Yeah.
You can collect DNA from a crime scene and you analyze this stuff and say, well, you know approximately what his age is, what his race is, what his hair texture is like, and even, and this seems extraordinary to me because the genetics of facial features are pretty complicated, they're coming up with quite remarkable Visual representations of what the person is going to look like.
This is all open source, as you know, but at some point someone is going to monetize this and they're going to find ways to offer this to police departments across the country as a way to, hey, you want to get your crime rate down to as low as possible.
All you have to do is implement this.
As long as you can find DNA at the scene of a crime, you can start to get Suspects.
That's right.
Really quickly.
So be on the lookout, our listening audience, for the company that starts to find a way to monetize this and then sell this to police departments.
Another reason to be a law-abiding citizen.
It's getting trickier and trickier.
All this surveillance camera that's all out there.
That's all Palantir.
We've talked about this because in New Orleans, Palantir, that's where they're implementing some of their test cases and In New Orleans, of course, the ACLU, they're all up in arms because, oh my gosh, you're just showing all these blacks committing crimes.
Well, if we could find a white person to commit the crime, I guess we'd show them too.
So again, we're seeing That in the 21st century, crime is going to become tougher and tougher to commit because from DNA to surveillance cameras everywhere, going to a central command location, it's going to be very easy to figure out what's going on.
And of course, that's one of the reasons why we're seeing so many people upset because, gosh, we've got to, as you noted, as patterns emerge, whether it's jumping a turnstile or whether it's engaging in some behavior that you're going to be That's going to negatively impact blacks?
Well, that's right.
But to me, it's remarkable that all you need is 2% of the population have its genetic information available to match practically anyone in that population.
Apparently, all they need to know is the real point of departure for these identifications is if they can find a third cousin.
And apparently, the average person has about 800 people who are that degree of relatedness.
And if they can find one, or maybe two, then they can pinpoint the person.
It takes a certain amount of specialized family tree building to do this, but pretty soon they're going to have all these computers programmed to look this up.
Bam!
And the point is, Your DNA doesn't even have to be in one of these databases.
Just so long as some third cousin of yours, one of those 800 people out there, might have signed up and spat in a cup and got his DNA analyzed.
That's extraordinary.
As Mr. Taylor said jokingly, keep abiding by the law, but hey... I'm not joking.
I'm not joking.
You said it somewhat facetiously.
Of course, because we have a great audience that does abide by the law.
Remember, at the end of the day, when you send your saliva or a family member sends this off, guess what?
That company, that DNA testing company, is going to find a way to monetize that data you're sending.
Same thing with Facebook and Google.
All that data is being monetized.
We're running out of time, but I did want to talk about Australia.
There was a remarkable thing happen this week.
Pauline Hanson, with whom our readers are probably familiar, she has been in and out of Australian politics and she has been very straightforward about wanting to preserve Western civilization, white civilization.
She's pretty explicit about it.
Her party proposed a measure in the Australian Senate, a parliamentary motion declaring, quote, it is okay to be white.
It is okay to be white now.
Apparently what happened is that the government, the people who are running the government, it's a combination liberal and conservative party, they read this thing as an opposition to racism and they instructed all of their senators to vote in favor of it.
Well, even with that vote in favor of it, the vote still managed to fail.
31 to 28.
But 28 senators voted for it, including several government ministers.
And afterwards, the Liberals and the Greens were saying, ah, you didn't realize that you are voting for a white supremacist sentiment.
Labor senator.
Penny Wong.
I guess she's one of those early English convicts who came over.
Labor Senator Penny Wong said the phrase was used by neo-Nazis and white supremacists.
And she's saying, no, no, don't you dare pretend that this was a mistake.
She says, now you want to come in and say, oops, we made a mistake.
Well, we don't believe you.
No one believes you.
And everybody knows this is just a craven, pathetic attempt to try to clean up your mess.
She said, well, believe it or not, They decided to bring this up for a second vote, a second vote, so that they could be on record as voting against the idea that it is okay to be white.
The entire, I mean, Pauline Hanson for some reason was not there for the second vote, but unanimously the Australian Senate has voted against a measure to say it is okay to be white.
And Senator Hanson, to her credit, she didn't attend this recommitted vote.
She told reporters, quote, we need to ensure that our white civilization, our western civilization, must be protected and looked after, end quote.
And I think she's quite right when you think that they actually had to do this recommitted vote and everyone voted that it's not okay to be white.
This just leaves me goggling, frankly.
Before we started talking to make this podcast, we were wondering what the situation would be in the United States.
I think this would put a lot of people on the spot.
It would put people so much on the spot that they simply would not vote.
They would find some procedural way.
Abstain.
To abstain because who can be opposed to the idea that it's okay to be white?
If it's okay to be black, Hispanic, Asian, can you really say it's not okay to be white?
But here the entire Australian Senate is saying it's not okay to be white.
The only person I think who might actually say that it's okay to be white is maybe Steve King.
I think that you would see a similar situation to what happened in Australia when they recommitted to the second vote.
We know every Democrat, but I think every Republican, save Steve King, would agree.
I'm sorry, would state that no, it's not okay to be white.
You know, I suppose, perhaps I'm naive, but I think even a few Democrats would be hard-pressed to vote against a resolution that says it's okay to be white.
You think they have all swaddled the Kool-Aid to the point that they could not bring themselves to say that it's okay to be white?
Oh, they're binging on the Kool-Aid.
They can't get satiated on the Kool-Aid.
They want to drink as much of that as possible.
That's what propels.
That is what is That's what they're trying to use to get their constituents to the polls.
I mean, again, identity politics is the future until white people start to elect individuals who are going to be capable of forcibly saying, you know what, it is okay to be white, like our friend down in Australia, Miss Hanson.
Until we have that, no, we're not going to get anywhere because the individuals that have been elected to the Republican Party are wedded to equality.
Someday, I would love to see something like that come to vote in the U.S.
Congress, but it's not happening tomorrow.
It's not happening tomorrow, but you know what?
We appreciate, once again, you taking the time to listen to Jared and myself pontificate for nearly an hour.
So for Jared Taylor, this has been Paul Kersey.
Our time is up.
▲
Export Selection