All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 14, 2019 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor
54:35
A Government ‘For the People’?
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to another edition of Radio Renaissance.
I'm here with my trusty sidekick, Paul Kersey.
This is Henry Wolff standing in for Jared Taylor, who is overseas on yet another European speaking tour.
This time he's going to Poland, Lithuania, Estonia.
He'll be taking part in some interesting events there that I'm sure you'll hear about later on this podcast.
But to just jump right into it, we've got some breaking news hot off the presses that a spending bill has been presented to Trump and he is now claiming, according to Sarah Huckabee Sanders, that he is going to sign it.
It's passed the Senate with something like 80 votes.
It's surely going to sail through the House now that it has Trump's endorsement.
And the bottom line of this thing is that as far as our issues are concerned, it's a disaster.
That's putting it politely, Mr. Wolf.
I mean, this bill, as Mark Kikorian notes, it's going to double the number of H-2B workers.
So basically, hey, we want our jobs replaced legally.
Yeah.
This is just insane.
There's a lot of nonsense in it.
Of course, as a non-profit organization, we don't endorse or support any legislation or anything like that, but we can give commentary on what this legislation will do as far as immigration goes.
Mickey Kaus, Ann Coulter, Ryan Gerduski, these people have been great sources on Twitter.
We've gone through the bill and seen what's in it.
The bill is, as our friends on the left would say, problematic.
It's not just problematic.
Let me read Ann Coulter's tweet that I believe puts it succinctly as to what this represents.
She tweeted out, There's no coming back from this.
No emergency or presidential powers will allow him to build the wall ever
after he signs this bill.
Trump has just agreed Hey, that was a Freudian slip.
Trump. Trump.
Trump has just agreed to fully open borders.
That's Anne's latest tweet.
This is Queen Anne who, up until about a month ago, Donald Trump was following her and about 50 other people.
He stopped following her because she was so critical of him before the first shutdown.
But she, to coin Pat Buchanan's phrase, or to riff off of it, she was right from the beginning of this whole affair.
And Trump has been definitely a disappointment.
The bill apparently has, is de facto amnesty.
Yes.
For basically any illegals who are enterprising.
And the reason is because it has all these provisions in it about unaccompanied minors.
Unaccompanied minors are going to become, effectively, the golden ticket.
Shields.
Yeah, shields.
Human shields for whole swaths of immigrants here illegally after this bill passes.
Basically, people who are either sponsors of these unaccompanied children or potential sponsors.
So, what does that mean?
Potential sponsors?
I don't even know if it's defined in the bill.
Presumably, that could be anybody in the United States.
Now this is one of those bills that was dumped on Congress, what, yesterday?
They had a few hours to even read this.
Some really good people have been doing tremendous work, as you stated, on Twitter.
Guys like Ryan Grodusky, Daniel Horowitz of Conservative Review.
Daniel Horowitz just pointed out, look, this is the definition of a cuckservative.
This bill, if he signs this, and only 17 members of the Senate voted against this.
Some of the better ones, I think Ted Cruz.
Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton, Perdue.
This is one of those bills, though, that repudiates the whole concept of Make America Great Again.
Donald Trump has done a few positive things since he's been president.
For those listening to this podcast, You know that Jared Taylor, he doesn't exactly endorse Donald Trump's moral stance and his moral fiber, or perhaps lack thereof, but you have to give credit where credit's due, Mr. Wolf.
He has done some positive things, but this is the issue that got in the presidency.
Yeah.
Build the wall.
He just held that rally down in El Paso.
35,000 people show up for this rally where all they're saying is build the wall, build the wall.
And what's happening?
Oh, it's a disaster.
And so not only can potential sponsors be exempt from deportation, but anyone in their household.
Anyone in a potential sponsor's household is exempt from deportation.
Essentially, this is just a mass blanket amnesty, assuming there's not something we're missing here.
So there's really even no point of anchor babies or anything else.
You don't need a baby who was actually born here.
You just need to pay a cartel to bring a child across the border, which is going to cause all kinds of, you know, Violations against human decency.
A massive humanitarian crisis is the way that a number of people have labeled this bill.
If it's passed, what it's going to do, like you just said, there are reports that there are a couple more caravans, one potentially totaling 30,000 plus people, which is full of, I think they said it's one of these that's obviously other than Mexicans, OTMs, so it's Africans, Guatemalans, Hondurans, Arabs.
This is the camp of the saints.
And our friends over at the Social Contract just came out with, I think, a sixth edition of that book, Camp of the Saints.
And it's important.
Dust off your copy of that book and understand this bill basically guarantees the legal right of a Camp of Saints to happen.
Well, what did we get in exchange for this disastrous quasi-de facto amnesty?
We got $1.4 billion in wall funding, which, you know, Not much.
Trump was asking for 5.7.
The estimated total cost of the wall is $25 billion.
So we're talking about roughly, potentially 4, 5, 6 percent of the wall will be funded.
But then there's a catch.
The wall, according to the bill, can only be built in what's called the Rio Grande Corridor, which is just part of the Texas border.
And it just so happens to be the part of the Texas border that is full of the most liberal people that that state has to offer.
You've seen that map of Texas that shows the voting patterns.
This is the area that's all blue.
Yeah.
That's all blue.
Yeah.
And that's significant because the bill also stipulates that Local communities can have to be consulted before the wall is built there.
And so what they're going to do is they're going to contact the local communities.
The local communities are going to say, no, you're not building a wall here.
And no wall is going to get built.
They're going to look to federal lands.
But wait, the bill says you can't build on federal land.
It does.
So all these parks and stuff.
So yeah, basically very little of the wall is going to be even able to be built with that 1.4 billion.
So essentially we got nothing except a mass amnesty, H2Bs, and Basically, it's a disaster.
Well, and some other things that it does, it also limits the ability of ICE to do its job, as well as the Border Patrol.
It basically handcuffs these organizations.
Yeah, I understand.
It increases chain migration.
It reduces the numbers of beds available at the border, which is going to increase catch and release.
Just across the board, it's just a piece of garbage.
But then we're told that, on the other hand, Trump is going to declare a national emergency with regard to the border.
And at first glance, we might say that that's a good thing.
And you know, we, people have been asking him to do this and so on.
But, uh, then, you know, immediately after he said that he was going to do that, Pelosi came out and said, Oh, well, if this is how we're going to start doing politics now, just wait until we get a president in with a little bit of different values.
And, uh, we'll see, you know, you want to talk about national emergency.
We're coming up on the anniversary of the, uh, the shooting down in Broward County, Parkland shooting.
So why don't we go ahead and declare a national emergency about guns?
How about climate change?
Well, that's coming.
I mean, again, you've talked about how moving forward, the Trump phenomenon was a unpleasant Impediment for the left, but demographics are on the side of the Democrats, and that by 2024, the House and Senate could potentially be controlled, as well as the presidency, by the left.
And we know what is happening right now.
The far left is dragging Democrats in their direction.
White, pale males are going the way of the Dodo.
Yeah.
Yeah, especially if he does it as a national emergency.
Precisely.
anti-white and you know it's it's funny if this wall is built I could see in
eight years it being torn down as a symbolic gesture as a repudiation of Trump.
Especially if he does it as a national emergency. Precisely.
That you can imagine the PR when they take bulldozers to whatever little fence
is built and it's not gonna take a very big bulldozer either if what we've
seen is... I could see leftist organizations fundraising off of would you like to
have a piece of the wall that we tore, that you helped us tear down.
Send us X amount of dollars and we'll send you an even bigger... The SPLC will probably do it.
They'll send you a brick from the wall if you donate to them, so get ready for that.
Yeah, this bill is, again, it's a reminder that the entire conservative apparatus has been poisoned That there really is no institution or organization outside of a few, Mr. Wolf, that really advocate for Americans and for our posterity.
And that's a real tragedy because the Koch brothers and their tentacles control almost every aspect of what we call conservatism, Inc., and their fingerprints all over, all over this bill.
Yeah.
Well, I think at the end of the Trump presidency, whether it's whether it's in Two years or six years.
I think we'll look back and we'll say that, you know, Trump wasn't able to accomplish a lot in terms of policy, but the things he was able to accomplish were to show people just how illegitimate conservatism inc is, and also just how illegitimate the media is.
Well, how anti-white the media is.
And some of the stories we're going to talk about don't tell perfectly.
And we'll talk, we'll talk about that now.
We've finally reached what I think we could say is the denouement of the Covington story,
Covington Catholic Boys.
Something called the Greater Cincinnati Investigations, it's an independent investigatory firm, has
issued its report.
And in it, they said that they found no evidence that the Covington students did anything,
quote, offensive or racist.
The closest you could come to that is they said that a couple boys did tomahawk gestures toward the Indian to the beat of his drum, but they didn't even find that to be offensive or anything.
The investigators said, quote, the statements we obtained from students and chaperones are remarkably consistent.
Wow.
Imagine that.
Almost as though they're telling the truth.
Exactly.
This is an investigation, Mr. Wolfen, to our listeners at home.
Sit down when I tell you this.
They interviewed 43 students and 16 chaperones and went over hours of video and social media content to come to this conclusion.
This was a legitimate investigation as if this was a murder or if there was an audit of some massive government program to figure out
what was going on.
When clear and day all you have to do is look at the one of the videotapes and realize,
wait a second, all of the blue check marks who declared war on these white boys were lying.
No, but the, uh, the cucked Bishop of Covington, Bishop Foyes, and you know, we all know that the diocese, if you've been following this story, initially came out and condemned these boys before anything came out.
Well, now, uh, they wanted to wait before they said anything fully exculpatory of the boys.
They wanted to wait until this independent investigation came out.
Well, Nice of them to wait now, once the boys have been exonerated very clearly in the public eye.
They decided to sit on it for a little while.
But Bishop Foy says this, he says, Taking everything into account, our students were placed in a situation that was at once bizarre and even threatening.
Their reaction to the situation was, given the circumstances, expected, and one might even say, laudatory.
Wow!
One might even say laudatory.
So you got a long statement here from Bishop Foyes, but totally absent from the statement is any apology.
No, there's not going to be an apology.
No, they can't.
Again, like you said, think about all the institutions, the very institutions that these boys were going to support at the March for Life.
The March for Life threw these kids under the bus immediately.
We can all remember the National Review I don't remember the exact story, but they ended up deleting it because it was so shocking that they would even publish this.
And the way they waxed on about the Indian and his Christ-like tranquility in the face of such bigotry.
These people are just itching to cuck.
They're right on the edge of their seats just waiting to bow before their overlords.
It's truly pathetic.
And you see this from the bishop, Bishop Foyes.
There's no apology toward the kids.
They didn't say, oh, yeah, we goofed.
I know that there have been in the past, but there was nothing in this final statement about that.
No attacks on the Indian guy, activist, Nathan Phillips, who got all this started by lying.
Not even a statement that he had lied.
The kids never said build the wall.
He made it all up.
He's an agitator and they won't go after him.
But they were totally willing to go after their own constituents, their own members of their diocese and their schools.
They were willing to jump all over them, but they won't jump all over this Indian who, by the way, was getting ready to attack the cathedral.
That's right.
Later that day or later that weekend.
Correct.
They came into the National Cathedral.
Not the National Cathedral, it was the large Catholic one, right?
Yeah.
But they go there and they're banging their drums.
I mean, this was a coordinated media assault.
And think about this year.
It's only February 14th.
Happy Valentine's Day to all of our listeners, by the way.
Oh, yes.
Happy Valentine's Day.
Happy Valentine's Day.
Think about all of the The media assaults have really transpired to try and throw white people under the bus particularly.
You had the incident that people have all forgotten about to start the year.
The Jasmine Barnes incident.
This poor 70-year-old black girl is gunned down in front of her family and one of the family members says it was a white guy in a red truck.
That did it.
So for seven days, starting at the very end of 2018, through about January 7th, 2019, every newspaper was running stories about, oh my god, we gotta find this white guy in a truck.
Was he a Trump supporter?
You had Houston black pastors coming out saying, this is only happening because of Trump, and Trump's America, and he's emboldening racists again, and there were massive protests that were going on.
Even though they knew that the woman was lying and within about four days they realized, wait a second, something's not right with this story.
Wow.
And it turns out... It's obviously the same thing with this, I don't even know how you pronounce his name, Jussie Smollett or whatever.
Jussie Smollett.
But yeah, just remember, two black gangbangers killed this poor girl and the story was dropped immediately because it served no purpose in the anti-white narrative.
Watch how the Smollett story is going to shape up because I just saw that police have taken in for questioning.
Two people, they landed at O'Hare, and one of them, and they believe it's the two people
who were in that grainy photograph that they released to the public.
And one of them happens to be an extra on the set of Empire.
Well, here's the funniest thing about the Smollett story.
We're not going to talk about this at length, but just real quickly, he was on Good Morning America, ABC, did this interview with one of the black hosts, and she was very sympathetic in the interview.
But she did question, you know, do you understand that people are pushing back?
And he talked about how, oh, this is, you know, only racists would believe that, that I'd make up the story with a MAGA on a Sunday.
It was this weird response that he gave.
But what he said is, you know, I already said that they were dropping, like, F-bombs and N-bombs, like, that pretty much covers their bigotry.
Do you really think I'd throw in, like, the MAGA thing as an extra comment?
And this is the first time we've actually heard that they're apparently were chanting, you know, N-bombs at him.
This has never come up before.
Until this interview.
Well, I think he said that they dropped an N-bomb at him as As they were running away.
That's what he told the police, but now he's saying that they let it off with that.
In the 60 Minutes interview, he said that they let it off.
They said, hey, you know, you, uh, in, you know, from Empire or whatever.
And so anyways, now police are questioning this extra from, uh, the set of Empire who, uh, my understanding is he's black and...
And a close friend of that fellow.
Well, there's a great story on American Renaissance by Robert Hampton, I believe, about this whole story.
And what's just so shocking about all this is that anybody believe this.
It's 2 a.m., it's negative degrees outside in Chicago, in an area that's heavily black and heavily gay, and you just have two random white guys who watch Empire.
Right.
Come on!
I mean, I couldn't name anybody that watches a show that is right-leaning.
Empire is one of those shows that is so over-the-top that you wonder, gosh, how was this on Fox?
Shouldn't this be on black entertainment television?
And this new update that you're giving me, I have not read about this.
I cannot wait until this finally blows up in this guy's face.
But it will be dropped very quickly.
Oh, it's going to be dropped so quickly.
But it'll be just like the case you were talking about.
It'll be just like Covington, where the initial outrage and the initial blame and anti-white Vitriol will have been just dumped all over white America and the exculpatory stuff will be whispered on, you know, page 20 of the New York Times or whatever.
And the net effect of it, because you have to look at this, you know, you can't, as people who follow the news cycle very carefully, I mean, we see it all, but most people just catch glimpses of this stuff.
Yeah.
And I bet if you ask people, like, what is the true nature of the Covington situation or what is the true nature Oh, some white guy killed a little black girl.
Yeah.
Duh.
Don't you know that?
It's a time to kill.
People perceive, and perception is reality when it comes to the news cycle, and so it increases the anti-white animus in this country.
And no one is held accountable.
Again, Smollett should go to jail.
If this turns out this alleged assault was all manufactured to cover up some sort of Trist that went wrong.
No, it seems I mean just my Amateur opinion is that it seems like they probably coordinated the whole thing.
Okay, because the police found out about these guys by examining the the rideshare data everyone in the area and I think they're about to do or they have done a This is why it's so fascinating what you just said there about how they're going after Smollett and figuring out what's going on.
When you think about crime in the 21st century and how police using technology and forensics from shot spotter technology to what Palantir is doing with trying to have data centers for police where they have access to every
CCTV, every security camera, where they can piece together what's happening.
What's most fascinating about the Smollett case is that only 60 seconds of his night weren't on film.
Right.
That much of that area of Chicago.
And to be able to find a spot in Chicago where there weren't cameras, they must have had to, like, case that area.
Correct.
And find out exactly where it was.
No, this is why it's going to be fascinating to watch America as we begin to disintegrate and leftists really retreat to the major cities.
They begin to Fortify them a lot of way, as we know that blacks are being forced out.
The underclass blacks are being forced out of San Francisco, Chicago, Washington DC, New York, and what they do to erect technological barriers to protect themselves from the still underclass that will exist there and that will be fascinating.
But you know what's fascinating about this whole Covington story is that there was another outrage, Mr. Wolf.
Another outrage for the Blue Checkmark Brigade to go crazy with on social media.
Uh-oh.
Are you referring to the Esquire situation?
I'm referring to a cover story on one of the more esteemed magazines in the country, and that's Esquire.
And the cover story had the title, An American Boy.
It was a white male from West Bend, Wisconsin, named Ryan Morgan.
It's a profile of him.
A human interest.
A human interest story.
And what happened next could only happen in a country where so many of our elite have swallowed the anti-white mindset.
How dare this happen during Black History Month?
I know.
And, well, what's interesting is they released the cover for their March issue.
Okay, so the story is technically supposed to be released next month, but they released the cover ahead of time as a teaser, and they released it during Black History Month.
You're not allowed to do that.
You can't talk about white people during Black History Month.
And so the fact that they even took the time to explore the life of this 17-year-old boy.
And the tagline for it was interesting.
It said, What it's like to grow up white, middle class, and male in the era of social media, school shootings, toxic masculinity, Me Too, and a divided country.
And that wasn't written by the author, obviously.
She actually has come out, Jen Percy is her name, she's come out and said she didn't choose the photo on the front story, she didn't choose the title, she didn't choose the tagline that I just read.
She said that she was just trying to write a story about white privilege and how far we still have to go.
Actually, Mr. Wolf, if I could read the actual quote.
She wrote this, she did an email to CBS News, because this somehow, this whole controversy mandated the corporate press to, the prestige press, to spend a few minutes on their nightly newscast talking about this.
So here's what she wrote the article quote the article shows how much work we still have to do to educate boys
about inherited White-male privilege it also shows that the teenage years
are an ideal Time to make change
I did not approve the cover image or cover context, and like you said, I found the presentation misleading.
Again, everything is wrapped in an anti-white package.
But it's so funny because here they are, and everyone's complaining about this story because they're saying, we don't need to hear a story about a middle-class 17-year-old from middle America who's white.
We don't need to hear this story.
We hear about that all the time.
But here you are, and I would challenge people to try and find a story like that.
Try and find another story about a guy not, you know, there have been human interest stories about like Rust Belt, Towns Left Behind, stuff like that, and I would argue in part those stories are to kind of denigrate whites in a way, or show whites when they're at their worst, and because that makes upper class white swivel whites, that makes them feel really You know, really full of themselves.
They can like turn down their noses at these retrograde whites.
This is why we hate these people, why they must be replaced.
Exactly.
But so to have like a human interest story about like a middle class white guy who's a Trump supporter in middle America, I mean, that who has like no real big problems in his life.
I mean, just Teenage stuff, but also, you know, he is living through this cultural upheaval that's happening.
It's against men, it's against whites, and so on.
And to feature that is, I would argue, exceptional.
But people were saying, Oh, we hear about this stuff all the time.
This is the water we swim in.
You know, we need to hear about some trans, uh, you know, half Asian, half black, uh, whatever, you know, disabled person.
Like that's what we need to hear about.
But we hear about that stuff all the time.
That's all we hear about.
Yeah.
We don't hear about just American boys.
Just like when foreigners think of Americans, like this kid is what they think of.
And you can't read about those people anymore.
And so it actually belies their whole point.
They're saying, oh, this is white privilege.
Like, no.
White privilege is when you get featured, you're a normal person and you get featured in a story and people are calling for, you know, you to be exiled.
So, currently in Hollywood, one of the main A-list actors is Chris Pratt.
He's a white guy who has, in many interviews, he just got divorced with his wife, but in many interviews he's talked about how he wanted his son to grow up away from Hollywood.
He got attacked a couple years ago because they did a either Memorial Day or July 4th picture of both of them walking outside their house with their hand over their heart, saluting the flag.
Very touching picture.
Last year, he was attacked because he did a muscle and fitness or a men's fitness interview where he talked about how, hey, I'm a little upset there aren't a lot of movies made by Hollywood anymore about the working class.
And people attacked him and he had to apologize.
This is a guy who is one of the main, he's the main actor of the Jurassic World, the Jurassic Park reboot franchise, which is a billion dollar franchise.
He plays Star-Lord and the Guardians of the Galaxy Avengers movies.
Multi-billion dollar franchise.
This guy is an A-lister.
And he was attacked and he had to apologize for saying that.
Of course now there's a war on him because he's marrying Schwarzenegger's daughter.
He's engaged to one of Schwarzenegger's daughters and the LGBT actresses, actors are coming out because he apparently belongs to some quote-unquote bigoted church and he's having to apologize and grovel.
And it's amazing because Hollywood has spent so much money.
Think about Netflix and think of the crap that Netflix has greenlit.
All these pro-black, pro-diversity type stuff, that's all they're force-feeding you.
Well, and what's funny too is that Jay Fielding, who's Esquire's editor-in-chief, he said in the very same issue, which is again forthcoming, he says that the story is part of a, quote, series on growing up now, white, black, LGBTQ, female, that will continue to appear in coming issues. That's all
that appears in issues. So, so yeah, they're going to continue. This was just the one to kick it
off and it, they probably kicked off with it because they knew it would cause a big controversy.
They probably purposefully released the cover this month because it's going to draw a massive
amount of attention to it and people like us are going to talk about it. But their future stories are
all going to be about these people on the fringes of society.
You know, newcomers to this country, people with minority sexual identities, the differently abled, and so on.
You know, so that stuff is coming.
You couldn't have expected just a story about a middle class white guy with no strings attached.
Of course it was going to be followed by everyone else.
You can't have that because any article that appears that doesn't attack white people for their white privilege and for their unearned privilege or whatever you want to call it or for being part of this systemic racist or Implicit bias, whatever new sociological term has been coined to try and state why white males still hold some semblance of power, it's automatically evil.
Right.
And when you have just this normal looking white guy, and I encourage all of our readers and all of our listeners to head over to ARC because I think in a couple days there's going to be a really big piece on this by Gregory Hood.
And it's going to be, again, one of his brilliant pieces where he talks about what this whole
episode means.
And again, it is the idea that there can be no positive examples of white males.
That our society has to be 24-7, 365 programmed from the top down to denigrate whites.
Right.
Constantly.
And, uh, it was pretty telling.
There was, there was one tweet I wanted to talk about where, uh, they said that, you know, this kid is just like any other kid.
He's gonna have his ups and downs.
He's gonna maybe have some anxiety, some depression, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
But there's nothing about being white, which gives this guy any There's nothing bad that happens to him on account of being white.
In other words, he gets no oppression points for being white.
And that's why they argue that we have to hear about all these other people.
Well, first of all, when did it become necessary for you to feel oppressed in order for your life to be interesting?
Like, why do we only have to hear about people who allegedly struggled due to their identities?
And why is that all we have to hear about?
But second of all, there's obviously a massive amount of complaints and grievances that this guy has to endure.
The story itself details the fact that he was berated and harassed at his school for being a Trump supporter.
That's correct.
And this is a fact.
Contra Jussie Smollett like you're not going to get attacked if you walk out in public as a black gay man like in all likely like the number of anti gay hate crimes in last year I think was like 50 in the entire country and who knows how many of those didn't end up like resulting in a conviction.
The number of Trump supporters who were violently attacked, I mean, was at least 50 based on what I saw on social media.
The fact is, if you're a white Trump supporter, you are the enemy of this entire system, of the corporate media, of academia, of the cultural left.
Everyone is gunning for you.
And this case is an example in itself.
People are like, oh, he has no problems that come from being white, and yet you're attacking him for being white.
Correct.
That's the whole point of this, and that's why it was important to juxtapose the whole Covington situation again.
Remember how crazy those three days were, when the story broke, When people who are attached to right-leaning publications were even jumping on it and saying, oh, this is terrible.
Then they would apologize and then they tried to ride the coattails of what was going on without really pointing out that, no, this really is only a story because there is anti-white animus animating the left, animating these blue check marks.
That is what motivates them.
That's what, when they wake up, they think, gosh, we got to find a story that we can use to It's the gas in their tank.
Yeah, exactly.
We've got to do everything we can to paint Trump supporters as bigots.
And here it was, these kids at a right-to-life march.
It's the moment they'd all been waiting for.
Oh, it was a picture-perfect moment.
And you know what?
Again, there were a few people who were instrumental in turning that story and flipping it.
And I do think that we will see some lawsuits come out of this.
I think that there are a number of journalists, a number of Well, it's not.
and actresses and personalities that are going to be sued by the lawyers of some of these students.
And I hope that they settle out of court for some substantial amounts that we never know about,
but that that will shut up some of these blue check marks.
And again- Well, it's not, because you saw just days
after the Covington situation that happened, they were ready to jump all over this Jussie Smollett story
and just buy that hook, line, and sinkers.
So they're not going to stop.
Any chance that they get, they're like, oh yeah, let's go ahead and reprint, you know, this is MAGA country, you know, as though like that would actually happen.
And everyone from President Trump on down has condemned these alleged attackers.
I'm surprised the Senate hasn't voted on it yet.
Why hasn't the Senate voted on it?
Liberty signaling on everything else.
Yes, and unlike our Senate, which doesn't do anything productive except give mass amnesties to illegal immigrants, we should turn now to Hungary.
Which is a real country, which is doing real things, and it's very interesting to contrast the situation going on there with what we have going on here.
This past Sunday, Viktor Orban announced during his State of the Nation Speech, which I like state of the nation a lot better than state of the union.
Exactly, there is no union.
Come on, when you have states in our country that can openly rebel against the president to have troops on the border, like California just did with Governor Newsom saying, ah, it's too expensive, let's get these troops off the border.
But there's no nation either.
Exactly.
But in Hungary there is, there is a nation and they're trying to keep it that way.
So, Viktor Orban announced what's effectively a pronatalist policy.
He said, he announced it thusly.
He said, there are fewer and fewer children born in Europe.
For the West, the answer to that challenge is immigration.
For every missing child, there should be one coming in, and then the numbers will be fine.
But we, in Hungary, do not need numbers.
We need Hungarian children.
Here, Viktor Orban expressly rejects this reign of quantity, this idea that, oh, all we need is numbers and that humans are interchangeable cogs, which is the truth that's at the very core of globalism.
Correct.
And he absolutely rebuts it, rejects it.
And just to contrast that with what Trump said, Trump's disastrous line during his State of the Union speech, where
he said, quote, I want people to come into our country in the largest numbers ever, but they have to come legally.
And you have to wonder if Orban was responding directly to that, where he says, we don't want numbers.
There we don't want numbers.
We want Hungarian children.
Numbers are irrelevant if there's not a Hungary left to preserve.
That's right.
And Hungary is not a territory or a collection of principles.
It is people.
Exactly.
There's a book review of this new book published by Regnery called A Race in America.
And conservatives, again, they are going to make money off of this idea that we're going to fight back to our Monuments being torn down.
We're going to fight, you know, give us your money, you know, read this book, and we're going to showcase all these horrible stories of cities being renamed, schools being renamed, our entire civilization being erased, and yet they have no way to counter it.
Except to say that, you know, don't worry, America's going to live on in our hearts.
We promise.
Yeah, in our hearts.
That's actually how the book ends.
Spoiler alert.
There's a review, to plug it, there's a Paul Kersey review on our website of that book.
You can see it at the top of our news feed.
Well, that's a shameless plug, but the point is, think about how powerful repudiating this globalist language is.
This is why Hungary has been Targeted by the United Nations, by the European Union, because they stand firm.
A leader like Orban who just comes out and says, we do not need numbers, we need Hungarian children.
The EU and the United States and everyone else will do all they can to try and bring them to heel.
But yeah, the plan is called the Family Protection Action Plan.
That's what it's translated out to, and it's a seven-part plan.
It's awesome.
It's kind of hard to get the details on the plan in English.
It'll be interesting to see a more detailed report as the plan unfolds.
But some of the prongs, just to go through them, they want to expand a loan program for families with more than two children in order to help them afford, I believe, larger homes than they currently have.
Women who marry and are under age 40, if it's their first marriage, they will get a $36,000 subsidized loan if they choose to take it.
And a third of that loan will be forgiven when she has her second child, and all of it will be forgiven when she has her third.
You know, a lot of people point to the speech Ivanka Trump gave at the July 2016 Republican National Convention in Cleveland as a moment where A lot of white college-educated women warmed up to Trump because she came out and talked about all this stuff about, we want to help women in the workplace.
They did increase the child tax credit.
But think about this, think about how many white American women, what you just talked about, just two of the prongs of this program.
That's affordable family formation.
This is exactly what Tucker Carlson was getting at in his talk which generated so much controversy and criticism from Conservatism Inc.
because he basically pointed out, what is the purpose of government except to help the people?
Yeah, and specifically the family unit.
Exactly.
That is the foundation to counter this globalist Well, that's what social conservatives have said for a while, you know, the family is the bedrock of society, and that goes all the way back to Aristotle.
but they've never been willing to look at the inherent tension between that and the
free market.
Correct.
And they've just assumed that the two are compatible.
And now comes Tucker throwing a wrench into that and saying, well, let's actually think
about this and not just accept things at face value as being sacrosanct.
But to go back to the prongs, we've got, as part of this Hungarian program, they're giving
subsidies I think on the order of about 10,000 US dollars.
dollars.
And keep in mind through all this that Hungary is a much poorer country, GDP per capita, than America.
I don't even think, I don't think Hungary's GDP is as big as Texas' GDP.
Yeah, but per capita.
Precisely.
Much lower.
And they're still doing these massive things.
I mean, it's unthinkable to imagine America doing this, and our GDP per capita is so much higher.
I think about four times as high.
Just off the top of my head.
But yeah, they're giving subsidies on the order of about nine or ten thousand dollars for families to buy seven-person vehicles.
So that they can fit their whole families.
And of course this would never fly in America because people would be worried about the emissions and so on.
But Orban is concerned with increasing the Hungarian population.
Everything else be damned.
Who cares about climate change when there is nation change?
To a point of irrelevancy.
The population decimated by these globalist policies.
Right.
You're not going to have a population around to experience global temperatures that are two degrees higher.
Next prong is that women who have raised four children will be exempt from income tax for their entire lives.
And this is one that I'd like to hear more about because it's kind of unclear to me whether that means, okay, is it only for the woman or is it for her whole family?
For her husband.
Because if it's just for the woman, that's less interesting because it means that she'd have to go back to work in order to really benefit from that.
But it is still interesting from that perspective because they could be encouraging or incentivizing women to have their children first and then go and have a career if that's what they want to do.
And I think you may have answered your question because one of the final things we have written down here is that there are benefits for grandparents who raise grandchildren.
Think about it.
When you have a family, it's a lot easier to have a sense of community.
When you have your family, not just your immediate family, but relatives nearby, Right.
To bond with, to build that community, and to have those associations, and to have traditions, to be able to pass down memories and shared experiences.
And so that's, this is basically a, an injection, a stelloid shot of hope for the Hungarian people that is inspiring.
Yeah.
It's inspiring.
And it's, I mean, these are big benefits, especially if that income tax thing applies
to the husband.
I mean, that would be massive.
But I'm not sure that it does.
But we'll find out more about it later.
But the point is that this is what real countries do.
This is what real countries do.
In Hungary, I think in 2017, they had a population deficit of about 40,000 people.
40,000 people more died than were born.
And, you know, you look at this, you see it's a problem, and instead of saying, oh, let's bring in people from Somalia, you say, let's make it affordable for people who want to have families to be able to do it.
And furthermore, let's give them tax incentives.
Let's have the rest of the country subsidize them, because not everyone wants to have that size family, but everyone wants to live in a nation, and everyone benefits from that.
And so yeah, people who are... there should be... I support things like bachelor taxes.
You know, if you're the cool wine aunt with no children, you should be subsidizing people who I do have children and that should be done through by government fiat.
I think these are very sensible policies and it'll be interesting to see just how well it works in terms of reversing their population decline.
Well, I mean it's worked in places like Israel where Israel has had a massive baby boom because the Israeli government puts the proliferation of the Israeli people as the most prominent goal.
It's almost shocking to even Think in those terms.
It's so hard to imagine a government that actually works in the interests of its people and citizens.
It's so remote of a thing.
For us to even conceptualize, as we're sitting here talking about how our government is doing everything it can to dispossess us.
Yes.
And won't even give us a couple miles of wall along our border to keep out the invasion.
As the VDARE Twitter noted, if this bill passes, a wall is irrelevant, as the Democrats claim.
It's too expensive.
It makes no sense.
Yeah, a wall is irrelevant.
It makes no sense.
Yeah, but we won't go back to that.
Yeah, so that does it for our news roundup.
I think we should go into some reader questions.
We had a reader, a listener, Jake, he wrote in to us and he asked, what is your guys' stance on the fact that crime overall has gone down in the USA for decades, even though non-white immigration has been at its highest?
You know, that's a good question.
It's a great question, and the short answer to the question is that it hasn't.
And not a lot of people realize this, but when people talk about the decrease in crime, they're using as their zero point the 1990s.
And the 1990s were the absolute apex of crime in America.
But if you go back far enough, if you go back to 1960 for instance, the violent crime rate in America was less than half of what it is today.
But nobody looks at that.
So if you actually look at the crime rate, violent or property, all the way back to 1960, it looks like a bell curve where the top of the bell is in 1990s.
And then it starts going down, coincidentally, right about the time of the 1994 crime bill that Bill Clinton passed, which we're now told was the most racist thing that's ever happened, and which Trump's criminal justice reform, the First Step Act- Is gutting.
Is gutting.
Is gutting.
The very things which many people theorize helped bring down the violent crime rates from that apex.
are now being reacted against, and the pendulum will probably swing back.
And one of the things we should note is that let's take a look at the question also.
Even though non-white immigration has been at its highest, yes, but where are those non-whites coming from?
Right.
You have to be honest about crime in America, and the elephant in the room is that it's largely black.
Right.
Largely black.
And largely African American.
Yes.
Because the immigrants we're bringing in these days from Nigeria and so on are not committing crimes.
Not at the rate of native blacks.
Not at the rate of native blacks.
Correct.
We're bringing in people, we're skimming off the top of societies that have Tens, hundreds of millions of people, and we're getting, they're sending their best.
Let's put it that way.
They are actually sending their best, but think about it also.
Ron Unz has done some tremendous research on how Hispanics aren't as violent compared to blacks.
Not nearly compared to blacks.
Now they're still more violent compared to whites, but not nearly to the extent of blacks.
It's really native blacks that are the drivers of violent crime in America.
Yeah, and you can look at any city that we have data on, New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, they used to break down, New York still does, Philadelphia as well, but they'll break down crime stats by race.
Right.
And it is, you know, these cities still have substantial white populations and there's just no white crime.
They're really, it's rare.
That's why Tom Wolfert wrote a whole book about trying to find the great white defendant.
Right.
And this question again, I think that you've already You've done a great job of pointing out the fallacy in Jake's question.
That, you know, compared to what?
Yeah, you've got to compare it to what.
But the other thing is the people, you have to ask, who are we bringing in?
And it's not just the cream of the crop from Africa.
We're bringing in Asians.
And Asians didn't, back in 1960, were virtually non-existent in America.
Almost all Asians came in after 1965.
And now you're at the point where Asians are about 6.5% of the U.S.
population.
And they have crime rates substantially lower even than whites.
And so that, if you're talking about crime rates on a per capita basis, they are a negative relative to whites.
Think about the racial demographics of America in 1994.
America was still over 70% white.
Right.
A very white country.
You know, going back to the time we were talking about the violent crime in the 1960s, Martin Luther King did this interview with Playboy, where he talked about 20 million Negroes in the country were needing a Marshall Plan, where he wanted reparations.
Think about that.
Within that time span, blacks are now, there are 44, 45 million blacks in the country.
Right.
You know, you think about the growth of not just the population, but per capita percentages
and stuff.
And, again, you can't have an honest discussion about crime without talking about black crime.
And so when you talk about non-white immigrants who are coming here, yes, as you noted, you
are getting the best Indians.
You are getting, in large part, some of the best Chinese, some of the best Japanese.
Again, if we wanted a great policy, we wouldn't be having any of this without the Immigration
Right.
We don't need this immigration.
Right.
And so that's kind of irrelevant, but what needs to be discussed, and what the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act did, was indirectly address the black crime problem.
And it was a massive problem at the time.
I have a relative who was a DC cop at the time, and he pointed out that You know, fully half of the people who they were arresting off the streets were under the influence of crack at the time of their arrest.
Yes.
And so you had this massive crack cocaine epidemic going on, and this is in large part why blacks supported, and black community leaders and so on, and legislators supported that 94 Act.
It made their community safer for eventual gentrification by whites.
It was tough.
But it was tough.
They brought in 100,000 new police officers.
It gave $9.7 billion in prison funding.
There was the three strike policy where if you're a repeat offender three times, you're going to get a life sentence.
And since that time, the federal prison population has doubled.
Now, the federal prison population is relatively small compared to the states, but still, a doubling is pretty substantial.
I think it's at about 220,000 now.
And most of these people are very criminal blacks.
No, and there's going to be a piece coming up on AR in the next couple weeks about a lot of the district attorneys that are being elected who are using the Michelle Alexander book, The New Jim Crow, as their Bible.
That book came out in 2011.
She's a black Lawyers criminologists where she talks about how oh my god, the criminal justice system is the new Jim Crow And so they've been influenced by this and so we've seen in places like Philadelphia and st.
Louis These da's basically we can't arrest ourselves out of the problem anymore We've got to stop the prison to we got to stop the school-to-prison pipeline We're not gonna we're not gonna arrest people for certain crimes because too many black and brown people are arrested and yet in Philadelphia the first year after this da came on board and The homicide rate went up I think 15% and the non-fatal shooting rate went up over 20% because they're not going after, they're not implementing broken windows policing anymore.
No, and that's something that's going away, but I would say as far as what's to blame for the crime rates going down, broken windows policing I think has probably been very effective.
You know, just zero tolerance.
And the fact is that now that that stuff has worked and crime rates are down, now people start letting go of that stuff.
What you've seen over the past couple years of Obama's administration was an actual increase in violent crime rates and property crime rates.
First increases in two decades, three decades, since the 1990s.
And the reason was because of all these, the Black Lives Matter movement, police afraid to do the kind of hands-on, broken windows policing that they needed to do because they wanted to improve community relations or whatever.
You had all these consent decrees going on that thankfully Jeff Sessions Justice Department did away with but the pendulum is swinging back.
It's still too early to see what the effect will be of the Trump administration.
But I think the general trend is You know, certainly I don't think his first step bill is going to help anything.
No, the general trend is... The general trend is going to be for the pendulum to swing back and things to get worse and then we'll get a new crime bill that toughens things up and the cycle will continue sinusoidally.
A couple other just quick things before we wrap up here.
I would also, a lot of people point to lead, actually, as a significant factor to why violent crime has decreased.
Yes, they do.
Because lead in gasoline and thereby in the air and blood contamination has decreased and that seems to have an effect on people's proclivity to violence.
Some people have pointed to abortion.
As a possible cause.
Freakonomics?
For decreased crime.
So yeah, it could be any combination of... That was actually the thesis.
You forget about this.
That was actually the thesis of one of the best-selling books of the 2000s.
That was the Freakonomics book.
Freakonomics, yeah.
And a lot of people took on the task, but it's like, well, what if this is true?
Yeah.
Obviously, we're not arguing one way or another.
We're just simply pointing out that was one of the ideas put out as to why crime was decreasing.
It's a theory.
It is decreasing.
But, you know, the mass incarceration, what all these black leaders and so on want to complain about, all these communities being torn apart by criminal blacks being arrested, I mean, that has taken potential repeat offenders off the streets.
Yeah, I mean, again, think about cities where the justice system in a place like Baltimore is so dragged
down because of so much crime that they're able to get pleas because of possession of
marijuana or something.
And now Marilyn Mosby, the Baltimore state's attorney, has basically come out and said,
we're not going to prosecute these anymore.
We're not going to arrest people.
We're not going to prosecute them because too many black and brown people are coming
into the criminal justice system.
A race-based policy has been implemented and the police are, they're up in arms.
They're like, well, what are we supposed to do?
I mean, we're supposed to let these kids just smoke pot in the middle of Baltimore?
I mean, we're trying to bring the city back from the brink of destruction.
And that's what's going to be so fascinating as we move forward into this century as to
which cities recover and which cities are irrevocably lost to the rising tide of color.
And we will keep track of that story on Radio Renaissance.
Well we will, and quick plug guys, If you aren't subscribed, please do so when you go over to YouTube.
Type in AmRen Podcast.
Subscribe to the channel so you'll know immediately when a new podcast is released.
And I think, Mr. Wolfe, you'll be here next week as well.
I certainly will.
Well, we look forward to that podcast.
Once again, Happy Valentine's Day, everyone.
Happy Valentine's Day.
For Henry Wolfe, this has been Paul Kersey.
Our podcast time is up.
▲
Export Selection