All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 30, 2019 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor
59:23
How Not to Be Insensitive on Halloween
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, wherever you are, wherever you are, you're just in time for the latest edition of Radio Renaissance.
Now, I have a little announcement to make about our podcast archive.
Those of you who listen to us on YouTube will have discovered that the archive is no longer there.
But the archive has not completely disappeared, and I will tell you how to find it.
All you need to do is go to the American Renaissance homepage, that's amran.com, and in the menu bar at the top, you'll find Home.
If you mouse over the Home, you'll see AR Podcasts, and you click on that, and every single one of our beautiful podcasts is there, all the way back to the year dot.
So, they are there.
Seek and ye shall find.
Now, tomorrow is going to be Halloween.
And so, Paul Kersey, who is with me, and I'm Jared Taylor, will talk to us a little bit about this celebration of what used to be Americana.
Well, hey, real quick.
Happy Halloween to all of our listeners around the world, in the United States of America, boys and girls, children of all ages.
Welcome once again to a podcast.
As Mr. Taylor said, YouTube channel is still going to have the latest Podcasts will be rolling out there.
The archive, easily found.
Amarin.com.
Just go to the home tab at the top, left-hand corner, and then you'll see on the menu bar drop-down, fourth one down is AR Podcasts.
They're all there going back, I think, to 2015.
Maybe late 2015, early 2016.
Point is, All the content's there, and we're going to give you a great show today, as was alluded to at the top of the hour.
Halloween's coming up, and well, USA Today published a story, Mr. Taylor, a dear listener, that tells parents and offers them a guide to ensure that there's no cultural appropriation this Halloween.
An expert broke down kids' Halloween costumes.
We all know that there's constantly this... there's been a woke war on Halloween probably dating back about a decade.
We've started to see, obviously, white people can't dress up as Indians.
Increasingly, white people can't dress up as anything except for maybe a nurse or a Or maybe a Martian.
Would that be extraterrestrial appropriation?
Well, that could probably be deemed an illegal alien.
I'm sure if you wore a sombrero.
But, you know, one of the main things that this article points out is that a lot of the Disney costumes are offensive.
Because there is increasingly a non-white lineup within the litany of the Disney characters.
So is it appropriate for a white child to dress up as Moana?
Of course, that's one of the Samoan characters from one of the recent movies.
Oh, I'd say of course not.
That's obviously bad.
Can a white child dress up as Cinderella, though?
A white child can still dress up as Cinderella.
Can a black child dress up as Cinderella?
Without a doubt.
In fact, that's one of the things, especially when it comes to the cinema, to the movie theater, I believe that we're going to see increasingly more and more of these movies remade so that they can recast them in a proper racial role by getting the white character out.
Well, cinders sound more black than white to me anyway.
Here's some of the characters that this USA Today piece made sure that white people know they shouldn't dress up as.
Pocahontas!
You might remember back in the mid-90s there was a cartoon that came out.
Pocahontas was drawn rather vivaciously, if I remember correctly.
People said that the proportions didn't really stand out.
They probably stood out too much.
But yeah, white people need to understand that that's something they shouldn't dress up as a mere Indian.
The Aladdin characters.
White children shouldn't dress up as the characters from Aladdin.
That would be Princess Jasmine.
That would be Aladdin the street urchin.
That's something that you definitely can't do.
Can you go as a lamp?
I guess a white person could go as the inanimate object, a lamp, but I guess you'd have to be careful who you say you can rub because you can't get three wishes doing that in our more culturally insensitive times.
Princess Tiana, I think that's from the Princess and the Frog, I guess that's the black character, the movie The Prince and the Frog, which bombed, came out in I think 2009, 2010.
Mulan!
There's going to be a live-action Mulan coming out.
So, white kids, you can't dress up as Mulan.
That's an Asian character.
Basically, you can't dress up as anybody who's not white.
But then anybody else can dress up as a white character.
There's never any such thing as cultural appropriation the other way.
It's actually encouraged that way because then there can be a push to try it.
Just like we're seeing the push to try and make a black 007, James Bond.
We want that to happen.
One more interesting one that the USA Today article notes.
White parents need to be careful dressing their kids up as the Black Panther.
T'Challa.
You need to be careful.
That's a black character.
That's a black empowerment character.
It would send a confusing message.
Right, right.
So, and then finally, it ends with this list admonishing white parents of, don't turn admiration into appropriation.
And I'll just read real quick.
So, culturally significant tattoos.
I guess this would deal with your Samoans, your Maori's who have the tattoos.
Sombreros, ponchos, mustaches, or anything that depicts a Mexican stereotype.
Oh, mustaches, a Mexican stereotype?
I guess so.
Native American feathers, or anything depicting Native Americans.
Right.
A bendy, or things depicting Indians.
A bendy?
A bendy.
I don't know what a bendy is.
Is that that hat that you... Don't know.
I don't know.
There's no risk that I will wear a bendy.
Well, you might inadvertently wear a bindi and then you'd not know it.
Yeah, exactly.
Okay, box braids, dreadlocks, fulani braids, also known as cornrows.
So white people, you can't do that.
You can't mimic and culturally appropriate black hairstyles.
And then finally, any of you white College students out there who are thinking about dressing up as an Arab with a hijab for your party, your mixer, your frat party.
Don't do it.
You know, I'm thinking, I'm thinking.
Maybe, maybe there is just one fictional white character that non-whites are not allowed to dress up as.
Who would that be?
Snow White.
Or is that okay, too?
Can you be black and be a Snow White?
Can you be Asian and be Snow White?
I think you can.
Okay, okay.
Well, I'll shut my mouth.
I think you can.
Again, I think it only goes one way, this concept of cultural appropriation.
So let's wrap this up and move on to a fun story about corporate America and how sensitive they are in this time period.
So Bed Bath & Beyond, they remove painted pumpkins.
Well, they were black plastic jack-o'-lanterns.
They looked actually really cool.
Well, they looked black.
Well, you say that they were removed after blackface comments.
So this is a Bed Bath & Beyond and they removed painted black pumpkins that had white mouths following complaints that they were offensive because they resembled blackface.
So it just took one complaint and they were removed not just in this store near Wetchester but they removed them off of the online store.
I actually went online to try and find one because I thought that'd be pretty cool to buy one of these pumpkins.
I don't think it's offensive.
It's a cool Halloween decoration and you know Halloween is becoming increasingly a corporate Yeah, I understand the NAACP local chapter was raving about this and Bed Bath & Beyond apologized and I suspect the NAACP can expect a fat check in the mail.
But we'll see.
Now when are tires going to be considered racist?
Well, I'm sure, you know, I'm shocked that someone hasn't tried to say that the Michelin Man looks like, I don't know, an updated version of a Klan member with that.
I don't know if you've seen a picture of him recently.
He looks more like a sumo wrestler to me, but that's cultural appropriation.
Okay, so anything else about Halloween?
Yes, one more thing about Halloween.
I think this is going to lead into one of your Ideas coming up.
So, we just mentioned about what college students, what white college students, should not be wearing according to the USA Today piece.
They don't get accused of cultural appropriation.
Well, get this.
More than half of American University students believe that wearing offensive Halloween costumes is not part of free expression and should be punished.
Wow.
I wonder what sort of punishment they have in mind.
I'm sure it's torturous and it's not something that they would recover from quickly.
So get this, the polls was conducted by the College Pulse.
Students were asked, quote, are highly offensive Halloween costumes, such as blackface, a protected form of free speech on campus?
Or should students who wear them be punished?
So, 51% of the students said that people who wear offensive costumes should be punished, while 49% said offensive costumes were a protected form of free speech.
Now get this, students at elite institutions were asked, they were less likely to side with free speech.
58% of Ivy League students signed off on the concept.
Well, you know, most of them are in New England.
I guess the punishment should be bring back the stocks.
Dress them up in the costume, put them in the stocks.
Public stockades.
No, no, no.
Stocks.
But in public so people can come by and put them in Harvard Square, you know, put them on the old campus at Yale and people can throw garbage out there.
Throw tomatoes or vegetables.
Dress them up in their costume and put them in the stocks.
Well get this, an even higher figure, three out of five students within the California State University system said that people who wore offensive costumes should be punished.
Well, bye-bye free speech.
And yes, you're right.
That does lead into a study conducted by the Campaign for Free Speech.
After a major study, it found that 51% of the people in the United States believe that the First Amendment should be updated.
Updated?
Updated, yes.
To reflect the cultural norms of today.
48%, and these are grown-ups.
These are not college students.
They say that hate speech should be against the law.
And as far as punishment for hate crimes, of that 48%, 54% say that they would consider possible jail time.
Jail time?
There's your punishment.
But the rest say they'd be satisfied with a ticket and a fine.
Okay.
Now, interestingly enough, for media personalities, the figures were reversed.
54% of respondents felt that the consequences for media personalities said it should be a ticket, while only 46% wanted jail time for offenders.
Interestingly enough, they are more likely to forgive media figures.
I don't know why that would be.
Media figures probably have a broader influence, so you'd think they should be punished more severely.
But that's not the case.
Now, when it comes to Facebook, Only 38% of survey takers felt that Facebook should allow free speech.
49% said that Facebook should monitor and restrict offensive speech and views.
Now, what is considered offensive?
It shook out like this.
52% of the survey takers wanted racism to be restricted.
That came in number one.
Followed by 50% don't like neo-Nazis.
I thought that's interesting.
I would have thought neo-Nazis were worse than racists, but I guess not.
And 46% don't like radical Islam.
And 35% say Holocaust deniers should be kicked off.
And 20% want anti-vaccine advocates restricted.
Anti-vaccine is fifth in this.
Yes, 20% say that they should be kept offline.
Does that fall under the category of science denialism?
Maybe, maybe.
And then followed finally by 18% who say climate change deniers should be denied free speech.
So there you go.
Wow.
Yeah.
Whatever happened to the marketplace of ideas, you know?
We're going to go socialist when it comes to the market.
There's going to be a command economy, and somebody's going to decide who are the winners and who are the losers.
And I'm afraid when it comes to that, you and I, Mr. Kersey, are going to be among those who are kicked off.
It's fascinating.
Real quick, you've always been one of the first people who have been targeted, whether it was Facebook, whether it was Twitter.
Whether it's been Google, where increasingly you don't even see any of the stories that are published.
Amaran.com even show up on Google searches.
If you hunt hard enough, but you do have to hunt.
Three or four pages, yeah.
Google tries to, they put us on the bottom of the deck when they're dealing the cards.
But, you know, an interesting aspect here is hate speech was not defined in this survey.
Okay.
People apparently all know what hate speech is, but I'm sure if they have any hesitancy as to what constitutes hate speech, there is a reliable source that will tell them.
There are a lot of reliable sources that will tell them.
What do you think is the most reliable?
The ADL.
Maybe the SBOC.
I think they're both experts in the subject, and they can tell them what's HP and what's not.
Well, and unfortunately, increasingly, the ACLU as well.
Uh, wrong.
The ACLU Nadine Strossen is one of the few people, and I have to say hats off to Nadine, who stands up four square for free speech.
She says if it is not against the law under the First Amendment, constitutional free speech provisions, then it should be okay and social media got no business taking it down.
Now, Moving on to something completely different.
Classical music.
This is data from what's called the General Social Survey.
This is a huge database.
It's been collected regularly since 1972 by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago.
It keeps a historical record about what people say and think.
Now, this one, interestingly enough, has been tracking who likes classical music.
Now, interestingly enough, also, the General Social Survey is one in which you can assume IQ of respondents.
It's not tested directly, but you can do that through years of education, profession, etc.
And people do that.
So, the question was, when it comes to liking classical music, is it, in fact, a racial phenomenon?
When you look around the audience of any symphony orchestra, Overwhelmingly white and, depending on where you are, Asian.
So, is this a racial trait?
Well, according to this survey, it's not a racial question.
If you control for IQ, blacks are just as interested in classical music as whites.
If you control for IQ?
If you control for IQ.
In other words, well, let's say it takes an IQ of, say, 125 to really like classical music enough to pay money to go hear a concert.
Well, then, a black with 125 IQ is just as likely to go to a concert or like classical music as a white.
Isn't that interesting?
It's a question of IQ, not of race.
So, when you go to, say, Montgomery, Alabama, I think Montgomery still has an orchestra, and if you go to the audience and it's all white, you find a few blacks, they're all pretty much the same IQ, is what this says, but one of the reasons why the audience is so overwhelmingly white is that when you get to an IQ of 125, whites are 30 times more likely to have such an IQ.
By the distribution model, yeah.
Yes, yes.
Which we're probably not supposed to, but that, let us, let us hasten to add that this is something that reflects only cultural environment.
This is only upbringing.
This is pure environment.
But for the last 100 years, the environment is working in a consistent way, such that whites are 30 times more likely to have IQs that are measured at 125.
Two questions for you.
Okay.
Increasingly you see stores play classical music to repel loiters.
People who are loitering.
I've heard of that.
So I guess this would also fall into that concept.
Well that's right.
Loiterers probably, having little to do, who have nothing important to do, probably have an IQ that are lower than the people who are hurrying to get someplace important.
That'd be just my guess.
Okay.
So it keeps them away.
My second question is, I believe in your book, Paved with Good Intentions, You talk about a number of cities that were once home to high culture, places like Detroit, or Cleveland.
Is it Cleveland?
I don't remember what city it is.
Cleveland used to have an absolutely world-renowned symphony orchestra.
It's hanging on.
I think it still has the Cleveland Orchestra, but they're just barely hanging on.
The one that really matters though is Oakland.
Oakland had a symphony orchestra that was making world-renowned recordings.
It had to disband because, well, there was something of a demographic shift.
So anyway, as the IQ of the United States falls due to dysgenics and to immigration, I guess what that means is, bring on the Ranchero music!
Well, I've read a lot about what's going on in Baltimore with their symphony orchestra, where they've tried to get the city to fund, they're having problems with attendance, Very bad.
No, that's the problem wherever there has been a demographic change.
The Great Replacement has?
But this has nothing to do with race.
Purely IQ.
At least according to this thought.
I thought that was very interesting.
And I'm moving on to the question of monuments, which all seem to be changing and moving.
In this case, it's not actually a monument.
It's a painting in Salem, Massachusetts.
In the city council chambers there has been an array of portraits on the wall and all of them though are of white people.
Oh gosh this is awful.
So what the city council decided to do is remove one of the portraits of a white person and that has to do with that happens to be Andrew Jackson.
Andrew Jackson as we know was a very bad guy and you know what they're going to replace Andrew Jackson with?
Who are they going to replace?
I agree with.
And a woman.
Okay.
This is supposed to be a leader of the Nomkiag tribe, which was supposed to have been there when Salem was settled in 1626.
Now, it seems to me it's going to be impossible to do a portrait from life.
It's probably going to be impossible to do a portrait from anything but the purest of imaginations.
And so for that reason, they're going to hire a Native American artist to do that.
Now, this proposal was led by someone named Elizabeth Peterson, probably a perfectly ordinary white person, and the only counselor who had anything to say about this.
This passed unanimously, by the way, with hardly any discussion.
He said, he called attention to the various portraits.
He says, each is a male and white, no women.
And now there is a slight, slight crack in the reality of the 21st century.
We may now have a Native American woman of Nomkiag heritage.
I'm very glad to have President Jackson moved.
So Jackson is going to hit the trail, the trail of tears, and he's going to go elsewhere.
Likewise, in Norfolk, Virginia, there still stands a 15-foot figure of a Confederate soldier on top of a monument right in the middle of downtown.
This commemorates the last reunion of surviving Confederate veterans.
And there's a law which dates back to 1904 that banned counties from moving monuments of that kind.
Now, here's the tricky part.
It was updated in 1997 to include cities in the ban.
Well, the city has been trying for a long time to move this thing and the city lawyers as well as Virginia Attorney Attorney General Mark Herring have decided that since it's a city that wants to move it, and because the statute went up in 1904, this 1997 ban on cities moving this doesn't apply.
This is a really weasel-worded decision.
Clearly, the idea is that they don't want these things moved.
But, they say it's technically exempt from this state law, banning the movement of war memorials, so it's going to disappear.
And Norfolk is still a majority white city.
I've actually been doing a project in Norfolk.
It was like 65% white, I think, 30 years ago.
And in that span of time, it's dropped down to about 46% white.
In, you know, just a couple decades.
Well, they've been trying hard, and they said, they argued, just as the city of Charlottesville did, that tried to get rid of statues honoring Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, that it was an infringement on free speech.
But there was a Virginia judge that said, no, no, no, no, free speech got nothing to do with it, there's a state law.
And so for the time being, Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson still stand in Charlottesville, but they're trying very hard to get them moved too.
And now, One last story on monuments.
This one is a bittersweet story.
It starts off bitter and ends sweet.
There was a statue, the Confederate Monument, erected in Sylvania, Georgia in 1909.
This was on a pedestal that from photographs looks about 30 feet high.
But in August of 2018, this was toppled by vandals.
Now, just this week, with 200 people in attendance, there was a rededication ceremony after a brand new 1,400 pound Confederate soldier was paid for by the Sons of Confederate Veterans and the United Daughters of the Confederacy and put back up on the pedestal.
So, that's the sweet part after the bitterness.
And one of the men from the Sons of Confederate Veterans at the rededication ceremony said, today, by the grace of God, We memorialize our Confederate ancestors who fought in defense of their homes, liberty, and independence.
May this memorial stand another 110 years to remind future generations of their noble forefathers who wore the gray.
So, there are sentiments that are still run deep and they have put back the soldier.
Now, there has been a $10,000 reward for the capture of the perps who pulled down the original.
The $10,000 remain unclaimed.
So, boys and girls, ladies and gentlemen, if you know who pulled down the Screven County Cemetery in Sylvania, Georgia, there's $10,000 waiting for you to turn them in.
It's so sad to think about all these monuments that have been faced, but the courage of those who stood by, used the money to have a new monument put up.
And that same thing can happen, guess what, in Memphis and New Orleans, and in Baltimore, where statues were taken down, and in the case of Memphis and Baltimore, in the cover of Night.
That's right, but you can't put up on you and you can't put up, they'd take that down too.
No, what happened in Memphis was particularly egregious.
Very briefly, probably many of our listeners know about this, but there was a wonderful statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest astride a horse.
Really, he looks like an absolute divinity on that horse.
And he was on public property and the law in Tennessee was, this is Memphis, Tennessee, that you could not remove a statue of that kind from public property.
Well, the city sold it.
For, I think, $2,000 or $3,000.
Some private entity.
Yeah, pennies.
Right in the middle of town.
Worth millions.
They sold it for nothing to this private organization.
Ah, no, it's on private land.
We'll take it down.
Gone.
Oh, just disgusting.
The Sons of Confederate Veterans then filed a suit saying that this was an obviously transparent attempt to subvert the law.
I don't know where it's gotten.
But, you've got sort of, well, we won't call it a bittersweet story, but it's one of these not-such-an-unhappy-ending stories from the world of professional wrestling.
Well, this is funny.
We've talked about the WWE before on this program, about Hulk Hogan and all the problems he has.
He was part of that fascinating lawsuit with Gawker.
Peter Thiel funded it.
There's a great book called Conspiracy, the details, the machinations of what went on.
Hulk Hogan was filmed privately in a conversation, even though this was going on, where he dropped the N-word a number of times back in 2008.
This came out during the trial.
Well, guess what?
He has now been a, he's been welcomed back.
This was three years, three or four years ago, this came out.
Well, he's on TV all the time now.
He's apologized.
He's apologized.
But you know what?
A lot of the black wrestlers got mad.
They said, we don't accept it.
But to their credit, the, uh, the CEO of the company of the WWE, which is a privately traded, a publicly traded company worth billions of dollars.
They have their Hogan's welcome back.
So this is, this is what's going on now with this black wrestler by the name of Jordan Miles.
He got a lot of social media hits and attention because he criticized the WWE as racist after the company designed a t-shirt that he said evoked racial stereotypes.
Now if you want to see this shirt so you can actually know what I'm talking about just type in Jordan Myles his last name is M-Y-L-E-S.
Now he stated his real name is Jordan Myles is his wrestling name his real name is Albert Hardy.
He tweeted that the shirt with its Big red lips and bright white teeth on a black background on the shirt recalled racist Sambo imagery, and it was, quote, in his opinion, a slap in the face to every African American performer, fan, and supporter.
So this was a shirt that was designed by the Federation.
Correct, by the WWE.
To publicize this guy.
Yeah, he was going to be able to make some money.
It's called merch money, merchandise money.
It's a great revenue stream.
Well, so in a since-deleted tweet, Miles said, quote, WWE doesn't care about black people, end quote.
I guess he's trying to do his best Kanye West impression when he said George W. Bush doesn't care about black people.
Well, get this.
The WWE issued a statement.
It read just simply this.
No shirts had been sold.
Jordan Miles approved this t-shirt for sale.
As always, we work collaboratively with all of our performers to develop logos and merchandise designs and get their input and approval before proceeding.
This was the same process with Jordan, and we responded swiftly once he later requested that the logo t-shirt be redesigned.
No t-shirts were sold.
So the whole thing was fabricated.
He went online to try and bring attention to himself.
Oh wait, so he approved this design but now the Federation is not going to sell any of them?
Well, he approved it initially and then he said, I want it down.
He changed his mind.
Then he went online to try and claim and try and bring attention that they were going to sell this racist shirt.
Hey, guess what?
In his opinion, racist imagery.
But guess what?
You approved it.
So, go back to that story about Bed Bath & Beyond and think about corporate America.
When any time a black individual says they're offended by something within corporate America, that In the case of Bed Bath & Beyond, you know, they go bend over backwards.
Well, this doesn't sound like a happy ending after all, so they're not going to sell it.
They designed this thing with his approval, then he decides to say, ah, this is racist, and so the Federation is not going to sell it after all?
Well, no, no.
He claimed it was racist after they had pulled the shirt.
So they agreed behind the scenes to pull the shirt, and then he used That as a way to try and attack him.
It's all about timelines, but the point is the WB didn't say, we pulled the shirt because it was, in his opinion, racist.
We'd already agreed to.
So again, it just shows that this mindset of black entitlement infects every sector of American society, even something as innocuous as professional wrestling.
Even as you would think, manly and vertebrate as professional wrestling.
Oh, gosh.
Well, you know, after we move out of the manly and vertebrate world into the effeminate and invertebrate world of academia, we find very strange creatures.
What we found just last week was that Ball State University recently hosted a presentation to, and I quote, Engage with the question of how English language practices in college classrooms contribute to, guess what?
White supremacy.
English language practices and, gosh, in class that contribute to white supremacy.
Well, the title of a 75 minute guest lecture given on this subject on October 14th by Asao Inoue was Freeing our minds and innovating our pedagogy from white language supremacy.
Well, who is this Inouye guy?
He's the Associate Dean of the College of Integrative Science and Arts at Arizona State University and his research focuses on anti-racist and social justice theory and practices in Guess what?
Writing assignments!
Okay.
Also, he specializes in, and I'm reading from his website, compassion in the classroom and understanding and addressing white language supremacy.
Apparently, he's rather a big dog in something called the Conference on College Composition and Communication.
This year, he gave the keynote address, which had the following title.
How do we language so people stop killing each other?
Or, what to do about white language supremacy?
So how do we language so people stop killing each other?
Well, at Ball State University, explained that your school can be racist and produce racist outcomes, even with expressed values and commitments to anti-racism and social justice.
The usual stuff.
White people can just have the best of intentions, but oh boy, oh boy.
White racism just pours from their pores.
Now, he explained that in order to succeed in even the most liberal and forward-thinking anti-racist institutions of higher education, a person of color has to act, think, and sound white to some degree.
Well, you do have to speak English.
Yep, most of the time.
Then he goes on, and you see, that is white supremacist.
Okay.
Grammar is white supremacist.
If you speak correctly, you are submitting to white hegemony.
Then, this is something else he said, grading is a great way to protect the white property of literacy in schools and maintain the white supremacist status quo without ever appealing to be white supremacist or mentioning race.
So, if you write with bad grammar, writing assignments, that's his specialty.
If you grade people down for saying, we be sick, then that is white supremacy.
Gotta stop it.
Dismantling and deconstructing every aspect of our society, even as something as simple as good grammar and proper sentence structure.
Yeah, it's incredible.
So what is his solution?
His solution is creating a classroom environment where everyone feels, quote, validated, heard, and feeling present.
I'm not quite sure how you do that.
Maybe play soft music, give them milk and cookies, and a curriculum that is conscientious so as not to, quote, reenact historical modes of colonization, which is what good grammar apparently does.
I'm surprised he didn't call it, instead of colonization, apartheid.
Well, right.
I guess it's interchangeable, though, at this point.
Well, it's all just white supremacist.
Yeah.
And now, he is known for advocating that students should be graded based on the labor they put into their work, not the quality of the finished product.
Labor Theory of Value.
That's an old Marxist concept, you know.
But what I want to know is, how does he know how much labor went in?
I mean, if you give an exam, a classroom exam, do you give the guy the highest grade when he looks the tiredest after he marches out?
I mean, how do you know how much effort went into this?
You go in effort rather than quality.
Gosh!
Well, you know, I think we should just run the entire economy on rewarding effort rather than... Well, it's all subjective.
I mean, again, there can't be... No, it's not subjective!
If you can say, this painting took a thousand hours to produce, you may think it's ugly.
But we're grading on effort, not quality.
So it should go for a higher price than one that you might... Effort, quality?
No, I mean, again, it's... It's insane.
Anyway, I think you were going to explain to us some findings about foreign languages spoken in the home.
Yeah, you know, I saw the story today.
A lot of people were ringing their necks saying, oh, this is so terrible.
Ringing their hands.
Well, they wouldn't ring their necks because they're thinking about how terrible things are getting in the country.
And yet, I interpreted the exact opposite.
So Paul Bedard over at the Washington Examiner, he put together a quick story noting that a record 67.3 million U.S.
residents speak a foreign language at home, the latest sign of the growing influence of immigrants on American culture.
Now, the data that was analyzed from the Center for Immigration Studies found that in the top 5 American cities, an average of 48% speak a foreign language at home.
In the top 5?
48%?
48%.
Mostly Spanish or Chinese.
And in 90 major U.S.
cities, more than half speak a non-English language at home.
So, the Center for Immigration Studies finds that 67.3 million residents now speak a language other than English at home, a number equal to the entire population of France.
The number has nearly tripled since 1980, and more than doubled since 1990.
The growth of the state level is even more pronounced.
All language figures in the Census Bureau data are for persons five years of age and older.
So, just real quick, a couple key highlights, and then we'll get to our analysis.
America's five largest cities, just under half, 48% of residents now speak a language other than English at home.
Other than English.
Yep, and New York City figures 49%.
In Los Angeles, 59%.
Wow, 60% of Angelenos don't speak English at home.
Chicago, it's 36%.
In Houston, 50%.
46%, in Houston, 50%, and in Phoenix, 38%.
Do you have figures for Washington, D.C.
by any chance?
I don't have figures for Washington in this story that would be easily accessible.
That depends on whether or not they count Ebonics as English.
Well, I mean, again, we're talking about Chicago where they have 36 percent.
So, Ebonics, you know, I think Chicago is one of those cities that is roughly a third white, a third Hispanic, and a third black.
They probably count Ebonics as English.
Regrettably, yes.
But, you know, real quick.
Languages with more than a million people who speak it at home in 2018 were Spanish, 41.5 million.
Chinese is second at 3.5 million.
41.5 million.
Chinese is second at 3.5 million.
Tagalog, 1.8 million.
That's what they speak in the Philippines.
Vietnamese, 1.5 million.
Arabic at 1.3.
French, I guess these are a lot of Haitians perhaps, 1.2 million.
Well, you know, I have to raise my hand and confess.
I speak French to my daughter at home, so I'm one of these sinners.
And Korean at 1.1 million.
A lot of people will say that this just shows that the United States is disintegrating.
I look at this and I say, hey, you know what?
It just shows that assimilation doesn't work.
And do we want these people to assimilate where they start speaking English?
What say you, Mr. Taylor?
I'm perfectly happy for them to speak whatever language they like at home.
The less they're able to communicate with the rest of us, the better, as far as I'm concerned.
Now that may sound harsh, but that emphasizes the fact that they are foreigners.
They are not assimilating.
They're alien.
And the sooner, the sooner our country recognizes that, the better.
Especially in these dramatic numbers where, goodness gracious, these cities are alien to your average American who goes to Houston.
I think Houston's about 29 percent.
At some point, AR is going to publish this amazing study of all the major cities that shows the Great Replacement, and Houston was one of those that the white population is just Dropping.
It's stunning, actually.
Well, you know, I remember years ago reading an account of a Korean that had emigrated to the Los Angeles area.
And he never bothered to learn English.
He learned Spanish.
That was a much more useful language for him.
And what did you say, it was about 60% of Los Angeles?
It's right under 59% in Los Angeles.
Well, gosh, yes.
Why learn English, for heaven's sake?
If you want to do business with the natives, you learn what the natives speak.
And that ain't English.
If you want to commodify language, yeah, exactly.
English is on its way out there.
But think Houston.
It's 50%.
Phoenix, 38%.
Only growing.
And this is one of those reasons why a state like Arizona, a state like Texas, they're about to be blue, ladies and gentlemen.
A state like Georgia, a state like North Carolina, they're going the way of Virginia.
Gracious.
Well, yes, they are certainly changing, and one of the reasons they're changing more rapidly is because of something of which I learned just a few days ago.
It's something called cancellation of removal.
Have you ever heard of cancellation of removal?
I have.
You have?
I have.
Well, you are better informed than I.
Cancellation of removal.
What this happens is, this is a way of countermanding a judge's order for an illegal alien to be removed from the country.
How can this happen?
The judge says, out!
You're here illegally!
But there are loopholes.
One has to do with refugees, and especially those who have been firmly settled in the United States for a certain period, they may be granted cancellation of removal.
Or it's also called a waiver of inadmissibility.
Aren't these great terms?
Hey, I just got a waiver of inadmissibility!
Hooray!
Even if they've been convicted of serious crimes.
Can you believe that?
No.
Now, what happens is, you have to have been here for a certain amount of time.
You have to meet certain criteria.
But if they are facing a judge's order that says, out, out, out, they can ask a judge for this cancellation of removal.
And if it's approved, it allows them to stay in the United States, get a special work permit called a C-10.
That sounds like some sort of plastic explosive to me.
And also get green cards.
And there are roughly 4,000 people who get a cancellation of removal every year.
These are people who have gotten the black ball, but they hand in the black ball for a green card.
They are legal, they've been caught, they've been ordered out, but this is a loophole through which they can jump and stay in.
Now, I'm bringing this up because Congress requires a showing of good moral character as a condition of eligibility to leap through this loophole.
And what the Attorney General has decided is that if you have had two or more DUI convictions, then that makes you ineligible.
That shows that your character is not good and moral.
So one DUI is fine?
One DUI is fine.
You get a mulligan, basically.
Well, no, you don't get a mulligan.
One DUI is fine, two or more, and uh-oh, no, no, no.
And this is a recent decision.
I mean, that had not been the case before.
Up until Attorney General Barr had made this new ruling, you could have had as many DUIs as you like.
But he says, no, no, no, we're just going to limit it to one.
Now, what to me was particularly fascinating about this is the reaction of an immigration lawyer named Nicolette Glazer.
And she wrote this.
Aha!
I see AG Barr dropped two decisions just before he called it a day to screw up further ability of immigrants to legalize status.
He goes on to say, she goes on to say, they want to prevent people from obtaining work permits to force self-deportation.
Evil bastards.
Now, this bespeaks, this is a, to me, a very eloquent statement of what these people think.
They're not interested in following the law.
All they want is people to be legalized.
And it makes no difference to Nicolette Glazer if you've had 10 DUIs.
Their moral character is superfluous.
Their moral character is superfluous.
That's exactly right.
And if you want to draw the line and say that somebody who's been picked up twice or more driving drunk, now you're a danger not only to yourself, but to everybody else on the road.
You are a real danger.
And if you're going to say, no, no, those people can't stay.
You are an evil bastard, according to her.
It's fascinating.
That completely flies in the face of the Naturalization Act of 1790 that our Founding Fathers put into play when it came to who could get naturalized as a citizen.
And it was, I believe it was white males of good character?
That's right.
No, no, not just white males.
Free white persons.
Free white persons of good character.
Yes.
But you see, it's all about how you define good moral character.
Because the law still requires good moral character, but according to Nicolette Glaser and her pals, good moral character, the bar is very low.
A few DUIs?
What the heck?
Maybe a few hatchet murderers while we're at it?
You've probably read some studies on DUIs in Mexico.
Is that a massive problem?
Oh, it's a big problem.
It's a big problem.
And in fact, I remember reading a NHTSA study, National Highway Transportation Safety Authority study, that looked into not only drunk driving, but pedestrian deaths in the United States.
Drunk driving is very much a Hispanic problem.
People don't talk about that, but there are actual hard statistics out there for it.
The other is pedestrian deaths.
People who are killed walking down the road.
And that's because So many Hispanics.
They're way overrepresented in these because they come from these areas where traffic pokes along at 15 miles an hour on these bendy highways.
And if they find themselves on a divided highway or an interstate, they're used to just crossing.
They never heard of red lights.
They bound out in the street.
Bam!
They're gone.
So that is another Hispanic problem in this country.
Anyway, I wish I had the statistics at my fingertips, but maybe some other podcast will do.
Now, I did want to move on to a poll on the subject of reparations.
There was a recent survey by the Associated Press and the NORC Center for Public Affairs.
It was a survey that found that 29% of Americans do support payment of cash reparations to blacks.
68% oppose.
So that's two-thirds to one-third oppose.
And needless to say, there are clear racial distinctions.
74% of blacks want Cash payments.
Okay.
They've got their hands are out and that number again 74 74% of blacks say grease my palm Compared to 15% of white respondents that you know, it would be hard to find statistical statistical findings as stark as that 74% versus 15% I wonder what percent of blacks said they would like cash payments or well, these are all cash point we're talking about So you get your cash allotment of Bitcoin, and then if you hold it, perhaps the Bitcoin, that cryptocurrency is going to rise, and that reparation payment could even be better.
Well, I don't know.
Maybe they want it in Boeing stock.
In any case, negotiable securities, cash, gold dust, I think they wouldn't be too particular about it.
Now, I thought this was also interesting.
Only 15% of white respondents want to ladle out the lolly as reparations.
74% blacks want the lolly ladled in.
And 44% of Hispanics said they support cash reparations.
44%.
That's interesting, but a majority don't.
Well, maybe, you know, maybe Hispanics are thinking, well, you know, if blacks get something, maybe we can kind of pull the same hustle.
Yes, pull the same hustle.
So, there you go.
Now, when it comes to whether or not the government should issue an official apology, 35% of whites are willing to issue an apology.
That's more than the 15%.
Significantly more.
Significantly more.
They'll say, okay, we can say, sorry, but when you're going to put your hand into my pocket and pull out dollar bills and give them away, no thanks.
77% of blacks and 64% of Hispanics think there should be an apology.
So, there's a stark, stark racial split here.
Do you think that within, say, oh, the next 20 years, do you think there will be cash handouts as reparations?
What's your guess?
I think that there will be cash payments as reparations to NCAA athletes Far before there will be black reparations.
I think we're actually seeing that, the push for college athletes to be compensated.
In fact, today there was a major announcement that the NCAA is going to consider looking into this after the state of California decided that college athletes can get paid by their likeness starting in 2023.
Paid by their what?
Because when you go to college, you're supposed to be an amateur athlete.
However, there's so much money coming in from corporate America that now these athletes can use their likeness in commercials.
So I think that there's a far greater chance that if this actually does happen, you'll see athletes from the past, primarily black athletes, say that, well, these predominantly white institutions We're able to make millions and tens of millions of dollars off of the backs of black bodies that were injured.
And we never got to go pro.
We need our money.
We need our gibs.
But that will mean, of course, that white athletes will get the same payments, presumably.
It's going to be the unraveling of Collegiate sports it's a great thing actually if you're listening to this this is this is this has to happen this you know because too many too many white people base their identities off of collegiate athletics of what the University of Alabama does in a football field or what North Carolina does in the basketball court on any given day so this is a great thing but no I actually don't think reparations are no they're not gonna happen I think that
The Democrats will realize this is only going to push more and more whites to begin to understand that, hey, this is a racial thing.
Yeah, you know, my view is that something akin to welfare and affirmative action of the kind we already have is going to be announced to be reparations or something like that.
Well, just a little bit extra.
But the idea of handing out cash to blacks, I just don't think that's going to happen.
But I've been wrong many times.
Many of the improbable, and I thought impossible, things that I thought could happen only in the fevered dreams of those with whom we disagree have come about.
So I could well be wrong.
But let's see, now Philadelphia has come up with some interesting assessments.
Yeah, this is great.
This is a new report by the Philadelphia Office of the City Controller, and they found that a single homicide in Philadelphia reduces the value of homes sold within 0.75 miles of the murder by an average of 2.3% compared to homes purchased slightly farther away.
Okay, one homicide will bring it down 2.3 percent.
Yep, so here's what the report stated.
Well, that means 50 homicides and the house is worth nothing.
Well, and remember, Philadelphia is one of the most segregated cities in the country and the homicides are largely within areas where Wow.
Blacks reside because in Philadelphia it's shocking.
No, it's not shocking.
But this is all purely environmental.
Yeah, here we go.
Quote, our results suggest homeowners who sold in the immediate aftermath of a homicide received a price about $3,400 lower than they otherwise would have if the homicide had not occurred.
Now they looked at 4,000 homicides and 220,000 home sales in Philadelphia between 2006 to 2018 to come up with this.
But there's a lot of fun things we can talk about with Philadelphia.
This is a city where a black city council member tried to say that Bulletproof plexiglass was an indignity against blacks at convenience stores.
That's right.
You have to push your money through a hole in the plexiglass.
Now, didn't they actually ban plexiglass at some point?
It has been, yeah.
And then there was another black council member.
That probably lowered property values in the neighborhood.
I'm sure you can do a study where if there's a convenience store with plexiglass, I'm sure property values drop by 10 to 15 percent, if not more than that.
Well, when the plexiglass comes down, the body count goes up.
There's also a black city council member who's upset about who's trying to stop gentrification because whites will come in and they'll buy these condos and they'll want a, get this, a balcony.
And apparently balconies because white people want to be outside and enjoy a nice evening and have some company.
But if you have balconies, that apparently is a bad thing because that will cause more gentrification.
And that upset this black council member.
Oh, because the white people will be exhibiting themselves.
Exactly, and more and more white people move in, and so he wants to get rid of... It's bay windows and balconies is what he's against.
Oh, for heaven's sake.
If white people are going to be in town, stay underground.
Stay out of sight.
Yeah, you've got to be the Eloys.
Actually, I'm sorry, you have to be the Morlocks.
Even though you are an Eloy, you have to behave like a Morlock.
Exactly.
Oh for heavens, no balconies, no bay windows because they can't be on display.
Because that will only further enhance more gentrification and convince more white people that it's safe to do this.
You can be outside.
You don't have to lock yourself away and pretend that oh you know we can live here but we can't let anybody see us.
Well you know they'll have to write that into the housing code you know.
Gosh.
Well, you know, again, that's something I could never have imagined, even in my most feverishly imaginative days.
Which one?
The city council member, the indignity of the bulletproof glass?
No, the idea that you can't have balconies or bay windows.
Because you got to keep white people out of sight!
Well, I told you before we got started, our job here is to educate, entertain, and elevate to our listening audience.
And for those white people who are thinking about moving into one of these cities that is predominantly black, or you want to move into a neighborhood where there's some low-priced property because you want to gentrify it, the first thing you need to do to really put up your flag is Is to have a contractor come in and put some bay windows on or knock some or do a enhancement and add a balcony because then you're basically saying, guess what?
We're reclaiming this territory as ours.
And that's what can't be happening in the city of brotherly love.
You know it may be that this counselor is really thinking of the welfare of these white interlopers because if you're sitting in a bay window Or if you're sitting in a balcony, even worse.
Just think of what might come your way at high velocity.
I think he's probably looking out for their safety.
You can say that, but think about this.
What if these bay windows are actually not windows at all, but it's plexiglass?
Would that be an indignity?
To the black citizens of Philadelphia.
Oh dear.
If the bay windows and then the balconies were also protected.
You know when you see speeches by President Trump and as he's giving a speech there's bulletproof glass that you really can't see.
That's right.
What if the techs have that as well?
In these gentrifying neighborhoods of Philadelphia.
It'll all be in the housing code.
Oh dear.
White supremacy is everywhere, and white hegemony is being shored up every time you breathe in and every time you breathe out.
But speaking of white supremacy, there was an article on the NBC website on October 27th, just a few days ago, titled, What's Needed to Defeat White Terrorism?
Oh.
White Terrorism.
Now listen to this.
This really just took my breath away.
Tracking this evolving transnational hydra Remember the Hydra?
You know the multi-headed dragon from Greek mythology?
Tracking this evolving transnational Hydra will require a highly specialized unit devoted solely to white terrorism.
Just like Islamist counter-terrorism, this will necessitate analysts fluent in over a dozen tongues and intimately familiar with regional history, cultures, and jargon.
It'll require field agents, social media monitors, liaisons with foreign security agencies and watchdogs, and the development of informant circles.
Infiltration.
All of which will have to be integrated into the wider matrix of homeland security.
All this, mind you, To fight white terrorism, whatever that may be.
Really, they're just talking about white advocacy, white nationalism.
Then this article goes on to say, Can you imagine this?
They are really gearing up to treat any kind of white advocacy basically as if it were the Islamic State.
But it's, you know, it's funny, you bring up this story and I think back to a book that is criminally under read.
Clark Howard, I think, wrote it, about the zebra killings.
Oh, the zebra killings.
And, you know, there was black terror that completely scared everyone in San Francisco for a couple years, right?
It paralyzed the city.
And yet nobody knows about what took place in the 70s there, where white people were afraid to go out.
I mean, this is such a criminally under Underappreciated time.
Do you remember how many actually died?
What, 15 or 20 white people were killed?
Yeah, but there were so many other white people who were murdered in mysterious circumstances that they thought that they could attribute potentially a couple, hundreds, to these cells.
What were they, the death angels?
No, they were, I can't remember what they called themselves, but they were a black Islamic group that thought whites were devils and had to be eliminated.
Just apparently, like this NBC author, you know, this transnational hydra.
Every head's got to be lopped off.
So, are they going to come up with this huge oppressive bureaucracy to slay the beast?
Well, I think we've got time for one more story.
This has to do with Denmark.
The Danes' belief that mass immigration poses an existential threat to their national identity is at the highest it's been in 30 years.
Good!
Yes.
28% agreed with the statement, Muslim immigrants must be removed from Denmark.
Repeat that number again.
28%.
And slightly less than half, 45%, said they think Muslims should be permitted to stay in the country.
But 28% say, no, all out.
Remarkable.
39% said they'd be ready to deport immigrants immediately if they're unemployed.
39%.
Well, just 32% of Danes disagreed with that view.
I guess the rest are undecided, but a majority of Danes, a plurality of Danes, want to deport immigrants if they're unemployed.
No, they can look over to Sweden and see what happens if they don't.
Good work.
Good work.
Yes.
Now, nearly half of second generation immigrants believe that criticizing religion should be banned outright.
No wonder Danes want them gone.
The irresistible force is meeting that immovable object of second generation and what happens to the freedoms.
You know, you think you're inviting these people.
You're getting some new food.
But guess what happens once that second generation is entrenched?
That's right.
Can't even criticize their religion.
Ensconced in their nation, precisely.
I hope it is an irresistible force and I hope it is a movable object.
We'll find out how movable it is.
Good luck to the Danes.
Yes.
Well, hey, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for listening to this Halloween 2019 edition.
We want to get in touch with you.
We want to hear your questions.
More importantly, we want to know your email so we can get in touch with you in case the YouTube channel Would go away.
Shoot me an email.
BecauseWeLiveHereAtProtonMail.com.
Once again, BecauseWeLiveHereAtProtonMail.com.
Or, you can contact us at the Amaran.com website and click on the Contact Us tab.
We wish to hear from you.
Well, may your Halloween be filled with more treats than tricks this year.
For Jared Taylor, this has been Paul Kersey.
Our podcast time is up.
▲
Export Selection