Andrew Clavin argues white supremacism is a manufactured crisis, exposing Democratic-driven censorship—like the House’s non-binding "white supremacist rhetoric" resolution—while dismissing rising hate crime claims as media manipulation. He contrasts it with Islamist extremism and critiques misrepresentations of figures like Candace Owens in congressional hearings, calling it a "farce." Data shows white nationalist violence unchanged for decades, yet the left exploits fear to silence conservatives on social media. The episode blends political analysis with mailbag advice—from proposing despite financial fears to addressing suicide as a "disaster"—culminating in a defense of moral instincts against ideological guilt-tripping. [Automatically generated summary]
A shocking new poll from the Hollywood Reporter shows that 57% of Americans are concerned that what they hear on network news is not accurate.
According to health officials, this means the other 43% of Americans no longer have the rudimentary intelligence required to perform such tasks as peeling an orange, asking a policeman to take them home, or driving a muscle car into a flaming pile of garbage at 170 miles an hour because their best friend told them it would be cool.
In other worrisome data, the poll revealed that nearly 53% of Americans find CNN a credible news source, which means over half of Americans are now suffering from a strange mental illness, which causes them to hear voices in their heads delivering credible news while they're listening to the people lying on CNN.
Several afflicted people were concerned that the voices in their heads were telling them to do terrible things like say you love Satan or vote Democrat.
But fortunately, those voices were in fact coming from CNN and the hallucinated voices were far more benign.
The poll further found that more than 20% of Americans find the news networks are not credible news sources, causing health officials to become concerned that nearly 80% of Americans are gormless idiots.
In a follow-up interview with an American who found the networks credible, 30-year-old Brooklynite Wimpy Artisnel told pollsters, quote, I know when I'm watching ABC, I am getting the whole truth and that Dr. Meredith Gray really is concerned about Andrew being alone in the operating room with Richard after Richard walked in on Andrew and Meredith making out, unquote.
When told that that was the plot of Gray's anatomy, Mr. Artisnel said, quote, I believe every word of it and the news as well, unquote.
In the wake of the poll findings, doctors at the CDC are working overtime to develop a cure for gullibility, which could, if effective, eradicate network news completely.
Tricker warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
Hitler's Legacy00:15:12
I'm the hunky-dunky, life is tickety-boom.
Birds are ringing, also singing, hunky-dunkity-ding.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hurrah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
All right, this is my last day here at Hillsdale as the Pullium Distinguished Fellow in Journalism.
I've become more and more distinguished as the week has gone on until I'm just so distinguished I can't even distinguish how distinguished I am.
Last night I delivered my public address at a tremendously pleasant dinner and event.
The whole thing has been really just a wonderful experience.
I'm going to have to think about it because it's such a nice place to be that I am a little bit torn about coming back to Los Angeles, though why anyone would be torn about coming back to Los Angeles.
Anyway, I think the speech will be available online somewhere.
I will figure it out and we'll put it out there for you.
One of the things I was talking about is I was talking about the fact that human beings have an inborn moral sense and that you can tell when they're inventing an ideology which is meant to circumvent that moral sense, when they're making excuses for stealing your money or seizing power or killing people.
And I listed some symptoms of a guilty conscience that plagues wrongdoers.
One symptom was silencing dissent because if you're lying about something, the truth can be very powerful, so you've got to shut it down.
And another symptom of a twisted ideology is disaster mongering, by which I mean seeing disasters everywhere around every corner.
Because in a state of emergency, moral laws can sometimes be reasonably suspended, which is supposed to justify your stupid immoral lies that you're telling about the things that you're doing.
Now, just like hypochondriacs can get sick, catastrophes do happen even on Chicken Little's Watch.
So let's take a look at white nationalism.
The Democrats say it's on the rise and the internet is to blame.
And also, of course, that evil Donald Trump.
Hate crimes are getting worse, they say.
Here's what I say.
The overblown hysteria about white nationalism is disaster mongering meant to disguise a move towards censorship of mainstream conservative speech.
The left can hold up pictures of Nazis and bigots and killers, but their real targets are the ideas expressed by people like you and me.
And I'll show you what I mean.
First, we have to talk about ring, ring of security, which is what you want around your home.
I told you the story about Jay Hay, Jonathan Hay, who has some job.
Nobody really knows what he does, but he walks around with an air of authority.
So we all respect him because who knows, maybe he can fire us.
But I told you about how somebody came to his house 2.30 in the morning.
Luckily, he had a ring doorbell, which let him talk to the guy and see the guy and the girl who was out there as they tried to talk their way into his house.
The minute they left the next day, he spent some money and he just surrounded his house with ring devices because Ring is dedicated to making neighborhoods safer.
You know about their smart video doorbells.
They also have the floodlight cam, which will set off automatic floodlights when anybody walks onto your property.
Ring helps you stay connected to your home anywhere in the world.
You can talk to anybody who comes to the door right there on your phone.
And as a listener, you have a special offer on a Ring starter kit available right now with a video doorbell and motion activated floodlight cam, the starter kit has everything you need to start building a ring of security around your home.
Just go to ring.com slash clavin.
That's ring.com slash clavin.
Anyone comes to your home, just press the talk button and say, how do you spell Clavin?
If they don't know, not let them in.
They're probably all right.
But if they do know, it's K-L-A-V-A-N.
It's Mailbag Day.
All right.
You know, I'm going to start doing it.
I'm going to just scream and then you're going to have to play.
It's Mailbag Day.
It is Mailbag Day.
We'll answer all your questions.
Stop, stop.
I can't stand it anymore.
Answer is guaranteed 100% correct.
We'll change your life.
Some of you for the better.
The rest of you are doomed.
And tomorrow I'm off.
I'm flying home.
And so the next show will be on Friday.
And then the Clavelinist weekend will come back.
And those of you who survived being doomed from the mailbag will, in fact, be doomed.
So white nationalism is bad, okay?
The left and I agree.
We agree that white nationalism is bad.
We have different reasons.
They think it's bad because they want to take the injustice they feel has been done against people of color and turn it around on white people.
They feel that they're always doing the same thing.
They're always saying, oh, there's an injustice.
We have to end the injustice.
But what they're really trying to do is seize the power to commit injustice as some kind of corrective for the injustice of the past.
I think white nationalism is bad because it's stupid and wrong to make moral judgments about people according to their race rather than their actions, okay?
Stupid to make moral judgments about people according to their race instead of their actions.
Let's call that rule one.
Do not make moral judgments about people according to their race instead of their actions.
Rule one.
You do not violate rule one because you don't want it done to you, right?
The golden rule.
Everybody knows he's an individual responsible for himself.
He's not responsible to everybody who's the same color he is or that comes from the same country he is.
You know, you can't say, oh, white people held slaves and therefore you're responsible because you have the same color as those white people.
And it wasn't white people holding slaves.
It was some white people holding slaves while other white people, of course, were fighting to free them.
You can't say black people commit crimes, black people are muggers, because it's some black people.
It's not the guy you're talking to at that moment.
He feels himself as an individual.
You want to feel yourself as an individual.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Breaking rule one is wrong.
The only time race actually matters is when looking at somebody according to his race exposes someone violating rule one.
Okay, so if Jews aren't getting any job at a certain jobs at a certain bank because they're not hiring Jews, they are violating Rule One, and that's a clue that the fact that they're not hiring Jews, you can see that that's going on.
But other than that, you're just adopting, you are violating Rule One if you start to disrespect people according to their race because they're black, whatever else it is.
That's why I'm against affirmative action, right?
I don't think it's right to penalize Asian people or white people according to their race by giving credits to other people because of their race.
I just think that's violating Rule One.
I'm against reparations because the person who's paying the reparations didn't do anything, and the person who is getting the reparations didn't suffer anything.
I'm against Indian reservations.
How about that one?
I think they should be phased out.
Why should they not just be full Americans at this point?
It's absolutely, it's just miserable on those reservations.
It's bad for them.
Why should we try to get rid of the sins of the past?
And there were sins of the past, but you cannot fix the past.
It just can't be done.
And I'm against white nationalism for the same reason.
My philosophy has a benefit over the left's philosophy in that it makes sense.
I'm against anything that violates Rule One.
But in their attempt to win power over the economy and speech, Democrats need disasters.
That's what I was talking about before.
If they can tell you that a disaster is coming, maybe you'll suspend the moral rules.
Maybe you'll suspend Rule One.
You don't know.
So they've got Russian collusion and evil Trump, and now it's white nationalism.
House Democrats are sponsoring this completely ridiculous, non-binding resolution condemning white supremacist rhetoric and violence that specifically targets immigrants.
So this is a hit at your old pal, the president of the United States, because he's trying to secure the border.
So that must make him a bigot.
You know, it's complete nonsense, but this is what they're doing.
So they came out and they give a press conference and they're talking about, they don't mention Trump by name, but they sort of refer to his characterization of the border situation.
Oh, it's an invasion.
And he used the word animals to describe those nice fellows who belong to MS-13.
I almost said MSNBC, a Freudian slip, but it's MS-13.
Even the people at MSNBC are not animals like the people at MS-13.
So I think we can let them off the hook for that.
Here is a clip, just to give the whole game away, from Brooke Baldwin at CNN interviewing Jonathan Greenblatt of the left-wing Anti-Defamation League, which used to be a respectable organization fighting against anti-Semitism, and now it's just another one of these organizations that's been taken over by the left.
Law enforcement, policymakers, and even some politicians haven't taken the threat of white nationalism sufficiently seriously.
So when the president says, no, no, it's just a small number of people.
Well, he's wrong on the facts.
Why is this happening?
Why is it on the rise?
And what are people doing about it?
I think there are multiple reasons why it's on the rise.
Look, it's always been there.
But first and foremost, in our charged political environment.
It's exacerbated?
It's all exacerbated.
The divisions, the tensions, the anxiety, that's all there.
Secondly, social media has created a sort of a connective tissue.
Easy way to spread the hate.
Previously, it didn't happen.
But one of the reasons why we had European white supremacists in Charlottesville and then foreign white supremacists who lauded what happened in Pittsburgh is because through not just Facebook and Twitter, but Gab and Discord and Fortune H and all these other platforms, they're all literally exalting.
And the third reason they're doing so is because they find their language and their means, literally, on the tip of the tongue of our president.
Ah, yes.
Okay, so there it is.
The whole plot laid out right there, right?
The problem is the evil white supremacists is on the rise.
And there's a little, if you weren't watching, there's a little chart in back showing it, spiked 17% or whatever, which really refers to hate crimes, most of which are against Jews.
And then it's the social media.
That's the problem.
Here's the New York Times, a former newspaper ran this piece.
I mean, this is, you know, it's a talking point when they're spreading it around.
Each venue is picking it up, right?
So attacks by white supremacists are growing.
So are their connections, right?
It's social media.
It just says in a manifesto, this is the lead in a manifesto posted online before his attack.
The gunman who killed 50 last month in a rampage at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand.
Have you noticed that the killing of Muslims is a horrible killing?
It's an atrocity.
But you have noticed that this has gotten more press in the New York Times than a Muslim killing 50 people would ever get.
I mean, immediately they'd be putting out stories about how we have to protect Muslims from the backlash.
But a guy kills Muslims and we hear endlessly about his white supremacy.
Anyway, he said this killer, this knucklehead who did the killing, said he drew inspiration from white extremists, white extremist terrorism attacks in Norway, the United States, Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
His references to those attacks placed him in an informal global network of white extremists whose violent attacks are occurring with greater frequency in the West.
An analysis by the New York Times of recent terrorism attacks found that at least a third of white extremist killers since 2011 were inspired by others who perpetrated similar attacks.
The connections between the killers span continents and highlight how the internet and social media have facilitated the spread of white extremist ideology and violence.
So be afraid of social media.
Be afraid of the right.
It's anybody who's talking on the right who's inspiring these people.
And the president, who does Twitter more than the president?
We just heard from CNN, no less a source than CNN, that 53% of Americans find credible, which is the most depressing statistic I've heard in weeks.
On CNN, they told us it's Donald Trump is the problem.
Social media is the problem.
What do you think the idea is?
Obviously, this is a world in which Ben Shapiro can be called a member of the alt-right.
Ben Shapiro, who has been attacked by the alt-right more than any other person, can be called a member of the alt-right.
Candace Owens, whom we love, Candace Owens was called on MediaIte a sometime Hitler apologist.
And we're going to get to that in just a minute.
So they hold a hearing on white nationalism, right?
And a funny thing happened.
The Republicans trolled the Democrats, who obviously run the House and they run the committee.
They trolled the Democrats by inviting Candace to speak, all right?
So CNN runs a story about this, and the caption doesn't even mention what happened, okay?
It does not mention what happened, is Representative Liu, Ted Liu from California, shows a video, a hate crimes hearing of Candace Owens discussing Hitler as if she were the target of the investigation.
Now, let's remember what Candace said about Hitler, because as we all know, whenever a right-winger mentions Hitler, we saw this happen to Ben at the March for Life, immediately there's an uproar, no matter what he said.
What Ben said was he wouldn't kill baby Hitler because he's not Hitler yet.
He would take baby Hitler away from his family.
And I was so thrilled that there was a baby that Ben wouldn't kill that I thought that was a lovely thing to say.
But in fact, they made a big fuss about it completely over nothing.
What happened in this meeting was Candace was asked by a member of the audience about nationalism in Western politics.
And Owens brought up our old friend Adolph, which is always a mistake, by the way, because you're always going to step in it.
And she said, I don't have any problems with the word nationalism.
I think that the definition gets poisoned by elitists that actually want globalism.
Globalism is what I don't want.
Whenever we say nationalism, the first thing people think about, at least in America, is Hitler.
He was a national socialist.
But if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, okay, fine.
The problem is that he wanted, he had dreams outside of Germany.
He wanted to globalize.
Her point obviously being that Hitler was a globalist, not, in fact, a nationalist.
She wasn't.
Look, pardon me, whatever you say about Candace, let's not call her suicidal.
Hitler wasn't exactly a friend to the black man.
It's not like she's saying, oh, what a wonderful idea Hitler had because he's a white, you know, you're going to call Kansas a white supremacist.
I mean, it doesn't make any sense.
So she comes to this hearing and Ted Liu dishonestly pulls a little clip of this and makes it sound like she's praising Hitler.
And Candace just ripped him apart and watched Jerry Nadler try to shut her down.
I mean, she's already given this speech about how the Democrats were the Klan.
The Democrats are the people who have kept black people down all these years.
And so they're after her.
They're after blood.
Listen to this exchange.
I think it's pretty apparent that Mr. Liu believes that black people are stupid and will not pursue the full clip in its entirety.
He purposely presented an extracted clip.
The witness will suspend for a moment.
It is not proper to refer disparagingly to a member of the committee.
The witness will not do that again.
Witness may continue.
Sure, even though I was called despicable.
Witness may not refer to a member of the committee as stupid.
Barr's Report: Silencing the Truth00:10:13
I didn't refer to him as stupid.
That's not what I said.
That's not what I said at all.
You didn't listen to what I said.
May I continue?
Please.
As I said, he is assuming that black people will not go pursue the full two-hour clip.
And he purposefully extracted, he cut off and you didn't hear the question that was asked of me.
He's trying to present as if I was launching a defense of Hitler in Germany when, in fact, the question that was asked of me was perturning to whether or not I believed that Hitler was a whether or not I believed in nationalism.
So you know if this were the other way around, if these were Republicans picking on a black woman who was a Democrat, you know that we would be hearing about how a couple of men misrepresented this woman and then bullied her, tried to bully her into silence.
You could see right there that she did not call Lou stupid.
She said that Lou must think black people are stupid.
Then Nadler said, oh, you can't call Lou stupid.
I mean, that is dishonest and it's bullying and it's an attempt to silence a black woman, but you'll never hear about that on the air.
And here's what they were trying to silence.
That clip that you just heard, that's been going around the internet, has got like a million hits, but that's not what she was there to say.
What she was there to say was this, and this is the truth.
There isn't a single adult today that in good conscience would make the argument that America is a more racist or a more white nationalist society than it was when my grandfather was growing up.
And yet we're hearing these terms sent around today because what they want to say is that brown people need to be scared, which seems to be the narrative that we hear every four years right ahead of a presidential election.
Here are some things we never hear.
75% of the black boys in California don't meet state reading standards.
In inner cities like Baltimore, within five high schools and one middle school, not a single student was found to be proficient in math or reading in 2016.
The single motherhood rate in the black community, which is at 23% in the 1960s when my grandfather was coming up, is at a staggering 74% today.
I am guessing there will be no committee hearings about that.
There are more black babies aborted than born alive in cities like New York, and you have Democrat Governor Andrew Cuomo lighting up buildings to celebrate late-term abortions.
I could go on and on.
My point is that white nationalism does not do any of those things that I just brought up.
Democrat policies did.
Good for you, Candace.
Great stuff.
That is great stuff.
All true.
You know it was true because the Washington Post said she turned a serious inquiry into a farce.
What she did was she exposed a farce as a farce.
That was really one of her finest moments.
It was absolutely terrific.
White nationalism has been at a steady state for 30 years.
It has been at a steady state for 30 years.
It is a sucky, anti-Western ideology.
White nationalists and leftists agree that the West is defined by whiteness.
It's conservatives who know it is defined by its ideas, its ideas about liberty, its ideas about the dignity of the individual, its ideas about a God who cares about us and forgives us.
That's what Western civilization is defined by.
Both white nationalists and leftists agree that it's defined by its whiteness.
They both think the same things because they both violate Rule One.
That is what's happening.
But here's a piece from the Wall Street Journal, excellent piece from Joe Craven McGinty.
Are far-right extremist crimes rising?
No.
There has been a steady rate.
She is quoting here from Michael Jensen, a senior researcher at START, the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland.
He says there's been a steady rate of far-right extreme crime since at least 1970.
So pardon me, I misspoke.
That's 50 years when we started collecting data.
What has changed is the emphasis on reporting far-right extremism.
It produces the perception that there is a new increase.
It's not true.
Seth Barron, writing in City Journal, talks about the fact that almost all of the world's extremist violence, all of the world's extremist violence, is concentrated in a handful of regions where very few white people live.
It's almost all Islamist violence, almost all of it, almost all of it is Islamist violence.
That's the threat to the world.
However, as Seth Barron continues in City Journal, in areas where whites do live, America, Canada, Europe, and Australia, New Zealand, white nationalists indeed perpetrate a significant proportion of the relatively uncommon acts of extremist violence.
Remember Obama talking about how we shouldn't worry about Islamist violence because you had a bigger chance of slipping and hurting yourself in the bathtub?
Remember when Obama said that?
And Steven Pinker says that in his book, Enlightenment Now, he says, oh, they're just trying to make you afraid, but the numbers don't rate it.
You have a better chance of being hit by whatever, lightning, than being killed by a terrorist.
But, you know, in a country that is majority white, there are going to be a lot of white people who are terrorists.
But the thing is, the New York Times and these other people, they list, they have a very, very strange way of counting what is a white nationalist crime or even an extremist crime.
They list the ADL, the guy before the Anti-Defense League, Anti-Defamation League.
They list things like a Klan member who was killed by his wife, who was also a Klan member, and they call that an extremist crime.
I mean, these are very much statistics that are being messed with.
And what is the point?
The point is social media is dangerous.
Right-wingers are dangerous.
If Andrew Clavin or Michael Knowles or Ben Shapiro goes on Twitter and starts saying, gee, you know, the individual freedom should be protected.
He can be shut down for anything because he's inspiring some clown somewhere with a rifle who's going to kill innocent Muslim people.
That is the narrative they're building.
It's untrue.
They are lying.
The incident of white nationalism isn't going up.
Again, it's a disgusting idea.
It's a stupid, anti-Western, anti-Christian idea.
It is a steady state.
It is a danger.
There's no question about it, but it is a very tiny danger, just like Obama said about Islamism, which is a much larger danger around the world.
They are talking about this because they want the right to shut right-wingers down on social media.
That's all it is.
It's crisis-mongering, which is a sign of guilt, and trying to stifle dissent, which is a sign of, guess what?
Guilt.
They are guilty because they're wrong and they know they're wrong.
Another crisis, by the way, just on another subject, really, is this Mueller report.
Attorney General Barr is in front of Congress and he's testifying.
He went there to testify about the Department of Justice's budget.
And of course, they blindsided him with a bunch of questions about the Mueller report and all this, the crisis and all this stuff.
What's really interesting about this is the rules that are hampering Mueller from releasing the report, which he says he will do within a week.
He says he will do it within a week, but the rules that are keeping him from doing it are rules that were put in place when the Democrats became hysterical because the Star report about Bill Clinton abusing women and lying about it, the Star report came out and it was released to the public and they were upset about that.
So they put rules in place to prevent that from happening so quickly.
Barr is following those rules and the leftist media is saying, well, the Star report was released.
Yes.
And after the Star report was released, they made new rules that are hampering Barr.
However, there was one piece of news, there wasn't one piece of news in these bar hearings that was kind of overlooked in this whole, in all the news about when he was going to release the report, and that is that he says that he is investigating the Department of Justice, not just the Inspector General, who is already investigating how the investigation into Trump started.
Barr says he, the Department of Justice, is going to investigate it too.
And when he was asked why this morning in today's hearings, this is what he said.
This is cut 13.
One of the things I want to do is pull together all the information from the various investigations that have gone on, including on the Hill and in the Department, and see if there are any remaining questions to be addressed.
And can you share with us why you feel a need to do that?
Well, you know, for the same reason we're worried about foreign influence in elections, we want to make sure that during elections, I think spying on a political campaign is a big deal.
It's a big deal.
Generation I grew up in, which was the Vietnam War period, you know, people were all concerned about spying on anti-war people and so forth by the government.
And there were a lot of rules put in place to make sure that there's an adequate basis before our law enforcement agencies get involved in political surveillance.
I'm not suggesting that those rules were violated, but I think it's important to look at that.
And I'm not talking about the FBI necessarily, but intelligence agencies more broadly.
So Barr may investigate how this Russian hoax got started.
If the Democrats are looking for a catastrophe, that could be it.
That could be it for them.
All right, we've got the mailbag coming up.
I've got to say goodbye.
Stop, please.
I can't.
This is like.
This is like one of those Chinese tortures where they drip things on you.
Anyway, we've got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
Come over to dailywire.com and subscribe.
It's a lousy 10 bucks a month, a lousy 100 bucks for the full year.
You get the leftist tears tumbler, and you get to ask questions in the mailbag, and I will solve all your problems for $100 a year.
I mean, that's a good deal.
Come over to dailywire.com.
All right.
A mailbag.
Now, that's when you're supposed to have the screen for the mailbag.
All right, from Braden.
Mailbag Moments00:14:31
Hi, are there any areas in which the private sector is outdone by the public sector?
In other words, in which the government can do things better than a private business.
No, there are no areas where the government can do it better, but there are areas where it has to be done by the government.
I mean, take the military.
The military, if you want to buy a screw in the military, you get screwed.
A screw costs you $100 million, right?
The military is incredibly inefficient, incredibly bureaucratic.
Doesn't have to be that way.
If it was run by the private sector, it would operate better.
I mean, it would still be our great military, but we would operate better.
Costs would be kept down because there'd be competition and bureaucratic red tape would be cut.
However, you cannot have individuals running an army in a free country.
That's not the way it should be.
You can get together in an emergency, you can get together a militia.
But the main army, that is one of the reasons.
That's one of the reasons you have the right to bear arms.
That is mainly the reason you have the right to bear arms.
It's because when the Constitution was written and they said the federal government is going to run the army, the state said, well, how will we protect ourselves from the federal army?
And the answer was, citizens will have the right to bear arms.
So in an emergency, you can put together a well-ordered militia.
That was the argument.
But you can't, even so, it would have to be the state government doing it because you can't have governments run by individual guys.
You can't have me, you know, Clavin's army coming by and saying, you're not obeying Clavin's rules.
Although actually, that would actually be an improvement, I guess.
So yeah, you could have that.
But for other people, you can't have that.
All right, from Jake.
But no, the private sector could do it better.
From Jake, Andrew, I'm looking for advice on how to behave in my current situation.
My girlfriend and I have been dating for about two and a half years.
We met and got together our first semester of law school.
We've discussed marriage.
We both agree we'd like to get married.
However, I've yet to propose.
The traditionalist in me wants to propose now because I'm excited to start this new chapter.
And I think it's wrong to date a girl for years.
However, the other traditionalist side of me knows that we have yet to graduate law school past the bar and I have no employment secured yet.
I know having these ducks in a row are important to her and her family.
They're also important to me.
And in particular, the lack of employment in many ways makes me feel like a little boy unworthy of making her a wife, not the man I want to be.
Any thoughts on balancing these two urges and what is the best way to approach the situation?
Yeah, I mean, first of all, you're mischaracterizing this.
This is not your traditional or one traditional urge against another.
This is one traditional urge against fear.
Ask the girl to marry you.
Ask the girl to marry you and then go and get a job so you can support her if she has a kid and if that's what she wants.
You want to know how you're acting like a little boy.
You're not acting like a little boy because you don't have a job.
You're still in school.
You're going to graduate.
Hopefully you'll get a job soon after that.
You're acting like a little boy because you're not asking the girl to marry you.
I mean, it's just pure rationalization and fear.
You asked, I gave you the answer.
I don't mean to be that hard on you, but that's the real answer.
From Corey, dear Mr. Clavin, I'm addicted to the devil's cocaine, anger.
I don't want to be, though.
I want to be like you.
I look up to you like a father or like the father I want to be.
The anger that I've carried with me for so long is tearing my life apart, and I don't know what to do.
Sometimes I wonder if my family is better off without me.
And that thought keeps me up at night.
How can I turn this around so I can do better for my son?
How can I be more like you?
Hey, Corey, first of all, good for you for knowing that this is a problem.
I mean, that's a really, really important thing.
It is really important to look in the mirror and say, I am screwed up.
Something is wrong.
I did it.
It saved my life.
You have to do it.
You've done it.
Good for you.
Now you need to get help.
You need to get help.
If not therapy, anger management, whatever it is you need to do, you need to get help.
I mean, you're not going to be able to get through this.
Why are you angry?
You don't know.
You know, it's probably something in your past, probably things that have happened to you, probably something that's twisted inside, some kind of knot.
There are people who make a profession out of untying those knots.
Go find one of them.
If you wrote me a letter and said, I've got this big problem.
I've got this enormous swelling in my side.
What did I tell you?
I would tell you to go to a doctor who fixes swellings inside.
That's what you do.
There are people who deal with anger.
Go find one of them.
Good for you for knowing you got a problem, but go solve it because it will ruin your life and it will ruin your son's life as well.
From Drew, hey, Andrew, I'm a big fan of the show and all the great entertainment you've created.
I've just started another kingdom and absolutely love it so far.
I also love knowing that not every piece of media I enjoy is spawned from the Hollywood left.
So I've always had this question, but in the last couple of years have found it very hard to ask or talk about since it occurred in my family.
From a Christian perspective, what are your views on forgiveness and going to heaven if someone commits suicide?
I've heard someone say it's an unforgivable sin, which I find disturbing.
I always enjoy hearing your wisdom on personal matters and would love your take on this.
Thanks for everything you do.
First of all, suicide is a disaster, okay?
I've been around it.
It's not a good thing.
People think it solves their problem, and it is a permanent solution to what usually is a temporary problem.
I mean, you know, the worst, the closest I ever came to suicide in my youth, I was weeks away from breaking through and solving so many of my problems.
I thought I was in hell.
I was really just in a small tunnel and the light was very close.
So suicide is a problem.
It leaves behind utter wreckage, utter devastation.
It destroys the lives of the people who love you.
It leaves them angry and guilty and feeling just awful.
It is a disaster.
The question you asked about whether there's forgiveness for suicide is a question that you don't have to answer, okay?
I don't have to answer because we don't get a vote.
We do not get a vote on who gets into heaven.
This is one of the misuses of religion as far as I'm concerned.
It is not one of the uses of religion to determine who gets into heaven because guess what?
One guy gets the vote.
He gets all the votes and he's taking care of it.
It's in his hands.
You don't have to worry about that.
What you have to worry about is doing the things that show that you believe in that guy.
Things like treating your neighbor, loving your neighbor like yourself, loving God himself, showing the kind of forgiveness that has been shown to you for who you are.
You know, people commit suicide in all kinds of tragic situations, sometimes just because they're depressed, sometimes because they have some kind of personal difficulty that could be cured in time.
Some people kill themselves because they have a fatal illness and they don't want their family to have to deal with it.
You're reading Another Kingdom.
The front piece to another kingdom is a quote from C.S. Lewis: Nobody knows any story but their own.
No one is told any story but their own.
You don't know what another person's relationship with God is.
You do not know what another person's relationship with God is.
It's not your job to judge.
So whether or not people can be forgiven for it is not a question we can answer.
But the question we can answer is whether it's a good thing to do.
And it's almost always a disaster for the people you love most and the people you leave behind.
From Austin, hey, Andrew, what do you think about Christians standing on the street corner and sharing the good news?
I've never heard of it helping anyone come to Christ.
And I know a lot of people, including myself, avoid them when we see them.
Many people think it's a requirement.
If you're going to be a Christian, how important do you think it is?
I think it's completely unimportant.
I think it's useless.
I don't think it does anything.
I think it's almost very unlikely.
I mean, there's nothing wrong with sitting outside and having a place where people can come and ask if they want to ask.
I think that buttonholing people, I think, is really off-putting.
It really disturbs me when people try to, when people argue that you have to do it because it's the right thing for you to do, but they're not arguing that it actually is effective in converting people, if it's actually effective in bringing people to Christ.
Now, I could be wrong.
Maybe this works sometimes.
If it does, then go out and do it.
But I think the best way to bring people to Christ is to be honest about your beliefs and to live in the joy of Christ.
And if you're not living in the joy of Christ, you should find out why and fix that.
That could be a psychological problem, not a spiritual one.
So, you know, I just think a lot of direct evangelicalism, evangelism, is not helpful.
You know, it's just not helpful.
If I'm wrong, if it is, then that's a good thing.
It's a good thing if you know how to do it well.
It certainly was great that Billy Graham, I think, brought a lot of people to religion and helped a lot of people.
So that kind of evangelism, I think, is worthwhile.
But buttonholing people and getting in their face, I don't know.
It just doesn't sound effective to me.
From Nathan, my wife and I have almost two years just had our first child.
We are both Christians and had no issue morally at the time using birth control.
And we were actually on birth control when she got pregnant.
Even though we were wanting to wait to have children, we both agree this is one of the best things that has ever happened to us.
But after spending time with my son, I have felt guilty for trying to prevent him from being here by using contraceptives.
Should I feel guilty for not wanting to have him, even though now I wouldn't change it for the world?
Thanks.
I love the show and I loved Another Kingdom and I'm getting my wife to read it now.
You know, no.
I mean, come on.
What good is this guilt doing?
What is this guilt improving?
Why is it changing?
Are you deciding not to use contraceptives now and have as many children as come along?
I mean, there's nothing wrong.
I don't believe there's anything inherently wrong in using contraceptives.
I disagree with the Catholics on this.
I think that having the family that you want when you want it is a helpful thing, not a bad thing.
I think a lot of people, you know, a lot of people have had hard times through the years with having more children than they could handle.
And I don't think you need to do that now that you have this wonderful technology of contraception.
I think contraception has caused a lot of problems.
It has taken, caused people to lose their moral minds and forget that sex is still an important act between two people, not just a kind of meeting of organs.
And I think contraception has had a lot of bad effects.
But used properly, just like antidepressant medication, used properly, I don't think it's a bad thing at all.
You were not, it's a silly thing to say you were trying to keep your son from being born.
You didn't know your son.
You didn't know that was who was going to be born.
You should not feel guilty about it.
If you don't want to use it, don't use it.
If you do want to use it, use it.
That's my opinion.
From Benjamin, my sister is in need of serious help.
Ever since she was in an emotionally and sometimes physically abusive relationship, she hasn't been the same.
Her mental health is very low, and sometimes she talks about killing herself.
All my life, I've seen her struggle with medical issues and her weight, and I've never known her to take responsibility for things that she can fix on her own.
I tell my mom she needs a therapist, but she tells me no, she needs Jesus.
Though I do agree that God can help, I'm not sure she has faith.
I know one day my sister will have to make a turnaround, but she is already almost 30 years old.
I love her and want her to fix herself, but she just won't, and I don't know how to help.
Thank you to you and the Daily Wire.
Listen, you can't force somebody to save themselves, and hectoring them and badgering them is not going to help her.
It's not going to help her.
I suspect, you know, of course she needs Jesus, but that doesn't mean she doesn't also need a therapist.
You know, she probably does need a therapist.
She probably needs somebody to talk to her who understands these problems.
It's different levels of human beings.
You know, the spiritual level is one level, but sometimes your psychological problems can keep you from getting to the spiritual level.
If you're constantly worried about, you know, depression, if you're constantly having bad relations with people, bad sexual relations, bad intimate relations of any kind, and you're depressed and you're unhappy, you're angry, all those things.
That requires a doctor.
I mean, just like you wouldn't, again, you wouldn't say, heal me, God.
You would say, heal me, God, and then go to the doctor.
You know, you don't just say, heal me, God, and then not get help.
God helps those who help themselves.
Now, what can you do?
Not very much.
The most important thing you can do is love her and be there for her and treat her with kindness and respect.
It's possible you may see an opening in a conversation where you suggest that maybe a therapist would help her, but it's possible that won't come.
You know, you can't save people.
You can't save their lives.
what you can do is put love in their lives.
And that sometimes can have a curative effect and sometimes cause them to trust you enough to take some good advice.
But most importantly, you should be there for treat her with love, treat her with respect, and hopefully that'll help her start to move away from obviously self-destructive behavior.
From Devon to Don Clavin the Godfather, it looks like since Trump was elected, Republicans have abandoned their position on fiscal responsibility.
The deficit has gone up drastically under President Trump, and no one seems to care.
Should we be calling out our own side on this?
What should be done about it?
Keep up the good work.
You know, this has been a problem on both sides.
I mean, nobody pays attention to this.
It's not with Trump.
I mean, it was George W. Bush, too.
He almost doubled, I think, the deficit.
And it is a serious, serious problem, probably, unlike white nationalism, probably one of the biggest problems we face.
I think that, you know, the right ended up hating Paul Ryan, and maybe Ryan was an ineffective Speaker of the House, but he was the first guy to have the courage, that I can remember, to have the courage to suggest ways that entitlements should be cut.
That is where most of our debt comes from.
It comes from these burgeoning entitlements that they can't, they have no discretion over spending them.
They have to spend them.
They should be pushed up.
They should kick in.
I mean, look, I would create a whole different system, but I don't think that's politically feasible.
I don't think that's going to happen.
We can talk about it, but I don't think it's going to happen.
But I think that you can push up Social Security to make it more realistic.
It was put in place to kick in at 65 when people died at 63.
That made fiscal sense.
Now people die at 80.
You need another 15 years to make the money that goes into Social Security.
You don't do it right away.
You do it over a generation.
But we need to reform entitlement, and there is absolutely no political appetite to do this.
That's a phrase people use, no political appetite.
That means people are too scared to do it.
They're afraid they'll lose their jobs.
And that's what we should do.
We should do it under Trump.
We should have done it under Obama.
We should have done it under Bush.
Nobody has the wherewithal, the guts to do it.
From Dalton, Dear Andrew Clavin, I've been watching your show religiously for almost two years, and you have truly changed my life.
Clearing Confusion About Friendships00:04:09
I was hoping you could clear up your position on men and women as friends.
You said something along the lines.
I can't understand the sentence, but I'll move on.
I was hoping you could elaborate on what you feel about this a little more.
P.S. I let my literature professor read your book, The Great Good Thing, and he loved it so much that he wants to use it for one of his classes.
Nice.
Thank you.
Men and women and friends, as friends.
Look, I have had female friends.
You can have female friends.
My only point about having female friends is that you should be aware that it's a minefield.
There are dangers.
Just because your friend, just because a female is your friend doesn't mean you don't still want to sleep with her.
It doesn't mean in a moment of weakness you won't sleep with her, whatever your obligations are, you don't want to violate that relationship that way.
You should just be aware of it.
I mean, the problem with sexual relations in America is that we don't talk about them honestly.
We don't talk about the fact that you're sitting there with your friend and in a moment, if you have a couple of drinks together, in a moment of tenderness, things might get out of hand in a way they just wouldn't if you're sitting with your guy friend.
That just wouldn't happen.
So it's dangerous.
I mean, that's the thing.
Be aware.
People can exercise goodwill and restraint and have these things happen, but you have to be aware that this is something that's happening.
And if you're married and your wife gets jealous, go with your wife.
I mean, serve your wife first before you serve your friend.
So I hope that clears that up.
I mean, it's just a kind of messy little fact of life.
From William Andrew Crankvan.
You've said that you believe opinions on abortion will shift with advancements in technology.
Do you still hold this position given that liberals are viewing late-term abortions more favorably?
Yeah, I believe that, look, I think that sexual mores are changing as we speak.
I think that the left, what the left always does is they come up with these stupid ideas.
And then leftists change their minds and blame right-wingers.
That's the way it works, okay?
So what's happening now is they have the Me Too movement.
The Me Too movement makes a lot of sense in a lot of ways.
Women shouldn't be abused, but women also need to take care of themselves.
Men should have a conscious care for women.
Women need taken care of.
How's that?
Let me put it bluntly.
Women need taken care of.
Men need to take care of them.
Even when they say yes, sometimes you have to take care of them.
Take them home.
If they've had too many drinks, take them home.
You got to, you know, and let them go and leave them alone.
You know, we have to do those things.
We have to act like gentlemen and ladies.
The same thing is true with abortion.
I think abortion is dropping off because people are getting the picture.
And they're getting the picture because we can take pictures.
We can see these things.
I haven't seen the movie Unplanned yet, but I understand that's what it's about.
It's about a lady who worked for Planned Parenthood and actually saw what an abortion looks like.
Why do you think abortion advocates tear down pictures of abortions?
Why do you think they want to censor them?
Why do you think they won't give a review to Unplanned or my film, the Gosnell film?
Why do you think?
Because they don't want you to see.
The more people see, the more they will know, the more they will know that this is untenable.
That's my hope.
It may go the other way.
It may go the way that people become so cold, so alienated from their own moral sensibilities that we just start to butcher each other altogether.
You better hope that's not what happens because it starts with unborn babies and goes to babies and goes to children, and that will happen.
But no, I think that people will wake up and they will see what's going on.
The left look at the left as being hysterical about this.
They're defending a bad ideology by getting more and more hysterical, more and more absolute about it.
That's what happens just before ideologies collapse.
I got to go.
I will not be here tomorrow because I'm flying back to Los Angeles, sad to leave Hillsdale.
And let me say thank you again to Hillsdale, all the people here.
John Miller, who invited me, Scott Bertram, the Publius Fellowship, Scott Bertram, who has kept this show on the road every day despite a series of unfortunate technical events.
I'll be back on Friday and then the Clavenless weekend.
So you got about two days left and then it's over.
Andrew Clavin's Farewell00:00:49
I'm Andrew Clavin.
This is The Andrew Clavin Show.
Oh, hooray, hurrah!
The Andrew Clavin Show is produced by Robert Sterling.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring, senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, and our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
Edited by Adam Sajovitz.
Audio is mixed by Mike Cormina.
Hair and makeup is by Jessua Alvera.
And our animations are by Cynthia Angulo.
Production assistant, Nick Sheehan.
The Andrew Clavin Show is a Daily Wire production, Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
Today on the Ben Shapiro Show, Bernie Sanders shares some unfortunate news with his followers.
A Democratic Congress person gets owned by Candace Owens, and the Israeli election plays out.