Ep. 743 dissects mass shootings—El Paso’s eco-fascist killer and Dayton’s leftist Satanist—rejecting partisan blame while condemning white nationalism as "inherently evil." The episode critiques media bias (CNN omitting Dayton’s left-wing ties), Trump’s measured response, and Warren/O’Rourke’s baseless accusations. It ties societal violence to masculinity’s extremes, warns against silencing dissent, and mocks progressive priorities like gendered language over poverty. Closing with Michael Knowles on white supremacy, it frames the debate as a choice: responsible leadership or escalating chaos. [Automatically generated summary]
So this is the place where I usually deliver some devastatingly brilliant satire, making fun of the absurd ideas of our friends on the left.
I do this because if I can't find the humor and absurdity, the world becomes too grim to bear, and because absurdity is funny, even when, especially, maybe especially when, it's the absurdity of corruption.
We were created to be like the angels and have fallen to be less than men.
That ought to be good for a laugh or two, same as when a toff and a tuxedo slips and falls into a mud bottle.
But as your mother used to tell you about fighting with your siblings, it's all fun and games until somebody gets hurt.
The same is true of the fall of man.
It's absurdly hilarious until the shooting starts.
There's nothing worse than these stories.
The killings in El Paso and Dayton, one by a right-leaning evildoer and one by an evildoer on the left.
Our countrymen snuffed out by two of Satan's glove puppets, people who were no longer fully human because the devil got into them through their broken places and devoured the men God made them to be.
The words that always come to my mind in these moments are the famous words of the philosopher Wittgenstein, who said, whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
Would that we could follow that advice, but since we can't, and since social media seems to give the worst of us the loudest voices, let me suggest just a couple of guidelines for speaking about the unspeakable.
First, your political opponents are not to blame.
No one has blood on his hands but the killer.
In a moment of anger after a tragic event, I made this mistake myself once.
I blamed Obama's anti-police rhetoric for the cop killings in Dallas, and I'm sorry for it.
Obama was wrong.
He might even have been careless, but only the shooter was to blame.
Look, we all have points of view.
We may be unhappy with the nation's turnaway from religion, I am, or we may feel religion is partly to blame.
We may not like guns.
We may not like undue restrictions on guns, and we may prove to be right in our opinions.
But the people who advocate for the things we oppose are not evil murderers.
They feel they have good reasons for what they fight for.
They're trying to do what's right.
They may be wildly wrong.
We can debate them.
We can even deride them.
But we can't confuse them with the enemy.
And secondly, it may be, it almost surely is, that there are some evils we cannot eliminate without doing undue damage to the greater cause of freedom.
White supremacy is a despicable philosophy.
It's an offense against the good God who made us in his image.
It is an intellectual path that leads straight to hell.
But I would rather preserve our right to free speech and thought than forbid even this vomitous ugliness.
We know that once we begin to silence people, free speech is lost altogether.
Only political power remains.
Who has the political force to label his opponent a white supremacist or a fascist or a communist or a heretic or whatever and gag him for the supposed good of all?
Cultural problems require cultural solutions.
Even if you could chain people to righteousness, the chains themselves would be so great an evil as to override whatever good was gained.
People of goodwill must instead unite in denouncing this sort of evil without using the denunciations to try to maneuver for political position.
In any case, this much seems clear.
Not one perfectly worded, ever-so-witty, Twitter-flung insult has brought us even a millimeter closer to a solution.
Nothing we've tried has done that.
Receive First Month Free00:02:13
So let's try something new.
Information gathering, civil debate in which we listen to the people we disagree with most, and carefully vetted attempts at solutions.
Come, let us reason together.
And in the meantime, let us pray as the Spirit tells us to, with sighs too deep for words.
Trigger warning.
I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky-dunky.
Life is tickety-boo.
Birds are ringing, also singing, hunky-dunky-dee-dee.
Ship-shaped ipsy-topsy, the world is a bitty zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hooray, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
First, I have to talk about keeps.
Do you want a wonderful head of hair like mine?
Of course you don't.
You want to keep your hair.
I mean, look at me.
Look at me.
Do you want to look like this?
No.
For five minutes now and starting just at 10 bucks per month, you'll never have to worry about hair loss again.
It's super easy to get started.
You sign up.
It takes less than five minutes.
Just answer a few simple questions and snap some photos to complete your online doctor consultation.
You get to talk to a licensed physician.
He'll review your information online, recommend the right treatment for you.
Then it's shipped right to your door every three months.
They offer the generic versions of the only two FDA-approved hair loss products out there.
You may have tried them before, but never for this price.
Keeps treatments are up to 90% effective at reducing and stopping further hair loss.
It's only 10 bucks to 35 bucks a month.
Plus now you can get your first month free.
It's a hell of a deal for keeping your hair.
You can't keep my hair because it's already in a box, but you can keep your hair.
If you suffer from hair loss, the last thing you need is to wait to see a doctor.
With Keeps, there's finally a way to get the help you need when you need it for a limited time.
Receive your first month of treatment for free.
Go to keeps.com/slash Clavin.
Again, that's K-E-E-P-S dot com slash Clavin for your first month of treatment free.
And I know what you're thinking.
You're thinking, okay, he doesn't have hair, but at least I need to know how to spell his name.
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
Let me begin talking about this because what I want to talk about is the way we talk.
Domestic Terrorism Debate00:15:48
I want to talk about the way we reason about this and obviously the political divides.
But I want to start by playing something from Pete Buttigieg that he said during the debates last week.
It has nothing to do with the shootings.
I just want to point out a kind of reasoning that I think we have to avoid.
This is cut seven.
It is time to stop worrying about what the Republicans will say.
Look, if it's true that if we embrace a far-left agenda, they're going to say we're a bunch of crazy socialists.
If we embrace a conservative agenda, you know what they're going to do?
They're going to say we're a bunch of crazy socialists.
So let's just stand up for the right policy, go out there and defend it.
That's the policy I'm putting forward.
Not because I think it's the right triangulation between Republicans here and Democrats there, because I think it's the right answer for people like my mother-in-law, who is here, whose life was saved by the ACA, but who is still far too vulnerable to the fact that the insurance industry does not care.
So, you know, I don't hate Pete Buttigeg.
I think he's wrong about almost everything, but I don't hate him.
But he has a way, a form of moral thought that I really think leads him down some stupid paths.
I mean, for instance, the guy is a Christian.
Good for him.
He's constantly condemning his political opponents as bad Christians.
He's constantly saying that their opinions make them bad Christians.
Here's a guy.
He's a gay guy, right?
Who 20 minutes ago, 20 minutes ago, we would have universally acknowledged that he was committing a sin simply by his relationship.
That's like literally 10 minutes ago.
I mean, you know, it was nothing ago that we would have all condemned him in terms of Christian morality.
Many Christians would still condemn him.
And instead of saying, gee, that's taught me that maybe I should be a little slow on the trigger to condemn the people I disagree with.
All he wants is to get that power of condemnation seized away from the people who don't like him, and he wants to use it on the people he doesn't like.
That is a bad way of thinking.
And the same thing is true when he says this.
When he says, oh, the left is going to call us crazy communists no matter what we say.
So let's not worry about that and let's just be crazy communists.
What he might have said, the right is going to call us crazy communists.
What he might have said was, you know, the right has a point.
The right has a point.
There are crazy communists.
There is something wrong with socialism.
It does collapse societies.
It does destroy cultures.
It does ruin freedom.
So let's be a little careful about that.
But still, they're going to call us that name anyway.
So let's not put forward the kinds of Democrat solutions that we want to.
That would have made perfect sense, and then he still would have been wrong about his solutions, but still that would have made perfect sense.
We do this too on the right.
I mean, we have a case against the media, and it is a good, good beef, right?
They lie.
They leave out anything that doesn't pull to their Democrat ideas.
They're unfair to us.
They demonize us.
If we vote for law enforcement at the border, enforcing laws of the border, they call us white supremacists.
No matter what we do, they call us white supremacists.
They're now saying it on CNN.
I mean, nobody's watching it, but still, on CNN, you know, if you voted for Donald Trump, you're a racist.
Anybody who voted for Donald Trump is a racist.
It's nonsense.
I think it's nonsense that Trump himself is a racist.
I think they're talking crap, but they do it all the time.
We have a perfect beef.
But it would be the wrong thing to say.
It would be the wrong thing to say, since they will call us white nationalists no matter what, there's no such thing as a problem with white nationalism on the right.
There is a problem with white nationalism on the right.
I mean, this is, it's the extreme right, it's the alt-right, it's something we all reject, and it's something we get so sick of being attached to, so sick of being accused of, that sometimes maybe we forget that it's really there, that it really is there.
So let's not do that.
Let's just talk about this without them.
Let us get the media to leave the room.
We'll get the left to leave the room for a minute.
Let's talk about this between sensible people like ourselves.
All right.
Now, there are two shootings, obviously, over the weekend.
And it's, you know, these are not frequent events.
I can't tell yet whether they're actually on the rise.
The statistics aren't in yet.
The old statistics said they weren't on the rise.
But certainly seems like there's a lot of these mass shootings, a lot of copycat killers in El Paso.
This guy, some of this is still unclear, but in El Paso, he did seem to be a white supremacist.
He hated illegal immigration.
He was also one of these environmental fascists that he was trying to solve this horrible crisis of global warming that doesn't exist, but, you know, or that can't be addressed certainly this way.
But so he, you know, he was a nut.
But I have to say that he was a nut on the right.
Guy in Dayton, right?
He said, I love Satan and he was voting for Elizabeth Warren.
All right.
So he was a left-winger.
You know, if you're voting for Satan and Elizabeth Warren, your philosophy is a little bit tough to track.
But clearly the guy was a left-winger.
And so, you know, you go on Twitter.
Twitter at this point is hell.
The moment these shootings start, you should just get off Twitter, should get off social media altogether.
I mean, I really, when I look at Twitter, I just see ourselves in hell.
What it's going to be like in hell, just people just constantly blaming each other for things that they didn't do.
I mean, the people I oppose, I oppose their philosophy.
I oppose leftism.
I hate leftism.
But they're not the cause of these shooters, even the guy on the left.
And here is something, you know, I looked at the New York Times this morning, a former newspaper.
They just don't mention, they don't mention the Dayton killers politics.
The fact that he's on the left just doesn't exist.
It's just not there.
Article after article after article about white supremacy, they don't mention it.
And, you know, Trump goes after the media, and he's right.
He has a tweet that he says the media has a big responsibility to life and safety in our country.
Fake news has contributed greatly to the anger and rage that has built up over many years.
News coverage has got to start being fair, balanced, and unbiased, or these terrible problems will only get worse.
Listen, I think he has a point there.
I think the fact that there is not, I would bet, I would bet cash money that if I went through the networks, if I went through every major news operation, the real major ones, trying to find somebody who voted for Trump and has a say over editorial content, I would not be able to do it.
And that is bad.
That is eliminating half the country.
It's bad that every comedian demonizes Trump.
That's a bad thing.
If you laugh at everybody, you bring everybody together.
If you laugh only at one side, you just make that rift worse.
Okay?
But having said all that, having said all that, there is a difference between these two shooters and their philosophies, and there is something we have to own here.
And I'll talk about it in just a minute.
But first, as our cities devolve into chaos and criminality, it is a good thing to care for the security of your home and the people around you.
And that is Ring's mission.
It's their mission to make neighborhoods safer.
You probably know about their smart. video doorbells.
They also have motion-activated floodlight cams.
The whole purpose is to keep your home safe.
Ring helps you stay connected to your home anywhere in the world.
If there's a package delivery or a surprise visitor, you'll get an alert and be able to see, hear, and speak to them right there on your phone, challenge them, talk to them, find out what they want.
That's thanks to the HD video and two-way audio features on Ring devices.
As a listener, you have a special offer on a Ring starter kit available right now.
You get a video doorbell and a 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.
You'll be able to see and talk to people wherever they are and say to them, how do you spell Clavin?
If they know, don't let them in, I'm telling you.
So here's the thing that right-wingers don't like to hear.
And I am a right-winger.
Here's the thing we don't like to hear.
Someone who votes for Elizabeth Warren is not evil.
I used to say the same thing about Obama, and people would yell at me, Obama is not evil.
Obama, that's not what evil looks like.
We think that's evil sometimes on the right because we're spoiled.
In America, we're spoiled.
We've never had a Hitler.
We've never had a Stalin.
We don't really know what evil looks like.
And we think, oh, Obama, he's evil.
He's not evil.
He's wrong.
Obama was wrong.
Obama was a little corrupt.
Obama in certain ways, in certain ways of his use of power.
But evil, no.
Elizabeth Warren, not evil.
I disagree with almost every word out of her mouth.
She does things that I really despise.
I mean, she did this thing, you know, she went out and she did this thing about Donald Trump being to blame for El Paso, but no one has asked her a word about the fact that the other shooter seems to have voted for her.
Here's Elizabeth Warren.
White nationalism is a domestic terrorism threat, and it is a threat that is every bit as big and as poses a threat to the United States, very much like foreign terrorism does.
The president has embraced white nationalists.
He has encouraged white nationalists.
He is there with white nationalism when white nationalists embrace him and call him their friend.
You know, I take them at their word on that.
And do you think that he is a white nationalist?
Well, he certainly has done everything that the white nationalists have wanted him to do.
The white nationalists have celebrated him.
And since he has been in office, since he has engaged in one ugly statement after another, day after day, we've seen hate crimes on the rise.
We've seen this kind of domestic terrorism on the rise.
This is where we are right now.
This is garbage, and it's garbage, and no one will say to her, well, the other guy was an Elizabeth Warren supporter.
Are you evil?
Are you part of the problem?
No one's going to say that to her.
But, but I have to admit, I have to admit, the left has a point this far.
There is something about white nationalism that is inherently evil, right?
The idea itself is evil.
If you are a socialist, you are signing on to an idea that is ultimately going to collapse society, ultimately destroy societies.
If you're a communist, you are signing on to an idea that is going to result.
It's going to result in mass murder.
But the impulse toward communism is not the same.
And that's why you see people walking around with Shea Guevara t-shirts and nobody says, hey, the guy was a mass murderer, which he was.
I mean, the guy was a mass murderer.
Nobody says that.
But if you walked around in a Hitler t-shirt, people would stop you.
There is something to this.
It's not the thing that the left thinks there is, but there is something to it.
If you say, gee, the world should be more equal, you know, the world should be more fair.
That's not inherently evil, even though you are going down a stupid road.
You're going down a path that's going the wrong direction because only freedom works.
But, but your intent is not evil.
Whereas if you think the battleground that we are fighting on is the battleground of what color people's skin is, if you think it's the battleground of what race you are, I'm not going to say you're evil per se because you should be allowed to explore any idea you want, but you're dancing with the devil.
You're dancing with the devil.
I mean, this is the Bible.
This is in the Bible.
And you cannot, it always got me that the Ku Kuk's Klan burn crosses on people's lawn.
You go like, what verse is that?
What verse are you referring to?
Thou shalt terrorize your neighbor.
Thou shalt hate your neighbor.
What are you talking about?
This is biblical.
If we're created in God's image, it doesn't say, you know, black people are created in God's image.
Listen, the first people may have been black.
For all we know, God looks like Morgan Freeman Jr.
You know, this is something that we know, that we know we are assigned the task of loving our neighbor.
You are, when you dance with this devil, when you dance with this idea, you are dancing with the devil.
So that we have to acknowledge that this is something on the right that is bad.
And it is on the right, even though we reject it, even though it's to the extreme, even though a lot of extremism on the left is in Congress where our extremism is holed up in his mother's basement, spewing hate onto the internet.
Yes, it's different.
I get it.
But we got to say we have to take responsibility.
I think we have to take some ownership for this idea and denounce it.
We have to be clear that we denounce it.
We don't have to play into the left demonizing us all the time.
So the Wall Street Journal had a good piece about this because it's very hard with the media lying all the time.
It's very hard to get a handle on how much of this is, whether this is growing, whether it's getting worse.
White nationalism has been a problem for a long time.
The journal writes that violence committed by white men inspired by an extremist ideology makes up a growing number of domestic terrorism cases, according to the FBI.
Of about 850 current domestic terrorism cases, now remember, it doesn't take a lot to do this, but in a country of over 300 million people, that's not that many cases.
40% involve racially motivated violent extremism, and a majority of those cases involve white supremacists, the FBI said.
So it's very hard, again, to get at what that means.
It may mean about 300 cases of those or white supremacists.
That's a lot, you know, but it sounds, it's still a lot.
These guys are lone wolves, all right?
Like they used to talk about with Islamists.
Michael McGarrity, the FBI's top counterterrorism official, says we are most concerned about lone offenders primarily using firearms as these loan offenders represent the dominant trend for lethal domestic terrorists.
So we're talking about guys who are on the internet.
He says frequently these individuals act without a clear group affiliation or guidance, making them challenging to identify, investigate, and disrupt.
Now, remember, again, to give the left the do of their stupidity, remember when Islamist terrorism was the big deal, the front page news, we kept hearing, oh, you know, Islam is the religion of peace.
Anybody who connects this with the ideas of Islam is a terrible, terrible person.
I remember Barack Obama saying, you have more of a chance of falling and hurting yourself in the bathtub than being hit by Islamist extremists.
True.
True of white nationalist extremists, too.
You have far more chance of hurting yourself in the bathtub than being killed by one of these clowns, right?
So we could say the same thing.
But they were wrong.
Obama was wrong.
When Obama said that, when Obama compared Islamist extremism to terrorism, to falling into the bathtub, what I said is that's like comparing a mole to cancer, right?
It's two different things.
There's nothing you can do.
If one person falls in the bathtub, that doesn't mean two people will fall in the bathtub.
But if you leave Islamist extremism unconfronted, if you don't deal with it, it will spread.
It will grow.
It is a cancer.
So I'm going to say the same thing about white supremacist terrorism, about all these mass shootings.
They spread.
I have to say, Donald Trump came out and talked about it this morning.
I thought he did a good job.
I thought he made a good statement.
This is cut number 10 of Trump's statement this morning.
The shooter in El Paso posted a manifesto online, consumed by racist hate.
In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry, and white supremacy.
These sinister ideologies must be defeated.
Hate has no place in America.
Hatred warps the mind, ravages the heart, and devours the soul.
We have asked the FBI to identify all further resources they need to investigate and disrupt hate crimes and domestic terrorism, whatever they need.
We must recognize that the internet has provided a dangerous avenue to radicalize, disturbed minds, and perform demented acts.
We must shine light on the dark recesses of the internet and stop mass murders before they start.
Binary Choice Burden00:09:17
All true, all good.
And by the way, this stuff about attacking Trump's rhetoric, you know, I want to address this for a minute because I think it's important.
All these guys, Beto did it.
It wasn't just Elizabeth Warren.
Beto said he was a white supremacist, which is nonsense.
It's just nonsense.
They should be ashamed of themselves for doing this.
The worst of them was this left-wing Princeton university professor, Eddie Glaud, who is on MSNBC and NBC all the time, who basically, he just, I use him because he exemplified the kind of argument we get from the left that makes conversation impossible.
Listen to what he said.
But it's also important for us to understand the kind of continuity, the line, the connection.
What does it mean to have a discourse in which people are dehumanized?
Where you use a phrase like illegal immigrant, where the phrase itself places that person outside of a certain kind of sense of empathy and decency.
What happens?
Other rising.
What happens when we use language like infestation, children?
You use this, Governor, children, carrying perhaps disease across the border.
What happens?
You set the stage for people who are even more on the extreme to act violently.
We are in a cold civil war.
We are in a cold civil war.
And there are some people who bear the burden of it, Chuck.
There are some of us who bear the burden.
You could take it.
You could not blame anyone other than Oswald.
My parents had to worry about other folk because we grew up in Mississippi.
You had the luxury not to worry about the context.
But we had to live.
We had to grow up in it.
Every word of that is crap.
Every word of it is crap.
It's intellectualized crap.
It's essentially just demonizing people you disagree with.
Illegal immigrants are illegal because they broke the law.
That's what illegal means.
You're not demonizing them.
You're actually describing them correctly.
He doesn't like that.
Does he want open borders?
I don't know.
But whatever he wants, let him argue for it.
Don't tell me, don't tell me that that's demonizing people or putting them outside of humanity.
We've got to be able to use language to describe the things we want.
That's insane.
It's ridiculous.
However, having said that, having said that, and having said that it is a shame that Beto O'Rourke and Elizabeth Warren and even Bernie, although Bernie was a little bit more circumspect, that they blamed Trump for these shootings.
I think that's disgusting.
I think it's embarrassing.
However, you have heard me a million times talk about how rude Trump is, the name-calling.
And you've heard me talk about that it might be necessary to break through this mental prison that the left has created.
Maybe we needed somebody, a bull, to come into that China shop and break these chains that they have put on the national conversation.
It may be necessary.
That doesn't mean it's harmless.
Just because it's necessary doesn't mean it's not a tragic choice.
I mean, this is what I've been saying since the election, that a tragic choice is in fact a tragic choice.
We had a choice between Trump and Clinton.
We made the choice.
We made the right choice.
There's no doubt in my mind we made the right choice.
But that doesn't mean it doesn't have consequences, and it doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about that and stand up for it.
I mean, think about Thanksgiving dinner.
You sit down with your family and your sister starts going off about what a glorious guy Barack Obama is.
I mean, this happens to me all the time.
You know, your brother, your sister starts saying, oh, Obama was so wonderful and Trump is the devil.
It makes a difference whether you turn to her and say, sis, I love you.
You're great.
We've been together all our lives, but you're wrong and I disagree with you and here's why.
Or whether you say, you know, you stupid witch, shut up.
You know, it makes a difference what you say to her.
She may react the same way, either way.
She may just be incapable of conversation, but at least you made the effort, at least the chance that you have to open a conversation remains.
Trump is the president of the United States.
He does go off half-cocked.
He does say things that the left can use to make their case against him.
And I think it's bad.
I think it's bad.
And I think it's going to have a price we pay.
It may even cost us the next election, which would be truly tragic.
It would be a truly tragic thing.
And I don't think we need people yelling at each other when we say these things.
I think that we can understand.
The guy's just a politician.
He's just a politician.
He's not a perfect guy.
He's not anywhere near a perfect guy.
And his flaws cost us just like his good qualities have benefited us.
That's a perfectly fair thing to say.
Let's go back, though, to Trump and what he did say.
The rest of what he said, talking about cultural problems, which I think is really interesting, cut 11.
Second, we must stop the glorification of violence in our society.
This includes the gruesome and grisly video games that are now commonplace.
It is too easy today for troubled youth to surround themselves with a culture that celebrates violence.
We must stop or substantially reduce this, and it has to begin immediately.
Cultural change is hard, but each of us can choose to build a culture that celebrates the inherent worth and dignity of every human life.
That's what we have to do.
Third, we must reform our mental health laws to better identify mentally disturbed individuals who may commit acts of violence and make sure those people not only get treatment, but when necessary, involuntary confinement.
Well, on the mental illness thing, he's 100% right.
I mean, I don't understand why the left is so willing to take people's guns away, which are guaranteed by the Constitution, but they don't want to take people's freedom away when they can no longer deal with that freedom, when they've gone insane.
People who are insane are not part of the conversation in the same way that children aren't part of the conversation about freedom.
Obviously, especially nowadays when we have meds that can help people, that can bring people down.
Obviously, I don't want to demonize all mentally ill people, but there are violent mentally ill people.
They say it's about 30% of shooters.
That's a big number.
It's probably more.
It's probably more.
And there's no reason we can't identify those people and incarcerate them in hopefully, you know, decent places where they can get meds.
But let me talk about the video games and conclude on something else.
The problem with video games isn't video games.
The problem with video games is unattended children, is children without parents, children without a father to sit with them and play video games, children without a father to choose or a mother to choose what kind of video games they're playing to watch over, how much time they play if they go away into this world.
And it's also a problem of men.
It is a problem of men.
And this is what I want to conclude with.
And then we're going to talk, bring on Knowles and talk about more about this white supremacy thing.
When I talk about, when I look at Never Trumpers, the mistake they make is they don't know what a binary choice is, right?
A binary choice doesn't mean there are only two choices.
It means of the choices there are, you have only two.
Somebody says your money or your life, there may be other choices, but you have been limited by the situation to two choices.
An election is a binary choice.
We made a choice between Trump and Clinton.
I think that was the right choice, but those were the only choices we have.
We didn't have a make-believe choice in which, oh, well, we vote for Clinton and then things really go well over the next four years and then we get a better president the next time.
That doesn't exist.
That's just speculation.
We had two choices.
That's a binary choice.
It's a tragic thing.
The future, you know, we see these t-shirts that say the future is female.
The future is male.
The future is male.
We have a binary choice.
The future is always male.
The future is male because men do things first.
That is the way it goes.
As long as men are men, men are going to do things first.
That's why we celebrate the first woman to do something because a man did it first.
The future is always male, okay?
People don't like to hear it, but it's just true.
Camille Paglia said, there's no female Mozart because there's no female Jack the Ripper.
Those two things are related.
They are related.
Men do crazy things like write great symphonies and kill people.
All right.
If our men are left behind, if our men are declared toxic, if their masculinity is derided, if their abilities and strengths and powers are left behind, you don't have a choice.
You don't have a choice between a beautiful, nurturing female society and some other evil male society.
You don't have that choice.
It doesn't exist.
You have a binary choice between a male future in which men serve the general public, in which men believe in their country and fight for their country, in which men believe in their women and defend their women, in which men believe in their homes and their church and defend those, or you have a country of El Paso and Dayton.
That's the choice.
That's the choice.
And if we don't start to address the problem of men in this country, because this is all men, all shooters are men.
All shooters are men.
But Camille Paglio is right.
There's no female Mozart because there's no female Jack the Ripper.
All shooters are men because men do stuff first.
These guys who shot up El Paso and who shot up Dayton, they're the wave of the future.
Unless we start attaching our men to this society again and stop demonizing them, that is a binary choice.
It makes people angry.
All binary choices make people angry because they don't like making them because they're tragic.
That's the choice we have.
The future is male.
It's either going to look like George Washington and Jesus, or it's going to look like these clowns.
Why Binary Choices Anger Us00:14:12
All right.
We've got to stop and say goodbye to YouTube and Facebook.
Come over to dailywire.com and subscribe.
Why?
Because you have money.
We want the money.
If you give us Alousie 10 bucks a month, Alousie $100 for the year, we'll answer all your questions.
We'll solve all your problems.
We'll come to your house.
We'll paint your house.
We'll do anything you want.
Just give us your money.
We've got Michael Knowles coming up.
Long time to see you.
I haven't seen you probably about 10 hours.
So we went to, we all went to you and me and Hay and my son.
We went to the Tarantino film.
That's right.
Once upon a time in Hollywood.
Three hours, what is it, like two hours and 45 minutes?
It was two hours and 45 minutes, which I didn't know when I agreed to go see it.
Yeah, and I looked down and I said, I'm going to be there until tomorrow, until my showtime tomorrow.
It was a long show.
It was, and yet it kind of flew by.
It actually.
It did.
He's an entertaining director.
He's an entertaining director.
He really knows what he's doing.
He knows how to keep you engaged.
It's not a great movie.
No.
But it's fine.
I couldn't figure out what it was about.
It did have, you know, not to give anything away, but at the end, it did have 10 of the funniest minutes I've ever seen.
That's Tarantino.
It's not giving anything away because that's every Tarantino movie, and he totally delivered on it.
I think there is a stretch read of it, which is that it's a movie about how Hollywood went wrong and how it could not have gone wrong and a kind of fantasy of how Hollywood could have stayed right.
Again, that is the, I'm trying to give it more meaning, probably than it really was intended to have.
Yeah.
But I felt it was worth my money.
I thought he was, there was something in there.
You kind of felt him trying to say something.
You know, I get a little tired.
I'm not a big Tarantino fan.
I liked the first film he did, the Reservoir Dogs.
But I get a little tired of him rewriting history.
He does this one thing where like, yeah, now the Jews are going to take revenge on the Nazis.
And you go like, now the slaves are going to take revenge on the southern whites.
Exactly.
And you just feel like, I get it, sort of, but it's like, it's tiresome.
And that's what this is.
But you did get this feeling that there was a kind of, you felt him kind of yearning for a different outcome that I think most conservatives share.
That's right.
It wasn't just the sort of childish, well, what if history were the opposite?
What if there weren't tragedy?
It actually did have a, I mean, because all of his movies are just about movies, and it's just about Hollywood, he was clearly trying to say something about Hollywood.
And I'm more than happy to impose my own pressure, but why not?
This is not the movie.
We paid for the movie.
That's right.
All right, so let's talk.
You are like, you have really studied this alt-right white supremacy thing.
You know a lot about this.
Is this something that we on the right have to own at some level?
Yeah, the whole reaction was so predictable.
The reaction was there are two shootings.
One from a guy who says he's more or less a fascist, and then one from a guy who's a leftist, Satanist, socialist.
And instantly you had the left blaming the right and saying that this is all about white supremacy and Trump needs to take responsibility not only for the first shooting, but for the second one too, for the Elizabeth Warren supporters, which didn't make a whole lot of sense.
Then you had conservatives who were rightly defensive by being told that they had to bear responsibility for this.
It's like a machine.
Yeah.
And so the conservatives said, we have nothing to do with this whatsoever.
The first guy, even the fascist, had nothing to do with the right wing at all.
And as is often the case, the reality is more complicated than that.
So the first guy, I read the manifesto.
I read all of these manifestos.
I know, you're a little strange.
I know.
I was going searching for them in the dregs of the internet.
It's not about the dregs of the internet.
I love just living there.
And it's almost a copycat of the New Zealand shooter.
And the ideology that he ascribed to is something called eco-fascism.
Eco-fascism is, it's not even just a sort of totally postmodern construct.
This is a somewhat long-standing ideology.
And it has something to do with the right and has something to do with the left.
On the right, like fascism, it draws on tradition, it draws on the nation, it draws on expansion and love of country.
And so in that way, I think the right has to at least accept the connection.
I'm not saying it has to bear responsibility.
That's right, but it has to accept the connection.
Then on the left, it is a hyper-environmentalism.
So it's a fascism that is rooted largely in ecology, in the natural environment, in the blood and soil.
So wait, is he, is it because of, oh, global warming is going to destroy us all, or is it something more mystical than that?
Yes.
I mean, at a very basic level, it is this idea that corporations and the right and the left have destroyed our natural environment and it's too late and the world is going to perish.
Some people kill everybody.
So I'm going to kill everybody.
More or less.
I mean, you've seen this from the environmental left for a long time.
They say we need to stop human flourishing, stop human industry, and actually suppress the human population.
Too many people.
So, I mean, that is very much a leftist ideology.
And this has had something to do with fascism for a long time.
You know, Hitler was a vegetarian.
This has become a cliché to say.
But Hitler was a vegetarian, and he was very concerned with the soil, not just the blood, but the soil too, and the natural environment.
And fascism itself, I mean, I think conservatives don't really need to have any connection to fascism because fascism is a product of modernity.
It's a post-Nietchean ideology that basically eschews traditional morality and religion and Christianity.
So, I mean, in a really deep sense, I think it's perfectly right for conservatives to say we want nothing to do with this, we have nothing to do with this.
But this particular ideology does have aspects of right-wingedness.
The guy was anti-immigration on policy positions.
He probably would have agreed more with Trump and Republicans than with Democrats.
And it had a little bit of left-wingedness.
On the environment, he would have agreed more with Democrats and with the left.
It's the reason why it's so unhealthy to have a media that's all on one side.
I mean, I cannot have a conversation.
That guy, Eddie Glaud, you know him?
I mean, the guy, it really gets me when they use these kind of intellectual-sounding formulations to basically just say everyone I disagree with is wrong.
Right, it is true.
It really bothers me when pseudo-intellectual hucksters get tenured positions at Princeton.
I mean, that bothers me a lot, too.
And it seems to be endemic to that institution.
So, I mean, that's spreading, though.
It's spreading, yeah.
Talk about the rot of our institution.
It really is true, yeah.
So, you see that in El Paso, and then in Dayton, Ohio, you see a left-winger, from all we can tell, I mean, from all of his social media, he was a Satanist, he was a socialist, he wanted socialism, he hated Trump, he liked Elizabeth Warren, he liked Bernie Sanders, and it is really cynical.
I mean, my conclusion from this, it's the title of my episode today, is there are very terrible people on both sides.
There are very terrible people on both sides.
Right, and I have no problem saying that some people who are affiliated with the right do horrible, terrible things.
But it's the blame game has not been equal here.
It hasn't been the right blaming the left and the left blaming the right.
It has been almost exclusively the left cynically using these not yet cold dead bodies to push a shallow and inaccurate political message.
You know, this is the thing.
I mean, like, I would sit down and talk to anybody.
There's a conversation that you can have where you say, look, how do we solve this problem while remaining free?
We're not Europeans.
We're not run by kings.
We don't want people to tell us what to say and what to think.
And we understand, we understand that that is going to have a certain effect of having some people who say disastrous things.
You know, that's just life.
I mean, they're bad people.
They say crappy things.
You know, how do we deal with that while keeping us free?
The minute you say, the minute you say, well, we've got to silence this person, say white supremacy.
We know there are people like Eddie Glaud out there who are going to say, oh, and you voted for Trump.
That's white supremacy.
We've got to silence you.
And to use even the term white supremacy, this guy, even the guy in El Paso, even that's not quite precise enough.
He was a white nationalist.
He actually writes in his manifesto that he doesn't hate the Hispanics who were brought over here.
He basically has this kind of racial essentialist idea of carving out different spaces for different ethnicities.
So he's a racist.
He's a bigot.
He's a white nationalist.
I mean, he's got this pretty perverse, what you would, I guess, call an alt-right ideology.
But just the term of white supremacy is the term that's used by the left to say that anybody to the right of Hillary Clinton is the same as this guy.
And it's just, it's just not true.
And obviously, ideology plays some role in this.
But the way the left talks about it, they say all of the mass killers are white supremacists.
No, that's not all the mass killers from this weekend are white supremacists.
And also, they always say the worst terrorists in American history since September 12th, 2001 have been white people.
You say, wait a second, hold on.
What was that date that you just used?
Because they just select these random data points.
Obviously, 3,000 people in one day due to Islamic radicalism.
And you know, we do have a problem.
I mean, I think almost everything is about ideas.
I think ideas really, I mean, obviously people are irrational, but in their irrationality, they express that irrationality through ideas.
And it's the ideas that we can attack without necessarily attacking the people.
We do have this problem where you can see why a reasonable person of goodwill, especially a reasonable person of goodwill who wasn't that educated in history and politics, might think like, oh, socialism sounds like a good idea.
You know, like I hear Elizabeth Warren saying things like, these evil corporations have to, we have to take their money.
You think like, why is that your money?
Right.
How did that become your money?
Where did you get the power?
Show me in the Constitution where it gives you the power to take that.
Or in any moral.
Yeah, I mean, I have a problem.
I tried to stay off Twitter because it is like being in hell.
But Sorab Amari, who I think is a good guy, but I have real disagreements with, he's now calling for guns to be confiscated and saying, well, you know, wisdom didn't start at the 18th century.
And I thought, that's no argument.
It didn't stop at the first century either.
That doesn't mean Jesus was wrong.
And gun rights didn't begin in the 18th century either, by the way.
It was a right that we inherited that is not to be infringed.
Yes, and when we see, when we look at Venezuela and even the newsmen on the left are saying, well, they can do anything they want to them because they have no guns, we know that you're a puppet of the government if you're not armed.
If you don't have an armed populace, the government can do whatever you want.
Right.
So if we could have this conversation like, okay, how do we solve this problem but remain free and get rid of like the all these other like name, the name-calling things, we could actually start to have a debate.
I don't see that happening.
I mean, as Neil deGrasse Tyson pointed out, over this weekend, over the same period, 290 people died from suicides and homicides.
That's 10 times as many people as were killed in both masses.
He had to apologize for that.
And he had to apologize for telling the truth because that's the culture we live in.
But what they want to do is tell you, don't read the manifesto.
Don't think about the ideas.
Don't think about the policy.
Don't think about anything at all.
We must act now before you start thinking.
I know, I know.
I like the way they praise the New Zealand prime minister for just seizing the guns.
You think like, okay, maybe.
That's right.
Yeah, yeah.
All right, I guess you're going to be talking about it.
That's the only news story, but we're going to be talking about how they're very, very terrible people on both sides.
And we're going to get into the specifics here on the ideologies because the left does really well in the broad narrative.
But when you get down into details, details are the enemy of the leftist.
Absolutely true.
Absolutely true.
All right.
A final reflection.
I have to end this on what I thought was the only comical thing that came out was the Democrat Socialists of America at a meeting.
And this is their announcement as they came together.
Where was this?
I wrote it down somewhere, but I can't.
It was in Atlanta, Georgia.
This is the Democrat Socialists of America, their grand meeting.
If we want to defeat capitalism, we are going to need a party that will organize working people to fight for the demands that we want and to win socialism.
Thank you so much.
Quick point of privilege.
Quick point of personal privilege.
Guys, first of all, James Jackson, Sacramento, he, him.
I just want to say, can we please keep the chatter to a minimum?
I'm one of the people who's very, very prone to sensory overload.
There's a lot of whispering and chatter going on.
It's making it very difficult for me to focus.
Please, can we just, I know we're all fresh and ready to go, but can we please just keep the chatter to a minimum?
It's affecting my ability to focus.
Thank you.
Thank you, Comrade.
Okay, is there a speaker against name chapter pronouns?
Privilege.
Point of personal privilege.
Yes.
Please do not use gendered language to address everyone.
Because he said, guys, guys, could we keep it down?
So my only reflection about this is I was looking at this.
I think if your problem is that someone said, guys, could we keep it down?
And that he said guys instead of guys and dolls, I don't know what you're supposed to be.
Comrades, comrades, could you keep it down?
You have no problems.
You have no problems.
You are a person who has no problems.
There are people in life who have problems.
They're poor.
They're on drugs.
They're in despair.
They have mental illness.
There are people in countries where they're so oppressed that the government can just come in and wipe them out, where they're living in huts.
If your problem is that people say, guys, you have zero problems, it might be a good idea, it might be a good idea, Comrade, to just reflect on why you have no problems, how it came to be that you alone, really, in all of history, in all of history, have no problems.
How did this happen?
Who is there to thank?
Is it Stalin or is it Washington?
Is it free markets or is it socialism?
Why are you standing there talking about the fact that somebody said, hey, guys, which is now basically a non-gendered term at this point, but why are you thinking about that?
Why are you so free?
Why are you so free?
Why are you so problem-free that that's the sort of thing you can think about?
It just really does seem to me a little bit of gratitude, and you could actually have avoided this meeting altogether and stayed home and watched TV.
All right, I've got to say goodbye.
We'll be back tomorrow.
Why Are You So Free?00:00:53
I'm Andrew Clavin.
is The Andrew Klavan Show.
The Andrew Clavin Show is produced by Austin Stevens and directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
And our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Edited by Adam Sayovitz.
Audio is mixed by Mike Cormina.
Hair and makeup is by Jessua Alvera.
Animations are by Cynthia Ngulo.
And our production assistant is Nick Sheehan.
The Andrew Clavin Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
If you prefer facts over feelings, if you aren't offended by the brutal truth, if you can still laugh at the nuttiness filling our national news cycle, well, tune on in to the Ben Shapiro Show, where you'll get a whole lot of that and much more.