Andrew Clavin’s The Real Resistance dissects Hollywood’s hollow awards season, where ratings plummeted and racial controversies overshadowed art—while a 12-year-old actor exposed industry hypocrisy. He ties modern "wokeness" to secular Jewish materialism (Freud, Marx) and critiques The Merchant of Venice as antisemitic, framing liberalism’s roots in Protestant individualism. Lawsuits reveal systemic racism claims—from NYC diversity trainers to California wildlife officials blaming white trauma for outdoor disparities—while figures like Tim Scott and Tyler Perry push back. Dershowitz warns corporate censorship (Amazon, YouTube) now threatens free speech more than government, advocating for absolute protections even for abhorrent ideas. Clavin’s mailbag dismisses male romantic fantasies as natural but condemns clergy silence on anti-racism indoctrination, urging resistance against cultural decay. [Automatically generated summary]
No one will ever forget this year's Oscar ceremony because no one saw it in the first place.
The award show was a glamorous star-studded tribute to a great American art form in 1939, but it has now become a sad gathering of self-important unknowns handing each other statuettes to honor the flickering emanations of their stunted inner lives that no one watched or wants to watch or knows the title of or cares.
What a gala event.
The show was so dull that the ratings dropped into negative numbers when several million people actively unwatched it by turning it on, facing in the opposite direction, sticking their fingers in their ears, and loudly singing the love theme from The Godfather, the last really good American movie ever made.
Of course, the results did give rise to some tremendously important political controversies that raged from the offices of the New York Times to the offices of the Los Angeles Times and absolutely nowhere in between.
For instance, many staffers at these former newspapers felt strongly that some guy shouldn't have won for his performance in one picture, but that another guy should have won for acting in some other picture because the first guy had a different colored epidermis than the second guy, which is very important in acting because something, something, something.
I know you all were following that exciting newsroom argument just as closely as I was because we're so incredibly interested in the opinions of a bunch of 25-year-old credential-faced ignoramuses who graciously took time off from pretending to care about black people in order to whine about an art form that went out of fashion about the same time as journalistic integrity.
There were some people who enjoyed the Academy Award ceremony, however.
12-year-old child actor Tommy Muggins said he was really happy Hollywood people would spend the show lecturing America on his moral responsibilities because it meant that for a few hours they'd be too busy to molest him.
Hoorah, Hooray00:03:09
Trigger warning.
I'm Andrew Clavin and this is the Andrew Clavin show.
I'm the hunky donkey.
Life is tickety boo.
Birds are winging also singing hunky dunkity.
Ship shaped ipsy topsy, the world is zippity zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray.
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hoorah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hoorah.
All right, here we are broadcasting from the socialist states of America, and we're all just so very happy here.
This would be a good time to show your delight that you are going to be taken care of from cradle to grave by the Biden administration by going on iTunes and subscribing to the show there and leaving a five-star review and subscribing to my personal channel on YouTube where, you know, it's fans only.
I will show my naked imagination to the world.
And if you want to leave a comment there and the comment is grotesque, we will add it to the show because it'll just fit right in.
Today's comment is from Austin Gott, who if you can't see it, has a little icon of himself as death.
He says, I truly treasure every comment Clavin reads on the show because I understand that the people who left them are now dead from the Claven this week and deserve to be remembered.
So long, Austin.
It's been great knowing you.
The mailbag will be on the show at the end.
All your questions will be answered.
If you want all your questions answered next week, you've got to subscribe to DailyWire.com.
How do we do this now?
You press watch, I think, and get to the Andrew Clavin show.
I don't know.
Just find out.
Find the show.
Find the program.
There's a little mailbag there and then press the mailbag.
You can ask any question you want if you are a subscriber.
You can ask about religion.
You can ask about politics.
You can ask about your personal life.
All my answers, guaranteed 100% correct, will change your life.
And some of you may say, will they change my life for the better?
All right.
I know you have heard me talking about Helix mattress, how I love to lie awake all night on my Helix mattress because it's very, very comfortable.
But Helix has left the bedroom and started making sofas.
They just launched a new company called All Form, and they're already making the best sofas we have ever seen.
What makes an all-form sofa really cool?
Well, it's the easiest way you can customize a sofa using premium materials at a fraction of the cost of traditional stores.
You can pick your fabric.
It's spill, stain, and scratch resistant.
You can pick the color, the color of the legs, the sofa size.
All-form sofas are also delivered directly to your home with fast, free shipping.
All form takes just three to seven days to arrive in the mail.
And if you're getting a sofa without trying it in store sounds a little risky, you don't have to worry.
You get 100 days to decide if you want to keep it.
That's more than three months.
And if you don't love it, they'll pick it up for free and give you a full refund.
And they have a forever guarantee, forever.
To find your perfect sofa, check out all form.com slash Clavin.
And All Form is offering 20% off all orders for our listeners at allform.com slash Clavin.
So you need to know, how do you spell Clavin?
Secular vs. Religious Shaping00:14:49
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
There are no easy things out there.
So a while ago, I was reading a bunch of books on the idea that the moral sense is evolved, like other senses, like sight and hearing, that they evolved over time.
The moral sense evolved over time.
Like Paul Bloom wrote a book called Just Babies, The Origins of Good and Evil.
The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haight was kind of famous for a couple of minutes.
Some of Steven Pinker's work covered this.
And I was just reading a lot about this, very interesting stuff.
But I had this moment when I suddenly realized that every single one of them, when they talked about their life and who they were, every single one of them was a secular Jew, like I used to be.
I used to be a secular Jew before I found Jesus, basically.
Now, I mention this because secular Jews have had a very strong hand.
And this is not religious Jews.
This is only Jews who don't believe.
When I say a secular Jew, I mean a racial Jew almost, you know, not someone who believes in the God of Judaism.
Secular Jews have had a very strong hand in developing materialistic ideas, okay?
Like Freud developed the idea that everything is based in sexual longing.
Marx developed the idea that everything was based on money.
So things that you thought were maybe, you know, spiritual, like love or ambition or art.
No, these were actually reactions to your sexuality, to your sexual drives that had been repressed and then were expressed as art or as love.
Your ambition, your happy life in your home is actually oppression because it's all about money.
And all of this was talked about in scientific jargon.
It was as if they were saying, oh, look, just as we used to think that lightning came from demons, now we know it's just ions bouncing around in the atmosphere.
Also, we used to think that you had a soul, but now we know it's just a reaction of material things against each other that give you these feelings.
And I call it pseudoscience because they never did any science.
I mean, Freud had a couple of, you know, he had a few patients.
He made vast, vast assumptions from them.
Almost all of his assumptions have been shown.
Some of his general assumptions, which were known for years, like the unconscious and things, were shown to be correct.
But a lot of his ideas, like the Oedipal complex and so forth, just have been completely dismissed.
And Marx, too, you know, he would make up values of things and just kind of declare that this was the truth.
And they were quacks.
They were both quacks, but they were brilliant quacks.
And they caught on because it made people feel that this was part of the scientific progress of the time.
Other things were being explained in materialist ways.
So why shouldn't human beings be explained in materialist ways?
And the same thing is true about this evolutionary psychology, right?
You listen very closely to what evolutionary psychologists are saying when they talk about the development of the moral sense or something like that.
They're just making up stories.
In fact, one guy called them just-so stories, like from the Rudyard Kipling stories, how the leopards got his spots.
This is like how the moral sense developed.
I'm not saying they're wrong, by the way.
I'm just saying it's not actually science.
It's not actually falsifiable.
So all of these things are based on the assumption that God is not there, that the soul is a material thing, that everything that happens in your life is not spiritual.
It's material.
And because of those assumptions, certain things become obviously illogical and false, I think.
For instance, I mentioned that book, Paul Bloom's Just Babies.
The subtitle of the book is called The Origin of Good and Evil.
The idea is that good and evil is created by us noticing it, right?
We developed the eye in order to see the moral sense, and that was what became good and evil.
Now, this makes no sense whatsoever, because, as I was about to say, we developed the eye in order to see light, because there is light.
The light we see is not the light, may not be this light.
We see human light, the human version of light.
We developed a moral sense.
It's only logical because there's such a thing as morality, right?
But all of these people start with the assumption.
Freud, too, Freud started with the assumption that God was a projection of the Father onto the heavens, when it makes much more sense that our feelings about our Father are a projection of God onto our Father.
All of these guys start with the assumption that there is no God and that the world can be explained entirely by material means, by material processes.
Now, don't think at all that I'm saying anything anti-Semitic here.
First of all, a lot of these guys' work has been really useful.
It's been interesting and entertaining and does explore our physical bodies.
After all, this is a material world, as Madonna said, not the Madonna, but Madonna said.
This is a material world, and everything that we see is done materially, even though it may represent some spiritual thing.
But the other day, two weeks ago, I think it was, I was talking about Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice, and I said, I mentioned that Shakespeare felt that Shylock was a bad guy because he was Jewish, and because he was Jewish had no mechanism for forgiveness and grace like a Christian.
And a couple of Jewish people wrote in and said, that's a terrible thing to say.
I don't believe that.
Shakespeare believed that.
Shakespeare never met a Jew.
The Jews had been expelled from England centuries before.
He probably never met a Jew.
He was just making a philosophical point about his feelings about the religion, as someone today might make a point about something he doesn't like in Islam.
But Shakespeare got that from the culture, from the way Christian culture treated the Jews, which was horrifically, horrifically.
The Jews, the Christian religion started as a Jewish sect.
They broke away and there was hostility between the Jews and the new Christian sect.
The Christians developed the idea that is already kind of mentioned in the gospel that the Jews killed Christ.
And this became doctrine through Catholicism.
It became doctrine during the Christian, during when Western Europe was Christendom.
It was doctrine that the Jews killed Christ.
Now, of course, the Jews are the only people in the Bible, essentially.
The Jews are the people that God chooses to as his re-entry path into the world.
So the Jews represent all of us in the Bible.
They represent everybody in the Bible.
So in fact, everybody is responsible for the death of Christ.
And to say the Jews killed Christ is just kind of sloughing it off on them to get rid of your own guilt.
But this really spread.
And people in America don't know this because American Christians have been good friends to the Jews for the most part.
But the history of Europe, the medieval history of Europe, is just a horror show for the Jews.
I mean, when there was a plague, they would say that the Jews had poisoned the wells, and then they'd go to their areas and they'd burn their houses, kill their children, just destroy their villages.
When they went on the crusades, you know, they went off to Outreamer, they called it, the Outlands.
They went off to Outremer to fight the Muslims, but they stopped off.
They said, well, since we're killing infidels, why don't we stop off and kill the Jews because they're in our own neighborhood?
And they would.
They would just come by and suddenly murder people.
They had a thing called the blood libel, where they would blame Jews for killing, murdering children and then using the children's blood to make their Passover bread and a kind of mockery of the mass.
And as I said once in a speech, I think it's a horrible thing to blame the Jews for that just because Shapiro happens to enjoy it.
But no, this was terrible stuff.
These caused riots.
Every Easter pageant had an evil Jew in it.
The Jew was the other in the way that blacks in America now pretend to be the other.
I mean, the Jew was truly philosophically the other.
And so when, you know, it's not an accident that the great civilization of Europe ended with the mass slaughter of the Jews.
It was as if Europe's shadow self, the shadow side of the Christian world that they had developed, that human beings had corrupted, the shadow side came out and took over Europe as Europe died.
When Europe started to become more secular after the Napoleonic Wars in the 19th century, that was a good deal for the Jews.
Napoleon went around liberating the Jews, and that's when the Jews began to rise up in society.
So you can't blame Jews for not being thoroughly enchanted with Christianity, right?
History shapes us.
We're shaped by the things that have happened in the past.
We're all shaped by them.
Our ideas are shaped by them.
The ideas themselves are shaped by them.
So it is not a surprise that if you are a secular Jew, someone who does not believe in the God of Judaism, you're not going to say, oh, like I did, you're not going to say, oh, I will become a Christian because the Christians have been hunting you for thousands of years.
So my only point here is not about Jews, you know, because as far as I'm concerned, if you wanted this important, intelligent, and productive people to love Christianity, you should have gone a little easier on the pogroms.
I shouldn't have burned their villages so much.
My only point is that we are shaped by history and our ideas carry history in them.
And maybe most importantly, we're shaped by religious history because religion, as Jung said, is sort of our idea of the totality of the world.
And even materialists are shaped by religious history, right?
We talk about this all the time.
We talk about the fact that leftism is a kind of materialist form of Protestant Christianity.
There's a book out called American Awakening, very interesting book by a guy named Joshua Mitchell, and he calls this the two economies.
He says, in the Christian economy, there's been a transgression, which is original sin.
We're all guilty of this transcession.
Only God can pay the price as a scapegoat for this transition.
But it'll never be made good, right?
We'll always be in a world of sin until the end of time.
So we have to forgive one another.
We have to give each other grace.
In the material economy, which is the leftist economy, the transgression needs a continual scapegoat because it doesn't have Jesus as the one-time sacrifice.
So it makes the scapegoat continuous.
And, of course, here it's straight white men, right?
Straight white men are the scapegoat.
They're supposed to pay and pay and pay for the transgression.
They are never forgiven.
There is no grace.
And those are the two forms of the Christian worldview we're seeing now, the two forms that were both shaped by the Christian worldview.
One of them has forgotten Christ and the other one keeps Christ in mind.
Remember this when I start to talk about, I'll get back to this a little bit when I start to talk about dystopias today.
So we should also remember that we're not just shaped by Christianity.
There are two kinds of Christianity.
Obviously speaking broadly, there are a thousand kinds at this point.
But there's basically Catholicism and Protestantism.
I know there's Orthodox Christianity, but that didn't shape the West.
We're just talking about the West.
You will notice that Catholics have now started a critique of liberalism As our country goes awry, our country is obviously going awry.
It's obviously becoming a little bit of a dystopia.
And Catholics have begun a critique of liberalism, which is largely a Protestant phenomenon.
That is, the country, this country derived its liberalism from the Protestant idea that each man could interpret Scripture on his own, right?
For the Catholics, the church is the ultimate authority on what Scripture means, what Jesus wants, what God is doing.
But for Protestants, they talk about the inner light.
You are basically allowed to bring to bear your own interpretation.
You can understand how ideas of freedom come out of those ideas and that this is a Protestant country.
This is a country made by, essentially, by Protestants, by men who are shaped by Protestantism.
Patrick Denin is one of the bigger Catholic voices in this.
He wrote a book called Why Liberalism Failed, and he basically says, with no moral core, liberalism makes liberty its highest goal.
This is also one of Socrates' arguments.
Liberalism makes liberty its highest goal.
It destroys all the norms in favor of moral liberty.
So all your traditions, all your religious traditions, all your values essentially disappear.
And ultimately, you need more government to control you because you've gone nuts, right?
Because now that I don't, now that there's no such thing as a lady and gentleman, there has to be a law that keeps me from treating a woman like garbage, right?
Before, if everybody in the society thought, no, there's such a, you know, you have to treat a lady as if you were a gentleman, then you don't mistreat women or you don't get caught at it anyway because the entire society will turn on you.
Once those norms are gone and liberty is the God, then there's nothing to protect women except the law.
And so the law becomes increasingly more progressive and you wind up with the kind of thing we've got going on now.
Saar Bamari, another Catholic convert, he says he wants a public square reordered to the common good and ultimately the highest good.
He wants God at the center of our liberal democracy.
Michael Knowles, he's the same way, right?
That's why you'll hear him joking about we need a king or some books can be burned.
It's fine.
They're just burning the wrong books, right?
Some voices should be censored.
They're just censoring the wrong guy.
This is why Ben and I have decided to have Knowles quietly put down like the dog he is.
It's not an accident.
It's not an accident that there are now seven Catholics on the Supreme Court, although Neil Gorsuch, who was raised a Catholic, apparently goes to an Episcopal church.
But all the conservative justices, all of them, are Catholics, right?
Except for Gorsuch, who, like I said, he's Episcopal, which is Catholic-like.
Because the Supreme Court is the one Catholic-like institution in this country.
It has become more and more Catholic-like.
It's like the Pope.
It's the person who gives the definitive answer on what our laws mean.
Now, the funny thing about Catholics, these Catholics who are talking about the problem with liberalism, is when you say, what should we do?
How can we stop this?
How can we make people turn to the highest good?
Their voices trail off.
They don't have any solutions because they're trying to solve a Protestant problem by Catholic means.
And we will not accept a church running the country.
We will not accept a theocracy.
The ultimate expression of this Catholic objection to liberalism is called Catholic integralism, which basically brings the church back into control of our religious lives.
And I don't think America is ever going to accept that ever.
Now, all of this, again, is not to blame anyone.
It's not to say Catholics are bad, Protestants are good, Jews are bad.
It's just to point out that we are all shaped by history, which is why the left pulls down statues and throws out writers, bans books, fails to teach about religion, fails to teach about history, changes our history, because they want to make you blind to who you are.
It gives you less freedom.
The more you know where your ideas came from, the more you can change them, the more control you have over them.
It might not hurt for secular Jews to turn around and say, you know, secular Judaism is a culture.
It's a great culture.
It's a productive culture.
It's an interesting culture.
But like every culture, it also has its flaws, right?
Why We Fail To Teach History00:14:05
It starts from this assumption of the material world.
Maybe because of their history, maybe it's something they should look at and change, right?
Now, obviously, I'm talking about historical forces, but you won't be surprised that in all of this, I see the hand of God, right?
The work of secular Jews and the disagreement with Christians.
We see the tension between being physical creatures, being material creatures, and also creatures who feel they have a soul.
That's the kind of tension between Christians and secular Jews, not religious Jews, secular Jews.
In the Protestant Catholic divide, you have this sort of struggle between liberty and authoritarianism that has defined the West, that has always been a part of the West.
It's the dance between our longing to be free individuals and our need to be in community.
And the early Christian church solved that conflict by having us become members of the body of Christ.
That word members comes from the Christian church, I believe.
At least they sort of augmented it because they said we are in the body of Christ.
We are members.
A member means a limb.
So we're organs in the body of Christ, which means each one of us is an individual, but we're all part of a greater thing that gives us life and gives us who we are.
And even the Jew, in my theology, the Jew is part of the body of Christ because the Jew is the part of the body of Christ that doubts.
He's the part that says, I'm not sure this is true, or I don't believe this is true, and without doubt, you really can't have faith.
So it's easy to see that with enough love, all of us, all of these disagreements, the Jews could be studying material ideas, the Catholics could be studying authoritarianism, the Protestants could be studying freedom, and all of these ideas could come together into one body that was going forward, moving forward and growing like a plant grows to the light.
But unfortunately, we all are shaped by history, and history begins with original sin, so instead we kill each other and destroy each other.
And instead of progressing like a plant growing toward the sun, we progress the way we're progressing now by building great civilizations and then tearing them down.
Everything you're seeing now was shaped by history.
It started way, way before any of us were born, even before I was born, which really is almost biblical times at this point.
But the more we know about it, the more we think about it, the more we see where it's coming, the more we have control over it, the more we can identify the ideas, change them, and reconstruct them into something better.
The left is doing everything they can to prevent that, and that's why we have to start to understand who we are.
One of the reasons I don't go to auto parts stores is because I don't know that much about my car.
I don't even know what the license plate is, so I don't want them asking me any questions.
But the other reason is because I want to go on rockauto.com, because I want to say rockauto.com because it makes the women swoom.
Rockauto.com always offers the lowest prices possible on auto parts.
They don't change prices.
It's a family business.
They've been serving auto parts customers online for 20 years.
So go to rockauto.com to shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.
And best of all, their prices at, you guessed it, rockauto.com are always reliably low and the same for professionals and do-it-yourselfers.
The rockauto.com catalog is unique, remarkably easy to navigate.
You can quickly see all the parts available and the prices are reliably low.
Go to rockauto.com right now and see all the parts available for your car or truck.
Write Clavin in their how did you hear about us box so they know we sent you.
You got to say it the same way.
You know, anyway you say clavin will make the women wild.
And it doesn't really matter how you say clavin, but you want to say rockauto.com.
Before I even hear this next segment, I know Andrew was going to say something racist and sexist.
I wish I'd thought of something before I got here.
But I do want to say that the fact that these historical forces are in play and are always going to be in play, because the left, the West is never going to be anything but what it has been.
It's going to continue on its progress, telling the story that God is telling that we do not yet understand, which I believe is ultimately to bring the church together and bring us all back together into one church.
But the fact that this is happening gives you some hope when you look at what's going on.
I mean, I don't know if you watched, you know, we had to watch that Biden non-state of the union address.
And it's depressing the way the left manages to create an atmosphere of inevitability, that this socialism is just going to get bigger and bigger and bigger.
He proposed so many trillions of dollars in spending.
He proposed things that you know, like child payments, like, you know, preschool education, like giving mothers paid leave and all these things that once people have them, they never give them up.
And of course, the cost, it's not so much the cost and money that's terrible, it's the cost and freedom.
But at the same time, the same time that's going on, there are these voices, there are these voices that are beginning to say, you know, this is bad.
We are going in a bad direction.
We are going too far.
It's really interesting.
Later on, we're going to have Alan Dershowitz on, and I read his book, his new book, and it's funny because he's a liberal, he's a stone liberal, but there's really nothing for him on the left anymore.
I was watching Bill Maher, and I always have a lot of respect for Bill Maher because Bill Maher, you know, this is the whole thing.
The dividing line is the people who believe in free speech, because free speech is the expression of the individual, and people who believe in free speech believe in the power of the individual.
And whether you're a liberal or a conservative, if you believe truly in free speech, you are a friend of the show.
I've told this to people before who have come on.
Alan Dershowitz is a liberal.
He's welcome to come on and talk about free speech.
But Bill Maher gets it too.
And when he sees what's happening, you start to see that he's not really on board with this.
He made this speech, which was really pretty startling, even for Maher.
There's cut eight.
You know the reason why advertisers in this country love the 18 to 34 demographic?
Because it's the most gullible.
Yeah.
A third of people under 35 say they're in favor of abolishing the police.
Not defunding, but doing away with a police force altogether, which is less of a policy position and more of a leg tattoo.
36% of millennials think it might be a good idea to try communism.
But much of the world did try it.
I know millennials think that doesn't count because they weren't alive when it happened.
But it did happen.
And there are people around who remember it.
Pining for communism is like pining for Betamax or MySpace.
So when you say, you're old, you don't get it.
Get what?
Abolish the police and the Border Patrol and capitalism and cancel Lincoln?
No, I get it.
The problem isn't that I don't get what you're saying or that I'm old.
The problem is that your ideas are stupid.
You know, that's the ballgame, essentially, if more and more people start to say this.
James Carville, I mean, this is the thing.
You know, all this time, these people own the TV shows, they own entertainment industry, they own the news industry, they own the academies, now they own the CEOs of major corporations, and they call themselves the resistance, right?
What are they resisting?
They're resisting freedom.
They're resisting the people.
But now, these are actual voices of resistance within the movement.
James Carville, the Democrat Clinton hack, who's really, you know, as in with this as he can possibly be, he said, wokeness is a problem.
He was talking to Vox.
He says, wokeness is a problem, and everyone knows it.
It's hard to talk to anybody today.
And I talk to lots of people in the Democratic Party who doesn't say this, but they don't want to say it out loud because they'll get clobbered or canceled.
Now, Carville doesn't necessarily disagree with wokeness.
He disagrees with the words, the language.
But the language is part of what wokeness is.
Language is the tool of bullying that the woke use against people.
And all of this, of course, is now centered around this horrific, racist, critical race theory.
It has all kinds of different names, anti-racism, but it's just racism.
I mean, you know, the Democrats always make this argument.
We always say, oh, yeah, the Democrats were the slaveholders.
The Democrats had Jim Crow.
The Democrats were the Ku Klux Klan.
The Democrats had segregation.
They always say, no, no, no.
But then it switched.
Magically, it switched.
Now it's suddenly, oh, God, no, just like you can't.
You know, there it went.
It just magically switched.
It never switched.
It never switched.
They have always been the racist.
They have always been the racist.
They're the racists now.
They believe in segregation now.
They just believe in it for different reasons.
They believe in bigotry now.
They just believe in it for different reasons.
Racism now, the whole thing.
President Biden rescinded Trump, the Trump administration's executive order prohibiting critical race theory training for federal agencies and federal contractors.
Democrats just never change.
But there's a reaction.
There are things going on.
And I want to bring this up.
I just want to bring this up so you don't think it's all one way.
I know it's bad right now.
I'm not trying to minimize it.
And it's sad.
I'm sad to see this happen to my country.
I'm sad to see these guys in control and in control and out of control at the same time.
But, you know, there are lawsuits.
There was a story in Real Clear Politics by John Moroski.
One suit, a white woman alleges that a New York City public school diversity trainer told employees white colleagues must take a step back and yield to colleagues of color.
In another suit, white men alleged that California wildlife bureaucrats featured speakers who said that black people don't use the outdoors in proportion to their population because of white racism, generational trauma, and historical fear of lynching.
You know, black comedians used to make fun of make jokes about the fact that they don't like the outdoors.
Now they have to explain why Jews don't like the outdoors.
A lawsuit filed by a 12th grade biracial student and his African-American mother says a Nevada charter school taught that people of color cannot be racist.
You know, there's a really interesting case.
I don't know if you've heard about this in South Lake, Texas.
South Lake, Texas is an upscale suburb of Dallas where the school districts are rated some of the top districts in the country and have performed the almost unheard of feat of not having any grade disparity between the races.
Like everybody's performing well.
Everybody's doing really well.
But a couple of years ago, some white kids made a video.
I mean, this is how all the stuff starts.
They made a video in which they sang the N-word along with some rappers, okay?
And now in the news stories, it says they chanted the N-word.
Well, they were singing along with rappers.
Rappers use this word all the time.
You cannot let rappers use this word and then penalize somebody for singing along with them.
It's ridiculous.
But it didn't matter.
The news media went nuts.
They love this story.
They love turning us against one another, so we don't focus on them.
That's what they want.
They want whites and blacks to hate each other, so we're fighting with one another, and we don't focus on the fact that their failure, it's their failure.
They're great society programs that they feed off like a bloated tick.
The Democrat Party is just stuck sucking that money out.
All that money, those trillions of dollars that Joe Biden is spending, you think you're going to get it.
You may think you're going to get it.
You'll get some of it.
But the Democrat Party are the ones who are going to be using that money to get votes, to give patronage jobs to their pals, to just take it themselves.
You know, the fraud and the misuse of it is also going to be part of their life.
They do not want to give it off, so they give it up.
So they want to not admit it failed, to distract us from the fact that it failed, and to turn us against one another.
So they turned this into a big thing.
The media went nuts on this.
There are instances of racists ferreted out.
And the response, you know, the school district is trying to get out from under, and their response was to teach something or propose something called the Cultural Competence Action Plan, CCAP, right?
So I went online and I looked at the slides with which you teach CCAP.
And what are they teaching in these classes?
What do they want to teach in these classes?
And it's funny because it starts out with stuff that you would agree with.
It starts out like be sensitive to other people.
They might not, you know, their culture might have some different rules than yours.
I wouldn't invite a Jewish guy to my house and serve, you know, pork, you know.
But that's where it starts out.
But pretty soon, pretty soon, it gets into this white, you know, fragility.
This white people have to watch their privilege.
You know, there are protected classes, you know, protected kinds of people that you want to step lightly around.
And so the parents have started to rebel.
And here's just a montage of parents showing up at these meetings and saying, no, you know, one of them is saying you broke the law because you discussed this outside of an open meeting.
And this has to be discussed in open meeting.
But here's just a quick montage of that.
CCAP at its core is racist.
It's time to scrap the CCAP.
We need to pause and hold our government officials, our elected officials, accountable for what they're doing.
We need parents everywhere to understand that your eyes need to be opened.
My headscarf was pulled off my head one day.
i was referred to as having a terrorist hat you have no idea what it's like to be called but teachers knew about the entire time And I'm sorry if somebody spent 20 months of their life working on this, okay?
Sometimes a stupid idea is a bad idea.
The purpose of CCAP is to impose a leftist worldview.
So it's really interesting.
The purpose is, it is a leftist worldview, but the real target of all this, the real target of all of this stuff is assimilation.
When they talk about white privilege, when they talk about white supremacy, what they're talking against is assimilation.
They're saying this nation, this culture was built by white Christian men, which is true.
It was this culture, the ideas for this culture were built by white Christian men.
And therefore, to ask black people to assimilate to this culture, to become fully American, is to ask them to somehow violate their blackness.
Now, of course, everybody assimilates, and we all violate something in ourselves when we assimilate, right?
The Jewish assimilates into a Christian culture.
The Irishman assimilates into an essentially British culture.
The Italian, like Knowles, he has to stop stabbing people all the time.
Everybody, everybody gives up a piece of their home culture to assimilate.
The blacks have been doing that.
The blacks have been suddenly assimilating, and the Democrats do not want that to happen.
Why Follow These Clowns00:02:11
So the target of all this critical race theory is essentially assimilation.
They're saying, you're asking these people to be white.
No, we're asking them just to conform to the norms.
And in this CPAC, CCAP, whatever it's called, they have, you know, don't think that everybody has to conform to the majority.
Well, we do all have to conform a little bit to the majority, right?
The majority is the country.
So finally, finally, I'm moving house.
I'll be out of that attic you've been seeing me in into a new house.
And one of the things I want to get for my new house is a ring doorbell so I can see who comes to the door no matter where I am.
Ring doorbells and security cameras.
All you got to do is look at your phone.
If somebody comes to your door, if someone's outside your house, doesn't matter if you're in bed, doesn't matter if you're in Spain, doesn't matter where you are.
You can look at your phone and talk to the person who is there and see what they want and who they are.
You can keep your packages and deliveries safe.
And Ring has hassle-free, easy-to-install indoor and outdoor cams.
You will never miss a visitor.
With motion detection, you'll get notified even if they don't ring the doorbell.
If someone stops by or something's going on, Ring lets you know.
There's a special offer on the Ring welcome kit at ring.com forward slash Claven, and it comes with Rings Video Doorbell 3 and Chime Pro.
Don't wait, get that special offer, the Ring Welcome Kit at ring.com slash Claven.
It comes with Rings, Video Doorbell 3, and Chime Pro.
It's the perfect way to start your Ring experience.
This way, if anybody comes to your door, no matter where you are, you can say, how do you spell clavin?
And if they know, call the police.
Tim Scott talked about this in his rebuttal.
Oh, let me, just before I get to Tim Scott, the progressives reacted to those, that montage.
You saw they reacted to people protesting.
They sent a postcard out.
I don't know if we have that.
Yeah, we do have this postcard.
It says, why follow these clowns anywhere, right?
And this is a school board election is coming up that has now become a referendum on this theory.
So they sent out this postcard.
It names local residents and even outs one to neighbors for past criminal conviction simply for objecting.
Vicious Attack on Objectors00:15:21
There's a vicious, vicious attack on the people who are objecting to this.
So Tim Scott talked about this last night.
I thought it was a really good rebuttal to Biden's speech.
I guess this is two nights ago.
You know, this is the hardest job in politics to have to give the rebuttal to the State of the Union.
But I thought Tim Scott did a pretty decent job.
And this is one of the things he's talked about about education and the left, 22.
A hundred years ago, kids in classrooms were taught the color of their skin was their most important characteristic.
And if they looked a certain way, they were inferior.
Today, cues are being taught that the color of their skin defines them again.
And if they look a certain way, they're an oppressor.
From colleges to corporations to our culture, people are making money and gaining power by pretending we haven't made any progress at all, by doubling down on the divisions we've worked so hard to heal.
You know this stuff is wrong.
Hear me clearly.
America is not a racist country.
It's backwards to fight discrimination with different types of discrimination.
And it's wrong to try to use our painful past to dishonestly shut down debates in the present.
So if you think that the left is not racist, immediately on Twitter, Uncle Tim trended like Uncle Tom trended until Twitter took it down.
They're just so incredibly racist.
I mean, it is just built into the Democrat Party.
It really is.
You know, the interesting thing to me about Uncle Tom, Uncle Tom is obviously a character from the novel and the idea is that Uncle Tom is servile toward the evil white master.
But of course, in the novel, Uncle Tom is Jesus.
Uncle Tom is a Jesus figure.
So it's a little bit more complicated than that.
But anyway, what a nasty thing to say.
He says America is not a racist country.
And good for him for saying that, because that is simply the literal truth.
And what the left likes to pretend is what they hear is there's no racism in America, which is nonsense, obviously.
Ibram Kendi, the guy who generates so much of this stuff, he puts out a tweet saying the heartbeat of racism is denial.
We can hear the heartbeat clearly.
That was his reaction to Tim Scott's comment.
Now, this is something that always burns me.
We talked about Freud and Marx at the beginning of the show.
This was a trick that they used to use.
A lot of Freud's theories were wrong.
And he would say, well, you want to sleep with your mother?
And you would say, no, have you ever met my mother?
Nobody wants to sleep.
I don't want to sleep with my mother.
Freud would say, ah, see, that proves that you want to sleep with your mother because you're repressing the fact that you want to sleep with your mother by denying it.
The denial is the proof.
Marx would say the same thing.
He would say, you're oppressed.
And he would say, oppressed.
I've got a lawn.
I've got a, you know, things are going great.
No, no, no, my friend.
That's false consciousness.
The fact that you are happy proves how oppressed you are because it's your false consciousness.
Online, they call this the Kafka trap from Kafka's novel, The Trial, which is this incredible assault on bureaucracy where this guy is arrested, Joseph Kay is arrested, and he has to face this madness on trial.
And the Kafka trap is if someone denies being something, it's taken as evidence that the person is that thing, since someone who is that thing would deny being it.
So it's the Kafka trap, right?
But this is really, you know, this is really something that is now filtering in to the resistance.
There is a resistance now to this, and people are saying it out loud, and they are risking a little bit being canceled.
Tulsi Gabbard put out a video.
This is cut seven.
My dear friends, my fellow Americans, please, please let us stop the racialization of everyone and everything.
It's racialism.
We are all children of God and are therefore family in the truest sense, no matter our race or ethnicity.
This is aloha.
And this is what our country and the world need.
The mainstream propaganda media and politicians, they want us to constantly focus on our skin color and the skin color of others because it helps them politically or financially.
Aloha means respect.
You know, I'm telling you, left and right, serious, sane left and right people, can talk together if they talk like this, right?
There are things, there are things that liberal, I'm not talking about the left, I'm talking about liberals, guys on the little bit on the left of center, like people on the right of center.
There are things that we can agree on, compromises we can make.
This country can go forward.
It can become America again, but people have to say stuff like this.
The other person who did this, I mean, it's amazing.
The Oscars literally, they got something like a third of their audience, the third of their audience they got.
There were more people in the chamber watching Biden, who also got absolutely no ratings whatsoever, than there were watching the Oscars at home on TV.
But they still took time to lecture us.
We don't even go to their movies anymore.
Their movies are boring.
Their movies are lecturing us.
They're lecturing us.
But the one guy who was a little bit different was Tyler Perry.
I mean, this was really interesting.
He made a speech that was essentially subversive.
And he won that Gene Herschel Humanitarian Award.
I know guys who've worked with Tyler Perry, and he's supposed to be a good guy and really focused on things that he wants to improve in the world and a charitable guy.
And he made the speech that was kind of subversive.
You can hear the audience only start to catch on to what he's saying as he goes along.
This is cut one.
I refuse to hate someone because they are Mexican or because they are black or white or LBGTQ.
I refuse to hate someone because they are a police officer.
I refuse to hate someone because they are Asian.
I would hope that we would refuse hate.
And I want to take this Gene Herschel Humanitarian Award and dedicate it to anyone who wants to stand in the middle.
In the middle.
And you could hear them going like, yeah, we refuse to hate black people.
White people?
We can't hate police.
Wait, excuse me, we can't hate police officers.
You know, that was a subversive speech.
He was using their own values.
He knows those are their values.
They're probably his values as well.
He was using their own values and spreading them to the rest of the country, which is against, is anti-anti-racism, his anti-this kind of racial theory.
These are voices, these voices are going to become important because ultimately the CEOs, they may want to pose and say, oh, look how enlightened I am, look how woke I am.
When woke goes out of fashion at the Oscars, when woke is being mocked by Bill Maher, when woke is not going to be accepted by the wokest, the people who are supposed to be the woke people, they're not going to want to be so woke.
It was really interesting.
Even on 60 Minutes, that guy, Ted Baxter, actually Scott Pelly, I don't know if anybody remembers Ted Baxter.
He was a stupid news character on the Mary Tyler Moore Show and Scott Pelley looks exactly like him.
But he had the AG, the Attorney General of Minnesota, Keith Elson.
He can't be anymore left.
He can't be anymore left.
And Pelley asked him, why didn't you charge Chauvin with a hate crime for killing George Floyd?
Here's this exchange.
Was this a hate crime?
I wouldn't call it that because hate crimes are crimes where there's an explicit motive of bias.
We don't have any evidence that Derek Chauvin factored in George Floyd's race as he did what he did.
You could have charged him with a hate crime under Minnesota law.
And you chose not to.
Could have, but we only charge those crimes that we had evidence that we could put in front of a jury to prove.
It's just the whole narrative when Kaplui.
The whole narrative is gone.
Pelley is going, you could have, you could have charged him.
Yeah, but it wasn't a hate crime.
It's amazing.
It is amazing.
You know, and why, you know, I don't actually know why he said that except to excuse himself, to get himself off the hook for it.
But this is something, my favorite of these, my favorite of these voices of resistance, these voices that are suddenly starting to say, you know, this is bad.
This isn't working.
It is in Portland.
Portland's mayor.
What is his name?
Tim Wheeler?
Ted Wheeler.
Portland's mayor who is also their police chief.
I want to play cut five first.
This is back in September of last year when they're still rioting in Portland, right?
They're rioting like every night.
They're burning Portland to grants.
It's not a riot.
It's a mostly peaceful riot.
It's a mostly peaceful burning of things and intimidating of people and taking over of a society and ruining a city.
It's mostly peaceful as they're doing that.
But Wheeler, last year in September, this was how he was going to deal with it.
It's time for everyone to reduce the violence in our community.
We all want change.
We all have the opportunity and the obligation to create change.
We all want to focus on the fundamental issue at hand, justice for black people and all people of color.
That's why as police commissioner, effective immediately and until further notice, I'm directing the Portland Police Bureau to end the use of CS gas for crowd control.
This is him two days ago after this has gone on and on and on cut four.
We must stand together as a community against this ongoing criminal intimidation and violence.
They want to burn.
They want to bash.
They want to intimidate.
They want to assault.
These people often arrive at their so-called direct actions in cars, and they're all dressed in all black.
If you see this, call the police.
If you can provide a license plate, if you can do so safely, that information can help later.
Turn them in.
If anybody's wearing black, just turn them in.
You know, throw the gas.
Bring back witch.
Why'd you stop the gas?
You told us it's a high-double test.
Throw the gas.
What can't continue?
What can't continue won't continue?
People are leaving these states.
People are leaving California in the latest censuses.
California lost.
California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio.
They all lost a seat.
California is paradise.
You have to work really, really hard to ruin paradise.
But we did it once, and they're doing it again in California.
They did it in the Garden of Eden, and now they're doing it in California.
People are leaving.
Take a look outside at Nashville.
There are so many cranes.
They say that a crane is the Nashville bird, the Nashville City bird, because they're building so much because people are coming in from L.A. You know, this just goes on and on and on.
And meanwhile, meanwhile, what Antifa says, right, they have a website called CrimeThink.
CrimeThink is one of their websites.
And Dan Henninger was writing about this in the Wall Street Journal.
He quoted them.
Say, this is what you, you put yourself in a weaker bargaining position by spelling out from the beginning the least it would take to appease you.
It's smarter to appear implacable.
So, you want to come to terms?
Make us an offer.
In the meantime, we'll be here blocking the freeway and setting things on fire.
Don't negotiate.
What Henninger says is that Joe Biden is doing the same thing.
He's not negotiating with anybody.
He just wants more and more and more.
He wants to spend and spend and spend.
This spending, remember, it doesn't just cost you money.
It costs jobs because they can only government can create half as many jobs per dollar, creates half as many jobs as a business creates, right?
It goes through all those hands, the tax collector, the bureaucrats, the program, and all these different hands.
They create half as many jobs as a guy who just says, I'll hire this guy and pay him a living wage.
So everything they're doing, it costs money, it costs jobs, and it costs freedom.
And that's the most important thing.
Once the government is giving you stuff, nothing is free.
Nothing is free.
Once Joe Biden is giving you daycare and he's giving you, you know, paid leave and he's giving you someone to come and take care of your children so mothers don't have to be mothers anymore.
Once he's doing that, he's in control.
They're in control.
And this was why America has had a lesser safety net, a smaller, more directed safety net than all of the European countries.
And this is why our economy is now bouncing back.
It's raging back.
While Joe Biden is claiming it's a crisis, it's raging back while Europe is stagnating.
It is not time to give up hope.
You know, as I always tell you, you can lose a fight, but you can't win a surrender.
You can lose a fight, but you cannot win a surrender.
There are voices speaking up.
There are forces in play.
There is a midterm election coming up.
There are forces in play that may foil this plan, but this is a plan.
This is a plan to turn this into a socialist country.
Those of you who've been listening to me for years, you know I'm pretty relaxed about this.
I'm never calling crisis.
I'm not saying this is a crisis.
This is what they want.
This is the left in charge.
These are the people who have ruined everything they've touched, anywhere they've touched it, forever.
They are now running the show.
But the resistance does exist.
So I know if you're listening to this show, you're probably a lunatic right-winger who thinks one day the government is going to make us all wear masks in a shelter-in-place.
You're probably screaming like that.
It's awful.
That would be why you want ReadyWise.
Now is a better time than any to be prepared with long-term nutritional food options.
ReadyWise has many options.
They've got emergency meals.
They've also got freeze-dried fruits and vegetables for convenient on-the-go nutrition.
They've got new adventure meals for hiking, camping, and other outdoor activities.
ReadyWise makes being prepared simple and affordable.
Order online and have nutritious meals shipped directly to your doorstep.
When government resources are strained or when the government is bothering you, it can be days, if not weeks, before fresh food is available.
Don't put yourself in a situation where you need food during an emergency.
Prepare today.
This week, my listeners can get 10% off at ReadyWise.com when entering Clavin at checkout or by calling 855-474-4084.
ReadyWise has a 30-day no-question-asked return policy, so there's no risk in taking the initiative to get you and your family prepared today.
That's ReadyWise, R-E-A-D-Y-W-I-S-E dot com, promo code Clavin to get 10% off.
And I know what you're thinking.
You're thinking, sure, you spelled ReadyWise, but how?
Oh, how?
Please tell me how.
Do you spell Clavin?
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
I just make it look easy.
So I want to talk today about dystopian fiction, right?
Utopians, utopias that go wrong.
And for obvious reasons, that I see so much of dystopian fiction becoming fact in our country right now.
The left is messing with language, just like News Speak in 1984.
They're having two-minute hates of white men like in 1984.
They are literally putting history down the memory hole, rewriting history, disappearing history, taking history off the internet when they don't like it.
It's very much like 1984, which was just basically an imitation of the Soviet communists, so that makes sense.
Dystopian Echoes00:09:32
But there's also other kinds of dystopia, like Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, where he talks about drug use, drugs being used to keep everybody happy.
He talks about brainwashing people to keep them content with their class, and mindless, meaningless sex, and women being taught the horror of motherhood because they don't give birth anymore.
They build babies essentially in incubators.
Now, an interesting thing that a lot of people don't know, I have something to say about dystopia that you've probably never heard before, maybe never thought of before, because it only came to me recently.
A lot of people don't know that Aldous Huxley was Orwell's, George Orwell, who wrote 1984, was his French teacher when Orwell was in what we would call high school.
I don't think the British call it that.
So when Huxley wrote Brave New World in the 30s and when in the 40s Orwell published 1984, he sent it to his old French teacher, Aldous Huxley.
And Huxley wrote him a letter.
And in the letter, the book had already been praised by critics, but Huxley had bad eyes, so he didn't read it until later on.
But he said it was a tremendously important book.
He said it was a profound book.
But he went on to say that he got it right and Orwell might not have gotten it as right.
He says, now, you know, in 1984, the torturer, people are tortured if they don't agree.
They're shown their worst fears.
Winston Smith is shown rats.
He has rats on his face because he despises rats.
And the leader in The Interrogator in 1984 says, picture a boot stomping on a human face forever.
That's what they were trying to build.
But Huxley said this to Orwell in a letter he wrote after reading 1984.
He said, whether in actual fact the policy of the boot on the face can go on indefinitely seems doubtful.
And given the fact that the Soviet Union collapsed, he seems to have been right about that.
He says, my own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power.
And these ways will resemble those which I described in Brave New World.
The lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude, by suggesting, hypnotizing people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.
Now, this made me suddenly realize something, okay, about dystopias, a lot of dystopias, not all of them, but some of them.
I want to show you three scenes from kind of dystopian movies that are all of them based on books that are just show you something tremendously interesting.
The first, there was a terrible, terrible television movie made of Brave New World in 1980 with Kier Bellier, an actor I never thought was any good.
But I want to play some scenes because there's a new version coming out soon, I believe, but there are no good versions of Brave New World, and that's partly because it's a satire.
But here's a scene where one of the guys who's kind of constructing, writing the propaganda is praised by his supervisor for what he's done.
This is cut nine.
You are viewing Helmholtz Watson's film, Planned Perfection.
Each newly produced infant is given six full years of nightly hypnopedic sleep teach lectures to reinforce class acceptance conditioning.
Later, in central conditioning centers like this, each child receives daily happiness reinforcement drills, as well as prescribed courses in erotic play, death acceptance training, full consumption practice, and nature nausea games.
Then, upon reaching computer lesence, after six more years in a final conditioning school, each happy, healthy individual will go forth to take up his or her predestined place in the greater society, dedicated to ensuring the continuing perfection of community, identity, stability.
Excellent and very nicely packaged.
You liked the whole film, I mean.
Oh, immensely.
You caught the whole spirit of unchanging perfection.
Spirit of unchanging perfection.
Now, here's another scene.
I'm going to show you these things first before I tell you what I've been thinking about.
This is a scene from a movie called The Giver, which came out, is a good movie, actually, pretty good movie, came out in 2014.
It's based on the famous novel by Lois Lowry.
This is the opening of the film where they explain what has happened after, I guess it's a nuclear war, has destroyed civilization, and so they put back the civilization to ensure that they will now be perfect peace.
And he explains it as the movie opens.
This is cut 12.
After the ruin, we started over, creating a new society, one of true equality.
Rules were the building blocks of that equality.
We learned them as new children.
Rules like use precise language, wear your assigned clothing, take your morning medication, inject it, obey the curfew, never lie.
Never lie, and they're all injected with kind of a soma that makes everybody sort of feel kind of equal.
And finally, just one more scene.
This is from the Stepford Wives.
This is from the not very good remake of the Stepford Wives.
Both movies were kind of bad, actually.
The book is excellent.
It's the IR Levin novel from the 70s.
And it was a kind of hilarious idea that the guy who made the animatronic models at Disneyland had created a perfect community.
And it was perfect because all the women were turned into animatronic housewives who had nothing on their minds at all but to take care of their husbands and their children and to do the chores.
They were all very beautiful.
They all had better figures than the original wives that they were built on.
And at the end, there's a rebellious, one rebellious housewife who finally gets turned into one.
And this is the final scene of the remake as she is introduced, this woman who is kind of a rebel, who had a career, wasn't satisfied with being a homemaker.
She is recreated as the perfect housewife.
This Cut 11.
What a delight to see all of our wonderful wives and their happy, happy husbands.
Tonight is truly the highlight of our year because tonight we honor our very newest citizens of Stepford.
In my opinion, they are the cream of the crop and couple that proudly proclaims Stepford, the American way of love.
What struck me about all of these dystopias is that they work, that the people are happy in them.
The people in Brave New World are on Soma and they are actually happy.
The people in The Giver are drugged and they do things and they work in this beautiful, you could see what a beautiful suburban community it was in the movie.
And they're happy in the Stepford wives.
The women have all been essentially turned into robots, but the men are happy in the community.
You could just see all the smiling faces, all the women spilling out of their Decolletages spilling out of their dresses.
But, you know, everybody is happy.
And in the Ira 11 novel, which it's really interesting, is the children in Stepford become happy when the women are dedicated to them.
One of the points of it is it's not a totally feminist book.
It's sort of saying, yes, homemaking is a sacrificial act.
Being a homemaker is, in some sense, a sacrificial act.
You are pouring yourself into other people.
That is what, that's, to me, what makes it so beautiful.
But if people don't want to do it, they turn them into robots.
And people are equal.
You know, in some of the communities, people are equal.
There's a famous story by Kurt Vonnegut that begins the year was 2081 and everyone, but he was finally equal.
And the way they become equal is they take the best people in the society and they handicap them.
So all the athletes have to carry weights around.
Anybody who's smart has electric pulses interrupting their thoughts.
And all of these things work.
They achieve the goal that they are trying to achieve.
All right.
I know this is a wonderful, wonderful time for you to run out, go to the post office, wait online for four hours with people sneezing on you.
That's what you want to do, unless you have a brain and then you want to go to stamps.com.
Stamps.com saves businesses thousands of hours and tons of money every year.
It can save you time no matter who you are.
It brings all the services of the U.S. Postal Service and UPS right to your computer.
For any business, it's a must-have.
Simply use your computer to print official U.S. postage 24-7 for any letter, any package, any class of mail, anywhere you want to send it.
Once your mail is ready, just schedule a pickup or drop it off.
It's that easy.
Stop wasting time going to the post office and go to stamps.com instead.
There's no risk.
And with my promo code Clavin, you get a special offer that includes a four-week trial plus free postage and a digital scale, no long-term commitments or contracts.
Go to stamps.com, click on the microphone at the top of the homepage and type in Clavin.
That's stamps.com, promo code Clavin, stamps.com.
You will never have to go to the post office again.
And I know you're thinking, that's a great deal.
How do you spell Clavin?
The Perfect Utopia Cost00:09:21
Ha ha ha ha.
You think we're going to, yeah, I will tell you.
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
In fact, in Brave New World, this is one of my favorite parts of Brave New World, the novel.
In Brave New World, there's a place where people live who don't live in the new community.
They live in the old-fashioned way.
And one of the people goes to visit them and you think this, oh, it's going to be paradise.
It's going to be dances with wolves.
It's going to be the savage, primitive guys are really the good people and they're having a great time.
And no, he gets there and the place is miserable.
They're violent.
They're superstitious.
They're sadistic.
They're dirty.
And it's not a good civilization at all.
And Huxley is telling you that there was a reason they made this Soma drug society because the society before it was miserable.
But in this community, in this community, there is one guy who comes to be called the savage or Mr. Savage.
There's one guy who has found a copy of Shakespeare and he has been reading Shakespeare and it has turned him into a humanist.
And they bring him back to the Brave New World and he brings Shakespearean values into this world and he falls in love with one.
All the women are beautiful, so he falls in love with one of the women there.
And he wants to honor her.
He wants to win her.
He wants to perform some great feat that will make him worthy of her because he thinks of her as an untouchable virgin.
Now, the women in this community are just banging everybody, right?
They hate the idea.
They've been taught, trained to hate the idea of permanent relationships.
The idea is just have sex.
It's fun.
You do it.
You're done.
And that's all they do.
And they learn to hate motherhood and they've learned to hate relationships.
All they are supposed to do is have sex.
So here's this guy who's in love with this girl and he thinks he needs to win her, right?
And she, meanwhile, has all these slogans that have been pumped into her mind that she just keeps repeating to him.
But he says, what can I do?
What can I do to be worthy of you?
What wonderful feat, what knightly feat can I perform to win your heart?
And this is her response.
This is a cut 10.
You needn't do anything at all.
Just take me.
Oh, please take me.
Oh, please make me quick.
I'll set my dial so you can drive me wild.
Hug me.
Hug me till you drug me.
Give me a kiss that's full of bliss.
Oh, shame, when is thy blush?
Stop at home.
Get me to a nunnery.
Go!
A what?
Assume a virtue if you have it not!
Out of my sight down at home!
A gram is better than a dam!
When your nerves go jingle jangle, a soma will make you spick and spangle.
Soma will make you spick and spangle.
He has become a human being, and he's flinging Shakespearean epithets at her because she's just, you know, she's happy to go to bed with him.
He doesn't have to win her at all.
She's not, you know, modest.
She's not protecting herself.
She's not ready to go and have a baby.
That's not going to happen.
So none of it matters.
There's no consequences to it.
The dystopian novel, the dystopian story, in order to be a story, depends on you having those values.
It depends on your having the moral understanding that in order to achieve this perfect world, something terrible has been done.
You have to think that it's terrible to take women's personalities away and turn them into robots.
You have to think that it's awful to drug people with soma and hypnotize them so that their feelings are controlled by the state.
You have to believe that in order for the story to be a dystopian story, because otherwise, if you have no moral code, if you do not have a human moral code, dystopia is utopia, right?
The only reason these stories are essentially horror stories is they depend on us to be horrified.
Otherwise, the civilization works.
In The Giver, one of the most powerful scenes and one of the most conservative, unbelievably conservative scenes is the giver is the kid who is going to inherit the secret knowledge of the society.
He is going to learn the basis of the society and all the things that happen on it.
And one of the things that happens that his father is, his own father is in charge of is that babies are killed if they're imperfect, right?
They have a couple of babies who are kind of like twins or triplets or quite, and then they take the ones who aren't perfect.
They only take the perfect one and the one who's not perfect.
They kill him and they call it releasing him.
And he gets to witness on a screen his father injecting this baby so that this beautiful, gorgeous, newborn baby is released.
And this is his reaction, cut 13.
That's death.
He doesn't know what he's doing.
Doesn't know what he's doing.
He killed him.
But he doesn't know what it means.
Just like you did.
Neither did Rosemary.
How can he not see the baby isn't moving?
Doesn't that tell him something is wrong?
The young and the old are killed.
Your friend Fiona, she will soon be trained to release as well.
That's a lie.
She'd never do that.
If Fiona understood you...
We are the only ones who understand it.
Then it's our fault.
You and me and all the receivers back and back and back and back and back.
There has to be a way to show them, to give them the memory so they can understand.
Because if you can't feel, what's the point?
You see, if you're not a human being, what's the point?
If you can't feel what's the point.
It is only, it's only a dystopia to the people who understand what they are doing.
The people who know not what they do, like the people who kill Christ, think they're doing the right thing.
They think they're living in utopia.
It's only a dystopia because of our moral impulses, right?
It's just like abortion.
Abortion works.
Abortion frees women from the responsibilities and the consequences of having sex.
Abortion does make their life easier.
Abortion does make it so that they don't get raped or make a stupid decision and wind up with a baby for life.
It works.
The only reason it doesn't work is if you have the moral sense to know that it's killing.
If they can talk us out of our morality, dystopia becomes utopia.
You can slaughter your way to perfection, right?
There's a wonderful story, 1973, by Ursula K. Le Guin.
It's so short, you can read it online, but I will tell it to you essentially.
It's called The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelis.
And it begins with this place, Omalis, that has a summer festival.
And it's just a beautiful, beautiful place.
And she tries to tell you about the people in this place.
And she takes out all of the things that might horrify you.
They're not robots.
They're not slave drivers.
They say they were not simple folk.
There was no king.
They didn't use swords or keep slaves.
They weren't barbarians.
I don't know the rules and laws of their society, but I suspect that they were few, as they did without monarchy and slavery.
So they also got on without the stock exchange, advertisements, the secret police, and the bomb.
And yet I repeat, these were not simple folks, not bland utopians.
They were not naive and happy children, though their children were in fact happy.
These are incredibly happy people.
But there's one secret in Omalis.
There's one secret in Omalis, that there's a basement room in a basement under one of the many beautiful, beautiful buildings.
There is a child locked in this room.
A child maybe says it could be a boy or a girl.
It looks about six, but actually it's nearly 10.
It's feeble-minded.
It may have been born defective, or perhaps it has become imbecile through fear, malnutrition, and neglect.
The child, who has not always lived in the toolroom and can remember sunlight and its mother's voice, sometimes speaks.
I will be good.
It says, please let me out.
I will be good.
They never answer.
The child is abused.
They abuse this child, lock this child up.
And she says, Ursula Le Guin says, if the child were brought up into the sunlight out of that vile place, if it were cleaned and fed and comforted in that day and hour, all the prosperity and beauty and delight of Omalis would wither and be destroyed.
Those are the terms.
Because the world is broken and sinful, in order to perfect it, someone has to pay.
Someone has to be sacrificed.
We say it's Jesus.
It's one and done.
We say that sacrifice is over and now we are free men and women.
They say it's white, straight male, and then it never ends and there's no grace.
Ursula Le Guin ends this story by saying that when they reveal, each person has to learn about this child hidden away and some of them just leave.
They leave Omalis, she says.
They walk ahead into the darkness and they do not come back.
The place they go towards is a place even less imaginable to most of us than the city of happiness.
I can't describe it at all.
It is possible that it does not exist, but they seem to know where they are going.
The ones who walk away from Omalis.
Dystopia is utopia.
If you ignore immorality, the left uses every trick it can to make you do that.
They say it's a crisis.
They twist language so it has no meaning.
They use the force of law and social shunning to make you forget your morality.
The ease of being given things.
Viagra And Surveys00:04:12
Oh, I'm getting stuff.
I can have all the sex I want and have an abortion.
To make you forget that it is immoral, to make you forget that it's wrong to take people's money away.
It's their money.
It's not Joe Biden's money.
It's theirs.
They should spend it on what they want instead of what the government wants.
It's wrong to kill or to mutilate your children, even if it's convenient or causes sexual paradise.
It's wrong to force choices on people, even if they're the right choices, because freedom is a good.
We keep saying, we on the right keep saying communism doesn't work and socialism doesn't work and utopia doesn't work.
But China is kind of proving that they might work.
They might work.
You might be able to run a society that works.
As long as you're willing to live with atrocity, we on the right are the ones who walk away from a malice.
I had a doctor once, absolutely true, who used to, on the front counter of his office, used to have a bowl of Viagra like M ⁇ Ms you could just walk and take.
So of course, you know, you know me, I took one.
It's good stuff.
I tell you, it actually works.
And RexMD makes getting generic Viagra easy.
It's all done online and from the comfort of home and then delivered.
There are no office visits, no talking to a receptionist.
Super simple.
And right now, sample packs of generic Viagra are available for listeners of my show.
And I'll tell you how to get those in just a second.
But here's how this system works.
You fill out a quick medical questionnaire on the website and a doctor reviews your situation and prescribes you generic Viagra if appropriate.
Then your medication is shipped right to your door with free two-way shipping.
RexMD is easy to use and they've helped over 100,000 guys get the medication they need.
It's never been easier to take control of your health.
Those sample packs of generic Viagra I mentioned are available to our listeners, but you've got to go to rexmd.com slash clavin.
Make sure you go to rex, R-E-X-M-D.com slash clavin.
That's rexmd.com slash clavin.
I can't believe I had to spell rex.
The question is, how do you spell clavin?
Because that's what really gets women excited in the first place.
It's K-L-N-V-A-N.
So you probably know that Daily Wire is growing like crazy.
We moved the whole company across the country.
We released our first feature film.
We struck up a movie deal with Gina Carano, launched a new talk show hosted by Candace Owens all within the last six months.
I'm in this incredible new studio they've got.
It's like an airplane hangar.
I'm writing stuff for them.
We're moving at the speed of light.
I'm so excited for the future of the company.
I really am.
And all of us here at Daily Wire would like to express our gratitude to you because you make all of it possible.
We want to continue to include you in our future plans.
Every week on my show, I talk about a lot of great products and services from sponsors.
I try them, I love them, I use them myself.
But we want to get to know you better so we can choose our sponsors with you in mind.
So please go to dailywire.com slash Clavin and fill out my audience survey to tell us a little more about yourself.
And to sweeten the whole experience, those of you that complete the survey will be entered to win a $1,000 gift card.
But you can only take the survey once per Daily Wire show.
So if you want to increase your chances of winning $1,000, go listen to Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh.
Oh, all right.
Go listen to Michael Knowles too.
And you'll get access to their surveys as well.
Again, my survey link is dailywire.com slash Clavin.
We would love to hear from you.
Don't miss tonight's episode of Candace.
She sits down with Dave Rubin, the host of the Rubin Report and author of Don't Burn This Book, to discuss everything from the recall of Gavin Newsom to Caitlin Jenner's run to replace him and more.
And catch her Wednesday next week for an interview with a very special guest.
So join now and stream Candace Live on Fridays at 9 p.m. Eastern, 8 p.m. Central, only on Daily Wire.
Get 25% off a new membership with code Candice at dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Hurry because this deal is going away next week.
And make sure you grab the audio podcast on Apple, Spotify, or whatever your platform of choice may be.
Just head to Apple Podcasts or Spotify and subscribe to Candace today.
First Amendment Fears00:15:30
So, as I said before, anyone left or right who is a friend of free speech is a friend of this program.
We had Floyd Abrams on a while back, another liberal famous defender of free speech.
And Alan Dershowitz is another one.
I think it is the line in the sand that separates Americans from non-Americans.
Alan Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard Law School, one of the most renowned lawyers in the world that's handled many famous free speech cases.
And he's got a new book called The Case Against the New Censorship, which I am well into.
And it's really interesting, really smart and good.
Alan, thank you for coming back on.
It's good to see you.
Well, thank you.
You know what separates, though, Floyd Abrams and I, Floyd and I have been battling together for free speech cases since the Pentagon Papers, but we divided over Trump.
Floyd Abrams, for some reason, and I still haven't figured out why, said that President Trump's speech on January 6th, which I abhor as a speech, was not protected by the Constitution, did not come within the Brandenburg print.
He signed a letter by hundreds of academics calling that argument essentially irresponsible and frivolous.
I continue to make it and continue to make it.
I didn't like the speech, but it was clearly protected by the First Amendment when the president calls for peaceful, patriotic protests to let your voices be heard.
What could be more covered by the First Amendment?
And why do you resolve doubts against the First Amendment just because it's Donald Trump?
You should always resolve doubts in favor of the First Amendment.
So why don't you have Floyd and me both on the show and we can discuss this issue because we're good friends and I admire him enormously.
We just disagree about this one issue.
I would like to do that.
I did not know that he was actually, I know about that petition, but I did not know he was on that petition.
I was shocked.
It's shocking.
Can you just explain so people know what you're talking about, what the Brandenburg principle is?
The Brandenburg principle is the single most important First Amendment case of the 20th century, which is where the First Amendment really came into being.
It didn't exist really in the 19th century as a matter of law.
And the Brandenburg was a Nazi, terrible Nazi who stood in front of a large crowd, you know, with crosses and nooses and you name it, and called for people to take revenge on Congress, et cetera, and horrible, hate-filled speech.
And the Supreme Court said, I think eight to nothing when Justice was not on the case, that it was protected by the Constitution, that it was despicable speech.
It was like the Nazis marching through Skokie, Illinois.
And I've always been on that side of the case, and so is Floyd.
But, you know, when it comes to Trump, there are some who have made the Trump exception.
That's okay, because he's gone now.
But I don't want to see the Trump exception become the rule.
Professor Lawrence Tribe now would make it the rule because he follows the crowd and the fads wherever they go.
So now the fad is to not prioritize the First Amendment, and Tribe is there along with others.
And I'm going to stick to my principles and always advocate free speech and always err on the side of more speech rather than less speech.
Now, the book that you're writing now, though, largely concerns this threat to free speech that's not from the government.
It's really not covered by the First Amendment.
It is the threat from corporations, from social media.
You call it the greatest threat to free speech since the Alien and Sedition Act, which were in 1798.
So that's a long time ago.
Why is it so threatening?
Because I completely agree with you about that, by the way.
Why is it so threatening?
You know, starting in 1969, I have been litigating First Amendment cases.
I argued my first case in the Supreme Court in 1969 on behalf of a terrible movie called I Am Curious Yellow, an anti-war movie which had a little bit of sex in it.
I then argued the Hare case, the Pentagon Papers case.
I was the law clerk in the New York Times versus Sullivan.
We win all the cases against the government.
The government is an easy target when it comes to the First Amendment because the First Amendment says Congress, which has been interpreted to mean government, shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.
So when the government tries to censor, it's extremely dangerous.
But in America, they lose all the time.
Now we have a situation where the censors are coming from the private sector.
They too have their First Amendment rights.
And that right includes the right to censor.
They're wrong to do it, but they have the right to do it.
Not only that, but the people who are on the forefront of censorship are good people.
They're our nephews, our children, our friends.
They believe in equality.
They're against racism and sexism and homophobia.
We're on the same side that they are.
They just don't understand the need for free speech.
As Brandeis once said, the greatest dangers to liberty lurk in well-meaning people, zealous but without understanding.
And that represents the new approach, the new censorship.
Good people doing bad things for good reasons.
You know, I always, whenever I read your stuff, it always, this is the argument that always bothers me because I'm a conservative.
I'm a conservative because I'm a liberal.
I'm a conservative because I think that the conservatives is a liberal.
Are you sure these are good people?
Are you sure that the logic of their philosophy has not led them, you know, under the name of being opposed to racism, under the name of being in favor of equality?
You're sure it hasn't led them into actually a moral error?
Well, it may have, as to some, but I have met people who really, really are good, really want to see the world better themselves.
You know, look, let's remember, too, being young is not a guarantee of being on the right side.
The people who first burned the books in 1933 in Munich were students.
The people who led the campaign to murder opponents during Stalin's regime were students.
The people who helped overthrow the country in Cuba under Castro were students.
The people who cleaned out Tiananmen Square as the result of Mao, many of them were students.
Students have been on the wrong side of every cause in history.
And so you're right.
Some of these students do become bad people.
But I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
And I certainly know some very good people who are in favor now of censorship.
And they're harder to fight against.
As Pogo said, we have seen the enemy and they are us.
So one of the things that I keep hearing people say is that you cannot stop Twitter, Facebook from censoring because they too were protected by the First Amendment.
But Lincoln made the argument that the Constitution is based on the Declaration.
And the Declaration says our rights are given to us by God and the government is formed in order to secure those rights.
So if our right to free speech is given to us by God and the government is there to secure our rights, if there are free speeches taken away by Facebook, doesn't the government suddenly have the power to act in some way?
I don't think I've ever said this before, but Abraham Lincoln was wrong.
Not Bill of Rights.
The Bill of Rights was a lawless, revolutionary document, which of course had to rely on God because they didn't have law on their side.
Then they passed the Constitution.
There's no God in the Constitution.
It's all about law.
The Constitution is a conservative document.
Hannah Arendt once said that the best way to turn a revolutionary into a conservative is have them win.
Then they have to govern and they become conservative.
So the writers of the Constitution did not believe necessarily in the same inalienable rights that Jefferson wrote about in the Declaration of Independence.
They didn't want to give people power to overthrow them the way they took the power to overthrow Great Britain.
So I've never been a supporter of the claim.
I own a copy, an early copy of the Declaration of Independence.
I value it and I love it.
I also own some early copies of the Constitution.
These are, you know, these are my Bibles in some ways.
But I just actually wrote an introduction to a short book on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, in which I make the point.
You can't imagine more different documents than the Declaration, God, natural law, no legal basis, the Constitution, which is a boringly structured document, which has separation of powers and checks and balances and all of that.
Remember, Alexander Hamilton didn't even want a Bill of Rights because he said, you need a Bill of Rights.
Congress doesn't have the power to restrict freights or to establish religion or to quarter troops.
So why should we specify the rights?
That'll make it sound as if the government has even more rights than the Bill of Rights denies them.
So, you know, they're very, very different documents.
And I don't believe that you can, I wrote another book about this, Rights from Wrong.
I don't think you can derive rights from God because there are too many gods.
There are too many interpreters of gods.
There are too many ways in which God has been misused.
I just think you have to be more of a textualist.
All right.
Well, even though I don't agree with you, let me make a different argument then.
If we indeed have the right to free speech, if that is something that we can assume we have for some reason, but if we have it, and it can be gutted by Facebook, what good is it?
Well, what good is it is it prevents the government from gutting it, but it's not complete.
It's not perfect.
If you take away Facebook's right to censor, you're taking away their freedom of speech.
Remember, a very important Supreme Court decision was when the Miami Herald refused to publish, I think it was, refused to publish a letter to the editor correcting something they had written.
And there was a Florida statute that said if a newspaper says something about somebody, they have to have a right to respond.
Spring Court said, no, no, no.
The right to free speech by a private person includes the right not to publish anything.
So we have to fight back in different ways.
Number one, we should take away their exemption under Section 230 of the Decency and Communication Act, which treats them like platforms, even though they really are publishers.
Number two, we can, if they get too big and engage in predatory activities against competitors like Rumble, who is trying to come in now and not censor material, we can fight them in the antitrust courts.
But the one thing we can't do, I think, is make them print material they don't want to print.
Now, Justice Thomas thinks we can under a common carrier notion.
And it's interesting.
It's a very, it's one of the most interesting First Amendment opinions in recent years, the recent opinion of Justice Thomas.
I think in the end, it would be dangerous to treat newspapers or internet as common carriers.
I think it would have too much of a restriction on free speech, but it's worth considering.
What do you mean, what is a common carrier, like a phone?
Yeah, the phone company, the buses, they can't discriminate.
You can't have a bus that says, we'll take you from New York to Boston, but if you're a Republican, you can't get on my bus.
You can't do that if you hold yourself out to be a common carrier.
Now, the closest they've come is they've applied the common carrier doctrine, not only to telephones, but to telegraphs.
Now, telegraphs are written material.
And so if somebody wants to send a telegraph saying, for example, what President Trump has said in his tweets, under the current law, Twitter can ban him, but the telegraph company can't.
And Justice Thomas said, you know what, that doesn't really make much sense.
We should apply the common carrier notion to very, very large carriers of information today.
It's a very interesting approach, but we have to think hard about it.
I mean, it really is disturbing to me that President Trump, who was indeed the President of the United States, whether you liked him or not, who had got more votes than anybody but Joe Biden in the election, that he now can't, literally can't speak on the major vehicles of communication in this country.
They'll take him off YouTube.
You interview him.
They'll ban you from YouTube.
They won't let him go on Twitter.
They started parlors so other people would have a place to speak.
They knocked Parlor off their servers.
I mean, I'm representing Mike Pillow, and I'm representing them precisely on that ground.
Mike Lindell, who I disagree with on a great many of his claims, has the right to express them.
And now he can't get on any major media because they'll be responsible in defamation for what he says.
He could conceivably get on the social media because of Section 230, but they won't let him on.
So he too has been silenced.
Now, I think he should be allowed to speak.
Let me give you another story, which you won't even believe.
This is so terrible.
So Bobby Kennedy, the son of the former attorney general and a very distinguished environmental lawyer, is a vaccine skeptic.
And I'm a skeptic about everything, but I believe in vaccination.
I've been vaccinated.
So he challenged me to debate him.
And we had a great debate for over an hour about the science, technology, the constitutionality, the history.
Lots of people watched it.
Tens of thousands of people watched it.
And then YouTube took it down.
They didn't want anybody to hear Bobby Kennedy's views.
They were perfectly happy to have him hear my views.
So they gave me a victory by a technical knockout.
I don't want to win by a technical knockout.
I want to win the marketplace of ideas.
I want the people to be persuaded.
And if they're persuaded by his ideas, let them follow his ideas.
That's what the marketplace of ideas means.
That is an amazing story.
The other story that I found enormously disturbing, we're talking to Alan Dershowitz.
His new book is called The Case Against the New Censorship.
It was the story on Amazon when they took down When Harry Became Sally, which was a book, a very responsible, scholarly, compassionate book, but opposed to the ideas of transgender, of the transgender movement.
Amazon sells 90% of the new books in this country.
And it doesn't seem to me too big a stretch to want them to carry books.
Books do these things.
They put forward dangerous ideas.
They put forward exciting ideas, ideas that go against the grain.
To have them take those down, it just seems to me such a violation of trust.
And just to add this, that if they start to take them down, publishers won't publish them.
They will literally erase those ideas from the public sphere.
Don't even need Amazon now.
Look at Simon ⁇ Schuster.
They decided to publish two books by the former vice president Pence.
No, I don't agree with Pence's ideas.
I don't know whether I'm going to read his book or not.
Probably I would because I like to read opposing points of view.
But 300 people, Simon ⁇ Schuster, writers, editors, agents, young people mostly said, no, no, no, not in our company.
We're not publishing his book.
Dangerous Ideas Erased00:14:13
Or Norton decides to stop publishing a biography of Philip Roth because the author was accused of being involved in sexual misconduct.
He denies it.
Nobody has seen the proof of it.
And yet I can't read the Philip Roth biography because Norton won't publish it.
What people seem to forget is that the First Amendment has two aspects.
Number one, the right of the speaker to speak.
So the publisher who published the Philip Roth biography has his right.
But then there's the right of the reader, the listener, the viewer.
We have a First Amendment right to listen.
That's what's so wrong with canceled culture.
When they canceled James Levine at the Metropolitan Opera, I love James Levine.
I love opera.
Don't deny me the right to hear the greatest conductor in modern history just because you don't like what he may have done when he was 25 years old.
You may want to punish him, but don't punish me.
And you're punishing me when you deprive me of the right to hear him.
You deprive me of the right to read Vice President Pence's book or the biography of Philip Roth.
People seem to forget about that aspect of the First Amendment.
You know, I have to ask you this again.
It's sort of what I opened with, but I want to take it from a slightly different point of view.
I mean, ideas, we all know, have consequences, and ideas tend to move toward their reasonable conclusions.
The left is censoring in a way the right hasn't done for a long, long time.
I mean, not since I was a kid was the right really censorious.
Isn't there something?
I mean, the complaint that we conservatives have about the left is that everything the government gives you takes away from your freedom.
Everything the government gives you comes with a price tag.
And the price tag is not just money.
It's also freedom.
It feels to me like these are people who have lost the argument.
When they lost the election, they wanted to get rid of the Electoral College.
When they lost the majority in the Supreme Court, they wanted to stack the Supreme Court.
Now they've lost the argument and they want to get rid of free speech.
And some of them even say this.
I mean, people in the New York Times saying free speech was all right when it was supporting the underdog, but now that it's supporting conservatives, it's no good.
Do you think there is anything inherent in the liberal point of view, the left-wing point of view, let's call it, that just trends toward this kind of oppression?
Well, historically, the extreme left has always opposed free speech and due process, as has the extreme right.
I grew up with McCarthyism.
During McCarthyism, was the champions of free speech.
You've heard of the free speech movement?
The free speech movement wasn't a free speech movement.
It was a movement for free speech by the left, but not the right.
Free speech for me, but not for thee.
Today, conservatives are the victims of suppression.
So suddenly they've become strong supporters of free speech.
I don't believe that necessarily there's anything on the right which inclines them to want more free speech and anything on the left that inclines them not to.
It's always free speech for me, but not for thee.
It's always selfish who genuinely believe in free speech.
I founded a few years ago, the Free Speech Club.
In order to get a membership in the Free Speech Club, you have to publicly defend the right of somebody who so disturbs you, who is so abhorrent.
If you're a Jew, you have to defend the rights of Nazis.
If you're a black, you have to defend dysgenics, that absurd notion.
If you're a woman, you have to defend pornography and sexism.
And you can't get into the club unless you demonstrate that you're willing to really go to the mat the way Voltaire said.
I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
You know, remember how many members are in that club?
You can hold the meeting in a phone booth.
You're a member.
I'm a member.
Harvey Silverglade's a member.
Alan Kors is a member.
Nadine Strawson is a member.
One organization that I can think of today, FIRE, qualifies for a membership.
No longer the ACLU, no longer many, many other organizations.
So I think we've seen it on both sides.
A very fair point that because right people on the right generally are suspicious of government, they should be suspicious of governmental restrictions on free speech.
But on the other hand, people on the right are generally more favorable to corporate freedom, corporate power.
So I think there's a lot of ambivalence about on the right about Facebook now, because Facebook and Twitter and and Youtube are left-wing oriented, it makes it easier for conservatives, but I wonder how many conservatives really are prepared to say, the government, the government should have some power to compel private corporations not to censor things.
If the shoe were on the other foot, I don't know what the i'm arguing with them now.
I'm why some of them say that they shouldn't be able to do it now.
I got to stop there, Alan Dershowitz.
The book is called The Case Against The New Censorship.
Uh, I really enjoyed talking to you.
I hope you'll come back.
Thanks very much.
You're a great person to have a conversation with.
I wish there were more of these kinds of discussions.
So thank you for thanks a lot, Alan.
I'll see you again.
Good sure, all right, and with that we move on to the mailbag.
We're.
Not going to seek, excuse me.
Yeah, All right.
The first one is from Eric.
Dear Clavin, I have no excuses.
I have a beautiful kind, loving wife who I love very deeply.
We have created a wonderful, god-fearing home with amazing children.
I've worked hard to conquer sexual sin in both thought and deed in my life.
Uh, because i'm a man, I know this will fight, will consider, continue my entire life.
Um, i've been quite successful.
However, one issue remains.
I find that I occasionally struggle with the desire for the newness of a new love with a woman.
Sometimes these thoughts or fantasies involve someone from my past and other times it is a faceless ideal.
Uh surprisingly, these are expressly non-sexual desires.
As I said, I love my wife and family very much and would never act on these desires, but i'm concerned that I even have these thoughts and I wish to take them captive and free myself from them.
I'd love to hear your insight on how to do this.
In other words, he's having fantasies about meeting a new love, starting a new romance.
My diagnosis is that you are a human male.
There's nobody who's not doing this.
In fact, many women uh, many loving wives are also having fantasies of a new romance.
There's a reason that books like 50 Shades Of grace.
All a gazillion uh copies.
Many of the women reading it are married.
It is just part of human nature in men.
I every time I say this, people are enraged, but it's simply true.
The urge for sexual variety is as powerful as the urge to have children is in women.
Uh, that is just the truth and people get angry at me for saying it, but it's just the truth.
And marriage is a sacrifice for men in that way and it's a way of hopefully satisfying them enough so that they don't become an absolute uh, destructive force.
Their sexuality doesn't become a destructive force.
You know when?
When Jesus said that when you lust in your heart, you commit adultery, he didn't mean that somehow you could stop lusting in your heart.
I don't think people can stop lusting.
And entirely what he meant was, you are in a state of sin.
That sin is are things you do.
There are sinful things that you do, but you are living, as we are all living, In a state of sin, and what Jesus is, is like a North Star that we can point ourselves to.
I don't really think, I think it is destructive to constantly berate yourself for every thought that you have.
I think these are thoughts that people have that let off steam.
It's like taking the dog for a walk, basically, to steal a metaphor from Stephen King.
You know, he said people read horror because it takes their horrifying dogs out for a stroll.
You know, this takes out your desire for a mental fantasy stroll and relieves the pressure on it.
The one thing that I do think you have to be careful of is that genuine, erotic, romantic energy, so much genuine, erotic, romantic energy goes into your fantasies that you turn it away from your wife.
You know, your wife, you should be romancing your wife all the time.
Even when you're annoyed, you should be reminding yourself that this is the love of your life.
And it sounds to me like you know that, but you should be reminding yourself in every conversation.
Whenever you hear, whenever you hear yourself getting annoyed, just remind yourself: no, no, wait a minute, this is the love of my life.
Let me romance her as well.
And so, if the romantic energy, erotic energy of your life is being poured into these fantasies, that is a bad thing.
Otherwise, I have to tell you, I would leave yourself alone a little bit.
This is something that probably is helping you preserve the marriage that you have.
We all yearn for variety.
We all yearn for new romance.
The beginning of a romance is one of its most exciting moments.
We all remember, we all ask each other how you met your wife, how you met your girlfriend, your boyfriend.
You know, these are exciting moments, and we relive them in fantasy.
You're not being unfaithful.
You're not even really lusting in your heart in this case.
You are just walking the dog.
You're just exercising the desire that we all have.
You are just a human male.
We are meant to be human.
We are meant to be who we are.
Jesus says, I came so that you could live life abundantly and have the joy that I have.
And that entails freeing yourself from many worldly desires, but it doesn't entail beating yourself up for just being a human being.
We do have to fight many of our desires.
We have to fight many of our actions.
But this, again, I think is something that is in us to help us let off steam.
And you're just like everybody else and shouldn't spend your life beating yourself up.
You've built a beautiful relationship.
You have a beautiful family.
Love your family.
Bring your love and your romantic energy to your wife.
And I think you're, you know, as we used to say, you're playing with the house's money.
You're ahead of the game.
From Anonymous, I just saw your video, The White Scare.
I'm fascinated by your presentation on the failing of the church in America.
I've been serving that declining vestige of what used to be called the mainline church for about four decades.
I'm nearing retirement and serving in the best setting I've ever had, but I'm concerned about making it to retirement while my denomination is requiring me to take anti-racism training in order to keep my standing.
I'm a white male, so I'm already in trouble.
About a year ago, I had what you would call a transformation toward conservatism.
I don't trust my denomination where I hold standing, and I fear it may be taken from me if I'm truthful.
So I think I'll try to walk carefully through the snake pit and at least try not to lie.
I'm thinking of moving to a platform.
He sounds like he's a priest or a pastor.
He talks about giving sermons.
I'm thinking of moving my sermons to a platform like YouTube to provide income for my family in case I lose my standing my job to provide for my retirement years.
I like what you said about the church, about the Christian faith and integrity.
I feel like I've been learning ministry all over again and now entering my prime.
Any advice or encouragement, I'll at least take your prayers.
I've been very impressed with your knowledge and wisdom.
Keep up the good work.
The world needs your voice.
Well, thank you for that.
You know, I'm not quite sure what you're saying here.
But if you're saying that you are going to participate in this racist anti-racism, if what you're saying is that you're a pastor or a priest or somebody who has, you say you have standing, someone who has authority to speak, you have to speak.
You can't not speak.
It's not enough not to lie.
It's not enough to play like dodging the bullets.
You've got to come out and say something.
You know, I'll tell you, I'm running out of time, but I'll tell you a very quick story about my son, Spencer, who was a wonderful guy, one of the most, one of the best theologians I've ever met, right?
He's a brilliant theologian, and he's gay, and he loved the Church of England when he was at Oxford, and he wanted to become a priest in the Church of England.
And he went to them and talked to them, and at least to feel them out, and he told them, he was very honest with them about the fact that he was gay.
And they said, well, you know, you cannot be actively gay.
Wink, wink.
And he said, well, what does that mean?
And he said, well, look, many priests are actively gay and have relationships and live with people, but you just can't talk about it.
So they weren't refusing him for being gay.
They're refusing him because he refused to lie.
He said, I'm not going to begin my priesthood with a lie.
I'm not going to become a priest by lying.
So remember, they weren't saying, no, you can't be gay.
They were saying, you can't tell anybody.
You can't tell anybody.
One of the proudest moments in my life, truly, was when he turned them down, when he turned them down.
I knew he wanted it.
I knew he was really interested in it.
I knew it was something of value to him, but he turned it down because he had integrity.
If you are a man of God, integrity is baseline, right?
If you are a man of God, integrity is baseline.
If these guys are teaching you or telling you racist stuff, I think you have to say something.
You know, you don't have to refuse to go.
You can go and listen to them, and then you have to stand up wherever you deliver sermons and deliver your sermon.
You're afraid of losing your job.
You've already lost your job if you lie.
You've already lost your job if you serve God without integrity.
You have no job.
What is your job if you serve God without integrity?
I'm sorry, but my answers are guaranteed 100% correct.
I want to be nice to you.
I want to give you an out, but there is no out.
If you're serving God, integrity is baseline.
You know, I was so proud of my son because he is a man of God, and I don't care what anybody says.
I don't care what anybody's theory is about his life.
He is a man of God and a man of integrity.
And that is what you have to be.
And so if they are preaching racism to you, you got to say something.
It's disgusting.
This stuff is disgusting.
It's disgusting to judge people by the color of their skin.
It is disgusting to denigrate white people or black people or any people.
If you're a man of God, you have to speak up.
Sorry.
I know that's not what you wanted to hear, but I had to tell you.
I got to stop there.
The Clavenless weekend is upon you.
So none of this really matters because the possibility of your surviving till next Friday is like almost invisible.
I mean, it's a microscopic.
It's like a microaggression.
You can't even see it.
But if you do make it, I'll be back on Friday.
I think I will be doing an all-access on Wednesday.
So I'll see you there if you are an all-access subscriber.
Back On Friday00:01:13
If not, I'll be back on Friday with the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm Andrew Klavan.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, on Spotify, basically wherever you listen to podcasts.
Also, remember to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro Show, the Matt Walsh Show, and the Michael Knoll Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Andrew Clavin Show is produced by Robert Sterling.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Our technical director is Austin Stevens.
Supervising producer, Mathis Glover.
Production Manager, Pavel Vidowski.
Edited by Danny D'Amico.
Lead audio mixer, Mike Cormina.
Animations are by Cynthia Angulo.
Production coordinator, McKenna Waters.
And our production assistant is Jacob Falage.
The Andrew Clavin Show is a Daily Wire production, Copyright Daily Wire, 2021.
Ratings crater for Biden's fake State of the Union.
A Cuban refugee claims that commies have already conquered America, and Ted Cruz pressures squishy Republicans to put their money where their mouths are.