Andrew Clavin’s Mom’s Home! Hide the CRT! dissects political polarization through Juneteenth’s hollow symbolism and Richard Cooper’s controversial take on modern marriage, framing his "storyteller" approach as a rejection of partisan outrage. He condemns CRT as Marxist race essentialism, citing Virginia school board arrests and Pennsylvania’s KKK smear, while critiquing both sides for moral hypocrisy—leftists exploiting racial divisions, rightists rushing to judgment. Sourabh Amari’s The Unbroken Thread argues tradition over individualism, contrasting Shakespeare’s Macbeth with modern "banal optimism," and Clavin’s mailbag reveals dating despair: Caitlin’s search for traditional husbands, Steve’s girlfriend’s erratic cohabitation, and Brandon’s plea to avoid ideological arrogance. The episode ends with a warning—no side holds moral certainty, only humility and love. [Automatically generated summary]
The Biden administration is continuing its efforts to bring America together by tearing it apart.
Its plan to enhance bipartisanship by reaching across the aisle to cram a radically partisan agenda down the throats of half the nation has already eased racial divisions by widening them and should soon alleviate urban tensions by allowing mobs to burn our cities to the ground.
After the era of Donald Trump, when the nation was torn asunder by journalists screaming hysterically while liberty spread and the economy improved, we are now at last entering an era where we will be freed from authoritarianism by surrendering all our freedoms to the government.
We should all say a deep and heartfelt thank you to the Democrat Party for recognizing that even their own voters did not approve of the radical leftist agenda of Elizabeth Warren, but would only elect the decrepit relic of a venal machine politician who could maunder unintelligibly while the Democrat Party pushed the radical leftist agenda of Elizabeth Warren.
And after the torment of division that Donald Trump imposed on the news media while the country thrived, what a wonderful change it is to see the news media returning to their constitutional role as defender of the rights and privileges of their corporate owners.
Now, instead of being forced to listen to unnerving reports of Russian collusion that didn't happen, and Ukrainian corruption that didn't happen, and campaign finance violations that didn't happen, and sexual malfeasance by Supreme Court nominees that didn't happen, we are blessed with a period of peaceful media silence while the country is driven into the ground by failed ideas and incompetence.
It's almost like a new era of good feelings, especially for Jeffrey Toobin.
And what about American blacks?
Who can forget how all through the Trump era they've wallowed in jobs and low crime while Trump viciously spewed harmless statements that could be taken out of context and made to seem racist?
Today, black Americans can stand tall knowing that Juneteenth is a federal holiday.
So if they had a job, they could take the day off and go outside if their neighborhoods weren't being sprayed with bullets.
Yes, no one can deny that we are so much better off for being so much worse off than we were when we were better off and things were so much worse.
Or better.
I get confused which is which.
So here's to you, Joe Biden and the Democrat Party.
Your patriotic hatred of this country, your anti-racist racism, and your anti-authoritarian oppression are making America great by destroying it completely.
Becoming Beautiful Heroes00:15:56
Thank you.
No, really.
Thanks a lot.
You insufferable schmucks.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky-dunky.
Life is tickety-boom.
Birds are winging, also singing, hunky-dunkity-doom.
Ship-shaped dipsy-topsy, the world is a bitty-zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hoorah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hoorah.
All right, we are back once again laughing our way through the fall of the republic, which is happening even as we speak.
The wandering sage, the homeless wandering sage of Clavinon, always returns to talk to you on Fridays from the back seat of his car where I'm currently living.
Please, if you would, go on Apple Podcasts and subscribe to this program and give us five-star review.
It is very helpful to us.
No one tells me these things, but now I know it's very helpful to us.
It pushes us up in the ratings, which means we can continue to bring you the kind of content that is already driving you insane.
Also, go on the Andrew Clavin channel on YouTube and subscribe there.
And if you press that little bell, probably nothing will happen.
But if you hear a bell, call your doctor.
And if you leave a comment and the comment is sufficiently racist and anti-women and just, it just really has to be low and disgusting.
We will include it on this show because it'll fit seamlessly in with the rest of what I'm saying here.
Today we have from Atlas Dominion, he says, boys, or she says, boys and girls watch Shapiro, men and women watch Clavin.
That's true and also raises the question who watches Knolls.
I think probably dumb animals.
And just we have security watching Walsh, you know, just for obvious reasons.
So I love games and I love to put a couple of bucks on a game now and then.
And Stat Hero really helps you out with this.
It's the first ever daily fantasy sports book that puts the player in control and puts winning within reach.
Here's how it works.
Stat Hero shows you their lineups and dares you to beat them, right?
It's you versus the house in a head-to-head fantasy matchup.
You name your stakes, winner take all.
You have the advantage.
Stat Hero is showing you their lineups ahead of time.
No one else does that.
You are in control.
Stat Hero is DFS the way it was meant to be, one-on-one.
Play Stat Hero now and change the odds.
Go to stathero.com slash clavin.
You can sign up for free.
And right now you can get three times back on your first play.
They're giving you a 300% match.
That's unheard of.
Go to stathero.com slash clavin, stath hero.com slash clavin.
Restrictions apply.
See stathero.com for details.
For instance, how do you spell clavin?
Many of you are thinking, well, that sounds great, but I don't know how to spell claven.
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
So last week, something happened that really keyed into something that I wanted to talk about anyway, which is I had this fellow, Richard Cooper, on.
He has a show on called Entrepreneurs with Cars, and he's what you might call a men's coach.
He talks to men about how to be alphas, alpha men, and so they can attract more women, but not to let women dominate their lives.
He had a whole philosophy about how women behave and what they were going to do.
And I brought him on because I think that men have legitimate concerns.
I've talked about this.
They have legitimate concerns about the worth of marriage in their lives, given divorce laws in some states that favor women and also given feminism, which gives women the sense that maybe they want to do something that is not involved in the marriage, not involved in the home, and whether men are getting the sort of things that they used to get and whether it's worthwhile.
And he addresses those concerns very differently, obviously, than I do.
And a lot of women wrote to me, a lot of women wrote to me to say how much they hated this guy, how much they hated Richard.
And here's a clip that most of them mentioned.
I'm not opposed to the idea of men and women living in a way that would be called marriage.
The problem is that there's a lot of risk that's involved.
It's mostly high risk and low reward for men, and it's low risk and high reward for women.
I'm in a long-term relationship, very happy with my girlfriend.
She's a compliment to my life.
She's not the focus.
She's, you know, she's a great piece.
So I'm with you on that.
But the problem is, is that things have changed quite a bit.
You know, the fabric of society, the social constructs, the social contracts that we have between men and women are quite difficult.
I mean, I have a chapter in my book, the book that you mentioned at the opening, on why smart men don't marry.
And in the West, it's a pretty risky endeavor.
And most guys march into it like they're marching into a slaughterhouse with their eyes closed, not knowing where the landmines are and where all the sharp objects are that can hurt them along the way.
So women were very upset.
The women who wrote to me, many of them were very upset.
First of all, he was calling his girlfriend a great piece.
I call my wife that, but I spell it differently.
But most of the women who wrote to me, they heard what I was saying too, and they understood that I said at the opening that I didn't agree with them.
I was juxtaposing my Relationship with my wife, which is very much a focus of my life and very, and the making of me, I would say, really an important thing in the way I talk about my wife.
And of course, the way, you know, I said to Richard while he was here, I said I thought he was speaking about women animalistically as if they were not individuals, that their biological imperatives ruled their lives, instead of being people like men who have to use the biological imperatives of their lives well, that you have to act well.
And that, you know, you know, I think, in general, that I believe that men and women incarnate the feminine and masculine aspects of God, and each one has to do it in his individual way.
But when we let go of ourselves and we let God fill our lives, that we do it in original ways that are still startling and beautiful, but are key into our bodies and do have to do with our biology.
But there were some women who were angry at me because I let the guy come on at all, or because I didn't debate him and destroy him.
You know, we have to destroy people on YouTube.
I don't know if they still say that.
When we were starting the Daily Wire, they would always put out YouTube videos.
It's like, Spencer Murray's destroys this guy.
And it always destroys was in capital letters.
And, you know, I don't bring people on to destroy them or to debate them.
I bring them on to hear what they have to say.
And sometimes I'll challenge their ideas and I will juxtapose my ideas to theirs, but I don't argue with them or try to shout them down.
And I'm not certainly not going to attack them after they're here.
I may take a point that they made and give my own point of view, but I'm not going to then rip the guy after he's not here to defend themselves.
That's not my point.
And look, you've seen me do this with my friend Jonah Goldberg, who's a guy I really respect and admire and people, but I very much disagreed with him about Donald Trump.
And you've seen Sebastian Gorka, who was more dedicated to Trump than I was, and I disagreed with him about things, but always let him have his say and let him explain what he thought Trump was doing.
And so this is a different way of doing things, right, than say Tucker Carlson, who brings on people that he agrees with and says, you know, and compliments them, brings on people.
And I'm not, I like Tucker Carlson's show.
I'm not, this is not ripping him.
It's just different.
But if he brings on people that he disagrees with, he tears into them, you know, and I don't do that, right?
So mine is a different way, and I'm going to call it the way of the storyteller, right?
A good storyteller loves the human story.
He loves the human world.
The story of the world unfolding is a tale of people interacting.
I've always said that my view of heaven is I just is a TV room, a well-stocked TV room where I get to watch the story of the world, the rest of the story of the world, and find out what happens and how it goes.
I just find the world very entertaining.
One of my earliest memories, one of my earliest memories that I forgot for many, many decades was playing with these blocks that were shaped with people and putting them into designs.
And that is essentially what a novelist does, you know, that he takes the human drama and he turns it into more contained stories.
Now, my favorite poet, John Keats, I call this the way of the storyteller.
My favorite poet, John Keats, called this the poetical character.
Here's what he said about what it means to have a poetical character.
He says, the poetical character is not itself.
It has no self.
It is everything and nothing.
It has no character.
It enjoys light and shade.
It lives in gusto.
That's what you frequently hear me call joy, the vitality of life.
It lives in gusto, be it foul or fair, high or low, rich or poor, mean or elevated.
It has as much delight in conceiving an iyago, which obviously the racist villain from Shakespeare's Othello, it has as much delight in an iago as in an imogen, who's the perfect virtuous wife from Shakespeare's Cymbeline.
What shocks the virtuous philosopher delights the chameleon poet.
It does no harm from its relish of the dark side of things any more than from its taste for the bright one because they both end in speculation.
What he means by speculation is keeping an open mind.
He calls this negative, Keats called this negative capability.
He said that's when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts without any irritable reaching after fact and reason.
He is just experiencing the world.
Now, some of you might say, wow, that sounds like the exact opposite of Ben Shapiro.
And it is one of the things I really am, I'm very obviously fond of Ben, and one of the things I really like about Ben is he and I see the same factual world.
We describe the world the same, but we have a different attitude toward it.
And mine is very much affected by this poetical character, the way of the storyteller, of loving the unfolding play of life.
Now, Keats' ideas obviously are derived from Christianity.
I don't think, I'm not sure he knows that they're derived from Christianity, but if he weren't from a Christian culture, he probably would not have come up with that idea of the storyteller, of what a poetical character is.
It comes almost directly, I would say, from what Jesus said when he said, love your enemies, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.
For he makes his son rise on the evil and the good alike, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
In other words, it's the same kind of attitude instead of rushing to judgment, loving the things that you see in order to become like God, in order to see the world from God's point of view.
Now, why is it, why is the world good when you see it from his point of view when we know it's so full of evil and so full of suffering?
The world is good when you see it from God's point of view because God is telling a story.
And we know this is a story of the world's fall and its redemption.
And we know that everything works to the good for those who love God and are in line with his purposes, right?
Because his purposes are good, right?
So when you see the world without judgment, when you see it with love, you see, it becomes beautiful.
And it becomes beautiful with all its horrors.
It becomes beautiful.
It's weird.
It becomes beautiful with everything because you're seeing everything.
You're seeing it the way God sees it instead of the crap show that we see every day and we live with every day.
Now, I am a conservative and I know exactly what you're thinking.
I can read your mind from here.
You're thinking, if we die, if we don't pass judgment, we're not judging the way, then the Taliban will take over America and elect Kamala Harris queen of the universe.
And yes, that is exactly what will happen if we sit around and do nothing.
The Taliban will take over the world and will elect Kamala Harris.
That's exactly what they will elect, Queen of the Universe.
So you're right about this.
I agree.
And I will get to my response to that in a minute.
But first, I just want to point out that conservatives too often make the other mistake.
They rush to the judgment without considering the demands of love, without considering the way of the storyteller to pause for a minute and look at the good, beautiful story that is being unfolded.
I'll give you an example.
On Juneteenth, there were partiers in Oakland.
People were shot.
I don't know if it was at the party.
I don't think so.
It was nearby.
And an ambulance was rushing these people to the hospital.
And the partiers descended on this ambulance, held it up so it couldn't get to the hospital, and it just started twerking.
You can see it if you're watching.
They started twerking and a lot of sexual display, and people climbed on top of the audience, made it hard for the ambulance, and the ambulance, I mean, made it hard for the ambulance to get through.
And look, this is a scene from hell, right?
This is a scene from hell.
And it's a degraded, horrifying, uncaring, wicked, it's wickedness, it's wickedness.
And what does it mean to look at that with love?
What does it mean to look in that?
Well, I have to tell you, the first thing that went through my mind when I saw it, and I should say these are black people, these are black Americans, and they were celebrating Juneteenth, so there's a certain kind of horrible irony to it.
You know, we all have a natural affinity of blood, I think, a tribalism.
You know, we try to rise above it, but it's natural in our bodies.
It's a part of our flesh to have this natural affinity.
I, for instance, you know, I obviously am a devout Christian, but my blood is in Ashkenazi Jews' blood.
And when I see a Bernie Madoff or Madoff or George Soros doing evil in the world, I get this kind of, it's like nails on a chalkboard to me.
I think, dude, do not do that, you know, because I feel this connection.
So I just, the first thing I felt when I saw this was empathy for all our fellow Americans who are black who have to look at that and just think, you know, a word I won't say, and their chin must fall to their chest.
It's just, it's just a painful thing to see it.
But this, what you just saw, what you just saw, that's not a disease of the blood.
That is not a genetic disorder, what you saw.
This is something that can happen to each and every single one of us once we let go of the hand of God.
That is what people are when they let go of the hand of God.
And how have we allowed that to happen?
I'm not blaming society.
I'm not blaming society.
Each of those people is an individual, and whatever his suffering and his pain, and whatever his experience, he is responsible for what he is doing in that moment, twerking to hold up an ambulance taking a shot man to the hospital, a shot person to the hospital.
They are allowing themselves to become that.
But I am seeing lost souls.
I am seeing lost souls.
I know that God has a beautiful plan, that he allows us to choose evil because that's the only way we can choose good.
And there is no such thing as goodness if you don't choose it, right?
Goodness doesn't happen by accident.
It happens by choice.
Evil happens by choice, and these people have made that choice.
And so it's, you know, it's part of this beautiful system that is ongoing, this great story that is being told that we know ends with redemption.
We know from our Bibles ends with the redemption of the world, and it's a beautiful story.
And we pause for a minute to see that, even as our hearts break, and even as we say, no, these people have to be held responsible.
And this culture that has allowed this to happen, this culture that has spoken into their world and told them, oh, you're poor victims, you're not responsible for your behavior, or you are not part of this country because this country hates you and therefore you are outside the moral order.
We have to take responsibility for that as well.
So what is the difference between what we do and what the left does?
Okay, how can we see the world from a godlike perspective of the storyteller and without standing by while the world devolves into that kind of hell?
And the answer is humility.
It's Pride Month, but here on the Andrew Clavin Show, it's always humility month.
There's no Pride Month.
Humility, the mistake the left makes repeatedly, repeatedly, is they try to see the world from this loving point of view, but they think that they are telling the story.
They have pride.
Teaching Structure and Order00:15:22
They don't understand that we are seeing the world as God sees it, but we're characters in the story.
We are not the storyteller.
We cannot change the story.
We can only be the part of the story that represents the good.
Remember, a couple of things.
You should remember about what Jesus said.
He said, he didn't say, love your enemies and they'll become nice.
He didn't say, love your enemies and the world will be a better place.
He always says the world will suck.
And the other thing was, he didn't say there was no such thing as evil and good.
He said God shines and reigns on the evil and the good, right?
He said God loves and delivers his gifts to the evil and the good.
He doesn't love the evil of the evil, but he loves the people who are being led astray.
And he is weeping too, as we know, for these people who are lost.
Humility tells us, right?
Humility tells us that while taking on a godlike perspective helps us see what God sees, we are not God.
We are not the storyteller.
Humility tells us that we are characters in the story and have to behave in such a way that we bring God's good into the world.
That is our mission.
That is what we're here to do.
And they think they're going to change.
They do this all the time.
They think we're going to change the narrative.
We're going to change the narrative.
We're going to say that men can, it's not fair that there are men and women.
So we're going to change that.
And if we say men can become women, we just have to shut up everybody who says that that's not true, just censor them, just make them quiet, and then it'll become true.
We are the storytellers.
But it is not so, right?
It is not so.
We have to be the characters who incarnate the good of God into the world.
That's our mission.
That's our point.
And we have to figure out how to do that.
And I want to take a look at the way this pride, this pride of feeling that you are the one telling the story, right?
This pride of seeing things as if you were just the therapist of the world, you're the therapist of the world, instead of seeing, oh, wait, oh, wait, I have to do good.
I have to hold people to account.
I have to make sure that our culture holds people to account and speaks about good and evil to them and teaches them that they need fathers, teaches them that they need structure in their lives and order.
All of those things are what we are assigned to do because we're characters in the story.
We're not the people writing the story.
And I will take a look at how the left makes this mistake.
So is your love life in the tank and your car is not running?
Well, that's a perfect time to go to rockauto, rockauto.com.
The minute you say rockauto.com, women will swoon, not only because you say rockauto.com in that voice, but also because they'll know that you are smart enough not to leave your car sitting there while you walk to the parts store and talk to a guy who doesn't know anything more about parts, car parts than you do.
You can go online and get great prices for any part you need.
Rock Auto is a family business.
They've been serving auto parts customers online for 20 years.
Go to rockauto.com to shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.
The catalog is unique.
It's remarkably easy to navigate.
You can see all the parts available and you will get a great price.
So go to rockauto.com right now and see all the parts available for your car or truck.
And they have a little box that says, how do you hear about us?
Write Clavin, but don't dress right, clavin, claven, because that'll help you with the girls too.
Claven that box so they know who we sent you.
You got to know how to spell it.
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
So let's take a look at critical race theory, because I want to talk about why, A, it's wrong, because people keep saying, well, why do you think it's, you know, I think critical race theory is racism in service of Marxist slavery, or let's call it leftist slavery, all right?
And people keep saying, why do you think that?
Why do you define your terms and all this stuff?
So let's do that.
Let's take a look at why I think it's an act of pride and an act of seizing the role of the storyteller rather than seeing the world through the love of the storyteller and being the character in the story.
So one of the things that's hilarious about this to me is all these parents are rising up and saying, you can't teach this in our school.
And the left is caught.
It's like mom came home.
These moms are going in and it's like, what is going on here?
Ah, we're teaching black history.
That doesn't sound like black history to me.
Go to your room.
It's like they've just gotten caught and they have to silence everybody because when you do wrong, you are shamed.
And when you get caught, you have to either silence the people who point it out or you have to lie about what you're doing.
And they're doing all of those things because CRT is race hatred in the service of Marxist slavery.
So let's just take a look at what they're doing.
All around the country, these parents are rising up and they're shutting them down.
They're trying to shut them down.
They're trying to make them silent.
In Luton County, Virginia, this is a school board meeting, right?
These are people that have been voted in to take care of your children in school.
And here are parents who show up to protest.
And as somebody was making a speech about this, you know, attacking critical race theory, the crowd, I think it was former Virginia State Senator Dick Black was talking.
And the crowd went wild and was singing and chanting and all this stuff.
So he called the police and had some of the parents arrested and clear out the room of a school board meeting.
You have no, these are your children.
We take care of them.
You're just the parents.
You have no right to this.
Take a look at this.
You're disgusted by your bigotry and your depravity.
It's time to replace it.
I'm a girl, I'm a boy.
I'm a boy, I'm a boy, I'm a boy, I'm a boy, I'm a boy, I'm a boy, I'm a boy, I'm a boy, I'm a boy.
The president of the United States is the president of the United States.
You need to be arrested!
Please don't say.
Now, hey, John, please don't resist.
You have to resist.
This is an unlawful arrest.
It's like Dr. Strangelove.
You can't protect your children.
And here this is a school board meeting.
You can't talk about your children's education here.
But they're trying to do this everywhere.
On CNN, by the way, I was watching this in one of my many hotel rooms and Airbnbs.
On CNN, they reported this.
They reported this as if the parents were in the wrong.
The parents got unruly and the police were called so they didn't get and interfere with the serious business of a school board meeting.
You know, you don't want parents at your school board meeting.
Unbelievable stuff.
Another, just another instance of it in Pennsylvania, Pensbury, Pennsylvania, school board, a former school board member named Simon Campbell.
You can tell he's a Brit because he's named all British people are named Simon.
Some pretend they're named Nigel, but they're all really named Simon.
And so they always use this technique.
It's like a shrewish wife.
You know, you're arguing with your wife and you are in the right and she finally says, you know, it's not what you're saying.
It's the way you say it.
It's the way you say it.
And so they try and shut him down.
They called him KKK.
That's what they called Campbell as he stood up to talk.
And he struck back by calling one of them the chairman Mussolini.
And so they threatened to shut him down.
And here's the brilliant exchange.
I've got news for you, school board president Benito Mussolini.
Your power does not supersede that of the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment rights of the citizens of this great nation.
Let's be very, very clear who has the power.
It is not government policy.
Do not warn me or do not disrupt my time.
This nation is founded on the quote profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues shall be uninhibited, robust, and wide open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.
That's constitutional case law in this nation.
I don't have to be nice to you.
Nobody behind me has to be nice to you.
If you don't like living in the United States of America, then you can all move to Russia, Cuba, or China.
This is the First Amendment.
He's reading some Supreme Court decision where the Supreme Court said, you know, you get in a political argument.
It might get ugly, but that's part of free speech.
That's what free speech is like.
But no, no, no.
That's not why they're trying to silence him.
They're not trying to silence him because he's rude.
They're trying to silence him because they're wrong.
That is why you silence.
That is why you silence people.
You don't censor people when they're wrong.
You censor people when you're wrong, okay?
Because you can always fight back against them if you're in the right.
There was a tape that fired the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a tape of a teacher's workshop at the University of Oklahoma, where the teachers discuss, this is amazing, the teachers discuss how to get their students to shut up, how to get their students not to say ideas that they disagree with.
This is cut five.
The Supreme Court has actually upheld that hate speech, derogatory speech, any of the isms do not apply in the classroom because they do not foster a productive learning environment.
And so as instructors, we can tell our students, no, you do not have the right to say that.
Stop talking right now, right?
I, in this case, I usually look for my students who might be like entertaining the idea of listening to a problematic argument.
Then I say, we don't have to listen to that.
One of the fears is that we're going to get in trouble for this, right?
Like we can't tell students that they can't say something in class, but we can.
We can, we can tell them.
Unbelievable, unbelievable.
Why would you is the question they don't ask?
And finally, the other technique that they use when they're not silencing people is they lie.
They got caught.
Mom came home and found them teaching CRT.
But it's not, no, no, no, it's not CRT.
Let's take a look.
Look, Bakari Sellers on CNN is selling that line.
Cut 11.
I think that critical race theory can go by another name, America's history.
It's amazing that we're having this discussion where we're celebrating Juneteenth and now individuals don't want to teach us what led us up to Juneteenth.
It's as if we want to keep a secret from our children that the founders of this country actually own slaves.
You know, at what point will we be able to teach children that what happened six years ago yesterday in Charleston, South Carolina was a white nationalist who walked into a church and murdered nine people.
I mean, that is a part of America's history.
So he's lying, right?
Because they teach that in school.
I learned that in school and I went to school in a little red schoolhouse on the prairie.
You know, they teach that in school plenty, but they're not, they don't want to teach critical race theory.
Why?
Okay, let's start with this.
So what are the rules of good?
What are the good rules?
You know, how do you get to good?
Well, one of them is that good things apply to everybody.
And this is one of the word games that the left likes to play.
If racism is wrong, it's wrong for everybody.
If racism is not wrong, what are you complaining about?
I mean, this is true again and again and again, right?
The good applies to everyone equally.
And they keep saying, well, a black person can't be racist because he doesn't have the power.
I'm like, no, anybody can be racist.
Anybody can be bad.
Look, human beings are human beings.
All of them can be evil.
All of them can be good.
Every single one of them can be evil.
Like I said, this is not something that runs in the blood.
These are the decisions people make.
So if racism is wrong, then racism is wrong for everybody.
Is CRT racism?
They keep saying it's not racist.
Here is a Washington Post explanatory video about white identity, cut nine.
Racism, racialization, white body supremacy is not episodic.
It's structural.
Remember that there were thousands of George Floyd before the one that you saw.
Your bodily response to this horror, right, is not the same thing as you dealing with the structural aspects of this.
George Floyd's death became a deeply personal and racial tragedy for many Americans.
For the first time, white people were becoming aware of their whiteness and the systemic ways that white supremacy affects all of us.
White people in particular get aroused, get upset, say, this is unjust, this isn't right, this shouldn't happen.
There's like an awakening that happens.
And so part of their racial identity development is seeing that awakening.
What they do with it is really the next piece of it.
In this episode, we're tackling white racial identity and why understanding your whiteness is integral to becoming self-aware as a white person.
That's racism.
All you got to do, all you got to do is play what Cheryl Atkinson calls the opposite game and just put black in there.
If you would only understand your blackness, you would see what was wrong.
If you only understood how black you are, you know, I mean, obviously this is ugly, hateful stuff.
If it's wrong for a white person to be racist, and it is, then it's wrong for a black person to be racist.
And there is plenty, plenty, plenty.
Any black person will tell you there is plenty of anti-white racism in the black community, and it's just as wrong as anti-black racism in the white community.
But the other part of it is why do I say that that race hatred, and it's all over the place with this stuff, anytime you hear somebody say whiteness or blackness as if it were a human trait, an essential human trait, or even an ingrained human trait that couldn't be, they can't be overcome by a good heart, just the way when you say women have biological needs and men have biological needs, those too can be overcome by the human heart.
You're being essentialist and racist.
But why do I say it's in favor of Marxist?
Well, that comes because of this systemic idea that it is a system, it is a structure.
The structure has to be changed.
And who changes the structure?
The government changes the structure.
It takes power to change the structure.
And they keep talking about power as if they don't have any.
But of course, all the corporations agree with them.
And all the businesses, all the academies, and the government, they all agree with them.
They have plenty of power.
It has nothing to do with that.
So, you know, when they give us ads, they sometimes tell us what they want us to talk about.
So, for instance, on the copy here, it says, riff on how much you value a good night's sleep.
I put no value on a good night's sleep because I've never had a good night's sleep, but I do put value on lying awake in comfort, and that is why I love my My Pillow.
My Pillow has a passion to help everyone get the best sleep of your life or to have a comfortable lying awake all night like I do.
MyPillow didn't stop by simply creating the best pillow.
MyPillow created the new Giza Dream bed sheets.
They look and feel great, which means an even better night of lying awake in comfort.
My Pillow found the world's best cotton.
It's called Giza.
It's ultra-soft and breathable, but extremely durable.
MyPillow sheets come with a 60-day money-back guarantee and a 10-year warranty.
The first night you sleep or lie awake on Giza sheets, you will never want to lie awake on anything else.
Giza dream sheets come in a variety of sizes and colors.
MyPillow is making a special offer to my listeners.
Go to mypillow.com, click on the Radio Listener Square and use promo code DAILYWIRE, and you'll find not only this amazing offer, but also deep discounts on all my pillow products, including the MyPillow Mattress Topper, MyPillow Towel Sets, and so much more.
Credit Approval Needed00:10:36
Call 1-800-951-7163.
Use the promo code DAILYWIRE or go to mypillow.com.
Make sure you use that promo code DAILYWIRE.
So let's see what they want to do.
How do they want to solve this structural problem?
Here's Ibram Kendi, who is a guy who says that CRT is central to his methodology.
Here is him talking about the anti-racist amendment he wants to the U.S. Constitution is Cut 34.
When we think about our democracy and one of the reasons why it's fractured and one of the reasons why it's always been fractured has been because of racism.
And so in order to truly eliminate racial inequities, we have to eliminate racist policies.
We have to constitutionalize the idea that a racial inequity is caused by a racist policy.
We have to prevent public officials from dividing Americans through racist ideas.
All right, so he wants an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that will form a group, an agency, the anti-racism agency, that will prevent politicians from speaking ideas that it deems racist.
It will deem what ideas are racist.
And it will enshrine in the Constitution that racial inequity, now you got to listen to this carefully, racial inequity is evidence of racist policy.
Racial inequity is evidence of racist policy.
Now, this is another thing about the good.
The good not only has to be the same for everybody, the good has to conform to the facts, right?
It has to conform to things that are, in fact, real.
The idea that racial inequity is due to racist policies or racist attitudes or racist ideas is what Thomas Sowell, whose IQ is probably about three times what Kendi's is, because I just don't think Kendi is a very bright guy.
I mean, it's amazing to me that people ignore Thomas Sowell, who's one of the greatest intellectuals of our age, and they put this guy up there.
It's just amazing.
But Thomas Sowell calls this the invincible fallacy.
I was trying to remember the word on backstage last night.
He calls it the invincible fallacy, the idea that inequity is due to racism.
Sowell writes, neither logic nor empirical evidence provides a compelling reason for expecting either equal or random outcomes among individuals, groups, institutions, or nations, or of natural phenomena, such as tornadoes or earthquakes, for that matter.
He points out that 90% of tornadoes occur in the U.S., right?
That's not because everybody else is bigoted against tornadoes and we're so welcoming to them.
It is just a million factors go into why that's possible, 90% of tornadoes.
But any two people are going to have different outcomes.
Any two groups of people are going to have different outcomes.
And so it is simply not true.
It is absolutely, look, the Irish came here and they tended bar and they became cops.
Jews, wherever they go, Jews make clothes and they go into finance.
You know, who knows why that is?
I think there are a million things that go into that.
But one of them is not necessarily racism.
It might be culture, it might be history, it might be a thousand things go into it, but it doesn't necessarily have to be racism.
And it's always going to be unequal.
If you have two groups of people, the outcomes are going to be unequal.
If you have two people, the outcomes are going to be unequal.
If you have natural phenomena, they're going to be unequal.
And yet, and yet, no matter how often the facts prove this, it's the invincible fallacy.
They will not let it go.
Finally, finally, in developing good ideas, ideas that serve the good, you have to distinguish not only facts from non-facts.
There's Ibram Kendi, his facts are simply wrong, but you have to distinguish reality from non-reality.
What I mean by that is the way things work.
You have to actually talk about the way things work.
Why does leftism lead to slavery?
Why do I keep saying leftist slavery or Marxist slavery?
If they keep saying we just want fairness, we just want fairness.
But because unfairness is the state of the world, because people will be unequal, no matter where they are, no matter who they are, and groups of people will be unequal, no matter who they are, no matter what their conditions, right?
Because that, you have to use force to make them equal.
And you cannot make the lesser people rise to the level of the good people.
So you have to drag the good people down to the level of the lesser people.
That's why they always say, oh, you have white privilege.
And I think, great.
I'm glad I have something going for me.
Good God.
I needed to have something going for me.
But they don't say, oh, yeah, so we're going to elevate our privilege.
They say, you have to get rid of your privilege.
You always have to come down.
I can't play basketball like LeBron James if I want to have equity with LeBron James.
Because the inequity between me and LeBron, by the way, is systemic.
I mean, it's systemic.
It's because I'm oppressed.
If they just let me, if only I could be free, I could just knock that guy off the court or at least score as many baskets.
But they have to bring, they have to bring LeBron down to my level for us to have equity on the basketball court, right?
So in order to do that, it has to be done by power.
So the powerful start to make the rules for how we behave, right?
Why do you think, why do you think socialists are going, we're going to take all your money away and we're going to make everything level?
Why do you think the corporations, why do you think Jeff Bezos is going, yeah, I love that idea.
That's a great idea.
And I'm going to take out any book out of Amazon that says that's not a good idea.
Why do you think that all of the top billionaire donors give to the Democrats, give to the socialists?
Why do you think the government is in their favor?
Why do you think the academies, all the people with power, all the, they call themselves the resistance, all the power centers are on their side.
Why?
Because there is no, this is the fantasy of socialism.
This is the fantasy of the left.
They think that there is such a thing called the state, this benign thing called the state, that is just wishes for your good.
But there's not.
It doesn't exist.
You have to distinguish reality from non-reality.
And there is no such thing as a state.
There are only people with power.
And people with power do the same thing all the time.
They lean on you.
They oppress you.
They control you.
And they think they're doing it for the good of the world.
They start out thinking that.
They end up smoking a cigar in their mansions while you go to hell.
But they start out thinking they're doing it for the good, and they get more and more power.
That's what the state is.
The state is people with power.
And there are people.
You know, it's like James Madison said this.
He said, if men were angels, this is one of his greatest comments in the Federalist Papers.
If men were angels, no government would be necessary.
If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.
In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this.
You must first enable the government to control the governed and the next place oblige it to control itself.
The left thinks it can rewrite that reality.
They think they're telling the story.
But no, what we know is we have to work within reality.
We have to work within the facts, which mean inequity is going to be inherent in any situation.
We have to work within the facts and we have to work within reality, doing good that is the same for everybody, holding everybody to the same standards of the good.
CRT does none of that.
It is race hatred in service of increasing the power of the powerful, right?
That's why the powerful love it.
That's why the power, yeah, yeah, you, you give us AOC, you give us that socialism.
We love that, says Jeff Bezos and every other billionaire, because he knows he's going to end up with all the power and all the money, and you're going to end up with nothing.
The little people are going to have no power to stop him.
That's the Chinese way.
It's not communism.
It's just left.
Let's call it tyranny.
Let's call it what it is.
So, you know, and listen, rightists can become tyrants.
We just don't have that power now.
Right now, we're not the people.
The power centers are not on the right.
If the power centers were on the right, we'd be in danger of becoming those people, but we're not.
Right now, we're fighting against this massive, massive collection of culture power that we allowed to happen.
They think that they can rewrite the world.
They think, oh, you know, I'm going to put in a system.
I'm going to put in a system where the human heart will no longer be the human heart, right?
I'm going to, once I just fix that thing, the human heart, reality is not going to be reality.
That's the pride I'm talking about.
So when we love people, right?
When we love people, when we love people even in their wickedness, even in their sin, when we love our enemies, when we love the people who hurt us, we are seeing the world as God sees it, but we are not God.
We do not become God.
We are becoming like children of God, but we are living in the world in time, and we have to bring that goodness of God into the world.
And that's what they think they're doing because they think they're doing that, but they in fact are trying to take the role of little gods.
They're trying to rewrite the world.
Can't be done.
The human heart is corrupt.
Powerful people become more corrupt.
You have to distribute the power and make sure the power is playing off each other.
The power centers are playing off each other.
And you have to limit the power of any power center so it cannot take away the rights of free people.
What they're always talking about is, no, no, no, we are going to take away those rights.
We're going to pass a constitutional amendment.
You'll no longer be able to have those ideas.
You'll no longer be able to speak those words.
And then everything is going to be just absolutely great.
So most people never look at the back of their credit cards.
They don't see the kind of interest rates that credit cards did.
If they did, you would know because they would say, they'd be talking like that all the time.
When the end of the month comes and you can't pay it off and you've got to let it go over, then you find out.
But instead of doing that, you can get a credit card consolidation loan from Lightstream.
Lightstream's rates start at just 5.93% APR with auto pay and excellent credit, lower than the average credit card interest rate of over 19% APR, and man, oh man, that adds up.
The rate is fixed, so you'll never go up over the life of the loan.
You can get a loan from $5,000 to $100,000 with no fees.
Plus, you can even get your money in your bank account as soon as the day you apply.
Lightstream believes that people with good credit deserve a better loan experience.
That's what they deliver.
Just for my listeners, apply now to get a special interest rate discount and save even more.
The only way to get this discount is to go to lightstream.com slash Andrew, L-I-G-H-T, S-T-R-E-A-M dot com slash Andrew.
This is subject to credit approval.
Rates range from 5.93% APR to 19.99% APR and include 0.50% autopay discount.
Lowest rate requires excellent credit.
Terms and conditions apply and offers are subject to change without notice.
Visit lightstream.com slash Andrew for more information.
Voters Reality Clash00:06:33
You know, there are only two things really standing between the left and this slavery they want to impose on us by any means possible.
They use race.
I've said this before, but they use race because Marxists usually use class, but class has always been kind of fluid in America, so we don't have the kind of class hatred you get in a country like England, which is where Marx was writing.
So they use race because we have had historical problems with race, so they use that to divide us apart.
And that's what, you know what, that's what they're trying to do.
They're trying to get us to hate each other.
They want men to hate women.
They want blacks to hate whites.
They want everybody to hate every gays to hate straits because we're fighting with one another.
We are not paying attention to what they're doing, which is accumulating power.
It's that simple.
And they may not even be aware that those are their motives.
Some of them, I'm sure, think this is the pathway to a good world.
But the two things standing in the way of them are the voters and reality.
Those are the two things standing their way, the voters and reality and voters reacting to reality.
So this week, this was a good week for the good guys, I think, because this week they tried to put that horrendous voter, what do they call it, the For the People Act.
You know, you always know, you always know by their names that it's the opposite.
It's always the opposite of what they name the bill.
So it's for the people.
It's like screw the people into the ground.
This was a true, true attempt to destroy and take control of our electoral system so that no Republican would ever be elected again.
It truly was.
It was going to give the federal government lots and lots of power over what should be decided by the states, how they run their elections.
It took the FEC, you know, the FEC is a, the election agency is a very powerful agency because it basically determines what the election laws are.
And so they set it up kind of brilliantly as three Democrats and three Republicans.
So it's constantly in stalemate.
So nobody gets to, say, pass a law that would be, or to pass a regulation in elections that would be only for one side.
So there are three Republicans and three Democrats.
And they wanted to change that to five people, two Republicans, two Democrats, and an independent wink-wink, all of them appointed by the president.
So you know that there would never be another law passed in favor of the Republicans ever again.
So they tried to push this through, and the Republicans stood up against them, and the left went nuts.
It had 50 votes from the Democrats.
The Democrats all fell in line.
This was to get it basically into debate.
And the Republicans went 50 against it.
And they, because of the filibuster, which needs 60 votes, they couldn't do it.
The left went nuts.
Oh, my God, the filibuster.
What a horrible, horrible thing it suddenly was.
AOC had a wonderful tweet.
She said, call me radical, but I do not believe a minority of senators should be able to block voting rights for millions of people.
50-50, she thought her 50 was the majority, and their 50 was the minority.
To be fair, no one told her there was going to be math.
So that's the voters.
And then there's the reality.
Crime, crime in this country is going through the roof.
And the New York Times is running think pieces.
Why are police quitting their jobs?
You know, why is it?
What is going on?
It's hard to say.
And why is crime rising when we defund the police?
What's going on?
You know, in Chicago over Father's Day weekend, 104 people were shot, 15 fatally, five of them, children, five of the people who were killed were being shot.
Those are black lives that don't matter.
The only black lives matter or that matter are the ones that help you get that Marxist power going.
If you're not helping the powerful get power, you ain't black.
That's basically what it is.
If you ain't helping the government get power, you ain't black.
You know, so the left says no more incarceration and crime goes up.
They say you can't search people for guns, crime go, you know, for illegal guns, crime goes up, they say defund the police, crime goes up, and you know, and oh, and mass incarceration has got to be stopped.
And, you know, this is interesting.
Justice Thomas wrote an opinion recently where he pointed out that the policies that caused so many people to be incarcerated were voted for by both Democrats and Republicans because they were trying to protect black lives.
The black caucus was in favor of those lives.
So Biden comes out and he has to redress this now.
He has to leave behind what he wants to talk about, which is taking over the electoral system and destroying our election system and giving you so much money that you don't care that you're a slave.
He has to stop talking about that.
He says to start talking about crime.
What's he going to do?
He's going to get rid of guns because suddenly guns are running wild.
They don't even need people to shoot them anymore.
Just suddenly it's the problem with guns.
And he says, you don't need, you know, the Constitution guarantees our right to own guns so we can fight back against the government.
So the states can fight back against the federal governments.
He says, no, no, no, that's not going to work.
This is Cut 24.
Those who say the blood of patriots, you know, and all the stuff about how we're going to have to move against the government.
Well, the Tree of Liberty is not watering the blood of patriots.
What's happened is that there never been, if you wanted to think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons.
He'll nuke you.
He's going to nuke you.
A crazy old man.
He doesn't even know where he is.
He's going to nuke the American public.
The Taliban must have laughed out loud when they said that.
They've been fighting against the Americans for 20 years and not a thing has budged anyway.
Look, you know, this is guaranteed our rights because we want to fight for freedom.
But they're not fighting for freedom.
They're not.
They want to take over because they believe they have the power of God to rewrite the world.
One thing that really bugs me is when I write an email to someone and it mentions some product and suddenly I start getting ads for those products, which means they're reading my emails.
Free email services from big tech email providers are not really free.
You pay with your privacy.
And since those companies have access to every email you send and receive, big tech can sell your data to the highest bidder and they do.
That's why you should trust StartMail to secure your email.
StartMail keeps your email private, period.
Every email is encrypted, even if the recipient doesn't use encryption, which means big tech can't read, scan, analyze, or sell your personal information ever.
Start mail also prevents government agencies from spying on you, like in Dragnet operations.
With StartMail, deleted means deleted.
When you delete an email, it is gone forever.
Don't trust big tech.
Do not trust them.
Start securing your email privacy with StartMail.
Sign up today and you'll get 50% off your first year.
Go to startmail.com slash Clavin.
That's StartMail with a T, S-T-A-R-T mail.com slash Clavin for 50% off your first year.
Startmail.com slash Clavin.
Gangsters and Guilt00:14:36
I know what you're thinking.
You're thinking, I can spell start, but what about Clavin?
I just make it look easy.
So we've been talking for the last couple of weeks about gangster movies, and I want to do one more little segment about gangsters because it fits in so much with what I'm talking about.
I was talking last week, I think it was, about how when you start to try to understand evil, you can start to be entranced with evil.
And what you want to do, of course, is you want to love the sinner, but not the sin, as they say, but also just take the viewpoint of the storyteller while remembering you are not the storyteller.
And that is the important thing, and that's why artists particularly can get entranced by evil.
Also, in their search for originality, they can go outside the bounds of the normal order.
They think that I can shatter the order.
They can rewrite the moral order.
And you can't do that, right?
You have to be original within the confines of the moral order.
So I wanted to take a look at what I think is one of the very few true works of art of the last 25 years, true American works of art, which was the Sopranos.
And I just want to take a brief look at it because I've talked about it before, but I wanted to take a look at it in connection with what I think is the greatest gangster story ever told, which is the play Macbeth, which I think has a lot of bearing on the Sopranos and what David Chase was trying to do with the Sopranos.
And part of the genius of the Sopranos was that he gave the romanticism about the mobster life, as Scorsese does in Goodfellas.
He gave it to the mobsters.
But unlike Scorsese, he also has an outer view where we see that the romantic of gangsterism is also condemning these people into a world of evil and degradation, right?
Tony Soprano is a man who in many ways is admirable.
He's a strong man.
He's a tough man.
He outsmarts other men, and that makes him kind of fascinating.
But unlike the character in Broken Bad, Breaking Bad, where I think the artists actually did fall in love with their character, they couldn't even let him be killed.
He had to, in some sense, kill himself.
Unlike that character, David Chase actually puts Tony Soprano in the context of a greater moral order.
There's a wonderful, wonderful episode, which I've talked about before, called From Where to Eternity, where his nephew Christopher is shot, and in a moment when he goes into a near-death experience, he actually goes to hell.
Here's a brief scene of that.
I'm going to hell, T. You're not going anywhere but home.
I crossed over to the other side.
You know what?
I saw the tunnel and a white light.
I saw my father in hell.
Get the f out of here.
And the bouncer said that I'd be there too when my time comes.
What bats?
The Emerald Piper.
That's our hell.
It's an Irish bar where it's St. Patrick's Day every day, forever.
It's St. Patrick's Day, every day, forever.
And the mobsters are all affected by this.
They see the ghosts of people they kill.
They contemplate whether they are going to hell.
They try to excuse themselves and say, well, you know, Tony Soprano says, I'm not going to hell because I'm just doing what I have to do.
And then by the end of it, they forget the whole thing.
And one of the themes of Sopranos, The Sopranos, is it's a TV show about the art of TV because TV is unique in some ways in that in a one-off story like you get in a movie or in a novel, the character goes on an arc.
He starts at one place, then he faces the challenges that will change him, and then he becomes changed.
But in the Sopranos TV shows, people stay the same.
They just do a different thing every week.
We know what we're tuning in to when we see this certain set of characters, but we see them do a different thing.
And that's where the interest in TV comes from, and they don't change.
And that's very much like life.
And that's one of the points of the Sopranos is that people don't change.
People have a very hard time changing.
But another theme of the Sopranos, and this is what I want to get to, is the therapeutic idea.
And the therapeutic idea is an idea that in some ways derives from Christianity but goes awry.
It becomes this idea that, oh, I'm looking, you know, I've been, my life was saved by therapy in my youth, no question about it.
And I have been in therapeutic situations on hotlines where I have had to take people as they come.
And no matter what they've said, I've had people say to me that they were worshiping Satan.
I've had people tell me they were doing terrible things.
And what you don't say to them is you're doing terrible things.
You try to understand them in the moment and accept them in the moment and offer them healing in that moment.
But, but the healing, you know, it's just like a surgeon, right?
A surgeon doesn't ask whether you're a mobster or a saint when he cuts you open to heal you, right?
But the point of healing you is hopefully that you go on to live a good life.
And so where therapy has lost its way is it's become a thesis, right?
It's become a thesis of how we are to react all the time.
So there's this wonderful series where, see, scene where Tony Soprano's wife, Carmella, goes to a Jewish psychiatrist and he says to her, he brings down the Old Testament morality.
He says, you have got to leave this man because he's evil.
And she tries to translate that into therapeutic language and he comes down on top of her.
Here's that section.
So you think I need to define my boundaries more clearly?
Keep a certain distance, not internalize my what did I just say?
Leave him.
Take only the children what's left of them and go.
My priest said I should try and work with him and help him to be a better man.
How's that going?
Have you ever read Crime and Punishment?
Dostoevsky.
It's not an easy read.
It's about guilt and redemption.
And I think, well, your husband turned himself in, read this book, and reflect on his crimes every day for seven years in his cell, then he might be redeemed.
What is so brilliant about this moment, okay, is that he's a Jew.
He is bringing this Old Testament morality to her.
But when he tells her what Tony Soprano has to do, he refers to crime and punishment, which of course is one of the ultimate Christian novels and a story of Christian, specifically Christian redemption.
And what I believe the show is telling you here is that the therapeutic system is the mistake that I was talking about in the opening of the show.
It is the mistake of observing the world from the point of view of God and then mistaking your role as the role of God.
That's the mistake, right?
That's the error people make.
The error we make on the right is we don't pause to love the world and to love the people in the world.
We don't pause.
We want to leap right to the judgment.
We want to leap right to the judgment.
But the thing is, you have to see the world like that before you even know where the good lies.
And then you have to understand that your role is now to enter the story and act out God's good in the world.
And so what he does is he reconnects Christianity.
He shows you that Christianity has lost its way.
I think we all know this is true.
Christianity has become, what did Schopenhauer call it?
He called it banal optimism.
It's become banal optimism.
Everything's great.
Everything's good.
You know, you can go to churches now where they never mention the fact that Jesus died.
They never mention the tragedy of life.
They never mention anything.
It's all going to be fine.
Jesus, God is going to take care of everything.
They wave their arms in the air and everything is terrific.
That is not Christianity.
And what he is doing is he's reconnecting Christianity to its moral roots.
Jesus lived and died a Jew.
That was not an accident.
That was the plan, right?
And so he's reconnecting Jesus to his Jewish roots.
But he doesn't say what he has to do is go and become a Jew.
He says he has to read crime and punishment and be redeemed through suffering and remorse.
And that is, it's a brilliant scene.
It is reconnecting it.
Now why I say this has to do with Macbeth is Macbeth is also about a husband and wife who descend into evil and it is also about a man who forgets his role.
He forgets to be in the story.
And it's so brilliant.
Macbeth, the Scottish warrior, comes upon three witches and the three witches tell him that he will become, predict that he will become the Thane, the prince of Caudor, and then he will also become the king of Scotland, right?
He's going to become the king of Scotland.
So they predict this.
Now, why is Shakespeare thinking about this?
Because it's the middle of the Reformation, and what people are talking about is predestination, right?
Predestination is God has already decided whether you are going to be saved or damned.
Now, many people think, and I actually believe this, that Shakespeare was a closet Catholic because he didn't want to get killed, but that he was a Catholic.
And what do the Catholics believe about predestination?
It's very complex.
They believe in it.
They believe in predestination, but only from the point of view of God.
We do not live on the point of view of God.
God lives outside of time, so everything is already there.
He sees everything at once.
We have no concept of what that's like.
We can't even, even the word predestination, which involves destiny, takes place in time.
So it's not really making any sense, right?
Because we are not God.
This is the point I'm trying to drive home here, right?
We are not God.
We cannot see what he sees outside of time.
We can only see it through love.
So when we say we're predestined, God is already taking into account our will, but even the word already makes no sense because it is a word that takes place in time.
We simply can't imagine.
We can't imagine what the world looks like outside of time.
So our ideas about predestination don't really make any sense.
We have to play our game.
We have to play our part, which is to be characters in the story.
Now listen to Macbeth's reaction to the witch's prediction.
What happens right after the witches make this prediction?
Somebody shows up and says, guess what, Macbeth?
You're now been made Thane of Caudor.
So the first prediction comes true, which means, oh, wow, maybe I could be king as well.
And listen to Macbeth's thoughts.
This supernatural soliciting cannot be ill.
Cannot be good.
If ill, why hath it given me earnest of success, commencing in a truth?
I am Thane of Cawdor.
If good, why do I yield to that suggestion whose horrid image doth unfix my hair and make my seated heart knock at my ribs against the use of nature?
My thought, whose murder yet is but fantastical, shakes so my single state of man that function is smothered in surmise and nothing is.
But what is not?
If chance will have me king, why chance may crown me without my stir, come what come may.
So it's one, I can't say it's brilliant, it's Shakespeare.
What he says is, if he is going to do this, if he is going to take the part of destiny, if he is going to play God, the only way for him to do this is to murder the king.
And he ends up by saying, well, I'm not going to do that.
So if destiny wants to crown me king, let it crown me king, come what come may.
His wife, however, Lady Macbeth, has a totally different opinion of this, and she accuses him essentially of being a girl, of not being man enough.
She says, you're too full of the milk of human kindness.
So she is putting him in the feminine position, and she cries out to the demons of the air.
She cries out, unsex me here and turn my milk into gall.
That is what Lady Macbeth says.
And so she begins to take the male part in encouraging him to do this.
And you heard him say, I would act against the use of nature.
Shakespeare is very much saying that by not embodying the feminine, Lady Macbeth has gone against the use of nature and Macbeth really different than all of these gangster stories where the gangsters had a certain masculinity to them.
He is saying Macbeth becomes evil when he becomes effeminate.
He becomes evil when he becomes effeminate because he no longer becomes a son of God and lets God do what he's going to do.
If he's predestined to become king, then let him become king.
That will happen whether he does anything or not.
He wants to tell that story.
He wants to be the author of that story, which he can only do by shedding blood.
And he sheds blood, and Lady Macbeth goes insane.
She says when she's covered in blood, she says, oh, a little water will take this off, but she finds that no water will take this off.
She says, well, my hands never be clean.
And ultimately, she kills herself.
And then when that effeminate masculine power is gone from Macbeth, he makes this famous speech where he says, life is meaningless.
This is from Macbeth.
Tomorrow.
And tomorrow.
And tomorrow creeps in this petty pace from day to day to the last syllable of recorded time.
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools away to dusty death.
Out.
Out.
Brief candle.
Life's but a walking shadow.
A poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage.
And then he's heard no more.
So we know that Shakespeare doesn't believe this because Macbeth, literally, that's Patrick Stewart.
We know Macbeth literally is an actor on the stage and the play does have meaning, right?
But it doesn't have meaning to Macbeth.
Why?
Because meaning, if you picture life, our life, as operating at one level and then at a higher level is God's moral meaning, right?
Macbeth has detached himself from that meaning and his life has become meaningless.
And that is what happens when you play God.
When you understand, when you have the humility to understand that you are in the story God is telling, then you take on the role that God has assigned you as a character in his story, which is to become a child of God and do God's good in the world.
Playing God's Role00:04:14
Oh, oh, oh, how I wish I had a home so I could get a ring security system for my home, but I'm homeless.
There's no point in just walking around with a ring button.
You know, that doesn't mean anything.
You got to have a home.
One day, one day, folks, I will have a home.
And there are a thousand reasons why protecting that home will matter to me if someone stops by or something's going on outdoors around the house.
I want to know.
Ring will let you know.
It's peace of mind anytime, knowing that your home is protected.
To get a ring alarm for yourself, go to ring.com forward slash clavin.
It's the perfect way to start your ring experience.
The best thing, besides ring being a powerful asset for your home, ring is also an affordable whole home security system.
You can easily install yourself, and I will, as soon as I have a home to install it in.
Start protecting your home today with Ring Alarm.
Go to ring.com slash Clavin to get your Ring Alarm security kit today.
You can build the system that's right for your home if you have a home and have it up and running in minutes.
You can talk to anyone who comes to your door, any place with the app, and just ask them, how do you spell Clavin?
And if they know, call the police.
So if you haven't bought Michael Knowles' new book, Speechless, what do we have to do?
Speechless controlling words, controlling minds, go buy it because with the help of political correctness, our country is rapidly falling victim to the insidious nature of the Marxist agenda, which history has demonstrated time and time again is a recipe for slavery and disaster.
But Knowles explains all of it in much greater detail in his book, which will give you the tools you need to understand and spot political correctness in order to stop it.
If you don't know the history and relevance of political correctness already, you're about to learn.
Just do everyone a favor and yourself a favor and go pick up a copy of Speechless Controlling Words Controlling Minds.
It's available everywhere right now.
And if you don't feel like making a trip, it's even available on Amazon in hardcover and Kindle edition.
I have read it and it's actually good.
And you know my feeling about Knowles.
I wouldn't tell you that if it weren't true.
If you enjoy your history uncensored, you need to make sure you're a Daily Wire member right now.
Why, you ask?
Because the Daily Wire is now streaming Created Equal, the story of the great Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his journey from humble beginnings in the segregated South to the highest court in the land, which, by the way, he was the second black American to ever serve on.
The documentary is only available to Daily Wire members.
So if you want more stories that diverge from the accepted political narrative, go to dailywire.com/slash subscribe and get 20% off your new membership with CodeJustice.
Despite the film's popularity, Amazon inexplicably removed it from its streaming service during none other than Black History Month.
But lucky for you, the Daily Wire has decided to step in and stream it ourselves.
So get your popcorn ready because you can now stream Created Equal anytime.
It's available to Daily Wire members over at dailywire.com.
If you're not yet a member, join now at dailywire.com/slash subscribe with CodeJustice for 20% off your membership and get ready for a film unlike any other.
And once you're a member, be sure to check out all of our other great content, like our talk show Candace, featuring Candace Owens, our first film, Run Hide, Fight, or Ben's new series, Debunked, where Ben debunks leftist myths in 15 minutes or less.
You can get all of this and more on demand by going to dailywire.com/slash subscribe and check out with 20% off using CodeJustice.
Do not wait.
start streaming today.
So last week we had a guest that many of you were very angry about, but we're not going to have that problem today because we have Sourabh Amari, who is not only a great guy, he is a fascinating thinker.
He has a terrific book out, a really interesting book called The Unbroken Thread: Discovering the Wisdom of Tradition in an Age of Chaos.
And he is, of course, the op-ed editor of the New York Post and many other things.
But this book, The Unbroken Thread, is really fascinating.
Saurabh, thank you for coming on.
It's good to see you.
Thank you, Andrew.
It's good to be back on your show.
Nightmare Scenario Revealed00:16:08
So this book starts out with a description of a fantasy about your son, Maximilian.
And he grows up and he is an elite.
He works for a hedge fund or a publishing house.
He does yoga.
He has a girlfriend and a Tesla and they travel around Europe.
And you talk about this as kind of, this is your nightmare scenario.
What is so nightmarish about that life?
It sounds like a lot of fun.
Yeah, I guess there could be worse nightmares, but my assumption is, and please God, I hope it's true, that my son is not going to end up being, God forbid, an opioid addict, or something like that.
So given the way elites in the United States tend to transfer their elite status to their children, chances are our son is going to be upper middle class, like his mother and I.
So the reason I worry about that life is because It's a dark vision because I don't want my son to be, frankly, a man of purposeless decadence.
Unmoored from any kind of sense of tradition, unmoored from any kind of the classical and Christian accounts of what it truly means to be free, to be happy.
Rather, he's just quote-unquote kept his options open all his life and sought to just sort of get ahead and maximize his own autonomy.
And the result is, I argue, that in fact he is not free, because to be truly free means to bind yourself to something greater than yourself.
To be free means to accept duty and accept sacrifice.
That's the kind of older account of freedom that I hope to transmit to my son and maybe the reader or parents who are readers of this book.
And that's the project of the book: to say, perhaps the modern, narrow account of freedom as mere choice might be wrong, and it may be leading us to society to a bad place.
Here is what tradition, broadly understood, offers as an alternative.
That's the book's thesis.
I mean, it's an interesting thesis in that it emphasizes, as the subtitle says, the wisdom of tradition, not necessarily of faith.
I mean, you're a man of faith, you've written a lot about faith, but that's not, you're not entirely writing about that here.
You're writing about tradition itself.
Is tradition enough in and of itself?
Well, the tradition that I talk about is heavily faith-inflected.
And a lot of, so I should note that the book is posed as 12 questions, 12 questions, each of which poke holes in one of our modern certainties.
But many of the questions ultimately have theological components.
So, for example, we begin with one of the early questions: is God reasonable?
Both in the sense that is it reasonable to believe in God and is that God a reasonable God?
So, you know, or why would God want you to take a day off?
And I actually addressed that through the life of Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel.
Obviously, the reasonable God question through Thomas Aquinas is the most fitting for that question.
But at any rate, you're right that there are plenty of traditions which don't deserve our reverence, and many of them die out.
You know, traditions come and go, they last for a while, not all of them endure.
But there is this enduring tradition which has a kind of religious component or has a religious expression, but elements of it can also be found in pagan philosophy, elements of it can be found in the Far Eastern traditions.
And they all, you know, they disagree among themselves, but they all emphasize this idea that various limits imposed on you, whether by tradition itself or by nature, are actually sources of liberation.
And the loss of limits make you less free.
So, a very obvious example is the Sabbath one that I mentioned.
Obviously, Muslims, Christians, and Jews disagree over which day to consecrate, but all of them agree that Sabbath restrictions are somehow connected with freedom.
And the American Sabbath was lost relatively recently.
This country had a Sabbatarian tradition going back before the founding to the time of the colonies.
And we were told that if we, you know, the Sabbath was restrictive, why don't you just do as you please?
You can choose to shop, you can choose to work.
But in fact, we find that on the other side of that liberation, we're more harried.
Working class people, especially, don't have time to spend with their families, with their kids.
And generally speaking, not having peace with ourselves because we're always working or always consumed with activities.
So you see, again, something that appeared to be a restriction was a source of liberation.
And that same paradox works itself out in each of the books chapters in different dimensions of life.
You know, it's interesting.
I lived in England for seven years in the 90s.
And when I got there, their Sabbath tradition was much stronger than ours.
London would just shut down.
Everybody would disappear and go home.
By the time I left, that had fallen apart.
And you could see it.
It was much more harried life.
It was much more, it seemed like it was going to be more free.
And yet, in fact, it was somehow oppressive.
You could actually feel it.
So you make a really good point about it.
And I actually witnessed that happen in England in the world.
In a short span.
Yeah.
So some of the people you put forward are kind of what we might call the usual suspects of people that we know and respect, like Seneca.
I was interestingly just about three months ago was rereading Seneca.
And your chapter in Seneca is called something like, What's Good About Death?
That's a good question.
What is good about death?
Well, I think Seneca would argue that death provides a narrative end point without which your life just meanders to the point of being intolerable.
He associated a life, a possibility of not there being natural death in life as an end point to life with the kinds of stories that don't have a clear beginning, middle, and an end and just sort of go on forever.
And he suggested that after a while, we would get we would tire of all of life's bodily pleasures, its rivalries, its competitions.
All of those would become tiresome.
And so it's pointless and in fact paralyzing to the point of kind of harming your ability to live a good life if you constantly obsess about avoiding death.
So I think we saw that over the course of the pandemic.
In fact, I wrote the Seneca chapter just as the pandemic was peaking in May, where it wasn't that Seneca would argue we should be jackasses.
And if he had lived now and he knew about the germ theory of disease, he would take reasonable precautions.
But he suggested that a kind of unreasonable fear of death that becomes all-consuming, or you treat one source of death, you magnify it to the point where you can't live anymore.
You're not living, first of all.
And then you become blind paradoxically to other sources of danger, like, for example, in our case, joblessness or social alienation for kids who weren't getting schooled because we so overwhelmingly focused on this one potential source of death, which is the coronavirus.
Is there a strange kind of paradox that the longer we live and the more our children are protected and these are great wonders of science that our children don't die in the way they did just 100 years ago?
Is there a strange paradox where the longer we live, the more we feel we have to lose and the less we actually dare to live?
That if you actually increase life to 800 years, we just never leave our house.
Do you think that that's operational in this pandemic, the way people reacted to it?
Look, I think a strictly empirically minded person would say, well, how do you prove that?
I don't know.
But I think just anecdotally speaking, it's absolutely true.
And we saw it working out.
I got to say, you know, look, Seneca did not have the benefit of revelation.
He overlapped with Jesus, but he wasn't a Christian.
He was a pagan Roman.
But even I being a Christian, I found great solace during the pandemic in reading his advice, which is basically that you should begin each day thinking that it could be your last.
Again, not in a morbid or a weird way.
It just puts things in perspective.
Like, yes, I'm going to be reasonable.
I'm going to take precautions.
But even if I take the greatest precautions, I might choke on a piece of apple and collapse and die.
And that could be the end of me.
So, you know, that gives you a sense of equanimity and calm, I think.
Yeah, no, I. Even as a believer, a believer who has a kind of a solace in a transcendent heavenly horizon, still needs that on a day-to-day basis.
Right.
Everyone wants to go to heaven.
No one wants to die.
I think that's fair to say.
One of the chapters that got a lot of attention in the press, and I thought, you know, I thought some of the criticisms were worth paying attention to was a chapter on Andrea Dworkin.
And for those who don't remember Andrea Dorkin, she was almost like a parody of an unattractive, angry feminist who said that all sex is rape.
And what tradition is she in besides the annoying tradition?
So, look, I use Andrea Dworkin for the proposition that sex is not a private matter.
The chapter question is: is sex private?
And the reason I thought she'd be a useful figure for that, and I have to say, she's the only figure in the book who, first of all, wouldn't want to be placed next to these other figures, meaning she wouldn't want to be near C.S. Lewis or Augustine or Seneca or Tom and others like she fit uneasily.
But I think she usefully stands for this idea that having been a child of the 1960s kind of cultural ferment and the sexual revolution, by the 1980s, she reassesses all of that radically and says, no, this is, you know, sex liberationism is not working out well, particularly for women.
And that contrary to what the sex liberationist types were saying in the 60s, 70s, and then into the 80s and 90s, and still today, sex isn't just good, harmless fun, that there is a kind of public political dimension to it.
And what people do in the bedroom and how they do it has ramifications into the broader society of how you organize society.
And I think that point is very much salient today.
So, for example, we have a society that says, on the one hand, we never stop talking about human dignity.
We've never talked about it so much as we do today.
And yet, alongside that, we also know that about 100 million Americans a day visit Pornhub.
And when they do visit Pornhub, some of the most kind of popular categories involve like choking and beating teenage or very young looking women.
So in other words, it proves Andrea Dworkin's point, but this was also St. Augustine's point, I argue, that, again, that the lust for domination of the bedroom warps or affects how you organize the rest of society, and it can belie your highest aspiration.
Now, very quickly, I disagree with Andrea Dworkin's prognosis.
I think her diagnosis in some ways was salient, and it would not surprise someone like St. Augustine.
I say that in the chapter, which is a kind of shocking contrast between the two.
But her prognosis was basically: men are shs, she said, and that's it.
There's no getting better.
Men are horrible.
Sex is horrible.
Whereas I suggest that the natural law tradition and various traditional ways of attempting to regulate human sexuality were the best ways to deal with this problem.
But of course, someone like Andrew Dorkin would just dismiss all of that out of hand because that was all male supremacy or whatever.
So I take a complicated approach to her.
Unlike the other chapters, it's not hagiographic.
It's critical of her.
And it's more nuanced than maybe the press reviews. the book might suggest.
It is.
And it is interesting.
I mean, I was recently rereading some of the theology of the body from, what do you call him now?
Is he Saint John Paul?
Is it a pause?
And it is interesting to me that it is such a high view of sex.
And when you read it, you think like, yes, this is obviously what we're supposed to be doing.
And yet it's very easy to slip into the immediate physicality of porn.
Yeah, and it does take a certain amount of religious training to actually elevate your life in that way.
It's very, very difficult.
You know, you tell a story.
You name your son Maximilian after a saint.
I name my children after James Bond villains, but I appreciate your naming him after a saint.
And the saint you name him after performs an act that is mind-bogglingly sacrificial and beautiful, where he replaces, he's in a death camp, in a Nazi death camp, and he replaces one of the people assigned to death, and he takes his place.
And you ask the question, is there any way in a society like this one we can find, we will ever find that kind of faith, that kind of sacrifice and willingness to sacrifice and nobility of sacrifice?
Because it's a story, the story, as you read it, tears come to your eyes at the beauty of it.
And yet it's hard to imagine most of the people you see on the street, including myself, it's hard to imagine elevating yourself in faith to that level.
Is that level gone?
I mean, is there something, what is it about the world that has cut us off from that kind of thing?
No, I mean, actually, I'm not as pessimistic as that might suggest.
I do think that lots of people, ordinary people, make sacrifices like that all the time, whether it, you know, health workers at the height of the pandemic, you know, when it was really like the death numbers were very high and we didn't know much about the virus, what they were doing is self-sacrificial in that way.
Or just what ordinary moms and dads go through or put themselves through in order to, you know, protect their kids.
That's the same kind of self-sacrificial act.
And I think, you know, members of our armed forces constantly lay down their lives for their friends.
And when they do, we give them, you know, the medal of honor.
So, you know, I think it does go on.
What worries me is that the philosophical thrust of our age makes acts like that, like St. Maximilian Colbey's sacrifice at Auschwitz or the more ordinary sacrifices, makes acts like that kind of illegible for modern people.
And if we continue to form people the way we do, you know, just for elites, just be selfish, get ahead.
For people who aren't in the elites, even more precariously, you know, just consume your porn.
Acts Of Virtue Legible?00:03:00
Here's your weed, legalize weed.
Here's your universal basic income.
Then you will get a world in which that sacrifice will become rarer and rarer.
And I think it's a bleak world that I would like to forestall where if people encounter something like a story like that, they wouldn't even be moved by it.
Because again, I think it becomes morally illegible to them.
We're talking to Saurabh Amari.
book is The Unbroken Thread, Discovering the Wisdom of Tradition in an Age of Chaos.
You know, you've written something about somewhat about this, and you seem to avoid it in this book, but it's a problem that now is kind of especially on the right among conservatives, how to reintroduce into our world the kind of religious ideas on which our country is founded, how to get them back into the schools, how to get them back into the public forum.
And we keep running up against this idea that that is somehow limiting people's freedom to impose upon them an idea of the common.
Yeah.
No, I hear it all the time.
I have several answers to them because this objection is often posed to me all the time.
The first is that coercion is impossible.
Even an especially liberal society coerces individuals.
We see that right now in the sense that we, contrary to all of this promise of liberalism, that it provides a neutral public square, classical liberalism is supposed to be the idea that it is indifferent as to ultimate accounts of human life.
It doesn't care what you hold to be the highest end of human life.
Just a mechanism for adjudicating between our disputes and protecting our rights.
That's all.
Well, we see that that's not true.
That in fact, liberalism, at least especially its progressive variety, has a substantive vision and it happens to be a very inhuman one.
But that vision is being coercively enforced, whether it's critical race theory, gender ideology, they enforce it against us very coercively.
It's just that not all of the coercion is meted out by like a government.
Some of it is, but lots of it is by private actors, large corporations, employers, private universities, or what have you.
But I think that's a distinction.
I mean, some conservatives, for them, that distinction is enough.
That's the end of discussion.
Well, private actors can choose as they may, but I think that's a very blinkered view because it's a formal distinction.
It's a legal distinction, but its effects, you are being coerced.
So if coercion of this kind is inevitable, then the question becomes, you know, what orthodoxy should you try to enshrine if you agree that the current one that's being rammed on our throats is inhuman and unreasonable?
CRT, gender ideology, et cetera.
Legal Distinction Coercion00:10:14
So that's one answer.
The other answer, I mean, is a more philosophical answer, which is that, again, I have to cite authorities here, but Aristotle, St. Thomas Aquinas, drawing from Aristotle, say, but in order to build a virtuous citizenry, mere exhortations to virtue aren't enough.
So when conservatives say, just evangelize the culture or just, you know, go out there and do virtuous things, that's all good.
But says Aquinas, again, quoting Aristotle, that you need the support of laws because laws teach people.
By what they forbid and what they encourage, they shape different kinds of people.
So we have to not shy away from using law, again, in a reasonable way, in a humane way, to lead people to virtue.
In fact, that's all statesmanship is in the classical account.
Sora Bomari, the book is The Unbroken Thread, Discovering the Wisdom of Tradition in an Age of Chaos.
Sorbets, great to see you.
I really appreciate it.
A really interesting conversation.
Thanks a lot.
Thank you, sir.
Thanks for having me.
All right.
I know you love your troubles or you wouldn't keep them with you, but all good things must come to an end and it's time to get rid of them with the mailbag.
I got them.
$1.9 trillion relief so far.
I wrote the bill.
On the environment.
Pay them more.
It's free real estate.
Yeah.
All right.
I'm going to do all the mailbag like that.
That is your crazy president.
All right, from Anonymous.
Hi, Andrew.
I just had my first child with my wife of five years.
The child is beautiful.
We've really bonded in the couple of days we've been together.
However, my wife had a one-time affair with one of my best friends a few months before we found out we were pregnant.
She assures me I'm the father, but my anxiety-prone brain and PATSD from after she told me is tearing me apart.
Whenever I look at my son, I carefully analyze his face to see if he looks like me or the other guy.
It's affecting my ability to bond with him.
I don't want to get a paternity test because I don't want to be petty and reinforce my anxiety by cross-checking every little thing.
Please, how do I let this go and just raise this child who depends on me and I know will give me so much joy?
Get the paternity test.
No, you definitely, this is not a petty thing.
It's not a little thing, every little thing.
It's a big deal.
There's a major, major betrayal.
You do have PTSD.
You're probably sad.
You're probably angry.
And you don't want to take it out on this child.
So find out.
Find out whether for sure your wife has no say in this.
She has violated your marriage.
So she has no power to disagree with this.
You should get a paternity test for the child and find out.
Now, of course, I believe that the test will come back and show that you are the father.
But if in fact it comes back and shows that you're not, then you will have the problem, two problems.
You'll have the problem of whether you can overlook that and love this child as your own.
And then you'll also have the problem of what you're going to do with your dishonest and unfaithful wife.
Adultery, remember, is one of the reasons Jesus allows divorce.
And I'm not saying that that's what you should do at all, but I think that you will have to take into account if it turns out the boy is not yours.
You will have to take into account her dishonesty.
But find out.
Don't live in doubt.
Don't torture yourself.
It's not a small thing.
You have every reason to feel the way you feel.
So find out.
Have the courage to get the test.
All right, from Caitlin.
Esteemed Clavin, your guest last week, as well as your comment about marriage, has me wondering if men nowadays know about the benefits of a more traditional marriage.
As a 27-year-old single woman, I find men over the age of 50 often say that I would be perfect for their son, or they don't understand how I'm signal.
However, men in my age bracket don't seem interested.
Do men today know what they are missing out on by opting for a roommate that helps pay the bills versus a homemaker, wife, and stay-at-home mom who raises babies?
All I have ever wanted was to be a homemaker and mother and bake homemade pies in heels and pearls.
I'm sorry.
This isn't CNN, so I'll keep my hands where you can see them.
But that's a turn on.
How would you recommend I meet men who are interested in a more traditional marriage?
Note, this generalization of the men I meet includes the men I meet at church work.
Sincerely, she signs it, sincerely 35232, which is a models figure.
Good cook, chaste, feminine, traditional, and still single.
Well, I'll tell you what, I'm not going to do this more.
I'm only going to do this one time, so don't send me all your emails about this.
But we're going to, I'll tell you what, Caitlin, we are going to set up a mailbox where, I mean, look, this is my audience.
Let's see if these guys really show up because if I were a younger man and unmarried, I wouldn't have even brought this on the air.
We have set up a mailbag, Caitlin K-A-I-T-L-I-N, clavinshow at gmail.com.
So guys, if that's an interesting, if that's an interesting proposition to you, you can send her an email and describe yourself.
You can send a picture, but it better be a picture of your face or else I will show up at your house.
I am a black belt and I will kick you into the middle of next week.
So be polite.
Send Caitlin, you know, tell her what you're about.
Send her a picture if you want to prove you don't look like Quasimodo.
And Caitlin, we will send you the password so you can get the mail.
We won't interfere.
And if you meet somebody, please get back to us and let us know if you want to.
And hopefully you'll find out that you're wrong.
Maybe the problem is that all the men who are looking for a woman who wants to bake pies and heels and pearls are listening to this show.
I think that may be the solution right there.
We'll find out.
So men, that's it.
It's Caitlin K-A-I-T-K-A-I-T-L-I-N, clavinshow at gmail.com.
That's where you can find her.
All right.
Again, I'm not going to do this again, but I thought like, wow, it sounds good to me.
From Steve, I love my girlfriend very much.
She recently moved in with me.
We have talked seriously about marriage, and it seemed like a foregone conclusion.
But now that they live together, she talks often about wanting her independence and prioritizes it above all else.
She will go out without telling me where she is going or when she will be back.
If I ask, either out of genuine interest in her life or not wanting to worry about her, she refuses to tell me.
She acts like I'm trying to control her.
Recently, after expecting her home around midnight, she didn't make contact with me until 7 a.m. and I had been worried sick.
When I asked why she didn't respond to my calls, she replied, because I don't have to.
This has started to be a troubling trend.
Is my idea of what a successful relationship should be wrong?
I promise I am not the controlling type and I've never tried to tell her where or when she could or could not go anywhere.
Any advice we have about the situation could be greatly appreciated.
I have two pieces of advice.
One, dump the girl.
Get rid of this girl.
She is not in this relationship and she has a serious problem.
And then question yourself of why you are letting this girl walk all over you.
You know, this is a relationship.
You moved in together.
You didn't get married.
But moving in together, listen, I think marriage is far, far more important and far better.
But when you move in together, you are making essentially some of the promises of marriage, even though you're not institutionalizing them.
You're still making those promises.
You are not free anymore when you live with somebody, when you live in a sexual or romantic relationship.
You are not any longer free.
You do have responsibilities to that person, whether you're a male or a female.
You cannot do whatever you want.
You can't disappear overnight and not call in.
That's a terrible, unkind, and unthinkable way to behave.
And so first get rid of her, because nobody should behave like that, and you shouldn't be treated like that.
But then ask yourself, why the hell did you let that happen?
You know, why on earth would you let a woman treat you like that?
And I would say the same thing if a woman were writing into me and saying that my boyfriend disappears and won't tell me where he is.
I would say the same thing.
Why are you letting that happen?
There's a problem there, and you better find it out.
First, get rid of her, but then ask yourself why it happened.
Brandon, a bald leader of the multiverse, I have a question in regards to religion and politics.
As a conservative, I would like to think that supporting Christian values makes God happy with me, but I am oftentimes troubled with the idea that possibly God looks at conservatives no differently than liberals in terms of being right.
I know he loves us all the same, but sometimes I worry that maybe our cause isn't as righteous as we think.
Essentially, my question is, how do we know for sure that we are on the right in this political battle?
Well, of course we don't know for sure.
And of course God loves people on the left as he loves people on the right.
These are our petty problems in history.
They are not God's problems.
They're ours.
And many people on the left are acting in good faith.
Many people on the left are not.
Many people on the right have gone astray.
And I think that if you are being honest with yourself when you stand before God, you should come away uncomfortable and come away self-searching and make sure that you are at least acting with integrity.
I spoke at the beginning of this show in the opening segment of the show or maybe the second segment of the show.
I spoke about how you test your ideas of the good, that they should apply to everybody equally, that they should deal with the facts and that they should deal with reality as it actually is, not as you would like it to be or not as you think you can rewrite reality.
And I think those are important things to test yourself against.
Am I being, you know, if I do I think racism is wrong?
Well, then it's wrong for everybody.
If it's not wrong, why am I even complaining?
Those are questions that we should always be asking ourselves.
And we should never think that, oh, we're so righteous that God is on our side.
I believe that the church is open to people of all political persuasions, but I do think that there are certain ideas that lead to evil, and you have to start to question yourself if you have seen them.
Listen, I think right-wing ideas can lead to evil too if they do not are not infused with religious values.
I think that that's just true.
I think people who think that they can be right-wing and it's all going to work out are capitalist and that's going to take care of it.
Anyone who thinks their system is going to take care of it is wrong.
They are wrong.
So all of us have to start from this position of love.
All of us have to start from a position of humility.
All of us have to get rid of our pride and understand that we are not God.
And all of us should be questioning that all the time.
And believe me, God is much bigger than our political fights and much more loving than we are to one another.
Nightmare Ride into Darkness00:01:31
I got to stop there, and that means that you are about to be plunged on a nightmare ride into darkness that we call the Clavenless Week.
It is going to be, there will be wailing, there'll be gnashing of teeth, a lot of teeth gnashing.
You'll probably have to go to a dentist after it's over, but don't worry about it because you probably won't survive.
If you do, we will be back here on Friday with the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm Andrew Clayton.
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.
The FDA prepares to add a new vaccine health warning for young people.
House Republicans move to break up big tech, and Ron DeSantis wants to force schools to teach students about the evils of communism.