Ep. 1039’s host rails against "woke" policies, framing them as Marxist-driven attacks on American identity—from NPR’s trigger warnings for the Declaration of Independence to CRT’s racial division in schools, citing Stephen Benét’s The Devil and Daniel Webster as proof America’s sins were always acknowledged. They defend Trump’s lawsuits against Big Tech for censorship, contrast parental rights with NEA’s push for nationwide CRT, and mock LGBTQ+ messaging in children’s media as Foucault-inspired indoctrination. Dr. Owen Strand warns churches adopting wokeness risk losing their faith to secular social justice, while a grieving father’s letter sparks advice on navigating loss without guilt. The episode ends with satirical crypto extortion skits and headlines mocking elite entitlement, framing resistance to cultural shifts as the only path to preserving truth and tradition. [Automatically generated summary]
The time has come for the wealthy in this country to pay their fair share of useless and destructive government programs.
Too long have individuals who have built enormous businesses that employ thousands of people used sneaky loopholes and legal boondoggles to dodge their responsibility to throw their money away on worthless government schemes that help no one except politicians who suck on the public breast like baby vampires sucking on a breast except with very sharp teeth so that they draw blood instead of milk and the mother ultimately dies.
The mother in this case being the public, or possibly the nation, if I recall what I was trying to say with this metaphor, which I no longer do.
But the point is this.
How dare the billionaires and millionaires and $100,000 heirs and people who are just getting by greedily hoard the money they earned by work and investment when they should be paying into an elaborate government system of wealth redistribution that will lift everyone to equal dependency, poverty, and unhappiness.
What about the children?
Do you want our little ones to live in mansions or even houses when we could be using their inheritance to pay for public education that would teach them to hate one another on the basis of race and then cut off their sexual organs to fulfill the insane dreams of perverts desperate to bury their shame in other people's misery?
Of course not.
Even as we speak, the fat cats and various other anthropomorphic animals are wallowing in productivity and job creation on their yachts and private planes and sprawling half-acre backyards when if they would only pay their fair share, we could be providing free daycare for all so that government babysitters could shower the nation's children with tender-loving sexual perversity and mental abuse.
Then, mothers would finally be free to go to meaningless jobs where they tap on keyboards for no discernible reason instead of wasting their lives, building the souls and minds of the next generation as if they were oppressed housewives from the 1950s standing at the pulsing center of a thriving civilization that idolizes them as avatars of feminine power, happiness, and achievement.
If big shots and money bags and tycoons and ordinary people are not forced to pay their fair share of useless and destructive government programs, our progress into the future could halt completely and we could sink back into being a healthy, well-run society of free men and women standing astride a world that gazes up at us in awe and admiration.
We must not let that happen.
Americans should grab their torches and take to the streets and burn their own lives to the ground in a wild frenzy of envy and stupidity.
Hooray for Hoorah00:03:42
Then everything will be great.
Or everything will be in ashes, but at least there won't be any rich people.
So, hooray.
Trigger warning.
I'm Andrew Clavin and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky donkey.
Life is tickety boo.
Birds are winging, also singing, hunky-dunky-dunky.
Ship-shaped hipsy-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, the vast right-wing conspiracy known as Clavinon deepens as the wandering, shadowy figure known as K, or just me, gives us the truth behind the lies that are behind the truth that are behind other lies.
Please go on Apple Podcasts and subscribe to this podcast and give us a five-star review.
It really helps us out a lot and it helps you out because then it's delivered.
Also go on YouTube, the Andrew Clavin channel on YouTube.
You can subscribe to that as well.
You can press that little bell.
No idea what it does, but it's, you know, just press it.
It'll maybe give you some kind of electric shock or some other kind of a thrill.
Leave a comment.
If your comment is sufficiently disgraceful and embarrassing and offensive, we will read it on the air because it'll just become an indistinguishable part of my commentary.
Today's comment is from Margot Lane, who says, women getting offended by a woman being called a piece haven't been called a nice piece lately.
And that's very offensive and fits right in with our philosophy.
So thank you, Margot.
That was excellent.
That was a perfect addition to the commentary here.
I don't know how you are with your computer, but I am naive.
I go on the computer and I don't even think about bad guys trying to use my material or even good guys, regular guys, trying to take my material and use it to sell me stuff.
We all take little risks every day when we go online, whether we think about it or not.
We think our connection probably won't be interrupted by hackers.
Our data probably won't be used against us.
But using the internet without ExpressVPN is like driving without car insurance.
Why would you take that risk?
Every time you connect to an unencrypted network, cafes, hotels, airports, any hacker on the same network can gain access to your personal data, whether it's your passwords, financial details, any of it.
It doesn't take much technical knowledge to hack someone, just some cheap hardware.
ExpressVPN acts as online insurance.
It creates a secure, encrypted tunnel between your device and the internet so hackers can't steal your personal data.
I use it every day so I can continue to be naive without thinking about it and be safe.
Secure your online data today by visiting expressvpn.com slash clavin.
That's E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N.com slash Clavin, and you can get an extra three months free.
Expressvpn.com slash clavin.
I know what you're thinking.
You're thinking Express.
Anybody can spell Express, but how do you spell Klavin?
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
There are no easy things.
I just make it look easy.
One thing I would like to say, I don't do this often, but I really feel that this is something I have to promote.
You know how Mel Gibson made The Passion of the Christ, and suddenly in Hollywood they thought, oh, wow, people like the Bible or something.
So they started to make these Bible movies, but they were all anti-Bible Bible movies.
So they made Noah with Russell Crow and Exodus with Christian Bale and Noah was about global warming instead of sin.
And Christian Bale said Moses was kind of a terrorist.
He called Moses a terrorist.
And so people who love the Bible didn't show up because they didn't want to see Hollywood use the Bible to sell their stupid leftist ideas.
Bible Movies Gone Wrong00:08:42
And now, this is absolutely true.
I know this for a fact.
Now Hollywood says, well, we don't want to make Bible movies because people don't like Bible stories.
They don't make any money because they think that the people were staying home because they didn't like the Bible instead of not liking them.
It was kind of like when they made war on terror movies where the Americans were the bad guys and nobody went.
And they actually had articles saying people aren't interested in the war on terror.
And then Clint Eastwood made his film American Sniper and the Americans were the good guys and people showed up in droves.
So I wanted to make a, I have teamed up with a group called KO Films, C-A-Y-O, KO Films, and we are trying to launch a project where we are going to make biblical content that is really good and faithful to the Bible, but also intelligent and full of interesting characters and really explores the Bible themes and again, is faithful to the story.
So KO Films is trying to raise money for this.
They have a website, investinko.tv.
Go on.
If you would like to support us in doing this, you can go on.
There's a little video with me on it.
Read the specs.
This is a real group.
They're really good.
The script that I've written, I wrote the first script.
It is, I can safely say, one of the very best scripts I've ever written.
Cyrus Nawasta, who's a terrific director and never directs anything that he didn't write himself, has agreed to direct this after reading the script.
But go on, investinko, C-A-Y-O.tv.
Read the specs because it is an investment.
And if you want to support us, we would appreciate it.
So over the 4th of July weekend, long 4th of July weekend, I went to visit the U.S. Marines Memorial in Arlington.
It's right across from Arlington Cemetery.
It was too hot for me to go walking in the cemetery, but I went to visit this statue.
It's a famous statue based on the picture of the guys raising the flags on Iwo Jima, raising the flag on Iwo Jima.
And it's hard for me to express how important this statue was to me when I was a kid.
I had a little model of it on my desk at home.
We would visit it whenever we were in Washington.
We had cousins in Washington.
Whenever we visited them, we would go to the U.S. Marines Memorial and look at the Iwo Jima statue of Marines raising the flag after this terrible island-by-island fight that they were fighting against the Japanese in World War II.
So when I went there, I had this, you know how things from the past will give you these visceral memories.
You can almost feel what it was like to be there.
And I realized that I felt like I was, my childhood is now another, from another time, almost another planet.
And, you know, it was this sense that I had, I loved this statue because it represented America to me.
It represented the fact that America had won World War II and was now fighting the communists in the Cold War and that we stood for something, we stood for freedom, and it was loving your country was almost required.
I mean, the idea that you wouldn't love your country, no matter how liberal you were, no matter whether you were a Democrat or a Republican, everybody knew that we had lucked out in being born in this country and it was a wonderful country.
So I was listening to Biden's 4th of July speech.
I'll just play this little bit of it that really, it really got to me.
It was not an evil anti-American speech.
It really wasn't.
But this was his idea of what was going to inspire us.
This is Cut 25.
245 years ago, we declared our independence from a distant king.
Today, we're closer than ever to declaring our independence from a deadly virus.
That's not to say the battle against COVID-19 is over.
We've got a lot more work to do.
But just as our Declaration in 1776 was not a call to action, was a call to action, not a reason for complacency or a claim of victory.
It was the call to action.
The same is true today.
Back then, we had the power of an idea on our side.
Today, we have the power of science.
So once we fought an empire for the ideal of liberty, now we've gotten over the flu.
Then we had ideas, now we have meds.
It's like, it wasn't an evil speech.
It was just stupid.
It has nothing to do with what this day is about.
You know, Biden at one point said, you can't define what an American is.
I can.
Sure, I can.
I mean, we are defined by our ideas, not by our meds, not by our science, not by getting over the flu.
Everybody gets sick.
Everybody gets over it.
Everybody fights it the same ways.
But this was a unique moment, July 4th.
And we've kind of lost that sense of our own uniqueness, our own decency, our own goodness.
Certainly the left has.
I mean, 50, the latest poll shows that 57% of respondents to this poll do not believe that Joe Biden is in charge of the country.
And obviously he's not, but the left who back him are willing to say much uglier things.
And they say them with such offhandedness.
NPR has a thing where they read the Declaration of Independence every year.
And this year they couldn't do it without a trigger warning.
They said, over the past 32 years, Morning Edition has broadcast a reading of the Declaration of Independence by NPR staff as a way of marking Independence Day.
But after last summer's protests and our national reckoning on race, the words in the document land differently.
You can always hear those weasel words, that passive tense.
They land, the words land differently.
On whose ears?
To whom?
It's always this kind of passive thing that's happening.
It's just out there in this atmosphere.
It's just not a bunch of elites sitting around talking.
They go on to say the Declaration famously declares that all men are created equal, even though women enslave people and Indigenous Americans were not held as equal at the time.
Wow, deep, man.
That is really deep.
We live in time and we create ideas and then slowly over time we live more and more into the meaning of those ideas so that we are now free to reach back to the people who created the ideas and yell at them and insult them for not having been the people that were created by the ideas they created.
Oh, wait, that's not deep.
That's incredibly stupid.
I mean, they just can't come out and say, this is fabulous.
This is a great thing that has happened in the world.
You know, you don't, not every day.
It's not every day that you have to mention our flaws.
We all know we have flaws.
On July 4th, it's like having somebody's birthday and saying, oh, it's your birthday.
You're closer to death.
You don't have to say, oh, it's July 4th.
We're flawed.
But just say, it's great.
It's great that this happened.
It's a fantastic thing that's happened.
Let's try and take care of it as our ancestors did when they died for it.
The other thing that really got me was this, at this same celebration, Vanessa Williams, who was Miss America for about 10 minutes during the Reagan era, and then they found she had done some S ⁇ M nude shots and they kicked her out of being Miss America.
But I've always liked her.
She's a talented singer.
She's a decent actress.
She sings what is now called the Black National Anthem.
So I don't want to make too big a deal out of this, but it's in keeping with what the left is trying to propose.
This is a poem, Lift Up Your Voice, is a poem written by a black poet, I don't know, around 1900, I think it was, to celebrate Lincoln's birthday.
And it has become called the Black National Anthem because it's very important to the civil rights movement.
But do the blacks really want a national anthem?
Do they really want Juneteenth to redefine this country as founded on Juneteenth when the slaves were freed or 1619 when the slaves were sold?
Do they really want to be different than the rest of us, that different than the rest of us?
Because the whole thing about it is the logic of it doesn't work.
They want to be, they are laying claim to having been offended in their American rights, rights that didn't exist before America, that weren't codified like they were in the Declaration and in the Constitution.
And so if they want to kneel when the flag is flown, if they want to insult the flag, they're essentially saying, oh, we're not part of this country.
We're not part of this country, and we want our rights.
You don't have any rights if you're not part of this country.
I mean, you have God-given rights, but it's only here that those rights are recognized as God-given and only here that they're protected.
So all I'm saying is that when I stood before the Iwo Jima statue and had that visceral memory of what it was like to be proud of America and a country that was proud of itself, I couldn't help but feel that maybe we were in this period of decline.
Decline And Democracy00:15:09
And decline, the decline of America is something that people have been predicting and talking about, certainly since the beginning of the country, really at the beginning of the country, I think it was Benjamin Franklin who, as they were at the Constitutional Convention, he was looking at George Washington's chair and on George Washington's chair there was a sun kind of on the horizon.
It was just like a half sun.
Here's a picture of it if you're watching.
It's just a half sun.
And Franklin said he wasn't sure whether the sun was setting or rising until actually they did put out the Constitution.
Then he said, okay, maybe it's rising.
But it's been a concern.
The decline of America has been a concern from the very beginning.
Barton Swame in this Saturday's Wall Street Journal reviewed a new book called Fears of a Setting Sun by a Syracuse University professor named Dennis Rasmussen, who says that all of the founders, most of the founders, feared that America was going to go in instantaneous decline.
Here's Barton Swame describing that.
He says, Washington in his latter years thought parties or factions would tear the country apart.
Alexander Hamilton believed characteristically that the federal government and especially the executive too anemic to govern so vast a republic.
John Adams doubted the people possessed sufficient virtue to make democracy work.
Benjamin Rush came to believe the Constitution a hopeless mess and doubted a nation so bewhiskeyed and be-dollered had much hope.
John Marshall was sure the nullification crisis of 1832-33 meant the end.
Thomas Jefferson agonized that slavery would tear the country apart.
Only James Madison thought the country would likely do just fine.
And one of the reasons they felt like this, and they were so conscious that the republic was fragile, is because they knew about an idea called anacyclosis.
And anacyclosis is an ancient Greek idea, which means the cycle of regimes.
And it's in Plato, it's in Aristotle, but the most cogent and cohesive statement of it is in a later but still ancient Greek historian named Polybius.
And the way it works is kind of like this.
It's a little pat.
It doesn't have to work like this, but the way it's explained is that there's chaos, and then finally, to settle the chaos, a man arises and becomes king.
And this kingship is, it can be, he says, Polybius says, it's by no means every monarchy which we can call straight off a kingship, but only that monarchy which is voluntarily accepted by the subjects and where they are governed rather by an appeal to their reason than by fear and force.
So this monarchy is a good thing, but as the monarchy descends through the family of the first king and it's taken on by people who don't care or who have become corrupted by power, it devolves into a tyranny.
So kingship devolves into tyranny.
After a while, the powerful people who aren't the tyrant get sick and they overthrow the tyrant and they establish an aristocracy.
That's kind of what happened with the Magna Carta, where they said to King John, you've got to give the aristocrats, the noblemen, some rights.
And there's a good version of this, the aristocracy.
Polybius says, we can't style every oligarchy an aristocracy, but only that where the government is in the hands of a selected body of the justest and wisest men.
So you can have a good aristocracy, but again, as these elites become corrupt, as they seek to consolidate their power and keep anybody from getting at their power, even if their failures lazy, corrupt, and stupid, finally, then the aristocracy becomes an oligarchy, right?
Just a tyrannical rule by a few.
And then the people get sick of that, and they have now become cohesive enough to rise up and they establish a democracy.
And here's what Polybius says about a democracy.
It is no true democracy in which the whole crowd of citizens is free to do whatever they wish or purpose.
But when in a community there is a traditional and customary reverence to the gods, to honor the parents, to respect our elders, and to obey the laws, the will of the greater number prevails.
That is what is called a democracy.
Ultimately, as we see, freedom, Plato said this, freedom becomes the only value in a democracy, and a democracy descends into mob rule.
And then what happens?
A strong man has to bring order again, and you go back to a king.
And that's the cycle.
That's anacyclosis, the cycle of regimes.
And it doesn't have to be that pat, but the point is, nothing humans make can last.
Everything is flawed, inherently flawed, and those flaws will eventually undermine it.
And the founders thought, well, maybe if we mixed up the regimes with some democracy in the House, some aristocracy in the Senate, monarchy in the presidency, maybe we can forestall that decay, but they weren't certain they could.
So the question always becomes in moments like this when it feels like we're in decay.
The question becomes, is it the time?
Has the time come when democracy, when the republic will fall and be replaced by a king?
Or should we keep fighting?
Should we give up?
Should we pick the best king?
Like those who picked Augustus, got a good king in the Roman Republic.
As the Roman Republic fell, the people who stood for Augustus actually wound up with a very good king.
They were actually freer after the empire came than they were before the Republic fell, when the Republic had just become a sort of series of civil wars and tyranny.
Or should we be like Cicero?
My son Spencer Clavin, no relation, wrote a wonderful piece once in the LA Times talking about Cicero, how he basically could not sign on to an empire, and so he retired and he wrote about democracy until the regime came and found him and killed him.
And that his writing inspired John Adams, right, thousands of years later, and John Adams on July 4th made that speech, I'm sorry, made the speech to encourage them to declare independence, and they did because his oratory, in part modeled on Cicero, brought them to their feet.
Now, I side with Cicero because I believe that God made us to be free.
And I believe that we should fight for freedom always, even as our democracy descends, if our democracy descends.
Christianity and its mother religion, Judaism, teaches us in the words of Isaiah, the nations are like a drop in a bucket.
They are regarded as dust on the scales.
In other words, only God is eternal.
The nations come and go.
And Jesus said we should render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's.
So we should obey the law until it takes from us the thing that makes us godly men, the truth about who we are.
When government forces us to lie, when government forces us to hate our enemies, to hate each other, when government forces us not to be able to worship and live out our relationship to God, that's when we have to stand up against them.
And a lot of that's happening right now.
You know, the government is demanding that we lie about transgenderism and climate change and race.
They're demanding that we hate anyone who disagrees with wokeism.
They're telling us that we can't go to church.
And the church, like a bunch of weasels, are obeying and shutting down their churches.
I don't think we have to stage a revolution, but I think each of us has to be a revolution.
Because if you're unafraid to speak the truth, if you're unafraid to love your enemy, if you're unafraid to worship, even when the government tells you that you're not allowed to worship, then you're free.
You're a free man.
It's like Hemingway said.
Then they can destroy you, but they can't defeat you.
If you can live in the truth, if you can live in love and if you can live in worship, then the cycle of regimes means nothing to you because you remain a free man no matter what point that cycle is at.
Even if it costs you your Twitter page, even if it costs you your job, even if it costs you your life.
It is a big thing to ask, but it's the thing that God asks of us, and it's the way we remain free no matter where we are in the cycle of regimes.
If you will speak the truth, if you will stand up, if you will worship, then the cycle of regimes cannot touch you.
One day, and that day is not so far away, I too will have a home, and when I do, I will protect it with a ring security system.
Then, if someone stops by the home I don't have or something's going on outdoors, the home I don't have, Ring will let me know.
It's peace of mind anytime, knowing that the home I don't have would be protected if I had it.
At my house, which I don't have, I would be able to keep an eye on every corner of this house I don't have with rings easy to install, indoor and outdoor cams.
The best thing about it, if I had a home, would be that besides Ring being a powerful asset for the home I don't have, Ring is also an affordable whole home security system you can easily install yourself.
I actually did install it when I had a home.
It's never been more important to be able to see who's there and what's happening with a Ring security system anywhere you are.
There's an app right on your phone.
You can see anybody at the door.
You can talk to them.
If I had a home, I'd have a door.
I'd have a ring.
Believe me.
And maybe someday I will.
Start protecting your home today with a 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 and have it up and running in minutes.
That's ring.com slash clavin, ring.com slash clavin, wherever you are.
Someone comes to your house, say, how do you spell Clavin?
And if he knows, call the cops.
The thing is, too, no matter how much you may think we're in decline or no matter how much you're tempted to give up on the country, the fight is still on.
We can tell it's still on because the woke empire is striking back against those who are rebelling against the corporations, the government, the media, and Hollywood.
I've been talking about these parents who are standing up against critical race theory and critical race, all critical theory.
All critical theory is simply socialism, leftism, tyranny in disguise.
That's all it is because they criticize, but they leave out what is kept silent in the criticism is, oh yes, we're going to replace this with more government, more powerful government, more government control of your money, your resources, your gasoline, all of that stuff.
But, you know, the parents are still standing up against teaching critical race theory in the schools.
Here's a new viral video.
This guy, Ian Rice, who stood up before a school board in Michigan, and just if you're not watching, he's a black guy.
Cut six.
Critical race theory is teaching that white people are bad.
That's not true.
That would teach my daughter that her mother is evil.
You already have an educator within your staff that has pulled my daughter aside and said, well, you're a minority, so you know better than to engage in certain things.
Wow.
Whoa.
When I was brought to the school's attention, nothing happened to the educator.
Instead, my daughter was brought in, and she was ridiculed.
So my question is now, with critical race theory being brought in, what is your criteria to educate the educators?
And who are you to educate my children, or any of our children, in life issues?
That's our job.
Your job is to teach them math and science.
Our job is to teach them about life.
Yeah, see, that hits the nail right on the head.
And all these people saying, oh, these parents don't understand, they don't understand.
Well, he sounds to me like he understands plenty.
He's got it exactly right.
But the thing is, the woke empire, when I say they're striking back, it's really true.
The nation's largest teacher union, teachers union, National Education Association, has resolved it will teach CRT in every state of the union, which would be defying laws that are now in place in Tennessee, Oklahoma, Iowa, Idaho, and Texas, and defying parents who are recalling the school boards who are insisting they teach that stuff.
And also, and I'm reading this off National Review, also NEA will research the organizations attacking educators doing anti-racist work and or use the research already done and put together a list of resources and recommendations.
In other words, they're going to come after you.
They're going to try and intimidate people into standing down so they take control over teaching your children's values.
By the way, they had to take this down off their website because wickedness doesn't like to be exposed to the light.
But if there's any question about what they're really teaching, because they keep saying, oh no, it's not what you think.
You don't understand what we're really, we're just teaching, you know, the slavery.
We're just teaching history.
It's just history we're teaching.
Here is, I think his name is Gloud, he pronounces it, Gloude.
It's Eddie Gloud, who's a Princeton professor who's often on MSNBC on Morning Joe.
And our pal Chris Ruffo was on explaining why critical race theory was so bad.
And here is Gloud's reaction.
He gets very, very upset about this.
This is what he says we have to teach.
It's cut eight.
We're going to make mistakes.
They're going to be extremes.
There are going to be moments of overreach.
I grant that.
But part of what we have to do in this moment, Joe, and we've talked about this, is to confront the ugliness of who we are.
And part of what I hear in these sorts of arguments is this sense in which that confrontation must be one where we're comfortable, where we feel good about who we are, who we are after we confront it.
So in some ways, I get, let me just, I'm scooting up in my chair, Joe, because I'm getting upset.
Because we're seeing right now in real time a reassertion of the lie.
The very thing that keeps us from becoming a different America because we don't want to accept who we are.
The ugliness, the ugliness of who we are, the ugliness of who we are.
Now here's the thing.
If there had been no England, if there had been no United States, if there had been no Declaration and no Constitution, Gloud wouldn't even know we were ugly.
We're ugly compared to our ideals, our perfections.
Of course we are.
Of course we are.
But how beautiful that out of our ugliness we brought these ideas forward that make us seem ugly to him.
Nowhere else on earth, no other time on earth, would we be ugly.
Any other time on earth, people would sit in awe at what we've done, at what we've done.
And I'm going to tell, and later in the show, I'm going to talk about one of the greatest short stories written in America, which really explains this, really puts this in a very beautiful and moving way.
But he wouldn't know we were ugly if it weren't for these ideas that were created out of our flaws, out of our sinfulness, out of our crazy, bloody history that is all of humankind's history.
And the thing that this parent, Mr. Rice, the parent, was saying, is the point.
Who are these people?
Who are these people to teach our children values?
What have they done that's so good?
Where does their sainthood come from?
Where does their moral standing come from that they want to take away from parents the right to teach?
You know, they talk about sex education all the time.
Well, you know, I can understand you want to teach children where babies come from, okay?
But what special wisdom gives teachers or any of these people the right to teach sexual values that parents oppose?
Or Hollywood.
You know, and Breitbart had a story, Breitbart.com had a story.
The increase of LGBTQ characters and themes popping up in TV shows made for children in the last decade is not an organic development.
It's the consequence of so-called queer creators pushing the LGBTQ agenda and working with major entertainment networks, writers, producers, showrunners, and directors to place sexualized themes into on-screen fair made for young audiences.
A recent extensive report by Entertainment Insider highlights the increase of LGBTQ messaging in children's programming.
They're doing it on purpose.
Why We Teach Kids About Gender?00:05:38
What standing, what right do they have to take from children, to take from parents the right to teach children their values, even if those values aren't your values?
You know, the San Francisco Gay Men's Choir put out a video that went viral singing a song about how, yes, in fact, we are coming after your children.
It's cut five.
You think we're sinful?
You fight against our rights.
You say we all lead lives you can't respect.
But you're just frightened.
You think that we'll corrupt your kids if our agenda goes unchecked.
Funny, just this once, you're correct.
We'll convert your children.
Happens bit by bit, quietly and subtly, and you will barely notice it.
You can keep them from disco.
Warn about San Francisco.
Make them wear pleated pants.
We don't care.
We'll convert your children.
We'll make them tolerant and fair.
So, of course, we're all for tolerance and fairness, but some of us have different ideas about how people should behave and what constitutes a moral sexual relationship and what constitutes an immoral sexual relationship.
And as you know, I'm pretty libertarian about all this, but I understand the arguments of people who are not libertarian and they have the right to pass those views on to their children without these creeps.
And you know, this guy, he really does come across as creepy, by the way, has that demonic smile you see in people who are really bad guys.
I don't know.
I don't know him.
I'm not saying anything about him personally.
I'm just looking at his face.
But what standing do they have?
What is it?
What is it?
What genius, of moral genius do these people have that should replace the ideas of parents in their children's lives?
Children will grow up, they will see the world, they will make decisions for themselves ultimately, and that is right.
And these people have a right to make the arguments to adults.
But children are, in fact, the charges of their parents.
And it's parents who should be teaching these things.
And when I look at the teachers' union, you know, something like 56, 57%, I can't remember the exact number, of Americans don't read very well.
We have public education in this country for everybody, and they don't read very well.
And they're teaching them about, you know, being gay or being anti-white or whatever they're teaching.
Why not teach them to read?
You know, it sounds like you got your work cut out for you.
And the funny thing about this is so many of the ideas they have are so dumb.
This transgender agenda thing is all based on Michel Foucault's faux history of sexual distinction, that it was an invention, that sexual distinction, the difference between men and women was an invention.
And Foucault was a gay, sadomasochist who chased after children, apparently.
He's been charged, accused of having chased after children.
And where again does his philosophy, where are the facts in his philosophy?
I've read Michel Foucault.
I've read quite a lot of him actually.
And he's difficult to understand.
He's maundering.
But he makes all these assertions.
Again, here is a guy on TikTok who is actually echoing Foucault, but this is what it devolves into.
And these are the guys who think that they have the moral standing to explain sexual morality to your kids.
And I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
They just don't.
I love this guy because he's so nuts as he's explaining the gender binary, which means the difference between men and women.
The gender binary is a racist cultural construction created by white scientists in the 19th century as a means of showing the supposed superiority of Western civilization at being the only culture able to uphold sexual dichotomy.
During the era of European colonialism, Europeans noticed that cultures around the world had sexual and gender diversity as an integrated part of society.
19th century race scientists saw sexual ambiguity as a sign of primitivity and believed that the binary distinction between the sexes gets more pronounced as a culture becomes more civilized.
This racist interpretation of evolutionary theory was used as a means to solidify the binary gender and sex systems within Europe and European colonies.
This is completely untrue, by the way.
Most primitive societies have very little, if any, homosexuality.
But I just have to, I can't help but point out that an absolutely brilliant satirist six years before that guy existed imitated him, made fun of him six years earlier.
Here he is, the great, he's impossible to imitate, so I'll just put him on.
Gender theorists today believe that the different behaviors and capabilities of men and women are not a reflection of their natural propensities and desires, but were imposed on them by the gender stereotypes of society, which were created at the conference of the Gender Stereotype Society held in 1817 at a secluded chateau on the shores of Lake Geneva.
It was there that it was determined by secret ballot that from now on, men would be able to invent things and lie convincingly about their sexual conquests while women would talk a lot about clothes and then make dinner.
These oppressive and confining stereotypes were imposed on the population of the entire globe through repeated exposure to televised football and the movie Cinderella, as well as archie comics dropped from planes on primitive villages, where up to that point, people had been living lives of complete gender equality.
I love that guy.
He's hilarious.
Creator's Freedom?00:14:22
Anyway, the thing about this is, though, you know, America has gone through these periods before, and I think a lot of the Salem witch trials, these periods of philosophical hysteria.
And usually, I mean, every time before now, a kind of common sense has risen up from the bottom, almost always, has risen up from the bottom, and the cloud of hysteria, the cloud of philosophical nonsense has been dispelled.
Sometimes just the threat from overseas has dispelled the nonsense.
The 20s would, with their craziness, the roaring 20s disappeared into the Depression, and the Depression disappeared into the World War.
And when we came out of World War, we were a stronger, healthier country.
Even now, though, you know, as the woke empire is striking back and going after our children in the schools and these evil, evil teachers unions, which should be illegal, are just declaring that, no, you don't have the right to teach your kids.
We will teach your kids.
At the same time, in New Hampshire, Republican lawmakers approved education freedom accounts, which students can use toward expenses as private school tuition.
In Pennsylvania, Democratic Governor Tom Wolfe signed a budget that includes an expansion of high-demand state tax credit scholarship programs that allow people to choose more schools.
Ohio lawmakers packaged several school choice provisions into their budget.
In Arizona, the legislature raised the funding cap for special needs.
The fight is not over.
In fact, the fight is on.
As you know, MyPillow has a passion to help everyone get the best sleep of their life.
But that doesn't do me any good because I'm awake all night long.
But MyPillow is so comfortable that I can enjoy it all night long.
It's fun to stay awake when you've got a MyPillow.
Now, MyPillow has created the new Giza Dream Bedsheets.
They look and feel great, which means an even better night of lying awake.
MyPillow found the world's best cotton 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 the Giza sheets, you will never want to sleep or lie awake on anything else.
Giza dream sheets come in a variety of sizes and colors.
MyPillow is making a special offer for my listeners.
You'll receive two for one low price plus free shipping.
That's a good deal.
Go to mypillow.com and click on the Radio Listener Square and use promo code DAILYWIRE.
There 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.
Call 1-800-951-7163.
Use the promo code DAILYWIRE or go to mypillow.com.
Make sure you use the promo code DAILYWIRE.
So when a fight is on, you know, there's always going to be one person right in the middle of it, and that is your favorite president, as he used to call himself, Donald Trump.
Donald Trump has sued Facebook, Twitter, and Google, seeking to restore his online profile after he was suspended from most social media platforms following the January 6th riots in the U.S. Capitol.
This is really interesting.
You know how on this show you get tomorrow's news today?
A couple of weeks ago, I texted Jenna Ellis, Trump's lawyer and a friend of this program and of me, and I said, why doesn't he sue Twitter?
Why doesn't Trump sue Twitter?
And she said, well, he probably doesn't care enough and doesn't want the problem.
And then he did, so he's obviously listening to the show.
He wrote an op-ed, or somebody wrote under his name, an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, explaining himself.
And what is also interesting is he makes an argument that I made last year on the show as well.
So clearly, you know, this show is the silent source of all the news on the conservative side, on the constitutionalist side.
It all generates from here, just like every slogan people have.
It all comes from me.
Here's what Trump writes under his name, what is written under his name, saying the big tech companies are manipulating and controlling the political debate itself.
Consider content that was censored in the past year.
Big tech companies banned users from their platforms for publishing evidence that showed the coronavirus emerged from a Chinese lab, which even the corporate media now admits may be true.
In the middle of a pandemic, big tech censored physicians from discussing potential treatments such as hydroxychloroquine, which studies have now shown does work to relieve symptoms of COVID-19.
In the weeks before presidential election, the platforms banned the New York Post, America's oldest newspaper, for publishing a story critical of Joe Biden's family, a story the Biden campaign did not even dispute.
Perhaps most egregious in the weeks after the election, big tech blocked the social media accounts of the sitting president.
If they can do it to me, they can do it to you.
And believe me, there are.
And here's his argument.
He says the coercion and coordination is unconstitutional.
Now, I didn't say that this was necessarily so, but I said this was a possible argument to make.
And so you always, if you're here, you're about six months ahead of everybody else.
Trump says the Supreme Court has held that Congress can't use private actors to achieve what the Constitution prohibits it from doing itself.
In effect, big tech has been illegally deputized as the censorship arm of the U.S. government.
This should alarm you no matter your political persuasion.
It is unacceptable, unlawful, and un-American.
Even the fact that they won't allow anybody to post anything about the Chinese virus that is out of keeping with the CDC, that's essentially doing the government's work of silencing people for them.
Now, look, we all know that Trump is going to fundraise off this, and this is partly a fundraising thing.
And I'm worried because his lawyers, when he was fighting over the election, his legal team, with the exception of Jenna, was so loony and bad that I thought they made what could have been an interesting case.
They just made it untenable.
And of course, the January 6th riot did hurt his reputation.
It was a bad thing.
He didn't stop it.
He didn't speak out against it soon enough.
And it was embarrassing.
Obviously, they've turned it into the Reichstag fire.
So at this point, it's hard to even talk about it in a sensible way.
But it was an embarrassment, I thought.
But the thing about this is, is this is, I think, probably the most important thing happening.
And the threat, and I've made this argument before, but let me just make it one more time.
The threat to our rights of free speech, whether they come from the government or they come from private entities, have to be stopped because the rights come from God.
The rights are both above corporations and they're above the government.
The thing is, these companies are not like the cake baker in Colorado who cannot be forced to express celebration over something that he thinks is unholy, like gay marriage or transgenderism.
That's not right that he should be forced to express this.
These companies have the wealth and power, more wealth and power, than most sovereign nations.
Most nations are not as wealthy as Amazon and Google and Facebook.
You know, these are incredibly powerful entities.
They have been given special privileges by the government in this 230 regulation, which allows them to act both as platforms and as publishers and to be free of the rights, of the responsibilities that publishers have when they decide what they will and won't publish, but to act like platforms, like a telephone company, essentially.
So on the telephone, you can pick up the telephone, say anything you want, as long as it's not illegal, as long as you're not conspiring, committing actual crimes on the telephone.
You can say anything you want, any opinion you want, including Nazis, communists, doesn't matter.
You can say all that stuff on the phone.
You should be able to say whatever you want on some of these platforms because they are that monopolistic and that powerful.
And the point about our rights coming from God, that the Declaration informs the Constitution, that the purpose of the Declaration is to state the philosophy that behind the Constitution, which is just a set of laws, means that our rights are given to us by our Creator.
You don't have to believe in that Creator, but you have to accept that He exists.
It's like an axiom.
You just have to say, all right, for the purposes of my liberty, I believe in this Creator, even though privately I'm an atheist.
That's perfectly fine.
It is the axiom of this country.
It is the unprovable but necessary idea of this country that our rights are God-given because you cannot make that argument.
Now, I had Alan Dershowitz on the show back in April, I believe it was.
And I said that to him, and he said, no, no, no, you can't rest your rights on God because there are too many different gods and too many interpretations of God.
And, you know, I thought, well, there are lots of different answers to one plus one, but only one of those answers is correct.
And you don't have to believe in Jesus or the Hebrew God.
You have to believe in the God who gives us these rights.
You have to believe the God of the Declaration.
And now, Dershowitz, the one thing about Dershowitz is he does admit that this is a complicated question, but that these guys constitute the most dangerous threat to our free speech rights in our lifetime.
And he had a really interesting comment on Newsmax.
This is cut two, where he talked about the paradoxes of this case and of this lawsuit and why the lawsuit is potentially very interesting.
Cut two.
It pits freedom of speech against the First Amendment.
Wow.
How could that be?
There's no doubt that the media giants are denying President Trump his free speech and me, my free speech.
They've taken down a debate between me and Bobby Kennedy.
And they're also denying the free speech rights of people who want to listen to their views.
So free speech is clearly on the side of the plaintiffs.
But the defendant, the media giants, are claiming they have a First Amendment right to deny free speech.
They have a First Amendment right to censor.
And the courts are going to have to resolve this conflict between free speech on the one hand and the First Amendment on the other hand.
First time in American history, this conflict has been presented.
And to me, the solution, the idea that our rights precede the Bill of Rights, our rights come from God, not from the Bill of Rights.
The Bill of Rights protects our rights, but the rights are already there.
We are endowed with those rights is the only argument that you can really make because the First Amendment is just there to keep the government from ruining, from taking away your free speech.
Your free speech rights do not disappear when the First Amendment disappears.
As Dershowitz pointed out himself on this show, it was a really good conversation.
Go back and look at it.
It was April 30th, I believe.
As he pointed out on the show, Alexander Hamilton didn't think there should be a Bill of Rights for the simple reason that any right that was not given to the government, any right that was not given to the government by the Constitution, this is what they mean by enumerated rights, any right that was not, any power that was not given to the government, the government didn't have.
And since the Constitution never mentioned speech, never mentioned that the government could control speech, there was no question whether or not the government could control speech.
They could not.
They could not do it because the Constitution is a positive document that tenders certain powers to the government.
And those powers it does not tender to the government, the government does not have.
That was Alexander Hamilton's argument.
Fortunately, fortunately, more far-sighted people prevailed and they wrote the Bill of Rights because once you give people power, they just assume they have all the power.
It's just impossible not to do that.
It is impossible for people to have power without wanting more and more power.
And the thing about this is, you know, I say this on Twitter all the time, and it's the left shows up and they're like the, you know how the monkeys go crazy at the zoo and they start screeching and throwing excrement through the cages?
That's what leftists are like on Twitter.
The minute I say this, there is no God, there is no God, you know, and you can't, no, no, these are private entities.
And if you can make Amazon carry a book, you know, like when Harry became Sally, they took down that book, meaning that subject will not be published.
That subject will not be discussed because Amazon sells most of the books in this country.
They think, well, if you can make them carry a book, then you can make the Colorado cake baker bake a cake for a gay wedding.
It's not the same thing.
It's not the same thing.
A small cake baker, local cake baker in Colorado is not the same thing as a multinational power, a multinational outfit with the power of a state.
You know, the left, again, used to know this when corporations were on the right side, when we had a manufacturing economy instead of an information economy, and manufacturing economy is responsible to reality, so they were more conservative.
And so corporations were more conservative.
You would hear the left talking about corporations all the time.
You still hear it in kind of throwbacks like Bernie Sanders or AOC, who's really kind of an old-fashioned communist.
You hear them talking, railing against the corporations.
But now that the corporations were in an information economy, so they're not responsible to reality because you can say anything you want without testing it against reality.
So now they're woke.
Suddenly the corporations are untouchable.
They're not untouchable.
They are a power center.
And power centers have to be controlled, have to be kept down so that the individual has the rights that are given to him by your old friend, Uncle God.
Without that creator in the Declaration, you cannot make the case for the freedoms we have.
It is that creator who gives us those freedoms.
And again, you don't have to believe in them, but if you want to be an American and you want to have those liberties and you want to argue for those liberties and for your equality, you have to at least stipulate.
You have to stipulate the creator.
You have to say he's there, even if in private, you ain't going to pray at all.
And somebody's eventually going to have to make that argument in a court of law because it's the only argument that ultimately will stand up.
It has been amazing flying recently because I was flying during the pandemic lockdown and it was kind of nice that planes were empty, the airports were empty.
Now they're packed.
A lot of us are going to be on the move again this summer.
The best thing you can do, take your Raycons when you travel.
A pair of Raycon wireless earbuds in your ears can make all the difference no matter what you're listening to.
You get crisp, powerful beats at half the price of other premium audio brands.
Raycons look great.
They feel even better.
They come in a range of cool colors and with customizable gel tips, which are really good for me because I don't get a comfortable fit without them.
And Raycons are built to go wherever you go with quick and seamless Bluetooth pairing and a compact charging case.
Raycon's offering 15% off all their products for my listeners.
Daniel Webster's Devil Deal00:15:28
And here's what you've got to do to get it.
Go to buyRaycon.
That's B-U-I-Raycon.com slash Clavin.
You'll get 15% off your entire Raycon order.
And it's such a good deal.
You want to grab a pair and a spare.
That's 15% off at buyraycon.com slash Clavin, buyraycon.com slash clavin.
But how do you spell Clavin?
You tap on the little thing.
Yep.
So I want to talk about one of the greatest American short stories ever written.
And if you're a political person and you don't care about the culture and you turn me off whenever I start talking about the culture, stay on.
Stay on this time because this is a really important point that essentially explodes everything that the left is saying about critical race theory and about what the right is trying to accomplish by stopping them teaching this poisonous garbage and racist garbage to our kids.
The name of this short story is The Devil and Daniel Webster.
And here are some important things you have to know about it.
This is by a guy named Stephen Vincent Bonet, very talented writer.
It was published in 1936 in the Saturday Evening Post.
Now, if you don't remember the Saturday Evening Post, I mean, even I don't really remember the Saturday Evening Post, but it was kind of America's magazine.
But, you know, Norman Rockwell's paintings would appear in the Saturday Evening Post, and it was a very American patriotic magazine.
So it was published in 1936.
It won the O'Henry Award, which was at the time the most prestigious award for a short story.
And it was taught to me in junior high school, and I would wager back in the day, it was taught to everybody in junior high school.
I would imagine you couldn't get out of junior high school without learning about or reading the devil and Daniel Webster.
He was a very talented writer.
He wrote a great spooky story.
If you're like me and you love spooky stories, he wrote a story called The King of the Cats, and this is a very spooky story.
He died very young in his 40s, Stephen Vincent Bonet, but he was given a posthumous Pulitzer, and he adapted, you know, the Rape of the Sabine Women, a famous myth.
He wrote the Rape of the Sabin women, and that was adapted after his death into the musical Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, which is Ben Shapiro's favorite musical, I think.
So this story is so famous, it has been mocked and satirized a million times.
The Simpsons had an episode about it where Homer sold his soul to the devil for a donut.
Just play a little bit of that.
It's funny.
I'd sell my soul for a doughnut.
Well, that can be arranged.
Thunders!
You're the devil!
It's always the one you least suspect.
Now, many people offer to sell their souls without reflecting upon the grave ramifications.
Do you have a donut or not?
Coming up, just sign here.
That was written by Conan O'Brien, who's one of the writers on a very funny episode of one of their Halloween episodes.
The Monkeys, nobody remembers the Monkeys, but that was a rock and roll show.
They had an episode with it.
Alec Baldwin and Anthony Hopkins made the remake of the movie, but that never got released because everything that Baldwin and Hopkins do together bombs in some way.
So I'm going to tell you the story.
And there'll be spoilers.
I won't give you the ending, but there will be spoilers, but it's worth listening to anyway.
And Daniel Webster, you have to know, was a great orator.
He was an American lawyer and statesman.
He was in the Congress.
He became Secretary of State.
He tried to become president, but he never did.
He was famous for his brilliant, brilliant oratory and his brilliant arguments in courts of law.
And he lost a lot of popularity when he supported the Compromise of 1850, which was to try and keep the 1850 right before the Civil War.
He was trying to keep the Union together.
And so he supported this compromise that had positions in it that made the slaveholders in the South angry at him, but also it had a fugitive slave law in it that made the abolitionists angry at him.
Some of them said that he had, in order to win the art of oratory, he had sold his soul to the devil, and now the devil had come to collect his soul.
He had lost his soul.
But a more charitable way of looking at it is he loved the union, and he was desperate to keep the union together, and he thought this compromise might do it.
And so that's the real character.
What Stephen Vincent Binet does is, I think maybe thinking about this idea that Daniel Webster had sold his soul to the devil, he turns him into a mythology.
So the story begins, yes, Daniel Webster's dead, or at least they buried him.
But every time there's a thunderstorm around Marshfield, they say you can hear his rolling voice in the hollows of the sky.
And they say that if you go to his grave and speak loud and clear, Daniel Webster, Daniel Webster, the ground will begin to shiver and the trees begin to shake.
And after a while, you'll hear a deep voice saying, neighbor, how stands the Union?
Then you better answer, the union stands as she stood, rock-bottomed and copper-sheathed, one and indivisible, or he's liable to rear right up out of the ground.
So you have this enormous character of Daniel Webster.
And of course, this is written in 1936, so it's long after Webster is gone.
The bulk of the story concerns a farmer named Jabez Stone who has no luck.
Everything goes wrong for him.
And one day he breaks his plow on a stone and he says, he's in a fit of fury.
He says, I vow it's enough to make a man want to sell his soul to the devil, and I would too for two cents.
Whereupon, of course, the devil hears him and shows up.
And here's the scene reimagined for the 1941 film of The Devil and Daniel Webster, on which Stephen Vincent Binet collaborated.
He helped write the script.
Here's the devil trying to convince Daniel Webster, convince Jabez Stone, I'm sorry, to sell his soul.
When I think of your opportunities, my opportunities.
Why, then, you have one of the richest farms in the country.
You just go about it the wrong way.
So many men do.
Hard work.
That's all right for people who don't know how to do anything else.
It's all right for people who aren't lucky.
But once you're lucky, you don't have to work for other people.
You make them work for you.
Well, mister, that sounds all right.
But how do I go about it?
Clever man like yourself, he can find money anywhere.
Money to pay his bills, money for his wife and children, money enough to be a rich man.
All he needs is a friend to point it out to him.
Like this.
And all these gold coins come out of the floor.
So Jabez sells his soul to the devil for seven years.
And after seven years, the devil shows up to collect.
And there's this very spooky, really well-written scene where the whole story is just beautifully written, where the devil is talking to him and reading the contract and all this.
And he's carrying what's called a Japaned box, which is a varnished box.
And a moth escapes.
And the moth flies around.
And Jabez Stone hears one of his neighbors shouting from the moth, shouting, help me, help me.
And it's the soul of one of his neighbors who he thought was alive.
And here, once again, I'll just show you one more scene from the film is that scene.
You promised me happiness, love.
French, just a minute.
I promised you money and all that money could buy.
I don't recall any other obligations.
But, well, let's look at the contract, huh?
Sherwood Slatterly Stevens.
I can cross him off there.
Certainly, Stevens.
She's an old customer.
Stephen's voice.
Miser Stephen's soul.
I'm sorry for the disturbance.
It can't be.
He's in there dancing.
He was.
He was.
He's not dancing anymore.
So Jabez wins a little more time.
He convinces the devil to give him a little more time and he runs to get Daniel Webster to defend him.
And Webster comes over, and of course, he's ready to take on the devil in argument.
But the argument, the devil has the contract on his side.
And he says, at first, the story says, at first, Jabez Stone had a flicker of hope, but when he saw Daniel Webster being forced back at point after point, he just sat scrunched in his corner with his eyes on that Japaned box, right?
He's in terror.
All right, we've made a lot of noise on this show the past couple of weeks about being an alpha male.
There's one simple trick that will do it for you.
Just say rockauto.com, especially if you need a part for your car.
When the ladies hear you say rockauto.com in that voice, ah, they will fall over because they'll know that you're not the kind of guy who has a broken car and walks slowly down to the car park store to talk to someone who knows no more about cars than you do when you could just use rockauto.com and get everything you need off your computer at a great price.
Rockauto.com is a family business serving auto parts customers online for 20 years.
So go to rockauto.com to shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.
The catalog is unique.
It's really easy to use, and you will quickly see all the parts available for your vehicle and choose the brand specifications and prices you prefer while you're fighting off the ladies, because they'll be all over you when you go to rockauto.com right now and see all the parts available for your car or truck.
Write Clavin.
You got to say it the same way.
If you want to keep the girls' interests, write Clavin in there.
How did you hear about us box so they know we sent you and spell it the same way?
K-L-A-V-A-N.
That's the only way it works.
So finally, Daniel Webster comes up with this argument.
And listen to this very closely, all right?
He's talking to the devil.
He's talking to the old Scratch, as they call him.
And Daniel Webster says, Mr. Stone is an American citizen, and no American citizen may be forced into the service of a foreign prince.
We fought England for that in 1812 and will fight all hell for it again.
And the devil says, Foreign, who calls me a foreigner?
And Webster says, Well, I never yet heard of the devil of your claiming American citizenship.
And here's what the devil says: He says, Who has better right to claim American citizenship?
When the first wrong was done to the first Indian, I was there.
When the first slaver put out for the Congo, I stood on her deck.
Am I not in your books and stories and beliefs from the first settlements on?
Am I not spoken of still in every church in New England?
Tis true, the North claims me for a Southerner and the South for a Northerner, but I am neither.
I am merely an honest American like yourself and of the best descent.
For to tell the truth, Mr. Webster, though I don't like to boast of it, my name is older in this country than yours.
So the devil says he's been in America all the time, the way they treated the Indians, he was part of that, the way the slavers came in.
So it was a complicated idea.
You know, this idea that we've never confronted our evil.
This is a story in the Saturday Evening Post written in 1936, won all kinds of wars made into movies, made into an opera, parodied in all this.
And the idea that America has had the devil in it from the beginning is right there on the page.
So Webster's smart, and he says, if the devil is an American, right, then he has to give Jabez a trial.
And whereupon the door opens, and in come 12 American and British sinners, and even an Indian sinner, I think, and a judge out of hell, right?
These are historical figures who are deemed evil for one reason or another, and they form the jury that is going to judge whether Jabez Stone has to surrender his soul.
One of them is a guy named Walter Butler, who was a loyalist.
He was a Tory who fought for the British in the American Revolution and who had a raid in New York on a place called Cherry Valley where the Seneca Indians tortured and murdered women and children.
So this is what Walter Butler is.
So the Indians appear both as being mistreated, but also as being dangerous savages, right?
So there's a very complex idea of the Indians.
Oh, they weren't saints.
Just because the Americans mistreated them didn't make them saints, but also they had this other side to them.
It's a complex depiction, and the judge is Judge Hawthorne, who presided at the Salem witch trials.
Now, here's the description of the trial: Webster had faced some hard juries and hanging judges in his time, but this was the hardest he'd ever faced, and he knew it.
They sat there with a kind of glitter in their eyes, and the stranger's smooth voice, the stranger's the devil, the stranger's smooth voice went on and on.
Every time he'd raise an objection, it'd be objection sustained.
But whenever Daniel objected, it'd be objection denied.
Well, you couldn't expect fair play from a fellow like this, Mr. Scratch.
It got to Daniel in the end, and he began to heat like iron in the forge.
When he got up to speak, he was going to flay that stranger with every trick known to the law, and the judge and jury too.
He didn't care if it was contempt of court or what would happen to him for it.
He didn't care anymore what happened to Jabez Stone.
He just got madder and madder thinking of what he'd say till finally it was time for him to get up on his feet and he did so all ready to bust out with lightnings and denunciations.
But before he started, he looked over the judge and jury for a moment, such being his custom, and he noticed the glitter in their eyes was twice as strong as before and they had all leaned forward.
Then he saw what he'd been about to do and he wiped his forehead as a man might who just escaped falling into a pit in the dark.
For it was him they'd come for, not only Jabez Stone.
If he'd fought them with their own weapons, he'd fall into their power.
He knew that, though he couldn't have told you how.
In other words, if he succumbs to the hate and the lies of the devil, he will become damned himself.
And that's what the devil wants.
He wants the great man, not just this little farmer.
So instead, he makes a different kind of defense speech.
And I can barely read this without breaking up.
It's such a moving speech.
But here's what he says.
Instead, he makes this speech to the jury.
He didn't start out by condemning or reviling.
He was talking about the things that make a country a country and a man a man.
And he began with the simple things that everybody's known and felt.
The freshness of a fine morning when you're young and the taste of food when you're hungry and the new day that's every day when you're a child.
He took them up and he turned them in his hands.
They were good things for any man, but without freedom, they sickened.
And when he talked of those enslaved and the sorrows of slavery, his voice got like a big bell.
He admitted all the wrong that had ever been done, but he showed how, out of the wrong and the right, the suffering and the starvations, something new had come, and everybody had played a part in it, even the traitors.
You see, these people who claim that without critical race theory, we're not going to teach the history of America, that we've never heard before about the evils of slavery, they're lying to you.
Here's Jamie Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers, who's just been lying about this from the beginning.
She's sitting with Chris Cuomo and she lies about what the right is trying to accomplish.
Here's what she says.
The fear is, is that teachers will be so bullied and so disparaged, we've seen that already and threatened, that they'll stop teaching about the Civil War, the 13th, 14th, 15th Amendment, anything to do with the, you know, the issues around race, discrimination, bigotry, and things like that.
It's a lie.
It's just a lie.
This story was written in 1936, won the O'Henry Award, was made into a movie twice, has been parodied and mocked and just was such a classic.
Black Lives Antithetical to Scripture?00:14:59
I don't think they teach it anymore.
It was such a classic that everybody knew it.
Everybody knew the devil in Daniel Webster when I was a kid was just a phrase that people would use.
We've been teaching the flaws and the problems and the sufferings and the evil of America forever.
We always knew there was good and bad here.
But out of the good and bad, a new thing has come.
And that's what all critical theory doesn't want to see, that in our flaws and our sinfulness, in our wars and our slaveries, in our betrayals of our own ideals, we have brought forth on this continent a new nation with a new idea, a kind of freedom that has never been seen before.
And that's what they're trying to take away, because they have this idea that they have moral standing, they have expertise, they have a kind of intelligence and an insight to see better than we can see ourselves and to teach our children what we don't want to teach them.
It's a lie.
It's been a lie from the beginning.
And I think this story is proof of that lie.
So my birthday is coming up.
And if you want to give me a truly meaningful gift, this Tuesday, I think, is my birthday.
I'm 172 years old.
If you want to give a truly meaningful gift to me, you might want to go to paintyourlife.com and get a professional hand-painted portrait of me from several different angles.
You can create that from any photo at a truly affordable price.
Or maybe you want to give it to somebody you actually know and love and something that they will value.
You can choose from a team of world-class artists and work with them until every detail is perfect.
User-friendly platform lets you order a custom-made hand-painted portrait in less than five minutes.
I actually tried this with a picture of myself, and it did come back, and it was great.
You can send any picture, anything you want, yourself, your children, family, a special place, or me.
I think that would probably be the best idea.
Combine photos into one painting.
It makes a perfect birthday gift.
And like I said, my birthday is coming up, so you want to get on it right away.
At paintyourlife.com, there's no risk.
If you don't love the final painting, your money's refunded, guaranteed.
And right now, as a limited time offer, you can get 20% off your painting, 20% off, and free shipping.
To get this offer, text the word Andrew to 64,000.
That's Andrew to 64,000.
Text Andrew to 64,000.
Paint your life, celebrate the moments that matter most.
Terms apply.
Available at paintyourlife.com slash terms.
Again, text Andrew to 64,000.
Some bow to political correctness and some write entire books exposing its evil roots to help Americans stop its spread.
Michael Knowles is the latter.
The book is called Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Minds.
And if you haven't picked up a copy, I want you to buy this book.
Go out and buy this book right away.
The book takes you through the origins of political correctness and why it's absolutely essential that we stand up and fight its insidious spread into every public institution in America.
Because if we don't, the consequences are waiting for us and our children in the not-so-faraway future.
And if you don't know where to start, don't worry in the book.
Knowles gives you the tools you need to understand and spot political correctness in order to stop it.
This book is the number one nonfiction bestseller in the country everywhere but in the New York Times.
The New York Times' number one bestseller sold 6,864 copies.
Speechless sold 6,573.
Still didn't make the list.
So if you don't know the history and relevance of political correctness already, you're about to.
Just do everyone a favor and go out and buy this book.
Buy this book.
Also, Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Minds is available everywhere right now.
And if you don't feel like making a trip, it's available on Amazon and hardcover and Kindle Edition.
So you have no excuse not to buy this book.
So as you know, I'm in the long, long process of moving house.
And one of the first things I did when I got to the new city I am in was look for a church.
And the minute I saw on a church a Black Lives Matter banner or a gay pride banner, or even the word diversity in their advertisements, I passed over that church.
And mostly it's obviously it's not because I don't love and support my fellow Americans who are black.
And I love my many gay friends and my gay son, who, you know, is as close to my heart as it's possible to be.
But just on instinct, I felt that anytime a church is supporting the ideas of every corporation, Hollywood, all the media, the government, and the academy, it's basically not being distinct from the world.
And there's something wrong with this.
It's just almost an instinct.
So I wanted to talk to Owen Strand, Dr. Owen Strand.
He's the provost and research professor of theology at Grace Bible Theological Seminary and Senior Fellow with the Family Research Council.
And he has a new book called Christianity and Wokeness, how the social justice movement is hijacking the gospel and the way to stop it.
And his name is spelled S-T-R-A-C-H-A-N.
If you go online to find the book.
Dr. Strand, thank you for coming on.
I appreciate it.
Thank you so much, sir.
Thank you for having me on.
So a fascinating book.
I've just got it yesterday, and so I'm making my way through it.
But before we start to talk about why wokeness and Christianity are antithetical to one another, how did wokeness get such a hold on the church?
How did it take over?
That's a good question.
I think it's partly because Christians want to be seen as against racism.
Of course, there's a checkered past when it comes to the American church and slavery and complicity and Jim Crow and such matters.
And so I think the current generation, the younger generation, is tempted to think that if it's anti-racist, if it frames its arguments that way, then the church must be for it.
In addition, I think you have a generation today that often takes its cues from a secular culture.
So if the elite left is platforming an issue, then that is a matter that the Christian church, especially younger types who want to promote a kind of reasonable, palatable Christianity, take very seriously.
I think you take those two matters, you take the postmodernification of America and the church more broadly, and you recognize that you've got a pretty potent brew that evangelicals are sadly taking in and thinking that if they become woke, if they drink this Kool-Aid, then they are effectively anti-racist in a biblical way.
But in reality, Andrew, the two worldviews are completely at odds.
Yeah, it's very, it's very dispiriting to see the church take on the ideas of the world.
I noticed the foreword of your book, Christianity and Wokeness the Forge, is written by John MacArthur, who's also been a guest on the show, writes terrific biblical commentary and is one of the few people who kept his church open, no matter how hard LA tried to shut it down, and they tried pretty hard.
So you have a very extensive explanation and a very specific explanation of why woke is not Christian, of the way it actually betrays Christian ideas.
I want to go through some of these.
I won't have time to go through all of them, but you say wokeness tweaks the doctrine of humanity, losing sight of the Imago Day, the image of God, as our constituent identity.
Can you explain that?
Yeah, in wokeness, basically, white people are effectively white supremacists.
That's according to the tenets of critical race theory, which is the formal ideology that drives the informal mentality or even the mood that wokeness represents.
So per critical race theory, if you're a white person, you're basically a white supremacist.
That's not because you have done actions or said words along those lines.
It's because whiteness is the oppressive power structure.
And I'm speaking here in Marxist terms that dominates people of color.
So that compromises the doctrine of the Imago Day, that every person has inherent dignity and worth.
Wokeness tells us, no, if you're white, basically you don't have that dignity and worth.
You're a worse pig than some other pigs, to quote Animal Farm.
I mean, it does strike me when I see these Black Lives Matter banners on churches, and there are a lot of them in the town I'm moving into.
I can't help thinking that Christianity is actually above the concept of race, that there's something that when Paul says there's no Greek or Jew in Christ, he basically is erasing the whole concept and they're bringing it back again.
Yeah, I think that's right.
I think fundamentally race is not an idea that is grounded in scripture.
The idea that if you have a certain skin color, then you're a different slice of humanity than somebody who doesn't have that skin color.
In reality, we're all made in the image of God.
We have all fallen in Adam per his real historical fall in the Garden of Eden, Genesis 3.
And the way everything can be made right is not by hating your skin color.
It's not by confessing your white privilege.
It's not by feeling guilty for 18 and a half hours out of every day per the tenets of the liberal handbook.
The way forward is to know Jesus Christ as your savior and recognize that in Christ, as you said, Galatians 3, we're not to divide along any fundamental marker of human identity.
We're Christians.
We're saved by Jesus Christ.
And that is the most important reality about us.
But wokeness tells us no.
And this is why it's so pernicious for the church.
You Christians who think you have unity in Jesus, actually, you need to recognize that white Christians hate black Christians by nature in a lot of cases.
And so this is poisoning the unity that we already have in Christ.
Now, it's funny when Eric Metaxas and I first met, Eric's a Greek and I'm a Jew.
And he said, wow, it really is true.
There is no Greek or Jew in Jesus Christ.
You say wokeness gives approval to evil.
Now, that's a very big statement.
What does that mean?
Well, it approves of basically the broader LGBT agenda.
So, for example, the woke mentality works hand in glove with what is called an intersectionality framework so that you see those who have do not have access to power in different groups, for example, sexual minorities, as those who have been oppressed by those in the sexual majority.
So, a person who's in the sexual minority, that means that they effectively have this kind of quasi-righteous status.
And if you embrace those tenets of woke ideology, you're going to recognize that you're being handed a fundamentally different morality than scripture gives you.
So, a lot of what the Bible says is good, wokeness calls bad.
And a lot of what wokeness calls bad, the Bible calls good.
Could you explain that a little more, a little more specifically?
Where do they do that?
What do they do?
What do they call good that is bad, specifically in the book?
Well, they call sexual identity, for example, homosexuality, as something that is fundamentally good.
They call transgenderism good.
They call perverse and deviant behavior because it's the behavior of a sexual minority, basically virtuous behavior that we should affirm.
And that's where you recognize when you go to something like the platform of Black Lives Matter, it's been scrubbed in recent months.
But before it was, it was marching hand in glove with this kind of vision of racial unity and racial equity.
So, wokeness is not just about race.
People sometimes think it is.
People think critical race theory, it's really coming down the pike at us on the matter of race.
It is, but it's also seeking a whole-scale transformation of the social order per the tenets of Marxist social justice, such that anyone who is oppressed by the majority and by the norm needs to be unseated.
And those who have been oppressed, those whose behavior has been labeled sinful, as in the case of those I was mentioning a minute ago, they need to be elevated and basically treated as a virtuous cause.
And that causes major problems for the Christian worldview.
You know, we've talked before of how this took over and the guilt that Christians feel or the Christian church feels over its spotty record in racial matters and all this.
But as you pointed out, Black Lives Matter, which has to be one of the cleverest names for a Marxist organization ever, Black Lives Matter had a website on which they said we want to destroy the family.
We want to destroy the heterosexual heteronormativity.
The leaders have said they are trained Marxists, which is antithetical to Christian thought.
I mean, Marx is a materialist ideology.
How did they miss that?
How did, I mean, I don't go to these meetings, these church group meetings where they debate these things, but how did they miss that little clue that maybe they were signing on to something that wasn't their friend?
That is a great question, Andrew.
And basically, in recent years, there's been a lot of movement from different outside groups pressuring Christianity and Christians, especially younger Christians, to think that they can merge Christianity with some kind of behavior like transgenderism or homosexuality.
So you can have a kind of third way.
It's even called that.
So, okay, no, we shouldn't be all the way bought into transgenderism as an identity, but you can merge that with Christianity and you can sand off the bad parts and bring in the good parts of Christianity.
And you can basically embrace an orientation that is antithetical to scripture, someone like me would say.
In the same way, there's been this pressure in recent years to bring in Black Lives Matter and to say, well, because all lives do matter as Christians, and indeed they do, we can merge Christianity with a Black Lives Matter kind of approach.
And what someone like me is here to say is, no, we have to reject these ideologies because not just because they corrupt Christianity, which they do, but because ideologies seek to take us over and they will.
And what they will end up doing is corrupting the host.
You won't end up with a blended Christianity that is a kind of compromised racial Christianity.
You will end up with a Black Lives Matter worldview that ultimately denies God, denies his creation order, denies the goodness of the family, denies the goodness of all identities that have ethnicity.
And so you're going to end up losing your Christianity in the end.
It's not a bargain that's going to play out well for you.
You know, I get a lot of letters from people who can't find churches.
And one of the themes that is constantly coming up is that the church seems to have lost faith in the faith.
They seem when you close down because the state tells you to close down.
I mean, I was appalled that John MacArthur was the only guy who kept his church open in LA.
I mean, he was one of the only people who kept his church open.
Has the church lost its faith in Jesus Christ?
God's Open Space00:15:38
I mean, do they no longer believe that they are on to some good thing that is above the world, beyond the world?
Is that, I mean, when you talk to the people in charge of these organizations, do they no longer speak in supernatural terms?
I think the supernaturalness of Christianity, the uniqueness, the apartness of the Christian faith, if I can use that word, is in grave danger of being lost today.
I think you're right on the money.
I think a lot of Christians have come of age in a very prosperous time when it hasn't been that hard to be a Christian.
And they want to preserve that status going forward.
And so they think if they can make some minor adjustments and maybe embrace this and sand this down and bring it in a little bit, that the Christian faith will continue to win an audience.
Part of this motive, Andrew, is evangelistic and apologetic, meaning I think there's a fair number of churches out there, often large churches, that actually are trying to present a palatable Christianity because they think they're doing unbelievers a favor.
They think they're taking off all the extremist parts of the Christian faith and leaving this lovely pulsing core of gentleness and niceness and acceptance.
And in reality, what you do when you make those moves is you end up with nicified spiritualized humanism.
You don't end up with atoning Christianity, with Jesus dying on the cross for sinners, with the apostles of the New Testament laying down their lives to promote the Christian faith.
You end up with a nicified spirituality that I fear is far more common than we might think today.
It's almost as if it's like a demonic trick almost that Christianity has so transformed Western culture that now Western culture says, oh, we are better than the Christianity that formed us.
So you can come back into the world now, but it's a trick, as they say.
It is.
You say that the gospel can be summed up as God's sin and redemption, and CRT redefines each of those three characters.
Critical race theory redefines God's sin and redemption.
Can you explain that?
Yeah, critical race theory basically makes God a God who is trying to make society a happier, more just place.
It changes the biblical God who is a God of divine justice and who holds all to account and who will send sinners to everlasting damnation to a God who basically is all about making this world a nicer place and making it more equitable.
That changes, when you change God, that changes sin.
Sin is now about basically being white and being a structuralist oppressor.
And redemption, therefore, is changed into this worldly efforts at making our public order a more equitable place.
Basically, what is happening today, Andrew, is that the social gospel, so-called, of 100 years ago that swept across Baptist and Presbyterian churches, predominantly in the North, is back with a vengeance.
It has a different branding.
It has a different set of core concerns.
But suffice it to say that the social gospel is once again in danger of displacing the biblical gospel of eternal salvation.
The stakes are that high.
And what is ultimately happening is that we are getting a reduced version of God in all of this, a God who is basically just concerned with this world.
That's the God of social justice.
That's the God of the social gospel.
And Christians today, as I say in this book, Christianity and Wokeness, need to reject this revised theology, or else we're going to lose not only our faith, we're going to lose God himself.
You know, I've become convinced that there's simply no way that this republic can continue to be a republic and continue to bring the founders' ideas into reality if we don't have some sort of religious revival.
So you're talking about something, a real poison in the church, I think, poison that in some ways, in some ways, the social justice part of it is almost just a symptom of a deeper underlying sickness, of a loss of true faith, of faith in the actual religion.
How do we begin to move this in another direction?
I think we do two things.
I think we expose the lies of this fallacious worldview.
In truth, it's not a worldview at all.
In truth, it's not going to bring justice at all.
It doesn't solve racism in the least.
It actually, as anecdotes are showing, when it's introduced into school classrooms, for example, it trains young people who did not formerly segregate according to race to do just that.
So first, I think we need to simply unmask this ideology, show that it is neo-Marxism, that this is just old Karl Marx, God hating Marx, creation order hating Marx up to his tricks again, 150 years after the Communist Manifesto.
Engels, of course, did all the real heavy lifting there.
But basically, Marx set people at each other's throats by teaching them that if you had money, you were an oppressor.
And if you didn't have money, you were an oppressed person.
That conceptual pairing of oppressor, oppressed, is very much what CRT and wokeness uses today.
And so if we unmask that, as my book, Christianity and Wokeness, tries to do, then people will be set up to see that this isn't pure love and light unleashed in society.
This is just Marxism, which is the idea, the body of ideas that is most responsible for human suffering in the last 150 years of any ideology.
Secondly, we promote the gospel.
You and I have been talking about it.
We preach that there is one new man, one body, one family through faith in the crucified and resurrected Christ.
That is the only way ultimately to know unity.
And so that's the good news.
Wherever you find one of those sound local churches you've been looking for, I assume in Tennessee, then you have found a place that celebrates, okay, you may have a different background than I may have.
We may have nothing in common, but we have Jesus in common.
And that actually makes us brothers and sisters in Christ.
We promote that secondly.
You know, I saw just before I came on the air, I saw you that I believe it was you sent out a tweet basically warning the churches that real trouble is coming, which was not an optimistic tweet.
Are you not optimistic that this can be turned around?
Do you think real disaster, day of wrath is coming?
So what I said is I think we should not retreat.
I don't want us to head for the hills into cloisters, but I do think we should prepare for winter because I do think if this kind of ideology succeeds in mainstreaming as it currently is, then it will set people at odds against one another.
The dark summer we saw a year ago where America burned and basically nobody stopped it will resume.
People will be trained to despise one another, hate authority, work against creation order, mainstream depravity and perversion.
And we have to recognize that, yes, we're called as Christians to be salt and light, Matthew 5, in the public square, as much as we can in our communities, in our neighborhoods.
We also, though, have to recognize that we have no guarantee that this order, this civilization is going to hold.
And so I'm not saying opt out.
I'm saying get ready.
Have a plan.
Build into Christian institutions, beginning with the local church, such that the people of God have support and have hope and have help.
Because if things continue to play out the way they are, we need to, at the very least, get ready for the collapse of civilization.
That book is Christianity and Wokeness, How the Social Justice Movement is Hijacking the Gospel and the Way to Stop It by Owen Strand.
And it's spelled S-T-R-A-C-H-A-N.
If you're looking for it on Amazon or Barnes ⁇ Noble, Christianity and Wokeness.
Dr. Strand, thank you very much for coming on.
It was really interesting.
I hope you'll come back and talk again.
Thank you so much for having me.
Appreciate it.
Thanks.
All right.
All good things must come to an end and all bad things must come to an end because everything comes to an end.
And now it's time for your problems to come to an end because it's the mailbag.
Did you try to extort Nike for millions of dollars?
No, and any suggestion is absolutely absurd.
Yeah!
It's avenati, I guess.
All right.
From Mike.
K. Drew, your thoughts on Bo Burnham on your show last week.
Move me when you said you felt the connection since he's around the age when you contemplated suicide.
You mentioned that he seems lost in endless analysis.
I'm now at that age too and feel stuck in that analytical cycle.
I overanalyze everything and I've had my own run-ins with suicidal tendencies in my earlier years.
My subsequent belief in Jesus changed my heart towards suicide, but I haven't been able to overcome the over-analytical side of me, even though I now do believe in God.
Do you have any advice on how to overcome this?
Well, I'm really glad you asked this question because the question of change and how to change, all of us have something, you know, always that we're trying to change.
And I think the question of change is a really good one, especially in relationship to God.
And I think the important thing to know is that you don't change yourself.
God changes you.
If you are praying and you should be praying every day, and I always recommend that you go somewhere private and speak out loud so that you will form full sentences and your mind won't trail off.
But if you're speaking full sentences, you will have a better chance of hearing yourself and understanding what God's response is to what you said.
And I think that that's really an important thing.
And so if you're praying every day, God will change you.
But the way he changes you, I have found in my experience, is that he opens a space in front of you for you to step into.
And you have to step into that space.
And as you step into that space, you change and he opens up a space in front of you.
So when you're talking about, for instance, over-analysis, and over-analysis has a theological, has a philosophical underpinning if you don't believe in God.
If you don't believe in God, there is no wholeness.
There's no wholeness without God.
So everything can be broken down and you think you're being wise and to a certain point that's true and then it stops.
It's as if you gave your car to a mechanic and said, could you fix this?
And you came back and he said, yep, everything is great now.
And all there were were bolts and nuts and pieces and parts.
He just overanalyzed the thing and took it apart.
The point of analyzing something is to fix it so that you can be in the wholeness of it, so you can drive the car.
Because it's the experience of driving the car, the getting from one place to another, the wind in your hair when you put the top down, all those things, that's what the car is all about.
It is not about all the little pieces, right?
The little pieces go in to form a bigger thing.
And the same is true with philosophy.
The same is true with your life.
You are trying to get to a wholeness that allows you to grow and move forward.
So what I would say is I would bet that the very fact that you are complaining about this, the very fact that you know this has happened, God has opened that space in front of you and now you have to step into it.
And how do you do that?
You do it by actually exercising your mind.
C.S. Lewis talks about this.
He says, sometimes you may feel that you are just pretending to be a Christian, but by pretending you're actually rehearsing and God will eventually make you into the thing that you pretend to be.
And that's true whether you're pretending to be a bad guy or you're pretending to be a good guy.
So in this, you know, you might try to focus a little bit.
You know, spend 10 minutes a day, seriously.
I mean, it really can start with something as simple as that.
Spend a couple of minutes a day focusing on the wholeness of things, on what it is you are analyzing.
What did you take apart?
What's the car?
You've got all the pieces in your mind, but what's the car?
What's the big thing that you're trying to live out?
And focusing on that for a couple of minutes, experiencing that for a couple of minutes.
Because wherever your joy comes from, and wherever your joy comes from, it comes through love.
You love the wholeness of the thing.
I mean, if it's a small thing you love, like I love to do certain kinds of puzzles, then you'll get a small amount of joy.
If it's a big thing you love, like another person or like God, then you will get bigger joy, enormous joy, even infinite joy.
And you want to think about the wholeness of that thing.
And so use your mind.
Use your head.
Don't think that you don't have to do any work.
God opens the space, but he expects you to walk into it.
You know, God opens a space for you to give up porn or alcohol or drugs, but you have to make that gesture where you step into the space he opened up.
And the same is true with this.
So put your mind to it.
Put your mind to concentrating on the wholeness of the thing that you're thinking about and why you love it and why it's beautiful and why it's good or not good or why it's ugly.
And just experience that for a minute.
Use a little Zen focus and focus on just the actual thing itself and see how that works and let me know.
Get back and let me know.
Here's a very, just a very, very sad one.
And I have to warn you, a man named George says, my wife and I just suffered the loss of our two-year-old son, our firstborn amazing brother to his one-year-old sister, and we have another boy due at the end of August.
Well, I've been searching for God to help me through these difficult times.
My wife, who's normally a very faithful Christian, is struggling with anger towards God for taking our little boy.
How can I try to help her renew her faith in these difficult times?
And what advice can you give us for coping with the bittersweet coming of our new baby boy in the middle of grieving the loss of our first?
How can we cope with the inevitable feeling of guilt that comes with loving our youngest son as we share his brother's toys room and close with him by preparing for his arrival into our family?
It makes us feel as though we're replacing our firstborn son.
As per your advice, we are seeking counseling, but would also like your input.
You really should, because very many families founder on this.
Listen, George, the worst thing that can happen to a person has happened to you.
The worst thing that can happen in life to lose a child has happened to you.
There is no words that I can speak that are going to alleviate your grief, your wife's anger.
And there is absolutely nothing wrong with being angry with God.
God didn't take your son, but he invented a world.
He created a world in which that was a possible outcome, and that was a thing that could happen.
And there's no reason not to be angry about that.
There's no reason not to be angry with the brokenness of the world.
There's no reason not to be angry with your loss.
And you should bring that anger to God.
You know, I mean, he's going to know what to do with it certainly better than I do, and certainly better than a counselor will.
You should bring that anger to God.
But the one thing I want to say that I can point out, because I can't make it better.
It's a tragic thing, and it's going to be with you forever.
And it's going to, the only thing that is going to lead you back into joy is one time.
As I always say, grief is a desert that has to be crossed on foot.
It's not going to get better in your time.
It's going to get better in God's time.
And what you want as you cross that desert to continue that metaphor, what you want is to follow God as your star out of the desert.
So when you come out, you come out as a deeper, richer person of more compassion.
And the sorrow that's in you informs your joy.
And that sounds like a contradiction, but it's not.
Sorrow and grief can inform your joy and make it deeper, richer, and more substantial than it was when you were shallow because you hadn't experienced this terrible thing.
But the one thing that I noticed in this letter that maybe something that I can add is that you talk about how you can help your wife renew her faith.
New Hope in Grief00:03:51
Your wife, that's not what your wife needs.
What your wife needs is for you to grieve with her.
She needs to see that you too are suffering, that you're together in this suffering, that you are not above her, you're not wiser than she is.
You're not at a different place, at a better stage because you're not angry with God.
And she is.
You are both in a state of loss, and you have to go into your grief and let it be.
Let it be.
Let it exist.
Look, I know grief, you know, and it's a terrible thing.
It is a terrible, terrible thing.
It's like being, you think you're in a brick outhouse.
You think you're in a brick enclosed space that you can't get out of, but you can.
And you keep walking and you keep moving.
And there is another place for you to get to.
And God has a place that He is leading you to.
But don't be afraid to grieve with your wife.
Don't be afraid to just be with your wife.
You don't have to help her.
You just have to be with her in this terrible moment.
And be ready to open your heart and love to this new child.
This new child is not replacing the other child.
The other child is with God.
But this new child needs your love, your full and complete and utter love and had nothing to do.
You know, he has nothing to do with this death.
And he's not replacing anybody.
He's a new thing, a new thing that is coming out of this tough, difficult world that we live in with its tragedies.
And God love you.
I hope you move forward.
My heart breaks for you.
Well, let us end on a higher note with this video from Paul, I think his name is.
This is the video we got.
Lord Claven, this is your arch nemesis, Lord Navalk.
I have kidnapped your colleague Michael Knowles, which I understand is an enormous blessing to you.
However, I will be sending him back to you unless you transfer me $100 million worth of cryptocurrency by Saturday, no later than around lunchtime.
Once the transfer is complete, I will wipe Michael's memory and set him free in Eastern Canada.
Unless you send another $2,000 or $3,000, it can be anywhere in the world.
I'll just need enough to cover flights.
Thank you for your time, Lord Claven.
Do not mess this up.
And I hope to hear from you soon.
Why on earth would I want him to release Michael Knowles?
He says my deadline is Saturday, but I'm going to have to think about that for a couple of weeks.
Meanwhile, the Clavenless Week is here.
There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
It's going to get very noisy.
It's going to hurt because that gnashing of teeth ruins your jaw.
You're probably not going to make it to next week, but if you do, I will be here.
This is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I am Andrew Cleveland.
Hey, if you enjoyed this episode and want to spread the word, give us a five-star review and tell your friends to subscribe too.
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 Falash.
The Andrew Clavin Show is a Daily Wire production, Copyright Daily Wire, 2021.
The Wall Street Journal publishes an article asking us to feel sympathy for Ivy League grad students who are drowning in six-figure debt.
Also, former media darling Michael Avenatti gets his prison sentence, and Rand Paul looks to revoke the federal mask mandate on airplanes finally.
Also, Scarlett Johansson believes she is underappreciated and underpaid.