All Episodes
Previous Next
June 11, 2021 - The Michael Knowles Show
50:35
Ep. 783 - The Whiteness Epidemic

A major medical journal calls whiteness a disease in search of “a permanent cure,” another major anti-Trump narrative falls apart, and Kamala flops down South. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
A major medical journal published a peer-reviewed research article last month on an urgent disease that scientists say we need to stop.
I'm not talking about the Wu flu, the Kung flu, the lung passed second.
Not that.
I am talking, I kid you not, about whiteness, which the author, Dr.
Donald Moss, describes as parasitic and for which he hopes to find a, quote, permanent cure.
Ugh.
A major anti-Trump narrative falls apart.
Kamala Harris' propaganda falls flat in Guatemala.
We do not have the cure to whiteness on this show, but we do have the cure to fake news.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is the Michael Noll Show.
My favorite comment yesterday from Jorge Felipe Gonzalez, who says, Oh, the nightmares I would have had as a kid with that weirdo singing on a kid's show.
Talking about the drag queen singing about how little boys are little girls on Nickelodeon.
Yes, one could have nightmares.
I mean, that truly...
Very obviously that dude is dressed up like a clown, right?
He's dressed up like a clown in a way where he's pretending to be a real thing, unlike a clown which is just pretending to be some sort of silly fictional character.
The thing that scares me about it, though, is the children who wouldn't be scared.
You know, the children who will look at this and say, oh, look, it's colorful.
Oh, the tune is catchy.
Oh, it's just another sort of clown.
And who will imbibe this kind of insane ideology.
Because that is the point.
That's why they're going after all of the kids' shows.
Sometimes you've got to tune that out.
And when you want to tune in, once you've tuned that out, you've got to check out your Raycons.
A pair of Raycon wireless earbuds in your ears can make all the difference no matter what you're listening to.
Maybe you're listening to music.
That's cool.
Maybe you're listening to a great new audio book called Speechless Controlling Words, Controlling Minds.
Maybe you're listening to your favorite podcast.
You will get crisp, powerful beats at half the price of the other premium audio brands.
I'm going to try to be diplomatic when I say this.
Raycons, it's just a superior product to the other versions of this on the market.
Okay, and at a much better price.
And Raycons look great and they feel even better.
They come in a range of cool colors with customizable gel tips included for a comfortable in-ear fit.
Raycons are built to go wherever you go with quick and seamless Bluetooth pairing and a compact charging case.
I cannot urge you strongly enough, go get Raycons right now.
Some good audio is really going to amplify your experience, get you out there and moving.
Right now, Raycon's offering 15% off all their products for my listeners.
What you've got to do is go to buyraycon.com slash Knowles.
There you will get 15% off your entire Raycon order.
Such a good deal, you're going to want to buy a pair and a spare.
That is 15% off at buyraycon.com slash Knowles.
Buyraycon.com slash Knowles.
Whiteness as a parasitic product.
A disease for which we must find a permanent cure.
What's another term for permanent cure?
You might say permanent cure would be like a final solution.
How do you cure whiteness?
How do you cure it?
Well, there's only one way to do that, and it's pretty ghastly.
This is what this doctor, Donald Moss, says in the article on having whiteness.
Quote, Parasitic whiteness renders its host's appetites voracious, insatiable, and perverse.
These deformed appetites particularly target non-white peoples.
Once established, these appetites are nearly impossible to eliminate.
Effective treatment consists of a combination of psychic and social historical interventions.
Such interventions can reasonably aim only to reshape whiteness's infiltrated appetites.
To reduce their intensity, redistribute their aims, and occasionally turn those aims toward the work of reparations.
When remembered and represented, the ravages reeked, but reeked or wrought?
I don't know.
This guy, he's not the brightest bulb in the pack.
The ravages reeked.
By the chronic condition can function either as warning, never again, or as temptation, great again.
Memorialization alone, therefore, is no guarantee against regression.
There is not yet a permanent cure.
When I first read this, I assumed it was satire.
I assumed he was joking and showing how crazy this anti-white ideology has become.
The anti-white ideology embodied now, most notably by critical race theory, but by all sorts of I think he's serious.
I think he's serious about this.
Of course, it is cliche and tedious and ridiculous to say, imagine if the situation were reversed.
Imagine if someone published an article about how black people are evil and we need a permanent cure and how they specifically target white people and all this sort of thing.
You would be run out of town on a rail.
You'd be basically booted from the country.
You'd probably end up in a terror watch list or something.
But this sort of thing is...
Presented in a major medical journal, Peer Review.
I mean, I don't think Peer Review means anything at all.
I think it's a complete farce.
But people seem to have some respect for it.
Well, this is an article in a respectable journal saying that white people are evil.
And they tell us, by the way, on the left, that this is delusional.
You know, there are all these sorts of theories out there over what this is all really about.
Is this ideological?
Is this sexual?
Is this...
Where is the politics really hinging right now?
And this guy's answer is obviously the racial answer.
He's saying, and there have been plenty of people who have claimed this, and then the left comes in and says, you're all kooks and conspiracy theorists.
This guy is saying, we hate you because you're white, and we want to get rid of all the white people.
That's what he's saying.
The issue of racial consciousness here is a really strange one because whites uniquely don't have a racial consciousness.
You can see Pew Research did a survey about this a few years ago, a survey of different racial groups, and asked them, is your race very important or somewhat important to your identity?
And for every single racial group, more than 50% of people said, yes, it is, except for white people.
So for every group, it was greater than 50%.
For black people, it was greater than 70%.
For white people, that number was just 15%.
So whites do not have a racial consciousness.
I don't think of things generally in racial terms.
I guess I'm a white person, so there it is.
Am I a white person?
I don't know.
I'm a little swarthy, but I suppose I would be classified that way.
I don't think of things that way.
I think of things in philosophical terms, religious terms, ideological terms, maybe geographic terms.
But race is pretty low on the list.
And yet, this guy is coming out and he's not attacking people because they're conservative.
He's attacking Trump supporters, right?
He says, great again.
But he's not attacking them specifically because they're Trump supporters.
He's not attacking them because they're Christian.
He's not attacking them because they're American.
He is attacking them because they are white.
And the simple fact is that the more this ideology progresses, you will see an intensification of white racial consciousness.
There's just no alternative to that.
You cannot have a political regime in which every single group is told to think primarily, if not exclusively, about their race, and in which only one racial group can be castigated, can have calls for genocide in a major medical journal, and not have that racial consciousness increase.
I don't think this is good for politics.
I don't think that a heightening of racial consciousness, and I think inevitably racial tension, is...
Good for American politics.
But in political battles, your opponents get a say, and the opponents are very clear here.
The left, by the way, I think this doctor's a white guy.
Not positive.
I think he is, though.
The name, like, Donald Moss.
He sounds like a guy from, like, Oregon or something, you know?
A guy who has, like, a thin beard and wears lots of, like, thin flannel.
That's just the image in my mind.
This guy is saying, we are going to fight political battles on racial grounds.
And so we conservatives can say, okay, well, we don't want to do that.
But the left gets a say too, and the left has made its decision.
I'll show you how this sort of thing works.
It's being discussed in racial terms.
Obviously, there's an ideological aspect.
So there's a BLM terrorist who burned down a police station during the riots last year.
I suppose there were probably many people who did this, but one of them is this guy Bryce Michael Williams.
He's 27 years old.
He pled guilty to setting fire to a Minneapolis police station as part of the riots that sprung up over George Floyd.
But Williams, because of this, was sentenced to two years and three months in prison for burning down a police station.
He was also ordered to pay $12 million in restitution.
Something tells me that this fellow is not going to be making $12 million anytime soon.
But the U.S. District Judge, Patrick Schiltz, while he was censoring, well, he was certainly not censoring this guy, while he was sentencing this guy, he referred to Williams, the BLM terrorist who burned down a police station, As, quote, a good person who made a terrible mistake.
He's a good person.
He's just, you know, he's just so misunderstood.
And sometimes, you know, you have a bad day, you wake up on the wrong side of the bed, and you burn your breakfast, and you go to work, and your boss, you know, is kind of rude to you.
And, you know, sometimes you just burn down a police station.
Don't you?
Who among us has not just occasionally, when life gets a little tough, burned down a police station?
He's basically a good person.
He's actually recommending that the sentence be reduced.
But reduced, I believe, even below the federal guidelines.
Meanwhile, Trump supporters who trespassed at the Capitol and who wore the horn hat and danced on a desk and who stole Nancy Pelosi's lectern, they are going to be sentenced to a decade or more in prison.
There will be no leniency.
They're being called terrorists.
They're being called insurrectionists.
Every single one of them.
Anybody who went near the Capitol on January 6th is having their lives destroyed and they are going to have the book thrown at them.
They're not good people who made a terrible mistake.
And by the way, trespassing at the Capitol and wearing the horn hat is not the same as burning down a police station.
It is much, much worse to burn down a police station than to wear the silly costumes at the Capitol and jump up and down and hoot and holler and mess up people's desks.
It's worse.
Okay?
It's worse to burn down the police station, but the Trump supporters might rot in jail.
The judge sums this up.
The reason that I wanted to quote what the judge said here is because that's not the conclusion he reached.
You can't look at a guy who burns down a police station and say, actually, he's a good guy.
The good person line is the premise that the judge is starting with.
The premise in the society, and there's obviously a racial aspect to this because the riots that this guy burned down the police station during were racial riots.
It's part of Black Lives Matter.
And the premise is that black liberal activists are good people and white Trump supporters are bad people.
And that's just it.
It's even in the psychology journal, right?
The Make great again, right?
It's a conflation of white people and Trump supporters.
I don't think that's fair.
Let's not forget, Donald Trump increased the number of non-white voters who came in.
Actually, the only group that he lost votes from in 2020 was white people.
But that's what they're conflating here.
And they're beginning with this premise.
Black liberal, good.
White conservative, bad.
And so, of course, the judge was going to say this about this guy.
It's just a fact.
The actual facts of what he did are completely irrelevant.
Of those evil, terrible Trump supporters, Donald Trump who colluded with Russia and who...
What else did he do?
He sold our country out.
He had bad deals in Ukraine.
You remember that?
What else did he do?
Oh, do you remember when he tear-gassed and brutalized all those peaceful protesters at Lafayette Square?
You remember when he held the Bible up?
Do you remember that?
Well, actually, that's just another one of these anti-Trump narratives, this fake news that had been pushed for months and months on end by the left and by the squishy...
Right.
The court jester conservatives pushed by that.
New report out says, just not true.
When you want to get the truth, when you want to get the truth on pricing, when you want to get the truth on every kind of part available for your car or truck, where are you going to go?
You're going to go to rockauto.com.
There's no question about it.
rockauto.com will save you so much dignity.
It'll save you time and money too, but so much dignity.
Because you go into the auto parts store, right?
And you say, okay, I need this part for my car truck.
And they'll say, well, is your car this version or that version or the LX or the PX or the QX or whatever?
Then they ask you this.
They humiliate you.
You don't have the answers.
They go in the back of the shop.
They don't have the parts.
They probably don't have any parts back there.
They go on the internet.
They probably go to rockauto.com.
They order the part.
They charge you twice as much.
Don't degrade yourself in that way.
Head on over.
Rockauto.com always has the lowest prices possible.
They don't change their prices every day.
And Tuesday morning, it's this price.
But then you've got a Wednesday.
No, it's very simple.
They've got the same prices for pros that they have for do-it-yourselfers.
It's a family business serving auto parts customers online for 20 years.
And the catalog is so simple to navigate.
Even I can do it.
How about that?
Head on over to rockauto.com right now.
Check out every part available for your car or truck.
And then write Knowles, K-N-W-L-E-S, in their How Did You Hear About Us box so they know that we sent you.
President Trump used violence against peaceful protesters to clear a public park to take a photo op next to St.
John's Church.
It was worse than that.
Elizabeth Warren says the President of the United States tear-gassed peaceful protesters.
Joe Biden is using the American military against the American people.
Hillary Clinton, tonight the President of the United States used the American military to shoot Peaceful protesters with rubber bullets and tear gas.
CNN's Oliver Darcy.
Peaceful protesters just had rubber bullets and tear gas shot at them so the president could have a photo op.
Jon Favreau, who's a lefty podcaster, and I think he worked for Obama.
The president had peaceful protesters shot with tear gas and rubber bullets so he could get his photo taken.
Kamala says Donald Trump just tear gassed peaceful protesters for a photo op.
And David French, who is, I guess you'd call him, what, a neoconservative or something?
He's a...
Former Republican who now spends all of his time attacking Republicans and conservatives.
He says, quote, This from the Washington Post is an extraordinary piece of journalism.
It's a video timeline of the federal law enforcement attack on peaceful protesters at Lafayette Square.
This is how the Trump administration violently cleared the path for photo op.
Just not true.
Just not true.
Lump that one away with the Easter bunny and the tooth fairy.
It didn't happen.
According to a watchdog report, Being reported, not by Fox News, not by the Daily Wire, not by CNN. Even CNN's admitting this.
Watchdog report finds the Park Police did not clear racial injustice protesters from Lafayette Park for Trump's visit to St.
John's Church last June.
This comes a report from the Interior Department's Inspector General.
So this is a government watchdog within the government.
It just didn't happen.
You can read the article yourself.
That will be the one time this year that you go to CNN.com.
It was completely fake news and no one will be held responsible for this.
None of these people, one of these people who lied about this is currently the president.
The other one is the vice president.
The other one, the third one, Hillary Clinton, pretended to be the president and questioned the results of a 2016 election.
We didn't hear calls about how that was threatening our democracy back then, but now it's a big problem.
And even...
Squish former Republicans, you know, people who present themselves as conservative but who really spend all of their time attacking conservatives and punching right and attacking the Republican Party.
All of them lied about this.
Maybe they didn't lie.
Maybe they just were too stupid.
Either they were cynical or they were ignorant and naive.
But...
When this came out, when the first reports came out about this, that the police were using a military, was shooting at the...
I just knew it wasn't true.
I knew it wasn't true because of how many times the media had lied about Trump.
I knew it wasn't true because that's just not the sort of thing that happens.
I knew it's not true because there would have been actual political blowback had one done this.
One wouldn't have risked this sort of thing.
If you perpetually fall for this fake news, or if you perpetually put out this fake news...
You are not worthy of being believed, right?
Your word is not worth very much, whether you're on the left or whether you're on the pretend right.
You just, that's it.
You can't keep falling for it.
You can't do that.
Lie after lie after lie.
When people ask, Michael, how come some kooky conspiratorial conservatives have questions about the vaccine or have questions about the way the election was conducted or have questions about this or about that?
It's not the conservatives' fault if we recognize that the media and the government and the big tech companies and the bureaucracy lie to us all the time, and they always lie in one direction.
They always lie to defend the dominant liberal regime, and they always lie to suppress any sort of conservative movement.
So it's not our fault that they've squandered their credibility.
It's their fault.
And it's why I'm just going to assume if we are told something, certainly something about conservatives, certainly something that will have political ramifications on how we behave, I'm just going to assume it's not true.
If it is coming, certainly in the heat of the political moment, certainly from these leftist outlets, and from the government bureaucracy, the deep state, the blob, from that as well.
And yet, some liberals, leftists, whatever word you want to use, think that the Democrats actually are too lenient on conservatives.
AOC says, quote, During the Obama administration, folks thought we'd have a 60 Democrat majority for a while.
It lasted four months.
Democrats are burning precious time and impact negotiating with GOP, who won't even vote for the January 6th commission.
McConnell's, that's the only way I can pronounce that date, by the way.
January, the worst day, the day which will live in infamy, worse than Pearl Harbor.
When the horn guy stole the lectern, McConnell's plan is to run out the clock.
It's a hustle.
We need to move now.
We need to move now.
Also, by the way, just a point on this, because of course AOC keeps coming back to January 6th.
Part of the reason that I am making fun of the parole clutching over January 6th, part of the reason is not even because of the events itself, the events themselves rather, but because I just don't believe the way the media reported on it.
Remember, the media has lied to us about every single event that in any way could be constructed as right-wing violence, or even fictionalized as right-wing violence.
When the left burns the country down for eight months, that's mostly peaceful.
When the right does anything, when the right blows its nose, that's right-wing violence.
But the story of January 6th has completely unraveled.
The story began that Trump supporters were killing cops.
Remember, Officer Sicknick had a fire extinguisher thrown at his head, and that killed him.
These murderers, these cop killers on the right.
And this was reported by the New York Times and the Washington Post, and it was just completely made up.
Even these news outlets had to correct themselves on page 700 months and months later, at which point no one was paying attention anymore.
But it didn't happen.
Officer Sicknick died of a stroke, an unrelated health problem, days later.
So, yes, I am going to make fun of the January 6th commission, because I just don't believe it.
I don't believe the propaganda that they're putting out about it, because they have squandered their credibility on the left.
AOC's wrong about this, though.
AOC, I think, is usually pretty politically savvy.
I'm not saying she's got a whole lot going on between the ears.
I'm not saying she's read a ton of history or philosophy or anything like that.
But she...
Knows how to position herself to amass more and more political power, but she's wrong about this political point that she's making, that the Democrats are wasting precious time because if they keep trying to negotiate with Republicans, they're not going to get what they want.
The liberal establishment, which includes the Democratic Party and all the major institutions, I think basically every single institution, including the military at this point, The liberal establishment will get whatever it wants.
It is the dominant regime in this country.
It is the way that politics actually works.
I know that you learned in your civics class.
Actually, you probably didn't because we don't have civics classes anymore.
But if we did, what you would have learned in your civics class is that we have three branches of government and the separation of powers and checks and balances and the, you know, I am a bill and I call myself Bill and the Congress makes the laws and then they're signed by the president or they're sent back.
But that's not actually how the government works.
Do you know who makes the laws?
Like the FDA. That's who makes the laws.
The ATF makes the laws.
Congress does not really make that many laws.
And when Congress does make laws, Congress is usually just giving guidelines to the administrative agencies who actually make the laws.
You know who else makes the laws?
Google.
Google makes the laws.
Because, yes, we have free speech and certain speech protections.
But we can't really exercise that speech because a handful of corporations control the flow of information around our public square.
And those corporations will severely curtail your right to free speech.
In reality, Google has quite a lot to say about your...
I mean, Mitch McConnell said this the other day.
He said, woke corporations constitute a parallel government.
This is true throughout the institutions.
And if Democrats are not getting something that they want right now, it is because the liberal establishment, the actual ruling power, just doesn't really want it.
And look, there's a Republican Party and there are some conservatives and the only ones who are buoyed, who are put on major television all the time, who are put on network TV, who are allowed to have positions and esteemed positions in the institutions, are the ones who do not threaten that liberal establishment.
They're the ones who...
Push back just enough to make it seem like there's real dissent and real debate in this country, but ultimately they lose.
Ultimately they roll over.
They lose with dignity, is what they say.
I don't think they're very dignified, but they say they lose with dignity.
They are the court jesters in the kingdom of liberalism.
The establishment will get whatever it wants.
When AOC is picking a fight over this, it's not about Republicans and Democrats.
It's about an intra-Democrat fight.
It's about a fight within the liberal establishment because that's the only power that actually matters in the country.
The...
Powers that be will basically do whatever they want.
If you don't realize that after the year that we have just had, then I don't know how to convince you.
They upended the entire American way of life.
They curtailed many of your political rights.
They shut down churches and opened up marijuana dispensaries and didn't even have to give you a reason.
The scientists changed their minds on very basic things.
Sometimes by the hour.
And they laugh at you when you raise a question about that.
Dana Carvey.
You know, Dana Carvey's one of the great impressionists ever, basically.
And a really funny comedian, and he was on SNL. Dana Carvey, who, at least in his public life, seems to lean left.
You know, he was always very nice about Obama, and he's had a lot of mainstream success.
Dana just did a bit on his podcast mocking this very fact, mocking the arbitrariness of the power of the established regime, mocking how little this establishment is accountable to the people and how little they care what the people think.
He mocked it in the person of, one, Tony Fauci.
But if it's proven the virus escaped from a lab...
I'll have no regrets.
But if I have my brothers, I hope the whole world forgets.
I'm Tony Fauci.
And from the bottom of my heart, go f*** yourself.
Go f*** yourself.
Go f*** yourself.
We'll be right back with Kelsey Grandma.
The whole bit is that Tony Fauci is this crooner, late-night host, so he's doing them kind of as a Sinatra or a Dean Martin.
I will say, Dana Carvey has some of the greatest impressions ever.
The Tony Fauci...
I don't know.
The voice is not quite...
I think the character is there.
The voice...
I don't know.
I don't know.
I'm just saying some other people do impressions and, you know, one can judge for oneself.
The point he's making, though, is totally right.
I'm Tony Fauci and you can go F yourself.
That's what I care about you, you stupid peasants.
I'm Tony Fauci.
He doesn't...
Obviously, he's not accountable.
And he is just...
He's a real person, but he's a symbol of that broader administrative state, the public health bureaucracy, that just doesn't care.
You can complain and we can talk until we're blue in the face, but they've got the political power and we don't.
That's the way it is.
Speaking of not caring, Kamala Harris was asked sort of a tough question on Univision, for goodness sakes.
Univision, a very leftist television station.
She was asked a question about this immigration issue and she couldn't take the heat and she snapped.
I said I'm going to go to the border.
When are you going to the border, Vice President?
The administration has asked...
I'm not finished.
I said I'm going to the border.
And also, if we are going to deal with the problems at the border, we have to deal with the problems that cause people to go to the border, to flee to the border.
And that is the root causes.
So my first trip as Vice President of the United States was to go Do you have a date for your trip to the border to see the situation with your own eyes?
I will keep you posted.
I will keep you posted.
I love it.
Good on this reporter.
Because everyone's been asking, hey, Kamala, you're on this Guatemala trip.
You're apparently in charge of immigration now because Joe Biden wanted to toss you right under that bus.
You remember that bus that you said brought black students to white schools that you said Joe Biden opposed because Joe Biden's a terrible racist?
You don't remember that bus?
Well, you're throwing it right underneath it because I think there is no love lost between Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, and he gave her an impossible job, and she's failing at that impossible job in a spectacular way.
So she goes to Guatemala, and she's asked this question, when are you going to the border?
And her answer, well, I'll go eventually.
And the reporter says, yeah, give me a date.
I'm not finished!
That's Kamala's favorite line.
She thinks this plays well.
I don't think this plays well.
I think this plays well with very angry, single feminist women.
And that's, I guess, the Democratic base.
It's a big part of the Democratic base.
But it's not a huge constituency.
And to the rest of us, this just seems so shrill.
It seems unprofessional.
It seems deceptive.
She obviously just doesn't want to answer the question.
And then this reporter doesn't back down.
Good on her.
And by the end, she goes, give me the date, Kamala.
And Kamala goes, I'll keep you posted.
She doesn't care.
It just doesn't matter.
This might be bad for her political career, but for the broader power structures in the country, it just doesn't really matter.
The trip was not a huge success.
The way you know this is because it is being reported in CNN that White House staffers think it was a failure.
Now, I just went on a long rant about how I don't believe things that are in CNN, but I want to make sure we're specific here.
There are different ways of covering stories, okay?
When CNN, a leftist outlet, covers a Republican president like Donald Trump, And quotes anonymous White House staffers.
I generally don't believe it.
I'm not saying it's never true.
But my inclination is not to believe it.
Because I know that those two organizations are adversaries.
CNN is out to get Trump.
Trump is out to get CNN. So I just don't buy it.
When CNN is reporting on the Biden White House, I'm much more inclined to believe it.
Because CNN and the Biden White House are not adversaries.
They're partners.
They're on the same team.
And so when CNN is reporting something from the Biden White House, it is because Biden wants to send a message.
And the message is being sent to Kamala.
The White House staffers believe that she looked ill-prepared, according to this report, and that her bad answers overshadowed this sort of thing.
It's really worth pointing out when we're talking about how to judge propaganda that comes out of the government or out of the big corporations or out of the media.
They're all kind of part of the same thing.
There simply are different standards of judging these places when they're talking about Democrats and when they're talking about Republicans.
Just like there's different standards when we're talking about a BLM terrorist versus a Capitol rioter, there are different standards when we're talking about Democrats and Republicans here being covered.
AOC has a more radical take, though.
AOC has a radical take here on this immigration question.
She says that the immigration crisis is actually America's fault.
What we, as a country, what the United States has not done is actually own up to the fact that we have contributed to regime change, destabilization, and interventionist foreign policy that has contributed Right.
And the reason that it's a problem, and this is not just U.S. supporting regime change.
This is also climate policy that is impacting the global south disproportionately, even though these farmers and these folks in Central and South America contributed to climate change the least in terms of their carbon emissions.
They are experiencing the ravages the most right now and first.
And so U.S. climate policy has contributed to this U.S. foreign policy, U.S. economic and trade policy has helped contribute to conditions that that people are fleeing.
So the point she is making that the U.S. has intervened in Latin America, that part's true.
The idea that the U.S. interventions have made Latin America worse, that part's false.
She's basically saying if we hadn't prevented communist revolutions in Latin America, the societies would be flourishing right now.
And we just know that's not the case and that's not how communism works no matter what AOC wants.
Number three, though.
The idea that because we have intervened with our neighbors, like every other country in the history of the world, because we have international relationships, that somehow now we have a responsibility to knock down our borders and take in the entire population of Guatemala, that's preposterous.
That doesn't make any sense.
It's the way the left argues, is they'll make one sort of true observation, and then a bunch of non-sequiturs will come from that, and that will lead them to this radical idea.
It's not just her, though, by the way.
Joe Biden, the whole administration is radical.
I mean, Joe Biden is now, in his budget, is replacing the term mothers with birthing people.
So it's the whole kit and caboodle is moving radically, radically to the left.
you know you can now find all the conservative content that you love wherever you are on the Daily Wire app.
Even if you're not a Daily Wire subscriber, you'll be the first to know what's trending with mobile notifications.
So download the Daily Wire app and stay up to speed with the freshest conservative voices around no matter where you are.
On this show, every day, I talk about a lot of amazing products and services from sponsors that I use and love, but we want to get to know you better so that we can choose our sponsors with you in mind.
We've been running a survey for a couple of weeks now to get to know our audience members better.
If you haven't already taken it, it is not too late.
Go ahead.
Go to dailywire.com slash Knowles, fill out my audience survey, and tell us a little more about yourself.
To sweeten the deal, everyone who completes the survey will be entered to win a $1,000 gift card.
You can only take the survey once per Daily Wire show, though, so if you want to increase your chances of winning the $1,000, go listen to Ben, go listen to Drew, go listen to Matt to get access to all their surveys as well.
Dailywire.com slash Knowles.
We would love to hear from you.
And we will be right back with the mailbag.
Welcome back to the show.
My favorite time of the week, the mailbag from Brian.
Hey, Michael.
I saw a billboard the other day and it said, smile, your mom chose life.
Since you're an experienced linguist, Someone who knows a lot about linguistic warfare.
Is this a message that pro-lifers should push?
To me, it's playing to the left and insinuating that there is a choice.
I believe it should say something like, smile, you didn't get murdered in the womb.
Thank you, sir.
It's a good question.
I don't necessarily mind the billboards because they are acknowledging that there is a choice.
I mean, just like...
You have a choice to murder someone.
And murder is illegal.
Abortion is legal.
Murder of a person who's not inside a womb is illegal.
And yet you still have a choice.
You can choose to murder someone or not.
And if you choose to, you'll face consequences.
So I think, this is rare that you'll hear me say this, the language here is not the biggest issue.
The biggest issue is the law.
If there were consequences for performing abortions, You would have less abortion if there were legal consequences.
Yes, we got to be careful in our language.
We should refer to unborn babies as babies.
We shouldn't refer to whatever stupid terms the left uses.
We shouldn't refer to it as women's health care or a choice or whatever.
But I actually think this slogan, you know, smile your mom chose life, really drives home this idea that...
The question is not just about the political rights of totally abstract persons and one's body.
It's actually the relationship between a mother and her child.
As Mother Teresa pointed out, St.
Teresa of Calcutta now, she pointed this out in a speech to the UN. Abortion is the driver of so many evils in the world.
It might be the single most evil thing going on in the world because if a mother can kill her child, There is nothing that anyone can't do.
So I kind of like the billboard.
But I think the way that really we need to make clear there isn't a choice is by taking away that choice.
It's by making it illegal.
From Marissa, Michael.
I've recently started learning about the law of attraction and manifestation.
At first, it discussed how you can just ask the universe for what you want, truly believe you have already received it, and it will manifest in your life.
I wanted to find out if this was real and connected to God, with Him being the universe.
Because it is hard to trust if God is not the ultimate source of manifesting.
Matthew 21-22 says, My short answer is stop that right now.
Cut it out.
Stop it.
This is a very bad idea.
For those of you who haven't heard of it, the idea of the law of attraction or manifestation is part of the New Age religion.
It's become very popular over the last few decades.
It's a form of occultism.
It's also sort of a form of Gnosticism.
And at a very basic level, to use biblical terms, it's a form of magic and sorcery, which is roundly condemned in the Bible.
You've made one major, a few theological errors, but one major one here is you've said that God is the universe, but that's not true.
God created the universe.
God is the creator and we are in the creation right now, but he is not the universe.
The idea that God is the universe is called pantheism, right?
The idea that really it's all just out there.
And the way that this New Age religion works is it creates an idol and a false god out of your ability to, you know, If you think it, you can do it.
And you see this in lots of popular books, like The Secret and things like that.
But it's heretical because you are suggesting that you have not only the power to manipulate the universe, but you have the power to control God.
And obviously, you do not, and that is incoherent.
So I would really drop this as soon as you can.
It's...
There's nothing new under the sun.
We talk about this often with the transgender idea that actually transgenderism is just another form of Gnosticism.
And for those who don't know what Gnosticism means, that means that your understanding of religion and of the universe relies upon secret knowledge.
Gnostic is the secret knowledge that you can possess.
And once you know the secret knowledge, then you can basically make yourself into a god.
But that's not Christianity.
That's not our religion.
So the Gnosticism of transgenderism is that you're a boy, but you secretly know you're a girl, so actually you are a girl.
And the Gnosticism here is you're living in certain circumstances, but you secretly know that you can force the universe to come into a line with the tyranny of your will.
And that is not true.
And if any of it ever does work, it certainly ain't coming from God.
So not to belabor the point, but stop Practicing sorcery.
Please, Marissa.
From Nick.
Hi, Michael.
Me again.
Oh, this looks like a related question.
What are your thoughts on astrology?
I'm currently living a single life, so my Tinder inbox looks like someone's home mailbox who went to Mexico and never came home, which is awesome.
However, so many of these babes are into astrology, and there is no filter yet to weed them out.
My question is, A, is astrology real?
And B, if so, should it be a turn-off?
Because it's, well, demonic correspondence and influence over weak-minded women who want to find themselves.
Thanks sincerely, the not wanting to shack up with fallen stars.
I think you've answered your own question, Nick, but you do get the point.
This is probably one of my least popular opinions, but it happens to be correct.
The problem with astrology, my friend Josh Hur made this point the other day on Twitter.
The problem with astrology and the reason that you should not consult astrologers It's not that it is fake and silly and a waste of your time.
It's that it's real and it compromises your free will.
So there is something to this.
Now, I'm not saying that every two-bit charlatan who's doing a palm reading or something is actually telling you your future.
But I am saying that the idea of astrology is to throw away one's entire free will and try to get a leg up on reality and to try to make oneself...
And so I just wouldn't do it.
Yeah, it's bad.
Now, a lot of people, they say, oh, you know, what's your sign?
Are you a Sagittarius or whatever?
And, you know, I suppose that's all innocent enough as long as you sort of discourage it and get that gal going to church.
All right.
From Jolene.
Hey, Michael.
I was recently at a wedding where I caught up with one of the groomsmen I had met several times over the years.
Anyway, the guy had his girlfriend at the wedding, but decided to tell me he had always been interested in me.
He said he never said anything because he didn't want to mess things up with his friend since I was like his sister and never thought I was interested, though I've always had a crush on him.
He has now been reaching out on social media with a very flirtatious vibe.
I'm single, but he is still in that relationship, and I respect that, but it doesn't seem like he really does.
We don't live in the same city, so nothing will really happen, but at what point should I shut him down?
Should I tell him I would be interested in pursuing things if he were single, or just leave what could have been in the past?
In all sincerest humility, Dolly's inspiration of Jolene Jolene.
I'm begging of you, please don't take my man.
I'm going to try to be nice to this guy here.
Let's say he's not a cad.
Let's say he's not a total player.
Let's say that actually he's just doing this to you, which might well be the case.
He might just actually have this secret longing for you and this is this opportunity that came up.
This is not the way to start a great relationship.
This is not the way to start something that will lead to marriage in an act of infidelity.
If this guy really wants to pursue you, And it's not just his passions running away with him.
And these sorts of things happen.
It happens to men and women.
But if it's not just his passions running away with you because people had a few too many drinks at a wedding and whatever, then he needs to just dump his girlfriend and pursue you.
And if he's not going to do that, if he's trying to have his cake and eat it too, I would ignore it.
It's not good for him, not good for you, not a good way to start things.
Jolene Jolene from John.
Dear Michael, I'm a high school teacher from Behind the Wire in California.
We just went through our first critical race theory staff development, and now there will be a new course here in California called Ethnic Studies.
They added that at college when I was there.
They added that as a major.
This was now 10 years ago.
But now it's obviously coming throughout all these schools and workplaces.
John goes on.
It is assumed the curriculum will be a far leftist's dream come true.
I currently teach advanced U.S. history, but some have been encouraging me to jump up to the front to teach this new class in order to bring the course back to some level of reality.
And save the kids from commie propaganda.
What do you think?
Should I jump in and save the kids?
P.S. I pre-ordered your book, Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Minds.
I can't wait to get it.
Oh, thank you.
Yes, that book is coming out in 11 days.
In 11 days, I will no longer be able to say that I have this new book, Speechless, Controlling Words, Controlling Minds, available now for pre-order.
It will just be available for order.
So, the question is how much control you will have over the classroom.
I believe that if you can infiltrate this class and make it good, make it a good class, sneak in a conservative worldview and take away the leftist view that's intrinsic to this field of study, then that would be great.
That's what the left did.
The left infiltrated all the traditional institutions and took them over and turned them to their ends.
So I think we need to do the exact same, and one good way to do that would be for you to teach this class.
If the class has this set curriculum that insists on things like whatever, whiteness must be abolished, you know, the story that we started with today from that medical journal, if it insists on things like systemic racism, and it's not referring to affirmative action, then...
It might not be worth your time because you might just be spinning your wheels.
It depends how much freedom you have in the classroom.
If you've got the freedom to turn this wicked, stupid class into something good, then absolutely do it.
And if you don't, run for the hills.
From Golda, dear Michael, I'm in the summer before my third year of law school, hoping to graduate in December.
I say this to give you context.
I've already sunk thousands of my own dollars and taken out student loans to get to this point.
My school is requiring everyone to get the COVID vaccine unless you can prove a religious or medical exemption.
I don't think I would qualify for either.
I would personally like to wait until there is more information to make that decision about what to put in my body.
Besides, if the school is going to require masks and social distancing, even for vaccinated people.
and everyone who would like to get the vaccine can get it.
It should not matter if I get the vaccine or not.
What should I do?
How hard should I push?
I'm frustrated that I feel really alone in this.
I would appreciate your advice.
I think you're perfectly within your rights and within reason to say that the medical establishment and the propaganda wing of that establishment that has lied to us for over a year now should not be necessarily trusted.
And if you're a young, healthy person, then you're really not at great risk from this virus.
And when people say, well, there are no long-term effects from this vaccine, that's not possible to know because the vaccine has existed for about six months.
So I get with seven or eight months at this point.
So it's just there are no long-term studies on it.
So I think you're totally right for that.
You'll have to make a prudential calculation.
If you can get an exemption, I would do that.
I would pursue basically every just and moral route to do that.
And I would try to do that.
If you have to get the vaccine, look, I'm not saying that I'll never get the vaccine, right?
I'm just saying it's a risk calculation.
So if one has to make the prudential choice to get it because of other considerations, then that's the way this But I think that exploring every option you have to avoid it, I think, is perfectly right and smart and just.
From Stephen.
Dear Michael, I'm a proud ginger-haired man of Sicilian descent who just graduated college, but I suffered a traumatic episode caused by past comments about my hair color and minority status.
I had finally accepted the under-representation of my people and realized GLM, a Ginger Lives Matter, would never take off.
But then, your colleague Matt Walsh mentioned redheads cannot be trusted.
I thought I was done with the days of being called a daywalker and a no-soul, but no.
What are your thoughts on his blatant heroism, and will the world ever recognize our plight?
Thank you for your support.
Sincerely, the Ginger Italian Stallion.
First of all, I know you're saying you're Italian here, but...
You might want to check with the mailman.
I don't know.
I guess there was Barbarossa, right?
Barbarossa was a red-haired Italian.
But I'll take you at your word on your ethnicity.
This is very difficult.
You are very oppressed.
The good news for you is you're not going to worry about this for very long because the medical establishment wants to find a permanent cure to your skin color.
So it's going to be a moot point, I think, if they get their way.
Last question from Adam.
Yes, here's my advice.
Read a lot.
Know much more.
Consider all of their views and figure out why they're wrong or if they're right, then adopt those views.
But I guess more likely than not, they're going to be wrong.
And know that you are correct.
And then you don't need to boast and yell and scream and brag about it.
Because when people know that they're correct, they can be very calm.
They can be cool as a cucumber.
The ones who scream and yell their head off all the time are the ones who do not feel very confident in their views.
So this is a very Catholic view, I guess.
The idea that just suffer.
Suffering is quite sanctifying, actually.
When they're talking about how great, I don't know, Obama is or something.
The new, how terrible Trump is.
And you just know that you are correct, calmly say your point, because I find that sort of calmness and just knowing the facts and getting it out there cuts through all the noise.
That's our show.
I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
We'll see you Monday.
We'll see you Monday.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, The Andrew Klavan Show, and The Matt Walsh Show.
The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Ben Davies.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Our technical director is Austin Stevens.
Supervising producers, Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Production manager, Pavel Vidovsky.
Editor and associate producer, Danny D'Amico.
Audio mixer, Mike Coromina.
Hair and makeup by Nika Geneva.
And production coordinator, McKenna Waters.
The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2021.
Hey everybody, this is Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
You know, some people are depressed because the republic is collapsing, the end of days is approaching, and the moon's turned to blood.
But on The Andrew Klavan Show, that's where the fun just gets started.
▲
Export Selection