Ep. 514 - Was America Built On "Stolen Land"? It's Not Nearly That Simple
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the Left now says Mount Rushmore has to go because it was carved on stolen land. But the reality isn’t nearly as simple as that. In fact, the whole narrative of white settlers “stealing land” isn’t that simple. We’ll try to inject some historical context into this discussion today. Also Five Headlines including the bloodbath in our cities over the weekend. Where is Black Lives Matter? And an education council meeting in New York descends into leftist insanity.
If you like The Matt Walsh Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: WALSH and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at https://www.dailywire.com/walsh
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, the left now says that Mount Rushmore has to go because it was carved on stolen land, they say.
But the reality isn't nearly as simple as that.
In fact, the whole narrative of white settlers stealing land from Indians Isn't quite that simple.
We'll try to inject some historical context and reality into this discussion today.
Also, five headlines, including the bloodbath in our cities over the weekend.
Where is Black Lives Matter on this?
They're nowhere to be found.
And an education council meeting in New York descends into total leftist insanity.
You have to hear it and see it to believe it.
But it raises a question of why would anyone send their kids to public school at this point?
I think there's just no excuse to do that.
So we'll talk about that today and so much more, all of that on the way.
But we start here.
The latest monument to come under fire by the left, as I mentioned, is one that they'll
probably need more than a chain and a band of vandals to pull down.
Mount Rushmore is, according to the media, a symbol of white domination and, quote, white
supremacy.
And even worse now, it's the site of a President Trump speech.
So that's the ultimate historical atrocity.
Um, and so it must be, as a recent New York Times article put it, reconsidered.
We have to reconsider it.
Seems a little bit late now to reconsider it, if you ask me.
Oglala Sioux president Julian Bear-Runner believes the monument should, quote, come down, but these are, these are giant 60-foot faces carved into a mountain, by the way.
He says it has to come down, but not via explosives.
So, because blowing up a 60-foot face carved into the side of a mountain would, bear runner concedes, probably cause more damage than whatever unspecified damage is caused by its continued presence in the first place.
So what are we going to do?
Maybe we put a tarp over it?
Maybe, here's a better idea, we could, you know those gag glasses with the noses and the funny mustaches?
We could make really big versions of those and put them on all the faces.
You know, because that way it covers up the white supremacy and it's funny to look at, so that's an idea.
But the most interesting part of this belated Mount Rushmore backlash is the repeated claim that we have to repent of the monument and somehow remove it because it was built on stolen land.
It's that particular claim I want to focus on.
Here's just a quick compilation of the media saying this over and over again.
Donald Trump chose the most grandiose symbol of U.S.
imperialism on Earth to usher in a very on-brand, star-spangled spectacle.
The mother of all photo ops, Mount Rushmore.
And we know why this president just can't resist going there.
President Trump will be at Mount Rushmore, where he'll be standing in front of a monument of two slave owners and on land wrestled away from Native Americans.
We have to acknowledge that Mount Rushmore is sitting on Lakota land.
The place Donald Trump is going to on Friday is stolen land.
Senator Tammy Duckworth, who's being considered for Joe Biden's VP spot, has also echoed this theme.
Over the weekend, she was asked about it, and she also said that it's on stolen land.
I think we should listen to everybody.
I think we should listen to the argument there.
But remember that the president at Mount Rushmore was standing on ground that was stolen from Native Americans who had actually been given that land during a treaty.
And again, let's talk about the greater context of where we are in our country right now, you know, our historical past.
We need to talk about what we're doing now to bring this country off of the brink of chaos that it's in.
Okay, stolen from, quote, Native Americans who acquired it, quote, during a treaty, she says.
Now there's a lot in there that I think needs to be dissected because a lot of it is wrong.
And we'll talk about all that in just a second, but before we do, I want to tell you about our friends at Helix Sleep.
They're sponsoring the show today and, you know, if you've ever had the experience, we all, I think, have had the experience of sleeping on a really horrible mattress, you know, one that just is sort of like fighting with your body the entire night.
It seems like a mattress that doesn't want to be slept on, it seems like.
And if you have a mattress like that, it can really do a number on you.
because if you're not sleeping well, then you're not gonna be living well and everything else.
That's why you need Helix Sleep.
Now, Helix Sleep has a quiz, takes just two minutes to complete, I've done it myself,
and it matches your body type and your sleep preferences to the perfect mattress for you.
So if you like mattresses that are really soft, really firm, if you sleep on your side or your back
or your stomach, however you sleep, whatever you like in a mattress,
they're gonna specify it to your unique taste.
You don't need to take their word for it either.
Helix was awarded the number one best overall mattress of 2019 and 2020 by GQ and Wired Magazine.
Go to helixsleep.com slash Walsh, take their two-minute sleep quiz, and they're gonna match you to a customized mattress that will give the best sleep of your life.
I'm telling you, I have one of these mattresses myself, and I can absolutely attest to that.
Right now, Helix is offering up to $200 off and free pillows with all mattress orders.
For our listeners at helixsleep.com slash walls, that's helixsleep.com slash walls for up to $200 off your mattress order.
Go there now.
So, Tammy Duckworth, as so many leftists tend to do.
You know, she speaks of Native Americans as if they're all this homogenous, unified group.
So white settlers stole the land from Native Americans generally, she says.
Which is kind of like saying the British stole land from Asians when they occupied India.
No, you wouldn't say that because they didn't take it from Asians.
They didn't take land from the Chinese, the Vietnamese.
They took land from Indians.
And that's what you would say, and the distinction is important.
In fact, leftists usually would be the first to tell you that it's racist to erase or minimize or ignore these kinds of distinctions.
To act like there's no difference between someone from one Asian country or another.
Or no difference between one Indian tribe and another.
They would usually say, that's racist.
Yet in this case, they're doing it themselves.
Why is that?
Well, I think there's a reason.
Why the we stole the land crowd is often sort of hesitant to get specific on the matter of who exactly we stole this land from, whether it's the Black Hills in South Dakota or any other plot of land that we supposedly stole.
Now, the problem, I think, is helpfully illustrated by this PBS article, which says the Black Hills were appropriated.
And this is this is a claim not just by PBS, but any time the media gets more specific, They're gonna tell you they were is appropriated from the Lakota Sioux tribe who were according to PBS quote the original occupants of the area now that is If you have any understanding of history at all
That is an absolutely ridiculous claim.
It would be like me saying that I was the first person to ever fly.
I invented human flight when I took a plane from Baltimore to Charlotte last March.
In fact, that would be less ridiculous.
Because the Lakota Sioux were thousands of years removed from being the first people, the original occupants of the Black Hills.
There has been a human presence in the Black Hills since prehistoric times, going back over 10,000 years.
And from that era until the U.S.
stole it, allegedly, many groups of people have fought, often quite brutally, for control of that region.
Slightly more recently, the Arikara tribe moved in around the time that Columbus sailed the ocean blue around, you know, the late 1400s, early 1500s.
The Cheyenne, the Kiowa, the Crow, other tribes all arrived in short order to fight for their own share of this coveted mountain range.
Finally, after hundreds of years of this, The Lakota, the alleged original occupants, came in the 18th century and drove all the other competitors away and established control of that area.
Now, when I say drove away, it's worth noting that for Indian tribes, driving competitors away often meant murder, pillage, torture, scalping, and similar methods.
The U.S.
did not take the Black Hills from its original occupants.
The original occupants had long since been exiled or exterminated by other Native American tribes.
The U.S.
arrived and was formed and founded thousands of years too late to take it from its original occupants.
It would be more accurate to say, now this is not ever how it's actually phrased, but if you care about accuracy, what you're going to say is that the U.S.
took the Black Hills from the most recent tribe that had taken it from the tribe that had most recently taken it before them, and so on, and so on, and so on.
Now this is not mere pedantry, okay?
This is not, I'm not being pedantic and getting into like splitting hairs here.
The point is that white settlers and pioneers By trying to claim and conquer new land, we're not introducing some new horror to the continent.
It wasn't like they were doing something that these Indian tribes were scandalized by, because they'd never heard of anyone doing this before.
Okay, now, the Indian tribes would have been angry about being moved out of their land, but they weren't scandalized by the concept, the way that we are now.
Because this is exactly what they were doing to other Indian tribes for thousands of years.
The white settlers were playing the same game of conquest that Indian tribes had been playing that all people everywhere across the earth had been playing since the dawn of human civilization.
It is just absurd to treat the theft of land by Europeans and Americans as a unique evil for which we must repent and take down our monuments in shame and weep and cry over and over and over.
We never stop talking about it.
What a terrible evil.
We stole this land.
We don't deserve to be here.
My God!
Wars of conquest have been waged, had been waged, in this part of the world for thousands of years before any white man graced these shores.
Wars of conquest, of taking over land and killing everybody there, enslaving their children and taking their scalps as souvenirs.
That's what was happening in this country before anyone with lighter skin tones ever showed up.
Slavery, torture, killings, rape, pillage, all of these were utterly common features of Indian conflict.
Anyone who says otherwise is lying or stupid.
Now, the white man came and jumped into that fray.
He didn't invent the fray.
This is how the world worked long before air conditioning and Taco Bell and Twitter accounts.
And we certainly can't say that white people were unique in their barbarism, in the manner in which they went about doing these things.
Such claims are rendered absurd by even a cursory study of tribes like the Comanche, who were known to torture babies to death and roast people alive.
Or the Iroquois, who committed a campaign of extermination against the Huron tribe over a century before the United States was founded.
Basically wiped them out.
There's a book by S.C.
Gwynne who's got, I've read a few of his books and they're all really good.
Empire of the Summer Moon, about the Comanche tribe.
And as he talks about in his book, you know, these were, and this is not, this book is not one long defense of or apology for white settlers.
It's, it, it, it doesn't flinch from the evil done by that group either, but it gives a balanced account.
And part of that balanced account is to acknowledge that Indian tribes in North America were almost without exception, brutal and warlike.
And you could say, well, that was the case across the world.
Yes!
You're exactly right.
You go back far enough, and everybody was that way.
Everywhere.
And that's to say nothing of the Mesoamerican tribes, like the Aztecs and the Maya, who engaged in human sacrifice on a scale that is impossible to fathom.
Archaeologists are still uncovering the endless, towering racks of skulls where the dismembered heads of the butchered victims were kept.
Now, it isn't difficult to see, maybe, why the Spanish conquistadors, you know, May have developed a less than favorable impression of the cultures they encountered when they first landed in Central America.
Just imagine what you would think if you witnessed an Indian priest rip a still beating heart out of a child while he was still alive.
I mean, what would you think if you saw that?
This doesn't excuse The many acts of brutality committed by the Spanish, and there were many such acts, or any other group of Europeans or Americans during the 400-year clash of civilizations that took place between, you know, the white man and the Indian tribes.
But it does underscore the need for historical context.
It was a harsh and violent age.
This is not, now anytime you get it, someone says, people say, oh, this is whataboutism.
This is not whataboutism, you dunce.
This is about historical context.
It's impossible to honestly and fruitfully and constructively talk about these things unless you understand them in context.
It was a harsh and violent age.
And the world was being tamed and settled by harsh and violent men.
Across the world.
Empires were being built by such men.
Across the world.
In the New World too.
Before it was the New World.
Before Europeans ever showed up.
There were empires.
And they became... How do you think they became empires?
How do you think the Aztec Empire, the Mayan Empire...
How do you think any of these empires established them?
Through tickle fights?
Pillow fights?
Through constructive dialogue?
Through debate?
You think that's what they did?
No, they came in to weaker tribes and killed everybody, enslaved their children, in some cases gang-raped the women, that's what the Comanches would do, and took over.
Now, we, I think, should be thankful that we have the luxury to feel squeamish about it now, about the way the world worked, about the law of conquest.
We should be very thankful.
That we live in a world, at least in this part of the world, that, well, until the anarchists succeed in pulling us down into anarchy again, at least for now, and this is becoming less the case, but for now, you know, we live basically safe and comfortable lives.
And as far as we're concerned, most of the lines have been drawn, and we just live here.
In fact, not just relative luxury, but we live in luxury that would have been unthinkable, unknown to the vast majority of the human race that has ever existed anywhere on Earth.
A lot has been said about the historical sins of white Westerners.
We have been confronting those sins for years now, and I'm sure that confrontation will continue.
It's never allowed to stop.
But if this confrontation occurs in a vacuum, without taking into consideration the context of the time, or the brutality of the foes that the Westerners faced, then we'll be left with the impression that white people today are the descendants of history's greatest villains, and that nothing they did was justified, let alone admirable or worthy of celebration.
And so, yeah, tear down all the statues, all the monuments.
They did nothing good.
These were all the bad guys.
And of course, fostering this mistaken impression is the point.
That's why we're not allowed to have a discussion.
That's why somehow it's, like, provocative for me to say the things that I'm saying right now.
According to some people, it's not just provocative, it's outrageously offensive and racist.
All I'm saying is verifiable historical truth should not be provocative at all.
To point out that 300 years ago, 500 years ago, 600 years ago, a thousand years ago was a brutal time.
Everybody was violent and lines were drawn through killing each other.
You know, to most people in the world, hundreds of years ago, the idea that you should just respect someone's boundary and the land that they claim for themselves, even if they can't defend it, That idea to most people across the world would have been absurd.
It would have been ridiculous.
It would have been ridiculous to many Indian tribes.
The idea that they should just, okay, well, that's your land.
You can't really, we're stronger than you, and we have better technology, and we want that land for our hunting ground, because you've got a lot of buffalo in your land, and everything, and you've got resources.
But that's, you were there first, and so we'll just let you have it.
The very notion of that would have been laughably ridiculous.
Because if they couldn't defend the land, you took it.
Your right to your land extended as far as your ability to defend it.
That, again, was the reality across the world for thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of years.
And I think that that context matters.
It doesn't matter in assessing the objective morality of the things that happened in the past.
Murder is murder and is always evil.
Stealing what is not yours is stealing and is always evil.
Doesn't matter if it happens in the year 2020 or the year 1020, right?
2020 or the year 1020, right?
But assessing the moral culpability of the people who commit these acts, that's where
historical context really matters.
Thank you.
So I have to say this again, because it's important.
And this is where I'm always going to be misconstrued.
And probably it doesn't matter how much I emphasize the point, I'll still be misconstrued, because a lot of the misconstruing that goes on is willful.
But still, I will emphasize it again.
I'm not saying that 500 years ago, or 300 years ago, or whatever, that it was okay to take land, or kill people, or pillage, or do any of that stuff.
What I'm saying is, assessing the moral culpability of the people who engaged in those acts requires an understanding of historical context.
Historical context is relevant to the question of culpability, not so much of the objective moral truth of the matter.
And that's it.
Okay, we will move on to our headlines, but before we do, I want to tell you about Paint Your Life.
You know, having nice artwork on your wall in your house is, this is something I'm only recently discovering as I, even though I'm 34, I'm just now entering adulthood, like so many people in my generation, and realizing that, you know, if you have a home, you got to have artwork and paint your life.
You couldn't ask for a better Place to go to get meaningful artwork and beautiful artwork
if you're looking for a way to feel connected to the loved ones
Who you can't be near you've got to try paint your life calm get a professional hand-painted portrait
Created from any photo at a truly affordable price you could choose from from a team of world-class artists
And you work with them through every detail to make sure that everything is perfect. They're very responsive
You know if you have something you want to change or an adjustment you want to make they're gonna be there
They're gonna help you it's a very user-friendly platform, and it lets you order a custom-made
Hand-painted portrait in less than five minutes quick and easy process and extreme. I was shocked by how affordable
it is as well given Mm.
That these are real artists making true artwork out of pictures that already are so meaningful to you.
At PaintYourLife.com, there's no risk.
If you don't love the final painting, your money is refunded.
Guaranteed.
And right now, as a limited time offer, get 20% off your painting.
That's right, 20% off and free shipping.
To get this special offer, text the word MAT to 64000.
That's MAT to 64000.
Text MAT to 64000.
Paint Your Life.
64,000 text Matt to 64,000 paint your life celebrate the moments that matter
most okay number one it was a bloody weekend Five children were killed in our cities over July 4th weekend.
All of them black children.
Nine people were shot in Baltimore.
Sixty-nine people were shot in Chicago.
Sixteen of those were killed.
Twenty-five were shot in Atlanta in a one 24-hour period on Sunday.
Including an eight-year-old girl who was killed right near the spot where Rayshard Brooks was justifiably shot in self-defense by police.
But there have been protests going on there because of that, because of that justified shooting of a violent criminal.
And in the midst of all that chaos, an 18-year-old, rather I should say an eight-year-old girl was killed, shot while she was in the car with her parents.
The parents of the child spoke out at a news conference.
Watch this.
They say black lives matter.
You killed your own.
Killed your own this time.
Just because of a burial.
They killed my baby because she crossed the burial and made a U-turn.
You killed a child.
She ain't do nothing to nobody.
They didn't give us time to make a U-turn.
They started shooting on my car before we could even make a U-turn.
Shooting my tires out like wild.
But black lives matter.
My baby was shot in her bed.
Killing your own.
Nobody that'll help me.
You killed an eight year old child.
Nobody.
She ain't did nothing to none one of y'all.
She just wanted to get home to see her cousin.
That's all she wanted to do.
She just wanted to get home.
So now you watch that very gut-wrenching video of grieving parents,
and you see in tragic detail the total absurdity of the Black Lives Matter organization,
and the destructive movement that it has helped to launch.
Because BLM has nothing to say about this child, or for this child, or on this child's behalf.
There will be no protests, no riots.
Not for her, not for any of the other four children killed this weekend, or any of the dozens of other people killed in general just this past weekend in our cities.
Now think about this.
Nine unarmed black people were shot and killed by police all of last year.
Nine.
Only a couple of those shootings were questionable.
Most of them were justified.
Twenty-five people were shot in Atlanta in 24 hours.
Now, Black Lives Matter tells us the first thing, the nine people, that's a horror worthy of rioting and protesting.
The second thing, the 25, is not.
Nine people in a year, verse 25, in a day, in one city.
Nine people across the country in a year, verse 25, in a day, in one city.
Which is the greater epidemic?
Which is the greater crisis?
Which is affecting communities more?
To reinforce the point again, compare nine unarmed black people killed by cops in one year to nearly twice as many black people killed in Chicago in one weekend.
There are dozens of ways to frame this.
Nine unarmed black people killed by police versus five children killed in one weekend.
Now, you know, the Black Lives Matter.
If the name of their organization was something like Police Brutality is Bad, PBB instead of BLM, well then they'd have a little bit more of an excuse to ignore the carnage in our cities as they're doing.
But the name of the organization is not Police Brutality is Bad.
The name of the organization is Black Lives Matter.
They're supposed to be fighting for, defending, attesting to the inherent value of black life.
And of all human life.
That's what they would say.
They would claim that they're not saying that all lives don't matter.
They're focusing on this problem of black life being dehumanized and devalued in our society.
That's what they would say.
And if that's their mission, and they say that it is, then there is nowhere that this mission is more necessary than in our cities.
Addressing the violence problem within the communities themselves.
The person who shot into the car where that eight-year-old girl was sitting and killed her, that is a person who devalued her life, discarded it, treated her life as nothing.
Most of these people that were killed this weekend, most of them would have been killed for nothing, for no real reason, either randomly or in robberies or in gang disputes or drug-related violence or for some other totally frivolous reason.
Yet, you know, so yes, there is a real problem with life being devalued in this country.
Black life especially.
But it's happening mostly within these communities and BLM has nothing to say.
Because they are frauds.
They are total, absolute frauds.
Number two, New York City's Community Education Council District 2 had a Zoom meeting recently.
And you can actually watch the entire video because it's public record.
I don't know if you're going to want to do that because how long you can stomach may vary.
It's really one of the most nauseating spectacles of SJW insanity that you'll ever see.
If you're a little bit more optimistic, maybe you would say it's one of the most hilarious spectacles.
I don't know.
I can't find the humor in it as much because these lunatics are teaching our children.
If not for that detail, I'd be laughing too.
But the part that scares me is that these are the people teaching our children in schools.
So let me just play one clip for you.
Just one example.
Here's a councilwoman, Rachel Broshe, taking another council member to task for committing the sin of allowing a black child to sit on his lap.
Now, I'm not joking here.
She's offended that a white man let a black child sit on his lap.
And somehow, that makes the other guy racist.
Watch.
It hurts people when they see a white man bouncing a brown baby on their lap and they don't know the context!
That is harmful!
That makes people cry!
It makes people log out of our meetings!
They don't come here!
They don't come to our meetings!
And they give me a hard time because I'm not vocal enough and I'm not trying to be a martyr!
I'm trying to illustrate to you that you think I'm a f***ing Excuse me.
You think I'm a social justice warrior?
And you think I'm being patronizing?
And I'm getting pressure for not being enough of an advocate.
And I take that to heart, and that hurts me.
And I have to learn to make how to be a better white person.
You don't have people telling you that!
I would like to know before this meeting adjourns how having my friend's nephew on my lap was hurtful to people and was racist.
Can you please explain?
Tom, I've explained it to you.
You can Google.
You can read a book.
Read a book!
Read Ibram Kendi.
Read White Fragility.
Read How to Talk to White People.
It's not my job to educate you!
You're an educated white man!
Correct.
My friend is going to educate you!
Oh dear God.
Dear God.
Do you see why I'm such an advocate for homeschooling?
These people have entirely lost their minds.
We are watching as leftism descends completely into insanity.
We are witnessing a collective descent into madness.
Perhaps unlike anything the world has ever seen before.
And it is at the tip of that spear is the public school system.
So get your kids the hell out of it right now.
And you know, parents will often, because I'm railing against public school system all the time, because the school system is an abomination in pretty much every conceivable way, and what I hear from parents a lot is That they don't want to send their kids to public school, but they don't have any other option because they can't homeschool, because they both have to work, or it's a single parent household, and they can't afford private school.
What else are they supposed to do?
And we're getting to the point where, I mean, really any other option.
Send your kids into the woods to be raised by coyotes, okay?
Anything would be better.
Really, anything would be better than sending them into the public school system.
We are quickly approaching a point where it would be difficult to come up with a solid justification for willfully subjecting your kids to this.
Number three, here's something.
Check out this viral photo of a maternity.
It's a maternity photo shoot, which is a thing, I guess, where pregnant women get professional photos done of themselves because people have an insatiable appetite to see pictures of themselves, and any opportunity is a good one, it seems.
So there's a twist, though, here.
Here's the pictures.
And she says, as you can see, her pregnant belly is covered in bees.
The queen says, the queen is tethered to my belly inside of a cage.
We just dumped the bees on me and they naturally began to beard.
I was terrified as I am allergic, but it was worth it.
So can I just say, I had to mention this because I'm as a beekeeper myself,
can I just say that I do not endorse or support the trivialization and objectification of bees as you see
in that photo there.
I'm not concerned about the fact that how dangerous it is for people.
That's not my point.
Bees should not be objectified in this way or commodified.
or otherized in the way that you see in this photo here. I'm absolutely outraged by that.
Number four, a mob of vandals in Baltimore tore down a statue of Columbus over the weekend.
Once again, no attempt was made to prevent it. No attempt is being made to apprehend the
criminals as far as I could tell. Here's what the mayor's spokesman said. He said,
our officers in Baltimore City, who are some of the finest in the country,
they are principally concerned with the preservation of life.
That is sacrosanct.
Everything else falls secondary to that, including statues.
Okay, so... Now somehow we have... So there's a... You have to make a choice now?
You can't do both?
If it's not a crime that directly threatens human life, then you can commit it?
Is that really the message you want to send from the mayor's office?
Well, apparently it is.
Now, I want you to compare that reaction to this in California, where a white man and a white woman painted over a city approved BLM mural It was right across the street.
It was in big, big letters.
It said, Black Lives Matter.
And two people came and painted over it.
And here's what their police department says.
Reading now from NBC, it says, The woman was caught on video by onlookers as she painted over the words, Black Lives Matter, on the street in front of the Contra Costa County Courthouse while the man appeared to film her on his phone.
Authorities are asking the public to identify the couple so that they may be held accountable for their actions.
According to the police chief.
The press release says, the community spent a considerable amount of time putting the mural together only to have it painted over in a hateful and senseless manner.
The city of Martinez values tolerance and the damage to the mural was divisive and hurtful.
So you just see, and of course many leftists in the media, they're passing around the video of these two people painting over the mural and saying how horrible it is.
They finally found a form of vandalism that they disapprove of.
And it's painting over a mural on the street.
You know, these statues that are being torn down, you want to talk about a lot of time being spent?
It's a considerable amount of time putting the mural together.
It's just, it's just letters on the street.
Okay, I could have done that in 15 minutes.
That Columbus statue that was torn down?
Or some of these other statues especially that are much older?
Do you know how much time they took to make?
And how much pride these communities have taken in them for decades?
Only to have this band of criminals tear it down because they personally don't like it?
Yeah, but that's okay.
But painting over a mural, now there is vandalism that is just totally...
Uh, unacceptable, apparently.
Let's move on to our daily cancellation.
For our daily cancellation, I'm going to be canceling not just these two girls, but them and anyone like them.
Watch this.
I'm ashamed to be an American where not all folks are free.
And I won't forget the enslaved who died and built this place for free.
So I proudly lift up all the folks who are still oppressed today.
Because there ain't no doubt this ain't our land.
F*** Trump and f*** the USA!
Ouch.
Another cringe challenge there.
That's a tough one to get through.
That's real, that's difficult.
And the worst part is that they had to sit down and rehearse this, and plan it, and probably write it, and practice it.
They had a little bit of choreography in there too.
And from the sound of it, and the look of it, it seems like they're at the pool.
You can hear the water in the background.
They seem to be wearing bathing suits.
So, they're relaxing at the pool.
And suddenly they decide to spend their time writing a song about how much they hate living in the country, where they have the luxury to hang out at the pool singing songs about how much they hate their country.
Just imagine having a mind that works that way, where you're sitting there, it's July 4th weekend, you're in the sun, you're having a drink, maybe drinking some lemonade, relaxing, and you turn to your friend and say, you know, I really hate it here.
It's just, imagine being such a miserable person.
But as I say, I'm not just cancelling them, I'm cancelling anyone like them, like for example, these people as well.
One, two, three, four!
Slavery, genocide, and war!
Five, six, seven, eight!
Five, six, seven, eight.
Five, six, seven, eight.
America was never great.
So a cute little rhyme there, not quite as inventive or elaborate as the girls singing the other song.
But as you see, these are all well-dressed, well-fed, privileged brats chanting about the inherent evils of the
country that allows them to burn its flag in the middle of the street without consequence.
Now, it should go without saying that if they tried that stunt in many other countries across the globe, they'd all be dead or in shackles before they got to 5678.
Now, I mean, if you look in India, for example, you can be imprisoned for wearing clothing with the Indian flag on it, much less burning the flag in the middle of the street.
In Malaysia, nine Australians were sent to jail for three days for wearing Speedos decorated with the Malaysian flag.
The slightest disrespect of the flag in Saudi Arabia will be met with extremely severe punishment, and that includes flying the flag at half-mast.
Even that is considered to be flag desecration and punishable by prison time.
So, or worse, you know, this is Saudi Arabia we're talking about.
But of course, these protesters don't have to worry about that because they live here, where they have, in fact, not just freedom, but much more freedom than they should have.
They have freedom, for example, to burn buildings and destroy public property.
That's freedom they should not have by any reasonable, you know, point of view, but they do.
But the fact that they live here, that's the interesting part.
And this is why all of these people are canceled.
And I know I'm obviously not the first person to make this point.
I'm probably not even the millionth person to make this point, but it's a good point, and one that has yet to be answered.
And so I'm going to make it again.
And the point is this.
If you believe that America is inherently evil, systemically racist, And in fact, that there is no progress, not even the election of a black president, that could even slightly change that fact.
And if you further believe that this country was built on stolen land, and that we have no right to be here, that there's almost nothing praiseworthy or good, and certainly nothing uniquely good about America or its history, then the obvious question remains.
Why the hell are you here?
Why don't you leave?
There are 195 countries in the world.
We're just one of them.
That leaves you 194 other countries you could go to.
Two-thirds of those countries are in largely non-white, non-Western areas.
Why don't you move to one of them?
Seriously, why not?
This is not a rhetorical question.
I really want to know the answer.
Now the first and most obvious and really only available rebuttal or answer to this question is that they stay here despite feeling this way about America because they want to fight for change and progress.
And that's what it's all about.
That's why they're not going to leave.
But that excuse is a total non-starter.
Because the things they hate about America are all things that cannot be changed if they are indeed true.
And even the things that seem like they should be able to be changed, if they were true, apparently can't be.
If this country was built on stolen land, and we have no right to be here, then there is no social progress that will ever change that fact.
It would be like buying a car that you know is stolen, and rather than giving it back to the owner, You decide that you're going to, you know, drive it around, but you're going to keep it clean and you're going to help, uh, you know, you're going to give old people rides to the supermarket every Wednesday or something like that.
You're going to use your car for good.
Okay.
You can do all you want like that, but that's not going to change the fact that it isn't your car and you shouldn't have it.
And by driving it, you are participating in and profiting off of its theft.
The supposed systemic racism in our country would seem like something that could be fixed if it existed, which it doesn't, but if it did, you'd think, okay, well, there's something at least that we can fix.
But as I said, the left has made it clear that nothing can really change that.
By their telling, the election of a black president didn't even improve the problem of systemic racism.
It's not just that we still have a problem.
It's that it's not even better after that.
It's still as much of an issue now as it ever was before, according to them.
Which means it would seem that it can never be changed.
America is sick to its core, according to them.
So given all of this, I mean, if you believe that these are all givens, I don't, but if you do, the only ethical choice is to donate your assets to an Indian reservation and move to a country in Africa or Asia or even Central or South America.
And, you know, that would seem like the only ethical option.
Yet nobody is doing this.
It's not just that only a few of the protesters are doing it, or that not enough are doing it, it's that none of them are.
None.
The option isn't even being discussed.
It's not even brought up.
All of these people sitting around, burning the flag, lamenting our existence on this stolen land, none of them, none of them ever stop and say, hey, you know, maybe we should just leave.
It would be like if I claimed that a local store sells stolen merchandise, and that its management is comprised of murderous racists who use the profits from their stores to subjugate and kill minorities, and yet I still went there every day to shop.
Walking through the aisles, shouting my laments.
Oh no!
Woe is me!
This store is terrible!
This is an awful store!
This store should not be here!
Hey, by the way, how much is this fedora?
$45?
That's not too bad.
Okay, I might...
Anyway, what was I saying?
Oh yes, oh, this store is terrible, oh my god!
If you caught me acting that way, there would only be two possible explanations.
Number one, I don't really believe any of the claims I'm making about the store.
Or two, I am willfully complicit in the evil done by the store and its ownership, and therefore not any better than them.
Now in the case of these protesters and the others who profess their hatred for America while choosing to remain here, I think the first explanation is probably closest to the truth.
They don't really believe this bullcrap that they're spewing.
They don't really believe it.
It's a game.
It's just something to do.
They're bored.
They're looking for a boogeyman to fight against.
And so they're out there acting like they're freedom fighters struggling against an enemy that doesn't exist.
Acting like they're being oppressed.
Meanwhile, they're able to do literally whatever the hell they want.
Yet you're so oppressed that you can go and burn down a freaking building and steal all the merchandise and nobody will arrest you for it.
That's how oppressed you are.
No, as I said, it's not just that you're more free than anybody else in the world.
You're way more free than you should be.
Because that's a freedom nobody should have.
Yet, if you're on the left and you're a quote-unquote protester, you have that freedom.
I mean, you belong to the most free group of people that maybe has ever lived.
So, no.
I just don't believe that they believe what they're saying.
I don't.
Because if they really did... Now, maybe on some level, on some surface level, consciously, they've been able to fool themselves, but if they really, really believed it...
Then that's what they would do.
There would be no excuse, no justification for not donating your assets to an Indian tribe and leaving.
Lead by example.
Right?
America was never great.
America was never great.
It's not great now.
It can never be great if all of these claims about it are true.
So go to a different country.
Go to a country that, even if there are no great countries, there's gotta be a country better than this one, right?
This is a racist dystopia.
Built on the back of slaves and through the blood of genocide, you would say, right?
So, I mean, there's gotta be many better options.
But no, you stay here.
Because, again, you're all frauds.
All of you.
And on that cheerful note, we will end it for the day.
Thanks for watching, everybody.
Thanks for listening.
Godspeed.
If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe.
And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review.
Tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts, we're there.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, Michael Knoll Show, and The Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring.
Our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Our technical producer is Austin Stevens, edited by Danny D'Amico, and our audio is mixed by Robin Fenderson.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020.
If you prefer facts over feelings, aren't offended by the brutal truth, and you can still laugh at the insanity filling our national news cycle, well, tune in to The Ben Shapiro Show.
