Today on The Matt Walsh Show, the parent of a “non-binary” seven year old provides us an unintentionally illuminating and horrifying look into the mind of a child who has been indoctrinated into this kind of lifestyle. Also Five Headlines including the Senate cures racism by declaring Juneteenth a national holiday, the Attorney General again speaks out against the imaginary epidemic of white supremacist violence, a climate activist groups accuses itself of racism and disbands, and Newsweek claims that there’s a furious debate about that video of a guy shoplifting a bag full of merchandise from Walgreen’s in San Francisco. What is there to debate about it?
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, the parent of a non-binary, quote-unquote, seven-year-old provides us an unintentionally illuminating and horrifying look into the mind of a child who's been indoctrinated into this kind of lifestyle.
It's very interesting.
We'll talk about that.
Also, five headlines, including the Senate cures racism by declaring Juneteenth a national holiday.
That's exciting.
The attorney general again speaks out against the imaginary epidemic of white supremacist violence.
A climate activist group accuses itself of racism and disbands And Newsweek claims that there's a furious debate about that video of a guy shoplifting a bag full of merchandise from Walgreens in San Francisco.
But what is there to debate about exactly?
We'll talk about that and much more today on the Matt Wall Show.
[MUSIC]
If you're looking for privacy on the internet, which you should be,
and we should all be looking for that.
And you may think just searching the internet in private mode is all you need to do,
but that doesn't mean exactly what you think it means.
Did you ever read the fine print that appears when you start browsing in incognito mode?
It says that your activity might still be visible to your employer, your school, your internet service provider.
How can they see it if we and yet and that we call it incognito?
To really stop people from seeing the sites you visit, you need to do what I do and use ExpressVPN.
We think about all the times that you've used Wi-Fi at a coffee shop, a hotel, a parent's house, whatever it is.
Without ExpressVPN, every site you visit could be logged by the admin of that network and that's true whether you're in on incognito mode
or not. What's more your home internet provider can also see and record your
browsing data and in the US they're legally allowed to sell that data to advertisers.
ExpressVPN then is an app that encrypts all of your network data and reroutes
it through a network of secure servers that you're so that your private online
activity stays just that private because you have a right to that information
not anybody else's.
So stop letting strangers invade your online privacy.
Protect yourself at ExpressVPN.com slash Walsh.
Use my link at ExpressVPN.com slash Walsh to get three extra months for free.
That's ExpressVPN.com slash Walsh.
E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N.com slash Walsh to learn more.
Every once in a while you stumble across something that really puts things into perspective, even if in an unintentional way.
And that's the case for a post by a guy named Tom Rademacher, who, by the way, is the author of a book you've never heard of called Raising Ali, How My Non-Binary Art Nerd Kid Changed Nearly Everything I Know.
Of course, you probably already sold based on that title alone, but here's the synopsis from Barnes & Noble.
Anyway, it says, 70-year-old Ali, a funny, anxious, smart kid with a thing for choir and an eye for graphic art, was gravely underchallenged in school and also struggling with identity and how to live totally as themselves.
Ali begged to switch to a new school with kids like me, where they wouldn't feel so alone or so bored, and so they made the change.
Raising Ali is dad Tom Rademacher's story of that eventful and sometimes painful school year, parenting Ali and relearning everything, every day, what it means to be a father and a teacher.
As Ali, who is non-binary and uses they-them pronouns and prefers art to athletics, vegetables to cake, and animals to most humans, flourishes in their new school, Rademacher is making an eye-opening adjustment to a new school of his own, one that's whiter and more suburban than anywhere he's previously taught, with a history of racial tension that he tries to address and navigate.
Well, that all sounds thoroughly dreadful.
It's also going to be tough for Rademacher to get his book into the bookstores.
There's limited shelf space because of the law that was passed a few years ago declaring that every parent with a quote-unquote non-binary or trans kid must write a book about it and also star in a reality TV show.
But the book is not the point.
The point is this tweet from Rademacher yesterday, seeking to explain the inner experience of a non-binary child.
And by the way, every time I say non-binary, please insert the air quotes around the term, because in reality, of course, there's no such thing as being non-binary.
There are males and females in the world, and only males and females, and that's it.
And that is a binary system.
Nobody is outside of it.
But in any case, Rademacher posted this.
I was talking with my kid, who's non-binary, about a friend whose child just also started using they-them pronouns.
The parents were struggling to get the switch right, so my kiddo said, tell them to imagine that, instead of a person, their kid is a swarm of bees.
Yes, a swarm of bees.
Now, we're going to assume For the sake of this monologue, that the child really did say what he's quoted as saying.
That is, admittedly, in most similar situations, an extremely dubious assumption.
But here there seems to be a deep and important truth, though not the truth that Rademacher and the supportive people in the comments seem to think.
Speaking of which, there were a lot of responses to this tweet, and most of them quite positive, unfortunately.
I want to read a few, just to give you a gist of what people are saying.
One person says, quote, I try really hard to use correct pronouns.
Sometimes I go through all my kids' names, five kids, to get to one that I mean.
So my oldest is used to me saying he, she, they, them, name.
I'm hopeless, but I'm getting better.
I'll try the bees trick.
To which someone else responded, it's OK.
My mom does the same thing, even with pronouns.
I use they, them pronouns, and sometimes she'll call my sister, she, her, by they, them pronouns.
Another response to the original post says, "That's great.
I have a harder time with 'they/them' than I did with switching from 'he' to 'her' with my niece, and it's mostly
because of a whole new usage for my old brain.
If I ever gender my non-binary friends, it's not because I don't respect your identity. It's because I'm a mess."
I have to agree with that last part, at least.
Another comment, this one from someone with the username Frontline Teacher says, My trans friend and I were talking about this a few weeks ago.
He sent his favorite story to me about a guy who brought an air horn to Thanksgiving and every time someone messed up his cousin's pronouns, air horn.
That guy is kinda my hero.
Another says, my kiddo is non-binary.
Went to see my parents for the first time since last January.
And since my kiddo came out and the grandparents struggled with their pronouns, I forwarded this along.
Thanks for the share.
And finally, one more example says, maybe we should simply start calling everyone they them.
We already do so when someone's gender is unknown.
A language divided by binary biological gender is a poor choice in a world where gender is a spectrum.
Yes, maybe we have that to look forward to.
Eventually, you will be non-binary too, and you won't have a choice in the matter.
But what world is that exactly being referred to?
Because it's not this one.
In fact, I would agree that a language based on binary genders would be a poor choice in a world where gender is a spectrum.
I would agree with that.
So if you ever find yourself on planet Zepton or whatever, where there are dozens of biological sexes, then you should keep that in mind.
In this world, however, on this planet, there are only males and females.
Those are the only options.
None others exist.
But I said that the swarm of bees analogy touches on an important truth.
And it does indeed seem to provide an illuminating glance into the fractured and confused mind of a child
who's been indoctrinated into left-wing gender theory.
Bees are insects with very little consciousness individually.
Together operating as a literal hive mind, they're able to work as one unit
by communicating with each other through the use of pheromones and other signals.
Of course, a swarm mind is a little bit different than a hive mind,
because bees in a swarm have split off from the hive and are now homeless,
for a new location to build a hive.
I'm telling you all this partly because bees are fascinating, but also because it gets closer to the experience of a non-binary or trans child than Tom Rademacher or the clapping seals in the comments probably realize.
A swarm of bees has no real identity, either collectively or individually.
No real consciousness, and also no home, no fixed point.
This is how children indoctrinated into this cult begin to see themselves.
They're not exploring a new identity or discovering one.
There is no new identity at all.
Rather, they are deprived of identity, deprived of a firm sense of themselves.
They're a swarm of bees, as the kid allegedly said himself.
Formless, homeless, lacking coherence and identity.
Now, if you go up to a child raised in a healthy home, who's been helped to develop a coherent sense of his own identity, and you ask him to compare himself to an animal, which any kid is happy to do, and will have an answer on the ready.
And with a well-adjusted kid who's been raised properly, he'll probably pick something fierce and majestic and solid and understandable, something like a lion or a bear or a wolf.
If your child sees himself not as one of those beautiful and ferocious creatures, but as a group of insects, not even one insect, but a group, something has gone horribly wrong.
And what's gone horribly wrong again is that he has no idea who or what he is.
He is shapeless in his own mind.
His identity is formless and void.
Anxiety.
You know, comes from the unknown.
We're anxious about what we don't know, what we can't predict, what we can't understand.
That means that the more that a person is living on solid ground in a world that's understandable and cogent to himself, the less that he will be anxious.
So what happens when you make even a person's basic biological identity unintelligible and muddled?
What happens when you say to a child, I have no idea who you are or what you are.
You can decide that for yourself.
Even though you know nothing at all about the world or yourself.
And there's an endless array of changing options.
Just choose one.
I can't give you any guidance.
It's all up to you.
Also, by the way, your identity could change 30 minutes later, even after you choose one.
Nothing is firm.
Nothing is objective.
Nothing is lasting.
Have fun.
This is taking a five-gallon bucket of anxiety and waterboarding him with it.
He is now drowning in uncertainty.
Rather than revealing the world and himself to himself, which is one of the most fundamental jobs of a parent, you've hidden both of those things from him.
You've made it all more obscure.
You say that you can give your child freedom by allowing him to be whatever he wants, but there's no freedom in confusion.
A human being can't be free if they're not first a being.
You must be something, someone, in order to be free.
You might as well drop your five-year-old off at the airport with a stack of 20s and say, you're free, go do whatever you want, anything at all, go anywhere.
That might be a nice treat for your kid after he graduates or something, but for a young child, it's called abandonment.
And that's what all this gender stuff is.
It's abandonment, neglect, deprivation.
Because you're depriving a child of what is most basic and essential.
That is, himself.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
If you've been listening to this show for a while, you've no doubt heard me talk about my Helix mattress, which we have two now in our house.
We're big Helix fans in the Walsh household.
Well, If you've hopefully taken my advice and gotten a Helix mattress, then you know the next thing you need is a Helix sofa.
And whether you have the mattress or not, you still need to get the sofa.
Helix has left the bedroom and started making sofas.
They just launched a new company called Allform, and they're already making the best sofas that I've ever seen or sat in, more importantly.
So what makes an Allform sofa really cool?
For starters, it's the easiest way you can customize a sofa using premium materials at a fraction of the cost of traditional stores.
You know, to do this normally, it's going to cost you A whole lot of money and it's gonna be way more affordable with Allform.
You can pick your fabric, the sofa color, the color of the legs, sofa size, everything else.
That makes it a perfect fit for your home, and frankly, for your butt as well.
Allform sofas are also delivered directly to your home with fast, free shipping.
In the past, if you wanted to order a sofa, it could take weeks or even months to arrive, and you need someone to come and assemble it in your home.
Allform takes just three to seven days to arrive in the mail, and you can assemble it yourself in a few minutes.
So, you gotta take advantage of this.
To find your perfect sofa, check out allform.com slash Walsh.
And Allform is offering 20% off all orders for our listeners at allform.com slash Walsh.
All right, so last show before I go on vacation for several days.
You know, a wrench was nearly thrown into our plans yesterday when we had to take our youngest daughter, one-year-old, to the emergency room.
It was a day before, you know, the trip.
And everything's fine now.
She was cleared after a breach.
She had possible concussions, what we were worried about.
And she was cleared, everything's fine, and she's healthy.
I'm not going to get into the whole story, except to say that she apparently wandered into a game of The Floor is Lava among the older kids and accidentally got herself bowled over by her brother.
Pretty hard fall.
And honestly, she's lucky that she survived, because she was waiting in lava to begin with.
But hopefully we've gotten our vacation emergency room trip out of the way, because there always seems to be one.
A couple years ago, it was me.
Blew out my Achilles on vacation.
And now we can kick back and enjoy, I guess, our 15-hour, or really, it's a 19-hour drive with four children under the age of nine.
This is how much I hate flying, that I would rather do that.
But in my experience, people tend to exaggerate the pain of driving long distances with little kids.
Here's what I'll say.
I find it to be, and we've done it a lot, I find it to be no less enjoyable than, say, being buried alive in a box full of rabid squirrels.
It's on that level.
I know that sounds kind of horrible, And I guess it is, so I'm not sure what my point was there.
But the good news is that the sustained close quarters kind of psychological torment really prepares you in case you're ever arrested and sent to Gitmo or something, which, frankly, these days is not outside the realm of possibility.
But we have a few things to talk about before I can wrap up.
In fact, I've got, we call this five headlines.
It's probably gonna be more than five, because I got a bunch of stuff and I want to get through it.
It's all gonna be dated by the time I get back.
Some of it might already be, frankly.
But we'll get into some of this.
So number one, the Senate passed a bill yesterday.
This is going to go to the House.
It's not official yet, but they passed a bill unanimously establishing Juneteenth as a national holiday.
And I think we have some of the footage of this potentially historic moment.
Let's watch.
Let's watch some of this.
Mr. President.
I ask consent the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res.
269 submitted earlier today.
The clerk will report.
Senate Resolution 269 designating June 19, 2021 as Juneteenth Independence Day in recognition of June 19, 1865, the date on which news of the end of slavery reached the slaves in the southwestern states.
Without objection, the Senate will proceed to the measure.
I ask unanimous consent, the resolution... Why exactly am I playing this?
I don't know.
I don't know why I'm asking you that question.
I should have an answer to that.
Really, I'll tell you why.
Because this is the end of racism.
This is the Senate curing racism, finally.
And I feel like that's historic.
It's also historic because all of these people who just found out what Juneteenth was, like last year, Now, they just found out last year, much of the country just found out last year what it is, and now it is a deeply important holiday to them that should be celebrated, not only in America, but across the planet, and indeed, probably across the entire solar system.
Here's what I'll, just two quick things about this.
First of all, in looking at it objectively in a vacuum, Having a holiday to celebrate the abolition of slavery makes sense.
Makes a lot of sense.
I can see that.
But I have a problem, and as you know, I've been saying this for years.
I am opposed, in principle, to anything that is done to appease or impress a mob.
Anything that is done with fraudulent intentions To appease or impress a mob.
And that includes tearing down statues.
It includes declaring holidays.
It includes anything.
If there is something worth doing, you do it because it's worth doing.
You don't do it all in a mad rush because you're trying to impress the mob or you're afraid of them or whatever.
And that's of course what's happening here.
It's not a coincidence that we had the riots and we have all of this and BLM, and now they're saying, oh, you know what?
Yeah, let's make Juneteenth a national holiday.
It's the same thing I said with the statues.
I think a lot of the statues that were torn down were not deserving of that at all and should have remained based on their own merits.
There may have been a few statues that you could make a reasonable argument for taking them down, but even with those statues, I said all along, I oppose tearing them down now under these conditions.
All in one mad dash.
If it was not for that, if it wasn't for the mass hysteria and a community just on their own got together and said, hey, we don't really want this statue.
Let's take it down.
Fine.
But under the circumstances, that's where I think it becomes a problem.
Also, I also have another problem.
If you, as the Democrats do in the Senate, if you hate America and don't think that America itself is worth celebrating, and in fact, you don't even think anymore that it's worth standing for the national anthem, And you also think, as they would tell us, and have said, that racism today is worse than it's ever been?
It's all been downhill?
Then I don't know if you're necessarily equipped to come up with new national holidays.
I mean, I guess that's the deal maybe we should make.
Like, okay, you want to make Juneteenth a national holiday?
Abolition of slavery?
Makes sense.
Sorry, are you saying now that we can celebrate America?
Is that what you're saying?
We can be proud of Americans?
Everyone should stand for the anthem?
July 4th comes along, we should celebrate that and be happy and proud?
Putting all the apologies aside, we're moving past that?
Is that what you're saying?
I think you really gotta pick a lane, it would seem to me.
All right.
We played yesterday the video of a guy shoplifting in San Francisco from a Walgreens.
Though, not really shoplifting.
Because you think of shoplifting, you think of a guy grabbing something off the shelf, sticking it in his pocket, walking out, trying to be discreet about it.
That's usually what you think of with shoplifting.
But not this guy.
He rode in on a bike and rode out casually with a garbage bag of merchandise.
If you didn't see that video, let's play that video for you again.
Well, the good news is you got the security there with the phones and they're filming.
Oh, there he goes.
Security guard tries to do his job.
He makes a noble attempt.
Grabbing for the bag.
Either you're gonna try to stop the guy from stealing or not, and considering you're a security guard, maybe you should try to stop him.
If you're not, why are you there?
Why have a security guard at a Walgreens in San Francisco if they're not gonna... What actually is he there to do?
To film it with his phone?
You have security cameras already.
That's, in a way, that's gotta be a pretty plush job to be a security guard in San Francisco.
If you don't have a job right now and you're looking for something, go become a security guard in San Francisco because you don't have to do anything.
Your job is to, you're a figurehead.
You just sit there, you take a paycheck, and kind of wave at people as they come in and steal things.
But if that's your approach, fine.
Well, not really fine, but if that's your approach, All right.
Why even try to grab the bag at all?
That's what I understand.
But anyway, the guy, so he steals all that merchandise from Walgreens.
And we mentioned yesterday how this has been a big problem, especially not just in San Francisco, but especially in San Francisco.
And stores have been shutting down.
There's like 17, I think it was Walgreens or CVS, I believe it was Walgreens.
17 locations had to shut down because of this.
And when you start having stores shut down, what does that mean?
It means people are losing their jobs.
And yet Newsweek says that there's been a furious debate that was sparked by that video.
They report, quote, Shortly after the video was posted, numerous social media users expressed their own opinions on the incident, with many sparking debate.
And then quotes various Twitter users.
I guess we actually need to read those.
San Francisco supervisor Asha Safai also responded to the video by writing, this is exactly why I held a hearing on organized retail theft and I'm pushing for greater accountability on shoplifting in San Francisco.
As his tweet noted, Safai held a hearing last month with retailers to discuss the increase in retail crime in the city.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, here it is, over the past five years, Walgreens has closed 17 locations in San Francisco.
Among the remaining Walgreens locations in the city, theft incidents are four times the average number reported in similar stores across the country.
Four times.
While speaking with Newsweek, Safai said one of the most shocking things from the hearing was to hear from Walgreens, CVS, Safeway, The Gap, to hear them say that San Francisco is one of the epicenters for organized retail crime in the United States.
So they're having hearings about it.
What do we do about this problem?
They're asking themselves.
You know, you could stop the people who are doing this and arrest them.
It's probably the one thing that you could do.
I don't know how much discussion there really needs to be had about it.
But from what I could tell, the debate is among some on the left, and are probably being generous by saying just some, who are essentially claiming that this is a victimless crime.
And yeah, you know what?
Go into Walgreens, steal all you want, because all you're really doing is taking from the CEO of Walgreens, whoever that happens to be.
And we know that all CEOs are villains, are bad people.
Unless it's like the CEO of Planned Parenthood or something.
We make exceptions there.
Well, of course, even if you were only, quote unquote, only stealing from a CEO, it's still stealing.
The basic problem, and I wish this didn't have to be explained, the basic problem with stealing, no matter who you're stealing from, is that the thing you're taking is not yours.
This is what I teach my three-year-olds.
You can't take something that's not yours.
That's the issue.
But of course it's not.
The CEO is the last person impacted by this.
The people at the top of Walgreens, I doubt they've suffered very much financially from the fact that 17 locations were shut down in San Francisco.
The people that suffer are the people that work there and lost their jobs.
So the logic that's given, it's the same thing we hear, the defenses of rioting and looting.
We're told that, oh no, this is, if you're taken from anyone, you're taken from the fat cats.
Which even if that was true, it still wouldn't justify it, but it's not true.
So this is an argument that's wrong on every conceivable level.
All right, next, this is from the Daily Wire.
It says, under the suggestion and guidance of the Of the BIPOC members of the group, a New Zealand youth environmental protest group inspired by teen activist Greta Thunberg, disbanded, accusing itself of racism.
School Strike for Climate, that's the name of the group, their Auckland chapter wrote on June 12th, quote, School Strike for Climate Auckland is disbanding as an organization.
This is under the suggestion and guidance of the BIPOC, Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, members of our group, as well as individual BIPOC activists and organizations.
We are not holding any more climate strikes in the Auckland region.
BIPOC communities are disproportionately affected by climate change, so the fight for climate justice should be led by their voices and needs, not Pakeha ones.
Pakeha means white New Zealanders, apparently.
I'm probably pronouncing that horribly wrong, but...
Um, the group continued and said that there was an urgent need to decolonize the organization.
And then they continue from there and explain how the BIPOC members suggested that the organization should be destroyed.
And so the white members said, well, okay, well, if you say so.
Everything we worked for, we're going to just toss it out.
I mean, this is an organization that we started and it meant a lot to us, but if you're telling us that we should just get rid of it, then we will.
The whole idea that, and we hear this a lot, that the communities of color, quote unquote, are disproportionately affected by climate change, environmental racism, and so on.
How can that possibly be the case if what we're being told about climate change is true?
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is telling us that climate change is going to destroy the whole earth in like 10 or 11 years.
It keeps changing.
I feel like the, it seems as though the timeline has been 12 years for the past like five years.
They keep saying it's always 12 years.
The destruction of the earth is always 12 years in the future, which is kind of interesting.
But whenever it happens, if it's going to happen, that's what you're talking about.
You're saying the entire planet.
We're destroying the planet.
So if the whole planet is destroyed and the human race comes to an end, how can that disproportionately affect a certain race of people?
It's like if there's a An asteroid the size of Texas, bearing down, about to collide with Earth, going to turn Earth into a giant fireball.
And you would have these white liberals saying, you know, I'm really concerned about how this is going to affect communities of color.
Yeah, it'll affect them in a pretty devastating way, but also everybody else.
Um, of course the answer is that climate change is not destroying the earth, but that's what they claim.
So, I don't know how exactly any individual group of humans could be disproportionately affected by the human race coming to an end.
Okay, next year we have Merrick Garland, Attorney General.
He has been on a tear recently talking about the threat posed by white supremacists He talks about it a lot.
We still haven't really seen these white supremacists, but he's telling us they're out there.
And here he is once again discussing this dangerous threat.
The number of open FBI domestic terrorism investigations this year has increased significantly.
According to an unclassified summary of the March Intelligence Assessment, the two most lethal elements of the domestic violent extremist threat are racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists and militia violent extremists.
In the FBI's view, the top domestic violent extremist threat comes from racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, specifically those who advocated for the superiority of the white race.
We keep hearing this from him.
This exact line, actually.
We've heard this many times.
The greatest threat is the domestic extremists, specifically those motivated by a belief in the superiority of the white race.
He keeps talking about it, and yet we haven't seen.
These are, either they mostly don't exist, or they've discovered some sort of, they have
some sort of invisibility cloak that they've discovered.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Which would certainly, I would agree.
If they have that, then now I'm even more concerned.
But how do they get away?
How do they get away with doing this?
Well, as we've discussed, it's pretty clear.
It's easy to say that white supremacist violence is the greatest domestic terror threat When you've ruled out or decided that the more severe domestic terror threats aren't really terror threats.
So Antifa, when you think about domestic terror threats, or domestic groups that are out there right now committing acts of violence, causing chaos in the street, who's doing that?
First thing comes to mind, Antifa, also BLM.
But guys like Merrick Garland from the beginning have said, well, except them, they don't count because Antifa, what's Antifa?
It doesn't even exist.
It's an idea in the hearts of men.
And BLM, they're racial justice activists.
Yeah, they have a propensity to burn down buildings and loot and kill people, but, you know, it's just their way of expressing themselves.
So if you do that, Then yeah, if you rule out, if you have a list of the most dangerous domestic extremists, and everyone at the top you've ruled out for one reason or another, which is always the real reason is ideology and politics, then yeah, eventually you're gonna get down to white supremacists.
And well, they're the only ones left.
Also, former FBI agent Andrew McCabe was on CNN after these comments from Merrick Garland reacting And he was asked about the attack on the GOP softball game a few years ago.
You want to talk about a domestic terrorist attack?
We've got a far-left militant showing up at a GOP softball game and trying to assassinate a whole baseball field full of Republican politicians.
That you would think, okay, there is domestic terrorism, ideologically motivated, But Andrew McCabe says that, maybe not really.
Let's listen to him.
Andy, I thought it was significant.
The Attorney General said very clearly that the FBI's view, the top domestic violent extremist threat right now, comes from racially and ethnically motivated violent extremists.
He's talking about white supremacists.
But he also took care to note extremism and attacks on All political parties on all races and creeds and religions.
He noted the congressional baseball practice that was attacked only after the gunmen had asked if they were Republicans.
I thought it was significant.
Did you think that was significant that he raised this?
Yeah, it was, and an incredibly deft way to bring in that other side of the equation.
I mean, let's call it what it is, right?
I think he came right out and said, you know, our biggest hotspot right now is racially motivated, ethnically motivated extremists, and we all know that the broad Broad majority of those are white supremacist people targeting people of color and immigrants and things like that.
But he brought the other side of the equation into it by referring to the shooting of the congressional baseball practice.
And he did it very carefully by saying a shooting by someone only who committed a shooting only after he confirmed that the players were Republican.
I think that reflects the fact that the FBI still doesn't exactly know what that shooter was up to.
They never really uncovered the sort of detailed evidence that laid out a specific plot or an objective, but it is undeniable that he was targeting Republicans.
It was really, I thought, very effective.
What?
What?
The FBI never discovered what his specific objective was, yet it's undeniable that he was targeting Republicans.
Andy, that's the objective.
Total incoherence.
And this is what happens when these ideologues are absolutely committed to the notion ahead of time that the greatest threat, the greatest violent threat we face, right-wing extremists.
That has to be the case.
No matter what.
That's what would bring someone like McCabe.
He could sit there and say, yeah, he was targeting Republican politicians.
He actually asked ahead of time, are these Republicans?
And then pulled out the guns and started shooting.
But still, we don't really know what he was doing.
That is as clear as it could possibly be.
If even after that, you can't know his motive, then you can't know anyone's motive.
You certainly can't declare the motives of these alleged white supremacists.
If that's not clear enough, what possibly could be clear enough?
And of course McCabe also says that everybody knows that the greatest threat are these white groups that are targeting people of color and immigrants.
Really?
Everyone knows that?
Because I don't.
You make it sound like this is happening all the time, every day.
Well, please start listing examples.
Give me, I don't know, given that this is the greatest threat, bigger threat than BLM, bigger threat than Antifa, can you give me from the last year, I don't know, 10 examples, five, two of this sort of thing?
I don't think you can.
All right, moving on.
Like I said, we've got a lot to cover, and I'm just trying to blow through as many of these as I can.
I wanted to mention this briefly from the website Uproxx.
It says, a recent study conducted by the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative at the University of Southern California found that Muslims are woefully underrepresented in film.
The report, which is titled, Missing and Maligned, The Reality of Muslims in Popular Global Movies, discovered that in 200 popular films released between 2017 and 2019, in the United States, UK, Australia, and New Zealand, Muslims account for only 1.6% of speaking roles.
To break it down even further, quote, while Muslims make up 24% of the global population, they made up less than 2% of the film's research.
Meaning out of 8,965 speaking characters in 200 movies, 144 were Muslim.
Of the 144 Muslim characters, about 34 were Muslim women.
144 were Muslim. Of the 144 Muslim characters, about 34 were Muslim women.
This according to USA Today. And this is a big problem that we have to of course solve.
A lack of Muslim representation in film.
The reason I mention this is that it perfectly illustrates how nonsensical this modern idea of representation is, especially when it comes to film.
First of all, you notice what they did there?
They're looking at films in the US, UK, Australia, and one other country, right?
And to show that there's an underrepresentation, they tell us that the global percentage of Muslims is 24%.
Well, 24% Muslims on the global, only 2% in these movies.
Yeah, but you weren't looking at movies globally.
If you included films that were made in Muslim-majority countries, I'm sure that percentage would go up.
But you specifically didn't do that because you're trying to build this case.
Because in reality, let's just take the United States, for example.
And I can't tell you off the top of my head what the percentage of Muslims in the UK is, for example.
It's going to be higher, significantly higher than it is in the United States.
But in the United States, I think the percentage by population of Muslims in the United States is probably 1% around there.
Very small.
And so what does representation mean?
Representation means if Muslims are being Proportionally represented in film, then that means that they would show up in films really rarely.
Because they show up in the population rarely.
One percent is very small.
So if you're rarely seeing Muslims in films in the United States, that means that Muslims are being properly represented.
Because they are a small minority.
That's what representation means.
Now, if you have 1% of the population and you want them to be in 10% of films, you're not looking for representation.
You're looking for something quite a bit more than that.
What you're calling for is massive, exponential over-representation.
And so be honest about what you're calling for.
And the other thing that's always lost in these discussions about representation is the small matter of choice, right?
People make choices.
We hear the same thing when it comes to women in the workplace.
And we're told women make 78 cents on the dollar, which is totally false.
But it is true that women oftentimes will go to lower paying professions.
And we're told that this is a big problem.
But once again, you're taking choice out of the equation.
Did you ever consider that maybe women go into those kinds of professions because that's what they want to do?
Muslims are underrepresented in film in the United States.
But I guarantee you, if we look at doctors, engineers, those sorts of professions, the STEM field, they're going to be overrepresented.
What does that tell us?
It means that in a lot of Muslim families and in Muslim culture, they put an emphasis on those kinds of professions and not as much of an emphasis on the arts.
Not true across the board, but generally speaking.
Is that a problem?
What are you saying?
We should have fewer Muslim... We need to siphon some of the Muslim doctors off and put them in movies instead.
No, people make choices, and that's perfectly fine.
I got one TikTok video.
We gotta play it.
I'm sorry.
I can't.
I cannot go into vacation knowing that my last show we didn't play a TikTok video.
It wouldn't feel right to me.
So, here we have a TikTok of a woman, a white woman, explaining why fatphobia is racist.
So listen up.
Here's your reminder that fatphobia is rooted in racism.
As always, if you haven't read this book, go do that.
The main thing to understand is that for the last 300-ish years, white folks have been marketing fatness as a black trait.
And this is regardless of whether or not black people individually were actually fat.
That was irrelevant.
The message they spread was that black women specifically were ravenous and uncontrollable, and these barbaric traits made them fat.
On the flip side, thinness was marketed as a white trait.
Again, regardless of whether or not individual white people were actually thin, that was irrelevant.
The idea was that white women specifically were refined and restrained, and this led them to having delicate, thin bodies.
Over the years, these messages have become more subtle, but even today they are still very prevalent in conversations around race, health, capitalism, and poverty.
This is the irony of the woke set, is that in the effort to dispel what they call racist stereotypes, they're spreading those, oftentimes inventing the stereotypes, and spreading them in an effort to dispel them.
So this is another example of that.
She's not the only one making this claim, and she was referring to a book.
The stereotype that That black people are fat.
That's wrong.
I've never even heard of that before.
That's an association I've never made.
I've never heard of that stereotype until the woke people started saying it.
Until they got up there and said, hey, you know, not all black people are fat, okay?
Okay?
Who said they were?
I think you meant to put that in your diary or something.
That's not to say to the public.
Don't project your own issues, your own biases onto everybody else.
If someone told me, imagine a fat person, probably I would imagine a fat white guy.
That's the first thing that would probably pop into my mind.
I don't spend a lot of time imagining fat people, but if I did, that's what I would do.
I wouldn't immediately go to a black person.
But even that, I don't know, maybe that's racist too.
Because the other part of this is that we're also told that fat is beautiful.
And fat is a good thing.
It's a positive thing.
It's nothing to be ashamed of.
And so, if that's the case, then even if someone did have this stereotypical notion that black people are more likely to be fat or whatever it is, isn't it a compliment according to you?
Fat is beautiful.
What are you saying?
That black people aren't beautiful?
Is that what you're saying?
Seems to be a little bit of a conflict there.
Bit of a conflict.
And no, in reality, obesity is not a racial thing.
It is pretty simple, really.
If you eat many more calories than you burn, you're going to get fat and gain weight, whatever your race is.
That is a problem that cuts across all racial boundaries.
You know, oftentimes I'll meet someone, they ask me for what I do for a living, and I'm offended that they don't already know.
And then I tell them, and then they ask me, you know, well, why should I watch your show?
Like, why do I have to explain myself to you in the first place?
I'm very bad at this self-promotion, as you could probably tell.
But if I had to answer it, it's number one for the conservative commentary, but number two, probably most important, it's to get a load and get a sight of my glorious, beautiful beard.
And I know all of you, you know, you want the same.
You want the same in your life, that kind of beard.
And what I tell you what you need is upkeep.
You can't just let it grow and neglect it.
You have to make sure you're taking care of the beard as it's growing.
And that's why you need Beardsupply.com.
Beardsupply.com has all the top quality beard products.
Men like these products for their beards.
Women like these products.
On there, men.
And for a limited time, when you go to Beardsupply.com and use code WALSH, we get 50% off your first month when you subscribe to one of their already affordable beard oils costing you less than $8.
Not only does 50% of your first month sound great, but subscribing comes with its own perks as well.
You get your product of choice automatically delivered every one, two, or three months.
It's your choice, and you never have to worry about running out of product ever again.
And remember, use code WALSH for 50% off your first month of the subscription.
So go sign up right now.
And I wish you the best in your beard-growing endeavors.
Again, that's Beardsupply.com.
All right, let's go now to reading the YouTube comments.
This is from JRCrash.
He says, Abuela's Ghost sounds like an awesome name for a band.
It does, actually.
I'll agree with you there.
Maximillion says, Matt, I think you should change the title of your show to The Bad News with Matt Walsh.
The more I think about it, it came to me yesterday in a moment of inspiration.
I only have those every once in a while.
The more I think about it, the more I like it.
I don't know if the powers that be here would necessarily like that kind of branding for the show.
The bad news.
Because there aren't very many people who, if you're selling the show that way, would actually want to click on that and watch it or listen to it.
Yeah, let me get some more of that bad news.
See, I would, but I think most people probably wouldn't.
Another comment says, referring to me calling the presidency the most stressful job on the planet, says, Matt, you're too smart for that.
People don't pay $100 million in campaigns to be the most stressed person on the planet.
Yeah, the most stressful job on the planet, obviously, hyperbole.
But it is a stressful job, being the president.
It doesn't mean that all of our presidents have done the job well, or even most of them have done it well.
But there's no denying that it is a physically and mentally stressful job.
I don't think there's any way around that.
And all you have to do is look at the physical transformations of pretty much every president in the modern times, except for Trump.
He's the only one who came out looking the same as he did going in.
But all the rest of them look like they aged 20 years in the Oval Office.
Doesn't mean they were doing a great job, but it's obviously a very stressful position.
We're out in front of the entire world.
And you have a great amount of power and responsibility and everything else.
And that's why you probably don't want someone who's 80 years old to be dealing with that level of stress.
If the job aged Obama and Bush 20 years in 8 years, what's it going to do to someone who's already 80 or 78?
Trail Price says, Matt, I think it's about time we address the alien in the room.
I don't know what in the world you're possibly referring to.
And finally, Edward and Jessica say, thank you, Matt.
I really needed to feel even more nervous about my flight on Friday.
Yeah, we were talking yesterday about all the violent incidents on airplanes have skyrocketed recently.
On top of that, it's more expensive than ever.
You have to wear a mask.
And that's why, you know, you're taking a flight.
I will do anything.
If I had to go across the ocean, we would go across in a rowboat rather than take a plane at this point.
Well, we've got drag queens singing to our children on Nickelodeon.
We've got little girls being encouraged to twerk in the street, which we'll talk about in just a second.
The left is, we know, trying to wipe out our culture as it once was and replace it with a brand of woke authoritarianism.
And we have to stop them.
And that's why you need to pick up Ben Shapiro's new book, The Authoritarian Moment, and learn about How we got to this place as a society and where we can go from here.
So if you understand the threat this poses to our future, it's time to read up on the truth and stop the nonsense in its tracks.
The Authoritarian Moment is now available for pre-order at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, or any other major bookseller.
You know, it's no secret also that the left is a cult, and cults are notoriously hard to leave.
However, some do find the strength to get out.
Georgia Howe is one of those people.
A former teacher and liberal, Georgia Howe, Saw the ideological indoctrination sweeping the nation, took a stand against it, which you can now listen to or do anywhere, anytime on her podcast, Office Hours, from discussing critical race theory to transgenderism to all the woke nonsense in her school.
She's really good on that topic, especially.
You get all of that with Office Hours with Georgia Howe.
So subscribe and download Office Hours with Georgia Howe on Apple Podcasts or whatever your platform of choice happens to be and get ready for the ultimate listening experience no matter where you are.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Alright Matt, hold on for me for just one moment.
moment, we need to come in and make an adjustment.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
(SINGING) --to you.
Happy birthday to you.
Happy birthday, dear Matt.
Happy birthday to you.
[APPLAUSE]
Are we filming this right now?
Is that the idea?
OK.
Well, I'm generally opposed to birthdays, as you all know.
But I'll make an exception in my own case.
So thank you all for that.
What am I supposed to do, blow this out?
It doesn't seem very COVID-safe, but... Well, it took me five.
That was pathetic.
All right.
Thank you.
Thoroughly embarrassed, and I appreciate it.
Thank you.
So, are we still doing the show, or...?
Today for our daily cancellation, I'm gonna cancel everyone involved
in that unseemly display.
But I also have something that hopefully requires little explanation.
And I think it really speaks for itself.
And I have to admit, I struggle with this, with whether to show this kind of thing or talk about it.
Because on one hand, I don't wanna call attention to it and contribute unintentionally to the problem.
But on the other hand, I don't wanna ignore abuse of a child and let it go and criticize.
And that brings us to this viral video as reported by The Blaze.
Quote, a video of a crowd applauding and encouraging a young girl who is twerking in the street in New York City outraged many on social media who called it abusive and immoral.
The video was posted to a Twitter account but originated from an account on TikTok called YourFaveAfricanFA, whatever that is.
It shows a very young girl twerking while the crowd records videos, applauds, and laughs.
The original video was first posted to TikTok and only garnered 207,000 views, far fewer than those on the same video posted to Twitter.
And before we go any further, I'll show you the video just so you understand what we're dealing with here, and here it is.
We all need this confidence in life.
[crowd cheering]
Now, as the Blaze alluded to, plenty of people were rightfully outraged by that video.
to, plenty of people were rightfully outraged by that video.
The sexualization of a child by a group of cheering adults is the kind of thing that should provoke outrage in the hearts and minds of all good and decent people.
We shouldn't react to the perpetual outrage culture, as some do, by deciding that apathy is the best course, as if outrage in and of itself is the problem.
That's been the defense mechanism of many people, including many on the right, who wish to demonstrate their non-leftist Bonafides, by not objecting to or showing any anger towards our cultural decay.
That's the wrong approach, to put it mildly.
The problem with outrage, just as with cancel culture, is that it often targets the wrong things, and it's wielded in the wrong ways.
I'm not against people being outraged, nor am I against people getting, or things getting cancelled, obviously.
I'm against both of those when they're disordered, improper, misapplied, or fraudulent, or some combination.
Of the four.
But not everybody was outraged by the video.
It did have its defenders, including a guy named Pete Dominick, who apparently is a comedian of some sort, and he came after me and accused me of being worse than the Taliban because I said that the adults in that video should be arrested.
Actually, in fairness, I said that if I ever run for president, my one promise is that I will arrest all adults involved in that sort of thing, and that sort of thing being the sexualization of children.
That's not entirely true, though.
I would do a few other things as well as president, like build a 300-foot statue of Christopher Columbus in the middle of D.C.
just out of spite.
And I'd ban U.S.
embassies from flying pride flags, or any flag that isn't an American flag.
I might do a few other things, too, but certainly criminalizing the abuse and exploitation of children in all forms and imprisoning the abusers would be at the top of the list.
For this, Dominic accused me of being worse than the Taliban.
And then he went on to argue that there isn't anything necessarily wrong with young children twerking on the street corner.
And he's not alone in that view.
Obviously, he's not alone, as the young child in the video was surrounded by adults who clearly felt the same way about the situation.
What we have to understand about a video like that is that it's not an aberration.
It's not something that happens out of the blue in an otherwise decent and morally adjusted culture.
No, this is born from primarily two factors.
One, the blurring of lines, blurring of the lines of distinction between adults and children.
In our culture, kids are routinely exposed to all kinds of degeneracy that even adults in prior generations would have never seen or heard or encountered in any form.
And now kids at very young ages are exposed to it.
Meanwhile, kids are given power and agency that they are not equipped to handle, as discussed in the opening.
They're given the power even to decide their own identity.
So the idea of the innocence and naivete of children has been lost.
Meanwhile, too, the role of adults, of parents, has been similarly blurred into oblivion.
Many parents these days think that their job is simply to facilitate their children's choices, whatever those choices happen to be, and ensure at least a basic level of physical safety, maybe, as the kids go about living however they want to live and doing whatever they want to do.
This is the kind of environment that we've created, and it gives rise to many terrible things, that video being just one rotten fruit from that tree.
I hope I don't have to go any further to explain the problem with what we just witnessed, or to justify myself in saying that all of the adults involved there are cancelled.
And quite a lot more would happen to them if I was in a position of authority, which, fortunately for everyone probably, I never will be.
And we'll leave it there for today and for the next several days.
I wish you all well as you're working in the drudgery and toil of your jobs.
I'll be enjoying my vacation the best that one can with four kids, and I'll see you back in a little bit.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
Also, 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 Knowles Show, 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 director is Austin Stevens.
Production manager Pavel Vodovsky.
The show is edited by Sasha Tolmachev.
Our audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
Hair and makeup is done by Nika Geneva.
And our production coordinator is McKenna Waters.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2021.
Today on The Ben Shapiro Show, a video of shoplifter in San Francisco draws national attention to the city's massive property crime spree, and the Biden administration declares white supremacy America's greatest domestic violence threat.
