Ep. 1069 - Leftists Push White Guilt On Thanksgiving
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, over the thanksgiving holiday Leftists invited us to shamefully grovel and beg forgiveness for the alleged atrocities committed by our ancestors. I will explain why I decline that invitation. Also, Hispanic voters are moving to the right. George Soros has a solution. Plus, you’ve heard about a pandemic. Now the media wants to tell us about a “tripledemic.” Protests break out against the communist regime in China. And a show about archeology is a big hit on Netflix, but the media warns that it’s “dangerous.”
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
DailyWire+ - Get 50% off new memberships at https://bit.ly/3ijYP0f and gift memberships at https://bit.ly/3ikv0g8
EXODUS - Watch Dr. Jordan B. Peterson’s new biblical series EXODUS: https://bit.ly/3u5fAPj
DailyWire+ Shop - Get 40% OFF the entire DailyWire+ Shop: https://bit.ly/3GQRmQj
Jeremy’s Razors - Get 20% OFF all Jeremy’s Razors products: https://bit.ly/3UaO9hx
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, over the Thanksgiving holiday, leftists invited us to shamefully grovel and beg forgiveness for the alleged atrocities committed by our ancestors.
I will explain why I declined that invitation.
Also, Hispanic voters are moving to the right.
George Soros has a solution for that.
Plus, you've heard about a pandemic.
Now the media wants us to learn about a Tripledemic is what they're calling it.
Protests break out against the communist regime in China, and a show about archaeology is a big hit on Netflix, but the media warns that it's dangerous.
How can a show about archaeology be dangerous?
We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Wells Show.
(upbeat music)
Huge reminder that this is the last day of our best sale of the year.
It's 50% off annual memberships and it ends at midnight.
With that, I have a thought to share.
Last week, the National Retail Federation forecasted record sales for this holiday season.
Projecting that, over the next few weeks, we will hand over to retailers nearly $1 trillion of our money.
And what are they doing with the money that you and I choose to give them?
Well, this year, Walmart kicked out the MyPillow guy and used our money to force-train their workers on critical race theory, denouncing the U.S.
as a white supremacy system.
This year, Amazon used our money in their studios division to produce both a castrated Lord of the Rings series, which rejects masculinity, and also an anti-feminine A League of Their Own reboot that is euphorically unapologetically gay, in quotes.
Even this weekend, Disney used consumers' money to release an animated film called Strange World, in which a woke father encourages his 16-year-old son to flirt with another boy.
These companies ridicule ideals, they shame freedom, and they warp a child's conscience.
And everyone listening or watching right now, boycotts are not enough, because boycotts are short-term.
They come and go in a week, and then these soulless companies get back to the business of making your morals and way of life extinct.
They're only It's one thing in a global economy that can reverse the left-hand path of multinational corporations like Walmart and Amazon Disney.
Only one thing can tame them, and that is competition.
And we are that competition.
Subscribers supporting The Daily Wire are that competition.
And because of our subscribers, we will grow into a long-term competitor to check Disney and their kind by creating cultural breakthroughs, by releasing explosive documentaries, by uncanceling important voices, By developing awe-inspiring films that celebrate industry and heroism, and by producing instant children's classics.
Only then, only after Disney and their woke pals have seen The Daily Wire and others out-competing their content, will they reverse course or perish.
So let me be as transparent as I can on this Cyber Monday.
My podcast and those of the other Daily Wire hosts streaming for free on the internet do not generate enough ad revenue for us to compete with Disney's $30 billion entertainment budget.
That's what our subscribers are for.
That's why we need you guys.
Our subscribers are concerned.
Citizens who choose to make long-term investments in Daily Wire plus funding both cultural wins such as the halting of transgender surgeries on children at Vanderbilt and also content wins such as Daily Wire's upcoming blockbuster films and documentaries.
We at the Daily Wire are investing everything we've got in this to put the government Big Tech and Hollywood back on their best behavior, and you can join us for less than $100 right now.
Invest long-term in The Daily Wire today with 50% off new memberships and gift memberships for your loved ones until 1159 p.m.
tonight.
It's easier than ever to get great content and finance our mission to help you and your loved ones live more freely.
As we head into December, we're going to start hearing more about the war on Christmas.
But before the focus shifts in that direction, it's worth noticing the much more direct and intense war being waged on the holiday that we just celebrated, which is Thanksgiving.
The war on Thanksgiving has been raging for years now as the cultural powers that be attempt to turn a time of gratitude and celebration into an occasion for guilt and recrimination.
Now, we know that these forces seek to destroy all traditions passed to us by our ancestors, and this is the primary issue that they have with Christmas, too, with every holiday that they themselves didn't invent, is that it's a tradition passed to us by our ancestors, and so they hate it reflexively.
But Thanksgiving, like Columbus Day, is especially egregious in their eyes because it harkens back to the European conquest of North America.
Which is an historical event that these days is supposed to provoke nothing but grief and lamentation.
In fact, for years the left has tried to literally rebrand Thanksgiving as un-Thanksgiving, or as it's called in some quarters now, Thanksgiving is a national day of mourning.
In recognition, of course, of alleged atrocities carried out against indigenous people by white settlers.
This was the message that the left tried to send again this past Thanksgiving, many taking the opportunity to post on social media with messages like this.
This is from journalist Walter Brahman, who says, while giving thanks and celebrating the holiday, remember it is a national day of mourning for Native Americans that marks generations of broken promises and oppression.
It is important to recognize that legacy as we grapple with a resurgent fascist movement.
Solidarity forever.
And then he continues, say it with me.
The United States carried out a genocide against this continent's indigenous people and it served as a blueprint for future generations.
A writer named Simon Moyes Smith agreed, posting, "Today is the national day of mourning for
indigenous peoples all across this land.
We also call it un-Thanksgiving.
On this day, we as natives celebrate our resiliency in that we are still here.
The U.S. tried to kill every indigenous man, woman, and child, but we are still here."
And there were also acts of protest around the country, like in Chicago.
As the New York Post reports, quote, for the second time in under two months, a statue dedicated to former President Abraham Lincoln was defaced in Chicago on Thanksgiving.
A statue of a young Abraham Lincoln in Senn Park in Chicago's Edgewater neighborhood was found covered in splotches of red paint, along with the words, colonizer and land back.
According to the Chicago Tribune, the statue also had Dakota 38 written on it in reference to the Dakota Sioux members who Lincoln ordered to be executed following the Dakota War of 1862.
Well, it's a good thing that there aren't any injustices happening in the world today right now, which frees us up to protest injustices from 150 years ago.
That is quite a nice luxury, I must say.
But, you know, maybe even something to be thankful for.
I don't know.
Just not on Thanksgiving, as the holiday is simply too complicated now.
It's complicated.
This indeed has become the media's favorite term to describe Thanksgiving, with many outlets bringing in Native American activists to talk about the emotional complexities surrounding what we all once thought was a simple and wholesome holiday.
But it's not anymore, because it's just complicated.
Watch.
Thanksgiving originally celebrated a harvest feast shared by Native Americans and English communists.
But as Fox 43's Harry Lee explains, the holiday can bring out different emotions for indigenous people.
For many Americans, Thanksgiving means gathering with family to eat a large meal together.
For Native Americans, the holiday isn't so simple.
A lot of people in the indigenous communities do want to look at this the time of morning because they see, you know, just what we have lost.
After Europeans colonized North America, many Native communities were decimated by disease, famine, and displacement.
Frank Littlebear of the Plains Cree Nation explains, though, that the many tribes and families of Indigenous communities now celebrate Thanksgiving in different ways.
He points out fall was always a season of thanks.
It actually started in October, a time of receiving the harvest of the Three Sisters, the corn, bean, squash, deer, things like that.
And really preparing for winter.
So it was actually a time of celebration.
As for the elementary school depictions of the first Thanksgiving, which often depict Puritan English and Wampanoag tribe members inaccurately dressed in Western Plains attire.
I think, yeah, there's there's certain things that they could probably do better.
Little Bear says it's still important to build a connection to Native American culture from a young age.
It's a building process that's not going to happen overnight.
Build a connection to Native American culture, that's what Thanksgiving's about.
Meanwhile, the ACLU tried the repetition technique, posting on Thanksgiving morning, in all caps, YOU ARE ON NATIVE LAND.
YOU ARE ON NATIVE LAND.
Unfortunately, they only repeated the phrase 10 times.
If they could have squeezed in that 11th time, I may have been convinced, but they only got to 10.
Now, There are a few points here that I think are worth making.
First, of course the story about Thanksgiving that we tell our children, or used to tell them, is simplified.
Okay?
That's because young children are only capable of understanding simple concepts.
You give them the simple version first, and then over time you build on it, adding layers of complexity.
And in fact, the left agrees with this, which is why they haven't actually set out to give children a more complex or nuanced understanding of the European settlement of the New World.
Instead, they've replaced one simplified story with a different, but even more simplified story.
It's just been simplified in the other direction.
So the popular and simplified myth now, told not just to children but hammered into everybody's head, is a story of evil, barbaric white people who came here and just immediately carried out a genocide against peaceful Indians, who never did a single thing to deserve or provoke any of the violence visited upon them.
This is the story we're supposed to believe now.
It is the new founding myth of America.
You know, every nation has its founding myth, right?
Usually the myths are designed to instill pride and patriotism and gratitude.
And yes, they're not always 100% accurate.
But people in other cultures and in other countries, they don't spend time debunking, well, that's not exactly how it happened.
They wouldn't have been dressed like that.
That's not the point of the story.
Okay?
Getting the wardrobe details right isn't the point.
A lot of times the point is, again, to instill pride, patriotism, and gratitude.
But our new founding myth is designed instead to instill resentment, and guilt, and shame.
The modern Western world is the only civilization in history that I'm aware of that lies to itself about its own history and founding in order to make itself seem worse.
Second, as I've pointed out many times in the past and will continue to point out, The claim that we stole land from Native Americans, from some group called, quote, Native Americans, or, quote, indigenous people, is incoherent.
There never was any homogenous group of natives occupying this land before the settlers got here, okay?
It's not like the whole country was occupied by this one group that we would call Native Americans.
There were rather disparate and warring tribes that waged wars of conquest and extermination against each other and had been doing so for centuries before we arrived.
The ACLU says that we're on native land, but whose land exactly?
I mean, which natives?
The ones who were most recently occupying the land when white people showed up?
Or the ones who those natives stole it from?
Or the natives who the natives it was stolen from, stole it from?
Or the natives who had it before that, etc.
I mean, you have to be more specific.
But you can't be more specific because there is no coherent chain of custody for this allegedly stolen land.
There was, for thousands of years rather, only the Law of Conquest, which is a law that all people lived by and died by.
That doesn't make it right, doesn't make it wrong, it just makes it what it is, what it was.
It simply means that it doesn't make any sense to try and identify special victims of conquest.
Because every conquered people were conquerors before they were conquered.
So, there are winners and losers in such a system.
This is the distinction.
You want to talk about the left wants nuance, well here it is.
In a world governed by the Law of Conquest, which is how the whole world was governed for thousands of years, there are winners and losers, but it is much harder to identify villains and victims.
You know, by the law of the land at the time, it's hard to make villains out of Indian tribes that, for example, massacred settlements.
That's just how it worked.
And the settlements were on land that those Indian tribes wanted or felt that they had a right to.
But it's also hard to make villains out of the settlers who responded in kind to that sort of aggression.
Again, it's the way the world worked.
We can only be grateful that we do not live in times nearly as harsh or unforgiving as that.
And we can and should be grateful to our ancestors who gave us The comfortable and luxurious lives that we lead.
Modern people love to feast at the banquet of Western civilization while still whining about the people who provided the banquet and judging them for doing what they had to do in order to provide it.
But you notice that none of these people are leaving the banquet.
They're still shoving their fat, ungrateful faces.
Third, and this is the point that I most wanted to drive home, and it is this.
I am a Native American, okay?
I am a Native American, and so are most of you in the audience.
And I don't mean that in the Elizabeth Warren sense.
I'm not claiming one one-thousandth Comanche blood or whatever.
I'm saying that I was born here, I am a citizen, And therefore, I am a native.
I am a native to this country, and I am an American.
Therefore, I am a Native American.
Now, that's a title that we really need to start using correctly.
Any legal citizen born in this country is native to it, and thus is a Native American.
We have no trouble recognizing this when it comes to state citizenship.
Now, if I told you that I was a Native Marylander, Because I was born in Maryland.
Nobody would have any problem with that.
I am native to Maryland because I was born there.
And yet somehow we have this idea that I can be native to Maryland, again, something no one would dispute, a native Marylander, and yet not native to the country that Maryland is a part of.
So I can say I'm a native Marylander.
But I cannot say I'm a Native American.
Because that title, Native to the Country, is reserved for a very specific group of people, to a special victim group, because they were here originally, we're told.
But they weren't.
Because if you trace it back far enough, every person who has ever lived on this side of the world is originally from the other side of it.
Nobody is native here in the absolute sense.
We are all descended from foreign nomads.
All of us.
And yet, my ancestors came here, just as the ancestors of those we call indigenous came here, and my ancestors fought for this land and conquered it, just as the so-called indigenous people had done before them.
And then I was born, And this is my country.
It is my home.
It is my native land.
And I'm proud of that.
And I apologize to no one for it.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[Music]
You know, on Friday we released the first two episodes of the brand new biblical series by Dr. Jordan B. Peterson.
This series is called Exodus, and in it, Jordan Peterson sits down with other scholars to read the book of Exodus and discuss what it means and why it remains significant thousands of years after it was written.
Scholars at the table include Dennis Prager, Jonathan Pagot, and many more as well.
There will be new episodes releasing weekly, and trust me, you don't want to miss this series, so check out the trailer.
Here it is.
The Hebrews created history as we know it.
You don't get away with anything.
And so you might think you can bend the fabric of reality and that you can treat people instrumentally and that you can bow to the tyrant and violate your conscience without cost.
You will pay the piper.
It's going to call you out of that slavery into freedom, even if that pulls you into the desert.
And we're going to see that there's something else going on here that is far more cosmic and deeper than what you can imagine.
The highest ethical spirit to which we're beholden is presented precisely as that spirit that allies itself with the cause of freedom against tyranny.
Yes, exactly!
I want villains to get punished.
But do you want the villains to learn before they have to pay the ultimate price?
That's such a Christian question.
(dramatic music)
You gotta be a member to watch, so head to dailywire.com/subscribe
to become a member and watch Exodus today.
All right, I wanna begin with a story that...
Is not one of the headlines that grabbed everybody's attention over the weekend.
In fact, this story has grabbed comparatively few people's attention, but it's important enough that I'm going to mention it here.
So, this is the story from Fox.
It says, a liberal group linked to billionaire George Soros has been cleared by the FCC to purchase Spanish language radio stations throughout the country, rekindling concerns that a radical political agenda will influence information provided to Hispanic voters.
Miami's iconic Spanish-language conservative talk radio station, Radio Mambi, is one of the 18 stations the Soros-backed Latino Media Group will purchase from Televisa Univision for a reported $60 million.
Radio Mambi, which is historically linked to the Cuban exile community and offers an anti-communism view, will be controlled by liberals once the deal is finalized.
Latino Media Network, which is partially financed by an investment group affiliated with Soros, the Soros Fund Management Is controlled by Jess Morales, a former Hillary for America
and AFL-CIO employee, and former Obama White House staffer as well.
The FCC rejected a petition to block the proposed sale.
And so that's the news.
So why is this important?
Well, I think that should be obvious.
George Soros, who is truly one of the worst human beings to ever live on the planet, at least in the past, I don't know, two centuries.
I put him in the top five, top ten at least.
And he has moved from financing the destruction of our cities with woke DAs who don't enforce the law to now buying Spanish language radio stations and flipping them over to make them leftists.
I mean, he's still buying up the DAs as well.
It's not like he has to choose between the two.
That's the advantage of being a billionaire.
But he's doing both and a lot more as well.
The idea here is to counter the move to the right that we're seeing in the Hispanic community.
Because the left for so long has taken the Hispanic vote for granted.
That's why they've, in large part, why they've opened up the borders to begin with, shipped as many Hispanic people here as they can.
That's what the Great Replacement is all about.
The Great Replacement that Chuck Schumer admitted to a week ago.
But they've hit a snag, because they've found that Latinos are voting Republican more and more with each election.
Now, the Democrats still get the majority of the Latino vote, but it's trending in the wrong direction for them.
Because they lost a portion of their usual share in the 2018 midterms, then even more in the 2020 election, and then even more in the 2022 midterms.
Again, things are trending in the wrong direction, so what do they do about it?
Well, you cue George Soros.
He's a literal comic book villain.
He even looks like the bad guy in a cartoon or something.
And his plan is to buy the votes back by taking over the information pipelines.
That's what's happening.
And as I've established now, in case it wasn't clear, he is an evil son of a bitch.
I mean, the world would be a better place when he dies.
And I know we're not supposed to say that sort of thing.
Well, the left can say that, but on the right, you're not allowed to ever point that out or say that.
But it's just a fact.
I mean, the guy's like 92 years old.
He's done immense damage to the world.
And when he is no longer in the world, it would be better for everyone.
And all of that is true.
But at the same time, we can also recognize, I think, that this is the left playing chess while we on the right play checkers, right?
Which is a common problem.
They go on offense always.
So they notice that they're losing the Spanish vote, so instead of just whining about it on Twitter, they go out and do this.
They try to reclaim the information pipelines.
They go to war for it.
Human beings have been going to war for resources since time immemorial.
Well, now the greatest resource is, it's not something you can dig out of the ground, it's information.
And as a political resource, it's, I mean, it's the number one political resource.
And the left is at war to control it.
That's why they're so upset about Elon Musk taking over Twitter.
They see it as a significant defeat in this battle, right, for, to control the information, which it is.
And this move by Soros, it's not going to be enough to neutralize the effect of what Elon Musk has done, but it's a start anyway, and that's what they're doing.
And we need to get our heads in the game and realize that.
Alright, so you've heard about a pandemic.
Well, now say hello to a triple-demic.
This is from Mother Jones.
It says, respiratory illnesses are sweeping the nation, overwhelming hospitals, causing kids to miss school, and keeping adults home from work.
The culprit, COVID, and respiratory, well, RSV is the virus, and the flu.
So that's all three of them.
Dr. William Schaffner says we're facing an onslaught of three viruses, COVID, RSV, and influenza, all simultaneously.
We're calling this a tripledemic, is the word they're using.
I've also heard tridemic used.
I think I prefer tridemic of the two.
And it's not a term made up by Mother Jones.
This is what the media is running with.
And here's the thing.
They are right that RSV is a scary virus in children, that's for sure.
We've had more than one child who ended up in the emergency room with RSV.
I've had to sit by the hospital bed more than once with a young child who's struggling to breathe.
It is one of the scariest things you can experience as a parent.
As far as the flu goes, again, yes, that can be extremely serious with kids.
As I mentioned, we've had the flu go through our house this month.
And it's...
You know, all the kids had nasty coughs for two weeks.
My wife is pregnant with twins.
Still hasn't completely gotten over it.
But the point is that RSV and the flu have always been with us.
Or at least they've been known about for decades.
I think RSV was first identified 70 or 80 years ago or so.
And they've always been the far greater concern, especially for kids.
There was never any reason for parents to worry about COVID with their kids.
There was never any good reason for that.
There was never any good data-backed reason for parents to be overly worried or even worried at all, actually, about COVID and their kids.
But flu and RSV were always the real risks.
And that's what some of us, many of us, have been saying for years now.
But we were shut down, castigated, ignored, silenced.
And now we're getting all these panicky stories about flu and RSV, also including COVID.
They throw COVID into it just so that COVID doesn't get its feelings hurt, I guess.
But we're getting these stories as though the media just found out that these viruses exist, even though they've always existed.
And we continue to live our lives in spite of them, right?
They're out there, we know that.
But we live our lives because what the hell else are we supposed to do?
You take basic precautions, you wash your hands, that kind of thing.
If you're sick, if your child is sick, you stay home.
Most people have always understood that you do that.
We don't need the CDC to tell us.
We don't need any kind of official quarantine recommendation.
Is it five days?
Is it ten days?
Is it two weeks?
It's always been pretty obvious.
If your kid's clearly sick, has a fever, is coughing and all that, then you stay home if you can.
But other than that, you basically just live your life.
What other option is there?
That's what we've been saying all along.
Like, if we were not, COVID and RSV, especially again when it comes to kids, they've always been out there, we've always known about them.
And yet we continue to live our lives.
Why then would we respond differently to COVID?
And that's the thing they could never explain.
On CNN, they're dealing with this tridemic and the senior medical correspondent has some advice on how we can deal with this.
Let's listen to that.
I know a lot of this has to do with the fact that people were taking such big mitigation steps over the last several years.
That's why we're seeing such a difference now.
A big question people want to know, though, is how they avoid getting sick as the flu cases are already this high and people are gathering for the holidays.
They're out and about much more than they have been in the last several years.
Right, Caitlin, so all of the advice that I'm gonna give you, you have heard it before.
There is nothing new under the sun.
It's very basic stuff.
It's things like getting a flu shot, so important, washing your hands frequently, and if you want to, no one's advising you to, but if you want to, certainly wearing a mask is going to help protect you against the flu, not to mention things like RSV and COVID and other respiratory diseases.
As you mentioned, flu hospitalizations at a high.
Right now, for this point in the season, such an early flu season.
If you look all the way to the right, you can see a bar that represents the rate now.
All the rates over the past 10 years, way lower at this point in the season.
If you want to.
If you want to, you can wear a mask, she says.
No one's advising it at this point.
But if you want to, you can.
At least for right now, they're not advising it.
This was always where this was going to head is that once people stop worrying about COVID and you're not able to, this is why they've moved on from COVID largely in the media.
It's got nothing to do with the numbers or anything like that.
It's just because they couldn't get the fear reaction out of people.
Most people, the fear panic, the panic button had been pressed too much and it was just spent, and they couldn't get that reaction anymore out of people.
But they still want to keep us muzzled, so maybe you move on and say, well, wear the mask now for the flu.
Even though, again, No one ever suggested that prior to COVID.
Medical masks existed.
Respiratory illnesses existed.
And yet there was no push by anyone to tell people to wear masks until COVID came along.
All right, Tony Fauci officially retired.
That hasn't stopped him from doing the news circuit.
He interviewed on Face the Nation over the weekend where, among other things, he talked about the anti-China approach, as he puts it, that the Trump administration had to the COVID virus.
Fauci still has not forgiven Trump for being mean to China when China unleashed a virus on the entire globe.
And that's the thing that's most upsetting to him.
So here he is talking about that.
What happens is that if you look at the anti-China approach that clearly the Trump administration had right from the very beginning, and the accusatory nature, the Chinese are going to flinch back and say, no, I'm sorry, we're not going to talk to you about it, which is not correct.
But they're not talking to the Biden administration about it either.
Exactly.
I think that horse is out of the barn and they're very suspicious of anybody trying to accuse them.
We need to have an open dialogue with their scientists and our scientists.
Keep the politics out of it and let the scientists, because these are scientists that we've known for decades.
Yes, we wouldn't want to accuse China.
We shouldn't accuse them.
They simply just created the virus.
They created COVID in their Wuhan lab.
Created it and unleashed it on the world.
But, and that's the only question that still exists here, is how exactly it ended up getting unleashed in the world and to what extent was it intentional.
That's the only question that maybe still is still a live question but will never be answered because the people that would be in charge of answering that question have no interest.
So, they created the virus, unleashed it on the world, one way or another, but let's not point fingers.
I mean, this is a courtesy that Fauci would extend to anyone, I'm sure.
If you walked up to him on the street and punched him in his lying, little, elvish face, I'm sure he would say, well, let's not point fingers, let's not accuse.
Yes, this person punched me directly in the face and is 100% to blame for doing so, but can we blame them for that?
Even so?
Meanwhile, speaking of China, The Daily Wire has this report.
Chinese citizens are protesting the Communist Nation's strict COVID policies, with at least one demonstration turning violent.
Protests intensified over the weekend in major cities across China, including Beijing, Shanghai, and Wuhan.
According to media reports, a demonstration in Shanghai eventually devolved into chaos, with police clashing with protesters and deploying pepper spray.
The protests emerged as a response to the zero-COVID policies imposed by the Chinese Communist Party.
Government since the beginning of the pandemic.
And now we're seeing, apparently, and you always have to say apparently because you can never be sure with anything that comes out of China, any information that we get out of China, but apparently we're seeing these widespread protests, which by the way, if you want to protest oppression or anything like that, this is what takes actual courage.
To be a BLM rioter in the United States, there's no courage there.
But to protest as a Chinese citizen, to protest the Chinese government, that takes courage.
More courage than the White House has, by the way, because the White House put out this statement.
I listened to this statement from the White House about what's happening in China.
This is their statement.
We've said that zero COVID is not a policy that we are pursuing here in the United States.
And as we've said, we think it's going to be very difficult for the People's Republic of China to be able to contain this virus through their zero COVID strategy.
For us, we are focused on what works, and that means using the public health tools like continuing to enhance vaccination rates, including boosters and making testing and treatment easily accessible.
We've long said everyone has the right to peacefully protest here in the United States and around the world.
This includes in the PRC.
It would be hard to come up with a weaker or more pathetic statement than that.
These are protests against communist tyranny being violently put down, and we'll never know even the extent of that.
Because again, this is coming from China.
And talk about controlling the pipelines of information, the Chinese communist government has almost complete control over it.
So we'll never even know the full extent of it.
But they're violently putting down these protests, and the White House's response is not even criticizing that.
It's not criticizing that, it's just criticizing the efficacy of zero COVID policies.
Even though they all supported those kinds of policies themselves for two years.
Great.
All right, you know, the story about the shooting at the gay club in Colorado Springs has, you may have noticed this, has already disappeared.
Which is interesting.
As soon as the shooter's non-quote-unquote non-binary self-identity was revealed, the story just evaporated.
Like, floated away in a puff of smoke.
At least that's what the media would prefer.
That's the vanishing Houdini act that the media is trying to pull off.
But we should not let them do that.
Okay, I can say that I'm not.
I'm not done with the story.
Which is why I want to play this clip from CNN last week.
And this is a clip of a man who identifies as a woman, a quote-unquote trans woman, who is a friend of one of the victims.
And I want you to hear how he deals with the fact that The shooter identifies as non-binary.
This is pretty amazing.
Listen to this.
Natalie, when we started the show, we got a little bit of news earlier that the attorneys for the shooter are now saying that the shooter is non-binary.
And the shooter would like to use the pronouns they, them.
This is for the court, in all court papers.
And that's what Anderson Aldrich's attorneys are saying.
Do you have any thoughts on that?
I think that's complete ludicrous.
I believe they're just saying that because they want to have the easy way out on this.
That's really, really offending, especially being a transgender woman myself, that a male Which, it was obvious with the mugshot, that's a man.
That's not a non-binary person because in no way, shape, or form could they appear as a woman the next day.
It's really offensive to even hear that, that they're playing that role.
And if they're non-binary, why would you go after the club where you feel safe at?
Why would you do that to a community where you are welcomed in, if you are non-binary?
Excellent question.
Obviously, all of this will have to be answered.
Wow.
Okay, so this person has made the judgment call that the shooter is not really non-binary because he looks like a male.
And so he, the person on CNN, is making a judgment about this other person's self-identity
by physically assessing them.
This is why the story went away.
I mean, for the obvious reason, right, that it's not, it's, the media completely embarrassed itself.
It's, you know, tried to use this event to defame people like myself and Libsyn Ticktock and Tucker Carlson, and it all blew up in their faces.
And now that the person has been revealed as a, you know, someone who identifies as non-binary, it's not useful to them.
And so that's why they're trying to put this aside.
And by the way, it's been a week now since this happened.
And the claim that we got from the media right after the non-binary wrinkle came to light was that, well, they're just claiming this now, and clearly this is still a right-wing militant person who's just claiming non-binary status to troll or to get out of the hate crime charge.
Which, as I explained last week, doesn't make any sense to begin with.
But we know that that isn't true, what the media is saying, to try to, you know, Dismiss this.
Because if there was any evidence, like a week later, if there was any evidence that this person was actually a right-winger who was motivated because of things that Tucker Carlson said, or who, you know, like followed me on Twitter or something, if that was true, if there was even a shred of evidence of any of that, we wouldn't know it by now.
It's been a week.
You notice, as far as I know, we haven't even been told what the shooter himself is saying.
He was captured alive, after all.
We've been told none of that or very little of it.
As I said last week, if a mass shooting happens and it's actually a right wing person who committed a mass
shooting, we will know everything about that person in like two hours.
We'll have every detail of their life in two hours.
And if it goes beyond two hours, three, four, five hours, and we've heard almost nothing, and then it's two days and we've heard almost nothing, well, that tells you that whatever the details of this person's life, it doesn't work for the media narrative.
We know that.
But the other reason that they had to just move on from this story is that I think they realized they were completely exploding their own gender ideology talking points.
Everything that we've heard from CNN, that really is, going back to that video clip for a minute, that just is an amazing video.
I mean, how many times have we of course been told that you can't even, when a baby is born, You can't even declare their sex male or female.
You can't declare it based on, you know, anatomy.
You can't declare it based on DNA or chromosomes.
Even if you have access to all that information.
And yet, this person can look at a mugshot of the shooter and just based on that alone say, oh yeah, not even.
Not even that he's not a woman, that he's not non-binary.
Whatever that even means to begin with.
Alright, I also wanted to mention this.
So Kat Tenbarge is the, speaking of groomers, Kat Tenbarge is the tech and culture reporter for NBC News.
And she tweeted this, I guess this was on Thanksgiving.
This is what she was thinking about on Thanksgiving.
I was with my family, but she was tweeting this.
She said, Tucker Carlson, libs of TikTok, etc., create a stream of content blaming trans and queer people for child grooming, but rarely or never feature actual victims of child grooming.
If they did, they'd have to reckon with the fact that many survivors are queer and trans themselves.
Huh.
That's interesting, Kat.
So, if we reckoned with the actual grooming of children, then we would realize that many of the survivors of grooming are queer and trans themselves.
Do you understand what you've just admitted to?
By the way, I don't disagree with anything she said there.
Aside from the accusation she's making against Tucker Carlson, who lives at TikTok, aside from that, but the gist of her point, I agree with.
I totally agree with it.
In fact, this is like the unspeakable, you're not allowed to even say this out loud, even though it's true.
You know, to identify the potential link between child abuse and then kids who identify as some version of LGBT, this is a link you can see if you look at the data points.
But you're not allowed to point it out, but Kat just did.
Because she doesn't realize what she just said.
Yes.
Why are, Kat, ask yourself this, Why is it that so many of the, quote, survivors of grooming are queer and trans?
Might that indicate that the queer and trans identities among children are a product of the grooming?
So you've got all the dots.
You see all the dots.
Now just connect them is all you gotta do.
And then you'll see the full picture.
One other thing before we get to the comment section.
Because I could not neglect to gloat about this.
Now, you may recall from my appearance on Dr. Phil, and I mean, I've made this point many times, where I've talked about, hey, if we're allowing people to have preferred pronouns and we're respecting their preferred pronouns, then what about other grammatical constructs?
I mean, what about a preferred adjective, for example?
As you know, my preferred adjective is handsome and brilliant.
And I said that partly as a joke on Dr. Phil, I don't know, six months ago.
Fast forward six months, and we have this on TikTok.
Listen.
I just had a parent ask me my preferred adjectives.
Because she wanted to comment on one of my photos, but she wanted to use words that I liked hearing for myself.
That's the kind of allyship that I need.
A+.
And this is why parody is impossible.
I got a lot of respect for the Babylon Bee because they have to stay ahead of the curve on this.
It's very difficult to do.
And things move so quickly that something moves from parody to reality in like the blink of an eye.
And there it is.
Now we are actually talking about preferred adjectives.
Because why not?
It actually makes a lot of sense.
If I am required to affirm your self-perception, then why would that not extend to, you know, adjectives as well?
I mean, like, however I describe my... I see myself a certain way, and if you are required to affirm however I see myself, then why would we not extend that to adjectives as well?
And that's where we are.
Let's get to the comment section.
♪ Do you know their name? ♪ ♪ They're the Sweet Baby Gang ♪
Old Skooled says, "Imagine the meltdown if there was a 'Purity and Abstinence' story hour at local libraries."
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Well, Old Skooled, that is a, I would, if I were to put, to make a hall of fame for comments in the comment section, yours would be in it, because that is a very, very good point.
Very good and simple point that I wish I had thought to make myself.
Yeah, imagine that.
Imagine if it was like a, rather than having a drag queen, a man dressed up as a woman, come and read to the kids.
Yes, what if it was a purity and abstinence, a purity and modesty, you know, story hour, where it's all, it's a very modestly dressed individual, man or a woman, reading books about modesty.
I think you've made the point.
The Way of the Hero says, I wouldn't want a stripper to read books to kids just as much as I wouldn't want a drag queen to do such.
This isn't specifically about drag queens.
This is about keeping the barrier intact between children and adult sexuality.
Right, exactly.
This is why, as I've always said, I mean, and I think the right way, you say stripper I mean, and you look at some of the footage of these drag events, family-friendly drag events, it is basically, you know, it is not even basically.
Like, there is actual stripping going on.
But I think more often it's better compared to burlesque, and we wouldn't want kids to be exposed to that.
The only problem with this argument is that I think more and more the left is going to say, and they're saying now, that, well, why not?
Sure, let's bring kids to the strip club too.
Why not?
I mean, it's just sexuality.
It's not scary.
And if you object, if you say, no, don't bring kids to the strip club, you freaks, they'll say, well, what are you afraid of strippers for?
So I think that's going to be the response, is that they're sort of going to take us up on that.
All right, Matthew Grove Jones says, I don't think Matt's that much older than me, but I look to him as a father figure.
I think that's the whole meaning of the sweet baby gang.
Not sure.
Only been into Walshie for a few years now.
I may have missed something.
Well, if you've been listening for a few years, then you should know not to commit two sins that you've committed here, Matthew.
One is to speculate about the origins of the Sweet Baby Gang, which you should know we do not do, and the other is to call me Walshie.
So if it's possible, you're banned from the show, readmitted, and then banned again for both of those offenses.
Sabri says, cute to see how Matt lives under the impression that his SPG does not enjoy seeing him suffer and therefore will help him out of his anime deal.
Looking forward to seeing you watch anime soon, Matt.
Well, I am greatly disappointed that, well, I'll read some of these other comments, but I was looking over, I did say, please recommend to me an anime that's got two or three minute episodes and like three or four episodes in a season.
And if that doesn't exist, I'm not going to blame the SPG for the fact that that doesn't exist if it doesn't.
But if it doesn't exist, then I need someone to make that anime.
Is that so much to ask?
And put it up on YouTube and then I can watch that and fulfill the terms of my deal.
But no one has done that.
I checked.
You had the whole Thanksgiving break to make an anime and put it on YouTube to help me out here.
Deeply disappointed.
Draconic Fang says, I recommend Full Metal Alchemist Brotherhood.
There are 64 episodes, around 18 minutes per.
Very well done and has some strong heart-clenching moments.
64 episodes?
At 18 minutes an episode?
Do the math on that.
I can't off the top of my head.
That's a lot of minutes.
I know that much.
You are not understanding the assignment here.
64 episodes.
I have to livestream this.
Don't you understand?
That's what, like, I have to watch the whole thing on a livestream.
Are there any better recommendations?
Daniel says, Matt, watching anime, this'll be good.
I hope they choose the weebiest ones.
The one people seem to walk in at the most awkward moments for.
God be with you, Matt.
I don't even know, the weebiest?
I don't know what that means exactly, but I don't want a weeby one, okay?
That doesn't sound good.
JG says, Walsh is a genius.
He took a sarcastic statement about anime and set it to stir up controversy, which sells.
Flipped it to sell an extra 100 books and is going to monetize watching anime since reaction videos are huge.
I'm sure he's going to make a pretty penny off of this.
Bravo, Matt.
I wish I could tell you that this was all some master plan on my part.
I appreciate that, that assumption.
But I appreciate your faith that this is all a 4D chess move, but it's really not.
And if it was, again, I would have flipped it for not 100 books, but 1,000, 10,000.
People are so desperate to see me suffer through anime that I could have demanded 10,000 books, and I think it would have happened.
Vigilant the Wolf says, the most demonic anime of all is Hetalia, but the episodes are only five minutes long.
If you last through a season, I'll be extremely impressed.
Well, there's an interesting moral quandary.
So you're saying, so this is a short one, yet it's the most demonic.
So we know that all anime is demonic and causes demonic possession, but you're saying this is the most demonic, but it's also very short.
So do I want to do that or do I want to do a longer anime that's a little bit less demonic?
I guess that's what we have to figure out.
And I need your help, Sweet Baby Gang.
I still am imploring for your help.
Let's get to the daily cancellation.
If the price of your Thanksgiving meal has left a bad taste in your mouth, remember, it's completely normal to keep paying more and more for the same things, right?
Wrong.
Well, right now, the Daily Wire Plus Cyber Week Sale is on, and everything in our shop is 40% off.
That's right, 40% off my Johnny the Walrus book.
Johnny the Walrus plushie, or you can get the bundles, 40% off for that as well.
40% off the Leftist Tears dog bowl, the iconic Daily Wire truth bomb.
And don't forget, it's free shipping on orders over $75, and you get a free Leftist Tears tumbler with orders over $100.
So unless you're one of the superfans who actually wants to give us extra money, don't wait.
Go to dailywire.com slash shop today and get our best deals of the year on all the gifts worth giving.
This weekend I watched one of the biggest hits on Netflix right now, which is a documentary series from a journalist named Graham Hancock.
The show is called Ancient Apocalypse, and in the series, just as he has throughout his career, Hancock argues that there was a lost global civilization that existed on Earth some 12,000 years ago, but it was wiped out in a cataclysm.
That erased most traces of this civilization.
He claims that our ancestors had a memory of this cataclysm, the ancient apocalypse in the title, which they recounted in the biblical story of the flood and in other ancient texts around the world.
The way he puts it, you know, he says that we are a species with amnesia.
We don't know the story of our own past.
And we accept what we've been told by mainstream science and academia, which insists that there were no civilizations at all, in fact, certainly not advanced ones, prior to about 4000 BC.
That's the mainstream accepted version of events.
Hancock says that they're ignoring or even potentially covering up evidence to the contrary.
And what is the evidence?
Well, much of it centers around various ancient structures around the world that have turned out to be much older than they were originally thought to be.
Hancock points to, for example, 1,000-year-old pyramids that, as it turns out, were built over top even older pyramids, which were built over older ones, like a kind of Russian nesting doll sort of situation.
The evidence indicates that our ancestors were, in fact, building bigger and more complicated things earlier than previously assumed.
And so Hancock is pointing to some of this.
Also, there's the similarity between these ancient structures.
Like, the Egyptians weren't the only ones who built pyramids, obviously.
Ancient people all over the world made their own versions of pyramids, and they were usually built to correspond with astronomical phenomena.
Why did all these societies, separated by oceans and millennia, decide to build these structures, and how did they build them?
That's an interesting question and one that has never been sufficiently answered.
Graham Hancock's answer is that the survivors of a lost Ice Age civilization went around the world passing down the knowledge of how to build these pyramids along with teaching agriculture and architecture and art, etc.
And that's how they figured out how to do it.
Now, why did these survivors do this?
And how did they survive the apocalypse that wiped out their civilization?
And where were they stationed for the centuries it would have taken them to go around the whole world teaching these techniques to thousands of different societies?
And how were they able to communicate with all these people speaking different languages?
And why isn't there any actual material evidence of this advanced civilization that supposedly existed 12,000 years ago?
Hancock says that it was wiped out in a cataclysm, but he also says that there were enough survivors to support this global campaign to civilize the entire world, which means that there were a lot of survivors.
Why didn't they leave behind any direct evidence of their existence?
These questions, and many more, are not answered by Graham Hancock.
Which is why I don't personally buy much of what he's selling.
I am not persuaded.
And yet, I very much enjoyed the series, just as I've enjoyed listening to him explain his ideas during his several appearances on Joe Rogan's podcast.
I've read one of his books.
I found it interesting.
I think his theories are quite interesting and entertaining and also outlandish and probably dead wrong.
Despite what you've been told, it is possible to have this opinion about someone or something.
It is possible to believe that someone is wrong.
And yet still find them fascinating.
It is possible to disagree with someone's ideas, and yet still believe that the ideas are worth listening to.
Say whatever else you want about Graham Hancock, he is, to use the cliché, an outside-the-box thinker.
And I can personally always appreciate those types of people.
We need more of those people in the world, not fewer.
They make life more interesting.
They make conversations more interesting.
And they get people talking about subjects that they would otherwise ignore.
I mean, a show about ancient archaeology is now the biggest hit on Netflix.
Which I think, as someone who enjoys history, that's worth celebrating in its own right.
Even if you reject his hypothesis completely.
This is not a difficult needle to thread.
Okay, it's not hard to say.
I disagree with your ideas, but I'm glad you've shared them.
At least it shouldn't be hard.
Yet, it's somehow beyond the capacity of the mainstream media, which has one word for ideas that fall outside of the mainstream.
Well, they have a few words, but one of the most common words is, the word is not interesting, but rather dangerous.
It's dangerous if it falls outside of the mainstream.
Hence, many headlines published over the past few days, like this one from The Guardian, says, Ancient Apocalypse is the most dangerous show on Netflix.
And then the subheader of that article says this.
A show with a truly preposterous theory is one of the streaming giant's biggest hits, and it seems to exist solely for conspiracy theorists.
Why has this been allowed?
Wait, why has it been allowed?
Who is supposed to disallow it?
Well, the writer never explains that.
He also never really explains what exactly makes a preposterous quote-unquote theory about ancient prehistory dangerous.
What is the danger, precisely?
So a bunch of people come to believe that an advanced civilization existed during the last Ice Age, and then what?
What catastrophe is supposed to follow from that?
Other articles have taken it a step further, claiming that the show is not only dangerous, but racist as well.
A headline from a different publication declares that there is a whole bunch of, quote, white supremacist nonsense behind Netflix's ancient apocalypse.
Yet Hancock never says anything about race in the show, or in his books as far as I know.
Even if you think that his lost civilization theory is the dumbest thing you've ever heard in your life, what in the world makes it racist?
Well, that's never explained either, but it doesn't have to be.
We already know that this is the media's version of Tourette's.
They just reflexively blurred out the word racist when faced with anything they don't like.
Everything they personally disapprove of is racist and dangerous.
As for the latter charge, the best attempt at an explanation comes from the Guardian article I mentioned, which arrives at this conclusion at the end.
It says, "...that's the danger of a show like this.
It whispers to the conspiracy theorists in all of us.
And Hancock is such a compelling host that he's bound to create a few more in his wake.
Believing that ultra-intelligent creatures helped to build the pyramids is one thing, but where does it end?
Believing that election fraud is real?
Believing 9-11 was an inside job?
Worse?
If you were feeling particularly mean-spirited, you could suggest that Netflix knows this and has gone out of its way to court the conspiracy theorists.
Ah, so there it is.
If you question the narrative from mainstream archaeologists, the fear is that it might send you tumbling down a rabbit hole where you begin to think critically and skeptically about a whole host of other topics as well.
Like election integrity.
This is indeed a dangerous possibility.
Dangerous anyway to the people in charge of formulating and disseminating the official narrative.
I mean, this is really the sin that Graham Hancock has committed.
He's pointing out holes in the official story.
He's encouraging skepticism.
Now, the theories that he formulates may have many holes of their own.
I think they do.
But that's not the issue as far as the narrative gatekeepers are concerned.
I mean, they don't care if something is wrong.
They themselves are wrong all the time.
Wrongness is not a problem for them.
The problem is when people notice how little they, the gatekeepers, actually know.
How fragile and tentative their own theories are.
How unearned and unjustified is their confidence.
That's what makes a documentary series about ancient archaeology dangerous.
Is that it might make you a little skeptical of the gatekeepers.
Which I guess is dangerous, yeah, but it's the right kind of dangerous.
And that is why it's not Graham Hancock who's cancelled today, but the gatekeepers trying to shame and silence him.
They are all cancelled.
That'll do it for this portion of the show as we move over to the Members Block.
