Ezra Levant and Dr. James Lindsay argue Trump’s 2024 victory signals a backlash against "transgender Marxism," with Lindsay framing it as a modern communist tactic targeting masculinity—like Stalin’s Kornitsatsia. Trump’s "radical" team, including RFK Jr., Vivek Ramaswamy, and Elon Musk (who defied a UK subpoena), aims to dismantle woke institutions via audits like Musk’s proposed "Department of Government Efficiencies." Biden’s potential countermeasures—judicial appointments or escalating Ukraine tensions—risk provoking Putin, while Trump’s cultural appeal contrasts with Democratic policies. Levant’s optimism hinges on Trump’s team reshaping governance, though Lindsay warns of reactionary dangers if opposition lacks balance, noting left-wing media’s fading influence as young men reject its narratives. [Automatically generated summary]
And you might say, well, what's that got to do with 2024?
Are you kidding?
Communism is everywhere.
It just doesn't call itself by that name.
We're going to talk about the aftermath of Donald Trump's historic victory and what it means for the communists in America in Canada.
I'd love for you to get the video version of the show.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com and click subscribe.
But I also want to tell you about this.
Did you ever feel like you need a translator just to understand your financial plan?
Rocklink Investment Partners cuts through the noise.
No more confusing buzzwords and endless charts.
Just clear, straightforward advice that puts you in the driver's seat of your financial future.
Don't believe me.
Give them a call for a free consultation to learn more about how Rocklink can protect and grow your wealth using the time-tested principles of wealth creation.
You can call them at 905-631-5462 or email them at info at rocklink.com.
That's Rocklink with a C. Info at rocklink.com.
Sensoryism bug.
Well, like everyone on planet Earth, I've been riveted by the U.S. election because, of course, it's much more than just a U.S. election.
It's an election for the sole hyperpower in the world.
And already before Trump is even sworn in as the president, you can see the world conforming to his will, whether it's announcements by some of the parties in the Middle Eastern conflict or Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky accepting the fact that there will be a peace negotiation.
Zelensky And Putin's Peace Negotiation00:15:32
Zelensky, of course, more than the other.
You can see economic decisions being made.
It really is a global election, but only Americans can vote for it.
Of course, for Americans, there are many more important things than just foreign affairs.
There's domestic affairs, the first of which is likely their unguarded southern border, which has led millions of illegal migrants into that country.
What happens if Donald Trump keeps his promise to deport them?
Will they come up to Canada across our largest undefended border in the world?
So many things to talk about.
A cultural shift, too.
Let me throw this in.
I saw this this morning.
A new ad for the luxury car brand Jaguar.
Jaguar, which is such a sexy, powerful, elite brand, a masculine brand, had this ad.
I can only call it transgender Marxism.
The weirdest ad I've seen.
They debuted it today, and it immediately felt stale and dated, like something from the Biden-Harris era that is so out of place in a new, more vigorous, more normal America.
Take a look at this Jaguar ad.
That ad felt like Kamala Harris was still president.
That ad, which is a flop online, we'll see how it does in the real world.
I feel like culturally there's a new era again.
People know that America will return to greatness as it did under Trump's first term.
If I'm sounding like a partisan psychophyte, I don't mean to be.
I just think the striking difference in cultural tone between Trump and Harris, who by any genuine measure was a communist and used communist phraseology and communist goals, it couldn't have been a starker choice joining us now to talk about this, is one of our favorite thinkers who joined us on election night.
Dr. James Lindsay is the publisher of the website newdiscourses.com.
I love to follow him on Twitter because he applies a philosophical take to the problems of the day.
And he is an expert, I believe, on communism and its 21st century variants.
He joins us today from Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Dr. James, great to see you again.
Maybe I'm too effusive and too partisan, but I really feel like the cultural temperament of the entire world changed on election night.
I just think the possibilities are different and the norms are different in the whole world.
What do you think about that?
Is that me just emoting or being solipsistic, or did the whole world change?
I'll give you a little bit of yes and a little bit of no.
A lot of yes.
There's a definite feeling that there's a new day in America and a new day rising around the world.
The business world, as you pointed out, responded immediately and vigorously.
The stock market went crazy.
There's an awful lot of hope and optimism and kind of high energy.
I was in, actually, of all places, I went to Los Angeles, California, to Beverly Hills right after the election, the day after the election.
And even there, there was a large amount of positivity in the heart of Los Angeles.
So something has changed.
But on the other hand, there's this tendency for people to say everything has changed.
And we've gone, you know, post-woke.
Woke is dead.
Woke is over.
The American people spoke as though the rest of the world doesn't matter.
And it's now over because we won an election.
And that's not reflective of reality at all.
I'm seeing them double down everywhere that they have power and probably triple down everywhere that they have a monopoly of power.
The institutions are still woke.
We might be able to clean a lot of it out of the federal government and we might be able to do some damage to it.
But so far, they're doubling and tripling down.
And like you pointed out with that very bizarre Jaguar commercial, the attempt to force this culture down our throat has not stopped yet.
Even in a business world that's looking at a Trump presidency in a new dawn of a different America, they're still trying to ram this down our throats.
And we can bet that that's still connected to their ESG scores, which haven't gone anywhere.
Larry Fink famously said that he didn't care what the outcome of the election would be because it didn't affect him one way or the other.
Isn't that interesting?
I mean, he really is one of the supervillains here.
He's on the board of the World Economic Forum, and he is the one who has infused politics throughout America using his power as an investor.
It's funny you say that.
You're right.
I've spent some time on campus in Ottawa recently, and they couldn't be deeper into woke.
I mean, the election of the U.S. president doesn't change a thing at Carleton University or any other university in Canada, other than maybe the resistance has more energy.
They have to resist him harder.
They have to fight against him harder.
I suppose so many institutions, the new Disney film, the new, you know, I think cultural institutions that have been colonized, they're not giving up.
They didn't lose an election, did they?
No, they didn't.
And it's really interesting, you bring up the resistance to Trump in Canada, and you're going to see them have to double down because they're fully aware that there's going to be a ripple effect throughout the entire world.
Culturally, like you were starting to say earlier, it's going to ripple through Canada.
It's going to ripple through Europe.
It's already rippling through Asia.
I saw some of the funniest videos of pro-Trump parades in South Korea and in Tokyo, Japan.
So our allies around the world are going to get a giant boost of morale from this Trump win.
And of course, they're going to have to fight even harder in countries like Canada to try to keep their grip on power as those populations take inspiration and heart from this.
You know, part of the appeal of Trump is the entertainment factor.
First of all, his personality is naturally, you know, he's got a huge charisma, a big personality.
He's an entertainer, whether that came naturally or it was honed through his hit TV shows and his beauty pageants.
The guy knows how to tell a story visually.
And he, I mean, whether it was the garbage truck moment or the McDonald's drive-through moment or just his style entering the UFC like a conquering Roman Caesar or something, the guy's got a panache.
And it feels so it's over the top but authentic at the same time.
Everyone knows that's him.
But he's got this entourage now.
He's got Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is aesthetically and in terms of ideology, very different.
But Trump says, no, you're part of the team.
You're going to be the boss of health and human services and go make a fuss amongst the food industry and the vax industry.
And he's got Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk.
He's saying, go destroy bureaucracies.
Like it's not just Trump this time.
He's got this sort of crew and he's even just visually hanging out with him toodling around on his jet.
But I think that who he's surrounding himself with, I think they're radicals in a good way.
Like I think they're a truly radical choice, which is a war against these permanent institutions.
It's a war against the deep state.
Every one of his cabinet picks, in my view, is a destroyer of the bureaucracy, not a leader of it, a counterweight to the bureaucracy.
None of them will be loved or approved by the staff they will run.
Like it's such a declaration of war against the battle's not over.
Trump won the election, battle's over.
No, the real battle's begun.
That's how it looks to me.
What do you think of all those things?
No, I think that's about right.
I'm always a little bit wary, of course, of anybody that's too close to power.
And this is a lot of power.
And I've made the controversially made the remark on Twitter just to remind folks that nobody actually voted for Elon Musk, which turned out not to have been the wisest of statements to make publicly.
But it is a cool team.
They do have a cool vision.
And the goal of with Elon Musk specifically and Vivek to clean out the bureaucracy with this doge is an extremely exciting development that's long overdue.
That's stuff Milton Friedman was calling for decades ago.
And it's about time that we actually did it.
And I think that actually, after his experience in Twitter, besides his experience running extraordinarily successful super high-tech companies, I think Elon Musk actually will bring a lot to the table on that endeavor.
Most of his cabinet picks, I'm pretty happy with.
Some of them I wish he could have done others, but I think your assessment is right that he's giving a declaration of war to the established federal government of the United States and saying we're going to make some changes and we're going to make some big changes and we're going to make them right now.
And so the government is on notice.
I think they know they're on notice.
It's a little bit scary because what I've noticed myself is an awful lot of people seem to have forgotten that Joe Biden is still president.
In fact, I think a lot, you even said Kamala Harris is president earlier.
I think everybody forgot that their administration is still in power, that Joe Biden still exists, that Kamala Harris still exists.
I saw on Twitter somebody said, you know, I've never seen a political character disappear faster than Kamala Harris.
And I'm like, she's the sitting vice president.
What are we talking about?
What's going on over there?
So this administration that is currently in power, not the Trump incoming administration, is aware of this.
And so they're trying to do a lot of things, as much damage as possible.
They're trying to secure the federal apparatus and bureaucracy against Trump and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy and the Department of Government Efficiency.
They're also trying to ram through as many judges in a kind of a very controversial political war, ram through as many leftist judges as they can.
And for whatever reason, the Republicans in the U.S. Senate right now are not actually helping the matter, failing to show up to vote, blocking, to block really some bad choices.
So it's a tricky time.
And I'm hoping, I'm always the guy that has to pour cold water on stuff.
I'm hoping we don't get caught up too much in this above spirit and therefore miss the moment that we have two and a half months still of whatever regime is actually running the show.
Biden is the name holder.
Harris is in there somewhere.
And that they're going to take advantage of the signals to run heavy countermeasures to the greatest extent of their power, which remains immense.
You know, you're so right.
And you have not mentioned the Ukraine war, where suddenly the lame duck president, or was it the vice president, or is it some other force we don't know, has decided at this 11th hour, Trump's talking about peace.
And both Zelensky and Putin have reacted to that.
Actually, both of them, positively, Zelensky sounds somewhat grudgingly, but the other day he said peace will come sooner under Trump.
And that is a blessing to Ukrainian young men who will not be put through the meat grinder.
So the world is reacting.
And what did Biden, or whoever the mystery leader is, went further than ever before and said that the Ukrainians can use highly precise, advanced, long-range missiles, the British, I think it's called Storm Shadow missile and the American missile called Attackums, which is an acronym, to give new weapons and to push as much for a final battle.
I don't know, is it an escalation?
Is it an attempt to actually start World War III?
God forbid.
This goes to your point.
In the next two months, insane things will happen with this ungoverned lame duck presidency, whoever's running it.
I'm actually, are you worried about war?
Are you worried about Anthony Blinken or whoever's running the war in Ukraine provoking a response from Putin that gets out of control?
Somewhat.
They're genuinely doing some kind of a provocation.
I'm still fairly well convinced that the majority of what this administration does that's in any way proactive is theater.
And so I'm more concerned about what they're going to do with the illusion of war, whether one manifests or not, than the actual war.
But Putin is not going to sit there and take this.
And he said he's not going to sit there and take this.
And he's threatening, although I think it's mostly saber-rattling and hope it's saber-rattling, that he is willing to change the rules of engagement regarding nuclear weapons should these kinds of attacks against Russian infrastructure continue.
And so I don't think it can be seen as anything other than a very dangerous provocation and maybe a desperate maneuver to try to create so much calamity and chaos on the world stage that it disrupts whatever it is that Trump wants to do here, both domestically and in foreign policy and prevents him from being able to accomplish a lot of his goals.
But also that it may even come to the point where it serves as some kind of pretext to try to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power.
And I say that acknowledging that, you know, the happiest Joe Biden of his entire life was sitting there with President Trump the other day saying there would be a peaceful transfer of power, and they both looked like they were very amenable to that.
But, you know, if they can gin up big trouble on the world stage, they could have a situation that disrupts Trump's first 100 days pretty significantly.
And they know that if Trump is going to really clean out that federal bureaucracy, those first 100 days are extremely important.
The clock is ticking.
That's the only time he's going to have kind of a clear runway controlling all of the government to try to get his agenda through because the Congress has to start thinking, the representatives have to start thinking about their reelection not terribly long after.
It's a two-year cycle.
And that first 100 days is therefore crucial.
And if they can disrupt that by creating total chaos on the world stage, that's to their advantage.
Yeah.
Well, I just heard on my way into the studio today that both the United States and the UK vacated their embassies in Kiev, that they were that worried that Russia would attack them.
So I feel like they really are trying to kick something off in their final little while.
My theory on the appointment, for example, of Matt Gates, the rambunctious young congressman from Florida, to appoint him attorney general or to nominate him for that position, that's been the one that I think has been received with the most shock by the establishment because he's so clearly a pugnacious fighter.
Matt Gaetz's Decoy Function00:07:55
My theory is Trump knows he's going to be in a fight.
So rather than wait for the deep state to declare war against him, he's just preempting it.
Like every one of these battles is, of course, I'm going to have a fight with them.
I'm going to move first.
So I'm going to have the initiative.
I'm going to, the default is I'm having Matt Gaetz in.
And even if he is not successful, you know, that Trump art of the deal is start with an enormous offer, and maybe the result you get is less, but it's still far, far more than you'd ever get if you started reasonably.
So maybe the Matt Gaetz and some of these other appointments are quite radical.
Maybe he gets them or maybe he just beats up the bureaucracy, puts them on the back foot, and he also telegraphs to his base, I have not stopped fighting.
We're just getting started.
Expect this to be a bruising battle.
I don't know.
He's not going quietly.
It's the opposite approach to when he appointed a bunch of insiders who were against him in 2016.
So maybe I'm just stating the opposite, but he is picking a hell of a fight, and I love to see it.
Yeah, I'm pretty excited about this fight.
I'm excited about the nomination of Matt Gaetz.
I'm not 100% certain that it's, you know, that he really thinks he's going to get it, but it's already accomplishing a great deal of its political warfare objective.
You've got these people going absolutely bonkers and humiliating themselves about it.
They're drawing a ton of fire onto Matt Gaetz, who's shown for years that he's extremely capable of handling it and therefore off of some of the other appointees who might be getting the grill.
So he's serving a kind of a decoy function, even if he's going to end up as the attorney general.
And if he does end up as the attorney general, he's going to fight like very few others could.
I can only think of a very short list of people who would be as qualified and as determined in that job as Matt Gates would be.
So I hope that that one comes through.
I will admit I was surprised by it, but I agree with you.
He's coming out making most of these picks saying that he's going to go swinging.
There's a handful that feel like he owed some kind of political favor to, I'm not thrilled, but maybe she'll prove me wrong with Linda McMahon for education.
I've never heard of her working in education, but she was big in the American First Policy group that helped with his election.
That feels like it's not exactly a hard swing.
I'm not also terribly thrilled with her colleague Howard Lutnick going into commerce, but maybe that's going to prove me, I'll be proved wrong on that.
But for the most part, these appointments are a great big Trump-style, we'll call it wave out of the drive-through window at the outgoing administration and saying that there's going to be big change.
I completely agree with you.
And I do like that he's causing that shake-up, whatever the political strategy is behind it.
You know, the phrase Overton window, of course, is the idea of what we think is possible.
You slowly move the Overton window and you normalize something that would be unthinkable before.
And I think that's part of these appointments.
And today, I was proved small-minded because I didn't think big.
Let me tell you the example I had in mind.
And we talked briefly about Elon Musk.
And Trump, obviously, they have like there's this bromance going on.
Trump loves the rocket ships.
And so Elon said, come watch the launch.
Like, it's actually sort of fun to see these guys as sort of as buddies.
Elon Musk, there was a report that the United Kingdom is going to summon or even subpoena Elon Musk to go and answer tough questions before their parliament about how the Twitter or X platform allows, quote, right-wingers to talk about immigration and Islam and some of the race riots in the UK.
So the UK is feeling pretty tough about demanding Elon Musk come and answer tough questions.
Okay, now that's not unthinkable to me because I've seen the British Parliament do that before.
But what is very new for me, the Overton window was stretched for me, was Elon Musk's reply.
And this is what's so unusual for a businessman who's exposed in every country in the world to legal or financial penalty to basically, I don't have it in front of me, but he had like a four-line four-word answer, which was no, we're going to demand they come and answer questions about why they would censor American citizens.
Holy moly.
So instead of, oh, yes, okay, we'll send somebody and we're very sorry, he says, no, no, you have to come to America and justify why you're mucking around here.
Like, bam, holy moly.
The idea that America would stand tall and not take some labor MP's subpoena to heart and flip it around saying, no, no, I'm an American.
I don't bend the knee to you.
You come to America and explain.
And I think to me, that was bigger than I would have thought.
That was not a normal response, a response I would have thought impossible with a guy like Elon Musk, who's used to saying F you to naysayers.
In a way, he's like Trump that way.
Like he doesn't care who you are.
He'll punch you back.
I thought that was an amazing foreign policy tweet.
And he's not the Secretary of State.
He's not the president.
He's not Donald Trump.
But in a tweet, he basically told the British parliament to F off.
That's astonishing.
And he's best bros with Trump.
What do you make of that?
Did you see that tweet?
I think that that's what needs to be happening, Ezra.
A lot of how we got here, whether you want to call it Canadian politeness or whatever you want to call it, a lot of how we got here is something that should be called bureaucratic politeness.
But there's these arcane bureaucratic rules of order that are not actually rules of order, where the people who have the desire and a position to abuse their power can effectively abuse their power over anybody because you have to answer this way and you have to be polite about this.
And this is the correct and dignified way to handle things.
And at some point, the idea that the accused might actually have a statement that they can make for themselves fell out of the window.
Well, Elon Musk just put it back on the table and said Trump has done so for eight years and it certainly isn't about to stop now.
I think he's actually got more vinegar in him than he did before.
And so I think it's long overdue.
And again, I talk about how his election is going to serve as an example for the citizens of countries like Canada and the UK and so on.
Well, this behavior also is going to serve as an example.
We should expect to hear all the bureaucrats kvetching and carrying on.
We'll hear the rhinos down here saying, well, that's not politic behavior, like they always do.
But that's because the rules of engagement in the bureaucratic space have been rigged so that you can't win that game.
It's designed to cause you to lose.
And Trump and Elon Musk are both characters who are willing to say, you know what, it's time to change the rules of engagement and not play on captured terms that are going to destroy us.
I think that's thrilling, long overdue.
We're talking with Dr. James Lindsay.
He's the boss of newdiscourses.com.
And I really value how he applies, he's studied communism.
He studied political communism, whether it was the original texts or whether it was the Soviet Union or the Chinese approach.
And so he can see the similarities and the patterns today.
Masculinity's Hidden Influence00:07:13
And there's no doubt about it.
Kamala Harris, by the dictionary definition, was a communist, absolutely.
But there's something else that's afoot.
And help me understand if this fits in with the communist nature of it, Dr. James.
The demasculinization of society, whether it's in schools in Canada, and I think it's the same in the U.S., women are now the majority of university students.
Men have been drummed out of so many places.
And masculinity, I mean, we refer to that crazy Jaguar ad just as one tiny example.
And there's been this counterculture, Dr. Jordan Peterson, basically how to be a man.
The book's called 12 Rules for Life, but it's basically how to be a man.
Even Gavin McInnes, our alumnus here, in his own way, telling people to be a man.
The Tate brothers, I have my disagreements with them, but they're trying to teach people to be masculine.
I saw a poll out of the UK.
Half of young British men love Trump and want a Trump-like figure instead of the effect taken leaders they have were there.
In this election, you had Tim Walz, who was like an AI version of a real man.
Like it was, you could detect it.
You had dudes for Kamala.
Remember this crazy ad where the Democrats showed what they think men are like?
Here, we'll take a quick look at it.
I'm a man.
I'm a man.
I'm a man, man.
And I'm man enough.
I'm man enough to enjoy a barrel-proof bourbon.
Meat.
Man enough to cook my steak rare.
Man enough to deadlift 500?
Then braid the out of my daughter's hair.
You think I'm afraid to rebuild a carburetor?
I eat carburetors for breakfast.
I ain't afraid of bears.
That's what beer hugs are for.
I'll tell you another thing I sure as I'm not afraid of.
Women.
I'm not afraid of women.
I'm not afraid of women.
They want to control their bodies.
I say, go for it.
They want to use the IVF to start a family.
I'm not afraid of families.
They want to be childless cat ladies?
Have all the cats you want.
Woman wants to be president?
Well, I hope she has the guts to look me right in the eye and accept my full-frogged endorsement.
Because I'm man enough to support women.
Man enough to know what kind of donuts I like.
Man enough to admit I'm lost even when I refuse to ask for directions.
Man enough to not ban young women from reading little ones or one of those pants books that the sisters like.
I'm man enough to raw dog a flight.
It sucked.
Not worth it.
I'm man enough to be emotional in front of my wife.
In front of my kids.
In front of my horse.
I'm man enough to tell you that I cry at love action.
Goodwill hunting.
West side story.
Impressive.
And I'm sick of so-called men domineering, belittling, and controlling women just so they can feel more powerful.
That's not how my mama raised me.
I love women.
I love women who support their families.
Women who decide not to have families.
Women who take charge.
And I'm man enough to help them win.
Now, Joel Pollack says that that ad, he says, that ad was not actually targeted towards men.
That ad was targeted towards women showing what the Democrats think men should be like.
And so it was, Joel was thinking that was actually an appeal to women.
I don't know, but there is something going on when young men see alpha males and say, I want to be like that.
And I think it appealed to blacks and Latinos as well, instead of the nagging, cackling Kamala Harris.
Tell me a little bit about how we've tried to drive being men out of favor and how this is a reaction to it.
Is there any, I don't know, has that been used in the past by Mao or Stalin or others?
Did they try and de-emasculate society?
Help me out here, or is this a new phenomenon?
Well, the Soviets were pretty masculinist in their orientation.
But there was, even in the Soviet Union, there was an extraordinary push for what they called actual equality, equality across all the different measures, not just financial or economic equality, but sex equality and racial equality or ethnic equality.
A lot of this program was called Kornitsatsia in Russian.
We would call it DEI in the West.
Exact same program cooked up by Stalin in the 1910s and implemented by Lenin and Stalin together in the 1920s.
Had to cancel it by the 1930s because it did exactly what DEI is doing here.
It turns into giant amounts of ethnic division.
So, yes, and less in the Soviet Union, but in the Chinese context, I mean, I've even seen one of the big posters that says, man, woman, boy, girl, we are all the same.
And so the men had to be emasculated.
The women had to be encouraged to masculinize.
It sounds a lot like what Western feminists have been doing for the last 50 years in particular.
And I think it's a purposed effort.
There is some history of it, but it's never been as virulent as we have it in the West because it came filtered unadulterated through feminism.
Everything that we have that's woke theory passed through the hands of feminist theorists in the universities and in the education departments in order to get to the world the way that it is today.
So this is a much more emasculating and much more effeminate approach to a communist way of thinking.
And again, I likened it to bureaucratic politeness earlier, but that is this sort of, again, emasculated.
Nobody's allowed to stand up for themselves.
And yeah, when you start to see examples of it, especially as a man, but also as a woman, in a different way, you end up being drawn to it because there's no force on earth like healthy masculinity.
Healthy masculinity builds the world.
Healthy masculinity protects the world.
Healthy masculinity basically makes everything better.
The problem is that when you try to get that healthy masculinity off the table, because it'll stop your communist revolution, if you don't, what you end up with is you still end up with 50% of the population being male.
And now they don't have any pathways, any learning pathways, mentors, cultural avenues to express and learn healthy masculinity.
So what do they learn instead?
What do they adopt instead?
And you indicated your reservations with the Tate brothers.
They learn a toxic masculinity that fits into the gap.
And so this is a very, this is by far known to be one of the most dangerous forces on the planet.
Young men who don't have good foundations in how to be masculine, how to build, how to protect, how to be a man, how to control their emotions, how to use their vision, their ambition, their dreams, their reason to restrain their passions routinely become the most dangerous men or people in any society and can become a real threat.
Now, historically, what that happens to be is that you end up with a backlash to communism in the form of a very, like you said, AI-generated, in a sense, pastiche, fascist masculinity, which is obsessed with the masculine form, but is in fact led by its emotions and hyper-neurotic and everything else that you wouldn't normally associate with a good healthy masculinity.
And so here we are in this weird moment where men are starting to wake up.
Backlash to Gender Marxism00:06:47
And I'm, again, very, very glad to have the example of Trump because Trump is weirdly this fun, positive force.
He's masculine, but he's not overbearing.
He's not going around beating people over the head.
He's funny.
He knows how to use charm and wit.
My wife calls him a class act, so he must be doing something right in that regard.
And so, you know, it gives people actually a healthy role model.
Maybe it'll actually turn some guys away from the Tates trying to figure out how to be a productive builder and protector in society because Trump is setting such a great example.
You know, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has a lot of ideas.
He is an ideas man, but he's also a very physical man.
And there were a lot of images of him working out.
He went on Joe Rogan, talked about his regime.
Like that, that guy's really fit for his age.
He's in his 70s, but he works out.
It's actually, I'd say he's probably top 0.1% in terms of fitness.
But there is something appealing to that.
Compare that to the transgender Rachel Levine icon for this is how this is health and this is a normal choice.
There was a lot of trans in the Biden-Harris administration and their messaging.
And I think that's one of the reasons Trump did well.
There was an ad that the Republicans put, I heard it was over approximately $150 million behind an ad focused on trans.
Now, I don't know if that's accurate because that's such an astonishing proportion of ads.
But I don't think the Trump campaign spent a lot on paid ads.
But here's one they did.
And you can hear in the diction, they were also targeting the black community here.
Black men.
They were saying to men and moms that this trans stuff is insane and that's what the Democrats are about.
Here's the ad in question.
Kamala supports taxpayer-funded sex changes for prisoners.
Surgery.
For prisoners.
For prisoners.
Every transgender inmate in the prison system would have access.
It's hard to believe, but it's true.
Even the liberal media was shocked Kamala supports taxpayer-funded sex changes for prisoners and illegal aliens.
Every transgender inmate would have access.
Kamala's for they, them.
President Trump is for you.
I'm Donald J. Trump.
Can I approve this message?
I'm not sure if they really did spend $150 million on that ad, but it felt extremely effective.
And I see even in the last few days that there is a transgender Congress person elected for the Democrats who's saying, I want to use the girl's bathroom.
And there's a Republican woman, quite attractive, by the way, which I think is part of it.
This is how a feminine woman looks.
Nancy Mace, if I've got her name right, who is saying over my dead body, she's introduced a bill to stop biological men from going into any private spaces in any federal property.
Like, I think this is a real winner.
Let men be men, let women be women, and stop the trans battle.
Now, you focus on the trans battle.
You've written a whole book about it.
What are your thoughts about that movement?
We looked at the Jaguar ad.
Has that moment ended, or is it just burrowing into the institutions?
What's the future of transgender politics in the United States?
So I want you to think of woke things, and transgender is very woke.
In fact, it's Marxist to the core.
I want you to think of this as like a fluid, the blob or whatever you want.
It's some kind of a fluid that's always seeking to flow into the directions where it can capitalize on the maximum amount of power.
Now, what's happening in Congress with this particular congressperson demanding to use the wrong bathroom because he's wearing a dress, that is a provocation.
That's a deliberate Bolshevik provocation in order to try to set up the conflict, in order to try to get political concessions or find some kind of compromise or just to delegitimize opponents and expose opponents.
This is what this is.
But the broader thing is that what's going to happen is that this ideology will burrow is not quite the right word.
It will flow and it will flow to every single place where it can extract the maximum amount of power.
And anywhere where it's hitting roadblocks, it will flow away from.
This is exactly what happened, by the way, in 1980 when Ronald Reagan took power.
And I think it would be very wise for people wanting to understand what should happen in this Trump administration to study what the left did during Reagan's administration because they worked extra hard in academia.
They went into all the different institutions where they could run rampant and they developed and consolidated their theory and power.
And we're going to see that here again.
So what we're going to see is maybe there's going to be these roadblocks in the federal government and we're going to watch it happen at local levels.
There's going to be a lot of heavy pushes at the local level in all of the woke politics because they're not going to be able to achieve it as well at the federal or even the state levels.
And so the on-the-ground grassroots battles are going to get a lot hotter, even while people think, well, we won Trump's president.
We can go back to sleep again.
Then that's exactly the wrong thing to do.
So what you should expect is to watch this thing.
I think, by the way, that broadly speaking, the transgender phenomenon has become a heavy liability, but there's no backing out.
It's a Rubicon they've crossed.
They can't back out and say, whoops, we messed that up.
And at the same time, they can't abandon the ability to extract power.
So you're going to see this flow into places that are smaller in scope and into the places where our traditional woke leftist strongholds and just redouble its efforts there.
And what you're also going to see is you're going to see it matriculate out into smaller and smaller local environments.
You might want to think like they've conquered the cities and now they're going to the countryside to kind of draw an example from the Maoist time.
So they know they're not going to make as much headway.
They've got a lot of institutional power.
I was walking around the downtown of Baton Rouge after lunch today, and I noticed here in Louisiana, in the capital city, pride flags everywhere.
There's signs up about pride inclusion everywhere.
It hasn't gone away.
It's not slowing down.
But what I've been hearing talking to people here on the ground in Louisiana over the last day or so is that it's now showing up pretty heavily in the smaller townships and in the more rural areas where it hadn't been as aggressive there before.
So I expect you're going to see it flow out from major centers to make big grand national pushes.
And you're going to see it just continue from the corporations and the institutions, the academia, and then into more and more local areas where it can try to extract the concessions that it hasn't done yet.
Institutional Power Plays00:04:58
Isn't that interesting?
We've seen some of that in Canada, especially in the province of Alberta.
By the way, I want to remind our viewers that our guest today is the author of the book called The Queering of the American Child, How a New School Religious Cult Poisons the Minds and Bodies of Normal Kids.
It's a form of gender Marxism is what it is.
But I think that it's jumped the shark, as they say, when AOC, Alexandria Oquizo-Cortez, really the leading young woman in the left wing of the Democratic Party, when she took the pronouns out of her Twitter biography and started calling herself a Congresswoman again.
It sounds like she thinks that that might be a dead end.
I got one last question for you.
You've been very generous with your time.
But the reason the deep state exists is because it's funded.
These people get to do full-time their politics on our tax dollars.
And politicians come and go, but the civil servants stay forever.
And when they have come to a consensus, it's like that old British show, Yes Minister.
You know, they manage the ministers, which is why Trump's appointments as battle-ready people is so important.
But that's the last piece of the puzzle is Elon Musk, who's famous for cutting 80% of the staff at Twitter, but improving it.
Like, it's astonishing.
I can't think of any other business that's cut 80% of its staff and had a better product afterwards.
Musk did it.
And, you know, he's running a company, SpaceX, that puts more mass into orbit than the entire rest of the world combined times 10, like all the other countries.
So he knows how to get things done because he's brute force and his, you know, he's so unemotional in his approach.
If he actually deploys that against the government complex, the bureaucracies, agencies, he's got this idea that Trump has approved Doge, Department of Government Efficiencies.
They've talked about actually deleting entire government departments.
They met with Javier Millé, the Argentinian leader who has actually done this in his country.
If you actually abolish entire ministries or cut them by 80%, you can starve so much of this woke beast.
Yes, you'll still have your Alex Soros private money, but even Alex Soros pales by comparison to the government funding of this stuff.
If you could cut government by even 20%, let alone 80%, you would stop so many bad things.
Does he have a chance?
Do Vivek and Elon, who are on this government efficiency, do they have a chance or is this a dream?
I am very curious to see how this plays out.
I think they have a chance to do some real good.
I don't think it's a fever dream.
I don't know how much they're going to be able to pull off.
I mean, I know they're doing a great recruiting effort right now to try to get people who have the skill to do these kind of very boring, very tedious, and very accurate audits.
And I know that there are people who live and breathe for that kind of work, believe it or not.
And they're signing up.
So I know that they're going to be able to get a significant amount of talent.
I mean, that's one thing that Elon Musk does command in this world is that talented people want to work for him.
You hear that pretty much in any of these kind of techie fields.
Talented people want to go work for him.
They want to test their mettle on the hardest problems in the world.
Well, you know, taking mass to space or getting a lander on the moon again or lander on Mars is an ambitious task that Elon Musk hasn't shied away from in the least, but is built steadily toward.
The only task I can think of that might be harder is cleaning out the federal bureaucracy.
And I think he might be up to the task, and I'm hopeful that he's up to the task.
I mean, the statistics are staggering.
I don't have them in front of me to quote them, but I keep seeing on Twitter, you know, it's like 17% of the federal workforce actually shows up to work regularly or something like that.
They just don't, there's people just not working.
They're working from home.
They barely get anything done.
I think California is still counting ballots because they are paid by the day.
I mean, that's a state thing, but there is incredible inefficiency in this federal bureaucracy.
And at the very least, what Elon Musk is going to bring to the table, even if he struggles to clear out the bureaucracy itself, is that he's sworn up and down all this transparency, which will amount to something like the Twitter files, but for the federal bureaucracy.
So the people are going to be able to start to see, and that's going to change the political will around these issues quite a lot.
And it might actually create the necessary mandates if they run into roadblocks.
John Oliver's Political Humor00:05:44
So this transparency push that he's attached to that mission of that entity seems to be, or that department seems to be an extraordinarily savvy move in all regards, and I think might bear the most fruit.
Well, boy, that's going to be exciting.
And in a way, Musk has done it before.
Hey, I got one last question for you.
I never watch American late night comedians.
I don't find them funny.
It's like politics with a laugh track to me.
It's so stage-managed.
I've seen Tim Dylan's takedown of late-night TV as just a corporate log rolling.
I'm totally convinced.
But in the last two weeks, I have enjoyed every minute of Jimmy Kimmel and Jamie Oliver, if I got his name right, and Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert because they're so pitiful, and they lack self-awareness.
But the reason I'm loving it, Dr. James, is because no one listens to them anymore.
And that's, I think, their deep sorrow.
If they were cold-blooded about it, they would say, oh, having Donald Trump as president will be a feast for comedy.
Like, he's so interesting.
It'll be lifeblood for their ratings.
But they've spent the last six months or last eight years campaigning against Trump, and nobody bloody listened, especially young men, as we've been saying.
The young men who, you know, the comedy today on TV is, huh, that's funny.
It's not, ha, ha, ha, like, you're not actually laughing out of comedy.
You're saying, huh, that's a good one.
And to see, and Jimmy Kimmel the other day was almost in tears talking about the loss.
I don't know if that was real or not.
I think if the tears were there, it's because he realizes no one follows Jimmy Kimmel.
No one obeys Jon Stewart.
And the spell has been broken.
I'm enjoying seeing the stranglehold on thinking being broken.
Again, am I overhoping here?
Or has that actually happened?
Has the power actually returned elsewhere to the people?
Or who knows?
I just love seeing these liberal comedians be so sad.
Yeah, I do think that that's happening.
I think that that's a real effect.
And I don't know which thing that you've said now is funnier, that you called John Oliver Jamie Oliver because you don't even know his name, or that you said that AOC is young.
Isn't she like 40 now or something?
So, I don't know which of those things is funnier, but it just speaks to the broader theme of their decreasing relevance to the American and Canadian people.
People are not interested in this garbage anymore.
We know we've been propagandized, and you can only know you're being propagandized so long before you realize the only thing you can do is turn it off.
They're not coming back around.
They're not going to change their ways.
They're just going to lie to you, try to manipulate your feelings and your beliefs.
And it's just going all wrong for them now.
And, you know, I think it's slightly delicious.
I said that I wasn't particularly, you know, a lot of people are relishing and how upset people on the left are.
And I don't have enough of whatever it is in me to be excited about people being miserable, except these propagandists on TV.
I enjoy every minute of watching these people who have lied to us on TV being miserable and stressed out because they've been trying to do that to the population for so long.
And it's just so rich, whether it's these comedians, whether it's the people on the view saying ridiculous and sometimes awful and legally actionable things.
It's really fantastic to watch the people in those positions just lose their relevance in real time.
You know, you're right.
I said Jamie Oliver, that's the TV chef instead of John Oliver, but you're correct.
I've never watched a single episode of his shows until this last week.
And by the way, I love seeing J.K. Rowling bat him around.
Give me 30 seconds.
Here's John Oliver making the case for transgenderism.
I sum this up by saying, shut up, he explained.
Take a look.
Ads on that one issue.
And it was frustrating to see the Harris campaign fail to formulate a response, especially because it's pretty easy to do.
Watch, I'll do it for you right now.
As we've discussed before, there are vanishingly few trans girls competing in high schools anywhere.
Even if there were more, trans kids, like all kids, vary in athletic ability, and there is no evidence they pose any threat to safety or fairness.
It is very weird for you to be so focused on this subject.
And finally, if you genuinely want to address the biggest concern for most girls who play high school sports, you'd be less worried about this and more about the creepy assistant volleyball coach who keeps liking their posts on fucking Instagram.
Yeah, well, J.K. Rowling batted that down pretty hard, pretty quick.
What a pleasure.
Hey, listen, I could talk to you all day because I just want to bounce ideas off you.
I love your point of view.
I think there's some cause for optimism, and I feel a great relief.
Like a load is being lifted off my shoulders, not just because I believe Trump is the right thing for America and the world, but because if, God forbid, he was shot and killed, if, God forbid, the election was stolen, not only would you not have had Trump as president, but you would have had a terrible trauma for America.
I think you would have had a generation of quarreling and hatred if Trump was killed or otherwise denied the ability to reach the finish line.
The harm to America would have been on par with the assassination of JFK.
Echoes of Trump's Impact00:02:56
I truly believe that.
So I'm relieved that crisis didn't happen.
And also, I'm delighted about what he's going to do for America and for the world.
I did not have skin in the game.
I cannot vote.
I'm not an American.
But by God, his election will affect us here in Canada in many positive ways.
And if we're not careful, some negative ways too, including with the border.
Last word to you, Dr. James.
No, I think that's right.
And, you know, I put it out that I am trying at my own campaign, speaking of Canadians.
Now that we have Trump having been elected and we have this very vibrant movement and people are putting their shoulders to the wheel down here down south for you guys, I want to see this echoed up north.
I want to see this echoed in Asia.
To see, you know, not a MAGA movement necessarily, but something that an echo of the MAGA movement in Canada and New Zealand and Australia and Japan and South Korea and Britain across Europe.
I would love to see that echo happen.
I think, of course, the Canadian context is nearest and most important for us as Americans down here, not just because you're our closest neighbors, not just in terms of geography, but in terms of culture and coming across and spending time together and having similar but not identical visions of the world, but also because we share such a long border.
I think that our mutual security depends on us getting this right.
And so I'm really putting my shoulder to the wheel to try to get something moving in Canada that capitalizes on this as well.
So I appreciate another chance to talk to Canadian people through your show, Ezra.
And maybe we can get to making Canada great again, right on the heels of this.
That's a great idea.
And listen, I love it when you come to Canada.
I know you've been here several times, speaking to huge crowds, by the way.
I remember when I saw you in Calgary, I was astonished.
No disrespect, but I thought a U.S. academic is coming.
I mean, you're more than an academic, but I thought a PhD coming to Canada to talk about a fairly philosophical issue.
I thought, okay, a couple hundred people there.
No, there was well over a thousand people gathered to hear quite a technical speaker.
I was so encouraged by that event.
I think that was actually the first time I met you in person.
So I love the fact that you care about Canada.
Most Americans don't think about Canada, but we will need the help like you have down under.
I'll let you go because I could get down, I called it down under, in the lower part of the continent.
It's great to see you again, folks.
You can learn more about our guest, Dr. James Lindsay, at his website, newdiscourses.com.
Good luck in Baton Rouge.
And I love the fact that you're on the road because I know you're talking and you're organizing and you're encouraging people.