All Episodes
Previous Next
June 1, 2023 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
33:02
From 'Trans Rights' To 'Trans Entitlements' A Threat To Civil Society

The increasing demands for trans group rights is destroying civil society and leading us to civil conflict. So says Wendi McElroy in a recent Mises Institute article. Is she right? Also today: You'll never guess who's sending Target bomb threats! Finally - Rand Paul's "I told you so" moment.

|

Time Text
Rights and Rebellion 00:15:18
Hello, everybody, and thank you for joining into the Liberty Report.
With us today is Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
Very good.
Ready and rearing to go.
We want to talk about rights.
Everybody has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
You know, just a comment before we get into the program.
I've always wondered whether it should be pursuit of happiness or property.
And that was an argument.
And, you know, the more I looked at it, I didn't like the pursuit of happiness.
It's too vague and all.
But I came to the conclusion that it's pretty good because it opens, because it's very open, because your pursuit of happiness may be totally different than my pursuit of happiness, and we should have a right to do that, obviously, if there's no violence.
But we want to talk about rights today, and there's a lot of demand for rights.
And I think about the ability now to change definitions.
I think somebody warned us about changing the definition and messing around with language.
So rights now, it's very confusing from people.
And I've gotten to the point where I accept the notion that the people who don't understand it, they're talking about demands, what they want and they need and all these things.
And some of them sound just like, well, they need it.
So they need food, so they have a right to food.
They need shelter.
They have a right to shelter.
But that sort of misses the whole point.
But a right means people own their own lives.
It's a natural right that they gain at birth.
And people should be able to make their own decisions about their life and how much freedom they want and how do they use it.
And they have a right to mess up their lives if they want.
But today, we want to mention a little bit of the story of the people who are in this trans movement, the right to change your sex through surgery and all whatnot.
And people who are not of age being changed by people who are not their parents.
To me, it's just criminal that people get into trouble at school if some teacher tells the parents what's going on.
And the teachers' unions are the ones that get by.
We have to be in charge.
And of course, they have an ulterior motive to all that.
So the trans people are up in arms because there's people coming and opposing some of this trans stuff in the commercial atmosphere.
They're getting together.
And one that's the most recent, of course, in Target.
People are objected.
We saw that coming up during COVID.
People standing up for rights that they think belong to them and not arbitrary and not something the government can switch and change around.
But if rights means entitlements, then we're in big trouble.
And the article we're looking at at the present time, trans rights means trans entitlements and the end of civil society.
This is very serious.
But of course, when we look to see who it is, the Mises Institute.
So we can expect a good article on this.
And this was written by Wendy McElvoy.
So it's a very important subject.
It's the principle of even define a right.
If we can't do that, we do have a tough time.
I think the emphasis on the end of civil society, I think we're witnessing.
What do we do?
All we have to do is make a trip to San Francisco.
I'm not going back there.
Not for a long time.
It gets fixed up.
Yeah, so put on the first clip, and this is from the Mises Wire.
And Wendy McElroy, people that read Mises or read Lou Rockwell will remember Wendy.
She's been writing on and off on Lou's site forever.
She's a feminist anarchist, self-described feminist anarchist.
And so she comes at this from a very interesting perspective.
But as Dr. Paul, as you said, trans rights means entitlements and the end of civil society.
And have just a couple of clips that I brought out from this because she's talking about a demand not for individual rights of people to do what they wish, but as you always talk about it, and I'm sure you're going to have a lot more to say about it, the idea of group rights and what it costs society.
So put up that next one.
Here's part of what she writes.
Now, this is a backlash against so-called trans rights.
The media characterizes this backlash as anti-trans hatred by conservatives, Christians, and other troglodytes.
But few, this is important, but few people care about the sexual or gender orientation of their neighbors.
True.
Critics of the trans movement are rebelling against the forced redefinition of biology, the destruction of women's sports by trans athletes, the hijacking of children's education, the medical experimentation of gender-transitioning children, and the intrusion of penises in women-only spaces like bathrooms, locker rooms, prisons, and shelters, she writes.
And she continues, critics don't want to oppress anyone.
They want a return to civil society of peace and individual rights.
Yeah, I think that's a tremendous point that she makes there.
And that is what our goal, of course, is, is to have peace and liberty.
And sometimes it's not complicated.
It's just maybe the definition of rights, you know, that makes the biggest difference.
And it is true that I've had a desire to make sure that people don't think rights are collective, group rights.
That always annoyed me to know when individuals have rights.
The groups do not.
But, you know, pure democracy invites groups getting together.
And, of course, the founders discouraged it.
Matter of fact, they were very negative on pure democracy.
And I think if this exists, it's how to form a gang.
You know, certain people come together with different beefs.
Well, I want this, and I want this, and I want this.
We're going to come together.
And as soon as we're 51%, we can become a dictator.
And of course, there's been many articles written over the years about the dictatorship of the majority.
And that is where the real problem comes from.
One is based on force.
The other is all voluntarism.
You get to voluntarily do what you want.
But what are the rules to guide it?
Now, Wendy makes some points.
You know, a lot of it is voluntary.
You bring people together with like-minded ideas, and it's sort of natural.
But the natural thing that follows, that has to be followed without the government telling you and defining exactly what you can do or can't do, is the fact that you can't use violence.
You can't use force.
And you can't change definitions.
You can't say that freedom means this to one group.
And so you have multiple people demanding it.
And guess what?
You destroy this society, especially if you put it in the category of rights.
We have these rights and we demand them.
You want to have to punish the other people who don't go along with this.
And This is why I think that we're in such chaos now, because the collective idea of rights is just totally bizarre.
You know, it really started, you know, in the 60s and even earlier.
You know, they talk about women's rights.
Women at times weren't treated equally.
But they can't demand that they have to get something.
They're making the same mistake.
So they say, I want this.
I want to be in this, this, and this.
So you have to have affirmative action.
And that's where things went astray as soon as the government was going to define what the consequence would be.
And it invites the segregation and telling people exactly what they can do or can't do.
And that, of course, destroys the whole principle of liberty.
Yeah, absolutely.
And I think what Wendy's saying here is this is, like you just said, it's just kind of like old wine in new bottles.
This is the old identity politics coming back in a new wrapper.
But this also reminds me, her piece reminds me of what you've been saying for quite a while now, which is the idea is to pit groups against each other, where they're fighting the pro-trans group rights versus the backlash against the intrusion of those rights into their individual rights.
These two pitted against each other, and the result is chaos.
And I think what you say over and over is that's kind of what they want.
Yeah, it starts off, they're all going to band together.
In a way, our side, I said, voluntarily to come together because we're all for liberty, and you have to reject violence, but you bring together.
And during my campaigns, I used to talk about liberty brings people together.
And we don't have to ask why you're coming.
Just use your liberty without violence.
And lo and behold, you know, from a personal viewpoint, I can say I felt good at times of being able to work with other people once they understood, well, liberty, he's not going to bother me.
Some people who had radical libertarian viewpoints that wouldn't talk to a conservative, and they were at least comfortable talking with me to try to understand it.
And I think that is important because people should realize there's a tremendous benefit by bringing people together and liberty will bring people together and the other ends up with the fighting and the screaming.
And I think this whole thing about Target has something to do with how the group joins all of how the groups all of a sudden friends and then, oh, it switched sides and became chaotic.
Well, the whole thing about I won't bother you, that has to imply that you don't bother me either.
So I don't bother you, but you can't bother me either.
If I'm not bothering you, but you're starting to bother me, you're starting to come into my dressing room, you're starting to cut up my kids, you're starting to force these things upon me in the public square that I don't necessarily want to see, then you're bothering me and that's the backlash.
And I think that's what Wendy is writing, and that's what we're seeing.
In fact, if you can put this next clip on from her article, she's talking about the re-emergence of identity politics and she defines it.
She uses a definition, standard definition, the politics of group-based movements claiming to represent the interests and identity of a particular group rather than policy issues relating to all members of the community.
The group identity may be based on ethnicity, class, religion, sex, sexuality, or other criteria.
End quote.
And then she adds, it's an attempt to splinter society into groups and categories, all of which are at war with each other because their interests are said to conflict.
So that sounds a little bit like the chaos that you've written about.
The one thing that helps iron this out when you're using the point of liberty to do what you want as long as you don't hurt other people.
But the one thing that is destroyed when they destroy the principle of owning private property, property is real important.
Sometimes I see freedom of speech and religion and everything is a consequence of the property.
And now, since nobody, you know, so often now we don't own our property.
Everybody pays taxes and they're all regulated and all this sort of thing.
So, you know, I always like the term home as your castle.
And even that doesn't hold true very often anymore because somebody wants to, you know, just like I mentioned already, teach the schools are now saying, don't call the parents.
We're going to recommend, you know, trans surgeries for their kids who might be 12 years old, and we don't want the parents to know about it.
But property is so important.
The home should be, you know, is our castle.
But what about, you know, when it comes to anything commercial?
They just throw it out the window.
Just this week, there was a story out that somebody, a few employees, the hoodlums came in, were tearing up the store and stealing.
And a couple employees started to resist them and stop them.
You know what happened?
They got fired.
Yeah.
They got fired for protecting the guy's property.
I've often wondered why there's so little fight back when people go into the property.
So that way they have no right to be in there.
But the person inside the building being harmed and robbed, he has rights, defensive rights.
He has a right to stand up for his life.
But they don't see it.
Everybody owns everything and everybody's indoctrinated by it.
And it becomes that the people who are defending, you know, privacy, churches, I mean, people don't have a right to go into a newspaper.
They don't have a right to come into the studio.
They don't have a right to go into a church and say, you know, freedom of speech is for me to say whatever I want in your church.
And most people understand that part, but they don't understand how often they have infractions in different manners.
So they end up doing it one way or the other through regulations, intimidation.
And you saw all the nonsense of who got into trouble with COVID lockdown, you know.
And she also talks about the role of the media, you know, in obsessively focusing on any of the most minor slight against a transgendered person, but completely ignoring, for example, when a trans person commits violence on a biological female, you know, and that's a good point.
Oh, the Nashville shooting is a perfect example.
We didn't hear a lot about that.
We heard it, remember it was referred to as former student shoots up school.
And she ends with this cautionary tale before we move to the next piece.
She says, I would end by asking, can a more general violence, a savage civil unrest, be far behind?
I believe it is already here.
And that's a chilling point that we really need to take on board.
But now you mentioned Target earlier, and we wanted to talk a little bit about a backlash against Target, and it's not from where you might expect.
Put on that next clip.
This is from our friends in Zero Hedge.
Target stores hit with bomb threat after, quote, turning its back on LGBTQ community.
So there was a bomb threat.
This makes the point.
Which side is the violent group?
Target Bomb Threat 00:11:57
And it's obviously those who believe in an artificial explanation of what rights are all about.
They're saying there are things that you get from the government and you earn them and the government, you know, and we can force them on people.
And then if it doesn't go their way, and the people, in a democratic manner, they stand up and say, and this was great because it was just the people who boycotted, which is a good principle that, you know, look, if you don't take care of your stores, we're not coming back here.
So they did that.
And all of a sudden, the people who, so they were shocked.
The LGBTQ people were obsessed with this.
And so they got a misunderstanding.
They were the allies of the store, went along with it.
And then the people spoke out.
That's to me the real democracy.
The people who react in the economy.
And that's risky to use the word democracy, but that's different than a democracy where you get 51% and you can dictate anything you want because the other ones, which they are doing, if we can get enough people to believe through intimidation, education, political force, and economic force and power, then that to them is legal and operational.
And that's the way democracy should work.
But no, I think the whole thing about this Target thing.
And then there's been other, I think it's that beer deal where somebody didn't like what they were doing, the way they were advertising their beer, this Bud Light stuff.
So that's to me, that's one of our things that we have encouraged that the people, you know, especially in COVID, a lot of people woke up.
And a lot of people were very despondent about that.
The people will never work up.
It's overwhelming.
They'll never change.
And at times I think that's probably likely for a while, but it doesn't mean it has to be that way.
People who declare that they're knowledgeable enough to know that next week is the end of civilization.
I don't quite buy that.
We don't know what it'll be like next week.
And if we continue to do this idiotic policy, things are going to get worse.
But that doesn't mean that they have canceled out all the people who are decent and know exactly what should be done.
And that's why we're hearing from them when you see these kind of cases like at Target, how they had to reverse their position, which made things worse for them.
Yeah, that's the interesting part is that, you know, they felt all this backlash.
And so they moved these children's clothes that promoted this ideology.
They moved it toward the back.
And instead of everyone being happy, everyone was even more angry.
That's right.
And to put on the next clip, because this is exactly what happened, they got a bomb threat.
At least one bomb threat was sent to a group of Target stores by people who were mad at Target for moving these clothing to the back.
And this is what the bomb threat said.
Target is full of blank cowards who turned their back on the LGBT community and decided to cater to homophobic right-wing redneck bigots who protested and vandalized their store.
Reads a threatening email sent to several target locations in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
He goes, the person who wrote the bomb threat goes on, we won't idly sit by as a far right continues to hunt us down.
We're sending you a message.
We placed a bomb in the following targets.
We will continue to bomb your targets until you stop cowering and bring back your LGBT merchandise.
And so I read this, Dr. Paul.
I read this bomb threat, and I said, this sounds like the LGBT people are acting like terrorists.
And then I went back and put on the next clip.
I went back and I realized I felt a lot better because I remembered this clip, the Department of Homeland Security draft document.
White supremacists are the greatest terror threat.
So it actually wasn't a terror threat because it's impossible.
Our government tells us that these people can't be terrorists.
So what the company did, the radicals did, they twist truth and then they blame the people that are opposing them for saying they're the guilty people and they're the ones who are sorting out the truth.
It's done that frequently.
They just do all this truth.
Just think of how that's done in politics now.
Just think in the last few years.
You know, we're not the champions of the former president, but there's been a lot of twist of people who were lying and cheating and violent.
And, you know, I think Russia Gate is an example of that.
Who was guilty in Russia Gate?
Well, I would say the truth is leaking out.
And it probably wasn't Donald Trump.
But believe me, how many people actually still believe that?
They twist it.
So whenever anybody is very aggressive against these races, I would assume that you better check carefully because the ones who make the most noise and condemning others for being racist, check and just see what their record is all about.
Yeah, for sure.
Well, again, just like I said in the last section, the media's role is important in this.
And let's skip ahead to that tweet from the Washington Post.
This is the media role, Dr. Paul.
Because all these things that are happening, and here's how the Washington Post characterizes it.
Why is 2023 the summer of anti-LGBTQ panic?
So it's not that there's nothing legitimate to having this stuff out front.
It's just a panic by anti-gay and anti-trans people.
That's how the Washington Post characterizes it.
So there you have it.
So excuse me, but so if a parent responds in a very positive manner, they're the bad people.
They're the bad people, yeah.
Well, let's do a final one because we've got to do some kudos to someone we know, and that's someone called Senator Paul.
And I love the way Politico characterized this.
They called it Rand Paul's I Told You So legislation.
And if we go to the next clip, this is what happened.
And we've talked about this before.
Senator Paul, around the time where they were authorizing all of those billions of dollars to Ukraine, Senator Paul knowing at the time, the tone of the country that he would not win a vote against that money, he said, can we at least have someone to oversee the money?
Can we at least watch where it goes?
Because Ukraine is notoriously corrupt.
And of course, they called him an agent of Putin and all sorts of horrible things.
Well, here's from Politico.
Senator Paul says he will reintroduce his legislation calling for a dedicated Ukraine aid inspector general after the Pentagon disclosed that it miscalculated Ukraine aid by $3 billion.
It also goes on to talk about how it overestimated the value of the arms being sold and all sorts of things.
So Senator Paul recognizes now that the accounting is even worse than he thought.
So he's going to reintroduce this legislation to have an inspector general.
You know, the principle here is, do the people have a right to know where their money is going?
And it's the principle of audit.
So audits, you know, I've talked about an audit for a while to do with the Federal Reserve.
And also the audit of the Pentagon in general.
We don't really audit the Pentagon.
But in this case, Rand is one step ahead of that.
He probably knows it's difficult getting audits after it happens because they mock you for doing this.
But what they do, what he has done is try to send the auditor out with them to keep the records.
But they wouldn't even allow that to happen.
No accusations, nothing.
Just somebody to look over their shoulder, which is probably one of the most important thing an elected official could do if they're in government, supposed to protect the rights of the people, is just know what's going on.
But that's where that's where the problem starts.
And just think now about the secrecy of government and how abusive that is.
And there's a tremendous emphasis on secrecy and security for the government and not for the people.
It was supposed to be for the people and not the government.
But the government was supposed to be transparent.
And I think that's exactly what he worked on, trying to pre-audit them, know what's going on, try to prevent the abuse.
But I think his timing was good to revisit this whole issue.
Yeah, it is.
And let's click to that next clip because this says a lot about what's happening and what's happening.
Go back one if you can, please.
So Paul's legislation would fold Ukraine oversight into the duties of the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction.
Now, this is the part I like best, Dr. Paul, about this, because you and I have talked about how the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction has done a spectacular job.
It goes on to say that office now held by John Sopko would be empowered to conduct audits, investigations, and oversight for programs run by the Pentagon State Department and USAID.
It would also submit quarterly reports to Congress.
This is essential, and this is an excellent way to do it.
And I would have to say, we've followed SOPCO for a long time.
He would be the perfect person if they could convince SOPCO to take on this thankless task.
He would be the perfect person in that position, and it would be a great service to the American people, to the American taxpayer.
Yeah, I wish that was enough.
I mean, how could you need more reference than that?
But, you know, in this day and age, in this age, when they twist manage, twist language and definitions, you know, it's a real struggle to get something across.
It just isn't all that complicated.
And I've argued that case for a long time.
Liberty is not complicated.
You know, just don't harm people.
And I think a lot of people over the centuries have realized that, that being left alone, your home is your castle.
I keep visualizing, you know, in ancient times, what was the first thing that the human race had to do?
They had to find a place to live.
They probably used a cave or a thatched house or something.
I'll bet you any money that that little cave or something became property and they had to protect against it.
And there were certain rights understood.
You didn't march in and start your own fire and this sort of thing.
So that is such a wonderful thing if people understand, you know, that this can be handled.
It's not complicated.
It gives the incentive to have your own property.
It's definable.
It's good for the economy.
It's good.
You know, in America, one of the traditions of America, in spite of all our problems, Americans have generally been pretty darn generous, you know, when there have been problems around the world.
And when you're wealthier, you know, there's no reason why under a more normal society that all these things would be better with just the basic principle of just give up on your violence.
And if you want to do something or work with something or buy something or sell something, you only have to remember one word to remind you what you do.
Make sure that both sides agree and that it's a voluntary action, social, you know, financial or whatever.
And that goes a long way to bringing peace in the world.
10% Off Generators 00:03:27
And then, Daniel, guess what?
They may apply that principle to a foreign country.
Maybe.
Nothing forced on other countries.
Yeah, but if you change the nature of the individual, then maybe you would have more of that.
Because if we searched, we could probably find some countries that go along pretty well together.
But lately, I think it's been getting worse.
You know, even with the 20th century was a disaster.
When you think of World War I, II, Korea, Vietnam, Middle East, and ongoing.
Now we're stirring things up.
I think there's a country called Ukraine.
They thought, well, maybe we can start a fire up there.
And it looks like they're working hard.
If our money is being used to bomb Moscow, I would say somebody's still working very hard to defy my suggestion.
Exactly.
Well, I like how the Politico article toward the end says, now the senator with Senator Paul, who's the top Republican on the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, is essentially saying, I told you so.
And he did tell them so, and they didn't listen.
And it looks like he might have some more votes to pick up if he reintroduces that, which is great.
Well, before we close, again, we'd have to mention our sponsor for this month, May, Dr. Paul, and that, of course, is 4Patriots.com.
4Patriots.com has come out with this spectacular new series of generators.
It's a new generation of portable, safe, silent, and 100% fume-free generators.
These are not those loud gas generators that can be threatening to you with carbon monoxide fumes.
No, they're available to all Americans at a price that most can afford.
It's a solar generator that doesn't use gas, it doesn't give fumes.
It's not loud.
It's quiet as a laptop.
And it's lightweight.
You can pick it up and take it with you wherever you go.
It's expandable.
You can expand the capacity.
And the best news is that right now you can go to 4patriots.com and I will include a link in the description and use the code RON to get 10% off your first purchase of not just of these generators but anything on the store site.
You can power your medical devices, your refrigerator, your telephones in a crisis.
And we are getting into hurricane season down here.
So anyone concerned about this, get your solar-powered generator.
Go to 4patriots.com and use Ron as a code to get 10% off.
And I'm going to close second to last day I'm here before I go up to Houston.
Put on that last clip if you have it.
Don't forget to get your tickets to our conference.
We have a few left in Houston.
They lie.
Nihilism in the war on truth.
Here's the lineup.
It's going to be a great meeting.
Scott Horton is going to talk about lying us into the new Cold War with Russia.
Our friend Jordan Schachtel about the Uniparty.
That is pretty much from the headlines this week as we talk about the budget, the Uniparty.
Peter Van Buren will join us from Hawaii talking about the Durham Report and how it unmasks the deep state.
Of course, Dr. Paul, you're on the hook to deliver a speech as well.
And I will try to muddle through something myself.
But whatever the case, I will put a link in the description or go to RonPaulInstitute.org, click on there, get a ticket, come have breakfast with us and listen to some good speeches.
Very good.
Promoting Liberty and Peace 00:02:04
And I'll close with a continuation of my point about what freedom is all about.
And it's not complicated.
It's very beneficial.
It doesn't cost very much.
And that is just accepting the principle.
The libertarian calls it the non-aggression principle.
And you can't commit aggression against anybody or anything.
But you know what is interesting is you say, well, it's too big.
How can you get all the people to agree?
Well, you could start with your next-door neighbor, which is a cure.
If I look at all my next-door neighbors, the neighborhood usually gets along, especially in most communities, even though we hear about all the other problems, that they get along and both neighbors get along quite well, and that can expand.
But they have to believe in the principle and why that is the case.
Unfortunately, what is emphasized is, you know, the pure democracy of dictatorships and lobbying for your liberties to do this and that.
But in the other thing that goes along with this, so many people think, thank you for your sacrifice by going into the military and fighting these wars because you have protected my freedoms.
You have protected my Constitution.
You have protected our prosperity.
I don't believe that is necessary at all.
I think that, you know, the neighborhood effect, if you understand that, you don't have to sacrifice anything.
It's positive for both sides.
But this whole thing that you have to sacrifice is very annoying to me because, you know, from a biblical viewpoint and by a moral standard, you shouldn't have to sacrifice an arm or a leg or a death in order to make yourself free.
But you have to understand what it is, and it has to be promoted.
And that requires education and an understanding of some basic principles which are not complicated.
And that is why we have our Liberty Report trying to promote the cause of liberty and the cause of peace because it's a chance that we can achieve peace and prosperity in that manner.
Export Selection