All Episodes
Previous Next
July 13, 2019 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:08:57
The Ugly Truth About Justin Trudeau | Ezra Levant and Stefan Molyneux
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everybody, Stefan Molyneux from Freedom Main Radio.
I hope you're doing well.
We are going to talk today with the one, the only, Ezra Levant.
He is a journalist and the founder of The Rebel Media, Canada's largest independent news network.
He is the author of some excellent books, including Shakedown, How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights, and Trumping Trudeau, How Donald Trump Will Change Canada Even If Justin Trudeau doesn't know it yet.
Now you really want to check out Ezra's website at EzraLevant.com, therebel.media.
Sign up for a subscription and follow.
If you're Canadian or care about things Canadian or just want to follow some great tweets, twitter.com forward slash Ezra Levant.
We will put the links to all of those below.
Ezra, thanks so much for taking the time today.
Well, thanks very much for having me.
I've enjoyed watching your show for a long time.
It's fun to be on it.
Thanks.
So last night in preparation for this interview, and it was in the wee hours, the dark night of the soul, it could be called, that I finished your book on trumping Trudeau.
Now, I felt that this last election in Canada, that Trudeau was kind of a foregone conclusion.
You know, the slippery slope, Prince Arella, who was going to win his way into the hearts and minds of, I guess, largely middle-aged Canadian females and other groups as well.
So I didn't pay too much attention to it and didn't know much about him.
But man, oh man, it does not seem like he exactly came out of central casting for the head of a G7 country.
I mean, I wonder if you could tell people a little bit about Justin Trudeau, where he came from, and how he possibly has the gall to be in charge.
Sure.
Well, I mean, he's the son of Pierre Trudeau, of course, who was a long-serving Prime Minister of Canada from 68 to 84, really, with a short break.
Pierre Trudeau transformed Canada in a lot of ways that I think were bad.
He tilted us towards the Soviet Union and away from the free democracies.
He demilitarized Canada during the Cold War, which Pierre Trudeau brought in the beginnings of cultural Marxism.
Brought in bilingualism, brought in, I mean, whether it's the metric system or multiculturalism, which was formalized by Brian Mulrooney, but he brought in a lot of, a lot of things that I think changed the nature of Canada from being a British Commonwealth country, proud of that tradition and a proud French quarters.
I think he changed us into a socialist, experiment that didn't work economically and started to fray socially.
So that's Pierre Trudeau.
And he was a Marxist.
You point out in your book, Pierre Trudeau was a Marxist in his college days, fairly formalized and fairly dedicated to that cause.
And that, of course, has that whole internationalism skepticism of any kind of national pride, particularly sort of white Western European pride and so on.
So that was kind of a whack to the foundations of the country as it stood.
Well, and this, I mean, right now that seems like just an abstract indulgence, but remember, in the Cold War, these were dangerous days.
And these were not elective military adventures.
This was standing against the Soviets and the Chinese and the Cubans.
I mean, whatever you think of those things today, they're almost quaint and nostalgic.
Back then, they were horrific.
And Trudeau always sided, Pierre Trudeau Sr.
sided With the Russians, with Castro, with China.
But let me say this to Pierre Trudeau's credit.
He, although he was so wrong, he was an intellectual.
He was high energy.
He was a creator.
He was even in his own way an entrepreneur.
He was a law professor.
He was a cabinet minister, a justice minister.
He created a magazine.
He created a thinkers club.
He was wrong in so many things.
But the man was an intellectual.
Now his son, Justin Trudeau was born into that, but lacked his father's work ethic, intellectual curiosity, or purpose.
And Pierre Trudeau's own father was a very wealthy entrepreneur, set up a trust fund.
So Pierre Trudeau himself never had to work a day in his life.
He did because he was a missionary.
He was in fact taught by Jesuits.
He was a Marxist missionary.
Justin Trudeau was the second generation in his family to not have to work.
And so he didn't.
And so he dabbled.
He dabbled in school.
He dabbled as a substitute teacher.
He dabbled as a snowboard instructor.
He dabbled in environmental science till that got boring.
He went backpacking, in his own words, to 90 countries.
I can't even name 90 countries.
He was just basically traveling the world as a tourist and a playboy, spending daddy's money, living off daddy's name, until one day in his late thirties he said, Geez, well I guess I should get a job.
I don't really know much of anything, but why don't I start as Prime Minister of the country?
And short years later, that came true.
Well, it's such a strange journey.
It's not wildly unpredictable, but from like random trustafarian to leader of a G7 country in a few short years, trading in on name and looks and all that kind of stuff, it is really astonishing.
And you're right about Trudeau, because his father, I mean Trudeau, I mean, he looked like, I don't know, some ferret who ran into a plate glass window too quickly and he didn't have any particular physical charisma, but his emotional energy, his intellectual energy and his intellect was first-rate.
I think not necessarily turned towards the sunlight of goodness, but he had that kind of intellect and he also had a profoundly great oratory, great speaking ability, particularly his off-the-cuff remarks were scintillating.
And having gritted my teeth and sat down to watch Justin Trudeau's speeches, especially his off-the-cuff stuff, you know, it's a little bit like Obama in that he's fairly silver-tongued, well Obama is better at that, fairly silver-tongued when he's got a teleprompter, but off-the-cuff there's just not that same polish.
Well, in fact, I think the best way to look at Justin Trudeau is he last paid true attention to politics when he was a child at Pierre Trudeau's feet.
So when he was a boy sitting around the table with his dad and the cabinet ministers and high public office holders of the day, if you listen carefully to the only things that Trudeau speaks you know, impromptu about.
It's like you're listening to a child's memory.
So it's shallow.
If you ask him about Castro, ask him about China, you'll hear echoes of what he probably heard his father say 30 years ago, and he has not thought about them since.
It's a child's memory.
The only issue that truly motivates him, that he speaks with energy and passion and knowledge and interest in, is marijuana.
And I don't say that as a joke or an insult.
It's just the one thing that really gets him revved up.
And his campaign team had to tell him to sort of shut up about it.
He even talked about how he used marijuana since becoming an MP.
And you would think a curious journalist might say, who is your dealers?
Who did you smoke it with?
Did you smoke it on Parliament Hill?
How do you feel about breaking the law?
I mean, there's so many questions.
Did you ever vote while stoned?
And I just wanted to point out while we're talking about this topic, we had to put this actual interview off to make sure that we recorded it on April the 20th, because without the 420 reference, we simply can't make, we can't tie all of these disparate pieces together.
And you tweeted about that, like, wouldn't you ask these kinds of questions he'd admitted to illegal drug use while having some pretty important information and pretty important decisions to make?
But of course, you know, if you shovel enough money at the CBC, it turns out that the echo effect of the honeymoon period tends to stretch out an infinitum.
Listen, there are arguments for decriminalization or legalizing marijuana.
I'm skeptical of them.
But you would think just that the chief law writer of the land Whether or not you agree with marijuana laws or not, they are on the books.
Just for him to so cavalierly talk about smoking marijuana as the chief lawmaker, was there no curiosity in the entire media-political-industrial complex?
There's just no natural curiosity or follow-up?
You're not curious how that went?
Who else was there?
Was it with his staff?
Was it in a parliamentary building?
Where did the money come from?
A lot of political leaders Don't even hold their own wallets.
Right, right.
There is this funny thing, you point this out in the book and I want to dive into this a little bit further because to me it's something that I did not appreciate as much when I was younger.
How much the elites within Western democracies gravitate towards authoritarian regimes and have sympathy towards authoritarian regimes.
Like I did a show a couple of months back on McCarthyism and how much The Soviet totalitarian state had infiltrated the very highest levels of the U.S.
government.
And you write in the book about not only, I think, the fairly well-known fetish that the Trudeaus have for Castro and for Cuba, where, as you point out, Castro and his ilk slaughtered the same proportion of Cubans as Stalin did to the Russians, but also his brother Alexander's focus on China and the fetish with Iran and so on.
There is really quite a lot that these elites have in common, not with you, the freedom-loving Canadian or voter, but with extremely authoritarian regimes around the world.
Yeah, Alexandre Trudeau is Justin Trudeau's brother.
Now we can't hang everything a brother does on Justin, of course not, but Justin Trudeau made Alexandre his Senior advisor, once becoming liberal leader.
And Justin Trudeau has spoken favorably about Alexandre Trudeau's journalism.
So I think it is fair.
And even if, and even to know the family thinking, where he comes from, because he was such a blank slate for so long as he partied his way backpacking through 90 countries, Alexandre Trudeau worked producing An anti-western pro-Iran documentary called The New Great Game.
I'm going from memory here.
I think that's what it was called.
With press TV.
That is a state broadcaster of Iran.
He did a similar project paid for by the Chinese government.
So these aren't even independent projects in authoritarian regimes.
These are projects done with the explicit approval, support, promotion and cooperation of the Chinese tyranny and the Iranian tyranny and that that comfortableness, that that ease of operating as a journalist.
You're not a journalist when you're doing that.
You are a propagandist.
But Trudeau himself, in one of those unscripted moments, you'll recall when he was running, he had a ladies' night event in Toronto.
He was asked a question he hadn't been briefed on.
It was a surprising question.
It was a great question.
Other than Canada, what's your favorite country?
That's a great question, isn't it?
And he said, China.
Okay, now I like China too.
I like Chinese food.
I like Chinese culture.
I like Chinese history.
There's a lot of things I like about China.
He did not say those things.
He said, quote, their basic dictatorship.
And then he expanded on it and said it allows them to make decisions on the spot.
He particularly mentioned the basic dictatorship of China as the chief thing that he found attractive.
And of course, His policies towards China and towards Iran have followed this love of authoritarianism.
One quick another point, again, it's Alexander, not Justin, but Alexander Trudeau wrote this bizarre cult-like pan to Fidel Castro and the Toronto Star a few years back, calling him a A superman intellectually and physically stunning who could scuba dive 100 feet below sea level, a master of internal combustion engines, and the stock market, and science.
I mean, it was like a cult member revering a cult leader.
That is the family from which Justin Trudeau emerges.
That is the world within he's lived.
To this day, he has not received the keys to his full trust fund.
He's still babysat by lawyers, accountants, handlers, spin doctors.
His whole life has been shaped.
He's as much of a Manchurian candidate that way.
as Barack Obama was.
Well, this to me is one of the basic job applicants.
Like you, I've hired many, interviewed and hired many, many people.
When being interviewed for the position of Prime Minister of Canada, or frankly having any political power in Canada whatsoever, a love for Chinese dictatorship, to me, would be kind of a disqualifying question.
It would be something like, well, thanks for coming in, but if you intend to shoplift, you can't work in my convenience store.
Sorry, that's just not how we do business here.
It's not reported on, the level of shock.
I mean, I sometimes feel like I'm carrying the entire burden of shock for half the country.
Like, shouldn't people just be agog astounded?
Not just with the family fetish for dictators in Iran and in Cuba, but this Preference for what is called a basic dictatorship.
A love for the idea that you can just make decisions without consulting those pesky in the way tribbles called voters.
Yeah.
Well, let me just tell you one more anecdote about that Chinese answer.
That was at a event that was open to the media.
And I'm trying to remember, I think it was maybe 2012 or something.
I have to look it up.
2013.
Thank you.
There were other media in the room.
Several media, they saw that question, they heard the answer, and they did not report it.
It was only reported by the old Sun News Network, which was a right-leaning news network I was affiliated with.
So that was a stunning moment too.
So here was an incredible revelation, showing the true nature of Trudeau, unscripted, so it was really him.
Other media saw it, heard it, and either saw it, thought it so unremarkable that they did not remark on it, or they went into spin mode, cover up for the idiot mode.
Oh, we best throw that down the memory hole and pretend he never said it.
Let me tell you one more example.
You mentioned China, you mentioned Iran.
I think those are important examples, but Trudeau had a very deliberate strategy to court the Muslim vote because Stephen Harper had so turned around the Jewish vote.
Over time, I think in his last election, Stephen Harper, according to some exit polls I saw, got 60% of the Jewish vote.
That's quite different to the United States where 60, 70, 80% of the Jews vote for Democrats.
So Trudeau, good strategy, said, okay, I'm not going to break the Jews away from Harper.
Maybe I'll go for the Muslim vote, which just happens to be triple the size demographically and in swing ridings in the GTA and other places.
So Trudeau had a very deliberate Muslim strategy.
He had a Muslim lieutenant named Omar al-Jabra, who was the former president of the Canadian Arab Federation, which was quite an extremist group.
They called for the legalization of Hamas and Hezbollah.
So these aren't progressive liberal Muslims.
So Trudeau, when he went campaigning to every and any city, he would very rarely visit a church, very rarely visit a synagogue.
But if there was a mosque in the city, he absolutely would visit it no matter what.
Now in Canada, as you may know, a number of mosques are funded by Saudi Arabia.
That's not a secret.
Saudi Arabia has a religious foreign ministry as well as a secular or a civil foreign ministry.
Some of those mosques in Canada are extremist.
As far as you can imagine, they're not just extreme in their ideology, But for example, there's a mosque in Montreal called the Asuna Wahhabi Mosque that has been named by the Pentagon as a recruiting zone for Al Qaeda.
And their literature calls for death, the infidels, death through adulterous, it's just all the way there.
Trudeau campaigned there.
And after revelations came out about these mosques, he was asked, do you regret campaigning there or other mosques?
And he said, absolutely no.
So just the same way as he brazenly embraces authoritarian China and his family does propaganda for the Islamic Republic of Iran, in Canada, there is no mosque and no Muslim group to extremist for him and his very first policy move after becoming prime minister.
He wasn't even sworn in yet as prime minister.
He was what we call prime minister-designate, what in the states they call president-elect.
When Barack Obama gave him a short, quick, courtesy call, just hello, congratulations, it was not a policy call, it was a courtesy call, Trudeau couldn't hold himself back.
He blurted it out.
He's withdrawing the CF-18s from the fight against the Islamic State.
He is repealing the law that says Dual citizens convicted of terrorism can have their citizenship stripped.
Every single thing you look at seems to be not just neutral in the war against Islamic terror, but on the other side.
This bit about not stripping dual citizen Canadians, Canadians hyphen or slash whatever else they are, that he's not going to strip them of citizenship but rather allow them to retain citizenship if they're convicted of terrorism, not just well there's rumors and so on, convicted beyond a reasonable doubt of terrorist activities to retain citizenship when they're already dual citizens is to me quite an astonishing perspective to have.
Surely, at the very least, it should be debatable, but it doesn't seem to be coming up in the Canadian media, which seems rather slavishly dedicated to the tousled one.
Well, there's two things going on here.
There's a push and a pull.
On the one side, it shows too much deference to radical Islam, so much so that even a convicted terrorist, he thinks ought to have citizenship.
So there's that.
But there's also his devaluation of what it means to be a citizen of Canada.
Devaluing the requirements we have, whether it's our citizenship guide, whether it's language or employment skills, whether it's the length of years you have to be a resident before you're granted citizenship.
All of these things devalue our nationhood and our citizenship and our sovereignty.
And in my book, I have a whole chapter called, What Would Soros Do?
George Soros, who's the essential globalist, whose own website brags about spending billions of dollars to promote a globalist agenda, has taken Justin Trudeau as a protégé.
Soros has had setbacks in the United States, in Brexit he may see more in France and Germany and elsewhere, Hungary rather, but Canada has been his retreat.
George Soros met with Justin Trudeau short months after his first election in New York.
They had a wonderful meeting.
They came to a joint agreement where the government of Canada and Soros' Open Societies Foundation jointly are working together on Canadian Muslim refugee policy.
They put out a joint statement.
They work on policy together.
They had a joint conference.
And one of those three points in their agreement It's combating anti-migrant, anti-globalist ideas.
So George Soros and Justin Trudeau in his Capacity as Prime Minister, have joined forces, this is not a rumor, this is government of Canada press releases, have joined forces to fight a propaganda war against any critics of globalism, open borders, or anyone who would object to the mass migration to the West.
It's incredible.
George Soros is colonizing the Canadian government.
Well, and Harper did have a policy, if I remember rightly, and correct me where I go astray here, but Harper had a policy saying, we're going to take the persecuted minorities from sort of war-torn districts within the Middle East and so on, which generally meant Christians or other groups that were being persecuted by the majority governments or by the majority culture.
And that of course meant a lot of Christians coming in from the Middle East and from other places.
And as you pointed out in a recent show, a year later, 50% of those who largely had private sponsorship, or a lot of them had private sponsorship, people putting up their own money, their own investment into getting these people settled, having them learn the language, get jobs, get introduced to the community, and there would be some shared values according to Christianity, 50% of them have jobs.
But then, when it's sort of state-sponsored stuff and you're bringing in non-Christians, it's only 10% of them.
So as you point out, five times more successful under the Harper program.
And Trudeau was asked, are you going to continue Harper's policy of favoring persecuted minorities when it comes to refugees?
And he said, absolutely not.
It's disgusting.
Disgusting!
How on earth is allowing a refugee program to focus on persecuted minorities disgusting?
That's in fact the definition of a refugee according to the United Nations definition of itself.
Someone who has a real fear that they're in danger by virtue of their religion, ethnicity, etc.
In other words, it means choose the lambs, not the wolves.
In Syria, there are lambs and there are wolves.
Justin Trudeau has shut down the lamb stream of refugees and has brought in the wolves by basically shutting down the private Christian church-based refugee program, capped it at a thousand, while rushing through 30,000 almost completely Muslim refugees who don't speak either English or French, many of them don't have more than grade four education, How are you going to succeed?
How are you going to succeed in Canada?
How are you going to make friends?
You don't even know how to drive!
Why are you bringing them here?
At least when they're in the region, in Turkey, in Jordan, in Lebanon, at least they have the language, they have the culture, they have the food, they have the climate, they're near You know, their infrastructure, their cultural infrastructure.
Why would you actually do that to them?
And let me throw one more fact at you, and I know this is getting off topic a little bit, but if you look at who those first 30,000-odd migrants were, almost zero were taken from a refugee camp.
The vast, vast majority were already resettled in the region, in Jordan, Turkey, or Beirut, which is actually quite a pretty city from what I can tell.
They were in apartments, some of them had jobs, they were already integrated, but to get those stats up, to get the artificial quota done, Trudeau ripped out these Muslim Syrian migrants from Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon and pulled them to Canada just for photo ops.
They actually did not need saving.
If you're in Jordan, you don't need saving.
If you're in Beirut, it's actually a fairly pleasant city, parts of it at least, but he brought them to Canada as part of his Muslim outreach, as part of his voter dilution, as a symbol.
I mean, it was actually, It was appalling and you've got to sort between the lambs and the wolves.
He's positively pro-wolf and anti-lamb.
This is something that I have talked about on the show for quite a long time and it's incredibly frustrating because of course there are people caught in a war-torn region.
A lot of the migrants are just economic opportunists looking to get free handouts in the welfare state in Europe.
But there are of course people who are fleeing war and persecution, fleeing ISIS, fleeing beheadings, fleeing all the god-awful stuff that's going on over there.
If you want to help these people and you're doing it rationally rather than virtue signaling photo op vanity projects, then what you want to do is resettle them in the region.
You could help 12 people by resettling them in the region for the same price as getting one person to resettle in the West.
And, of course, refugees are supposed to be temporary until the situation in Syria or other places is stabilized, which may happen.
It certainly seems to be heading that way in some ways.
So to me, it's really frustrating because all you have to do is think about it.
If you had to be resettled as a Canadian, would you rather be resettled in America or Saudi Arabia?
Where would you be more likely to succeed?
So bringing people over here makes it much tougher for them to go back.
And it also doesn't give them the opportunity to succeed in a local environment.
And we can see that in these statistics of people coming over who are Muslims or non-Christians, only 10% working a year later.
That is not a sustainable model.
Let me be clear that if you are displaced because of a war, that does not make you a UN refugee by their own standard.
I have a refugee lawyer friend who had a client whose husband was killed in the street in Lebanon.
And she applied to be a refugee here in Canada, which was years ago, and she was turned down because the refugee board said We're sorry that this happened to you, but you are not being persecuted because of your race or religion or ethnicity.
You just happen to be in a civil war and we're very sorry, but that is not the definition of a refugee.
So just simply vast population transfers, that may be something.
That may be population replacement, that may be liberal voter recruitment, that may be massive virtue signaling, that may be Democratic destabilization by some sort of Soros plan.
I don't know what it is, but it is not the legal definition of refugees.
But let me tell you a solution that Australia has done that I find very interesting.
Australia had a lot of boat people coming to Australia from Asia.
Who wouldn't want to go to this beautiful, happy country?
So wealthy.
And some of them were real.
Some of them were real refugees.
Many of them were just economic migrants paying smugglers.
Australia brought in a plan that I thought was very bright, and both, you know, left and right in Australia, there's sort of a consensus here, from what I can tell.
If you come to Australia, you're intercepted and you're taken to an island, one's called Christmas Island, so you're not allowed to go to Sydney and just melt into the population.
You're held, you're given health, and you're checked out, your documents are checked out.
If you're legit, if you're a legitimate UN definition refugee, okay, Australians will help you, but they will send you to a nearby island that is perfectly safe, and you can live there, like Nauru, a very small island.
Australia pays them thousands of dollars per refugee to take these refugees.
And so Australia is saving someone from persecution.
They're having a happy life, but they just don't get to choose what bedroom they can sleep in.
It's like if a homeless man comes to your house.
You can check them out.
Are you really homeless?
Are you really hungry?
Are you for real?
If you're not, get out of here.
Scram, you faker.
Oh, you're for real?
Okay.
Well, you can stay in the guest bedroom.
You're not staying in the master bedroom.
Australia Is big hearted.
It says we will actually help you and save you from certain death.
But you're going to live in Nauru.
And if you don't like that, well, you can go back to the country you came from.
That's a great solution.
Just because someone walks into Canada and says, I'm here, doesn't mean we have to take him.
Same with the States.
Well, it's funny, you know, at a personal level, Ezra, I mean, I have spent, not as much now after recognizing the difficulty of it, but when I was younger, I would spend some time, you know, really trying to help people, help people get their lives turned around, help people get jobs, help people, I've done it through my show as well, help people get to safety, get into therapy, what it is.
It's really, really hard to help people.
It's really complicated to help people because you want to give them the right values, you want to give them material support, but at the same time you don't want to enable dependence and, you know, it's really complicated.
And I sort of feel like if you're some elite and you've sort of lived a pretty privileged life, you haven't kind of mucked it up with people who really are needy and are challenging and sometimes manipulative in their desire for support, then it's just easy to say, "Well, we'll throw money at it, and we'll give them this, and we'll give them that, and somehow magically everything will be fine." But when you're actually down there in the trenches trying to help people on a one-to-one basis, you recognize how difficult, how complicated, how challenging it is.
What a delicate balance it is between support and enablement and a lot of other factors.
And I think that most people who haven't done that just think, "Oh, you know, there's going to be a government program, and there's going to be money fired at things, and just everything's going to be fine." I almost know people who haven't actually tried to help any particular individuals with their own time and investment because they have that perspective.
Well, yeah.
And that's why these private refugee sponsorships are so valuable, not just because it's private money, but because you have 10, 20, 30 people in the church who now have a personal investment in this family.
They're going to try and make that family work.
Oh, why is your kid running with a gang?
Why aren't you looking for a job, dad?
Hey mom, you're going to meet the local ladies and you're not going to wear in the cab and you're not, you know, so you have the personal investment, people who care, but you know what?
Faith Goldie of the Rebel did some investigations in some of these schools in Halifax, in Fredericton, in Atlanta, Canada, where these, Syrian migrant men are dumped, and I say men, because men as old as 21, 22 are being dumped into high schools with Canadian girls.
You dump a 21-year-old Muslim man with a beard, full beard, in high school with a bunch of Canadian girls who dress like Canadian girls who are not wearing burqas, what do you think is going to happen?
Sexual groping, Gender apartheid type treatment, disrespect to teachers, violence, punching other, just incredible violence.
Choking girls with a chain, punching girls, hitting girls who either are too slutty for their Sharia style or not consenting, not submissive enough.
It's a terrible thing that's going on there.
Some of these schools have 10, 20, 30 kids just dumped on them.
They have no language skills, they have no resources, and the real victims are the families whose kids are in there with them.
And here's my point.
The moment those kids are dumped in Justin Trudeau's kids' schools, the private fancy schools, then I'll believe that they truly support this mass migration of culturally unfit migrants.
Because They live behind gated communities.
They have high security, often provided by the state, obviously, of their politicians.
They send their kids to fancy schools.
There are no Syrian 21-year-old men bullying and sexually harassing girls in Justin Trudeau's kids' schools or in the other schools of the elite that make these decisions.
If you look at where Muslim migrants to the United States go, they don't go to the high value zip codes in Washington DC or New York City.
They're dumped in blue collar or red state areas.
So the people making these decisions are very far removed from the consequences of them.
Yeah, to me there's almost a direct line up the XYZ axis which is support for radical multiculturalism is directly proportional to one's surrounding oneself with all white people.
That just seems to be one of these tragedies of the modern world.
Now let's talk about the helicopter dump of money that greeted Justin Trudeau's entrance to power.
I've always been suspicious of the left for a number of reasons.
They don't like to engage that much in open verbal combat and debate.
They tend to want to just bring in, say third worlders or other cultures that will reliably vote for the left rather than take their case to the people.
And last but not least, they Really, really like to turn on the fire hose of cash when achieving office.
And of course, if you've got really great arguments, you know, if you're a really attractive guy, you don't need to pay women to go out with you.
I mean, the fact that you want to pay women means that you think you're kind of like the ass end of a troll.
So you've got a quote in here, which I just got to read, which is, I'm sure this is not all it is, but you say, and being a good liberal, Trudeau knows that the best way to campaign is to promise cash.
In his first hundred days as Prime Minister, Trudeau gave away $4.3 billion.
No, no, no, that's not the end of it.
$4.3 billion, you say, in foreign aid.
$13 million for Vietnamese farmers, $15 million for job training in Africa, $14 million for infrastructure in Indonesia, and a whopping $2.65 billion for global warming projects in the third world.
And it just doesn't stop.
While Alberta's oil industry wrestles with massive unemployment, Trudeau pledged $200 million in aid to the OPEC nation of Iraq.
What an astonishing confession of intellectual impotence to need to fire that much cash to get support.
Well, there's a few things going on there.
First of all, that's, again, if you think of him as a child trying to think back to a child's memories of what his father did.
His father swanned around the world, like maybe an ancient prince would have someone falling, throwing rose petals behind him.
Trudeau Jr.
remembers his great father as, you know, the white man's burden who would go to these places and throw cash around and throw moral support around.
And I think, so part of it is an echo of what his father did, third worldism, otherism, alienism, globalism.
I often joke that You know, a Canadian Indian Reserve, if it really needed help getting clean water, it should rename itself the Syrian First Nation.
I think Fort McMurray should call it, you know, if only he cared enough about people in Canada who needed that help.
But it's also part of a campaign to ingratiate himself with third world nothings, because he wants the, he's always jetting down to the UN.
Justin Trudeau is always shutting down to the UN, whether it's meeting Soros there, or the UN Secretary General, or launching some feminist initiative there.
What a joke.
He's trying to ingratiate himself.
He wants Canada to have a seat on the Security Council, which is a vote.
There's the permanent members of the Security Council, but there's those who rotate through.
He so desperately craves that.
Because, I mean, I followed Justin Trudeau a fair bit before he came an MP, and although he's extremely wealthy, inherited millions, He's a bit of a penny pincher and a miser in his own way.
He did the speaking circuit.
We actually had the same speaking agent, if you can believe it.
And Trudeau would charge about 20 grand a speech, which is not bad money for Canada.
I know that's not US size bucks.
But almost all his speeches were either to students Or teachers.
We wouldn't get a lot of speaking groups with aggressive Q&As.
He would go around saying all these cliches, and he would get the simple applause of a junior high school student, or a junior high school teacher, who was probably daydreaming about how dreamy Pierre Trudeau was, and isn't Justin Trudeau too, and how he would have his shirt unbuttoned.
There's something about speaking in banal cliches, To uncritical audiences.
Trudeau did that before he was an MP in his speaking circuit.
He does that a lot of campaign events.
And that's what going to the third world and dumping millions or billions of dollars is.
Easy applause.
No tough questions.
You're on the side of the angels.
It's pretty gross.
And it wouldn't just... Obama did a bit of that too.
I think Obama was more ideological about it.
I think Obama truly was a third worldist.
I think Obama had a lot of hangovers from his father's anti-colonial Marxism.
I think Trudeau's coming from it as a virtue signaling, take up the white man's burden, just like my dad did.
Like, I think it's a lot more.
A reflection of Trudeau's own white liberalism than it was of Obama's anti-American counterculture.
But both of them, it manifested itself.
It looked the same on the outside.
People who prefer foreign countries to their own.
Well, and this comes, I think, to one of the core issues that troubles me in your book and about Trudeau as a whole.
So this is a quote, Trudeau talking to the Times regarding Canada.
He says, there is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada.
There are shared values, openness, respect, compassion, willingness to work hard here, right?
To be there for each other, to search for equality and justice.
Those qualities are what make us the first post-national state.
Now, I mean, you know, I've been trained in philosophy and all of that.
So post-national state is, you know, hey, look, I invented a square circle.
Aren't I cool?
I mean, the post-national state is a contradiction in terms.
But maybe this is relative to what you were talking about with his speeches, you know, these banal cliches.
It's like you could open up any Hallmark card and get the same set of adjectives.
One thing I really liked about Canada, I came over from England with my family when I was 11.
I knew we grew up poor, so, you know, had a certain respect for that kind of hardworking ethic.
Canadians are very sensible in many ways because it's a harsh climate.
It's a harsh winter, you know, not a lot of room for mistakes, a lot of common sense, a lot of foundational sensibility in Canada.
And so these kind of openness, respect, compassion, no, no, these are just adjectives.
How about things like, I don't know, property rights, separation of church and state, freedom of speech, you know, intolerance towards intolerance, which is a lot more...
More difficult to achieve, but a lot more virtuous than just thinking some group hug is going to make all the shivs in the world drop to the floor.
So this empty-headed just, ah, peel off and get a whole bunch of positive adjectives and I'm going to call myself a statesman.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And some of those are personality traits.
They're not really, they're like individual personality traits.
I would put it to you that many of those banal adjectives, Most countries in the world, or at least most Western countries in the world, would say they're that.
But Canada has a 400-year history, longer if you include Aboriginal history.
We have a shared story of battle, of settling this harsh climate, of Courier du Bois, of The railway of fighting in the British Empire along with the mother country in World War I and II, even in Korea, and even there were Canadians who actually volunteered in Vietnam.
There's a real story there.
And post-national, I mean, you know the root of the word national.
It comes from where you're born, like native.
Canada, there is something to being born here.
We're not just a hotel.
It's not just a geographical place on a map.
And the strange thing about Trudeau is sometimes he flips around on that, and he says Canadian values, like the Charter of Rights.
And if you look at the Charter of Rights, there's some of those things you listed.
Freedom of speech.
There's actually not so much separation of church and state.
In fact, the church is hardwired into our Constitution in a way that it is not in the American Constitution.
The church has a lot of historical rights in Canada.
Part of that comes from the French history, and Trudeau should know that.
We actually don't have that much separation of church and state.
We certainly do have separation of synagogue and state and mosque and state, which he doesn't quite get.
But you're right.
The idea that we're done as a country, that we're nothing as a country, it's part of his devaluation of our citizenship, his refusal to assert our borders.
The craziest thing in the world right now is how any one in the United States who either has a criminal record and is worried about being deported for that, or is a bogus refugee is being worried about deported for that, is just simply walking across the border into Canada and our border is not being enforced.
In fact, I see these horrendous images of our RCMP literally carrying luggage as if they are bellhops, as if young men and women grow up and say, I want to become a RCMP officer.
I want to be a Mountie so I can be the luggage boy for illegal immigrants walking from the United States who so clearly are not refugees because the United States by definition cannot be a refugee to Canada and vice versa.
We have a treaty to that effect.
But we see stories of people flying to the United States specifically to come through this.
We are the world's dope, the world's mark.
I mean, the United States just replaced the dopiest president with the toughest president, but we have no new guy who's willing to be conned or at least, I mean, it's so, it's so frustrating.
I believe that those politics of identity, of nationalism and of Respect for citizenship and borders.
I think that those are a sleeper issue in Canada, and I think that whatever goodwill there was for real refugees from Syria, and as I say, most of them weren't real, when you see images of young men simply walking across from New York State into Quebec, walking across from Minnesota or North Dakota into Manitoba and saying, I'm a refugee, that will burn up even Most liberals goodwill because they'll say, you know what?
He's, he's faking it.
I'm, I'm, I'm being taken advantage of.
I'm being tricked.
This will actually burn up more goodwill than anything Trudeau has done positively.
His passive acceptance of these fakers.
I can't believe he's allowing it to go on.
Well, not just allowing it.
I mean, according to his tweets, Ezra, he's encouraging it.
Come on in.
Canada welcomes you no matter what.
That is not a policy.
That is a dinner party invitation to the planet.
And I don't know if Canada's because, you know, peaceful neighbor to the south, nothing really going on to the north, big giant oceans to the east and west.
Have we just become so complacent in our ice castle that we forget that there's a world of monsters sometimes out there who will do people harm?
Have we completely lost the idea that sometimes defending your culture means that other people are less happy?
I mean, we've got this antithetical allergy to any kind of assertiveness to the point where, I mean, historically, cultures that lose the ability to assert themselves get walked all over.
Well, and one of my worries, and you referred to a book I wrote about I don't know, more than five years ago, called Shakedown.
It was when I was prosecuted by the Alberta Human Rights Commission.
For 900 days I was investigated and prosecuted, put through the ringer, because as the publisher of a magazine 11 years ago now, I published several of the cartoons of the Danish newspaper, Jyllands Post, of the Muslim prophet Mohammed.
And we published them to illustrate a news story about the riots around the world back then.
I was put through the ringer and I saw how free speech is not valued by the left as they claimed it was in the 60s.
And we've seen that in Berkeley recently.
We've seen that at cross campuses.
We've seen that with Professor Jordan Peterson at U of T. And I believe that the war on free speech And censorship, and the word police, and scolding police, and this attempt at creating a taxonomical species, a difference between free speech and hate speech, as if the same words, when spoken with a different emotion in your heart, suddenly become illegal.
I believe this is actually the most important issue of the year, of maybe our generation.
Because first of all, it's used to stop debate about any issue, whether it's about terrorism, refugees, borders, Globalism.
If you play the word police game, the thought police game, the censorship game, you stop any dissent.
And when you hold the establishment cards, as the left now does, all of a sudden Berkeley doesn't really want free speech because they have the power now.
They never really believed in it.
They just believed in it as a temporary tactic.
I see, though, the philosophical fraying of our understanding of free speech This false dichotomy between free speeches and hate speech as if we could ban a natural human emotion.
But I see it now coming through in legislation.
And I see in Canada the passage of the motion M103 to have a whole of government approach to eliminate Islamophobia.
What does that mean?
Fear of Islam?
How can you pass a law to eliminate fear of any ideology?
I see this as a central issue.
The censorship of words and ideas and thoughts And I see it as the central characteristic of the leftist ideology in any country.
I see it not so much in politics, I see it in politics, but I see it in corporate titans.
I see it in Facebook and Twitter and Google.
I see Eric Schmidt, the executive VP of Google, talking about a spell check for hate.
A spell check for hate.
I see it in Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and Google signing an agreement with the European Union Not passed through legislation, not through any deliberative process, a private negotiated censorship agreement between those four tech titans and the European Union, so specifically designed to halt the rise of Marine Le Pen in France and the alternative for Deutschland and Frauke Petry in Germany.
I see that as the great challenge of our day.
The censorship, not just from government, but through these massive tech titans.
Well, I mean, I think that is one of the biggest issues that we have to face.
It was kind of inevitable, like the left was for free speech when they were in the minority and attempting to storm the bastions of power.
Now that they hold, you have the three Ps, four Ps, sorry, which we get to in a sec, but now they hold those bastions of power.
Naturally, they're not as interested in free speech.
You know, it's like small companies, they don't like a lot of regulation.
When they're growing, when they become big companies, they're very big fans of regulation because it keeps the small companies from competing with them because they don't have the same armies of lawyers and regulatory compliance specialists and so on.
So this is sort of a natural cycle.
And we have this astounding, you know, the biggest explosion in human communication since the invention of the printing press.
And when you get the invention of the printing press, you get the dissemination of texts in the vernacular to the general population, causes the splintering of Christendom under the Catholic Church, and it is a massive explosion in human communication, sets the stage for all of the wonders that came after it.
Well, the terrors and the wonders, like the religious warfare, then The Age of Reason, the Enlightenment, the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution, all of that grew out of communication.
And this capacity for you and I to even have this conversation and transmit it to millions of people, that is a huge threat to the existing power structures that have grown up with a near monopoly over the means of communication.
To hell with the means of production.
What really matters in society are the means of communication.
And this whole monopoly is breaking up right under them.
Yeah.
It's, I use the phrase, the political media industrial complex.
I sometimes say the word the media party because it's not just any one media group.
I think you could include a lot of consultants, pollsters, pundits, second-hand idea mongers, think tankers.
You know, Daniel Pipes came up with what he called the four P's.
The politicians, the press, the police, And the professors, and he's added another P, the prosecutors.
And look, for example, at the New Year's Eve 2000, like about 15 months ago, 16 months ago, in Cologne, Germany, when more than 1,000, more than 1,000 German girls complained to police since then that they were either physically assaulted, sexually assaulted, robbed or outright raped.
By five to six hundred Muslim migrants.
It was a shocking, shocking evening.
Silvesternacht, that's what they call New Year's Eve there.
But then more, it's still on the internet.
If you go to January 1st, 2016, the Cologne Police Department, you can find it still on the internet today.
Their official report filed January 1st after the worst violent riot since the Second World War in Cologne.
The police said it was an uneventful night, it was a relaxed evening, there were a few pickpockets and fisticuffs, that's it.
It was a lie from the police chief.
But that, hundreds of people saw it.
I went to Cologne and I spoke to a bouncer at the Grand Hotel in the square, who's a bit of a famous celebrity bouncer, there's such a thing.
And he took some images on his phone and he told me about some fights he had to protect some girls.
He said, he spoke to some of his friends around Germany the next night and told them what He saw this and said, we don't believe you.
We don't believe you.
He said, oh, you'll see it all in the media in the days ahead.
And nothing happened.
And they all called him a liar.
And they said, if it happened, why didn't we see it in the news?
This was in the central plaza of the great city.
There was media, there was police, there was everything.
Because there was a collusion.
And there's several state-owned German media.
And they later said, well, we didn't want to talk about it until there was an official Police statement or political statement.
So is that how it works?
You have the police lying and the media saying, well, we're not going to talk about it until the politicians talk about it and being delayed.
And it only leaked out inadvertently.
That is collusion amongst these 4P professionals.
The cooperation of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Google, Microsoft is what's so terrifying, because that would be the way to go under and around the 4P professional establishment.
But when they get in on it, when they decertify 30,000 pro Marine Le Pen Facebook pages in one fell swoop, when our YouTube videos of the rebel are demonetized, even if they have keywords in them, like terrorist or Syria, When your Twitter account can be suspended because you upset the wrong person, that's terrifying to me.
And I think that people like George Soros don't go quietly.
And the establishment, they're going down screaming and kicking.
And Donald Trump, that was a shock to the system, but it's no way the end of the battle.
It's just the beginning in so many ways.
Yeah, very, very well said.
And I think that Donald Trump being the first social media president, that groundswell of support and the bypassing of the mainstream media that media channels like yourself and what I do, and what a lot of other people did, helped to get him into the White House.
That has not gone amiss.
That has not been missed by the powers that be.
And of course, Ezra, they used to have generations.
The lie used to last for generations before it was exposed.
I mean, the lie about, oh, you know, there's radicals that burnt down the German parliament in the 1930s that helped Hitler to cement his dictatorship, or even the lies about WMDs lasted for a couple of years.
The lies about McCarthy have lasted for decades and are still in the process of unraveling.
But now, but now you have incredibly intelligent people with time on their hands, all watching the mainstream media, all dismantling these propaganda planes as they're trying to get off the runway.
People are like peeling, like a demon on the wing, just peeling back the engines and throwing aside the propellers.
And so they can't even get a lot of these lies off the ground.
I mean, the amount of work that's being done on the internet for free that is replacing what, you know, other people should be doing.
I don't know if you heard there was this guy, who hit someone with a bike lock at this Berkeley campus, right?
You saw this today.
The geniuses, it's what's called the weaponized autism, which I think is a bit unfair because I think they're just stone geniuses, at Slash Paul, they found this guy and have revealed this guy, and now the victim can charge him with assault, and now he's been identified.
This was not happening in the past.
There's no way that the cologne stuff would have gotten out without social media, without the Internet.
Of course, they're going to try and whack it down, but it's the Internet.
It's going to be whack-a-mole.
If they kill one thing, two others will grow up in their place.
Now, they're going to keep trying to do it because that's their business model at the moment, but they can't get away with the same lies, and I think it's fundamentally disorienting that the media now are Pinocchio, Like before they could just lie with a straight face and maybe a generation or two some truth would come out, you know, like Walter Durante covering up for Stalin at the New York Times in the 1930s and praising totalitarian communism.
But now the internet has put this nose on the mainstream media when they tell a lie, boink, out it comes.
I mean this just came down today with these photos of the football team.
This inability to get away with lying is really, really shocking to the powers that be.
I don't know how they're going to adjust to it.
Of course they're going to try fake news and they're going to project all of their lying capacities or their lying realities onto everyone else.
But we will just own that term and turn it back on them like we did with fake news.
I'm glad you're optimistic.
There is some room for optimism.
The social media president, not just that he uses it, but that he was propelled that way, that all of Hillary Clinton outspending him on the, she outspent him on the four Ps, that's for sure, but it didn't help.
So yes, there is reason for optimism, but not everybody follows social media.
Twitter is just an obscure thing in the whole grand scheme of things.
Most people on Twitter don't even check it once a month.
So a lot of people just hear a cliche on the mainstream media, a one-liner, they maybe turn on CNN, maybe they see it at an airport.
Most people don't even read a newspaper.
So I think there is an active, engaged resistance to the mainstream media.
But most people, I think, are not engrossed with it.
They're focused on ordinary stuff in their lives.
But let me say, we had a turning point ourselves.
We're 26 months old here at The Rebel.
For the first month, people just laughed at us.
I mean, we started The Rebel literally in my living room, which we sort of did on purpose to show how low we were.
And we got rolling a bit and, you know, we hired a few folks and we started going.
But we were either ridiculed or there was just contempt, but it was, it was a haughtiness.
And things started to change about six months ago when I started publishing our stats.
And for, I mean, I, we started a company, I felt, you know, maybe that secret or private, there's really not a lot of private stats on the internet.
You could go to a website like social blade that tabulates how many views each channel gets.
So I thought, well, what the heck, I'm just going to start posting.
our Google analytics and our YouTube analytics on Twitter for the whole world to see.
And I don't care if that's being too, too disclosure oriented.
I don't care.
And I think our critics said who, who hated us and scorned us or ignored us realized we were the same people we were before I started doing that.
But here's what changed.
The fancy folks, the folks who, who are part of the four P's, Realized that they were not who they said they were.
They were not the dominant mainstream view.
They were the cranks.
They were the extremists.
And the views that they hated and had such contempt for, but comforted themselves by saying to themselves, that's just such an obscure point of view.
Look at the Sun News Network.
It failed.
Surely that's proof those ideas don't have purchase.
Look at Donald Trump's win shocked them because it made them think, well, maybe I don't understand the world I live in.
And we're at around 20 million views a month or whatever it is between YouTube and our website.
I haven't checked recently.
It's between 15 and 25 million views a month.
McLean's.ca, which is like the Time Magazine of Canada, they had, according to their ad kit, 3.5 million views a month.
National Post, 13.5 million views a month.
What, five times bigger, six times bigger than McLean's, almost twice as big as the National Post.
That's when things turned and the hatred turned to fear and self-doubt because all these keepers of the official opinion, for the first time, they had to confront the fact that no, they were not the normal ones.
They were not the mainstream ones.
And ordinary Canadians care about borders and values and separation of mosque and state.
And they're not globalists and they don't believe everything they hear about the global warming apocalypse.
And all these things that they just comforted themselves by saying, well, we're the only ones that count.
We're the only ones who matter.
Those extreme views are so obscure.
I think there's a terror.
And your numbers are going up!
Your numbers are going up and the traditional media's numbers are falling off a cliff.
So they may not be able to read birth rates in Europe, but they sure as hell can read where the numbers are going with your organization relative to their own.
Yeah, and I know I'm sounding like I'm bragging here a bit, but just yesterday I was looking at some of the stats.
According to PostMedia's quarterly reports, they lost 9% of their circulation in 90 days.
So every 10 days, They're losing 1% of their circulation.
So they're down 3% a month.
We're growing by one measure, our YouTube subscribers, we're growing 8% a month.
So they're shrinking 3% a month.
We're growing 8% a month.
It's not because we have more resources.
It's not because we're fancier.
It's because I think we were telling the other side of the story that was sequestered and suppressed.
Or just ignored or not allowed to flourish.
So maybe you're right.
Maybe there is some hope for cause for optimism.
It's definitely a race and I'm not, you know, everyone lean on the gas and, you know, if you are the person in your social circle, in your family gathering, if you're the person who's checking Twitter for your news, I'm afraid I'm going to have to invite you to get in other people's faces and just bring them the information that they don't have.
Like one of these statistics that in your book Ezra that just blew my eyelids back was 8% of Canadians support increased immigration.
8% of Canadians.
There are probably way more Canadians who believe in space abductions or that Elvis lives in Markham.
But 8% of Canadians support increased immigration and yet we're getting more immigration next year.
Now, that is such a disconnect that you'd think that the mainstream media would be all over that, but they don't, and they're not, because, I mean, the Maclean's has gone, to me, steadily leftward to the point where it's barely tolerable, even for research at the moment, but, you know, that iron law that any organization that is not specifically right-leaning will inevitably drift to the left seems to be taking place in the media.
We want, as Canadians, to be able to criticize any and all ideas without fear.
That's the social marketplace of ideas.
And if one group comes along and says, well, you can't criticize our group, we're going to get the law, it's like, okay, can I be scared of you now?
Is that okay?
Because, you know, this is interfering with a foundation of freedom we've all taken for granted.
I could go to do my master's at U of T and I could criticize the living hell out of communism and I could criticize the living hell out of socialism.
I got a lot of pushback.
I got into a lot of debates.
It was very exciting and it was very productive for all people concerned.
My ideas got better.
Their ideas, which were bad, got disproven 100% of the time.
But this idea that, okay, well, we got to stop here, here, no more.
Okay, but that's not a fundamental value.
And that's taking ideas and taking them out of the marketplace of ideas.
And that does not help anyone in the long run.
Yeah, well, I mean, that 8% immigration, I'm trying to remember the citation in the book.
I think that was a poll sponsored by the Globe and Mail.
But there have been a number of polls by a number of pollsters all on the immigration question, the values question, value screening for immigrants, Syrian migrants, general immigration numbers.
It's not just the overall number.
Every single demographic group, every single region in the country, men and women, even left-wing voters, Do not want higher immigration.
Some people are fine with it where it is.
And that's I think a normal human reaction.
So I'm fine with things as they are.
But for those who want to change the number who want Less is vastly greater than the number who want more, which is truly a fringe, 8%.
And yet, that's one of Trudeau's great missions, is to bring in more.
And he's choosing people who are not a fit.
I mean, if we were getting more immigrants from the United States, from the United Kingdom, or even from French... A lot of persecuted people, a lot of persecuted whites in South Africa looking for a place to come.
Well, I mean, first of all, there would be no linguistic problem.
There would be no cultural problem.
There would be no skills problem.
It would be so harmonious.
I don't even think people would notice, let alone object.
So I think, but it's not that.
And, you know, I like to hold up what immigrants were in.
I mean, to me, Irving Berlin.
He was a Jew, born in Russia, came to America, he was born in Israel, Berlin, changed his name to Irving Berlin.
He learned English, obviously.
He loved America so much he started writing patriotic songs.
God Bless America.
He was a Jew, but he wrote White Christmas.
He really got the whole tradition of the USO and traveling entertainment for the troops going.
He wrote, I hate to get up, I hate to get up, I hate to get up in the morning, if you know that song.
And he would go on tour to entertain the troops.
I mean, could you find a more patriotic, America-loving guy like that?
And that was an immigrant.
I thought, if that's immigration, I think people would say, yeah.
And there are immigrants like that, but you have Other immigrants that are specifically chosen in a manner that will make them unsuccessful.
They don't know the language.
They don't support the culture.
They're not interested in assimilating to it.
And they're actually being encouraged by the government to have enclaves, to be separate.
I mean, the idea of bringing anyone in a niqab.
If you were wearing a niqab, I'm talking about the full ninja.
You're not going to make friends.
You're not going to integrate.
You're not going to be a success here.
You're coming to colonize us.
You're coming to settle.
We're already settled.
We don't need to be settled by people who are looking to export that culture.
If you want that, there are countries that will accept that.
That is not our country.
I don't go to a French restaurant in order to get tabbouleh, right?
I mean, if I go to a French restaurant because I want to eat French, and there's this fundamental thing that I remember growing up, and this was true in England even more so in Canada, Ezra, which was, What is wrong with having babies anymore?
Is this gone completely out the window as far as how we should organize our societies?
What's wrong with the native population just having some babies?
Because this is kind of a weird thing that's happened.
And it's happened throughout the Western world where since, you know, you could say Rachel Carson's silent spring in the 60s.
But there's been this don't have kids.
It's bad for the environment.
There's all this wonderful life you can have.
You can be child-free.
Not empty nesters.
Are you child-free and don't have kids?
And that zero population growth was a big thing when I was a kid.
And it's really, really bad to use up all the resources in the West.
No kids, no kids, no kids.
And I think a lot of people listen to that and you can see the birth rate for a variety of reasons, but the birth rate went down significantly.
And then after like a generation and a half of no kids, no kids, no kids, now we're told, oh, sorry, you don't have enough people.
You don't have enough people.
So now we have to bring in people from the other side of the planet.
And it's like, nope, that's not what we were told.
We were told that it was really, really bad to have kids because of too much resource usage.
Take someone from Syria and bring them to Canada.
They're going to use a lot more resources.
And I think it's got something to do with the fact that for politicians, If the domestic population has a lot of kids, the politicians have to spend money on those kids and they don't get votes, right?
Because the kids can't vote.
But if you bring, if you convince your local population not to have kids, then you can bring in adults who are going to vote for you out of gratitude for you bringing them in.
So it's a way of stuffing the ballot and getting people in rather than having to spend a lot of money on schools, on daycares, on pediatricians and so on.
So it's one of these creepy things that comes out of the welfare state and the redistribution of income that's the foundation of sort of post-capitalist Western society.
There is this weird thing where rather than have a domestic population have more kids, it's somehow clearly to the benefit of politicians to import people from other cultures, which is, I think, not a very good – It's a pretty wild experiment.
It's never succeeded before in human history, and I don't know what exactly has changed now.
Yeah, I went to Malmo, Sweden, and the city's about 40-45% Muslim, but it's really cleaved in two.
There's a Muslim area that's Rosengard, and then there's the Swedish area.
That city will not be re-Swedenified.
It won't be.
It will be Islamified.
And there's no iron law that says it will remain called Malmo, it will remain Christian.
Constantinople, once the richest, largest, most Christian city in the world, was conquered and Now it's called Istanbul and the great Hagia Sophia was turned into a mosque.
Egypt was once a mighty Christian country.
Now there's 10% of it Coptic Christians.
There's no iron law that says a city or even a country must remain Christian.
In fact, why would it be if at least Egypt and Constantinople fell fighting?
Malmo is running to its demise.
Malmo will be renamed.
And its laws will be changed.
And hopefully there will be lessons that we can learn from Rotterdam and from Malmo and from Molenbeek.
At their expense before it becomes our expense, too.
I just wanted to thank you so much for your time, Ezra.
A really great pleasure.
Just to remind people, please, please check out EzraLevant.com, therebel.media, and truda.com forward slash Ezra Levant.
We'll put the links to those below along with Ezra's great books.
Thank you so much for your time today.
I'm sure we'll talk again soon.
Well, I look forward to that.
Great talking with you and keep up the great work.
Thanks, man.
▲
Export Selection