S5119 - Desantis Scores MAJOR Victory For Conservatives, FL BANS Critical Race Theory Sparking Woke Outrage
Desantis Scores MAJOR Victory For Conservatives, FL BANS Critical Race Theory Sparking Woke Outrage. Democrats and woke media claim Ron Desantis is trying to ban the teaching of history but this is false.
Critical race theory is a reactionary ideology that seeks to restore discrimination in the US under the guise of academic theory.
Republicans have struggled to even address the issue but Desantis as usual is ahead of the curve.
#democrats
#CriticalRaceTheory
#Republicans
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Today is June 11th, 2021, and in our first story, Ron DeSantis has succeeded in banning critical race theory in Florida schools, sparking outrage from the woke left, who argue he is just banning the teaching of systemic racism.
But that's not true.
In our next story, CNN host Brian Stelter faces phone calls from C-SPAN audience members who slam him as a liar and as the minister of misinformation.
And in our last story, young people are experiencing prolonged adolescence.
A Fox News guest says AOC and women who don't have children have the minds of children.
But it's actually more than that.
Millennials are stunted and it's men and women.
Now, if you like this show, leave us a good review and give us five stars.
And if you really like the show, please share it with your friends because word of mouth is the only way podcasts grow.
Now, let's get into that first story.
It will also ban teachings from the 1619 Project, which is fake news and historical revisionism.
Now, of course, the far left and the woke are particularly mad about this.
They are pushing the lie that critical race theory is just an analysis of where race and law intersect.
Now, of course, no matter what definition you try to give them as to what critical race theory is, they'll always kind of tweak it or change it.
We need to understand what is actually being banned, because Ron DeSantis did not overtly say critical race theory, but everyone kind of understands that's what's banned.
Specific tenets.
I'll give you a simple definition of critical race theory.
Now, what the left means when they say this, they mean academic research analyzing where the law and race intersect.
It is a component, a racial component, of what's called critical theory, which is essentially Well, I want to be very careful of the definition of critical theory, but it is Marxist.
It is cultural Marxism.
It is from the Frankfurt School, and in many ways seeks to analyze the structures of power and law in government and in societies, but it is overwhelmingly Marxist.
Now, critical race theorists are actually something quite insidious, in my opinion.
They are reactionaries.
If I were to give you an actual breakdown, in layman's terms, what critical race theory is, I would describe it as, critical race theory is a reactionary ideology masquerading as academic theory which seeks to reverse the civil rights movement.
It is a racial component of critical theory, which also seeks to subvert power structures in governmental institutions.
Critical race theorists want to bring back racial segregation.
Don't take my word for it, I'll show you their quotes.
They advocate for overt racial discrimination.
What you need to understand about critical race theory in history is that the rule of law in the world for tens of thousands of years of human history has been what's called Identitarianism.
A simple way to break down that, I know there's a lot of jargon here, is that when the United States was formed, it was overtly a white nation.
But things changed.
There was a revolution, a revolution of ideas put forth through classical liberalism from great thinkers like John Locke, as well as many of the founding fathers, basically all of the founding fathers, And we determined that individualism is, well, it trumps all, essentially.
There still is a responsibility to the collective, but we must protect the individual.
Now, the Founding Fathers and many of these thinkers were overtly racist, and that's what critical race theory uses to manipulate people.
Well, instead of getting ahead of myself, how about I show you the news as to what's actually going on, and then we'll break down the core analysis.
For the past 56 years, we have had a revolution.
Identitarianism is out.
The 1964 Civil Rights Act says you cannot discriminate on the basis of race.
For the first time in human history, we now have a government that says people must be treated fairly regardless of their identity.
Now, of course, there are still people who push back on identitarianism and identitarianist policies, and I believe overtly that we should not be basing the law on identity.
We should be restricting that.
Of course, it's not a one-for-one argument.
There are certainly some conservatives who don't think some identities should be protected, and some conservatives who think some identities should be protected.
It is a long, complicated process, but ultimately what I'm trying to say is Reactionaries.
That's what the critical race theorists are.
A reactionary is someone who wants to revert to the status quo, to a previous political period they thought was better.
That is critical race theory.
They do not like that we ended segregation, and they want racial discrimination.
They want to revert us to how it was before civil rights.
There's some nuance to that statement, so let me break it down.
But first, I'll bring you the news.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com.
Become a member to get access to exclusive members-only segments from the TimCast IRL podcast.
But when you become a member, Your membership dues, what you pay, is helping us to expand this business.
We're hiring journalists.
We're expanding the newsroom.
We are going to be fact-checking the fact-checkers and fact-checking, fact-checking across the board.
We are going to do our best to create real news, new shows, culture, commentary, podcasts, sitcoms even, to build culture, to prove that we're for something.
And here's what we like.
Good ol' entertainment without the wokeness, anti-wokeness, and real news.
Become a member to help support that effort, but don't forget to like this video, subscribe to this channel, share this video.
I'm gonna give you a breakdown and an assessment of critical race theory.
And I'm also going to stress we must not get wrapped up in the simplistic idea of critical race theory in terms of what the culture war really is.
If you know people who don't understand what critical race theory is or have a tribalist view of it, allow me to break things down and show you the latest news and I will tell you this.
I think the conservatives have some things wrong.
I think the liberals and the leftists have a lot wrong.
And I'm going to try and break this down to explain what's happening and why.
The rule doesn't explicitly mention critical race theory, but aims to combat associated ideas.
Now, of course, I know many people may say Fox News is biased, so I'll also show you CNN.
FLORIDA BANS TEACHING CRITICAL RACE THEORY IN SCHOOLS.
THEY SAY, FLORIDA HAS BECOME THE LATEST STATE TO BAN CRITICAL RACE THEORY CONTINUING THE GROWING CHARGE BY REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS AGAINST SCHOOLS TEACHING ABOUT SYSTEMIC RACISM.
FULL STOP.
ONE THING WE'VE OFTEN SEEN FROM THE LEFT IS THAT THEY WILL ASSERT CRITICAL RACE THEORY IS JUST TEACHING ABOUT SYSTEMIC RACISM.
That is only partially true.
It is actually fairly untrue, but there's a morsel of truth to it.
The problem is, critical race theorists, the woke, what they do is they feign academia.
They pretend this is an academic theory, and they take a morsel of truth and then use that to push overtly reactionary racist ideologies.
Well, if you oppose racism, And you believe in civil rights for all people, then you must understand what critical race theory is and how they are manipulating you.
That's right.
White supremacists and racists are trying to manipulate your goodwill and your opposition to bigotry in order to push these laws.
It's a brilliant semantic argument on the point of the reactionaries, but we must call it out for what it is.
CNN says, After hours of debate and public comment Thursday, the Florida State Board of Education unanimously approved the amendment banning critical race theory.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who appointed much of the board, spoke ahead of the meeting, saying critical race theory would teach children the country is rotten and that our institutions are illegitimate.
That is not worth any taxpayer dollars, he said.
The amendment states topics must be factual and objective, and specifically prohibits the teaching of critical race theory, meaning the theory that racism is not merely the product of prejudice, but that racism is embedded in American society and its legal systems in order to uphold the supremacy of white persons.
Now...
That is a simplistic view and often it is the definition used to obfuscate what they're actually trying to do.
Take a look at almost any country on the planet and their laws are rooted in their ethno-nationalism or identitarianism.
Identitarianism, simply put, I know it's hard to get to the jargon, Identity plus government, identitarian.
So if you had, like, libertarian, you're saying liberty-based government.
Or structures, authoritarian is authority-based.
Identitarian is policy and law based on identity.
We get rid of that.
Now, of course, there are remnants of it.
What's true is systemic racism exists, but the Founding Fathers laid forth a new nation which created core tenets which ultimately abolished these things for the first time in human history.
For the first time.
Of course, other nations, Europe particularly, also got rid of many of these things.
It is relatively new that we have gotten rid of race-based law.
These people want to bring it back.
I oppose that.
And I'll explain because I know the leftists try to nitpick.
What I mean is negative and positive rights, discrimination towards a negative, putting people down instead of helping people up.
There's a lot to understand here, but let's read more.
The amendment also bans materials from the 1619 Project, a Pulitzer Prize-winning initiative by the New York Times that reframed American history around the date of August 1619, when the first slave ship arrived on America's shores.
The 1619 Project, if you're not familiar, is a work of fiction.
And I don't mean that as a derogatory opinion, I mean quite literally.
It is a work of fiction.
They take a look at American history and they wrote, they made things up.
And they even admitted they made things up and even said, the people who wrote this, that it was not intended to be a historical view.
Unfortunately, many schools are teaching this overt fiction.
Let's read more.
In a statement posted to Twitter, DeSantis said the amendment protects students from being indoctrinated to think a certain way, mirroring language used by other states and locales that have made similar moves.
Critical race theory teaches kids to hate our country and to hate each other.
It is a state-sanctioned racism and has no place in Florida schools.
In fact, this is true.
There have been many... I should stress something very, very important.
Many people can't define critical race theory very well, and that's probably on purpose.
The left does not give good ground to people in order to challenge their ideas.
We first learned of it as maybe intersectionalism, feminism, intersectionality, third-wave, fourth-wave feminism, and now ultimately critical theory.
The words keep changing.
This is a pit trap for conservatives who have started focusing on critical race theory instead of wokeness.
Call it wokeness.
Now I've heard people say, I don't want to use that because it's a pejorative.
Critical race theory is one component of critical theory.
It is a passive element of the woke, who also adhere to things like intersectionality.
It is complicated on purpose.
It seeks to exploit your goodwill to seize power from the working class, empower the elites, and empower overt white supremacists.
For example, Robin DiAngelo is an author of Critical Race Theorists.
She is an admitted white supremacist who has expressed in her book her discomfort being around black people.
Do not go to these white supremacists for your views.
I'll break this down for you.
I'm trying to explain this so that you can share this video with people who don't understand it.
Many of them won't believe it, but you need to understand that the critical race theorists are seeking to manipulate and lie.
I will tell you this.
For what it's worth, and I know it's memed, I am second generation mixed race from a mixed race family who fought for civil rights and experienced the horrors of racial segregationism.
I do not wish this to return.
Now, the critical race theorists and the woke will try and claim that anyone who opposes them are the actual racists.
Do not believe them.
I will show you quotes from these people so you understand.
unidentified
Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms4America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms4America has the exclusive VIP meet-and-greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit momsforamerica.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
They go on to say, let me read a little bit more so you can hear some of the counterarguments.
Critical race theory has become politicized in recent months, with opponents arguing the area of study is based on Marxism.
It's not about an argument.
I will prove to you it is.
It is a threat to the American way of life.
But critical race theory, according to scholars who study it, explores the way in which a history of inequality and racism in the United States has continued to impact American society today.
Quote.
It's an approach to grappling with a history of white supremacy that rejects the belief that what's in the past is in the past, and that the laws and systems that grow from the past are detached from it.
Kimberly Crenshaw, a founding critical race theorist and a law professor at UCLA and Columbia University told CNN last year.
And yet, across the country, local boards of education and states are pushing against teaching the impact of systemic racism and critical race theory in schools, calling it indoctrination.
CNN, of course, believes in this ideology.
CNN, of course, is biased.
In fact, I can show you up here, Ground.News shows you CNN's bias is left bias.
Now, they're right in many of these regards, though.
Cobb County bans critical race theory in its classrooms.
We also have this from Dispatch.
Dispatch.com.
House Republicans introduce bill to ban teaching of critical race theory in Ohio.
We can see the manifestations of Critical Race Theory, and I'll break down for you how the media plays this and how to avoid the lies.
First, media giant iHeart.
We are looking at only diverse hires at this time.
Opponents of critical race theory tend to support the ideas of meritocracy, that people earn their positions through hard work and proving their value.
Of course, a company that focuses on meritocracy will likely succeed, as the best candidate for the position will take that position.
Now, critical race theorists do make a good point when they say that historical racism and the remnants of systemic racism create a disadvantage for minorities.
Ultimately, however, these disadvantages manifest among class.
And not among race when we've already banned racial discrimination.
While it may be true that there is a disproportionate amount of Black families and Latino families who will suffer the remnants of historical racism—redlining and blockbusting, for example—at this point we have already in law banned these practices.
At this point, we must focus on class.
And if it is true, so the critical race theorists say, that black families are disproportionately held back by these policies, then class-based solutions will disproportionately benefit these same black families.
Of course, critical race theorists don't accept that because their true goal is not to help minorities.
In fact, it is likely to cause them harm by reversing civil rights policy.
For example, California has a constitutional amendment banning discrimination on
the basis of race in public accommodations, universities, and contracting. The Democrats in that state
attempted to repeal that amendment, which only would have benefited the overwhelmingly white
majority. Of course, critical race theorists say other states don't have that
policy, so why does it matter?
And I say, I think it's good that we ban discrimination on the basis of race.
Now, let me show you how it's framed in the left.
They say, the nation.
Florida's Ron DeSantis wants to cancel education about systemic racism.
An authoritarian governor and 2024 GOP presidential prospect seeks to bar teaching how slavery, segregation, and white supremacy have shaped policy.
That's not true.
At all.
It is a gross mischaracterization of what they're seeking to ban.
Now, critical race theory in itself may be academic ideas and theories, but its manifestation, as I just pointed out, is typically what conservatives and the anti-woke and anti-identitarians are protesting against.
I don't oppose teaching people about critical race theory.
I oppose the indoctrination of critical race theory ideology.
Let me explain.
I actually think it's fairly important that people know what critical race theory is and are taught why people think the things they do.
I think schools can teach what critical race theory is without indoctrinating kids to its ideas as if they are true.
We can teach children, this is Islam, this is what Islam believes, without telling them Islam is true and correct.
You see my point?
The Nation says Ron DeSantis is an authoritarian trying to ban the teaching of slavery.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, we heard this on the left.
That's not true.
Let me show you what Wikipedia says Critical Race Theory is.
They say Critical Race Theory is an academic movement of civil rights scholars and activists in the United States who seek to critically examine the law as it intersects with issues of race and challenge mainstream liberal approaches to racial justice.
Critical race theory examines social, cultural, and legal issues as they relate to race and racism.
They're going to mention several prominent critical race theorists like Derrick Bell, Kimberly Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, Cheryl Harris, etc.
etc.
You get the point.
I would like to show you...
Some of the things that are heavily criticized.
In their views section, there are common themes.
One of the things they mention is white privilege, which is heavily criticized.
The idea of white privilege is it stems from the notion of whiteness as property, whereby whiteness is the ultimate property that whites alone can possess.
The problem with this is that critical race theory, at its best, is heavily restricted to just Europe, European countries, and the United States.
And it doesn't account for the laws that have been passed and doesn't account for the civil rights movement.
You can argue that white privilege exists.
The problem is it's a surface-level View.
The reality is that the world is overwhelmingly identitarian.
China overwhelmingly benefits the Chinese.
Japan, policy-wise, overwhelmingly benefits the Japanese.
In South Korea, for example, their laws overwhelmingly benefit South Koreans.
And these are usually defined by ethnicity.
In the United States, it's a very different structure.
We are the great American melting pot, so you have a majority privilege for sure, and remnants of historical racism and systemic racism like redlining and blockbusting, policies that made it very difficult for black families to move into wealthier neighborhoods and accrue wealth.
These are real things that should be pointed out and criticized.
But ultimately, what comes down to it is, if we want to really solve for the problem of racial disparities in wealth and education, At this point, with the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Supreme Court precedents banning discrimination on the basis of race, we've already addressed that issue, and now we must rectify the class-based issues which are the remnants, in many ways, of these racist policies.
It's a fact.
America had racist laws back in the day.
We got rid of many of them.
It's not perfect.
We still have racists in this country.
It still manifests in very awful ways.
But at an institutional level, we have passed the laws banning these things.
What do we do now?
Well, if you take a look at people like Ibram X. Kendi, a prominent critical race theorist, he argues we must have racial discrimination.
Here's what he says.
They say that critical race theory promotes widespread discrimination against people of white or Asian ancestry.
The most frequently cited critical race theorist, Ibram X. Kendi, makes this explicit.
As he puts it, the only remedy for racial discrimination is anti-racist discrimination.
The only remedy for past discrimination is present discrimination.
The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.
The discrimination critical race theorists want to remedy, though still through still more discrimination, is any failure to meet a racial quota.
As Mr. Kendi puts it, quote, when I see racial disparities, I see racism.
So if a nuclear weapons lab is full of Asians and whites, not blacks, he sees it as racism, even if everybody was legally hired based solely on their qualifications, not their race.
The sweeping perpetual discrimination advocated by critical race theorists violates Supreme Court decisions like Richmond v. J.A.
Croson Co.
1989.
Ibram X. Kendi is a particularly prominent critical race theorist.
He was recently asked to define racism.
He could not do it.
Because critical race theorists define racism as prejudice plus power, they then use the word racism in their own definition.
So that means racist structures and structures that are racist, and you're like, bro, define the word for me.
You can't use the word's own definition in a definition when asked.
What does anti-racist mean?
It does not mean to oppose racism.
No.
If you oppose racism, you are opposed to racism.
Anti-racism is a semantic strategy for reactionary ideologues to implement racist policy.
When I covered, many of you may know this, when I covered riots in Ferguson and in Baltimore, Black Lives Matter activists were proposing segregation.
They argued that we needed to return to the pre-1964 Civil Rights Act era because there was a world in which black communities were strictly for black communities.
I disagree with this.
I don't believe in segregation.
I think people should come together and we can all hold hands and sing songs under the rainbow because we are human beings.
And I don't find race to be relevant.
I think it's all about the content of our characters, like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
However, people like Ibram X. Kendi believe we should discriminate on the basis of race.
He calls it anti-racist discrimination.
What he's saying by anti-racist is, racists passed laws a long time ago.
We should have those exact same laws pointed at people of different races to create the outcomes we want.
As it was explained to me during Occupy Wall Street, quote, it's our turn now.
That's what they believe.
All that really means is they want to return to a racially segregationist worldview.
Or world.
Sargon of Akkad, aka Carl Benjamin, who you may be familiar with, once said that the alt-right and Black Lives Matter are made for each other.
They agree.
They both want to separate and have their own...
Ethno-locals or nations or whatever.
White identitarians even describe much of what they want very similar to what Black Lives Matter wants.
They straight up say, look at Black Lives Matter, what they're advocating for, and they'll tell you they agree with that.
I've heard it from their own mouths.
Go to their events, they say it.
They think that they should have a right to identitarian policy just like Black Lives Matter does.
I don't want any of that.
I think these things are problems.
I think America is built upon different people from different backgrounds with different worldviews coming together and the best of the best create something even better.
We've only had 56 years of anti-identitarian law.
The 1964 Civil Rights Act was hard fought.
People in my own family lived through this era and had to experience the horrors of segregation.
Did you know that it was illegal to cohabitate before 1967?
That's Loving v. Virginia.
That means three years after the Civil Rights Act was passed, you as a white person still couldn't live in the same building with a Hispanic woman, with a Native American woman, with a black woman, with an Asian woman.
It was illegal in many parts of this country.
We fought and got rid of it.
They want to bring it back.
You may have seen many of the arguments from the woke that interracial dating is fetishizing.
That it's wrong.
And they tell people not to do it.
They advocate for segregating.
They say that there should be dorms specifically for certain peoples of certain races.
They say that they oppose Asian hate, but then you see what happens to people like Andy Ngo.
They brutally beat him.
White people brutally beat him and claim that they're fighting against racism.
And now they've begun to argue that whiteness is just a cultural construct and that Asians are actually now white.
No joke.
Meanwhile, they're arguing Slavics are not white.
Okay, so explain to me how this works.
There is an organization that has absolutely said that Slavic people are not white.
The argument is, as I've put, early on, they claim that white people have inherent privileges and certain access that regular people don't.
Well, I know people who live in Ukraine.
They can't come to the United States.
I know people in South America and Africa who can.
Where's the white privilege to help them?
Well, then you start seeing that there's an organization called the Coalition for Communities of Color, who said that Slavic people actually are not white, because whiteness is a construct of those who have power, blah, blah, blah.
If that's true, then how does white privilege exist, and how does passing exist?
One concept that exists within critical race theory is the idea of passing.
That means if you appear to be as the dominant group, you will be able to pass for them, people will believe you are them, and then you will get access to those same privileges.
But Slavic people have blonde hair and blue eyes.
So what is whiteness, then?
If you look Asian, you will pass for the white group?
Why is it that they claim that it's whiteness, which is a reference to complexion, but then argue that certain racial groups are white-adjacent or white when they don't have that same complexion?
How can passing exist if Slavic people can also be people of color?
The ideology makes no sense.
It's not supposed to make sense.
It's supposed to be confusing.
It's supposed to advance historical revisionism.
It's supposed to trick you into giving up your goodwill so that other people can steal from you, from those in the working class.
It makes no sense that a homeless white person is an oppressor, but that Oprah Winfrey is oppressed.
She's a billionaire.
She can buy a horde of security guards to beat anybody she wants.
And how would you even go after someone that powerful, even through the law?
Sure, it's happened to some billionaires.
But these ideas are morally bankrupt.
And what it's resulting in is race-based policies that violate the law, or at least get close to it.
As I mentioned, media giant iHeart says, we are looking at only diverse hires.
What does that mean?
It means they're not going to be hiring white people.
It means they are now choosing to say, if you are white, we will not hire you.
Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating That's a violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
I don't care what your race is.
election. We do all that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts. America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
That's a violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. I don't care what your race is.
I think it's wrong to segregate people. This is what they're advancing.
Now, Ron DeSantis and many conservatives are pushing back on this.
They're getting these things banned.
That's a good thing.
But I want to talk about the pitfalls that conservatives are bringing up and the anti-critical race theorists are missing out on.
Critical race theory is just a component of critical theory.
While I showed you critical race theory, and white privilege in these ideas, and internalization, institutional racism, some of these things, sure, they make sense.
But the authoritarian application of critical race theory is what most people are protesting against.
We cannot forget it's a component of critical theory.
Critical theory is an approach to social philosophy that focuses on reflective assessment and critique of society and culture in order to reveal and challenge power structures.
With its origins in sociology and literary criticism, it argues that social problems are influenced and created more by societal structures and cultural assumptions than by individual and psychological factors.
Maintaining that ideology is the principal obstacle to human liberation.
Critical theory was established as a school of thought primarily by the Frankfurt School.
Theoreticians Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Eric Fromm, and Max Horkheimer.
Horkheimer described the theory as critical insofar as it seeks to liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them.
In sociology and political philosophy, critical theory means Western Marxist philosophy of the Frankfurt School, developed in Germany in the 1930s and drawing on the ideas of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud.
So when you talk to someone, When you talk to critical race theorists and people on the left, they'll typically demand of you that you give up this information.
They will say, define critical race theory.
And therein lies the serious conundrum.
They use definitions of words to obfuscate their true intentions.
So if I just said, oh, it's just a critical race theory is just analyzing the intersections between law and race.
Then it makes it sound that it's not that big a deal.
I mean, well, that's normal.
What if you said, I want to engage in critical lumber theory?
It's where lumber and timbering policies intersect with the law.
You'd be like, well, that makes sense.
We want to understand why the law exists and why they ban certain timbering practices.
But then, what you actually tell people is that timbering is the most important thing in any component, and we should be allowed to tear down all of the trees for the sake of restoring justice.
You'd be like, wait, wait, wait, hold on.
You want to chop down all the trees?
Like, we need trees.
We want sustainable farming.
No, no, no, no, no.
We must tear all the trees down.
You'd say, environmentalists fought long and hard for policies to protect these trees.
Your theory is not analyzing the law and timbering.
It's just pretending to, to make an argument that we should be allowed to cut trees down in the Amazon.
Hey!
Sound familiar?
We fought long and hard for laws banning racial discrimination.
These people come along and say, we're just analyzing those laws and race, and then advocating for racial discrimination.
Reverting us back to how things used to be.
It's no surprise that it's coming from the Democratic Party.
Now, it's hard to break people out of the matrix.
They think the Democrats are the people who oppose racism, but they've always been the party of racism.
They've been the party of the South, the Dixiecrats, they call them.
The Democratic Party was the Confederate Party.
They were the party of the Klan.
They were the party of Jim Crow.
And they are the party of restoring racial discrimination.
It has never changed.
So when someone comes to you and says, we just want to analyze the law and how it intersects, you got to ask them, do you seek to overturn the laws that protect us from racial discrimination?
They'll probably still lie.
No, of course not.
Okay.
So when iHeartMedia says they're only going to hire diverse, so we'll sue them and we'll use the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
And as they pointed out in the Wall Street Journal, The sweeping perpetual discrimination advocated by critical race theorists violates Supreme Court decisions like Richmond v. J.A.
Croson Co.
When you hear that certain laboratories, nuclear laboratories, are sending white people on retreats that are overtly discriminatory, you know you're dealing with racists.
When they call you into a meeting at your job or school and tell you they want to teach you the history of white people, it's overtly racist.
I think we need to end discrimination on the basis of race.
Unfortunately, critical race theorists are ideologues.
They claim to want to oppose ideology and liberate people, but they're fascistic.
Now, they're not nationalists, so I won't call them fascists, but they do believe there is no truth but power.
That's critical theory.
It's a dangerous line of thinking that must be opposed.
We must respect individual civil liberties and rights and classical liberalism that guarantee our rights in the face of an authoritarian machine.
The critical race theorists, they're the proponents of cancel culture.
We must oppose them.
Hopefully this has been informative and can help you, and you can share this video if people want to challenge you on what critical race theory is, but I'll leave it there.
The next segment's coming up tonight at 8pm over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and I will see you all then.
Brian Stelter may be the worst guy in cable news, and I know that's a lot to say because you've got Don Lemon, you've got Chris Cuomo, you've got Rachel Maddow, we get it, we get it.
But the reason I say that Brian Stelter may be the worst is that while you have those other personalities who lie, and often it's obvious they're lying or they're saying nonsensical things, Brian Stelter is the guy who goes on TV and tells you not to watch other shows.
He's the guy who goes on TV and claims it's only everyone else.
He's actually the smart and the good one.
Now Don Lemon and Cuomo and the rest of them, yeah, they do this too.
And of course, you know, Tucker Carlson is also very critical of MSNBC.
But Tucker has his opposition on his show.
Tucker wants to bring on Antifa, and he wants to bring on Democrats, and he wants to argue with them.
Often, they don't really engage in a good conversation, but many do.
Brian Stelter, on the other hand, doesn't have any of these personalities.
It's a homogenous, bubble world of paranoid delusions.
He sucks up to Jen Psaki.
It's really awful.
Now, I know, I know, I can rag on the guy all day and night.
I do know him.
I've met him a couple times at various events.
And I got some good news for all of you.
It's always a bit pessimistic.
We're always looking at what's going on and it seems like things are getting bad.
Sometimes there are really, really bad things.
That's true.
But sometimes there's some good things.
Like this story.
From Fox News.
CNN's Brian Stelter roasted by C-SPAN callers.
Biggest minister of misinformation I have ever heard.
My suggestion is whatever CNN says, do the opposite and you'll do fine.
Bravo!
Bravo.
Good sirs.
They're right, of course.
But I love it.
Are people calling in to C-SPAN to say, Brian Stelter, you are just a bastion of truth.
We're so grateful that you go on TV and just shower us with your truth.
No.
People called in and said, bro, you lie.
You lie all the time.
CNN's ratings are in the trash and getting worse.
And this is why.
It's the only thing they can grasp onto.
Now, I love it.
I love it.
Let's be fair.
You know, my ratings are down.
Everybody's ratings are basically down.
I think Tucker Carlson's the only one who kind of, like, maintained.
But he did lose a ton of viewers in that big Fox News election night thing.
But he's really maintained a lot of his audience.
My views have gone down a bit.
A lot of people on the right aren't happy with my opinions.
Well, you know, so be it.
I'm not gonna lie.
Now, of course, tribalists think I'm always lying, so it is what it is.
I'm gonna tell you what I think.
Hey, guess what?
I'm kind of a centrist.
CNN?
No, they're gonna chase the dragon.
They're gonna keep chasing after trying to pander to people who hate Trump, and that means they're gonna keep lying.
They're going to keep lying to keep people who hate Trump wrapped up in that tight little ball.
It doesn't work.
Let's read the story from Fox News.
news they say. CNN's Brian Stelter was mocked by callers who referred the media pundit as
the minister of misinformation and evoked disgrace and evoked disgraced former CNN darling
Michael Avenatti during an appearance on C-SPAN. Quote, Mr.
Stelter is the biggest minister of misinformation I have ever heard and I'm a news junkie,
is a car identified as Kevin from Indiana. This gentleman told the American people and
his news organization for four years that there was a there was Russian collusion. And
actually, after all the thirty five to forty forty million dollars and government investigation,
we come to find out there was zero zero collusion from the Trump administration in Russia.
His stories absolutely evolve.
Stelter, who was regularly lampooned and often referred to as the media's hall monitor, was polite when faced with direct criticism.
Thank you for your feedback.
I appreciate it, Stelter said.
I mean, look, good for Stelter for actually going on C-SPAN and, you know, opening himself up to this.
A separate caller identified as Gordon in Kansas asked Stelter to admit he and his network are a bunch of liars about Donald Trump.
Callers weren't done attacking Stelter, as Rick from Georgia then brought up one of CNN's most embarrassing blunders.
I was just wondering if you still feel like Michael Avenatti is the greatest thing in the world and should run for the president of the United States.
My suggestion is whatever CNN says, do the opposite and you'll do fine.
It's not, it's true.
CNN has just been, it's been all fake news.
The other day we talked about the Lafayette Square protest.
IG report comes out and says Trump did not have the protests cleared.
so that he could do a photo op.
It was actually kind of the inverse.
Trump did a photo op because they had already cleared the protests.
They were planning on putting up some barriers or some fencing due to some of these protests.
It was pre-planned and pre-scheduled.
And then Trump came out and took a photo.
I remember talking to family members.
So I, Trump did a photo op and I'm like, that's, that's, that's, that's not true.
Yeah.
Well, if you listen to Brian Stelter, you got your head up your bum and you have no
idea what's happening in the real world.
They say Stelter famously told Avenatti on air in 2018, One of the reasons why I'm taking you seriously as a 2020 contender is because of your presence on cable news.
Avenatti was a CNN regular.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, we get it.
I don't care about Avenatti.
They say a 2018 Media Research Center study revealed that Avenatti appeared on CNN a whopping 74 times over a 10-week period.
At the height of Avenatti's fame, he spent his rare time away from CNN's green room, partying with the network's anchors.
Full disclosure, I actually considered Avenatti as a potential candidate as well.
And it was because the Democrats were desperately looking for a counter-Trump, a high-profile bombastic personality that hated Trump that they could use.
So it wasn't about politics.
And maybe Brian Souther wasn't wrong in that regard, I guess.
But the only reason he was a possible contender is because they kept propping him up.
Stelter dismissed the caller, claiming he almost forgot how to say Avenatti's name, because he's been out of the news for so long and claimed a right-wing meme of the CNN host sipping coffee while chatting with the former lawyer keeps the story alive.
It becomes an attack point to make fun of people like me out of context, Stelter said.
Another caller said Stelter was shameless, while yet another caller called CNN a joke.
The liberal CNN host smiled through much of the criticism, often defending his network in the process.
Brian Stelter, as I said, quite possibly one of the worst people on cable news because he's the one who acts like they're the arbiters of truth and everyone else is lying and he's just state propaganda.
That's what he does.
He says Fox News is state propaganda.
Then you take a look at his interview with Jen Psaki and you're like, well, this guy clearly is not going to ask any real questions.
Meanwhile, Fox News gets slammed because they weren't walking in lockstep with Trump.
Sorry.
If you were to come, I'll tell you this.
It's the exception and the rule, right?
Fox News has its problems.
But it's the exception, not the rule.
Fox tends to have some good coverage.
Brett Baier's pretty good.
Tucker Carlson's pretty good.
And then they have some pundits who do some bad things.
But it's the exception, not the rule.
MSNBC and CNN, it's the rule, not the exception.
The Democrats live in a paranoid, psychotic state, on par with the QAnon people, believing absolutely insane things for insane reasons.
There's a lot of Q people.
A lot of them believe really crazy things.
It's unfortunate.
But they are not the mainstream Republicans.
They are not mainstream Trump supporters.
High-profile Trump supporters are not going around talking about Q. High-profile, prominent Democrats on TV talked about Russia for four years.
They would not shut up.
And the Democrats entertain this and they do impeachment after impeachment.
I mean, how many times?
Until... They just won't stop.
They are truly insane.
And this creates a very strange political world.
I'm not a conservative by policy.
I'm probably centrist, you know.
I probably agree with conservatives on a lot of things.
Probably lean left on some policy issues.
But I also believe in objective reality.
And if you actually look at the videos and look at the evidence, you know CNN is lying.
And that's where we're at.
Here we go, baby.
Brian Seltzer wrote this turd of a news story.
We turned so far right we went crazy how Fox News was radicalized by its own viewers.
For the love of all that is holy, Brian, look in a mirror!
What is wrong with you?
Oh, you do it on purpose!
Tucker Carlson will invite on Antifa and Democrats and leftists.
The Five on Fox News has Juan Williams.
And they're always arguing.
If you watch Fox News, you could even see a Bernie Sanders town hall.
Perfect Network?
Of course not.
CNN?
Gutter trash.
And people like Brian Stelter don't deserve to have jobs.
Here we go.
Oh, it's fantastic.
When Donald Trump lost the presidency last November, Fox News lost too.
But unlike Trump, Fox has never been in denial about its loss.
The network's executives had multimillion-dollar stars stare to the ratings in the face and their multimillion-dollar stars every day and saw that their pro-Trump audience was reaching to the prospect of President Biden by switching channels or turning off the TV.
We're bleeding eyelids, a Fox producer remarked in December, and we're scared.
Let me, I'll point something out for y'all.
CNN's ratings are just aflame.
Here we go.
Debut of unfiltered with Dan Bongino helps Fox News outdraw CNN and MSNBC for the 16th straight week.
Huh, about that.
CNN needs Obama for ratings boost after liberal network failed to reach 1 million viewers for 6 days straight.
Tucker Carlson earned more than double the viewers than CNN in Obama's interview.
Okay, Fox News is doing a lot better than CNN.
That's simple, isn't it?
Now, it's really funny when you see the likes of Brian Stelter writing about this stuff, acting as though CNN isn't on fire.
Fox News is losing viewers, they write.
It's like, okay, well, have you considered that you're losing more viewers and everybody's ratings went down?
This is what I love the most.
I love there's people on the left and the right coming at me right now, being like, Tim's views are down!
Well yeah, I mean the election cycle's over.
I am an individual who does culture and politics.
And we're in the off-season.
I'm not surprised.
We had a massive burst last year.
It was one of the biggest presidential campaigns ever.
CNN saw that.
Fox News saw it.
Fox's viewership has gone down, but still remains very strong.
My viewership has gone down, but still remains very strong.
And I'll point out, I have these people on the left and the right, like I mentioned, attacking my viewership.
It's like, dude, I cut my segments in half.
I stopped producing half of the content I used to produce.
So yeah, my viewership is down, but...
I mean, it is what it is.
You'd expect that.
Also, what I'm trying to do right now, because of people like Brian Seltzer... Let me tell you this.
Brian has inspired me.
He's inspired me.
Go to TimCast.com.
TimCast.com.
Become a member.
CNN has inspired me to step up and do more.
I can't just be a guy on YouTube for 20, 30, 40 years.
I can't do it.
There's gotta be more.
Eventually, you reach the point at which there's a market cap or market saturation, and it doesn't make sense for me to just keep doing videos like this.
It doesn't.
So, at the beginning of the year, I decided to cut down on half the segments I produce.
I would do six, now I do three per day.
And that resulted in a serious decline in overall viewership, but I don't consider that an actual ratings decline, it's just less content.
Of course, grifters are trying to say, aha, look, Tim's views are gone!
And it's like, I mean, a lot of them are down, generally speaking, yeah, that's to be expected when you're not in the political season.
But a lot of it is just due to the fact that I've reduced my content.
And why did I reduce it?
We launched the vlog because we want to make culture.
We have to be for something and we have to be inspirational.
We can't just be trash like CNN's Brian Stelter constantly complaining about Fox News.
I can't just be constantly complaining about CNN.
And I do it a lot.
Fair point.
Complaining about the media all day and night.
So I decided, you know what?
It takes a lot of time to produce three and a half to four hours of content.
I believe, in terms of political commentary, I was producing more content per day than anyone else.
I think Glenn Beck was second with like three hours.
I was doing like three hours and 45 minutes.
And I reduced it.
I reduced it.
Now it's down to like, I think, what are we at?
Three hours and 20 minutes or something.
So maybe it's still a lot.
But it's not the same because I do a host.
I do the interview show.
We do Tim Casteiro.
But we got to do something about this, right?
Newsroom at TimCast.com is launching soon because we have to be for something.
I can sit here all day and night and complain about CNN, but what's anybody actually doing about it?
You know what?
I was thinking about this.
Andrew Breitbart was doing something about it.
Obviously, I don't agree with the guy entirely on his politics, but much so on his principles, and I didn't know a whole lot about him back then when he was producing Breitbart.
I don't think Breitbart's the greatest thing in the world.
I'm not trying to, you know, prop up any network, but I will point out, here's a guy who slapped his name on it and started producing content, and he was growing and expanding quickly.
And fighting for something.
And the media absolutely hates Breitbart.
It's interesting.
You know, Breitbart.com, probably one of the first times Republicans had media and personalities demanding things.
Right now, the Republican Party isn't for anything.
I mean, seriously, you might say, like, here's their positions, but what are they demanding?
The Democrats demand universal health care.
They demand a complete overhaul of our health care system.
Republicans?
Nothing.
The Democrats demand a bunch of... The Democrats demand a bunch in our cultural institutions and changes to our language and Nancy Pelosi says we're not going to say men and women and things like that.
The Republicans just say no.
At a certain point, the Republicans need to say, here's what we are for.
Here's what we are fighting for, and here's what we are doing.
I don't like the Republican Party.
I like the Libertarian Party a little bit better, but they're a little wacky.
Dave Smith's a cool guy.
He's got a great video.
I tweeted about it.
So Dave, you rock.
We've had him on the show a couple times.
Here's what we gotta do.
We can sit here and rag on CNN and Brian Stelter and all laugh and high-five each other, and then in 10 years, CNN will still be there in some weird, gross corporate form, and we'll be sitting there, old and middle-aged, going like, yeah, boy, I tell you what, that's CNN's trash.
And then what do we have to show for it?
The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
So here's what we're doing.
TimCast.com newsroom launching soon.
We've got some journalistic prospects coming out.
We're going to interview.
And we're going to start hiring people.
And we're going to do field reporting.
We're going to do original reporting and fact-checking.
We are going to build something.
I think Breitbart is great in that regard.
And there needs to be more... I don't want to say right-wing personalities.
Maybe just, like, not woke and likes America.
You don't have to love the country and hug the flag like Trump did, but you can certainly respect the country and what it gives you.
That's what we need.
We need to build things.
We need to generate resources.
We need to stop giving money to people who hate us.
Stop giving money to these movies that are overly woke.
Vote with your dollars.
You see something that's trash, you don't buy it.
Comics?
They're in trouble.
Maybe they'll fizzle out, or get subsidized by some limetics, and that's why they want communism.
Because under communism, you have a command economy.
And then the despots can just say, keep making woke comments, even though nobody wants it.
Force people to read that trash.
Or, like I mentioned on the show, I said, hey, we'll take manga.
You know, if you write graphic novels or you're making your own original, you know, manga-style comics or whatever, we'll take it.
We'll publish it.
This is what we're going to do.
We're going to build culture.
We're going to counter CNN.
We are going to launch a newsroom.
We are going to make more podcasts.
We're going to make sitcoms.
We're going to make shows.
And I started to wonder about this.
The left is good at it.
They keep doing it.
They get venture capital.
You get Vox.
You get BuzzFeed.
How many right-wing startups were comparable to Mike.com and BuzzFeed and Huffington Post?
Breitbart?
Yeah.
Yeah, Andrew Breitbart was like, I'm gonna put up and do something.
And where are the conservatives right now to do the same thing?
You've got some high-profile conservative personalities, you've got high-profile personalities, and I wonder about some of this stuff too.
I understand it's not easy, it's not easy, right?
So, you know, let's take an individual like Joe Rogan, for instance.
Joe certainly has the resources to hand off millions of dollars to anybody to start doing real news.
Sounds simple.
Joe's not a journalist though, so I wouldn't expect that of him.
What would happen if he hired someone who was actually really bad?
I have some experience with that.
So you've really got to be heavily involved and oversee quality and assurance and vet the people you're hiring.
And you've got to have hard restrictions and standards based on what they produce and what they're writing.
Then you build a culture around factual and honest journalism.
So Joe's a high-profile personality with resources who's very critical of the mainstream media and often talks about, you know, the lies and the manipulations, but he's not in a good position outside of just potentially being an investor, so it doesn't make sense for him.
But there are a bunch of other personalities.
Man, look, it's the craziest thing that people argue with me over this.
There are how many conservative YouTubers who are making six figures?
It's like, start growing your business.
Here's the problem, man.
I guess the right is just not good at it.
Not so much the right, I guess, but it's like the anti-woke.
Left and right is meaningless at this point.
I don't even know what that means.
But it's the anti-establishment.
They're just not good at it.
I'm not trying to be mean, but it's true.
I'm not going to pretend like I'm particularly good at it, but I'm going to keep fighting.
I am going to be pushing that boulder up the hill, and there's never a point at which we can rest.
But maybe at a certain point, we can have something that will sustain itself and counter the lies.
And we will have a fact-checking division.
And we will tell people like Brian Stelter and Don Lemon, and even some of the people on Fox News who pump out their right-wing version of tribalism, we're going to say, no.
I'll tell you the biggest challenge we have.
People want to have their worldview confirmed to them, even if it's bad for them.
So, recently you may have heard I criticized Andy Ngo.
A bit crass, I admit.
Probably should have worded it better.
A lot of people didn't quite understand my position.
So I'll eat that one, but I'll say I stand by my position that conservatives, people on the right, need to be leading the charge with their experience and not joining the fray.
What do we get?
A lot of the people who... So I'll put it this way.
Does it make sense for me, at this point, to just do these YouTube videos and nothing else?
No.
That's why we launched TimCast.com at the beginning of the year.
Because I'm like, if all I do is make a video criticizing the media and calling out the lies and the wokeness, and that's all anyone else does, where does that leave us in 5-10 years?
Well, eventually I retire and then, gone.
Can we build something sustainable, use our knowledge and experience and access to expand the operation, to create 10, 100, 1,000 more commentators and shows, and start pushing back on the lies from the mainstream media, create something comparable to the likes of Netflix and Hulu and Disney and Paramount?
That's what I want to do.
I want to have a website that produces news and commentary, a full multimedia enterprise.
Not because I want to make money or anything.
This is funny.
I can criticize someone on the right, and the conservatives say the exact same things on the left.
You're a lawyer and a grifter.
You just want money.
No, I really don't.
I really don't.
So we make money.
You go to TimCast.com.
You sign up to become a member.
You get access to the members-only section.
We make money when you do that.
Here's what we'll do with that money.
We are going to expand the operation.
We're going to hire people.
We're going to create a newsroom.
And the reason it's not going as fast as I'd like is because I'm the one who's doing all the QA and vetting.
Plus, I'm hosting these shows.
And that's when I realized there's got to be a certain point where I stop hosting these shows and start overseeing the expansion and stop being the individual in the fray.
So what might happen in the future is that this channel and Tim Pool cease to be.
Or we change the content on them just for the sake of keeping the channels going, but Timcast IRL I would continue to host, and then I would use more of my time to get other people producing content to do more shows and expand this and push back.
That way in 10, 15, 20 years, when I'm unable to do this, what we end up getting is there will be an apparatus to challenge this establishment media I'm probably never going to sell.
I have no reason to take investors.
None whatsoever.
All the people who have signed up have given me the opportunity to expand the business without investment.
And I'm not going to get anybody who's going to stand in my way.
No investors are going to come in.
No activists to tell me what to do.
And that's what needs to happen.
I don't want to own an Infinity Pool.
I don't want to buy a Lambo or a Ferrari.
Granted, to be fair, we do have skate parks here and everything, but let me just tell you.
If you've seen the Cast Castle vlog, check it out, youtube.com slash Cast Castle.
Yeah, we got some skate parks, but I'll tell you why we did it.
For one, obviously, I love skating.
I've been skateboarding for several decades.
Recently, I've gotten more into inline just because it's something new and fun, and we're getting scooters and bikes.
Because I want to make a multidisciplinary hangout space.
We're going to be doing in-person live events where you as members can actually come.
We're dealing with some issues before we can launch.
That's kind of holding us up.
But once again, I'm doing all the quality assurance, which makes it very difficult to move forward.
But we're getting there.
We're getting there.
Snowball rolling down a hill.
Here's why we do this.
Do I want a skate park?
Well, yeah, I do.
I like ramps, right?
But I also hung a Gadsden flag in the park, where we want to do murals.
We want young people to watch a video where people are having fun and being silly and playing music, and there's a Gadsden flag in the background.
Then that little kid will see in their school, when their woke, lunatic teacher says, the Gadsden flag is a white supremacist symbol!
He's gonna go, no it isn't!
The castle guys, they just are skating around.
There's people of all different races who hang out there.
They have a Gadsden flag.
You're lying to me.
That's what we need.
We need to build culture.
We need to be for something.
For the longest time, I have been on YouTube complaining.
And I say, I'm just a guy who complains on the internet.
And then people are like, what are you even doing about it, Tim?
And even now, people are like, why aren't you on the ground, Tim?
I don't think my talents and abilities are best... I don't think I best serve people with my talents by just going into the fray and on the ground.
I think I've got to use my resources, your support, to build something to take the system over, to push back.
To create culture.
Which means... Sure, we'll keep complaining about stuff.
I'll keep pointing out Brian's out there's a liar.
Second, we will create culture.
So we have the Castcastle vlog.
We're slow rolling.
I think we have like nine vlogs now.
We want to get to the point where we're doing every single day a vlog.
Not super easy to do, especially when I'm the one running everything, so I am, you know, spread very, very thin.
And the next thing we want to do is we want to create a website that expands upon the complaints and things like that.
And I say that somewhat facetiously, but doing real news, and that's the next bit.
I'm trying to do all of these things, and I've got a great team, people working here.
I think we've got a lot of employees.
It's expanding.
I'm hoping that we have, by the end of the year, maybe 50 employees or more.
And I think once we start producing more content on the website, once we start producing more news and start bringing in opinion pieces from thought leaders and thinkers and individuals, we're going to have a mix of paywall subscription only content and we're going to have free content and articles.
The articles will have, you know, viral across social media.
Real, on-the-ground reporting, calling up people, verifying things.
When they say a story and it says, you know, Donald Trump does backflip, hey, we'll call and say, we want to get a comment on this.
Is it true you did a backflip?
Then we'll publish that story.
A lot of people say, all Tim does is read other people's news.
Hey, tell you what, fair point.
However, I've been planning this for a long time.
I don't need to read other people's news.
We can fact-check this ourselves.
We can make the phone calls and then just read our own news.
And that's what we'll do.
And that's what we'll become of these channels for sure.
And we'll use it to promote the website, and we'll use it to grow and expand and hire more journalists, create new operations, mini documentaries.
The reason I'm talking about all this, again, you can become a member at TimCast.com, but it's because I'm sick and tired of saying the same thing about Brian Stelter and CNN and Don Lemon and all this trash.
I'm tired of doing a video, I'm like, oh hey look!
We gotta do something else.
We have to build something.
We can't just be standing there pointing the finger at the other side saying, you guys suck.
We need to prove why we're good.
So that's what I'm gonna do.
I'm gonna build skate ramps and invite people out and say, hey, it's more fun over here, no one's gonna cancel you.
We're gonna have the Gadsden flag.
We're gonna talk about freedom and individuality and independence and liberty.
We're going to inspire young people to do the same.
We're going to give people an opportunity.
We're going to create a path to success that exists outside of the trash woke cult.
And then people will maybe change their tunes.
I hope to plant a seed whose shade I know I will never sit beneath.
I want to make sure that right now, I've got my tree and I've got my shade with these channels, but it's not something that can be handed down.
If the only thing that exists of my work is just me and my thoughts, then when I eventually can't work or stop working or my work ceases, it's over.
Nothing holding that place marker challenging these systems.
We have to build it.
You can support my work at TimCast.com.
I'm going as fast as I can.
I'm trying to hire as many people.
So in between these segments I record, I'm like reading emails and trying to find the right people.
And I can only assume eventually my head's gonna explode because Spread very thin.
I'll leave it there.
I won't rant too much longer on this, but seriously, all of you guys who subscribe, who keep watching, who believe in the work that we are doing here at the TimCast Media Company, and who are members at TimCast.com, you are making this possible.
And I will do my best to not let you down, but I will also assure you, we're not going to just give you what you want to hear.
Yeah, I'm going to criticize people on the left and the right.
Absolutely.
I'll do it a little bit more tactfully, to be fair.
Because my tweet against Andy was a bit harsh, considering I don't even tweet that harsh against people on the left sometimes, so I was just frustrated.
I want to see the anti-establishment, I want to see the people challenging the woke succeed, and so it's frustrating sometimes.
And I apologize for that, but I stand by my opinion.
It's time for people on the right, people who are anti-woke, the intellectual dark web, to lead the charge, put the money down, start a news organization.
Hey, come on.
Peter Thiel.
Peter Thiel is extremely wealthy, and we know he opposes this trash.
Bro, throw some money behind something.
And you know what to that extent too?
Joe Rogan.
I'm not saying it's easy for these guys to figure out who to throw money behind, because I'll tell you this, I don't want any investment from anybody.
But there's got to be something people of resources can do to challenge this stuff.
I'm gonna do my best.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel, and I'll see you all then.
In an appearance on Tucker Carlson's show on Fox News, Victor Davis Hanson of the Hoover Institution made a shocking and offensive statement about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and women in general, saying that AOC and women who don't want kids, they have the minds of children.
Wow, that is shocking and kind of true, but it's not just about AOC or women who don't have kids.
It's just about millennials.
So this is an important point I think many of these conservatives should point out because they're in a prime position to point this out.
Let's not make this about tribalism and we don't like Ocasio-Cortez so we're going to insult her.
Honestly, I don't even blame her for her situation in life and the choices she's made.
Not that people have to make specific choices, but if you look at life and how people have traditionally behaved and developed, there is a general idea of maturity.
And it's not about some traditional view like conservatism or anything like that.
I'm saying quite literally like humans have families, they have kids, they produce things, they provide things, they do things, and we're not doing that anymore.
And I wonder about this.
It really is that we're experiencing what Victor Davis Hanson calls prolonged adolescence.
I believe that's the phrase he uses.
But it's millennials in general.
It's across the board.
It is men and women alike.
Look, there are certain right-wing politicians who don't have families either.
Why is this happening?
Well, perhaps because millennials are stunted, and perhaps it's breeding something really dangerous.
There's a lot of reasons why millennials may be stunted.
For one, the student loan crisis.
A lot of people were told to go to college.
That was a huge mistake, and I blame boomers.
Sorry, boomers.
I'm not trying to be mean specifically to any individual boomer, but as a generation, they told young people to go to college.
Now we're sitting here debating about stupid things like critical race theory, where they think that one of the core tenets is whiteness is property.
Y'all are nuts and racist.
But who put these kids in these systems?
Now, at a certain point, an individual needs to recognize their own faults, but when their worldview has been crafted in a specific way, they don't realize they are permanent children.
It's kind of unfortunate.
Millennials were raised and told to do things they didn't.
They took out loans, they went to school.
The loans buried them in debt they can't dream of paying back, and they had no idea.
Come on, dude's 18, lady's 18.
They don't know what any of this stuff is.
They're doing as the leaders of the current culture are telling them to do.
And now they're screwed over by it.
Sure, I don't know if it makes sense to just bail out all of these college kids because they're going to go on to become the highest income earners in the country, on average.
But it's not just about that.
It's about the financial crisis.
Hey, thanks for the mortgage-backed security crisis, boomers.
Again, I'm not targeting individual boomers, but...
I don't think boomers, for the most part, watch this channel.
I'm sure there are many of you, and again, not singling any of you out.
I assume if you're watching a channel like this, you're aware of what happened.
But you get multiple economic crises, and millennials don't have a chance to grow up.
More importantly, I think college was one of the biggest mistakes we have ever made, and we gotta turn back that clock.
All these kids were indoctrinated with stupid ideas, and now they're indebted and permanent children.
But maybe, hey, maybe it was worth extracting the value from the system and watching it burn to the ground.
It's kind of shocking to me.
You know, that was the hippie generation, right?
The boomers, weren't they the hippies who were like free love, and now they're the older and extracting the value from the system in many ways.
So let's criticize AOC.
She deserves criticism, but also I'm gonna defend her a little bit.
I think we need to point out the problems that we inherited and figure out a way to kind of fix things.
So I've got an article from the Atlantic talking about millennials being prolonged children and what that means for us as a society.
I kind of think it means the beginning of the end, seriously.
It has a lot to do with production of resources and the current crisis we're experiencing.
Oh man, can you imagine what it's going to be like when millennials are in their 50s, leaders of industry, producing nothing but demanding everything?
It's gonna be great, isn't it?
Yeah.
Well, they'll come and steal your stuff, so I can only imagine that a communist revolution must be on the way, huh?
Maybe it's an exaggeration, but here's the story from Mediaite.
Fox News guest slams AOC on women who don't want kids.
They have the minds of children.
Again, you know he's not wrong, but you need to include all of the dudes who are in their late twenties and early thirties, who are sitting in their basements playing video games.
I mean, the basement's probably a stupid trope, but not Doing anything.
Look, I know there's probably a lot of guys who watch, you know, who aren't doing anything, and I think that's why Jordan Peterson was so popular.
My only advice to you is, if you've got the time and the energy, just do whatever.
No, I mean seriously, just literally do whatever.
Maybe playing video games actually is something fruitful.
Start streaming if you're doing that.
Maybe just read some books.
Maybe it's not all bad, but production is important.
They say, Tucker Carlson expressed concern about birth rates in... I love how they put Gilead.
Uh-huh, okay.
The United States on Thursday night.
This is perfect, by the way, because, uh, I don't know if you guys watch Freedom Tunes, but he has that, uh, Seamus has that cartoon where it's, um, if the right wing was left wing, and Jordan Peterson's left-wing version is doing a 12-part lecture on The Handmaid's Tale, which is, you know, Gilead, haha.
During a discussion about transgender people and pronouns with Victor Davis Hanson of the Hoover Institution, Carlson claimed some on the left are offended by fertility and nature and the idea that people reproduce.
After pointing out that people today are waiting longer than previous generations to have kids and buy homes, Hanson blamed the feminist movement and offered up a theory.
Alright, I'm going to read his theory, but I'm going to point out I also, in some ways, blame feminism.
Not completely, but it's the feminism run amok.
Because I actually believe in gender equality.
I believe women should have every opportunity a man should have, and if they want to choose a house.
But there are certain things that go above and beyond in terms of what they're actually advocating for, and then pressuring people into.
Of course, the feminists always get mad when I bring this up, but Yeah, we're gonna talk about dating and women in their 30s and their struggles and I'm gonna lay some truth on y'all that's gonna piss off all the feminists.
But, Victor says, our crisis right now is we're not reproducing ourselves and we're suffering from what?
Prolonged adolescence.
These children, they have adult bodies but they have the minds of children.
They don't want to grow up.
AOC is a good example of a person who's suffering from prolonged adolescence, and she said she doesn't want to have children because of climate change.
I don't know if it's because of 1.7 trillion dollars in student debt or the economy, but they just don't want to take off their training wheels and go out experience life and its adventures and dangers.
They say in 2019, Ocasio-Cortez said she had concerns bringing children into the world at this point.
Basically, there's a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult, she said, and it does lead, I think, young people to have a legitimate question.
Is it OK to still have children?
She faced fierce backlash from conservatives at the time, including from Carlson.
It's sad, Carlson told Hansen.
Even sad for Sandy Cortez, you know.
Kind of missing the best part.
There is a segment we have on, if you go to facebook.com slash TimCastIRL, there's, from the podcast show, we have a super chat from someone who said, there's this woman, and she was speaking at, I think it was in Texas, and she was like, she was a valedictorian, and then she went on this pro-choice rant about, okay, maybe it wasn't a rant, but she went on this pro-choice tirade about her dreams being stripped away from her if she has a kid, if her contraception fails, and my first response is like, Who's forcing you to go bang dudes?
Okay, we'll keep it family-friendly, but come on, man.
But anyway, I digress.
She says her dreams would be stripped away.
Well, someone responded that their whole life changed the moment they had a child and saw the face of their newborn child.
The only thing they could think about was the future, and that was when they saw the true dreams of life.
Think about the mother hen.
You've seen the photo.
She's standing in the rain, drenched, covering her wee little babies.
Think about the power and the passion that lies in a parent sacrificing everything for their child.
Now, I don't have kids, but I can certainly understand when I see that.
That is a powerful, powerful driver.
Millennials don't have that.
But I think millennials make excuses for why they don't have that.
I can only make so many excuses.
I don't know.
I honestly have no good reason why I don't have kids.
Or why I'm not... I can actually give some really good reasons about marriage, which we'll talk about.
What I think's happening now is, it's not just about having kids.
I think that misses the bigger picture.
Several things happened in this country and in our society that stunted Millennials in many ways.
They are full-grown adults and they aren't going out and about and seeing life for all its adventures.
But you look at the politics that this breeds.
It's not about just kids.
Not having kids is a symptom of what happened to Millennials.
It's also just culture in general.
When I was talking about feminism and why I think this is part of the problem, it's that They've created a pressure.
They're making women more masculine, but there's nothing replacing femininity.
Now, there is, of course, the trans movement for sure, but it's not the same thing.
They're saying women should be CEOs.
There's not as much of a pressure on men to be nurses or, you know, to be teachers or to raise kids.
The pressure is almost exclusively towards masculinity or traditional masculinity.
Meanwhile, they besmirch masculinity as toxic.
What I think happens is, you have these millennials who are stunted for a variety of reasons, who are angry, who have been made promises.
When those promises weren't upheld, well, they become demanding.
As permanent children, millennials, most of them, not all of them, maybe not even most, but a good portion, Many prominent female writers, for instance, they end up being demanding like a child.
When you're a spoiled child, you say, gimme, gimme, gimme!
Shut up, Mom!
I want another scoop of ice cream!
But you already had it!
Shut up, Mom!
Spoiled brat.
Demanding that Mom buy another scoop of Rocky Road because cookies and cream just didn't cut it.
Or maybe you get a good kid with discipline who understands.
If you want ice cream, you mow the lawn.
You don't mow the lawn, no ice cream.
Millennials have become permanent children.
I can blame millennials.
I can blame the individual for their problems.
At a certain point, though, I think it is fair to point out that millennials were raised by other humans, so I can't blame them for anything.
I can only point this out and say, it's time to get your act together.
Over at The Atlantic, they have a story.
Why Millennials Can't Grow Up.
And this is from only a couple weeks ago.
Today's economic conditions are not just holding Millennials back, they're stratifying them, leading to unequal experiences within the generation, as well as between it and other cohorts.
Now I'll put it this way.
I'm a millennial.
I came from humble means.
I'm very successful.
I think this is the rule, not the exception.
The problem is millennials are told not to try, not to sacrifice, not to work hard.
People like AOC and the likes of the DSA tell you you will never succeed and it's not your fault.
It's their fault.
It was never anyone's fault for me.
I just didn't have stuff.
And I remember being young and looking at these other kids I knew and these other people as I was growing up who just grew up wealthy.
And I said, if I had an ounce of the opportunity you had, I would have done so much more.
Now it's only that I'm older when I realize it's actually not true.
It was a bad thing that many of these millennials had things handed to them.
It hurt them.
They had no drive, no reason for doing anything.
They grew up with TV and video games and bagel bites or Hot Pockets or whatever.
And they never had to break a sweat, get their hands dirty, roll up their sleeves.
Obviously, they did some work, but I'll put it this way.
Many of the millennials that I know, especially based on how I grew up, would consider their lives to have been normal, and would consider the things they did to have been hard work.
It's just not reality.
Hard work is being buck naked in the middle of the woods and trying to figure out where your shelter is gonna, you know, building a shelter and finding water and food.
We don't have that.
We have, you've got to take out the dishes and mow the lawn and do the garbage.
It's like, well, I worked when I was a kid, bro.
Kind of.
You did chores.
I get it.
But have you experienced real hard work to fight to survive?
Have you had to sleep on couches or sleep on park benches?
Probably not something we want people to experience.
But my point is, I realized the kids who grew up with everything in many ways are the worst off.
Because now they don't know how to maintain that.
They're older and they're struggling.
The problem is there's so many of them The good times were breeding weak men, that they're just looking at the government and saying, I can force you to steal from them to give to me.
That's prolonged adolescence.
That is people like AOC.
Here's what The Atlantic published.
May 13th.
A few weeks ago, I met my first millennial grandparent.
I was interviewing a woman in her late 30s about President Joe Biden's new child tax credit proposal, and she mentioned that it would benefit not just her two young kids, but her older son's kid too.
The incidental meeting was a reminder, both, that millennials are getting older, and that they are doing so without growing up, at least not in the way that many of them might wish.
The woman I interviewed does not own a home, nor is she anywhere close to affording one.
She has nothing in the way of savings.
Nevertheless, she is a grandmother catapulting into middle age.
Millennials, as just about everyone knows at this point, are a generation delayed.
The pandemic recession has led not-so-young adults to put off having kids, buying a house, getting married, or investing in a car, and yet again.
But today's economic conditions are not just holding millennials back.
They're stratifying them, leading to unequal experiences within the generation, as between it and other cohorts.
Marriage is a prime example.
Millennials are getting hitched later in life than people in prior generations did.
The average age at first marriage has steadily climbed over the past half century from 23 to 30 for men and 21 to 28 for women.
As a result, millennials are less likely to be married than Gen Xers or Baby Boomers were when they were the same age.
The marriage rate among young adults has fallen 14 percentage points since 1990.
But the rising average masks some growing variation in millennial experience.
Millennials, in particular women, who have completed college are tending to get married older.
Many millennials who did not attend or complete college are opting not to marry at all.
Three decades ago, the marriage rate was above 60% for all adults older than 25.
Now it is roughly 65% for those of the college degree and 50% for those who only finished high school.
The same kind of trend is affecting childbearing.
Data compiled by the economist Caitlin Myers and published in the New York Times shows a sharp parenthood bell curve in the 20th century.
Let me stop right there.
Tucker Carlson's guest was right.
Maybe the left will get mad because he singles out AOC.
But let me make a point about marriage, and they'll make a point about feminism.
Do you want to know why many millennials aren't getting married?
Because they're not stupid.
There's probably a lot of guys that are driving force as to why they're not getting married.
Let me make something clear.
There's a meme, and it's a man on his knee Proposing to a woman, and he says, will you agree to a government contract that you can leave at any time, guaranteeing you half of my possessions?
Something like that.
And the woman says, yes, yes, a million times, yes.
Why would anyone in their right mind, in this day and age, and much because of feminism, Why would anyone want to get married?
I mean, think about it.
Let's say you're a successful, wealthy woman.
You marry a loser of a guy who doesn't work.
He gets half your stuff?
Well, the courts might actually favor you in this regard and still order the man to pay alimony.
But let's say you're a guy who's of modest means.
You want to get married, and the woman can divorce you at any moment for any reason and take half your stuff.
Now, I get it.
You know, there's supposed to be an agreement between the parties to, you know, till death do us part.
But that hasn't been true for generations, for probably a hundred, two hundred years, till death do us part.
Well, it used to be social enforcement.
Jordan Peterson talks about it.
You couldn't just get a divorce.
It would be frowned upon.
People would look at you like you're violating your social contract.
These days, nah, it's encouraged.
Get divorced.
Who cares?
Okay.
If I have no guarantee that a marriage is Actually grounded in something meaningful?
And could just break at any moment?
Why would I sign a contract?
Why would I agree to give away part of my life with no guarantee at all?
Other than I'll say it, but I don't necessarily mean it.
Oh sure, you can trust the other person.
And I think for a lot of young people, they ultimately do trust the other person.
Okay, I guess you can get a prenup as well.
But then it just seems like there's no real reason to do it.
I mean, why?
Serious question.
Give me an answer.
But let's talk about where this leads us now.
There were a lot of articles.
I covered a lot of stories about women in their 30s, career women, who aren't able to find men who make as much money as they do.
And we hear from a lot of feminists, men don't like me because I'm strong, and they don't like me because I'm successful, and they don't want to feel challenged, and I'm sure that's true.
I'm sure that's true for a lot of men.
It also might just be that if you're a guy in your 30s and you've got money, you're not going to date a woman in her 30s.
It's just that simple.
Now, women can complain about it all they want.
But, sorry ladies, complaining on the internet that men aren't dating you and blaming them for being children doesn't matter.
You can scream into the void all you want.
The data is clear.
Now, we can change society.
I'm not saying I agree with it, but take a look at OkCupid's data.
Men, overwhelmingly, just want to date 22-year-olds.
We had Jack Murphy.
He's on IRL every other week, and he was mentioning that if you're a successful guy, and you're in your late 30s, 40s, whatever, you're going to be dating way younger.
Why would you date a woman your own age?
Men make that choice.
I guess women have a harder time of it because men have an age preference.
Now feminists don't like the idea of an age preference because it's not fair, I guess?
I guess that's a harsh reality.
Life isn't fair.
And men and women are not completely the same.
They're very different.
Men want young, attractive women.
Women want strong, charismatic, and successful men.
And if you spend all of your twenties working towards a career, I'm sure you'll find a lot of men who respect you.
You're a brilliant scientist.
You're a great engineer, or a great leader, or a great manager.
They'll say, that's fantastic.
But what was it, you ever see the movie Wedding Crashers?
Bradley Cooper, I think his name is right, the actor, he's like, I want a wife, not a martyr.
I mean, yeah, a lot of guys think that way.
And they might not wanna say it.
Maybe there's a lot of soy boys, you know, who are just very demure and feminine.
That's fine, I'm not saying they shouldn't be.
By all means, be you, do your thing.
But I think on average, if you look at the data, there are guys who are just like, I'm not gonna date an older woman who's just a career woman, sorry, I want a family.
So they're not gonna do it.
You end up with women.
And here's the ultimate point.
They'll be children forever.
I think ultimately what's making Millennials into permanent children with prolonged adolescence probably has a lot to do with not needing to provide anything to anyone.
It's not just about kids.
It could be because you have a kid, you gotta make sure your kid's fed.
But it's also about doing work to support your family.
They don't do that anymore.
They leave.
Turn 18.
Bye.
Take out massive loans.
Join the institutions.
When they get out, they demand the government take care of them.
We're not going to function this way.
It's not a good thing.
So here's where I think this goes.
What do you think happens when millennials are in their 50s?
What do you think happens when people our age are now the leaders of industry?
They're gonna demand the government take care of everything for them because they don't want to.
The government will then be comprised of people of the same ideology, and they'll become despotic, entitled, petulant children running the government, and they'll beat and imprison anyone who opposes them.
I think it's exactly how you get a communist revolution.
So maybe then, after a hundred years of hard times, you'll get some strong men and the system will collapse and something will change.
I don't know for sure.
But I can say, while AOC may be in prolonged adolescence, it's not just her.
