Texas Preps Vote On SECESSION, 2024 Could Bring CIVIL WAR As MORE People Call For National Divorce
WATCH INFRINGED NOW At - https://timcast.com/members-area/infringed/
BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO FIGHT BACK - https://castbrew.com/
Become a Member For Uncensored Videos - https://timcast.com/join-us/
Hang Out With Tim Pool & Crew LIVE At - http://Youtube.com/TimcastIRL
Texas Preps Vote On SECESSION, 2024 Could Bring CIVIL WAR As MORE People Call For National Divorce
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Make sure to go to TimCast.com, click join us, and become a member to support this podcast and all the work we do, and you'll get access to exclusive uncensored segments from TimCast IRL and way more.
Now, let's jump into the first story.
With that house exploding last night, and the man firing 30 to 40 flares into the air, I started thinking, you know, we haven't had a good heart-to-heart conversation about civil war in a long time.
And there's actually a big story that one of our members over at TimCast.com brought up, and that is Texas preparing to vote to leave the United States.
And so we have these two big stories.
Of course, I think the core of this is going to be more about what's happening with this country and where we're heading into 2024.
Which is... You know what, guys?
I'm hanging out at the old poker table like I do on the weekends.
And I'm asking people what they think.
Or, you know, someone else brought up politics.
I usually don't talk about that stuff.
I just talk about playing poker, but...
You know, somebody, basically the conversation is what's going to happen in 2024?
Who's going to win?
How's it going to play out?
And the general consensus was there's no election.
Which I find funny because Roseanne on Timcast IRL said there wasn't going to be an election.
For which Michael Malice challenged her to a bet of $1,000 and they shook on it.
The question is what does that mean by no election?
Well, everyone basically agreed.
No matter what happens, there's going to be 10,000 lawsuits before the election and 10,000 lawsuits after the election, and the likelihood Is that after the votes are counted, we may end up with something like, I think, what was it, 1876?
You're gonna have states presenting different electoral counts.
And that is basically what happened in 2020.
Now, I say basically because there were electoral votes certified by the governors, but the state legislatures were challenging them.
Or wanted to.
And the argument made by the Trump supporters is that Mike Pence should have returned those vote counts to the state legislature to ask them whether or not they approved of the way the election was run, because that is their purview.
The Constitution says the state legislature is determined how elections are run.
The results are presented to the governor, the governor signs it, sends them off to the electoral college Or not to the, but to Congress to certify the vote.
Well, didn't happen.
So what's going to happen this time around?
Probably something very, very similar.
And now, before we even get to that point, we're hearing that Texas is one step closer to leaving the United States.
Yes, they've obtained the amount of signatures required to get a referendum on whether or not Texas should assert itself as an independent nation.
So I want to go over this, but I do want to give you a quick update on the house that exploded.
And the reason why I'm not doing a full segment on the exploding house is because I don't think it's actually anything.
I mean, it's a big story, it's kind of scary, it's kind of crazy, but I don't think it's necessarily any kind of political conflict, but...
We saw this last night, an Arlington home exploded in a gigantic fireball, raising it to the ground, after a suspect inside set off flares.
The story is actually crazy, but it is quite simple.
A guy started firing flares into the air.
30 or 40 of them.
I believe the neighbors were evacuated because of this.
I hope so.
Then the police came, trying to coax the person out.
Reportedly, they fired non-lethals to break the windows.
This guy opened fire on the police, and then eventually, when the police were trying to enter the home, The home exploded.
It was a duplex.
So, uh, other people, you know, lost their house as well.
And that's why I always say, you know, people are always, I know people who live in townhomes, and I'm like, ain't never, I ain't never gonna do that.
I will not buy a house, buy, that's attached to someone else's house with the same architecture.
Because what if they're a crackpot, and they set a fire, and then you lose your property?
That's the stupidest thing ever.
But this is what happens here.
This guy goes nuts, blows up his house, and the people who live next to him, they lose their house too.
Now I guess the reality here is, uh... Look, the guy was crazy.
That's it.
Reports on who this guy is are that, you know, he was mentally unwell and believed crazy things.
He wasn't left or right or anything like that.
But in seeing this story in Arlington, a lot of people, of course, are questioning what the motivations were and jokes about evidence that would lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton aside.
I think that's generally it.
Well, we did have this story.
Texas may secede from the Union.
I think it's very, very unlikely, but the sentiment is actually interesting, and there is a large percentage of people in this country who actually want to secede from the Union.
Changing America back in 2021, this is The Hill, said, Well, okay.
Let's start with Texas.
What's going on over in Texas?
now want to secede from the United States.
Well, okay.
Let's start with Texas.
What's going on over in Texas?
Now, a lot of people are arguing that when Texas joined the union, they reserved the
right to secede outside of any other normal union agreement other states would have.
Texas, this is fascinating, was an independent nation, and when Texas was offered to join the union, the offer was to create five states.
Not just Texas, but Texas could be broken up into five different states that would each join the union.
And they said, nah, we'll keep Texas the same.
One unified body.
It would have been very interesting if Texas did join as five different states.
Imagine how the vote count would be held today.
It would be substantially more conservative.
Newsweek says advocates for Texas's secession from the United States believe they're on the verge of scoring a crucial victory.
And, of course, this is from last Friday.
The Texas Republican Party's executive committee is set to vote over the weekend on which ballot propositions voters will decide during the Republican primary elections in March 2024.
One measure would ask Republican voters, quote, Should the state of Texas reassert its status as an independent nation?
Ahead of the vote, the Texas Nationalist Movement, an organization that supports Texas's independence from the U.S., warned the GOP they have enough signatures to force a vote on the question.
So, we're not quite at the point of vote.
They are preparing to make that vote.
I believe we have a tweet here from the Texas Nationalist Movement saying, Yeah, there's a long way to go.
has over 100,000 signatures. Now it's time to get Texas on the ballot this March.
Yeah, there's a long way to go, and this is, I don't know, probably wishful thinking for people who are wanting Texas
to secede.
But, you know, I gotta be honest.
I'm reading some of these articles, and I agree with some of these activists.
If Texas were to secede, the net worth, in my opinion, of Texans would skyrocket.
I really do think so.
I can make it really simple for you.
No more U.S.
regulation on Texas labor and manufacturing and work, and they would instantly absorb tons of companies.
People would instantly just be like, If we open up or operate out of Texas, the tax rate will be dramatically lower.
And there you go.
Of course, then, you'd have, I guess, tariffs or something?
On importing goods into the United States?
Whatever.
Texas nationalists have, for years, pushed for a referendum.
On Texas' secession.
Despite the fact there is no provision for a state to secede from the U.S.
Constitution.
That doesn't need to be.
The state seceded from Mexico in 1836 and spent nine years as its own nation before becoming a U.S.
state.
It also seceded from the Union in 1861 before being readmitted following the end of the Civil War in 1870.
Now the fascinating thing with Texas in the Civil War was that Texas didn't join the South because they were ideologically aligned.
Texas joined the South because they were geographically locked out.
Crazy, right?
It's true.
The position on Texas was they're surrounded by Confederate states in every direction.
And so, if the Confederacy... At the time, there's no war.
These states were like, we are no longer the Union.
Texas is like, well, what are we supposed to do?
We are locked out from the Union.
We can't be in a Union and have this gap between the states.
So they were just like, I guess we're with the South.
Didn't work out so well.
In June of this year, our organization launched a petition campaign under the Texas Election Code, Section 172088.
The section allows voters by petition to place a question on a party's primary ballot.
In short, by collecting 97,709 signatures and submitting them with a filing deadline on December 11th, we could actually bypass the SREC's ballot proposition process and compel the party to place the question on the ballot.
I want to stress, it's a primary ballot.
This is not an official referendum in the state to actually secede.
Newsweek reached out to the Texas Republican Party.
If the question makes the primary ballot and passes, it would not be legally binding, nor would it mean Texas is actually seceding from the U.S.
Still, it would be a key victory for secession advocates, who critics view as a fringe belief that would face significant hurdles in a general election.
I don't agree.
I'm not convinced they would actually win, but I do not agree.
Take a look at this story from just a few weeks ago.
Texas secessionists feel more emboldened than ever. I love these quotes.
No taxes or Fauci's, no speed zones or toll roads, no liberals, no gun laws,
no windmills, no poor people, a separate currency, stock market and global depository,
complete control of our own imaginary policy.
World class, world class college football.
A farewell to the world.
I agree.
I do.
And it's really simple.
The federal government says, you can't do this, you can't do that.
We're going to be rich, we're going to be rich, we're going to be rich," he kept saying
it.
As soon as we declare independence, we are going to be wealthy.
I personally believe that our personal GDP will double in five to seven years.
I agree.
I do.
And it's really simple.
The federal government says, you can't do this, you can't do that.
You get rid of that and people in Texas are going to be like, drill baby, drill.
And the people who live in Texas are going to reap the benefits of that.
Not to mention, all taxation would go to Texas instead of the federal government.
So, Texas could functionally just be like, alright, right now you make half a million dollars a year, you're giving a third of that to the federal government.
Texas doesn't take that much.
Texas could do a compromise where they're like, well, everyone's taxes are going down, Because we are declaring independence, we are raising our income tax up slightly.
So, if you're normally paying $35, you're now going to pay 22%, which is an increase from what Texas takes and a decrease from your overall taxes.
So, your taxes will go down substantially, and revenue for Texas will go up substantially.
And that is going to dramatically change things.
unidentified
But let me 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 Moms4America.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
Dick Durbin is calling for illegal immigrants to be enlisted into the Army.
Okay.
Now I'll break it down for you.
Let's say you live in Ohio.
Or you live in Western Pennsylvania.
Good, hard-working American.
Okay?
You just want to get by.
You want your kids to go to school.
You want to be able to have a cheeseburger on the weekends or whatever you eat during the week.
You want to hang out with your friends and your family and have a good time and survive.
You're not asking for much.
You don't want to rule the world.
You're just trying to live.
Well, one day you are headed to the local grocery store to purchase some ground beef.
But unfortunately for you, there is a sign that says you are not allowed to buy ground beef.
You are barred from entry.
Ah, climate change and whatever.
And you say, wait, wait, wait, wait, why can't I?
Other people are buying ground beef.
Well, you know, they've limited who can buy beef how often and you are above your allotment.
And so you begin to protest and say, no, no, no, I have the money.
If I have the money to buy it, I should be able to buy ground beef.
And then all of a sudden, some guy walks up, doesn't speak English, doesn't care.
And he starts yelling, yelling at you, move, move.
And you try talking, he says, no English, no English, move.
And then you start arguing.
All of a sudden, there's three or four guys, none of them speak English.
And then next thing you know, they're beating you.
Riots break out, protests break out over restrictions and lockdowns.
Not necessarily as hard lockdowns like COVID, but there's protests.
How about this?
Guy goes to the grocery store to buy ground beef, is barred from entry because of some lottery system where they determined that climate change so you can't buy your beef, but you can pick up the cricket if you'd like.
Dude says, look, I've got money.
I want to buy ground beef.
A fight breaks out.
Someone in law enforcement, a non-citizen who was placed there because Illinois is doing this, kills the guy.
Not that he was trying to, but he does.
Like that Somali migrant in Minnesota who killed that woman.
It's a long story, but it was like a traffic stop and he just kills her.
And it was like shocking because it was a minor traffic violation.
Shot her and killed her.
So this has already happened.
Let's say protests break out.
The government says, look, we got a bunch of angry protesters in the streets.
What do we do?
They dispatch law enforcement, National Guard, and the majority are comprised of non-citizens.
And then comes the big question.
When ordered to open fire on the insurrection, as they'd call it, would these soldiers do it?
Would American military men and women open fire?
They're not citizens.
They're from another country.
They don't care.
Let's make it crazier.
In Staten Island, they bust in a bunch of illegal immigrants into this neighborhood and the locals came out in protest and the police beat and arrested the local residents.
These were American cops.
They beat and arrested the residents who did not want the state to bring in non-citizens and steal their money.
That's what happened.
So yeah.
You want to talk about what could happen?
Imagine how bad it is already with American citizen police officers willing to bash women in the face with truncheons because those women said, do not bring these non-citizens into our community.
And the cops smiled and laughed and just started mercilessly beating these people.
These cops are evil, by the way.
I'm not saying all cops are evil.
I don't like the ACAP garbage.
But because we need the police to actually defend these communities, but they don't.
They're an occupying force.
What happens when you replace the National Guard with non-citizens?
Not only are they likely not to speak English, they don't care.
It's one thing if you can try to appeal to a citizen of your own country to stop doing this to you, and they don't.
It's another thing when the powers that be instruct non-citizens to open fire on local American citizens.
You're facing down a foreign army.
Sorry, that's the reality.
Oh, they can slap the American flag on it, but these are not U.S.
citizens brandishing the weapons and aiming them at you.
And that's where we're headed.
So, when Dick Durbin is saying, do you know what the recruiting numbers are at the Army, Navy, and the Air Force?
They can't reach their quotas each month.
They can't find enough people to join.
And there are those who are undocumented who want the chance to serve and risk their lives for this country.
Should we give them the chance?
I think we should.
In my state of Illinois and Chicago, and in rural areas downstate, we're holding our breath hoping that we can keep hospitals open.
You know why?
We don't have enough medical personnel.
And yet there are people all around this world who have medical credentials as doctors and nurses and skilled technicians who want to come to the U.S., but we don't give them the chance.
I think we're headed in this direction.
I think this is exactly where it's going.
Now, the imaginative conservative says the three reasons why a national divorce would shatter America.
They say, uh, well, they're not really, uh, good.
There's more than three.
But, uh, I bring this up only to point out, sentiment for national divorce is not, uh, universal.
The Washington Post writes, who are the Americans who support secession?
After Marjorie Taylor Greene, uh, proposed this, back in September, Philip Bump wrote this.
He says, when he argued, when she argued on September 11th, Now that doesn't mean a whole lot, because you would need substantially more than that, and in a specific area.
Texas is going to need 51%, probably more if we're being honest, to actually vote and declare independence.
I don't see it as being likely.
At least right now.
But let's get to the meat and potatoes here, my friends.
Let's jump a year ahead.
It's 2024, December 5th.
The election results are in question.
Now, the media has reported, for the most part, that Joe Biden or Gavin Newsom or who knows, the Democrat has won.
Several other outlets have reported that Donald Trump has won.
Well, how can that be?
Well, because reporting on TV is not unified.
I mean, it's not it's not official.
So what happens is you get, for the most part, cable television saying the Democrat has won and Trump loses again.
But then online you see something different.
Many large and prominent media outlets, let's say RealClearPolitics, which is not establishment, you've got The Hill, which is more middle of the road, and Newsweek saying Donald Trump is the winner.
Well, how can that be?
I mean, Newsweek, they're mainstream.
They get ragged on all the time.
Yeah, but Newsweek does run it a little bit in the middle.
So MSNBC, of course, says we're projecting, projecting the winner is going to be Democrat.
But then you have other outlets online saying the opposite.
All of a sudden, nobody knows.
This happened with Fox in 2020 when they called Arizona before the results were actually in and everyone was like, whoa, you can't call it just yet.
There's way too much in question.
And they did.
But take a look at Arizona with Carrie Lake.
The voting machines weren't working.
The ballots were printed incorrectly.
I love this.
When I point out.
And I say, they're not gonna have, some state is gonna print out ballots and have Donald Trump not on the ballot.
People are like, the ballots have to be printed 90 days in advance, that can't happen.
Oh, look at Arizona!
Printed in advance?
Well, certainly not in Arizona, I guess, because the ballots were printed wrong.
Okay, maybe, when it comes to Trump's name, you can't overlook that.
The ballots may have an improper barcode which jams them up.
So let's play this game.
It is Election Day, 2024, and in Arizona or Colorado, several states, Georgia perhaps, Colorado's not so much an important swing state, but let's just say in Georgia or Arizona, we get another one of these problems.
And people are reporting that their ballots are not being scanned properly.
You see, people might tolerate a governorship race, but they were not happy with it, and the challenge is ongoing.
In Georgia, there's rumors that voting records were destroyed, and the courts are ordering them to be released.
Now they're gone.
I think, if that happens, Arizona potentially too, that should nullify the election, no matter how- I don't care how long it's been.
I don't care if it was 100 years ago.
You declare it null.
And if that person is still in office, they're no longer in office, and the position is vacated, and there must be a special election.
Because we have to know who was voted in.
So let's say this.
There's an error and then you get a Democrat Secretary of State who says, no, the error is meaningless.
Our state goes to Democrat.
The state legislature says, no way!
We did not have an election run properly and immediately votes to bar the electoral results or the vote count.
Democrats try ramming it through the Electoral College anyway.
Republicans object saying, and they bring in someone from Arizona saying, in the Congressional Chambers, we did not have this election.
These are not the official results.
Something like that.
Maybe.
2020 was wild enough.
They wanted Mike Pence to kick back these vote counts.
And you know what?
He should have.
Why?
He should have in the respect that the state legislatures demanded it.
And I'm not saying they all did.
In the instance where a state, like Georgia perhaps, said, rules were changed by the governor and we need to review this process and resolve litigation, Mike Pence should have said, I can't count this.
Richard Nixon famously counted votes that were not certified back in, what was this, 1961?
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 And affecting the 2024 presidential election.
We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
So in 61, they were counting the ballots, and this is where there was an issue with Hawaii.
Nixon decided to read the votes, to count the votes, that were not certified.
Precedent is there.
So what happens?
A lot of hypotheticals.
I'll give you one.
Simple solution is, the vote happens, and that's it.
You say, and the winner is Democrat.
And then everyone goes, no!
And they complain, and then, you know, that's it.
Seriously, that seems like the more likely outcome.
Well, you know what?
I'm not sure it takes the plurality.
Or, I'm sorry, the majority.
It may be the plurality.
It's perhaps the largest probability is that.
The election is held, they say someone won, and that's it, we move on.
But there are numerous other scenarios all surrounding the idea that no matter what happens, nobody will accept the vote count.
It's entirely possible this time around, we're not going to have a proper count.
Now, of course, look, it's Kamala Harris.
So let's imagine Donald Trump wins.
Oh boy, this is gonna be fun.
Let's say it is Biden and Harris.
And Donald Trump wins.
But there are several states questioning the results of the election.
And they cite Republicans in 2020.
And then they demand that Kamala not count the votes.
And Kamala, of course, being a scumbag, says, OK, I'm not counting these.
And she refuses.
Now, it would still go to state delegations, in which I believe that would result in a Republican victory, but she refuses to count, which stops the process, and now it's been several months and we do not know who the president is going to be.
I don't know where that goes.
I don't think it immediately leads to civil war or anything like that.
But I'm telling you right now, it does not look like we are going to have a clean run-through of 2024.
You probably already have 10,000 lawsuits on each side being prepared.
Several already being filed.
You already have claims of voter fraud.
You already have calls for secession.
And you mean to tell me...
That if we go back to 2021, when 1 in 5 people in the United States wanted to secede according to this poll, I'm sorry, 37%, a third of citizens, according to the Hill.
One third.
And 37, so actually a little bit more than that.
You think that number hasn't increased?
I think it has.
I think it's probably much higher.
Among Republicans, it's 50%.
Then it jumped to 66% in June.
This is several years ago.
Where do you think that number is right now?
Marjorie Taylor Greene called for a national divorce.
I'm pretty sure that sentiment among Republicans is very high, and sentiment among Democrats is high enough.
So what do you think's going to happen come one year from now?
I think I'll be sitting in the I won't be sitting in this room.
We'll be sitting in the new studio, but I'll be sitting sitting in a room just like this one.
And I will be saying to you, we still do not know who the president is.
Of course.
From now until then, there is a wide range of variables that could take place.
Donald Trump could get abducted by aliens.
Joe Biden could have a lizard person burst from his skin and reveal that we've actually been ruled by reptilians.
Now, those are on the lower end of likelihood.
Sure.
But it could be something more realistic like Joe Biden suffers a heart attack or Kamala Harris resigns.
I mean, who knows?
The more likely thing is Biden suffering some kind of ailment.
Gavin Newsom steps in, is appointed by the DNC because they can't do a primary.
Joe Biden has a medical episode barring him from being able to run.
And then, not legally, but like physically.
And then Gavin Newsom steps up and then they just say, oh look, Gavin Newsom won.
I don't know.
I have no idea.
But I tell you, if a Democrat wins in 2024, I believe it's bedlam.
Because right now, everybody hates the Democratic Party.
You've got the young people complaining about Palestine.
You've got the older people complaining about the economy.
And there is no Democratic candidate who's going to unify these groups.
So, even if Newsom won, now you've got the young vote, the pro-Palestine group, they're marching through the streets screaming intifada, they are not going to accept this.
And then you've got the Trump supporters, who are not going to accept it.
Now let's say a Democrat does win, or a Republican wins, sorry, then Trump wins, the same pro-Palestine group, and now the liberals.
No matter which way you slice it, this country is at odds with each other politically, to an extreme degree.
Perhaps the best course of action.
And this is scary to say, but reality is, Texas and other states just secede, and then there's no question of it.
No one complains about who the president is because everyone just says we're going to do our own thing.
I suppose all we can do is wait and see, so I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
It is an honor and a privilege to bring you two of my favorite stories.
Gen Z could be the most conservative generation ever.
I often talk about how abortion and sterilization will result in the future generations of this country being substantially more conservative.
Because liberals don't have kids, conservatives do, and that's all that really matters.
But my friends, this would not be a complete TimCast news story without Civil War!
From the Daily Mail.
Younger Americans fearing 2024 election could spark a civil war are prepping for disaster.
40% of Gen Z have spent money on doomsday preparations, new survey finds.
Considering this pure confirmation bias, I should be like the biggest news personality among Gen Z.
Or maybe it's because I'm a big news personality, Gen Z thinks these things.
No, I think the reality is Gen Z, the product of conservatives, Who have more kids have this tendency.
These tendencies.
And that is to say, I don't believe that Gen Z as a monolith is conservative or believe Civil War is coming and are prepping.
As we saw, it's only about 40%.
But that could be the plurality.
The issue, of course, being, as I often say, in the 2000s, liberals stopped having kids.
I mean, they're having kids, but they're having 1.43, I think it was, and conservatives are having 2.05.
That means, for every four people, three of them are going to be conservative.
What do you get?
Okay, it's about 20 years on, and we're seeing Donald Trump actually winning among the younger generations.
We are seeing the young far-left extremists and non-binary progressive and pro-Palestine stuff, but I think When it comes to breaking down Gen Z, you're probably going to find the right is larger.
That is to say, there will be many Gen Z people who don't consider themselves Republicans, don't like conservatives, are fairly moderate, but this puts them in the right-leaning camp.
So there's a bunch of different factions among those who would consider themselves to be Gen Z, but the right is more dominant, at least in terms of what ideas overlap with each other.
That is to say, while there are large groups of woke Gen Z-ers, they don't make up a very large faction of Gen Z at all, and are probably in the minority.
But this is funny, because I gotta slow down just a little bit.
Could Gen Z be the most conservative generation ever?
Well, it's weird.
They are somewhat conservative in some ways, but I do think a lot of these polls are actually getting some of this stuff wrong.
This story, this is from Financial Review, actually does get it a little bit wrong.
They're arguing that because the Gen Z is going out less, having less sex, and losing their virginity later, they're conservative, when in reality, Society is probably just breaking down.
But I actually have an argument and an opinion on this.
And that is, yes, these things will lead to a more conservative generation, and I think that's what we're seeing.
As Gen Z watches the world crumble around them, the failures of the millennial generation, and what's to come, they're probably thinking, like, we need to start fixing things.
And that's what makes things interesting.
Seeing that high school Gen Z males are leaning more conservative, they dip down a little bit after 2020, and seeing that they're prepping, oh boy.
So, uh, ladies and gentlemen, without further ado, I give you the conservative Gen Z generation prepping for a civil war.
How about that?
Financial Review writes, The lamb queue outside Fabric, famous London nightclub, stretches 150 meters around the corner despite the drizzle.
It is freshers' week and the students sway and cling to one another behind the barriers, others mill near the entrance, blah blah blah.
It doesn't look very different from when I started university just over a decade ago.
But when I started speaking to students, their lives seemed quite different.
They tell me they go out once a week, much less than my peers.
When I repeat this later in the night, I'm assured by others that once a week is on the higher, more debauched end.
Often they say, it's more of a case of once a month.
Are Gen Z uniquely socially conservative?
There are two dominant opposing theories about this generation, which is generally defined as those born between 96 and 2012, or between the ages of 11 and 27.
On the one hand, they appear more free-thinking and progressive than any generation before them.
Sex-positive, anti-racist, and waving the flag for identity politics, with words such as cis and non-binary part of their daily lexicon.
On the other hand, as my non-scientific poll of the Fabric Freshers suggests, they are in some way more abstemious.
Modern-day social conservatism has evolved into a response to the extreme liberalization of Western society through the sexual revolution, the breakdown of traditional family structures, immigration, and the decline of religion.
Its beliefs don't necessarily map neatly on to those of the conservative party.
It was David Cameron who legalized gay marriage as prime minister in 2013, and there exists a blue labor faction grounded in cultural conservatism.
But I must stop our good friend writing this review and point out What he doesn't understand is the bifurcation.
He sees Gen Z as a monolith.
Oh, it's interesting when you ask Gen Z they don't go out, but it's also interesting that they are also sex positive.
No, no, no.
Those are two completely different factions.
When you look at those who are going out and partying and doing sex clubs and things like that, yeah, you found the progressive, non-binary, using the word cis and everything like that.
What you're not finding is the people who don't go out, who are not leaning in this direction.
That is to say, as I've said several times, It's a mass bifurcation of the generation.
So, if you were to pull them all together, you might find, well, they're very progressive, but also strangely conservative.
No, you're mixing two very distinct groups.
And that is what is very, very interesting.
Quote, Gen Z long for a political offer that satisfies their nostalgia for the things they've never known.
Marriage, parochial life, and national pride.
I think that's true.
And I think it's because Gen Z got a tiny piece of it.
And millennials got a little bit more.
But I recently went to, uh, where was I?
I was at the Zoomies.
I was skating the other day and I was wearing this checkered Vans belt and people were like, where was it from Hot Topic from 2003?
And I'm like, no, it was from Zoomies yesterday.
I don't know, I just bought a belt.
They're good belts for skating.
But there was a young woman there who was probably in her mid-twenties, okay?
So Gen Z.
And I can't remember what song came on it was a song from like 99 or something and I went oh boy oldies you know because it's been almost 25 years and she was like oh I live in the 90s and I'm like wow that's crazy I mean I guess people like the 80s too but I do think that a lot of a lot of Gen Z men It must really suck to be Gen Z. Those of us Millennials, we got to experience the last decade.
And I think for Gen Z, it's almost like you're looking into a fake version of reality.
It doesn't exist and never existed.
As if we're in some kind of simulation and the stories of the United States predating the 2000s are just manufactured to facilitate your existence.
Meaning, we know the 20s, we know the 30s, we know the 40s, the 50s.
All of these decades have a distinct feel to them.
Now, I think the 20s and the 30s have their moments, right?
You got World War I, you got the Great Depression, and you've got iconic imagery related to these decades.
The 50s are when things really solidified.
The 60s, the 70s, the 80s were such unique time periods that almost flipped on a dime.
That is 79 into 81 and it was like BANG!
The American culture was totally different.
Now, of course, it overlaps.
Because it's not digital, it's analog, right?
It's waves.
So, you get a little bit of the late 70s into the 80s, you know, obviously Queen persisted from the 70s and the 80s, they changed their look.
The 80s had a very distinct style.
If you're a millennial, born in the 80s or early 90s, you experienced some of the last decade.
But for Gen Z, born in the mid to late 90s and 2000s, They weren't actively participating in culture for several years after that, at a time when culture was actually washing away.
And now you've got people who want to live in a decade, and they don't.
Let me tell you, my friends.
Go to the mall.
You know what really blows my mind?
Any mall you go to, it's got a hot topic.
They've got Nightmare Before Christmas merch everywhere.
Yo, when I was like 15 years old.
Okay, we're talking, I think, like 2002, uh, ish.
2002, 2003.
ish 2002 2003 2000 yeah between 2001 2002
9-1-4 for Christmas had been out for a long time already And so all the young people who grew up watching that movie, who are now teenagers, are buying the Jack Skellington beanies with the things hanging down or whatever.
Wearing Nightmare Before Christmas shirts.
Yo, it's been 30 years!
Okay?
And they're still plastering these stores with this stuff.
And I'm like, why is there a 19-year-old buying that?
Okay, I guess.
I mean, in the 90s and the 2000s, you'd buy Zeppelin stuff from the 70s.
But this store has never changed!
It's the same thing, and I'm like, time stopped.
I wonder if that's why many of Gen Z just are living in the world that they are, wanting to have this nostalgia.
Perhaps.
But here's what I love about all of this.
Gen Z ain't stupid.
Now, again, I'm not going to mishmash two different distinct worlds, which is progressive and right-leaning.
I don't say conservative because the right means something different today.
I think that you have a large percentage, it looks like 40% of Gen Z adults are actually concerned about social collapse and decay.
And they're smart.
And I respect this.
It's not about whether civil war happens or the country collapses.
It's actually quite simple.
Sometimes it rains.
So, we often do promos for SafeAndReadyMeals.com.
Emergency food supplies.
I don't do them all that- I don't do them that often.
Uh, we only shout out SafeAndReadyMeals.com typically when there actually is some kind of disaster, and the reason being is that... Look.
You've got a- You've got a first aid- This is the pitch I always give, is you've got a first aid kit.
When was the last time you used it?
Okay?
We've got one downstairs.
It's never been touched.
It's like... I mean, you get a cut on your hand, you go to the first aid kit, but we don't even... Like, it's there, we know where it is, it's mounted on the wall, so everybody knows where it is.
unidentified
For a lot of people, they don't even know where it is.
And so, I always say, you barely use it, but you got one.
Well, you eat every day, you drink water every day, at least I hope.
What's your emergency plan for this?
I think Gen Z gets it.
It's not about the world ending.
It's just really simple.
Are you prepared for a disaster?
Are you thinking ahead?
This is why I think Gen Z is got a lot of smart people, smarter than millennials.
Millennials are completely broken, by the way.
Let's read this in the Daily Mail.
Younger Americans fearing 2024 election could spark a civil war are prepping for disaster.
They say Gen Z adults born after 97, that's the generation, is the most likely to be prepping for a disaster with a whopping 40% claiming to have spent money on doomsday supplies in the past year.
The survey of 2,179 US adults was conducted from January 9th to February 17th and has a 2% margin of error.
Finder, who has been collecting prepping data since 2017, asked people if they'd spent money on prepping, spent money prepping for emergencies over the last 12 months.
Across all generations, food and water was the most commonly bought prepping item, and 20% of Gen Z preppers purchased toilet paper.
According to the latest survey, 29% of Americans spent money on prepping, up from the roughly 25% who did in 2017.
Many doomsday preppers said they are taking precautions ahead of the 2024 election because they are concerned it will bring civil unrest, while others worry the government will botch its response to the next big natural disaster.
They're right!
They're completely right about all of it!
The 40% that are buying.
I'm sure there are more that think it's going to happen, too.
The government will botch a response to a natural disaster.
They've got a photo here of the Superdome in New Orleans.
The reason why I only do the shoutouts when there's actual disasters is...
I don't, I don't know, I don't like the idea, I don't mind doing promos for like, oh, castabrew.com is our coffee.
Yeah, we drink coffee all the time.
But I think when people are watching a disaster unfold, it really, it's the opportune moment to tell people, this is why you need to be prepared.
Right?
It is the perfect sales pitch.
But it's not, it's not about just making money.
It's like, look.
There's a ton of times, many, many instances where you could promote emergency food or whatever.
The reality is, I genuinely think people should have this stuff.
There are certain things I think you should have so you survive.
What better time to tell someone, hey, here's an example of what might happen.
Please pay attention.
So I do think it is important.
And look at these, man.
I gotta tell you, look.
Millennials are broken.
The boomers are great.
I really do like boomers.
But there's a lot of bad boomers.
Whatever.
There's bad people in every generation.
But if I was gonna take, if I was gonna do a breakdown, I'd say, like, the boomers, man, they did great stuff, okay?
Star Trek, The Next Generation.
And the Gen Xers who interned on those projects, good for you.
Gen X helped bring us The Simpsons, along with boomers.
Funny in the 90s.
Season 9 was really the last good one.
But a lot of great stuff from Boomers and Gen X. Aw man, great Gen X music.
Can we be real?
Smashing pumpkins.
Let's roll, baby.
Then Millennials came about.
And it's muddled garbage.
Sorry, it is.
Look, we can break down exactly what's wrong with Millennials, but I'll tell you.
That poll I covered a couple weeks ago, where Boomers, Gen X, and Gen Z all said, I'm satisfied with $120,000 a year, and Millennials were like, I want $550,000!
That's absolutely insane.
Millennials think in order to be happy, they need $550,000 a year.
What?
And some people have said, well, it's because Millennials went through two economic crises, and it's... I don't know, man.
When I was, as long as I've been alive, I've had the internet.
So there's, there's, I had a leap over the millennial generation or whatever.
Something about the way millennials grew up and then got the internet when they were like 13 or whatever really messed them up.
So millennials, we're talking about mid to late 80s on average around the time they're born.
And the ubiquity of the internet is really like emerging in the early 2000s and then 2007 with cell phones.
For me, I had the internet my whole life.
So I'm constantly exposed to this, but it could be.
The people who are online in like 1992 are going to be working professionals and tech people, not your average person.
Which is why when Reddit first launched, it was very tech-centric.
The ideas around all of these default forums, if you're not familiar with what Reddit is, I don't know, were based on what Silicon Valley people were into, and it was fairly libertarian.
Maybe that's it.
Millennials end up becoming some weird broken generation.
And Gen Z is paying attention.
So maybe Gen Z is paying attention to videos like this.
And again, I know that Gen Z is split in half.
Millennials too.
And it's only going to get more pronounced.
However...
There's been a hard fork in American society.
And this hard fork will result in a much, much more conservative future.
That's why I think it's important to bring up Gen Z being the most conservative generation ever.
They're not going to be the most conservative generation ever in terms of... But I think it's fair to rephrase this.
Obviously, the boomers are more conservative than Gen Z.
However, in terms of what it means to be conservative moving forward, conservative typically referred to conserving traditional values and things like this versus progressive, which is trying to progress society.
Now, I don't think those words are accurate in what they describe, but that's generally what people mean.
Typically, the younger generations adopt newer, more radical views that oppose the older generations.
Only now.
Gen Z may be the most conservative generation ever, and what that means is, it doesn't mean they're more politically right-leaning or traditional than the silent generation or the boomers.
It means, in terms of what would be defined as conservation or progression, They are leaning more towards conservation.
So while they are very progressive, the shift typically from generation to... Let's put, let me put it this way.
Let's say every generation is a five-point shift left.
That is progressive, right?
Gen Z has a minus one percent, or a positive shift to the right, meaning the shift was more conservative than any generation before it, though their views are still fairly progressive compared to other generations.
You get my point?
They're more likely to believe in traditional values, even if those traditional values are like from the 90s.
As opposed to, say, the Boomers or the Silent Generation were.
The Silent Generation has... Who are the kids?
The Boomers had the Millennials, and the Silent Generation had the Gen Xers, I think.
Is that how it goes?
I don't know.
I don't know how to track these generations.
It comes and goes in waves, right?
But you get my point.
Gen Z may not be- If you were to take an old person and a Gen Z person, you're gonna be like, old person's way more conservative.
But if you were to compare the progress of human society, you'd be like, conservatives shifted- Uh, Gen Z shifted way more conservative than any generation before them.
Here we go.
USA Today.
Could the 2024 election cause society to collapse?
Some preppers think so, and they're ready.
I wonder what the age of these preppers are.
Give me some information.
What do we got?
Breck Waggoner looks at the windows of her home in North Carolina and sees disaster coming.
Not immediately, but someday.
Okay, well, I hold it.
She's 39.
You see, this narrative once again is emerging.
But this is what I want to highlight.
Now go back to Gen Z.
40% prepping.
who consider themselves preppers. People prepped to serve, prepared to survive without government
assistance during disasters. Those disasters could encompass anything from a major storm to
widespread looting sparked by election anger. You see, this narrative once again is emerging,
but this is what I want to highlight. Now go back to Gen Z, 40% prepping. That means you
have potentially a plurality of Gen Z that does not trust the government. So are they progressive?
Are they socialist?
I don't think so.
Don't ask me why.
I don't know.
But I don't think so.
Here we go.
The Wire says, U.S.
careening towards the abyss of fascistic violence and civil war as election 2024 approaches.
Oh, it would not be complete without that from Politico.
Here we go.
The threat of civil breakdown is real.
National security officials are still not prepared for a far-right revolt.
Okay.
The New Statesman.
Oh man.
Here's a leftist publication saying, is Gen Z the most conservative generation in history?
Why teens and 20-somethings could fuel the next Tory revival.
And this is, uh, British, British.
But of course, we would not be Timcast if we were not fair and balanced.
Which is why I give you, from the New York Times.
Just from October.
Millennials and Gen Z are tilting left and staying there.
Really?
Jamel Bowie writes that it's an old saying that if you're not liberal when you're young, then you have no heart, and if you're not conservative when you're old, you have no brain.
No.
Can we fix this one?
Learn the phrase, okay?
It's alliterative.
If you're not liberal when you're young, you have no heart, and if you're not conservative when you're old, you have no head.
It's head and heart, not heart and brain.
Learn your alliterations.
The idea, of course, is that liberalism is a game for the youth and that age brings security, stability, and natural resistance to change.
The upshot in American politics is that while most voters might start center-left, with Democrats they'll end their political journey center-right with Republicans.
That's the story.
The reality is a little more complicated.
Not only does our narrative of political change over time exaggerate the degree of rightward drift among different people as they age, but it's good evidence for the youngest generations of America that it's hardly happening at all.
The evidence comes from a new Wall Street Journal analysis of the latest data from General Social Survey, a comprehensive examination of Americans' attitudes and beliefs conducted since its creation in 1972 by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago.
It is true, according to those researchers, that those voters typically become more conservative as they get older, which is to say as they gain income, buy property, and start families.
But the extent of the drift, or where it finally reaches, depends on where they start.
Okay, let me slow it down.
People aren't having kids anymore.
It's kids that makes you more conservative.
It's when you are like, hey, I gotta buy, I gotta support my kids.
They need food.
They need diapers.
They need shelter.
No longer can I sleep on a park bench.
It's not about me, it's about them.
And then you look at your taxes, and you're like, whoa!
How much money am I giving to the government?
And for what?
They're blowing up.
Who?
Look, man.
People just want to feed their kids.
Here's the thing.
I had a conversation with a liberal friend of mine who was totally pro-abortion to the point of birth.
She has no kids.
She also did not care that they're showing kids graphic sexual content in school.
No kids.
And I said, well, it's really easy.
You don't have kids.
You don't care.
Other people with kids are scared that their kids are being attacked and threatened.
Because they are!
That's really it.
I'd be willing to bet that if you were to do a survey, they would say conservatives are more likely to have kids.
I'm willing to bet it's that people who have kids are more likely to be conservative.
Meaning that before kids they could be liberal, after kids they're conservative.
It's also that question about women who get married are more likely to be conservative.
Is the question that when women get married they become conservative?
Or is it that if women are conservative they get married?
You see how this works.
Here's what I think.
I don't think Millennials and Gen Z are tilting left and staying there.
I think there is a portion, as I mentioned, of the bifurcated generation where some are progressive and they're not having kids, so their worldview isn't changing.
What's going to happen when they're older and need someone to take care of them?
Their views on government assistance will be emboldened.
For those with kids, they'll say, my kids will help me out.
For those without, they'll say, I need the government to do this.
You see where this is going.
It is people not having kids, which is creating a massive bifurcation.
All in all, however, I think the data shows that Gen Z is more conservative than any other generation.
I think it is fair to say, but I want to make sure I'm clear on what this means.
Gen Z is the most conservative generation we've seen out of the past six or seven generations, meaning To clarify, once again, if you took a 70-year-old and a Gen Z-er, their views would be wildly different.
The Gen Z-er would be way more left-leaning.
In terms of what it means to be conservative, right?
If you look at the 1600s when dueling was commonplace, call that traditional.
Long gone, right?
If you compared someone from the 1600s to someone who is 70 years old today, the 70-year-old would be progressive.
The point being, every generation shifts a certain amount of degrees to the left.
As we would perceive it, I suppose.
Or towards progressivism.
It would appear that from Silent, Boomer, Gen X, Millennial to Gen Z, Gen Z actually inverted it for the first time ever.
And this was data that came out in 2018, and we're seeing it more and more and more.
That typically generations will move leftward, but Gen Z actually ticked slightly rightward, making them more conservative than any other generation before it.
Because conservative to progressive is relative to generation before it.
I don't know what that means, moving forward.
I mean, I think we're on track for a conservative Christian nation.
Or Muslim nation, to be completely honest.
But Abrahamic and conservative, based on these facts.
I think based on birth rates, we're looking at Christian.
Because people also mention, yeah, but what about immigration?
A lot of these immigrants are Christian, too.
So I guess you know what?
We'll see.
But as the years go on now, being five or six years since that study came out, it's only being proven more and more.
So, 2024 will be interesting, but I'm really interested in what 2028 will be.
Next segment's coming up at 4 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
The new rumors circulating after the release of the GTA 6 trailer is that the protagonist is in fact not female, as many people have suspected, but is.
I guess according to left colloquialisms, a woman, in that the main character of Grand Theft Auto 6 is trans.
I think this is just absolutely not true.
The rumor comes from basically nowhere.
And there are a lot of people who want to claim these things.
Right now the real story is...
That people want GTA 6 to be woke.
I don't know if they actually want it to be woke, but if you Google search this, everyone's basically writing an article that says, is GTA 6 woke?
Okay.
First, you've got the people complaining that it's a female protagonist, and I gotta be honest with you.
I don't know if it's necessarily woke, but it is a component of, you know, diversity.
In that, you don't... Look.
This is what I said last night.
Trailer comes out, everyone's all excited about GTA 6, the new game.
It's gonna be massive.
It's gonna make billions, okay?
Nah, for real.
Billions.
Um, and I don't just mean in direct sales.
The direct sales are probably gonna gross over a billion dollars, and then there's gonna be a whole bunch of other stuff in terms of online play.
It's gonna make a lot of money.
But here's my thing.
When I play GTA, okay?
You are running around, punching and beating people and shooting people and stealing cars.
Yeah.
You know, personally, I don't want to play a female character.
It's not... I don't know if it really matters, but it's kind of weird in my mind.
And, you know, you can tell me that I'm wrong or something.
I don't know, it's just how I feel.
Like, this lady's gonna run up to a random guy in the street and punch him, and he's gonna go down?
Nah, come on.
Yo, if your average woman ran up to your average guy and swung a fist at him, it's not gonna hurt him.
I mean, it may hurt a little bit, but it's not gonna, like, put him down.
And then, so my point was, like, Okay, so you play as this character, you run up and punch a random guy, and then he just clocks you in the face one time, you go down, WASTED!
You lose all your HP instantly, and then you wake up outside the hospital.
I think what's really going on is, I don't really care if it's a female character, as long as you can just make your own characters and play the game as you want to play it, like you could in GTA 5 anyway, so who cares?
Make your own character, customize his clothes, you don't have to play the main storyline or do any of this stuff, I never do anyway.
So, who cares?
But you see, People really, really want the narrative because the narrative drives clicks.
The rumor is that the protagonist is transgender.
I love it.
I wish it were true and I could run the headline just like they did because it gets a lot of clicks.
Nah, nah, I'm gonna have to call it a fake rumor or an unfounded rumor or whatever.
I don't know why I should say this.
There's no... There's... Okay, here's the story from Sportskeeda.
The online community has been abuzz ever since GTA 6's trailer.
The video was released early after hackers had leaked it prior to its official reveal.
Oh, that's cool.
Now, rumor has been circulating online that Lucia, the first protagonist revealed in the game, is a trans woman.
This has led to some lengthy debates on social media, with some users dismissing the theory entirely and others being outraged by it.
The article looks at how the community has reacted to this claim.
Okay, first of all, apparently...
There's a few posts.
There's a drama alert posted.
First look at GTA 6 female protagonist.
She is rumored to be transgender.
Franklin's sugar mama.
And based on, based on these photos, you know, let me just point out, uh, the lady be wearing a lot of makeup for somebody who is in prison.
It's funny that they have this character, this female character, in prison garb.
The funny thing is, it's probably modeled after a real woman, and so this woman's probably like, what?
Super offended by it.
And then you have this photo, and people are saying that, now, look, anybody who's watched the trailer, I think it's fair to say it's obviously not a trans character.
Rumors started to circulate after the trailer was released.
DramaAlert shared some screenshots from the trailer showing Lucia, the female Latina protagonist.
They stated that she's rumored to be transgender.
They then shared a screenshot of what users will get if they type in GTA 6 Transgender in Google.
The first result is that of a Reddit post from a year ago.
More users began discussing the topic as it spread across social media.
Some users were noticeably upset by this.
Oh.
If this be Lucia, and GTA 6 is transgender, I swear in my life that I'm never going to participate in this BS.
There are things more important than a game.
However, it's not the first time fans have been concerned by the idea that GTA 6 will be woke.
There's another viral post that was going around, and I saw commentators talking about it, saying that GTA 6 is going to have a pronoun system.
It probably will!
Probably will.
You know why I say that?
Because Starfield does, and Baldur's Gate 3 does.
So, uh, yeah.
The funny thing is... It's so stupid.
There's, like, right in the beginning of Baldur's Gate, a scene where someone's talking about you, with you standing there, to reference your identity.
It is so cringe!
You know exactly why they did it.
Okay.
Spoiler alert, Baldur's Gate's been out long enough now.
So basically, you, uh, the game starts.
You can choose your character.
You can choose a body type.
Not male or female.
Body type!
Okay, so they call it now.
And there's four.
There is small female.
Average male, burly female, and burly male.
And I guess it's average male or female, and then big male or female.
Whatever.
And so let's say you choose an obvious female character.
They actually let you then choose your genitals.
So in Baldur's Gate 3, you can choose the female body type, with wide hips and boobs, and then Character male junk!
Anyway, let's say you make a female character with female body parts, if you know what I mean, and then decide you want a male identity.
I love this part.
In the end of the game, you encounter a raid occurring on a, uh, grove, and there's, uh, these three guys are like, oh, raise the gates, the goblins are gonna get us!
You then have to fight a bunch of goblins.
It's fun, isn't it?
And then afterwards, the gate opens, you come inside, and one of the dudes inside yells at the other guy outside, who called to open the gate, and says, YOU LET GOBLINS HERE!
THEY'RE A CHILDREN, YOU FOOL!
And then they're like, they're about to fight.
Then, you get the option, as your character, to interject.
And you can do a lot of things, you can swing at either one of the guys.
It's fun, it's fun.
And then you can say something like, I've seen way bloodier battles than this, depending on which class you choose.
And then the guy outside, let's call him guy A, goes, I don't remember asking you a damn thing!
And then the other guy goes, this woman just saved your life, show some respect!
And I'm like, okay, okay, so funny.
So if you give your character a male identity, You walk in, clearly female, the guy goes, this man just saved your life, and it's the stupidest thing ever!
It is so cringe, the world these people live in.
Anyway.
It's clear they put it right in the middle, right in the beginning of the game, to create this circumstance where a stranger, without knowing your identity, would correctly refer to you by your perceived identity.
Meaning, your character could be discernibly male, and the guy will still say, this woman just saved your life, and it is, my friends, an absurdity.
Because even if, in the real world, you identified as female, but you looked male, people would call you male.
Because they're not gonna make the assumption about your identity when you look like a dude!
Welcome to the modern era.
So I really don't see this character being trans.
One person said she is not trans, these people will make up anything.
I agree, come on.
People just want there to be some kind of woke component to this.
People are tweeting about it.
Here's a story from Newsweek.
GTA 6 trailer sparks backlash.
No, you know what it is.
I'll tell you.
We're winning the culture war.
And as we win the culture war, and more and more content starts to actually adhere to, like, basic normal parameters, there still needs to be a component for which people can make online content about.
Fortunately enough for me, I can just call out the people spreading the lies and the manipulations, so be it.
But I will say, you know, some people just don't like a female protagonist.
I don't know if that's woke, though.
People have pointed out that in GTA 1 and 2, when it was like a top-down view, that you could choose one of four characters, two male and two female.
Granted, there was no real, like, storyline back then.
It wasn't open.
It wasn't the same.
It was a fun game.
I remember playing the original GTA, and you're like, everything's overhead, and the car's driving, and you crash, and the cops chase you.
But GTA 3 really changed the game with the 3D world.
It's a fun game, and I know what everyone's going to do.
Every time I've played GTA, and I think I've only bought GTA 4, I don't know if I bought 5.
All I do is I just, I get the cheat codes.
What I love doing, and I think it's GTA 5, is activating super punch and super jump and invincibility and then I just have the guy run around and punch people to go BOOM and they go flying.
That's all I care about.
And then you put in the code to spawn a jet and then you fly around.
I never once have ever played GTA in any legitimate way.
I always just run around and do random nonsense.
So if that's what GTA 6 has to offer, okay.
Some people are complaining because in the trailer, and this is really funny, yo.
Yo, there's some life that's backlash here.
In the trailer, probably like 70 to 80% of the characters they show are not white.
Mostly black and Latino.
Well, it's supposed to be Miami, so what do you expect?
But the funny thing is, yo.
The game is about criminals, and they show just a whole bunch of non-white people.
They do show white people.
There are people claiming there's no white people on the show.
That's not true.
It's just a majority not white.
So if, like, you're trying to be woke and not racist, that ain't the way you do it.
So apparently now there's leftists who are mad.
Anyway, look, man, I'm excited for the game.
It's coming out in 2025.
Who cares?
Uh, I really don't think it's gonna be overly woke.
It's a crim- It's a game about crime and stuff.
However, I do think you're gonna see woke characters in it.
I'm willing to bet there's gonna be trans characters, gonna be drag queens, gonna be all that stuff.
And people are probably gonna get mad about it, but whatever.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment is coming up at 6pm on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
Well, of course, it's cycling season again, and so we have basically the same story that popped up last year popping up again, only this time, on the podium for this Chicago cycling event, you have two biological males in the women's division.
And of course, it's sparking outrage.
Now there's other, I don't know who these individuals are.
I believe some of these individuals that are biologically male and competing are actually, they actually engaged in public displays of affection for each other.
Or it may be two female, or a female and a male.
I honestly, I don't know all that much.
But I just want to tell you something, guys.
I know that there are many women who are upset over what's going on in women's sports.
And I see they've got a quote here from Megyn Kelly.
She's saying it's infuriating.
But look how happy third place is!
Look at this woman!
She's happy!
She knows.
She knows her position.
And it is beneath these two individuals.
It's beneath them.
She's not as good as they are, and she knows it!
She's just happy to be up there.
Look, I got no beef with this.
I'm at a point where you need... You don't get to just inherit whatever you want, and it does suck.
But let's read a little bit, and then I'll break down what I mean.
Outrage as transgender women take gold and silver at Illinois Cycling Championships.
This makes me sick to my stomach.
Quote.
A pair of transgender women won first and second place at a female race in Illinois.
The championships were held on December 3rd and comprised of a dozen different competitions divided into men, women, and junior athletes.
But two biological men placed atop the podium for the women's single speed category.
Well, you can just say two men.
I mean, I don't know why you add biological.
You can call them trans women.
Or men.
Christian Chalmers, the bronze medalist, was the sole biological female.
You don't need to add the word biological to female!
According to Redux, Chicago Cross Cup website notes that it will disqualify anyone who practices discrimination or harassment of any kind on the basis of race, color, religion, age, gender, orientation, gender identification, national origin, or any other stupid idea someone comes up with to belittle another racer.
And this is why I want to talk to you, because we had a great call last night on TimCast IRL's members section.
Become a member at TimCast.com to call into the show and talk to us.
And they had a question about gender being fluid and not immutable.
Interesting.
You see, one of the big arguments about why gender should be a protected category is that it is an immutable characteristic.
However, we also do protect religion.
And these are the questions that arise when it pertains to things like this.
If religion, someone's deeply held faith-based beliefs, are protected, meaning if a Christian came into your bakery, you can't say, no Christians!
I find that kind of weird.
Because, what if you just, I don't know, made whatever you want into your religion?
This is the problem with non-immutable civil rights qualifications.
So if someone is black, 50 years old, and a male, And they walk in and someone says, we don't allow 50-year-olds, black people, or males into our store.
Well, it's like, I can't do anything about that, dude.
That's just who I am.
I didn't choose, right?
And so, I think that's fair to be like, don't discriminate.
However, when it comes to things like orientation, identification, or religion, now we're talking about ideas you have.
Right?
So, national origin I get.
You can't do anything about where you come from.
But if someone is... Like, this is the crazy thing.
Religion.
The difference between religion and politics is almost non-existent.
I mean, it's overwhelmingly overlapped.
So if someone comes in and their religious stance is not to serve women or do these things, you can't discriminate against that person?
What if someone's religion is that women can't speak to them and they keep berating the female staff saying, I will not have this person speak to me.
Okay.
Here's an idea.
So, let's say someone's religious belief is that women do not speak and should not work, and they come and sit down at your restaurant.
You have only female servers.
And so you say, uh, please go wait this table.
You, as a female server, walk up, and the man goes, Ugh!
Manager!
I want the manager!
The manager comes out, a man, and says, is there a problem?
Where is the male server?
And they say, we don't have one.
He goes, well, my religion says I do not speak to women I am not married to, and they do not provide for me.
And they say, well, we don't have a man for you.
Ah!
Now you're discriminating on the basis of someone's religion.
You are telling them outright their religious beliefs are unacceptable, and you will not serve them.
Now hold on!
You may be saying, but Tim, Okay.
It's not what we mean is kicking them out because they're Muslim or something is discrimination.
Whether or not they choose to accept service or woman is something totally different.
Well, hold on there a minute.
Let's talk about disability.
If someone can't walk.
You are discriminating against them if you don't have a wheelchair ramp, which is why the law requires wheelchair ramps at all new businesses.
And most governments require this.
And if you have a second floor, gotta have an elevator.
Yeah.
Because people in wheelchairs, it is discriminatory to not provide a service to a person who requires it.
Let's try this one more time.
A person who physically cannot go upstairs, you must have a process by which the person can.
So often, you'll see they have a stair set and there'll be a little elevator next to it to lift it up for someone who's in a wheelchair.
Okay, that's great.
Now let's say someone's religion.
Muslim.
It is accepted, widely known, of their views.
It's not absolute, but, you know, of their views of what women should do.
And let's say the guy is staunch, orthodox, whatever, says, no, I will not be talked to by a female.
I will not.
I will not have this person.
By what logic can you say we are not obligated to provide for you this service?
You see what I mean?
That's why I think the immutable characteristic things is where things start getting really weird.
Because if you're talking about someone's religion, people's religions are all different.
No two person has the same religion.
Sorry, it's true.
And what I mean by that is, everyone has a minor alteration at a granular level as to how they actually perceive their religion.
Now, of course, you can say, Christians, there's two billion of them.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
But how many different denominations?
Within those denominations, two individuals might actually disagree on the meaning of a certain piece of scripture, and they might defer to a priest.
That's what I mean.
So, of course, there are people who follow the same religion, but if you are required to provide a service to a person, Who is disabled?
Otherwise, you're discriminating.
I don't see how it's any different when it comes to any other circumstance.
You need to provide for women a bathroom for which they can use, and if you don't, then you're discriminating against women, right?
See, this doesn't make sense.
These ideas don't add up.
If you can argue that you can't discriminate on the basis of gender identity, politics is not protected.
In DC, politics is.
Political affiliation is a protected class.
But by this standard, if an idea is protected, then any idea can be protected.
And I get told that you'll get laughed out of the courtroom when I investigate this stuff.
I called human rights lawyers years ago, asked somebody, said, nah, they'll laugh you out of the courtroom.
And I said, if you can laugh my ideas out of the courtroom, then why can't a judge laugh any ideas out of the courtroom?
There's no answer.
There's none.
It is only the zeitgeist.
It is only what is culturally acceptable.
So, if I said my gender was Trump gender, because in New York they allow gender to be any self-expression, and, you know, someone said you can't come in acting like Trump and wearing these clothes, which I don't think they would, but you can be like you're discriminating against me on the basis of gender identity.
Let's say you wanted to wear that Borat thong.
You know, the one where that goes around your junk and over your shoulders?
And they said, you can't wear that in here.
No, no, no!
New York says you cannot discriminate on the base of the clothing someone wears.
And I'm wearing clothing.
This means those signs say no shirt, no shoes, no service.
They're null.
Because New York actually protects against people based on the clothing they choose to wear.
Amazing, isn't it?
So what do we have here?
Let me just put it this way.
This woman who got third place, she's actually the first place female.
And look how excited she is.
Look how happy she is.
Dude.
She's happy.
We're all happy.
I wonder how many women did not enter the contest because they didn't want to be involved.
Here's what you got to do.
Make your own league.
That's it.
Females only.
Female division.
There is no argument for why they have mixed gender, uh... Well, I'll tell you this.
In major league sports, women are allowed to try out.
They just never win.
In women's sports, men are allowed to try out now as well, and they're starting to win.
I guess that's the whole point of Lady Ballers, the movie by The Daily Wire, that eventually, there just won't be women's teams.
There will just be... There'll be the team, and the women's team will just be lesser athletes, but male.
That's where we're headed.
Isn't it obvious?
Right now we're looking at a podium with two males on it.
Yet next year it's going to be three males.
And we all predicted this.
And then it will go to the Olympics.
Why not?
Why wouldn't it?
If you're North Korean and you want to win, are you going to be like, send in the women?
Or are you going to be like, no, send in the males.
We'll just say they're women.
Those are the rules.
They allow it.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
They have testosterone restrictions and things like that.
But even then, All it takes is you get a male to go on some kind of testosterone suppressor, not hormone replacement, which will lower the testosterone, which will have negative effects, but they'll still retain male advantages, and then they'll get tested, and then right before they're set to compete, they'll get off the blockers.
It's just so insane.
They're like, your testosterone has to be below a certain amount.
Okay, when's testing?
When are you going to test my blood for testosterone?
They do it, and then as soon as you do the test, you get off the drug that blocks testosterone.
And now, all of a sudden, your T levels are back to normal.
It's the stupidest, stupidest thing.
Okay?
There's divisions for females and divisions for males.
If you want to have a lesser males division, by all means, go ahead and do it, but that's all we're doing.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up tonight at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
Ah yes, the fabled dinks.
Dual income, no kids.
We have this viral video going around of two people, and I'm just sorry.
They look very nice, but yo, it is... This video is nails on a chalkboard to me.
We're dinks!
We just do irresponsible things, but okay, okay, let's slow down and break down.
What this is all about.
There is a an effort, I guess I would call it, to convince people not to have kids.
And so you've got lots of people are putting out these videos talking about how great it is to not have kids.
And I'm like, yo, keep doing that, please.
Please keep convincing more and more people not to have kids.
Now, I know many of you are like, what, Tim?
No, why?
Well, because I don't want them to have kids!
Like, I want you to have kids!
I want to have kids!
Alright?
I look at the people who have kids, and I'm like, they're doing pretty well.
Now, of course, I mentioned in a segment previously that having kids will probably make you more conservative.
So, in fact, it'd probably be better if they all did have kids.
But the end result of these people not having children is just going to be them As per usual, we're going to set the sound.
from human genetics, human lineage, and their story ends with them.
But there is a lot I want to break down here. What does it mean? Why? Why not have kids? Why have kids?
Let me first start by playing this video which we'll get going for you. Here you go.
As per usual, we're going to set the sound.
unidentified
We go to Trader Joe's and workout classes on the weekends.
Nearly 7% more than dual-income couples with kids.
So what is that?
Dukes?
But, uh, or yes kids.
Dual income with kids.
But are way less likely to own a home.
Here's what it means.
You know what I was thinking about this?
Because these stories are popping up more and more.
Praising the dink!
And I was just like, What is a- I'm looking at this couple right here.
They're looking at buying a house or whatever.
And look how happy they are.
And I'm thinking about this video where they're like, we're dinks!
We just do whatever we want!
And I'm like, but you can always just kind of do whatever you want.
And then I see these posts from people with kids and they're like, but having kids is what I want.
And that's why I feel like that video of like, we're dinks!
We go to parties!
It's a cope.
Because nobody who is doing what they want needs to make a video talking about how great it is that they're just doing a normal thing, right?
Where's the video where a guy's like, I have kids!
I get to teach them things and then watch them imitate me and it's really heartwarming.
I have kids.
They love me and when they grow up, they'll protect me.
I feel fulfilled in raising a child and experiencing the joys of childhood once again through their eyes.
What else can I say?
I have kids and I'm teaching them to be great at sports and watching them accomplish things that I never... Watching them achieve things I wasn't able to fills my heart.
How many people were like, when I was a kid, I had a hard upbringing.
So when I have a kid, I want to have them, you know, I want them to have the opportunities I did not have.
So they get to achieve something.
My point is this.
Whether you like your kids or you don't like your kids, it's a normal thing to have or not have kids.
I mean, actually, it's not a normal thing to not have kids.
It has been the norm throughout history to have kids.
What I'm saying is, You're doing this thing that is historically atypical.
Not having kids.
And then you're making content where you're like, look how great it is that we're not doing this thing that you do!
Then later, she mentions Klaus Schwab, and he goes, who's Klaus Schwab?
And she goes, he's the head of the WEF.
And he goes, what's that?
Yo, Bill, retire!
You know what it is.
Dopamine stimulation.
But for what point?
For what purpose?
I look at humans holistically.
Humans as a greater than themselves are doing things.
What those things become?
I wonder.
The creation of artificial intelligence?
Expansion into a space-faring people?
It's not so much about any individual's pleasures, gratifications, family, or not.
It's about what we all contribute to the manifestation of something greater than ourselves.
What I see with these people who are like, I'm a dink!
I'm gonna go to a party!
Dopamine stimulation.
Not having kids is just about flicking your dopamine receptor over and over again until you die.
And for that, you've contributed nothing.
You've become effectively a vestigial component of human civilization, and for that, you will wither and fall off and be forgotten.
And that's fine!
Do whatever you want!
Be happy.
But the end result is going to be a course correction.
As we see this bifurcation, a hard fork, with progressives and people not having kids, progressives abort their kids or sterilize their kids in certain circumstances, and then, thus, they're not likely to reproduce.
Not only that, but you're going to end up with a lot of these young people and these progressive values where they have atypical desires which result in not having kids as well.
All in all, the trend is massive.
People on the right are having kids, people on the left are not.
Now here's what I think may happen.
It is true that people on the right are having less kids than people used to, but people on the left are having way less than anyone else now.
What this means is the population will dramatically shrink.
And at this point, survival will become paramount.
And thus...
People will start having more and more kids.
You know, right now, there's no real risk to humans going extinct.
They'll make the arguments about climate change and World War III, but like, even with these things, humans are just so numerous, they'll persist.
Be it a small group of people, or whatever.
And then eventually growing into a large group of people.
So there's no real risk right now for human civilization because we are well-fed, we are happy, we are clothed, we are sheltered.
And there are certainly people around the world who are poor, but, you know, for its entirety.
This means...
There's no social pressure at all to have kids.
None.
Nobody cares.
So when these people are praising, jumping up and down, weird things, it's kind of like, dude, no one cares.
Go be Chelsea Handler and wake up at six in the morning, do drugs and masturbate.
I mean, that's literally what she does.
I'm sure that's very triggering for your dopamine receptors.
Great.
And then when you die, no one will care or remember you.
And then what happens is as population shrinks, and there become real risks to human civilization, this
will see a resurgence in population growth.
Population growth will contribute back to the advancement of human civilization
towards various technologies. I think AI is going to change everything in ways we can't comprehend.
But I look at this like a course correction that's... I don't see it as a bad thing.
There are a lot of people on the right who would be like, it's bad that people are adopting these views, and I look at it more just... I'm attached from it.
I see a system in place.
And when the system becomes filled with... As human civilization expands, and we develop new technologies and better ways to treat diseases and produce food, you end up saving a lot of people who normally, throughout human history, would have died.
Either eaten by a bear or starved to death.
But we kind of figured out how to save him.
Oh, you got mauled by a bear?
Surgeries, we've saved your life.
You're starving?
Norman Borlaug, he massively increased the crop yield for wheat.
And for this, we can feed you until you're morbidly obese.
But this is a deviation and a problem.
We've got morbidly obese individuals, people eating too much.
And what happens?
A natural course correction.
I kind of feel like the universe is just fairly perfect.
These people who become morbidly obese die.
The other people who have no survival mechanism stop reproducing and cease to exist.
And the gene pool is shifted back to what it originally was.
I'm not going to say it's good or bad.
It's neither.
Some people might argue it's bad these people aren't having kids, but I'm like, they seem to be happy.
Is it bad of me to say that the people who are cheering on the death of their genetics They're happy with their lives.
Nobody's oppressing them.
So what happens is, as the society expands, and we start saving the lives of people who traditionally die, those people find ways to not reproduce or die anyway.
And so then civilization just has this arm of the leftist progressivism grow off of it and then rot and fall off.
So you've got these two paths splitting right and left.
The right will keep going and the left will just rot and decay and then cease to exist because they don't reproduce.
It's it.
It's almost like just a typical course correction and human expansion.
And then the future is going to be much more conservative.
I believe it'll be fairly classically liberal, but still relatively conservative by today's standards.
And, um, studious.
And honor-bound and things like that.
Honor-based.
I think that a lot of the leftist progressivism stuff just can't survive.
The Soviet Union only lasted 69 years.
So, and to be fair, Nazi Germany didn't last at all.
They got crushed because they were nuts.
And, uh, but bad things still happen.
So I think bad things will happen, but I think what we're actually looking at is... You know, something kind of like a Star Trek future, I suppose.
And not the modern Star Trek, more like the next generation.
But I guess we can only sit back and see, and give a shout-out to all our Dink friends!
But we should be thanking them for their sacrifice.
You ever watch the show Sliders?
There's an episode of Sli- uh, for those that aren't familiar, it's a show where people travel to different dimensions through a portal.
They're lost, and the timer goes off, and the portal opens, and they jump through, and they don't know where they'll end up.
The funny thing is, like, sooner or later, they just... I think they actually did this, they land in a volcano planet, and they're like, they're just dying.
But then the portal opens, and they leave.
But there's one planet where everything's really nice, everyone's super wealthy, and you can go to any ATM and take out as much money as you want.
Because the way it actually works is every time you take out money, you are being entered into a lottery where you get killed.
And so, as they're pulling all this money out, people are like, wow, that's so honorable of you, that's so noble.
And then they're like, of course, winning the lottery means you die.
You are culled.
And that's how they keep the population low.
So, my point is that everybody in that society was praising those who chose to do this.
I think we should have the same view.
To all the liberals who abort their children, and all of the liberals who don't have kids, we should be clapping for them, saying, thank you for your sacrifice.
By sacrificing in this way, the future is going to be Christian and conservative.
