Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 720 | American Girl Betrays Girls & the SEL Trojan Horse | Guest: James Lindsay

Episode Date: December 7, 2022

Today we start by discussing the American Girl company turning its back on girls. Recently, American Girl started selling a book called "A Smart Girl's Guide: Body Image" that actively encourages young girls who feel uncomfortable with their bodies to pursue gender transition. Not only does the book explicitly talk about puberty blockers for kids, it also has advice for how kids can deal with this with no input from their parents at all. It seems like American Girl went from telling young girls that being a girl is a good thing to telling them to simply stop being a girl if they don't like it. Then, we welcome our friend James Lindsay, author of "The Marxification of Education: Paulo Freire's Critical Marxism and the Theft of Education," back to the show to discuss several things, including James' recent return to Twitter, the drama surrounding an old photo of him, and why leftists can't stand to be ignored. We also talk about the leftist "religion" in general, how leftists believe they can build a paradise on Earth if only we install the right government, and how the Left is manipulating language right now to push that goal along. This also explains why Christianity is such a thorn in the side of these people, because the truths handed down in the Bible are impervious to the Left's attempts at manipulation and control, thus undermining leftists' ability to control people. --- Timecodes: (01:06) American Girl book (18:45) Interview with James Lindsay begins --- Today's Sponsors: Good Ranchers — change the way you shop for meat today by visiting GoodRanchers.com/ALLIE and use promo code 'ALLIE' for a discount! Reliefband — save 20% off plus free shipping at Reliefband.com when you use promo code 'ALLIE'! Healthycell — get 20% off your first order at HealthyCell.com/ALLIE, use promo code 'ALLIE'! Covenant Eyes — protect you and your family from the things you shouldn't be looking at online. Go to coveyes.com/ALLIE to try it FREE for 30 days! --- Relevant Episodes: Ep 431 | Dissecting the Dangers of Critical Theory | Guest: James Lindsay https://apple.co/3F9qDw6 Ep 556 | How Race Marxism Is Infiltrating Schools, Churches & the Government | Guest: James Lindsay https://apple.co/3VDFAgX Ep 559 | An Athiest's Take on Christianity & The Power of Truth | Guest: James Lindsay https://apple.co/3HghXXm Ep 639 | The Queerification of American Kids | Guest: James Lindsay https://apple.co/3h5laOO Ep 652 | The Left’s ‘Don’t Say Groomer’ Policy https://apple.co/3Fd29lu Ep 548 | Social Credit Scores, Joe Biden & the Great Reset | Guest: Justin Haskins https://apple.co/3FBrMy4 --- Links: Daily Mail: "American Girl is accused of 'stripping away all innocence' in book that teaches children as young as THREE how to change gender by asking doctors for puberty blockers" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11509601/American-Girl-accused-stripping-away-innocence-book-teaches-girls-change-gender.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=social-twitter_dailymailus --- Christmas Merch: Use code ALLIE20 for 20% off the whole shop! Full collection: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey?sort_by=created-descending#MainContent --- Buy Allie's book, You're Not Enough (& That's Okay): Escaping the Toxic Culture of Self-Love: https://alliebethstuckey.com/book Relatable merchandise – use promo code 'ALLIE10' for a discount: https://shop.blazemedia.com/collections/allie-stuckey

Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort.

We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. American Girl promotes puberty blockers to three-year-old girls. Yes, you heard that right. So at the top of this episode, I have a very, let's say, passionate response to them about this. And then also we are talking to James Lindsay.

We're talking about the dangers that he sees in social, emotional learning curriculum in schools. Also, the whole OK groomer thing that got him kicked off Twitter, what that was like. And also, we will be dissecting the philosophy and ideology and theology behind struggle sessions, specifically white fragility, racial struggle session. So all of this and much more on this episode of Religious. of Relatable. It's brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers. They've got a great deal for you going on right now this month at Good Ranchers.com. Use promo code All right. Before we get into that conversation with James Lindsay, I just wanted to react to, to respond to this

unbelievable American Girl story. I saw it this morning and I knew that I had to say something about it at the top of this show. Let me read you of this headline and then I'll let you know what I think. This is from Daily Mail. American Girl is accused of stripping away all innocence in a book that teaches children as youngest three how to change gender by asking doctors for puberty blockers. So you might recall growing up, American Girl had these books that they would put out about how to take care of your female body and what it meant to go through puberty,

to become a woman, to start your period, all of these things. I don't remember reading these books myself, but I think I had friends who did, and some of you have reached out to me and told me that you read these to your daughter growing up and that they were really good. They were really just about taking care of yourself and being happy about your femininity, everything that makes you a girl, everything that turns you from a girl into a woman. These are very awkward years. These can be very self-conscious, insecure years. And so these books were a way to support girls. and to show them that it's okay. It's good to be a woman. It's good to be a girl. These are not things to be ashamed of. These are bodies that we are supposed to take care of, that we are supposed to steward that we are supposed to be grateful for. That's a good thing. That really was what American girl was about. To let girls know that it's good to be a girl, that girls have value, that girls bring a lot to the table. That's what their book series were about. Not just this kind of book that taught girls what it means to, grow up and grow into a woman, but they're historical fiction books that had girls from different eras, and they would have a series about that girl and all of the different experiences that she had. And they were really good. I had a lot of those books growing up. I was a voracious reader growing up,

and I would read the books about Molly, the books about Josefina, the books about Samantha, the books about Felicity. I loved them all. The books about Addie. And I had a few of their dolls. just a really fun and innocent thing to be a part of. It was a good entity as far as I know and as far as I can remember for girls. And yet American girl, just like every corporation almost and nearly every institution has now been taken over by the malignant cancer that is progressivism. And it has now bought into this lie, this dangerous and deadly lie, that it is possible for a person to be born in the wrong body. And that a feeling that you have about your gender trumps biological reality

and that you might have to maim your body in order to fit that feeling, that identification that you have in your heart and your mind and your soul. As we will talk about with James Lindsay, this is a pseudo-religious and superstitious belief. that degrades reality, that dismisses reality, that degrades the body, and it has lifelong consequences. So American girl went from telling girls that your body is good, that you were given a good body at something to care for, to then encouraging girls to go on puberty blockers. So let me read you a little bit about this as reported by the Daily Mail. The popular American girl doll brand is facing backlash for pushing children as

youngest three years old into changing their gender. Yes, this is a book that is marketed for ages three up. As a mom of a three-year-old, I cannot tell you how angry that fact alone makes me. So I know toddlers at this point. I have lots of nieces and nephews and then I also have two toddlers of my own. and I see that they are constantly trying to make distinctions between things. They are constantly trying to put things into their proper context. They are constantly trying to identify things, including human beings.

Oh, that's a mommy. That's a daddy. That's a man. That's a woman. That's a girl. That's a boy. That's two girls. That's two boys.

I see how important that is to their development. To put things into categories, the world is really big, really chaotic and really confusing to all of us, but to especially children, to which everything is new. And so they are trying to make their world smaller, to make more sense, to make themselves feel safer and to really understand everyone and what's going on, who poses a threat, who's not, who can they familiarize themselves with, what can they understand, what's still confusing to them. This is vital for their development, not just their understanding of the world, but their

understanding of themselves. because they're not just trying to put other things and other people into their proper categories to make sense of everything, but they are also trying to put themselves in certain categories to make sense of themselves, to orient themselves in a very big, very chaotic, very confusing world so some things can just make sense to them. It is important for their sense of self, for their understanding, for their development, to know what the difference is between male and female, what makes someone a girl or a boy, what they are, that it's something that they can look at and rely on, and not something that they are responsible for deciding themselves based on what they may feel that day.

And by the way, kids at that age get pronouns wrong all the time. They get male and female wrong just based on whether they're being silly in that moment or whether they just got confused or just whatever. I mean, because they're three years old. They're babies. Their brains are barely developed. Our frontal lobe doesn't even get developed until we're 25. We can't even expect most adults to figure out this stuff and yet we're putting it on children.

Purposely, and it is for the purpose of grooming. Don't let anyone tell you differently. You do not talk to a three-year-old about switching their gender and one day possibly may mean their body because of a feeling that they have in their mind unless you are grooming them toward a particular outcome. It's not about inclusion. It's not about compassion. It's not about representation.

All of these, again, we will talk about with James, are manipulation tactics to get you to comply so that your son or daughter will be led down a path of permanent sterility and of being a slave to the medical industrial complex so that they will rely on not just this ideology, but the fake science and all the people who are making money off of it for the rest of their lives. It is to so confusion. God is not a God of confusion as we read.

God is a God of peace. Satan is the author of confusion. This is the opposite of love. This is the opposite of caring for your body. Like this is the opposite of compassion and true empathy. This is hate. This is confusion. Let me read a little bit more.

about this. It's called, because every time I read something about it, it just makes me angry enough to say something. It's called a smart girl's guide body image contains, a smart girl's guide body image contains lines that give advice to prepubescence on how to change their gender without their guardian's blessings. Parents have since slammed the book's contents as deceptive and dangerous as we should. A passage in the book marketed to girls aged between three and 12 advises if you haven't gone through puberty yet, quote, unquote, quote, the doctor, and then quote again, the doctor might offer medicine to delay your body's change is giving you more time to think about your gender identity. That is misinformation.

That's not what puberty blockers do. The effects of puberty blockers can be permanent because guess what? There is a reason, a scientific, biological reason why every human body goes through puberty. It's not just, it's not like arbitrary. It's not an accident. It's not something that you can just take on or off. It's not a button that you can. press. It is necessary, not just for your body's development, not just for your lifelong health, but for the maturation of your mind. And again, I will pose this question, what kind of group benefits from locking young children in perpetual adolescents? Ask yourself, what perverts like that? Who wants to stop a group of people from growing up, from developing mentally, from developing

bodily. Ask yourself who benefits from that. Yes, all of the doctors who are making money off Leupron and things like that. But tell me what other group of people might like that, might find some kind of pleasure in that kind of thing. Halting your puberty will probably lead to lifelong infertility, depending on how long it goes on, depending on if you later go through the cross-sex hormone situation, process. And so they are encouraging girls, hey yeah you know what you might be born in the wrong body oh yeah you don't want to develop those breasts you don't want to look more like a woman let's let's put you on some medication uh to see if we can halt that because this might all be a mistake it might not be so good to be a girl that's what

american girl company is saying the book pinned by resident american girl author mel hammond is currently available on shelves and bookstores across the country and on the company's website the release of the book comes amid a wave of increasingly woke content from the American Girl brand. Earlier this year, its parent company Mattel recently put a transgender Barbie doll on the market. No, it didn't. And here's what I mean by that. There's no such thing as a transgender Barbie. There is male.

There is female. And then there is confusion. Then there is chaos. Then there is identification of something other than what you actually are. So they may have tried to market a transgender Barbie. which is absolutely destructive. But you'll never be able to accomplish something like that. I guarantee if you handed that Barbie to your average, like two or three year old,

they're going to call it what it looks like because that's what kids do. That's what they're supposed to do. Part of the book reads, parts of your body may make you feel uncomfortable and you may want to change the way you look. One excerpt deemed problematic by parents online reads before asserting that's totally okay. It goes on to advise children. You can appreciate your body for everything. It allows you to experience and still want to change certain things about it.

On the very same page, the book promotes the use of puberty blockers telling girls to seek them out from their doctor if they feel confused about their gender but are not physically ready to undergo hormone therapy. So we just jumped immediately from, you know, what it was 20 years ago, girls are too fat. You need to stop eating. You need to go on a diet as soon as you go through puberty. You need to change your body to look stick thin. it's not good to have hips.

You can't have any curves at all, except for when you turn 16, you're supposed to be like a decop, but you have to have hips like a nine-year-old boy. So we went from that unrealistic expectation telling girls that your body will never be good enough. You'll never really be thin enough to where we are now is that it might not be good to be a girl at all. So like we had no progress. We think we're making progress, but we're not. We're still teaching girls that their body is. not good, that they need to make changes to it in order to try to conform to what they think

that their body should be. 20 years ago was American girl also telling girls, hey, if you don't like your body, you can just stop eating. Hey, if you don't like how your hips are too big, maybe you can just binge and purge a little bit. Tell me why this is different. Well, I think we know why it's different because it is a sort of religion to them, but functionally it's not. In substance, it's not. So parents are slamming this. The author of the bug Hammond lists her pronouns in her LinkedIn profile, of course. She earned a master's to green children's literature at Kansas State, where she says she said he'd misplaced in giant food in picture books. So that's what our universities are producing and are developing. Parents take back, send back the doll,

the products, the books that you got from American Girl. Do not gift your children this for Christmas. Do not spend another scent here. I understand your nostalgic. I do. So am I. I would have love to introduce my kids to this. Like, I would have love to have given an American Girl doll to my kids. I learned a lot. I learned a love of reading from this stuff. I liked my dolls. I had a look-alike doll. She was a little cheerleader, American Girl Doll that I had when I was little. I understand the nostalgia. I understand the just longing for things to be how they used to be and to just kind of push this stuff to the side and say, you know what? I think we can still go to Disney.

I think that we can still buy American Girl Doll books. I think that we can still, you know, shop at the places that are actively working against the well-being and the safety and the security of our children. I think it's fine. and look, it's not the same as it used to be. And I understand we can't boycott everything. I don't boycott everything. We do the best that we can. But I think that this is a clear one.

They're telling your girls that they can cut off their breasts and become something that they will never be. They are pushing infertility, sterility in your children. And guess what, parents, this author and the employees at American Girl are not going to be the ones there to pick up the pieces when your daughter is reeling from. and dealing with the confusion and the destruction that this idea has wrought in her life. They're not going to be there when she's recovering from her mastectomy when she is 17 years old. They're not going to be there when she mourns her infertility when she's 25. They're not going to be there when she has surgery after surgery, doctor's appointment after doctor's appointment because changing your gender through surgery

never really works. They're not going to be there to pick up the pieces of her depression when she realizes that she maimed her body for nothing. You are. You're going to be the one holding her hand. You're going to be there. You're going to be the one who is comforting her. And you have to be the one now to tell her what is true. Someone is always going to be discipling your kids. Always. Someone is always looking to win over their hearts and minds. Parents, it is our job to be that person. It is our job to disciple our kids. It is our job, our obligation from day one to tell them what is good and right and true,

to insist upon it and to make sure that before they get out into the world and they greet all of this confusion and chaos and these deadly lies that they have a foundation of truth and of love. And one of the best and easiest things that you can do is tell your kids, it's good to be a girl. It's good to be a boy. God made you with purpose. Your body is good. We all go through times of confusion and insecurity, but who you are made is not an accident. It is purposeful. And it's something to be grateful for and celebrate. American girl, shame on you. Shame on you. I hope you lose so much money. This is great. grooming behavior. This is perverted. This is predatory. Yes, this is pedophilic. And you deserve all of the

backlash you're about to get. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort, we ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this

T-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. James, one of my favorite guests. Thanks for coming back and joining us. How are you doing? I'm pretty good. Pretty good. Yeah. It's been busy. You got back on Twitter. Yeah, back on Twitter. That's a nightmare. Yeah. Yeah.

How does it feel being back? Well, I didn't want to come back. You didn't? No, I didn't, actually. I got kicked off, you know, back in August. And I was almost immediately, I thought, you know, wow, it felt like I got splashed in the face with cold water. And it wasn't like you're wasting your life, like a lot of people talk about. No, I was very effective on Twitter.

And so I didn't feel like I was wasting my life. But I felt like it's not the best way to do it. the things that are done through Twitter. Yeah. It's Twitter or social media in general, in my opinion, are not a good way to have the public conversation. They are the new public square by matter of fact or structure or whatever, but they're not a good way to have a public conversation.

In fact, they're terrible. Yeah. And so I was kind of like relieved. I did get to feeling a little bit lonely after a couple of months. I felt disconnected. I didn't know what was going on. There's this thing. Maybe you're not a big fan of Chris Hitch.

Christopher Hitchens from back in the day, but when he was dying, he started writing these things about mortality when he got cancer. And one of the things that he said, and I thought it about it a lot when I was kicked off Twitter is when you're going to die, it's not that the party that's ending that upsets you. It's that you know that the party will most assuredly go on without you in it. And, you know, I got that feeling. It was weird. I got kicked off. I got eulogized. I read eulogies.

I got called free speech martyr. You got kicked off for the groomer thing. For the groomer thing. Yeah. And before we even talk about getting kicked off, let's back up a little bit. Most people know where the okay groomer came from. But tell us like how you came up with that and what you were actually, what you were actually labeling groomer behavior that thing got you booted.

Okay. So yeah, I actually did my first okay groomer tweet to somebody. And it was actually just some random, like, anonymous person, like being snarky at me or something, the first one. And then I realized it's resonant memetic quality and kind of stuck with it. I think it was... And it comes from OK Boomer. That's right. That was the meme that from a few years ago, making fun of baby boomers for being baby boomers.

That's right. So it was like October of 21. And, you know, we all remember from whatever previous election, the perky little girl dancing around with her Bernie shirt saying, Okay, boomer, okay, boomer. And it's just so evil and how dismissive it is. Yeah. You know, it doesn't matter what a boomer says. You say, okay, boomer.

And then that just means you're old, I don't care about your opinion. Bye. Yeah, I always did think it was rude. And there's been a number. It's like, okay, Karen. It's the same thing. It is. It's like your age or your gender or your race, especially when it comes to Karen, if you're a white woman,

then no matter what you say, no matter how legitimate your complaint is, it's, dismiss sarcastically. No, you're just in the person who complains box or you're just in the old person who doesn't get it box. And in this case, I realized that, you know, I understand that one of the things that leftists absolutely can't stand more than any other thing is being dismissed. Because all they do is play these complicated word games, you know, you're a woman, I'm a man, this isn't hard, but they have to write thousands of pages to explain why that's not sufficient. So they have to be taken seriously. So something that dismisses them actually, really cuts to the core. Plus, they're grooming in a variety of ways kind of at once,

which gives it accuracy and lexical ambiguity. So, I mean, I don't think that I masterminded this okay, Groomer response, but I said it, and as soon as I said it just flippantly to this person who smarted off to me, which is a thing I do on Twitter, I realized kind of all of its memetic qualities very, very quickly because people went berserk also. And I think I I got threatened to get kicked off a Twitter for it, like, very quickly. I started getting the, you know, German law says you didn't break any laws, emails, like, right away. Yeah. And so I apparently used it something like 700 times by the time they kicked me off for it because the human rights campaign did an analysis and, like, counted all my tweets or something.

Oh, my gosh. Absolutely obsessive. I mean, very communist behavior. Let's count their tweets, make a list, you know, the whole thing. But what was I calling grooming? There are a number of things, but primarily I was thinking of this weird combination of ideologically grooming people or brainwashing people into a certain way of viewing the world. And then the fact that that view of the world contains explicitly queer theory and thus sexual topics. And so that's where that lexical ambiguity comes in.

It means something that they're definitely doing regardless of their sexual intents, which is grooming kids into an ideology. And then simultaneously, it sticks because they're grooming kids into sexuality, which is at least, you know, if we were to lay out the eight or ten steps to grooming a child, whatever those would be. And I think I've seen such lists of how the process works. I think I've read them on this show, but I don't have them in front of me. I mean, it's like definitely at least hitting one, two, and three or something like that. You're building trust, separating from family. Yeah, exactly. Talking to them about private things, making things that were.

previously private and previously taboo out in the open to condition them to more comfortably talk about things like sex and genitalia and relationships with adults and to not just separate them from parents but make their parents seem like an entity that they shouldn't trust. That's right. They're the enemy. That's right. And we're your friend. That's straight groomer behavior.

And that's every dystopian novel. That's one aspect of it, except whether it's Brave New World. whether it's 1984 separating kids from parents and creating an enmity. Yeah. So there's a lot of reasons that it would stick. And there's a lot of, it's very memetic also. Okay, Groomer. And then like I said, it dismisses them.

And they really, really don't like to be dismissed. And I. Why do you think that is? Like, what is it about leftism that that, okay, groomer bothers them? It seems like even more than people calling them straight up predators because people have been calling, you know, some of these left-wing activists that for a while, but the okay groomer really set them off. Why? Well, I think, A, because it's very memetic, so they understand sort of how- It's catching on. Yeah, people, it's quick, it's easy. But the dismissiveness thing is really

irritating to them. Like I said, they write thousands of pages to justify something you could explain as stupid in a sentence. You know, I even had this, I went to a talk. That's right. I went to this talk recently. You know, the meme where the, it was like the leftist with like the huge blurry wall of tiny, tiny letters. And then there's the Chad character with a golden beard. And he's like, I'm not reading that. I had that experience in real life. I gave a talk at Iowa State and this woman came up. And I had mentioned apparently this Marxist professor and it was her doctoral professor. And so she came up very upset. But she had this t-shirt on with like a paragraph written down the front. You know, she's out in the audience. I'm sitting on standing there on stage.

And she's like, as you can, this is how she started, as you can probably read by my t-shirt. I don't agree with you or something. And the first thing that came to my mind was, Lady, I'm not reading all that. Yeah. But that's what it is, is they have, they're trying to justify unreality through words. So they have to use lots of words.

But the second, this is why that meme works, the second you cut through it and just don't take all their jibber, jabber seriously, they're lost. They don't have anything except words describing nonsense. And when you refuse it, they have only more words. So they have to pull you into taking them seriously. And this is how they ensnared. And their words don't have substance.

That's also why it's either dismissive or definitions. Like those are the two tactics that you can use that really make them mad. That's right. It's okay, grumer, or what do you mean by X? Either of those things really piss them off because they don't really have an answer. That's right. It's really a lot of empty words. And this is how, I mean, this is how they construct their false reality that they have to pull

everybody into. And so if you just don't participate, they can't ensnare you in, you know, what has been described in some philosophy before. I'm starting to use this terminology as the wizard circle. It's like they're casting a linguistic spell and trapping you in it. Now, the other reason they can't stand it is, of course, it's very damaging to be identified as a groomer, except if you're not one, right? Of course, you can just more or less brush that off if it's false, but the fact is it's true in many ways at once, but not. necessarily everywhere. And it's really like provocative to say this, but there is a sense where if we accept their definitions, which we shouldn't in general, but they are bound by them in some sense of

structural reality, right? That the left for a very long time has been structurally pedophilic. And I mean that, that you have the postmodern philosophers signing the statement to get rid of age of consent, all of them signing it, these hard leftists. All of the queer theorists of the 60s and 70s that you and I have talked about, pedophilia is an out in the open part of their ideology and their new ideas. That's right. One of the key arguments of the first official paper designated as queer theory, which is thinking sex from Gail Rubin in 1984, is that child porn is a panic. There shouldn't, like it shouldn't be criminalized. That cross-generational sexual encounters is something that we shouldn't be looking down on. it's been there. And so even the ones who aren't actually involved in this are in their phrasing, as they might have it, you know, creating a system or a structure that supports and defends and enables that to carry on despite its harms, which is how they think of how reality is constructed with racism and sexism and trans, whatever, classes, everything's structural. Well, it turns out that the system that they defend with queer theory kind of at its dark heart is structurally pedophilic. And that goes back. I mean, we could say it goes. back to Plato, but we're going to get real controversial to do that. But this is something that you

could make an argument. And so they can't, like, they can't just brush it off of them. Yeah. Where they've come at me for weeks now, they're doing it to everybody now on Twitter. They're okay, Groomer. They're trying to like use it backwards, which is funny because in a sense, it doesn't stick to anybody but them. And right wing or conservative or just normal people don't care who the groomer is left or right. They just don't want groomers. So if some conservative gets caught. I don't care if it's in the Catholic Church. I don't care if it's someone on the, it doesn't matter to me. I don't care if it's Kanye West defending Blenciaga or Kim Kardashian. It's all wrong. Yeah. Yeah. And so, but it sticks to them and they can't get it can't brush it off.

Yeah. And so it's, I mean, it's, I think done major, they're proving, I think, right now that it's done major damage. They kicked me off a Twitter. They literally celebrated this. I mean, the one who made the call to get me kicked off Twitter, a trans activist in New York, apparently, I mean, apparently did tweet. you know, I can't do the quote from Game of Thrones exactly, but it's like, I want James to know it was me or whatever, or tell James I want him to know what was me, whatever the quote from, you know, riffing off of that. And then when I got back on, these people went berserk and directly said that they were going to hound me off of Twitter

by harassing me and by making, if I'm going to be back on, they're going to make my experience and they're so miserable that I don't want to be there and I'll leave. And it's kind of funny because, like, I don't want to be there anyway. So now I'm having to like retool my psychology because they can play into that. Right. The fact that I already didn't want to be there. Yeah.

Yeah. I want to talk a little bit more in a second about like we talked before. The camera started rolling that this has been a rough couple of weeks. I'm guessing that has something to do with it. It does. Yeah. Well, I mean, it's also just been a busy month. Yeah.

With abnormal stresses. Yeah. So one thing like for example, I'm leaving to go to Phoenix this afternoon and I've got a workshop that I'm doing on kind of the esoteric religious aspects of all the woke stuff. So I'm really, you know, at the front edge of what I'm researching and understanding. So I've spent a lot of time trying to put this together. But two, three weeks ago, whatever it was, it turns out I got invited to do a debate about woke at the Oxford Union. So I'm flying across the ocean, doing the whole thing.

And that I put some time and effort into preparing. So in other words, I didn't prepare any for these workshops. So it's just this weird time on the calendar where I have this massive weighty thing. I just had a book come out yesterday. I've got all these kind of big things hitting at once. And then simultaneously get led on Twitter, which is the most distracting place on Earth. And got hit with like a massive struggle session, which even if you can like I can unplug and set it aside, that doesn't matter. But it's very like you know what's going on.

And people are writing articles about. it and it's like I couldn't quite get away from it because people were sending it to me and I'd open my Twitter and just kind of staring at shock. Yeah, let's talk about what that is. If you're okay with that. Like what, so there was accusations of you like taking a picture with some kind of like sexual predator or something. I saw that George Tikai was even. George Takai, yeah. Yeah. So basically they're saying, oh, the person who accuses the left of being groomers, he's actually with a groomer. So like what was that? What was that? What

on? So I got invited to, just to tell the story, because I put it on Twitter, normally they're trying to struggle session me into telling the story. So normally I would say I can't tell the story. And then I look all evasive. And so the goal is, of course, to separate people. They want to separate people and not trust me. They want people to not trust each other who are, you know, friends or fans or whatever it happens to be. But I told the story on Twitter later on a Friday night right after Elon Musk said he was going to tell everything about Twitter. So there was a distraction. But it's there. And I've actually recorded a podcast of my own that'll come out sooner or later about it.

But the long and short is there's this event. It's called The Better Discourse Event. They did these things, these shows, these debate shows in Fort Worth. They've done a number of them, usually two a year. These are great people as far as I know. Good friends of mine. They've supported me. And I'm talking about a group called Myth Informed Milwaukee.

And so they host it. And they're friends with a woman named Nikki Klein. Nikki Klein was on Battlestar Galactica. This is, I think, the, and it's just a character I kind of knew on Twitter. And at the first time, I went to one of their things, this was the extent of what I knew, met Nikki. Okay, cool. Somebody I kind of recognized from Twitter. We hung out, you know, at the event in the green room.

It was kind of a big public green room with food. There's usually 20 or 30 people back there involved with the event hanging out, carrying on, whatever. We got along. She was nice. She's a somewhat private person. I don't know anything about her life. We're at an event. But then I come back to the event again.

The six months later, the next one, which was in April this year. And I found out that she was in this Nixium sex cult thing. Yeah. Which I had never heard of. It's like in XIVM, the notorious multi-level marketing company turned sex cult. I had never heard of this until they started seeing these accusations. Apparently, this was a big deal. I don't watch TV.

I haven't watched television since 2003. if it's some like thing that blew up in pop culture unless it's directly related to like woke stuff, I don't know anything about it. And I wasn't even like paying attention to stuff like that whenever that was. So I had no idea what it was. So I got told she's involved in this and I'm like, all right, whatever. And we come back to the event. We're hanging out again. She's just this person who's there and nice and we have, you know, rapport. And we were going around and it turns out that I took a picture with a friend of mine, this guy, Colin Wright, he swipe right on Twitter. Twitter. We have like this kind of long story. He wrote me this kind of he was in college, a PhD, he was doing his PhD. And he wrote me this kind of long, like stressed out email. And I was like, you should publish this. And I helped him work it up. And he rewrote it, submitted it to Quillette. That was his first published essay. Now he's like a great resource on all of this. He's a biologist on all this queer theory, sex gender stuff. He's really doing a great job. Yeah. And so I hadn't, I'd worked with this guy. for like three years. I hadn't met him in person. And so we met in person. And so we're playing

around and just like being silly and getting to know each other. And we're sitting in these beanbag chairs doing the iconic man spread thing from my profile picture, which is my like running joke, which by the way, it's a self-effacing joke. Yeah. People don't even know that when that picture was taken, I was making fun of myself for an event in which I had done it. And I saw the video and was like, oh my gosh. I'm so embarrassing. And so I like making my point. Because of how you're sitting. And then there are people though on Twitter who like, legitimately criticize you for it. There's like, there's no reason for you to sit like that. I'm literally, in the instant when I was being taken, I was literally making fun of myself.

Yeah. In front of a crowd sitting on the exact same spot to just add flavor to the story where Winston Churchill gave his first public talk. And so here I am manspreading like a fool, making fun of myself. And somebody took a picture. I made it my profile picture and laughed. And then it became this kind of like running joke. So I took one with Colin and, you know, I said something like I taught him everything he knows and put it on Twitter. And then Nikki was standing there. Like, we're all just kind of around. And I was like, you know, we should take one and you should say, you taught me everything I know.

And she being a woman and man spreading, ha, ha, ha. And she was wearing pants. So, okay. And so we sat in two chairs, took a picture. Everybody's all, like, accuses me all these things. The guy that took the picture is gay, like, very gay. And like, it's like, we're all buddies and just hanging out backstage. But we're like, whatever.

And she. put the picture up with Totem everything I know. And then within about an hour, she was like, that was probably a bad idea. Do you know what's going on? I was like, I don't even want to know. And because she was connected with this thing. Now, of course, she's been, you know, convicted of nothing. I knew that there was a connection, but I don't know what it is.

She pled guilty to racketeer, or her wife, I guess she's a lot of Span, pled guilty to racketeering and racketeering conspiracy in 2020, I guess, because of this sex cult. Yeah, this cult thing is a constant. complicated story in its own right. I barely know what it is. I don't know if they were grooming adult women to join the cult. I don't know how that works. It's not my business. Yikes. Have I ever talked to you about your sex life? No. You usually don't talk to people about their sex lives when you're like, hey, it's the second time I met you. Tell me about your... So you just didn't know. You know that she was involved in this. I knew she was. I just didn't know what it was and didn't care because we're at an

event and we're just nice people being nice to each other. Like, and I don't actually, I mean, I've heard her side of the story, which is that the really disgusting charges against the guy that ran the thing, which is this Keith Renier guy, are the result of planted evidence by the FBI, from which I understand some of this has come to light is probably true, although I'm not, it's not a story I keep up with. It's not like, it's not what I do. I'm too busy reading books that are the worst books in history instead to keep up with this. So it's like I kind of knew. I didn't know what it did if that matters.

But this is a person that was nice to me. We were being nice. We had rapport. We read the same thing. We took a picture making an obvious joke. And what it is is that the left has nothing on me. And so they have to sink their teeth into the closest thing they can. And it's actually not really about me.

I tested this. I actually, when they were going berserk to see what happened, I ran into Roger Stone at an event also, which I didn't even know who he was, but somebody's like, that's Roger Stone. Go get a picture with him. I was like, is that a good idea? Okay, whatever. And I just walked up to him and, you know, he's like, hey, I'm Roger. What's your name? And I was like, I'm James. He's like, what did you do? Because I didn't do nothing. And I thought that was kind of funny. And we took a picture and I put it on Twitter during the whole mess. And I was like, hey, look, leftist. I took a picture with somebody else. They didn't talk about it. They've never touched it. never even like Roger Stone, right? And there's one of their super boogeymen. And then all they care about is discrediting the OK Groomer. So they've proven in my opinion, I've did some experiments here.

They've proven in my opinion that all they want to do is discredit my use of OK Groomer and thus OK Groomer itself because it's not me they care about. They don't care about people at all. They care about narratives. They care about linguistic control. And OK Groomer is really messing up their project. Okay. So they think that they're trying to point out some kind of hypocrisy in the same way that if, I don't know, if someone, like I'm sure that Obama has talked about like the dangers or the evil of anti-Semitism, but he has a picture with Louis Farrakhan, who is one of the worst perpetrators of anti-Semitism. So I guess they're trying to do something like that.

Yeah, they're trying to, well, yeah, I mean, they're also just trying to harass me off the platform. I mean, I don't know, because a lot of people just don't see it. And it's, you see your notifications and other people don't see. most of your notifications. Although people that tried to interact with any of my threads on Twitter saw this because I don't know the actual number, but I would guess that they posted this picture or a screenshot of this picture where the extra leftist added words of, you know, violent sinuation over 100,000 times in about a week. Every time I opened my Twitter, if I looked at my notifications, 48 out of the top 50 things would be that person deserves a block. And then I have all these people, just block them and ignore them. I'm like, I spent 12 hours one day just blocking people and couldn't keep up. There is no just block them and ignore them. I wasted an entire day,

and then I gave up on blocking them after that, trying to block people, because in the past, it's actually stem the tide, but they're hellbent on getting me to hate Twitter so much or hate social media so much that I leave, which it's funny that if I end up leaving Twitter, it will have nothing to do with them but as frankly I'm like maybe the only person in right wing spaces right now but I don't trust what Elon Musk wants to do with it

I'm glad he's opened it I want the free speech I think it's a necessary thing I just had a great talk with Charlie Kirk about that the other day and I think it will be transformational but he said he wants to turn it into Wii chat is how they ensnared China do not trust I don't even know what that is We chat's your one-stop shop

It's basically something like Twitter, Facebook, it's its own social media thing, plus Signal, plus TikTok, plus your bank. Yeah. All your financial transactions. It's like your one-stop shop. Like most places, last time I went to China, which was in 2019, it was most places, like if you go to somewhere, not like a small little shop or a tourist trap or whatever, but if you went to like the mall and when you go to the mall because it's a trip every time, most. most of the stores only will accept WeChat or Bank of China QR payment or strongly prefer it

or even offer you discounts to use it. So it's like one app to control them all with your identity looped into your bank account to your everything. And you can just imagine. I mean, that's, how does the social credit system stop you from using money? Well, if you can only pay with a QR code in an app,

that's how the social credit system stops you from, using money. And so I'm not worried about it to the degree that some people are, that this is this free speech moment on Twitter is a Maoist 100 Flowers campaign. Have you heard of this? The Bai Hua. So Mao at one point, after he seized power, said China is a place of free speech. We're going to have free speech. We're not going to be like the evil, you know, nationalists, the Guamintang, we're going to do this. Let 100 flowers bloom. And then everybody, you know, at first was like, wait a minute, he's a dictator. And then they started to speak up and he let it go for a year and a half to use.

What are the hundred flowers a metaphor for? Free speech. Okay. Flowers of speech blooming. And what they did was made lists of everybody who was against the government and killed them all afterwards. Right. Yeah.

They actually did this to our military, by the way. And if you said anything wrong, like you mentioned earlier, people might not know or catch this reference, but you mentioned struggle sessions, how people are trying to struggle session you into a confession about that picture, obviously, that comes from Mao's China, as you know, but not everyone. knows, people being tortured and publicly humiliated because they said something wrong or even suspected of thinking something wrong and, you know, tortured them, humiliated them into finally fine, saying two plus two equals five. Yeah, exactly. They did often,

especially as a cultural revolution rolled on, got physically violent. But the point of it is actually guilt and shame. It's to put people in a guilt and shame spiral until they psychologically break. and come over to their side. And a lot of people don't know this, by the way. We don't call them struggle sessions because we look at that and say, wow, they're really making people struggle. We call them struggle sessions because their term for that in Chinese, which they actually use themselves was pi pan do jeng,

which means critical theory struggle session. It literally means to struggle or to wrestle or to grapple with, to be struggled through self-critique and social critique. And so we call them struggling. Sessions because the Chinese literally called them struggles. Right. And we saw it so much, especially after 2020 and George Floyd. I mean, I think the Black Square was a part of the struggle session.

That's right. People apologizing. I bring this up a lot because I'll never forget about this. They're like in the mommy Instagram world, two companies. There was one who is like a sleep training company for babies. And then there was one that makes baby wraps. And both of them were accused in different ways of racism. the sleep trainer because she had donated $1,000 to the Trump campaign,

and then the baby wrap company because they tried to patent a baby wrap that really Africans had, like, developed like a thousand years ago or something like that. Well, the one who donated to Trump decided that she was not going to apologize, that she was just going to say, I'm going to keep doing my job. You can stick around if you want to. You don't have to. And, I mean, she was totally harassed. Her, like, paid for materials, put public so people wouldn't have to pay for them anymore.

And then this other girl over here, she decided to just continue to acquiesce. She did this public apology where she was crying. That wasn't good enough. The activist said, you're making this about you. She tried to do it again, making it nod about her. They said, you know, you're on the right path, but you're not there yet. You still have to do better, do the work, all of this stuff. She decided not to pursue the patent anymore, which is absolutely ridiculous.

And she, I mean, wasn't better for it. Like, she didn't gain customers for it. she just tried to kind of assuage her guilt. It was exactly a struggle session. They did psychologically break her. She literally confessed in her first apology that she thought about committing suicide. And still the activist said, stop making this about you. You're making yourself a victim.

That is a critical theory struggle session that happened after George Floyd. That is straight out of Mao. If you read about what Mao's prisons, Mao's schools, which I bothered to do, if you actually read about them, it's exactly what they're talking about. First of all, they called struggle sessions a form of helping you. They were helping you want to confess and helping you want to see your life from the position of the people or the oppressed, as we would update it into, you know, out of Chinese communist language and into, you know, the modern pedagogy of the oppressed kind of woke. And so they were, it's all, you're making it about you. You're not seeing this from the position of the oppressed who are being injured first.

by you re-centering yourself and your needs. That's the idea. And we're helping you see the proper perspective, what they called in China, Renmin Li Chong, which is the people's standpoint, which is the communist standpoint, of course. And then as this progresses,

when they break you and you start to confess, you actually start to see yourself as guilty. You don't just feel it. From what the, the way the prisoners in Mao's prisons described it, you know that it's not true, but you kind of believe it. And you're in this weird, brainwashed dual space.

where you believe it and don't at the same time. Very double-think, very 1984, very psychologically broken. And then when you start to do it and you go far enough down, their confession, apology, break, apology, the whole thing, give up your business road. Then you get to start what they call Shuihi in Chinese, which is study. That's where they start telling you, you need to do better, you need to read the books. Here's this book. Here's that book.

Here's this book. And you start reading the brainwashing literature after they've made you psychologically vulnerable and absolutely desperate for relief from the psychological abuse and social abuse they're putting you through. Because the goal is to make you feel like it's not possible to be liked by your social group any longer, to be respected by your social group. And therefore, for you to start to internalize, maybe it's me. Maybe there's something actually wrong with me. Maybe I actually did commit a crime.

Maybe I did do a cultural appropriation. Maybe I did center my own feelings. And they're trying to make you internalize that guilt and that's, shame so that you'll become psychologically vulnerable, at which point, if they believe that you're deep enough into it, immediately they're going to give you some cult indoctrination material, white fragility or whatever else. Yep. It is happening not just in the racial sense, but also when you're looking at the sexual

revolution, whatever you want to call it, queer theory. As you said, white fragility basically is a struggle session for white people to basically say, as you've talked about so many times, any kind of refutation. that you might feel towards someone calling you a racist and saying that you're a part of the problem is just evidence of your fragility. That's right. And so it really is a form of psychological breaking.

I mean, it's like you're being like click trained. You know how you click train dogs when they're doing something good or doing something bad? You give them a treat or whatever. I mean, it's like as soon as you have the thought is the white person, well, I'm not racist. Or, well, I didn't do that. Or my parents didn't own slaves or something.

it's like you've got Robin DeAngelo or whoever the activist is on Instagram clicking and say, nope, nope. Or if you say something right, clicking you and saying like, here's a little treat, which comes in the form of like calling you an ally or saying that you're unproblematic or whatever. That's right. It is. It's operant conditioning is what it is. It's operant conditioning achieved through social manipulation and psychological. Yeah, that's right. Virtue signaling is actually the thing that you do to start to get yourself out of it. accuse you of that too. It's the blood over the door, so they'll pass over you. Right. And let me just tell you, there's not enough blood. Yeah. You can't put enough blood on the door. In fact, the people in the prisons lived in constant fear knowing if you, you know, so once you get into the study thing, they let up on the struggle and your time was more pleasant, which by the way

psychologically makes you work even harder at confessing and studying and brainwashing yourself because you're now feeling this weird sense of commitment to this thing that has the power to punish and reward you. They've literally dominated you. And then they, every now and then, you slip up, you make a mistake. And they struggle you again for a couple of days to remind you, by the way, we can throw you right back into that any time. And this is, if you actually look at how the woke treat each other, that's what they do.

That's exactly how they treat each other. Yes. And so this isn't new. Yeah. This is every bit as evil as it always was. Yeah. Its results are everybody's terrible as one can predict. Resisting, it's very hard.

I mean, you gave a great example of somebody who did. You say, you know what? Treat me how you want. I'm carrying on. But the thing is, is if you read about, you know, Mao's environment that he created, the psychiatrist writing the books explains as Robert Lifton is a very prominent one. And he, to quote him, he says, everybody who is subjected to this, it penetrates into their psychology. There is no avoiding the manipulation of social ostracism and shame and guilt and then self-blame.

There is no avoiding it. So these reports like I became suicidal. Yes. This is how it works. And its goal is to lead you into believing the way they need you to believe, even if you believe otherwise at your core. Yeah. You know, I see it. You talked about like the woke screen, the woke that way.

there are some accounts I think one of my favorites is still kicked off Twitter called males of Reddit and it's basically just showing these you know Reddit threads between men who identify as women talking about all of their issues but sometimes they'll put up there like a post by a non-trans person asking a question about transgenderism and you will see like for example maybe it's a story about how there used to be husband who is now transitioning into a wife is like, I don't know, doing something that bothers them or seems really misogynistic or really problematic or perverted or whatever it is, you'll see that as this person is trying to explain their problem and get advice, they are caveating every sentence. Oh, yeah. Well, I'm not

transphobic and I know she's really a woman and I really want to be sensitive to her and I really want her to express her femininity, but I think she raped me last night. Like before they say the egregious thing. They have to cushion everything that they say to try to fend off any, like, criticism because they are trying to avoid the struggle session. They're trying to show, hey, I'm struggling myself. You don't have to struggle me. I'm struggling myself. That's right. When really at the end of the day, they don't really believe that their husband can be a wife. That's what it is. That's the core of the Chinese process is actually to get you to do self-criticism. In fact, it was mandatory in the prisons. And if you weren't doing enough of it, they would

struggle you for you. So they're actually practicing this. In regards to like the Passover illusion, though, it's like you're not painting the blood on the door. You're like spraying it with a fire hose constantly to try to protect yourself. And like I said, there's just not enough blood. You brought up to schools a minute ago. And I want to make kind of really clear, this is what they're doing to our girls in particular, but to our kids, period. They've kind of just dropped boys. Boys are just, just give them Adderall or something and get rid of them, right? girls on the other hand suck their their testosterone drop their testosterone levels yeah well they've achieved that so now they have to destroy girls and perhaps create infertility on the other side um but what are they doing so if you're a basic white girl can you imagine something worse than that so first of all you're listening critical race theory 24 seven about how your race is implicated in all these horrors this all this racism you benefit from racism you're a bad person blah blah you can't get your skin off you as much of you as you might want to at that point.

And so what do they say? Well, you know, it's possible that, you know, there are other gender identities. So they funnel you toward this, this queer theory as your root of escape from the psychological pressure they put on you about race and social pressure they put on you about race. And all your little friends are all bought into this too. So they're struggling. It's mostly, it's not the judges in the Chinese prisons that struggle you. It's your cellmates because they're climbing their way out of prison.

And if they don't struggle you really well, they get. get dropped back down to the bottom and have to start again. And so all their buddies are like, oh, yeah, you don't want to be that, you don't want to be that, blah, blah, blah. Well, so then you say, you know what, you finally cave in and you're like, well, I'm just a tomboy. Well, they've got articles written about the long racist history of tomboys. And so then you say, well, I'm non-binary.

You take that next step. You're not really willing to plunge into trans. You imagine you're a 13-year-old girl getting groomed in this direction. And they, well, that's two. Non-binary was created by white people, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, to reinforce some binary, something, something. they've got a whole line of just bullying and bullying and bullying until really your only escape, and this is what Lifton says about the whole environment of Maoism,

is they put you under outstanding psychiatric and social pressure and then give you a very narrow range of possible responses that always drive you toward what they want. And so what's left is straight up queer identities, like all the way, which they will also force you to recognize as political identities in the correct way, don't count. So there's people are like, oh, they're social contagion. Like I'm thinking, yes, because that happens, bulimia was like the poster case of that. But no, there is an active, driven pump. It's not just contagion. It's like the media and the schools are spraying the infectious agent or it's not even right. It's more like to use another Chinese metaphor, which I've experienced

in my own life. It's like, have you ever seen those videos where they're, because I got to do this, where there are too many people and they're trying to get them on the subway and there are literally people pushing people packing them in like officers like shoving people in to pack more people into the subway it's like that they're pushing people into queer theory jamming them in there until it's just absolutely full by creating awful Maoist social pressures and psychological pressures and we're not talking now about adults who almost all break we're talking about 12 and 13 year old girls in fact that age group that seventh grade eighth grade age group is is absolutely crucial ninth grade because there's a huge transition. Talk to teachers, they'll tell you, sixth graders are all still sweet little kids, seventh graders start getting weird and a little stinky.

Eighth graders are almost all little jerks. And by ninth grade, they're all little bastards, right? That's the progression of those difficult years. And they are capitalizing upon that natural tumult to spin these kids off into orbit and to break them, to destroy them.

It's evil. There's a lot going on. that time you've got hormones. You do have the social aspect of you start wanting to be cool. Mom and dad all of a sudden have no idea what they're talking about. And so you get more influences and more authority from celebrities, from friends, from older friends, from TikTok. And not only are they introduced to this stuff, I also think the early sexualization of kids that is happening, especially girls, through things like TikTok. I think it desensitizes a lot of kids to just it desensitizes them to perversion and to things that really they are not ready to be

introduced to. Correct. They can't think through it yet. No. They can't even logically understand a lot of the stuff that's presented to them. And then along the lines of what you were saying, there's not really an incentive to. What is the incentive for a teenager who, unless, I mean, they've got really just great grounding. And they really have a moral compass.

they're Christians, whatever it is. What is the incentive for a 13-year-olds to say, no, I'm not going to announce my pronouns. I'm not going to be non-binary. There's no such thing as non-binary. Every incentive is to go along to get along. You don't want to get bullied. Who wants to be harassed on top of the bullying and harassment that, you know, has always happened since the beginning of time at this age?

Like who wants to be the different person or in the sense, you know, like a more of a, different. Who wants to go against the grain? Who wants to swim upstream? It's never been cool to do that. It's never been easy to do that. And now it's harder than ever because there are so many social pressures to go along with it. I can't imagine. I'm so glad that we didn't have, I didn't have all of that social media when I was in middle school and high school. I think I would have been crushed in a lot of ways by it. Oh yeah. Absolutely. Absolutely. And this is why what's happening between the social sphere, which is reinforced by the social media apps very, very strongly, the entertainment world. Hi, Disney. Yeah. And then schools. Normally, what you might have is these influences coming in from a maybe social media,

but if we go backwards in time, that's not there. But media, maybe Disney's putting out creeper stuff or whatever, or whoever is. Nickelodeon's making some weird stuff. Normally, the adults acting in Locoparentus at the schools are tamping down on that. And now they're not. They're pretending to spray water on the fire lit in these poor kids souls and they're spraying gasoline instead. Who? The teachers. Oh, yeah. Yeah, the social emotional learning programs which are going to reframe everything through equity, everything through inclusion, everything through sustainability. These programs are designed to feed that. And of course, what do they say is the purpose

of these? We talked about white fragility, right? Just linguistic game, no tricks here. What are some opposites? And I know you're going to be on the spot. What is an an antonym, an opposite of fragility. Strength. Strength or resilience, right? Yeah. What is social emotional learning supposed to teach? Resilience.

So what does resilience mean? Not being fragile. What is being fragile mean? Not accepting your brainwashing. So resilience means accepting your brainwashing in their weird little linguistic universe. Yeah. In the same way that you just said, like equity doesn't actually, equity means inequity when it comes to progressivism.

Well, this is what it means. Let me just, because I do this on stage. a lot now and it works every time, which is amazing. I took a big risk the first time I did it. I thought I'm going to fall on my face. But I just did it. I was like, all right, I'm going to define a word for you and I want you to tell me what word I've just defined. This is the definition. An administered political economy in which shares are adjusted so that citizens are made equal. And every single time the crowd yells some combination of mostly socialism, a little bit of communism, and a little bit of Marxism. That's the definition in the public administration literature for equity. equity is socialism. The only difference is that it takes into account social and cultural property, not just economic property. Yeah. That's it. It is literally the same thing as socialism.

And so they've used this word. That one's not like a tricky rebranding like diversity and inclusion are that mean like inclusion by exclusion, you know, and diversity means everybody thinks the same because they have critical consciousness of what they look like. but they all have critical consciousness so they all think like little robots those are like weird equity is just literally an old word with a new label on it it's just literally

can you take the big socialism pile of poo and put it in the box and put a bow on it but equity really in the real sense like in the biblical sense we read that God is equitable in that he is impartial and so he is

not judging people more favorably because they're poor or because they're rich, et cetera. So in the real sense, in the good sense of equity, we would like for everyone to be equal in the eyes of the law. No one is above the law. You're not given more power just because you have more money or whatever it is.

But they have actually changed that. That's right. Something that used to be universally positive to, okay, we're not talking about equality of treatment or equality of value anymore because you're made in the image of God and given rights by God. Right. We're talking about that everyone, actually, it's the opposite of that. It is we are going to try to ensure that everyone has equal outcomes by treating everyone differently based on your identity. That's exactly right. Differently based on your

class and differently based on what you have. And we are going to be extremely partial based on what we think you have in the form of oppression or privileges to try to get everyone to equal outcomes, what they call equity, what Thomas Soul calls cosmic justice. Right. And so with with the idea of God being perfectly equitable then, what do you have? You have God is going to, whatever inequities we suffer in life through faith, etc., then equity will be achieved in God in the end. So what do we have now? We have people who are like, no, no, no, we'll achieve the equity here. In other words, we're God. Yeah. And that's always what it is. And that's what we've talked about so many times that Marxism is an opposing narrative of the time.

of eternity. It's got its own arc of redemption. It's got its own arc of like making the earth new. It's got its own soteriology, eschatology that opposes Christianity, its own version of salvation, sanctification, and justification that is completely opposite of Christianity. But it's very much a religion in that sense. Well, that's because it's G. And I mean that in the old school, big capital G, not even the Christian, you know, the first century Christian, or cults or whatever. Yes, exactly. Special knowledge, but part of the Gnostic creation myth is that the thing that we call the Creator, God, from Genesis, there's actually a real God behind the scenes, and because of a number of tricks of how the fullness of God, which is the

pleroma, the realm in which this true God exists, the way it works, through a number of, this is their mythology, so bear with me, you end up with the creator that calls himself God in Genesis. actually being the demiurge, which is the architect or the, what's it, artisan. It means artisan in Greek, demiurgos. And so it's the artisan who builds the world, but it turns out he's actually the result of a sin, which is a non-creator, wisdom in this case, Sophia, trying to create when that's outside of her ken.

And so you end up with this evil creator. And so to knock it into the weeds and simplify, they think that the story in Genesis is mostly true as told, except that the thing calling, or recognizes God, is a demon that's created a perfectly evil world as a perfect prison for the souls of men, which are, in fact, identical to the Christ. They are, in fact, the second person of the Godhead. And so they think that God is a demon. and so therefore their redemption arc that we're talking about, their whole program, their whole cult faith is that they have to take the place of God through the special knowledge that there is a real God behind the evil God. And that's how you liberate yourself from the prison is by knowing that enacting it out in the world.

And so you see this kind of in everything they do. So the Marxists saw the bourgeois class as the demiurge. They're the people who have the means of production of society. They're the artisans who build society. So what are we going to do? We're going to overthrow them and do what? Seize the means of production of society, which is a production of society, man, and nature, which it's their duty to complete in their faith.

This is literally just a reinvention of the Gnostic cult hiding God in politics. And that's why everything since Marx has seen large, large numbers of crazy people treating politics as God. I like to say like when leftists talk about separation of church and state or Christo-fascist getting their religion out of politics, it's not because they believe in some, you know, form of neutrality. It's because they simply believe that their religion or pseudo-religion should dominate. They don't check their worldview and their religion at the door before they vote, before they teach, before they engage in the public square, before they legislate. They allow their world. view to dominate everything they do. But as soon as a Christian says, hey, this is what I believe and I believe I should be able to bring my ideas to the table, may the best idea win, all of a sudden that's imposition. That's bigotry. And like we saw an example of this.

This is a recent example. And yesterday I saw that there was a tweet about a restaurant that refused to serve a group of Christians because apparently these Christians, just by nature of being Christian and believing what we do about marriage and sexuality, that they made their employees feel unsafe. This is Metzger Bar and Butchery in Virginia, decided 90 minutes before the event, hey, we're not actually going to cater for y'all even though we agreed to. So you've got that. And of course, that's going to be applauded as a fight against spigotry.

that's the right thing to do. These are employers that are being brave. But then, I mean, you have people like Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cake Shop. You have people like Lori Smith of three or three creative who have had the past decade or so of their lives ruined by people suing them because, not because they refuse service entirely, but because they refuse to convey a particular message that opposes their religious beliefs. And leftists think that this is wrong, that you shouldn't be able to do that, that that's some kind of like theocratic, I don't know, imposition to simply represent your values in the workplace as a Christian. But they literally have no problem fully using the state, the powers of the state, to force you to say what they want you

to say. So the whole live and let live thing was a Trojan horse, I think, to make people accept their religion, to accept their perversions. They're the only ones that are allowed. to impose. It was like everything with these people. There's a genuine let live and let live kind of libertarian impulse. And then there are people who want to manipulate your own values or your society's values in order to impose their view. And this is what Gnostics always do. They infiltrate Christianity. They pervert what Christ's message was or they pervert love thy neighbor or whatever specific thing. And the next thing you know, everybody's wearing a mask and staying at home and not watching, you know, not visiting their parents and all this stuff. And when people die. And it gets

churches are shut down and all this stuff because of love thy neighbor, right? So they get inside and they infiltrate and pervert the message. And they pervert the message also of this, you know, live and let live because what they want to do is they very much want to impose their view because their actual view, if we quote from Hegel, who was in this tradition, and that's, it's complicated. There are lots of strands, strands of the tradition or whatever. But Hegel said he said it not once, but several times in different ways, things like state, is God bestriding the earth, the state is the divine idea as it exists on earth. You know, so they see the state as God.

Why would they see the state as God? Because they think that they have the vision of the true God as Gnostics. So they represent the view of the true God, who they believe they've in some sense had an encounter with. Marxists won't recognize this because they'll say, we don't believe in God. But this is the underlying psychological architecture that they're tapping into from the Gnostic cult. And so what you have as Christians for them is not just, a false god, but a false god that refuses to recognize what it is and therefore poses a massive

threat. But the irony of course is, because the Iron Law of Oak Projection never misses, is that Christians are overwhelmingly promoting something, you know, obviously I'm not going to say it's true because then I would be disingenuous to myself. But they're saying something that resonates with reality overwhelmingly. I was listening to Charlie Kirk talk. That's an interesting way. Interesting way not to say. I know, but anyway, I was listening to Charlie Kirk the other day, and he was talking about how the Bible is a book of distinctions, and what we're dealing with with all this is the obliteration of distinctions, which, by the way, is another esoteric religion. That's right. Which is what light versus darkness is and God versus disorder.

Well, yeah, right. And the hermetic religion's goal, it's the dialectical religion. It's another Gnostic-based thing. It's not the same as Gnosticism. It's a whole thing. I'm not trying to pretend it's complicated. It's just like, this is going to take three hours. I can't explain it.

Yeah, yeah. It's not hard. It's just a lot of people overhistory did weird stuff. Yeah. The hermetic belief, though, is that you arrive back to God by obliterating all distinctions. Yeah. Including the final distinction from God. And so that's how you, that's like a process to get back to it.

Oh, my gosh. That makes me think of so many things. That makes me think of like the female self-help world that really ultimately is trying to obliterate the distinction between you and God. You and a goddess. you are trying to search, you really are, you're getting rid of your toxic relationships, which typically just means your normal marriage, or like your, you know, needy kids, which are just normal kids, or your job or your boss, all these normal demands, you are getting rid of all

those things, all the definitions, all the distinctions, all of the supposed, like, expectations and standards that the world has put on you to find yourself and inside you'll find this, like, beautiful inner goddess. So that is ultimately a really. raising the distinction between you and God, thinking that it's going to make you happy. It's to get back, it's to get back, remove all distinctions and get back to pure immediacy,

which is the manifestation of God. That's the concept. But Charlie said the Bible is a book of distinctions, good versus evil, men and woman, et cetera, et cetera. You know,

we could go on and on about different examples. And what he's saying, and I agree with this, regardless of my religious dispositions, is that reality is a reality of distinctions. Like you and me aren't the same. You know, you're not the same as the chair. I'm looking at different furniture around.

You know, we're not, things are different from one another. And all of understanding exists within the distinctions. But that's interesting because- All of understanding exists within distinctions. That is very true. But this is where they get you. Because this is what they always do. They understand it better than you.

That's the trick. And so they have actually, in the German from Hegel, they have first end. That's understanding. We can go back to the Greek, which is Dianoya for Plato, which is kind of technical understanding. It's not identical to technique. It's like the thought process behind technique. So this is a long line of thought.

That's why I invoke Plato. But above Dianoya is epistamé or in Hegel's German, which is knowing. And above Hegel's first stand understanding is for nunft, which is reason, which means they have the higher level understanding. They have the higher level reason that. lets you interpret that lower level understanding. So when I say within distinction, there's understanding, they laugh. Because I've resonated with you and they say, he doesn't know what he doesn't know, is that there's a higher level understanding, which is that I've had, not me personally, they've had an encounter with the divine intellect, not necessarily God, but with the mind of God.

They've tasted or seen the plan. And thus, they have to impose it on all of us because they have it. And so Christianity, the point I wanted to make is that Christianity represents something much, much more true than their lies. And so Christianity poses an extraordinary threat because truth is the great equalizer. It is the actual leveler. It's the thing that says, hey, look, whether by faith or by reason, hey, look, your Gnostic BS is crazy person stuff at best or evil at worst. And so it's either the infestation by a demon or a demon itself. And so you have, we're not going to do that. We're going to, you know, cast that out of our system or out of you if we can to rescue you, et cetera. And that is extraordinarily threatening to them because they see no

distinction between philosophy, science, religion, and politics. It's all just manifestations of their superordinate belief system that can never be wrong. Yeah. And that is exactly why they try to infiltrate Christianity and not just combat it because they really don't have some kind of like apologetic or theological argument against it. It's just that you're wrong. And by the way, you are inducing suicide and violence. And that's also why they call people like me a fundamentalist. We used to know fundamentalists is like the girls who don't wear pants and who don't wear makeup and who aren't allowed to go to school past eighth grade because they're. like father has already arranged their marriage and things like that. That's what we used to know as like fundamentalist and those groups still exist in the United States. But now those people call fundamentalist people who just believe in the Bible. Anyone who believes in the Bible and who believes what Christians have believed for thousands of years is radical. So they will say things like, well, you can be a Christian. It's fine to believe a Christian. You can't just be a fundamentalist

Christian. What they really mean is that you cannot be a Christian, not in any real sense of the word. You can say that you're a Christian. You can't live like it. You can't believe like it. You have to be a secular progressive who simply uses Jesus as your political mascot. Such a good point that you made that they don't make any distinction between politics and theology. It's all the same to them. It's the same.

It's all Presque theology is what they would call it. But yeah, this is what they do is they narrow down the definitions of good sounding words and expand the definition of bad sounding words. So good sounding words like diversity. Now it means this very specific thing that you understand diversity, the way that diversity people teach diversity, right? In other words, you have critical consciousness. They narrow that definition down until there's no variation and no thought. So they capture the good sounding words. And Dr. Bella Dodd was a disaffected communist and said they capture the good sounding words on purpose.

And this is in the 50s that they had most of them already. Then they expand the definition of bad sounding words. So fundamentalist. Now it encompasses everybody who's a Christian. That's a word with negative valence. You know, anti-vaxxer. That's a word with negative valence. Now it's everybody who doesn't want to participate in the same.

They expand these slur. Right. And they create thought terminating cliches is the term that is used for them. When you hear them, it just shuts things down. And it's a magic spell in a sense. But what it boils down to with this is what they're trying to do is separate, if you want to rip from the Bible unfairly, they're separating wheat from chaff the way that they see it. And what that is, if we go back to this hermetic or Gnostic literary,

in the corpus remitum, they explicitly explain that there are men who have access to mind, meaning mind of God, no use with a capital N, in Greek, and then there are men who don't. And they're lesser men. And then Karl Marx turns this into socialist man and regular man. And socialist man understands. I even saw a thing today that you would understand socialism if you understood socialism. And they do this again and again and again. But what they're trying to do is that the people with the bad terms are the people who don't have nose.

They're not Gnostics. They don't have access to the divine mind. And so what they have to do is try to brainwash as many people into having that as possible because they believe that either we all go to heaven together, because there is no heaven. We build the kingdom on earth. We complete God as a human project, not you, not somebody, not individual. That would be, that would be arrogant. That would be hubris.

We as a collective, complete God. So everybody gets on board or else you have to cast them into the Hoypull that's made out of mud or whatever and let them fall into their material, passion, desire, or whatever. And so they have to classify people as things like deplorables. And what that means is people who don't have our view of the world, which is they believe is... You don't have access to the divine special knowledge that we have, which is narcissism. And you actually see that in like very specific terms. You only have a few minutes left. So after I say this, I'm going to transition really quickly. But you see this in a lot of the conversations about

race or oppression, like you talked about the pedagogy of the oppressed, that I, white woman, I can't know, not just because I haven't myself had black experiences, but because I have not inherited the oppression of my ancestors that they have. Like, it's very spiritual, it's very theological. They will say, like, you can't understand this. You can't know this. It doesn't matter if you are factually right about the numbers, about police brutality or the reason why these disparities exist. The facts don't matter. Reality doesn't matter because they would say, I have a special knowledge as a black or brown person, as someone who has inherited this oppression from my ancestors even. They would say that you simply don't have.

So that's why they shut down argument. It's not really about rationality or logic or facts to them. And it's the same thing with gender. I've seen this before and you could probably break it down. Dang it. James, it's always this problem. We need three more hours. But I've seen this. Queer people are divine. Yeah. I've seen that phrase a lot. And it's like they have special knowledge and it doesn't matter. Yeah. They know their gender soul. Yeah. They know who God meant them to be. It's spiritual. And so they're going to remake it in their body. It's literally a religious ritual

and a religion nobody knows exists. I mean it. I mean it's the same thing. I know we probably don't agree on abortion, but like a lot of their reasoning that it's not a human. that's not a factual statement. That's not a scientific statement. That's like a superstitious statement. Right. That's not a human. No, that's totally incorrect. No, you're not totally incorrect. They are totally incorrect. I want to make very clear. It's spiritual. It is definitely a human. They do not. The question's about personhood, which is when do the rights extend. Right. That is the real question. Yeah. And that where we disagree, we disagree thinly, I think. But their claim that you know, the human, they're just wrong, except that the people who don't have noes aren't

human. And that's a whole episode we could do about the weird esoteric literature of the 1920s. I got a podcast coming on on that soon too. I freaked out when I read that stuff. Okay, this is what I want to end on because every time you come on, I'm like, oh, we need to do a whole podcast on that. And yet again, we're not. SEL. So just that's basically what your book is about, the markedification and theft of education. Their titles Marxification of Education, Paula Ferreary's critical Marxism and the theft of education. Okay, let's talk.

I know there's a lot that we could talk about in there, but tell me specifically about SEL because I know that I have a lot of great teachers who are listening, who are conservative, Christians, whatever, who will say, no, SEL is good, we need SEL. Tell me your perspective on that. Break it down for us in five minutes. Yeah, they're getting tricked. They're getting pulled into the, they're getting pulled into the Woods and Circle.

And SEL as a concept can do good, doing social and emotional or even what they call whole child education. By the way, all these Gnostic stuff that's all holistic. That's where that concept comes from. That's where the whole holistically pro-life means that you might be pro-legal abortion, but you need to be like anti-death penalty and like pro-immigration. Holistically always waters down the actual issue. Because it's the hermetic idea. But it's exactly what we're just talking about. That's where it comes from.

but the program of SCL, the reason they can say that is because there are like 20 things going by the name SCL. And so they sell by the better ones and implement the bad ones. And your teachers that you know are probably not doing anything particularly evil, though they might be doing some that they don't realize because it can be subtle. But the goal of social emotional learning is to manage the social and emotional learning and well-being of children, which there's an open question, should the school do that? You can say, well, some kids, yeah, but should it be doing with all kids? If you have a, you know, if you can get a diagnosis and whatever,

we could say that that would be different for some kids, but should it be doing it for all kids? Is it the school's job? You can tell that the SEL people are BSing because they say, well, SEL's been happening as part of education all the time anyway. We're just doing it in an organized fashion. But what they're funneling it toward is what's called systemic SEL, which is kind of what my book talks about,

the Marxification of Education talks about how education is stolen. Systemic SEL is built off of Paulo Ferreira's method, which is that you hijack other subjects as mediators to political knowledge. And then eventually it's all taught through transformative or culturally affirming lenses, which are equity-based, radical-based, explicitly set to building a critical consciousness. If we read, for example, in the handbook of social emotional learning, which one would think is about social emotional learning, it's the official like six hundred and six, six, 60, 680 page handbook that they published in 15, 16, something like that.

Linda Darling Hammond, who's one of the main consultants that's pushed SEL through Castle, the collaborative for academic social emotional learning, wrote the forward to this book. And she says that what it means for a school to be social and emotional competent is that it imbibes and promotes Paulo Ferreira's ideas of transformation and humanization, which are Marxist ideas of transforming and humanizing, which means making kids. into little empathetic Marxists, like fake empathetic Marxists. And so what it does is it enables the theft of a math lesson to turn it into a social and emotional lesson, which gets taught through an equity or resilience or inclusion or sustainability

lens. And that, by the way, is a huge push right now. Even the NEA is doing it. UNESCO's pushing it. That education within a year, all we're going to be talking about is that it's trying to teach the sustainable development goals of the United Nations. That's all where it's going. The NEA has now put out a big document. I just did a thing on Twitter about it yesterday. Climate change. Climate change. The 17 sustainable development goals to transform our world to be a sustainable and inclusive future. And the first thing that this document from the NEA site is the world economic forum. I mean, this stuff's not a conspiracy. It's literally right in front of you. Well, it is a conspiracy. It's not a conspiracy theory. But social emotional learning is the tool. It is, and you can do lots of

good things with social and emotional educational techniques. But when it becomes systemic and transformative, which it always will in the end, what you're going to end up doing is using a brainwool, you're turning your school into a brainwashing program and the people involved in it may not even know. They sell it as increasing engagement, helping troubled kids, etc. But they've redefined at-risk kids to be all the kids by saying that what they're at risk of is graduating not social and emotional compliant. or competent or whatever, and therefore they're all at risk,

and therefore they all qualify for at-risk funding from the government to implement more SEL, which, and then we could talk about how bad it is a lot, but people should read the book to understand how that systemic thing works, how they use a math lesson as a mediator to a political conversation. I know we're pretty much out of time, but you can take a word problem like, Johnny's riding with his mom and dad to the amusement park in the car. The amusement park's 50 miles away. They've driven 30 miles.

How much further they have to go? That's a real example from a real SEL training, by the way. And you'd get the teacher to engage by, hey, who's been to an amusement park and who hasn't? An amusement park is what friary, if you read the book, calls a generative theme. And so who's been to the amusement park and who hasn't? It generates a political conversation. And so some kids raise your hands, some don't. Well, why have some of you been and some of you haven't?

Why would some people not be able to go? Well, my parents don't think I'm old enough. Now you're having a conversation about political or parental authority with the school that wants to separate that. Or some people can't afford it. Now you're having a conversation about poverty, socialism, maybe race gets looped in with it. What about that mom and dad? Now you're having, well, I only have a mom. Now you're having a conversation about feminism.

Or we have two moms. Now it's sexuality. You know, should people go to the amusement park in a car? Is that bad for the environment? Now you're having a conversation about environmentalism. You can have a million political conversations off of something extremely innocuous. and social emotional learning is used to tool that toward things like self-awareness, which can be good or really bad if the Marxists control it, self-management, you know,

relationship management, responsible decision-making, like don't throw that away. You have to recycle it or whatever. Yeah. And then, you know, social awareness, which is, of course, I mean, we can all just see straight through that. That's going to be woke as heck. Yeah. Yep. So all things that sound good, of course, someone would want their kids to learn about being responsible, being kind, being quote unquote empathetic. And we don't realize that they are basically lumps of coal packaged and really pretty Christmas packaging.

What those teachers you have, those good teachers you have listening should realize is what we were talking about earlier. Every good definition is a funnel down to a Marxist point. So it starts out. There's a big wide net. Oh yeah. Diversity means lots of things. Social emotional learning means lots of good things.

And what happens is you slowly get twisted and bent and struggled and policyed into now it's systemic SEL doing transformative and culturally affirming Marxist nonsense. And that's, that is the end point. That is where the slippery slope lands or whatever you want to say. It's because every definition narrows down to a functional point for them. Yep. Absolutely. Absolutely. Everyone go out and buy Marxification of education. You can get it. I'm guessing wherever books are sold. Right. And follow you on Twitter since you're back on Twitter now. unless you're a groomer, you probably don't want to follow him. All right.

That's all we got. Thanks so much, James. I appreciate you coming on. Thanks, Allie. Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity,

and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions. and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed,

you can watch this D-Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us.